As the international community looks to advance the ceasefire plan in Gaza, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) emphasized the need for continued pressure from countries like Turkey and Qatar on Hamas to comply with the terms of the ceasefire requiring it to disarm.

But he also warned that there should be limits on the ways in which Turkey and Qatar are involved in the future of Gaza, arguing that they should have no role in certain sensitive areas, even as they remain involved in reconstruction work.

Lankford, in an interview with Jewish Insider this week, said that Hamas’ release of the final remaining deceased hostages will be an inflection point necessitating movement into the next phase of the ceasefire plan presented by the United States.

“The requirement for Hamas to disarm is still there. It has to be there, both for the people that live in Gaza that are Palestinian and for the security of the entire region,” Lankford said.

He said that ensuring that Hamas disarms, something it has thus far refused to do, will require  military, diplomatic and financial pressure, particularly from countries like Turkey and Qatar that have been Hamas patrons. 

“If the Turks want contracts to be able to rebuild in Gaza, which they do, then that’s not going to happen until Hamas is actually disarmed, so Turkey’s got to decide, ‘Do you want those contracts to be able to rebuild or not?’ If they do, then here’s what that requirement is going to be,” Lankford said.

He said that providing a higher level of security and freedom of movement on the Israeli-controlled side of Gaza will also help to increase pressure on Hamas. And he said that any further violations of the ceasefire agreement by Hamas should be met with “immediate, serious consequences.”

Turkey and Qatar’s roles in the future of Gaza should be limited to certain sectors, Lankford added, given the countries’ hostility to Israel and support for Hamas. He said he’s comfortable seeing Ankara assist with reconstruction, but it should not be involved in running hospitals, schools or mosques or in rebuilding the economy.

“We’re going to have to figure out what are roles that they can do and they cannot do,” Lankford said. “There are certain roles they just should not be a part of.”

He said he’s not yet able to name specific countries that he would be comfortable seeing taking on more sensitive tasks — though he noted Indonesia’s interest — and said it’s “going to take a multinational force.”

“It’s going to be a trusted force. It’s not going to be American forces in the middle of that. It needs to be a trusted force from the region as much as possible, but that’s going to have to be somebody that’s tenacious enough to say, ‘No, we’re going to actually bring some stability to this area,’” Lankford said. “And I don’t know who that is yet.”

He said that there are “plenty of Arab countries that don’t like the Muslim Brotherhood and don’t like all of its offshoots” — including Hamas — but the question will be whether they’re “willing to be able to put their sons on the line” to confront the terrorist groups in Gaza.

Asked about efforts to counter the Muslim Brotherhood at home — several of Lankford’s colleagues have introduced legislation to designate the group as a terrorist organization and have pushed for similar action by executive order from the White House — Lankford said that supporters of the effort have more work to do to raise awareness.

“I think the first issue for me is really to keep raising it, to be able to continue to raise awareness of it, because you’re not going to build momentum among 100 senators if it’s the first time they thought about it,” Lankford said. “So we’re going to have to build some of that momentum for a while.”

The Oklahoma senator, a co-chair of the Senate antisemitism task force, has also been outspoken about rising antisemitism on the “New Right” and was critical of the Heritage Foundation’s response to neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes’ recent appearance on Tucker Carlson’s podcast.

Asked about Carlson, Lankford said that he “can say whatever he wants to … but we also have a protected right to be able to speak back and to say we disagree on areas.”

“I think the worst case scenario is to just be able to leave it out there,” Lankford continued. He argued that providing counter-narratives to antisemitic talking points is crucial to stemming the tide of antisemitism on both sides of the aisle. 

“If you get loud voices that say it and repeat it, people that just see it and don’t see a counter-narrative just accept it,” Lankford said. “We’ve got to make sure a counter-narrative is out there so that people actually hear a different opinion on it.”

Lankford, a Southern Baptist minister, objected to Carlson’s comments condemning Christian Zionists.

“To say those that support Israel that are Christians are ‘heretics,’ and are ‘the worst’ — I guess worse than Hamas and Hezbollah,” Lankford said. “That’s a bit of a bizarre statement to make, and I think we have a responsibility to be able to speak out and say, ‘Hey, I don’t agree with that.’” 

“It seems that he is defining what Christianity is. And he has a right to be able to say whatever he wants to, but I also have a right to be able to live biblical Christianity as well, and to be able to see the scripture in the full context of what it says,” Lankford continued. “So I want to speak out on that as well.”

Asked about Vice President JD Vance’s exchange last week with a student who asserted that Jews are seeking to persecute Christians — a narrative that Vance did not address or dispute — Lankford said that leaders, including in the White House and the Trump administration, need to speak up “for the most basic issue of religious liberty.”

He said it’s important for people to be able to hold and live their own faiths and to also protect the ability of others to practice different faiths. “What’s interesting on that dialogue is, I’ve literally not met a Jewish person that wasn’t very protective of religious liberty,” Lankford added. “It’s literally the opposite of that question.”

President Donald Trump heaped praise on the leaders of Qatar, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Indonesia on Thursday, lauding them and members of his administration as key parties responsible for getting Israel and Hamas to agree to the first phase of his peace plan for the region. 

“I want to express my tremendous gratitude to the leaders of Qatar, Egypt and Turkey for helping us reach this incredible day and for being there. They were there with us all the way. And of course, as you know, Saudi Arabia and Jordan and so many,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting at the White House. “I will tell you, [Turkish] President [Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan was personally involved in dealing with Hamas and some of the others. He’s been great. They’ve all been really amazing. Indonesia has been amazing. Indonesia has been fantastic.”

“The whole world has come together for this, people that didn’t get along, people that didn’t like each other, neighboring countries that, frankly, didn’t like each other,” he continued.

The president confirmed in his remarks on Thursday that his team was working on organizing a Mideast trip for him to commemorate the deal, which would include stops in Egypt and Israel, where he has been invited to address the Knesset. 

He said he plans to depart from Washington on Sunday and is considering the timing of the release of the hostages in his plans. “They should be released on Monday or Tuesday. … That’ll be a day of joy. I’m gonna try and make a trip over,” Trump said. “We’re planning on leaving sometime Sunday,” he added later.

Regarding the U.S. officials involved in the deal, Trump credited Vice President JD Vance; White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth; Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff; Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and former advisor who spearheaded the Abraham Accords in the first Trump administration; and CIA Director John Ratcliffe with helping bring the agreement across the finish line. 

“All Americans should be proud of the role that our country has played in bringing this terrible conflict to an end,” Trump said. 

Israeli and Hamas negotiators signed off on the first phase of the deal in Egypt earlier in the day, which would see the release of all the remaining hostages in exchange for the release of Palestinian security prisoners. 

In brief remarks to reporters during the meeting, Rubio similarly attributed the administration’s success to its engagement with Arab and Muslim-majority nations.

“What really took a turn about a month ago, less than a couple weeks ago, is when we were at the United Nations, and [Trump] convened an historic meeting, not simply of Arab countries, but Muslim-majority countries from around the world … Indonesia was there, Pakistan was there, and created this coalition behind this plan. Then on that following Monday, you met with the prime minister of Israel here, and that plan was presented. And then, of course, our great negotiating team followed up on it in the interim,” Rubio said.

Asked about the potential for political turmoil in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition by far-right parties who said today they would oppose the deal in a Cabinet vote, Trump replied that the issue was not a concern and predicted that such an agreement could help Netanyahu.

“Bibi may go a little bit out of whack. Look, that’s politics. … I think he’s very popular right now. He’s much more popular today than he was five days ago, I can tell you that. Right now, maybe people shouldn’t run against him, five days ago it might not have been a bad idea,” Trump said. “This has been a very good thing. I don’t think he did it [agreed to a deal] for that reason [of political survival]. But I think just looking as an analyst would look at this … I think Bibi should be very popular right now.”

Trump said that, beyond bringing an end to the war in Gaza, the new agreement was “really [about achieving] peace in the Middle East.” He then described the war as a “big retribution” in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on the Jewish state.

“Remember, Oct. 7 was terrible, but also, from the Hamas standpoint, they probably lost 70,000 people. That’s big retribution. That’s big retribution. But at some point that whole thing has to stop, and we’re going to see to it,” he said.

Looking forward, Trump was noncommittal about how future phases of his 20-point peace plan  would be implemented or upheld, instead noting that Gaza would be rebuilt, the Abraham Accords would expand to include more countries and the hostages would be returned. He also declined to take a stance on supporting or opposing a two-state solution. 

“Gaza is going to be slowly redone. You have tremendous wealth in that part of the world by certain countries, and just a small part of that, what they make will do wonders for Gaza,” the president explained. “I think you’re going to see some tremendous countries stepping up and putting up a lot of money and taking care of things. There’s this tremendous spirit like I haven’t seen.”

“The first thing we’re doing is getting our hostages back. That’s what people wanted more than anything else. They wanted these hostages back that have lived in hell like nobody has ever even dreamt possible. And after that, we’ll see,” he later added when asked about ensuring all sides adhere to the deal. “But they’ve agreed to things, and I think it’s going to move along pretty well.”

Stability in Syria could help ease tensions between Israel and Turkey — two countries with competing interests in the region — and the U.S. has a key role to play in shaping the security agreements needed to get there, experts from the Middle East Institute said Thursday during a panel titled “Can Turkey and Israel Find Common Ground in Syria?”

“A lot depends on what the United States decides to do, how they treat the Kurdish question in the northeast of Syria, and what they ask the Israelis and the Kurds to do,” said Natan Sachs, a senior fellow at MEI who focuses primarily on Israel. 

“It’s not that [President Donald] Trump can decide what happens, because these interests, certainly for the Israelis but also for the Turks, are seen as vital domestic interests. It’s not just the question of the peace process in Turkey. For Israelis, it’s seen as vital threats on the Israeli border. But nonetheless, there is enormous room, I think, for [U.S.] diplomacy here with some chance of success.” 

The webinar, moderated by MEI’s vice president for policy, Ken Pollack, also featured Gonul Tol, a senior fellow at MEI who focuses primarily on Turkish politics. It comes against the backdrop of the collapse of the Assad regime last December and Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa’s assumption of power in January. Al-Sharaa addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, the first time a Syrian president has done so in almost 60 years, presenting a vision of a “new Syria” after decades of civil war and dictatorship under the Assad family. 

But questions remain about Syria’s future and the influence of its two most powerful neighbors — Israel and Turkey. Sachs and Tol addressed how Syria has become a focal point for Turkish-Israeli rivalry, what role the U.S. could play in softening the hostilities between its two allies and how the situation impacts stability in the region. 

The Assad family “has been a long foe of Israel, but it was a known foe. It was a devil that they knew,” said Sachs, expressing concern that al-Sharaa, who was once a leader in Al-Qaida, could be a “pragmatist, but not someone who’s changed fundamentally.” 

Tol said that “it’s always been Syria that kept the two countries together, historically, from Turkey’s point of view, overlapping interests with Israel in Syria and on some level Iran too.”

“That was the glue that kept the relationship, no matter what was happening on the Palestine question, right? So now we are at a moment where that glue is not there,” Tol continued. “Syria and clashing interests are driving these two countries apart. What is worse is what kept that relationship in the golden years of the 1990s was the fact that Israel really needed Turkey, and it was the main factor behind this bilateral partnership. But in the last several years, Israel has taken many steps that makes Israel a lot less dependent on Turkey. I mean partnership with Ankara granted Israel this legitimacy.”

“So we’ve got a point where there is a dominant Israel that is militarily very powerful … Israel does not need Turkey anymore, and Turkey does not have leverage,” she continued. 

Tol called the Kurdish angle “important” to the situation. “Kurds now want autonomy,” she said. “They are somewhat emboldened by the Israeli presence there [in northern Syria] and as long as Syria remains unstable they won’t be able to send back those refugees.”

She went on to say that the presence of U.S. troops in the country complicates the situation of stabilizing Syria. A potential solution, Tol suggested, is “maybe both sides should just accept different spheres of influence,” similar to Israel and Turkey’s understanding in Azerbaijan. 

“The parties helped there in order to establish a non-conflict mechanism. So you control Turkey’s tens of thousands of troops in northern Syria. So the understanding was going to be, okay, you remain there. We are here. We do our business. So we don’t conflict with each other. Can that be done? I think that would be an ideal scenario for [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, because Erdogan wants Israel out of Syria. But he understands that it’s not realistic,” she said, adding that the two countries would like good relations. “Erdogan is not interested in military conflict with Israel. That is, I know that’s a negative that some have been pushing, but I just don’t think so. And I don’t think Israel has any interest in confronting Turkey’s military either. Turkey is a NATO country at the end of the day, and the stakes are just too high.”

Asked whether Israel can accept a Turkey-Syria agreement, and under what conditions, Tol pointed to recent reports from Israeli media that said one of the asks from the Israeli side in an agreement with Damascus is that it stops cooperating with Ankara on defense.

“We know that Turkey wants to have access to spaces in Syria and Israelis were saying they weren’t going to accept this … but Damascus is slow on that and in a difficult spot, too. So I think the defense angle, if Israelis are pushing that, forcing Damascus to stop having that defense partnership with Ankrara, that would be difficult to follow,” Tol said. 

Sachs said a red line for Israel in a Turkey-Syria agreement would be “Turkish access to [air] bases, and in particular flexibility for aerial defense.”  

“The Israeli assumption here is that Turkey’s influence is almost a given,” said Sachs. “The question is more the confines of that limit, not whether [the countries] come to an accommodation. From the Israeli perspective, the current trend is extremely worrying, with the rise of a regime it is very skeptical of — and with good reason.”

President Donald Trump suggested on Thursday that he was likely to permit Turkey to purchase F-35 fighter jets as soon as “the end of the day,” ending a nearly eight year blockade on Ankara’s acquiring the top-of-the-line fighter jet as a result of its 2017 purchase of a Russian S-400 missile system.

Speaking to reporters from the Oval Office alongside Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ahead of a meeting between the two and their respective teams, Trump said without mentioning the F-35’s or the less-advanced F-16 jets by name that he expected the Turkish leader would “be successful with buying the things” he would “like to buy.”

“He needs certain things, and we need certain things, and we’re going to come to a conclusion. You’ll know by the end of the day,” Trump said at the outset of his meeting with Erdogan. 

The White House declined to comment on what the president was referring to or if an announcement regarding resumed F-35 sales to Ankara was imminent. 

Erdogan has focused his visit to the White House, his first such trip in six years, around securing U.S. sanctions relief and approval for new arms deals, including the F-35 jets and other fighter and Boeing aircraft. Trump implemented the sanctions during his first term after Turkey purchased a Russian air defense system that U.S. officials warned could be used by the Russians to harness data on the F-35’s capabilities and compromise the aircraft.

The sanctions, pursued through the Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, are still in place due to Turkey’s refusal to replace the Russian system. The Biden administration approved the sale of F-16 jets to Turkey in early 2023 on the condition of Ankara allowing Sweden to join NATO.

The prospect of Trump changing course on the sale has sparked bipartisan concern from some lawmakers. While some see such a sale as a way to incentivize better behavior from Ankara, others have warned that the embrace could have the opposite effect.

A bipartisan coalition of House lawmakers wrote a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday urging the Trump administration against approving a deal for F-16s or F-35s. 

It was signed by Reps. Chris Pappas (D-NH), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Dina Titus (D-NV), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), Don Bacon (R-NE), Jim Costa (D-CA), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), Dan Goldman (D-NY), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Wesley Bell (D-MO), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Rob Menendez (D-NJ), Greg Landsman (D-OH) and Gabe Amo (D-RI). The American Jewish Committee, CUFI Action Fund and FDD Action were among the organizations that endorsed the letter.

“The security risks of Turkey’s acquisition and continued possession of the Russian S-400 system are well known. The S-400 poses a direct threat to U.S. military aircraft, including both the F-16 and F-35, by enabling Russian intelligence to gain insight into sensitive U.S. military technology if operated alongside these platforms,” the lawmakers wrote. 

“Congress has consistently upheld bipartisan restrictions on Turkey’s access to the F-35. Any move to reverse this policy without first securing the statutorily required certification would be a clear violation of U.S. law, undermine Congressional authority, and signal to others that U.S. law and strategic principles can be disregarded,” they added.

A bipartisan group of House members urged the administration to “be very careful” in negotiations with Turkey about its potential re-entry into a program allowing it to acquire and potentially co-produce F-35 fighter jets, ahead of a White House meeting between President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday.

Trump said Friday that he would host Erdogan at the White House for trade and military talks, “including the large-scale purchase of Boeing aircraft, a major F-16 Deal, and a continuation of the F-35 talks, which we expect to conclude positively.” 

Lawmakers have been pressing for months for the administration to be cautious in allowing Turkey to acquire the advanced fighter jets, something it has been banned by law from doing since it purchased a Russian S-400 missile defense system. By law, Turkey must dispense with that system before it can be re-admitted into the F-35 program, but some lawmakers have pushed for additional conditions, given various conflicts with Turkey, including its hostile posture toward Israel.

“The United States must be very careful when engaging in negotiations particularly as it relates to discussions surrounding Turkey’s potential reentry into the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. Turkey was rightfully removed from the program in 2019 following its acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 missile defense system—a clear violation of U.S. law under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA),” Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Chris Pappas (D-NH), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) and Dina Titus (D-NV), who chair the Congressional Hellenic Caucus, said in a joint statement on Monday.

They emphasized that the Turkish-Russian cooperation, in spite of Turkey’s NATO status, “directly undermines the security of U.S. defense technology and poses a threat to the strategic integrity of allied defense cooperation,” as well as “risks exposing sensitive U.S. military capabilities to Russian intelligence, eroding allied trust, and jeopardizing the development of next-generation military platforms.”

In addition to the formal legal obstacles that should ban F-35 acquisition under current conditions, the four lawmakers added that Erdogan has “consistently demonstrated a disregard for international norms and democratic principles.”

They said that upholding the sanctions law is critical both to protect U.S. defense technology as well as to demonstrate the U.S.’s commitment to the rule of law.

“Rewarding Erdogan’s government without meaningful changes in behavior would set a dangerous precedent and weaken the credibility of U.S. foreign policy,” the lawmakers wrote. “The United States must stand firm in defending its laws, its alliances, and the international order.”

Bipartisan groups of House lawmakers are aiming to crack down on Turkey in the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, introducing a series of amendments seeking to place further restrictions on U.S. aid to the NATO ally in response to its support for Hamas and hostility toward Israel.

Turkey recently announced its plans to close its airspace to Israeli aircraft and cut off remaining commercial ties with Israel. It has long hosted Hamas leaders, and its leadership has been increasingly hostile toward Israel since Oct. 7, 2023, including threatening to invade the Jewish state. The NDAA, Congress’ annual defense and foreign policy legislation package, is set to come up for debate on the House floor next week.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Tom Kean Jr. (R-NJ) introduced an NDAA amendment that would ban any arms sales or transfers to Turkey until the administration outlines how it is ensuring that Turkey is no longer threatening or violating the sovereignty of U.S. allies, providing support to terrorist groups or purchasing any defense systems from U.S. adversaries.

Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Brad Schneider (D-IL) introduced a separate amendment to add new preconditions to the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey, including requiring that Ankara cease cooperation with U.S. adversaries, end its military threats to Israel, cease providing support for Hamas, Hamas affiliates and terrorist groups in Syria and stop targeting Kurdish civilian infrastructure.

Bilirakis and Schneider introduced another amendment imposing similar conditions on the sale of F-16 fighter jets or F-16 upgrade kits, also a controversial issue on the Hill, to Turkey.

Currently, the sale of F-35s is banned under U.S. law in response to Turkey’s purchase and continued possession of an S-400 missile defense system from Russia, but Ankara and Washington have been in negotiations for months about potential pathways to lift that restriction and resume the sale process. The State Department recently denied plans to change U.S. policy on the issue.

An amendment by Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) would require the U.S., in considering military sales to Ankara, to protect Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge over Turkey.

Bilirakis and Schneider introduced other amendments requiring reports to Congress on Turkey’s targeting of civilian populations in Syria and elsewhere, its support for terrorism and cooperation between Turkey and Iran to evade U.S. sanctions.

Goldman, Malliotakis, Gottheimer, Kean, Bilirakis and Rep. Keith Self (R-TX) introduced  another amendment requiring a report on Turkey’s relationship with Hamas and the support Ankara is providing to the terrorist group.

And Goldman, Malliotakis, Gottheimer, Bilirakis and Kean proposed an amendment requesting a report on the Turkish occupation of Cyprus and whether any members of Iran-backed terrorist groups are present or active in Cyprus.

It remains to be seen which, if any, of these amendments will receive consideration or be incorporated into the House’s final draft version of the NDAA.

CUFI Action Fund, the advocacy arm of the Christian pro-Israel group, issued a memo on Wednesday backing the Bilirakis-Schneider amendment on F-35 sales and the Titus amendment on Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge.

“Congress should expand the current F-35 ban beyond the narrow question of Turkey’s possession of Russian missile systems,” Boris Zilberman, CUFI Action Fund’s senior director for public policy and strategy, said in a statement. “The broader issue is Ankara’s sustained pattern of behavior: regional aggression, diplomatic sabotage, and support for terrorism. U.S. defense technology should never be placed in the hands of governments that threaten American allies and enable terrorist activity. That standard should be non-negotiable.” 

Zilberman argued that Turkey is “not misunderstood” but instead “is making deliberate strategic choices — choices that undermine American security, compromise our alliances and erode regional stability,” calling Ankara a “revisionist anti-Western power.”

“It is time to stop pretending that [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdoğan’s Turkey is still the ally we want it to be — and start treating it as the adversarial actor it has become,” he continued.

Asked about Turkey’s latest anti-Israel moves, including closing its airspace, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) told Jewish Insider this week, “Israel is fighting an existential war against a terrorist organization and I would ask all nations to understand just how serious a threat Hamas poses to Israel.”

He said that the U.S. has a “key role” in working with Turkey to ensure that it can work with our other allies, including Israel.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) added that it’s “always of concern when two of our allies are not getting along,” but declined to comment further.

A bipartisan group of 40 House members is urging Secretary of State Marco Rubio to maintain the U.S. ban on exporting advanced F-35 fighter jets to Turkey, amid ongoing reports that the U.S. and Turkey are negotiating to allow the sale of the jets.

“We strongly urge the Administration to review the facts and reject Turkey’s attempt to rewrite the history of its violation of U.S. law and national security policy,” the lawmakers said in a letter to Rubio on Thursday.

The group highlighted that President Donald Trump, during his first term, signed the law that bans the sale of the F-35s to Turkey in light of its purchase of an S-400 missile defense system from Russia.

“Nearly a decade later, Turkey still possesses S-400 systems and has shown no willingness to comply with U.S. law. This behavior cannot be rewarded,” the letter reads. “Lifting sanctions or allowing Turkey back into the F-35 program without first removing its S-400s would jeopardize the integrity of F-35 systems; expose U.S. military secrets to Russian intelligence; undermine our defense industrial base and allied confidence in purchasing future U.S. platforms; and disrupt development of the next-generation fighter jet recently announced by the Administration.”

The lawmakers emphasized that U.S. policy on the issue has been consistent across administrations and parties.

They said that the U.S. must “uphold U.S. law, maintain CAATSA sanctions, and protect American defense and intelligence assets” and “continue to hold allies and adversaries alike accountable when their actions threaten U.S. interests.”

The letter was led by Reps. Chris Pappas (D-NH), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Dina Titus (D-NV) and Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), who lead the Congressional Hellenic Caucus.

The letter is supported by the American Jewish Committee, Christians United for Israel Action Fund and FDD Action as well as the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association, the American Hellenic Institute, American Friends of Kurdistan, Armenian National Committee of America, Coordinated Effort of Hellenes, the Hellenic American Leadership Council, Middle East Forum and the International Coordinating Committee Justice for Cyprus.

A bipartisan group of House members introduced legislation this week to redesignate Turkey at the State Department as a Middle Eastern country, rather than a European country, describing the move as a message to Turkey about its turn away from its relationships with Europe and the United States and shift toward U.S. adversaries.

The bill is designed “to send a clear message to Ankara: The United States recognizes Turkey’s turn to the Middle East and no longer sees Turkey prioritizing its relationship with Europe,” according to a statement from the bill’s lead sponsors, Reps. Brad Schneider (D-IL) and Gus Bilirakis (R-FL).

The statement says that the designation change is consistent with Turkey’s growing ties with Russia, China and Iran, its backing of Hamas and its hostile military actions toward Greece and Cyprus, which “are fundamentally at odds with Western security interests”; its “increasingly anti-Western posture, turning away from its European aspirations”; and its “growing authoritarianism and continued hostility toward NATO allies.”

They noted that the redesignation would leave Turkey in the same category as Iran, Syria and Libya.

“Turkey is at a crossroads, but Erdoğan has made his choice,” Schneider said in a statement, referring to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. “His government harbors Hamas operatives, props up [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s war machine, and obstructs NATO unity — while still demanding the privileges of a Western ally. It’s time for American diplomacy to stop pretending that Turkey is still part of Europe.”

The bill is being introduced under the auspices of the Congressional Hellenic Israel Alliance.

“Turkey has consistently demonstrated a complete disregard for following international law,” Bilirakis said in a statement. “Erdoğan repeatedly acts contrary to American interests, with his dangerous behavior contributing to the instability of the region. The time has come for official U.S. foreign policy to more accurately reflect the realities of this hostile regime’s conduct and for Erdoğan to be held accountable.”

The bill is co-sponsored by Reps. Dina Titus (D-NV), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Chris Pappas (D-NH) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), and comes days after a congressional hearing where lawmakers voiced concerns about Turkey’s role in the U.S. alliance system.

The bill also requires the State Department to report to Congress on the impacts of Turkey’s move away from Europe.