Israel-Turkey tensions raise fears of a wider regional confrontation

Steven Sahiounie, Journalist and Political Commentator

Tensions between Ankara and Tel Aviv have reached one of their most dangerous points in years. Although political and military disagreements between the two countries are not new, recent developments in Syria, combined with Turkey’s continued support for Palestine and Gaza, have brought the relationship to a critical juncture.

The latest escalation followed Israeli airstrikes targeting the Abu al-Duhur air base in Idlib, Syria. Israel justified the attack by claiming that Syria was preparing to allow Turkish forces to deploy at the facility. Turkey strongly rejected the allegation, with its Defense Ministry stating that there were no Turkish forces at the airport and no Turkish military delegation present before or during the strikes.

In the hours after the fall of former President Assad on December 8, 2024, Israel carried out hundreds of airstrikes on all military bases and facilities across Syria. This left Syria completely defenseless and devoid of security other than armed security forces of the new Syrian government. Tanks, helicopters, jets and weapons stockpiles were all destroyed.

The United States described the newest Israeli attack as an “unnecessary escalation” and revealed that Washington was working to establish a mechanism to prevent military friction between Israel, Turkey and Syria.

The strikes reportedly caused no casualties. Abu al-Duhur, located in northwestern Syria approximately 70 kilometers east of the Turkish border, has been out of military service for years and has changed hands repeatedly during Syria’s 14-year conflict.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nevertheless declared that Israel had sent Turkey a “clear message” that it would not accept the establishment of Turkish military bases in Syria. Although Israel did not formally claim responsibility for the strikes, Netanyahu’s remarks were widely interpreted as an implicit acknowledgment.

Israel has argued that a Turkish military presence in Syria could threaten its freedom of military movement and potentially establish a new strategic reality in which Turkish aircraft could restrict Israeli operations over Syrian territory. This has encouraged Israel to adopt what appears to be a policy of pre-emptive strikes aimed at enforcing its perceived red lines on the ground.

Turkey and Syria condemned the attack as aggression and a violation of Syrian sovereignty, warning that continued Israeli military action could further destabilize the region.

Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani disputed Israel’s justification for the attack in comments reported by Axios, saying Damascus had informed both Israel and the Trump administration before and after the strike that there was no intention to establish a permanent Turkish military base or deploy Turkish forces at Abu al-Duhur.

According to al-Shaibani, the work at the facility was focused on rehabilitation for the Syrian Air Force and was part of military cooperation and training programs involving several regional and international countries.

He also revealed that Damascus and Israel had conducted security negotiations for approximately one year under U.S. mediation. According to the Syrian minister, the two sides had reached a written security framework that took Israeli concerns into consideration, but Israel later backed away from its commitments.

Despite the attack, Damascus has indicated that it remains open to political solutions and de-escalation, provided Syrian sovereignty is respected. In the minutes following Assad’s departure, Israel invaded Syria and occupied a large part of Syrian territory south of the capital Damascus, and continues to occupy the land with no plans to leave, while terrorizing the residents.

President Donald Trump declined to directly criticize the Israeli strike, saying only that he knew the details, demonstrating the inability of Trump to exercise any pressure or constraint over Netanyahu.

The United States has become increasingly concerned that the confrontation could spiral into a direct military clash. U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack, who also serves as Washington’s ambassador to Turkey, said the United States was working on a mechanism to prevent a confrontation between Israel, Turkey and Syria.

The roots of the current confrontation go back much further than the Abu al-Duhur strike. Relations between Israel and Turkey suffered a major crisis in 2010 when Israeli forces intercepted the Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara, part of the Freedom Flotilla, resulting in the deaths of Turkish activists.

Turkey, along with many European countries, has criticized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, and have called it Genocide.

The confrontation has now expanded beyond Syria. Turkey announced that it intends to seek an Interpol Red Notice for Netanyahu as part of a domestic criminal case connected to an attack on activists attempting to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. Turkey has previously issued domestic arrest warrants against Netanyahu over the Gaza war and has repeatedly called for international action against Israel.

Direct military conflict would be extraordinarily dangerous. Both Turkey and Israel are closely connected to Washington, while Turkey is a member of NATO.

Another major question concerns the regional security arrangements involving Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. If Turkey were directly attacked, would Ankara’s partners activate broader defense commitments, including those associated with the Mecca agreement, or would those arrangements remain primarily political and deterrent in nature?

Syria is undergoing a major transformation, and Turkey has been a strategic partner, but Israel has been acting as an enemy before and after the fall of Assad. Instead of embracing the opportunity to develop a peace and security relationship with Syria, Israel has insisted on invasion, occupation, and continued airstrikes.

Washington is unable to prevent Israel’s continuing land-grab in Gaza, West Bank and Syria. The US-Israeli war on Iran continues to widen, with no end in sight.

The newest confrontation between Ankara and Tel Aviv is no longer merely a diplomatic dispute, but could be the beginning of a new and potentially devastating chapter in the Middle East.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist.