When the world's at stake,
go beyond the headlines.

Following years of quiet ascent, Turkey’s combat drone industry now finds itself at a moment of decision. Having secured a rapidly expanding footprint across Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East, Ankara is now pivoting toward NATO and European defense-industrial integration. But this dual-track strategy — expanding defense exports to fragile and conflict-affected regions and embedding in the NATO ecosystem — may no longer be sustainable as geopolitical polarization intensifies.

In this new phase, Turkish drone diplomacy is forced to confront a basic but difficult choice: pursue global market dominance with few constraints, or integrate into Western military-industrial structures that demand transparency, accountability, and political alignment. This is more than a commercial dilemma — it’s a political economy decision with long-term consequences for alliance cohesion, regional power dynamics, and the future of unmanned warfare. As great-power competition intensifies, deeper integration with NATO represents the more rational strategic choice for Ankara. While this course may constrain Turkey’s access to markets in fragile and conflict-affected regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa, it anchors Ankara within durable alliance structures and preserves access to high-value strategic procurement and defense-industrial ecosystems.

Baykar’s Meteoric Rise: State-Backed Innovation Meets Global Demand

At the heart of Turkey’s drone industry is Baykar, a private company led by Selçuk Bayraktar — President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s son-in-law — and his brother, Haluk. Over the past decade, Baykar has grown from a domestic defense startup into one of the world’s prominent drone exporters, propelled by sustained government support, privileged access to research and development, and a permissive export regime that prioritizes strategic influence over regulation.

In 2024, Baykar’s drone exports reached $1.8 billion — up from $1.2 billion the year prior. Around 90 percent of that revenue came from foreign sales. Its flagship platform, the Bayraktar TB2, has achieved combat validation in conflicts from Libya and Syria to Ukraine and Ethiopia. The company’s combat drones are now fielded in more than 30 countries, many of which occupy geostrategic terrain in the broader landscape of great-power competition.

Turkey’s broader defense export industry generated revenue of $7.1 billion in 2024, with armed drones alone accounting for nearly $700 million in direct sales and enabling a broader ecosystem of munitions, sensors, and support systems. The global drone market is expected to grow at 12–13 percent annually through 2030. Europe’s combat drone market alone is projected to reach $19 billion by 2030, with increasing defense autonomy and joint procurement initiatives like Eurodrone accelerating demand. At the same time, the Asia-Pacific drone market — currently valued at $13 billion — is set to double in size by 2030, driven by rising tensions and military modernization. The drone market in the Middle East and Africa, while smaller in market size ($1.8 billion in 2025), offers 13–15 percent annual growth, with lower barriers to entry.

Cheap and Useful with No Strings Attached

Three core factors explain Turkey’s combat drone prominence globally. First, Turkish drones are significantly cheaper than their American or Israeli counterparts. The Bayraktar TB2 costs a fraction of a U.S.-made MQ-9 Reaper, making it accessible to budget-constrained militaries. Second, Turkish drones have proven their worth in asymmetric warfare, surveillance, precision strikes, and psychological operations. Their track record in Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Ukraine has elevated their reputation. And finally, unlike Western suppliers, Ankara imposes few political conditions on end-users. This “no-strings-attached” approach appeals to authoritarian regimes and transitional governments facing Western embargoes.

These advantages have made Turkish drones a staple in conflict-prone and fragile states, where surveillance, force projection, and regime survival are urgent priorities. Ankara lacks a coherent vision when it comes to strategic end use of its drones. In Sub-Saharan Africa, Turkish combat drones strengthen authoritarian regimes that are actively hedging towards Moscow and Beijing. However, when one investigates Middle Eastern, North African, Central Asian, and Indo-Pacific markets, Turkish combat drones support strategic deterrence against Russia and China. This paradox suggests that purely mercantilist logic guides Ankara’s choices.

Turkish Combat Drones in Sub-Saharan Africa

Ankara appears to be driven by pure mercantilist instincts in Sub-Saharan Africa. Turkish combat drone exports found a lucrative market and a clientele willing to pay if the Turkish drone platforms allow for these regimes to maintain their edge over their domestic and foreign adversaries. Africa has emerged as a particularly receptive — and competitive — market for Turkish combat drones. However, the recklessness of governments in using indiscriminate violence against civilians in Sub-Saharan Africa put Ankara in a precarious position as the sponsor of violent authoritarian regimes. Moreover, considering how most of the authoritarian regimes in the Sahel and Great Lakes region along with the horn of Africa  hedge towards China and Russia and against American interests create questions about whether Turkey ever considered the strategic impact of the end use of its drones in the region. Turkey’s “no-strings-attached” approach in Sub-Saharan Africa sidesteps end-use monitoring and lacks accountability mechanisms typically expected in the export of lethal autonomous systems. This creates a permissive environment in which regimes with poor human rights records and limited adherence to international humanitarian law can freely exploit drone technology for coercive and domestic control purposes.

In the Sahel, Ankara has supplied drones to military-led regimes with dismal human rights standards like in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and Chad, all of which have also drawn closer to Russia’s Wagner-backed security architecture. In East Africa, Turkey has exported drones to Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Rwanda, and Djibouti. The Ethiopian Air Force employed TB2s during its brutal campaign against the Tigray insurgency, raising alarm about civilian harm. In Sudan, Turkish drones have been deployed by the Sudanese Armed Forces in densely populated urban combat against the Rapid Support Forces. Ankara has not raised any concerns about allegations of civilian atrocities committed by Turkish-made drones with any of these governments, most of which are increasingly anti-American. The unchecked proliferation of Turkish drones in Sub-Saharan Africa thus poses a dual threat: It contributes to tactical overreach and civilian harm in fragile states while also emboldening authoritarian actors in geopolitical competition with the West.

Elsewhere

Outside these markets, the picture is radically different: Turkish combat drones are largely adopted by countries that are traditionally, if not increasingly, aligned with the United States against Chinese and Russian strategic challenges. From North Africa and the Middle East to the southern Caucasus and Indo-Pacific, Turkish combat drones have proved to be an effective tool of strategic deterrence.

North African states such as Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Morocco have procured Turkish drones, citing their cost-efficiency and fast delivery timelines. In Libya, Bayraktar TB2 drones proved decisive. Their neutralization of Russian-supplied Pantsir air defense systems helped the U.N.-recognized Tripoli government beat back Libyan Gen. Khalifa Haftar and his Russian-backed Libyan National Army controlled eastern Libya since 2017. By war’s end, Turkish intervention had effectively realigned the battlefield with Italian and American preferences.

The Gulf states — including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait — have used Turkish drones operationally in Yemen and along their borders. One common element among these clients is their pro-American strategic postures against Iran’s proxies in the region.

Ankara’s growing combat drone market share in Ukraine, Central Asia, and the south Caucasus is particularly meaningful as Turkish combat drones help these governments diversify the sources of their weapons systems and lessen their traditional reliance on Moscow and China. TB2 drones gave Ukraine critical defensive advantage against Russian forces during the initial phase of Russia’s invasion. Baykar promised to rebuild its joint drone manufacturing plant in Ukraine after it had already been targeted by Russian forces. Azerbaijan, a long-time Turkish ally, used TB2 drones to great effect in its 2020 and 2023 campaigns in Nagorno-Karabakh, neutralizing Russian-made Armenian air defenses and reshaping the regional balance. In Central Asia, Turkey has secured agreements with Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. Plans are underway for a drone production facility in Kazakhstan, signaling Ankara’s intent to entrench local partnerships.

In South Asia, Turkish drones have found clients in Pakistan and Bangladesh, both of which got closer to Washington after President Donald Trump took office for the second time. During the 2025 border skirmish with India, Pakistan deployed TB2s with limited tactical effect but significant symbolic value. In the Indo-Pacific, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Maldives — key partners in upholding freedom of navigation against Chinese encroachment — have all acquired Turkish combat drone platforms. Interestingly,  Japan and Taiwan — two staunch American allies — have expressed interest in acquiring Turkish combat drones, seeing them as low-cost alternatives to U.S. systems amid China’s expansionist threats in the South China Sea.

NATO Integration: The European Pivot that Makes Sense

In contrast to strategic incoherence elsewhere, Turkish combat drone integration to NATO systems supports a viable and coherent perspective for Ankara’s combat drone futures. The intensifying efforts in Ankara’s defense industrial circles point to an awareness of this opportunity. The Turkish drone industry’s shift to integrate into NATO’s defense-industrial ecosystem is driven by three needs: access to an established market; gaining legitimacy as the drone platform of choice by NATO partners; and opportunities to invest in next-generation drone technology. Three important developments in the past couple of years offer clear indicators for what is to come.

The first notable deal was with Poland. Poland became the first Central European NATO member to acquire TB2 drones in 2024, purchasing 24 systems with munitions and full integration into NATO’s logistics infrastructure via the NATO Support and Procurement Agency. The Polish military operates these drones from its 12th armed drone base in Mirosławiec and deployed a unit to Turkey in 2025 as part of a NATO surveillance mission over the Black Sea — a clear sign of interoperability in practice. A second important development was Turkey’s acceptance into the Riga-based “drone coalition.” In July 2025, Turkey joined the Latvia-led drone coalition, a NATO-aligned grouping focused on autonomous systems development. The coalition’s competence center in Latvia will serve as a joint testing, training, and command hub for drone operations, further institutionalizing Ankara’s presence in NATO drone networks. The third and most important combat drone deal was struck when Baykar acquired Piaggio Aerospace in Italy in late 2024, securing a European production base. By mid-2025, Baykar and Leonardo — Italy’s largest defense firm — formed a joint venture (LBA Systems) to co-develop NATO-compliant drones. The venture will integrate Baykar’s platforms with Leonardo’s sensors and early warning systems, enabling customized solutions for European defense clients. The first prototype is expected by 2026. These moves open doors to the European combat drone market — projected to exceed $19 billion by 2030 — but also invite greater scrutiny.

Turkish drone components are not 100 percent locally sourced. Despite Turkey’s ambition for defense-industrial independence, critical combat drone components — such as electro-optical and infrared sensors, engines, and imaging systems — are still imported. Countries such as Canada, Germany, Austria, and Ukraine all contribute parts. Canadian sanctions in 2020, for example, disrupted TB2 production after exports were used in Nagorno-Karabakh. Ankara has since increased domestic production and diversified suppliers, but full self-sufficiency remains a work in progress. In the eventual integration of more Turkish drones in militaries across NATO, there will be pressure to impose stricter technical, safety, cybersecurity, and interoperability standards and certifications. There may also be potential issues of contention such as where different components are sourced (if from non-NATO verified suppliers), export restrictions, and disagreements from other NATO allies with different political convictions.

Decision Time

Turkey’s combat drone industry embodies the tension at the heart of Ankara’s foreign policy: the desire to project independent power while reaping the benefits of Western integration. However, this dual track is no longer sustainable as global political polarization intensifies. There are two paths ahead for Turkey. The first path involves maintaining a no-strings-attached, mercantilist strategy. Ankara continues expanding commercial reach across Sub-Saharan Africa to anti-Western authoritarian regimes aligned with China and Russia. At the same time, a no-strings-attached, mercantilist approach paradoxically allows for making deals and heavily investing in pro-Western governments in other regions that strategically deter against China, Russia, and Iran.

The second path builds on the existing integration framework with NATO and European partners. The NATO path requires the prioritization of full integration into Western defense ecosystems. This would entail adopting more stringent export controls, aligning with NATO operational and legal standards, and investing in transparent supply chains. While this may limit market access in certain regions, it could position Turkey more securely within long-term alliance frameworks and high-value procurement channels. Ultimately, this is not just a commercial decision — it is a political and strategic one. The degree to which Turkey can balance autonomy with alliance alignment will shape both its defense-industrial future and its broader role in the evolving global security order.

In the face of new global political realities, the NATO integration path is the more rational option for Ankara. Ankara has turned its combat drone sales into a geopolitical instrument, using them to expand influence across fragile and conflict-affected regions while bargaining with Washington and Brussels for strategic relevance. NATO can integrate Turkish drones into its inventory, but it should do so with open eyes. Ankara’s balancing act may serve its national interests well, but it raises an uncomfortable truth for the alliance: Cohesion cannot survive if one of its key members treats NATO as just another market. The Turkish drone industry’s growing footprint in Europe is promising, but fragile. Regulatory pressures, political skepticism, and security concerns may harden over time. Meanwhile, Ankara’s support for authoritarian regimes and its uneven alignment with NATO strategy complicate the path forward.

For Western policymakers, the question is not simply whether to welcome Turkish drones into NATO arsenals, but under what terms. If the goal is to establish norms for responsible drone use, incentivize end-user accountability, and prevent coercive technology proliferation, Ankara ought to be brought into the fold — but with clear expectations.

Doga Eralp, Ph.D., is an associate professor of security studies at the Command and Staff College at Marine Corps University. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Marine Corps University, the Defense Department, or any part of the U.S. government.

Image: CeeGee via Wikimedia Commons