Turkey’s massive military, trade, Islamic diplomacy and education expansion into Africa is, some analysts say, undermining U.S. goals, as Ankara capitalizes on wars and conflicts on the continent.

Experts claim Turkey’s military sales appear to be based on maximizing profit, without worrying about what the arms sold do to the balance of power, particularly in Jihadist areas such as the Sahel.

Recently, multiple reports claimed Turkish companies have sold military drones to both sides in the 3-year-long conflict in Sudan.

‘Turkey is really capitalizing on all these conflicts in Sudan, in Ethiopia, in Somalia, to strengthen its military presence, its diplomatic and economic engagements,’ Turkey analyst Gönül Tol, told an American Enterprise Institute seminar in Washington last week. Tol, founding director of the Middle East Institute’s Turkey program, added that the country is ‘one of the top, top weapons providers to Africa. So if there is more chaos, that will only help Erdogan strengthen his hands.’

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, stated in October that overall trade volume with the African continent has shot up from $5.4 billion in 2003, to $41 billion in 2024. He told a business and economic forum in Istanbul that the state-backed carrier Turkish Airlines is literally leading the way into African countries for Turkish companies, now flying to 64 African destinations.

Erdogan told the forum that over the past two decades, ‘we have advanced our relations hand in hand, shoulder to shoulder, and most importantly, heart-to-heart, to a level that could not even be imagined.’

Drone sales to Sudan’s warring partners would only prolong the war, conduct which is directly against U.S. policy. Just last month, a State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital that ‘the U.S. is working with allies and others to bring an end to external military support to the parties, which is fueling the violence.’

‘Turkish drones, marketed as cost-effective and politically low-friction alternatives to U.S. or European systems, have proliferated across African conflict zones,’ Mariam Wahba, research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital.

‘Reporting that Turkish firms supplied drones to both the Sudanese (government) Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces (the opposing militia in the conflict) underscores Ankara’s transactional approach: access and influence take precedence over stability, civilian protection or alignment with Western policy objectives,’ she said.

In a 2025 FDD report, Sinan Siddi, senior fellow and director of the organization’s Turkey Program, wrote, ‘The deal between Baykar and SAF is worth $120 million, resulting in the sale of six TB2 drones, three ground control stations, and 600 warheads.’  Siddi claimed the deal took place after the U.S. placed sanctions on such sales.

Although Turkish drones are also claimed to have been sold to Sudan’s RSF militia, the company said to have been involved is reported to have publicly denied making the sale. The company did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

A State Department spokesperson, when asked by Fox News Digital about the allegations said, ‘We refer you to the Government of Turkey for comment on reports related to any Turkish firms operating in Sudan.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the Turkish government but received no response.

The TB2 drone reportedly sold to the Sudanese government is made by a company said to be owned by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s son-in-law. Experts say the TB2 is one-sixth the cost of a U.S. Reaper drone. Fox News Digital reached out to the company, but received no response.

The U.S. Africa Command’s Africa Defense Forum recently reported it ‘typically costs between $2 million and $5 million per aircraft, though total system packages — including ground control stations, communication systems, and training — often cost significantly more, sometimes reaching $5–$15 million per system depending on the contract. The TB2 is recognized for its high cost-efficiency, with operational costs estimated at only a few hundred dollars per hour.’

Particularly in Africa’s Sahel region, the FDD’s Wahba claimed Turkey is trying to return to the principles of its Ottoman Empire, which ruled for centuries and promoted the culture of imposing caliphates – areas where Islamic law is strictly enforced.

Wahba said, ‘On the whole, this is a worrying development that risks undermining U.S. interests. In addition to backing Islamist movements such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, which does not bode well for its ideological orientation, Ankara is pursuing a neo-Ottoman foreign policy that is already taking concrete shape across parts of Africa.’ 

‘Turkey’s arms sales across Africa are best understood’, the FDD’s Siddi told Fox News Digital, ‘not as ad hoc commercial transactions, but as a deliberate strategy to expand Ankara’s political, military and economic footprint on a continent increasingly contested by global and middle powers.’

He said, ‘By exporting drones, small arms and security services to fragile states such as Sudan… the Erdogan government positions Turkey as a low-cost, low-conditionality alternative to Western partners, while simultaneously opening new markets for its rapidly growing defense industry. These weapons transfers are designed to buy diplomatic leverage, secure access to ports, bases and contracts and cultivate client relationships with regimes and militias that can advance Turkey’s regional ambitions.’

The number of embassies Turkey operates in Africa has rocketed from 12 in 2002, to 44 today. Wahba said the 64 African destinations Turkish Airlines flies to is a useful indicator. ‘As a state-backed carrier, its rapid expansion of direct routes into African capitals mirrors Turkey’s diplomatic and security priorities. The airline functions as a soft-power and access enabler for Ankara’s broader agenda.’

Wahba claimed this all should matter for Washington, ‘because Ankara’s model increasingly competes with, and in many cases directly undercuts, U.S. priorities on conflict mitigation and stability.’

President Donald Trump will deliver his first official State of the Union address of his second term Tuesday night before a joint session of Congress at the Capitol, as viewers watch for viral moments and headline-grabbing exchanges like those that have defined past speeches.

Here are the top five moments from past State of the Union addresses.

1. Reagan surprises the crowd with first-ever acknowledgment of a guest in the audience

It’s become commonplace in recent years for presidents to acknowledge guests in the audience during SotU addresses, but President Ronald Reagan’s 1982 address was the first time the practice was rolled out. 

Reagan’s speech came just weeks after Air Florida Flight 90 crashed into Washington’s 14th Street Bridge over the Potomac River shortly after taking off in an accident that killed 78 people. 

Three people survived the crash thanks to civilians on the ground who rushed to their aid, including Congressional Budget Office assistant Lenny Skutnik, who stripped off his shoes and clothes and dove into the frigid waters.

Reagan honored Skutnik in his speech, which made honoring people in the crowd a common theme in the years to come. 

‘Just two weeks ago, in the midst of a terrible tragedy on the Potomac, we saw again the spirit of American heroism at its finest — the heroism of dedicated rescue workers saving crash victims from icy waters,’ Reagan said. ‘And we saw the heroism of one of our young government employees, Lenny Skutnik, who, when he saw a woman lose her grip on the helicopter line, dived into the water and dragged her to safety.’

2. Speaker Pelosi tears up Trump’s 2020 speech

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sparked a social media firestorm and cemented herself in State of the Union infamy in February 2020 when she stood up and tore Trump’s speech into pieces after he had finished.

When Fox News asked Pelosi afterward why she did it, she responded, ‘Because it was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives.’ She added, ‘I tore it up. I was trying to find one page with truth on it. I couldn’t.’

Pelosi’s outburst came on the heels of Trump’s first impeachment trial, which ended in a Senate acquittal the day after the speech.

‘Speaker Pelosi just ripped up: One of our last surviving Tuskegee Airmen. The survival of a child born at 21 weeks. The mourning families of Rocky Jones and Kayla Mueller. A service member’s reunion with his family. That’s her legacy,’ the White House tweeted after Pelosi tore up the speech, referencing individuals who Trump mentioned during his address.

3. Rep. Joe Wilson ‘You lie!’ outburst at President Obama

One of the most remembered moments from a State of the Union address came in 2009 when South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson interrupted President Barack Obama’s address, which at the time was far less common than it later became. 

‘There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants,’ Obama said, talking about his controversial Obamacare plan. ‘This, too, is false. The reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.’

‘You lie!’ Wilson shouted from his seat on the Republican side of the chamber, causing widespread yelling from other members in the audience.

Wilson later apologized to Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. 

‘This evening, I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill,’ Wilson said in a written statement. ‘While I disagree with the president’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility.’

4. Rep. Boebert heckles Biden over Afghanistan withdrawal during 2022 address

‘You put them in, 13 of them,’ GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert shouted at Biden as he talked about Afghanistan veterans who ended up in caskets due to exposure to toxic burn pits. Boebert was referencing the 13 U.S. service members killed during Biden’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. 

Boebert was wearing an outfit that said ‘Drill Baby Drill’ in opposition to Biden’s energy policies and her outburst drew some boos from the audience.

At another point, Boebert and Greene started chanting ‘build the wall’ when Biden was talking about immigration. 

5. President Biden blasts GOP lawmakers in 2023 address, prompting jeers from Republicans in the crowd

‘Some of my Republican friends want to take the economy hostage — I get it — unless I agree to their economic plans,’ Biden said to Congress, prompting a shake of the head from then-GOP House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in the background and shouts from the crowd and shots of other Republicans shaking their heads. 

‘Instead of making the wealthy pay their fair share, some Republicans, some Republicans, want Medicare and Social Security to sunset,’ Biden continued, which caused an even more pronounced shake of the head from McCarthy, who mouthed ‘no’ as Republicans continued to jeer. 

‘I’m not saying it’s the majority,’ Biden continued, which resulted in even more boos from the raucous crowd. 

‘Let me give you — anybody who doubts it, contact my office. I’ll give you a copy — I’ll give you a copy of the proposal,’ Biden continued to say over increasingly louder shouting from the crowd. 

‘That means Congress doesn’t vote — I’m glad to see — no, I tell you, I enjoy conversion,’ Biden said, apparently meaning to say ‘conversation.’

Biden’s speech continued to devolve from there as Republican outrage interrupted him on multiple occasions. 

‘I can’t believe they just left!’

‘Why didn’t they just stay until they fixed it?’

‘Why didn’t they make them stay?’

I must have fielded forty questions last week from colleagues, friends and acquaintances. Even reporters and editorial staff from other news organizations. And that’s to say nothing of a few Congressional aides.

Everyone had the same question. They were in disbelief that lawmakers just abandoned the Capitol a week ago Thursday and left the Department of Homeland Security without funding on Saturday at 12:00:01 am et.

The Senate tried twice to avert the partial government shutdown on Thursday. The Senate failed to break a filibuster on a placeholder, undetermined funding bill. And then Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., objected to a request by Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., to approve a stopgap, two-week funding bill. Passage of the bill would require agreement of all 100 senators. But all it took was one objection. And Murphy, speaking for many Democrats on both sides of the Capitol, interceded to sidetrack Britt’s effort.

‘I’m over it!’ shouted an exasperated Britt on the Senate floor, as Congress pitched at least part of the federal government into its third shutdown since October 1.

Democrats are refusing to fund the Department of Homeland Security until there’s a specific agreement to reform U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). And – few Democrats will say this out loud – but their base insists on Democrats shuttering DHS over ICE tactics after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.

This is somewhat ironic. Republicans funded ICE through 2029 via last year’s One, Big, Beautiful Bill. So thanks to Democrats, TSA, the Coast Guard and FEMA – all under the DHS aegis – are without money right now. That means tens of thousands of employees are technically working without paychecks as they scan passengers at airports, patrol the seas and respond to natural disasters.

This brings us back to the basic question: Why didn’t they just stay until they figured it out?

As a reporter, I have covered dozens of shutdowns, partial shutdowns, near shutdowns, flirtations with shutdowns. That’s to say nothing of various permutations of interim spending bills – long and short – known as Continuing Resolutions or CRs. Those bills keep the funding flowing at the old spending level – until lawmakers all agree on something new. Sometimes one CR begets another CR. And even another one after that until everything’s resolved. The exercise can go on for months.

But as it pertains to DHS, lawmakers weren’t going to solve the issues surrounding ICE right away. So both the House and Senate got out of Dodge last Thursday as the deadline loomed. Lawmakers were everywhere from the Middle East to Munich when the bell tolled midnight Saturday and DHS lumbered into a slow-speed funding crash.

Failure to fund the Department of Homeland Security may seem unreasonable from a policy standpoint – regardless of what you think of ICE. But it’s not unreasonable if you understand the politics and Congressional procedure to fund ICE.

Let’s say they were on the precipice of an agreement to fund DHS. That may involve some last-minute trading of paper between Senate and House leaders. Maybe a call or two from the President to reluctant Republicans. If lawmakers believed a deal was within range, it’s doubtful that leaders would have cut Members loose. They would have stayed if there was a viable path to nail something down last Friday, have the Senate expedite the process and vote on either Saturday or Sunday (albeit after the deadline) and then have the House vote on Monday. That’s all under the premise of a deal being close.

They were nowhere near that stage when lawmakers called it last Thursday. Democrats didn’t send over their offer for days after a brief shutdown of 78 percent of the government more than two weeks ago. Democrats then criticized Republicans and the White House for slowly volleying a counteroffer. Democrats then rejected the GOP plan – only sending back another plan late Monday.

Getting a deal which can pass both the House and Senate – and overcome a Senate filibuster – takes time. And there simply wasn’t a deal to be had yet.

This is where things get really interesting. With no agreement in sight, you simply don’t anchor lawmakers in Washington with nothing to do. There’s nothing to vote on. There are no committee meetings scheduled. All tethering lawmakers to DC does is stir up trouble.

There’s a line in the song ‘Trouble’ in The Music Man by Meredith Willson: ‘The idle brain is the devil’s playground.’ Who knows what kinds of mischief you would have, just making very cranky lawmakers hang around Washington for days – without anything to vote on. Keeping everyone here does not contribute to securing a deal. Yes, all 532 House and Senate Members (there are two House vacancies) must eventually be dialed-in to vote on a bill to fund DHS. But we aren’t there yet. A handful of Members in the House, Senate and people at the White House will be the ones to negotiate an agreement. Rank-and-file Members marooned in Washington with nothing to do but post outrageous things on social media and appear on cable TV is counterproductive.

Now, let’s look at the other scenario of being close to an agreement. House and Senate leaders may believe they are still a little short of votes. But if something is viable, leaders know they can nail down the votes with some arm-twisting, legislative and ego massaging and a few forceful phone calls. Yes, that process may require elbow grease. But in that instance, keeping everyone in Washington for a few extra days and blowing up a long-awaited Congressional recess actually helps the process.

Why?

Think of the Stockholm Syndrome. You demand that everyone stay in Washington for an extra day or two and the ‘hostages’ will start to come around to the viewpoints of their captors. Yes, everyone is frustrated and mad. But they feel the bill is something they can support and finally end this triumvirate of government shutdowns. In this case, the fustigation builds – but just a little. Everyone is happy to vote yes and rush off of Capitol Hill.

If they were close to nailing down an agreement on DHS funding, then Congressional leaders would have deployed a version of the Stockholm Syndrome to wrap up everything.

But with no deal, leaders were more afraid of the mayhem they may trigger by keeping everyone in Washington. The devil would romp freely through the playground of idle brains.

So how will you know when there’s a deal?

When everyone’s present and accounted for.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provided an update Sunday morning, saying TSA PreCheck is operating normally Sunday following reports that it had been suspended amid the partial government shutdown.

The suspension of the TSA PreCheck and Global Entry programs was first reported by The Washington Post, which noted the changes would begin Sunday at 6 a.m. EST. DHS says it will now be evaluating PreCheck on a ‘case by case basis.’

‘At this time, TSA PreCheck remains operational with no change for the traveling public. As staffing constraints arise, TSA will evaluate on a case by case basis and adjust operations accordingly,’ TSA wrote in a statement on X.

‘Courtesy escorts, such as those for Members of Congress, have been suspended to allow officers to focus on the mission of securing America’s skies,’ it added.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Saturday blamed Democrats for shutting down the government, saying they were causing ‘serious real world consequences.’

‘This is the third time that Democrat politicians have shut down this department during the 119th Congress,’ Noem said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital. ‘Shutdowns have serious real world consequences, not just for the men and women of DHS and their families who go without a paycheck, but it endangers our national security.’

Noem said the department was making ‘tough but necessary workforce and resource decisions to mitigate the damage inflicted by these politicians.’

She said TSA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would be ‘prioritizing the general traveling population at our airports and ports of entry and suspending courtesy and special privilege escorts.’ The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), she added, will halt all non-disaster-related response to prioritize disasters.

Noem noted the suspension comes as a major storm is expected to hit the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, criticized the Trump administration for ‘idiotically’ shutting down the programs ‘to punish the American people.’

‘This is Trump and Kristi Noem purposely punishing the American people and using them as pawns for their sadistic political games,’ he said in a statement. ‘TSA PreCheck and Global Entry REDUCE airport lines and ease the burden on DHS staff who are working without pay because of Trump’s abuse of the Department and killing of American citizens.’

He called on the administration to immediately reverse the decision.

The third government shutdown in under half a year began on Feb. 14 after Democrats and Republicans were at an impasse on reaching a deal regarding President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

DHS was the only department left without federal funding after Democrats walked away from a bipartisan plan released last month in response to the deaths of two U.S. citizens at the hands of federal law enforcement agents in Minneapolis during anti-ICE demonstrations.

DHS is the third-largest Cabinet agency with nearly 272,000 employees. Roughly 90% of DHS workers were expected to continue working, many without pay, according to the department’s Sept. 2025 government shutdown plan.

DHS has jurisdiction over numerous agencies and offices, including CBP, TSA, FEMA, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Secret Service.

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind and Alex Miller contributed to this report.

An emotional Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., attempted to blame critics – and even President Donald Trump’s own off-the-cuff agility – for the backlash she received for her response to a question at the recent Munich Security Conference on American defense of Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.

‘If you think I don’t understand foreign policy, because of out of hours of discourse about international affairs, I pause to think about one of the most sensitive geopolitical issues that currently exist on earth, I’m afraid the issue is not my understanding, but perhaps the problem is you’ve gotten adjusted to a president that never thinks before he speaks,’ a raspy-voiced Ocasio-Cortez said on a late-night Instagram Live video circulating on social media.

The leftist congresswoman’s Munich stumbling on Friday, Feb. 13, started the critical firestorm and has conservatives questioning her fitness for a potential 2028 Democrat presidential primary campaign.

‘Um, you know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is a um — this is, of course, a, um, very long-standing, um, policy of the United States,’ she said with pause when asked about America defending Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion to enforce its One China Policy over the island-nation.

‘And I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point, and we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic, research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.’

Vice President JD Vance, a potential 2028 presidential campaign opponent in a prospective general election matchup, weighed in multiple times this week to Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks.

‘I think it’s a person who doesn’t know what she actually thinks, and I’ve seen this way too much in Washington with politicians: Where they’re given lines and, when you ask them to go outside the lines they were given, they completely fall apart,’ Vance told Fox News’ ‘The Story With Martha MacCallum’ in an in-studio interview earlier this week.

‘That was embarrassing,’ he continued. ‘If I had given that answer I would say, ‘You know what? Maybe you ought to go read a book about China and Taiwan before I go out on the world stage again.’ I hope that Congresswoman Cortez has the same humility. I’m skeptical.’

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has tightened control over Hezbollah in the Middle East amid looming prospects of potential U.S. strikes, according to reports.

According to the Jerusalem Post, the tactical shift comes as Hezbollah and Iran prepare for military confrontation in the region, with analysts warning that if Washington specifically strikes the regime, Hezbollah is ready to be ‘activated.’

‘If the regime in Tehran feels threatened, the likelihood of unleashing Hezbollah against Israel and U.S. regional assets increases substantially,’ Ross Harrison, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital.

‘Hezbollah would not be activated right away, unless the attack immediately targets the leadership of the Islamic Republic. But as part of a graduated response, Hezbollah will likely be seen as an asset,’ he said.

‘If it faces an existential risk, then Iran may throw caution to the wind and try to deploy Hezbollah to the maximum,’ Harrison explained.

President Donald Trump previously gave Iran a deadline of 10 to 15 days to respond to a deal, raising questions about what steps Washington could take if Tehran fails to comply.

A new round of talks is now scheduled for Thursday in Geneva and expected to focus on Iran’s nuclear program, including uranium enrichment levels and sanctions relief.

‘The decision-making circle in the White House is very small regarding Iran, with the president keeping a close hand on it all,’ Harrison explained.

He added that any decision to directly target the Iranian regime would likely rest within Trump’s inner circle of advisers.

‘Normally there is input from the National Security Council and the wider intelligence community,’ Harrison said. ‘Since the decision-making process in the White House is opaque, it is hard to know how much of this is getting through.’

‘If the U.S. is engaging with the Saudis and Emiratis, they are getting warnings about the possibility of this war spreading to the broader region, which would be deleterious to the U.S. and its allies,’ he added.

Harrirson also warned that there was ‘potential for attacks to spread across the region, to Israel through direct Iranian ballistic attacks and via Hezbollah, and to the Gulf Arab states through Iran directly and possibly via the Houthis from Yemen.’

Regional media reports also suggest Iran’s ties with Hezbollah are strengthening. Sources told Al Arabiya and Al Hadath that IRGC officers have been rebuilding Hezbollah’s military infrastructure and managing strategic war plans.

The coordination follows changes within Hezbollah’s leadership, Harrison explained.

‘Since the killing by Israel of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah last year, ties and operational coordination have to some degree been reestablished,’ he said.

‘The IRGC has supported Hezbollah in Lebanon for decades,’ he said, adding that efforts to reestablish ties appear to be occurring ‘particularly in light of the destruction of Iran’s nuclear sites last June.’

‘Iran is trying to resurrect lost assets, such as its missile program and its connections to Hezbollah,’ Harrison said.

‘Hezbollah has been seen for decades by Iran as a deterrence asset against an Israeli or American attack. Since Hezbollah has its own interests, connected to but separate from Iran, whether its leadership will go all the way for Tehran is unknown,’ he concluded.

The developments surrounding Hezbollah and the IRGC came as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has appointed close ally Ali Larijani as the country’s de facto leader, according to reports.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

President Donald Trump called on Netflix to fire board member Susan Rice immediately or ‘pay the consequences.’

Trump’s comments followed remarks Rice made Thursday on the ‘Stay Tuned with Preet’ podcast, hosted by former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara. 

During the interview, Rice warned that corporations she said had ‘taken a knee’ to Republican pressure should not expect forgiveness from Democrats if they return to power.

‘This is not going to be an instance of forgive and forget. The damage that these people are doing is too severe to the American people and our national interest,’ Rice said.

It was not immediately clear what specific actions the Trump administration might pursue.

Netflix did not immediately respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment.

Rice made the remarks while discussing what she described as corporate retreats from diversity and governance commitments amid pressure from Republican lawmakers.

‘If these corporations think that the Democrats, when they come back into power, are going to, you know, play by the old rules, and, you know, say, ‘Oh, never mind. We’ll forgive you for all the people you fired, all the policies and principles you’ve violated, all, you know, the laws you’ve skirted.’ I think they’ve got another thing coming,’ Rice added.

Rice, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, predicted an ‘accountability agenda’ awaited those entities, forecasting an electoral shift in the upcoming midterm elections. 

She also pointed to waning public approval for Trump’s economic and immigration policies in making her case.