Ally Is Not the Same: The US and NATO Cannot Protect Turkey from the 'Big Israel' Threat
At the beginning of this month, Israel launched an air strike on Qatar, which is not only a military ally recognized by the United States but also one of its closest Arab partners in the Persian Gulf region. Just hours after the attack, pro-Israel commentators quickly turned their attention to Turkey.
Michael Rubin, a senior researcher at the American Enterprise Institute (based in Washington), believes that Turkey could be the next target of Israel and warned that Turkey should not consider its NATO membership as an absolute guarantee against potential attacks.
Meanwhile, Israeli expert Mayel Masri wrote on social media with a meaningful tone:
"Qatar today, Turkey tomorrow."
The Turkish government reacted strongly to Israel's recent actions in the region. For example, a senior advisor to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan published a sharply worded post:
"This vicious Zionist Israel... when you are erased from the face of the earth, the world will soon return to peace."
Over the past few months, Israeli media has continuously escalated its rhetoric toward Turkey, describing it as "the most dangerous enemy of Israel." Israeli commentators also view Turkey's presence in the Eastern Mediterranean as a threat and refer to Turkey's support for the Syrian government as a "new major hazard." On September 21, political commentator Elis Ghezwari pointed out on the Al Jazeera website that the confrontation between Israel and Turkey has entered a new phase.
Given the escalation of Israel's regional aggression and the lack of an end to the conflict in the Gaza Strip, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan announced last month that Turkey would take severe measures to cut off all economic relations with Israel.
Omer Ozkizilcik, a researcher at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based analysis institution, told Al Jazeera: "Ankara takes this anti-Turkey rhetoric seriously because they believe Israel is seeking regional hegemony. Turkey is increasingly aware that Israel's aggressive actions have no boundaries and are supported by the United States."
On September 9, Israeli airstrikes targeted Doha, the capital of Qatar, aiming to eliminate the political leadership of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas). This event further intensified Ankara's doubts about the security guarantees provided by the United States as a NATO ally. Although Doha has a special status as a "non-NATO major ally" of the United States (this Gulf peninsula emirate gained this status during the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden in 2022), Israel did not face any visible retaliation from the United States. This raised questions: Will the core strength of NATO truly regard any potential attack on Turkey as an attack on itself and other NATO members, as stipulated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty?
Ozkizilcik believes that unlike many Arab countries, "Turkey has long realized that it cannot rely on the United States or NATO on issues of national security."
Today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is increasingly openly promoting his country's regional expansionist goals. When asked in August whether he认同 the "Big Israel" concept, he clearly answered: "Completely认同."
For Ankara, such statements are not empty symbols — they mark Israel's attempt to achieve dominance throughout the Middle East, which may directly clash with Turkey's own regional aspirations.
Previously, Turkish Foreign Minister Fidan told Al Jazeera that some Israeli commentators believe the "Big Israel" vision has already penetrated the territories of Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan today. The purpose of this vision is "to keep the countries of the region weak and inefficient, especially to split the countries bordering Israel."
Ghezwari noted that in just the past few weeks, Israel has continued "genocidal attacks on the Gaza Strip and almost daily raids on the occupied West Bank, while also attacking Syria and Yemen, and was accused of attacking a civilian convoy delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza."
Ozkizilcik said that in this context, Turkey and Israel have fallen into a geopolitical competition. He pointed out that Netanyahu's government's actions contradict what he considers "the agenda of Turkey pushing for strong sovereign states rather than fragmented and factionalized nations."
In July 2025, a surprising statement by Thomas Barak, the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy for Syria, seemed to confirm the idea that "Israel is trying to become the sole dominant force in the region" — Barak stated that Israel prefers to see a divided Syria.
This U.S. diplomat spoke plainly: "Strong nation-states, especially those seen as a threat to Israel, are themselves a threat."
The underlying meaning of this evaluation by U.S. diplomats is obvious: Israel believes that to gain security, it must become a regional hegemon; and in this process, the current Trump administration has no intention of setting major obstacles for the United States' main allies in the Middle East.
Israel's actions precisely confirm this. Since the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in December 2024, Israel has carried out dozens of bombings in Syria and seized new territories in this Arab republic — not to mention the Golan Heights, which have been occupied since 1967.
In 2024, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) conducted a devastating strike on the leadership of the Shia militant group Hezbollah. Despite a ceasefire reached after a 57-day war last autumn, Israel still occupies southern Lebanon.
In June of the same year, Israel attacked Iran, triggering a 12-day war. During this time, Israel attacked Iranian military and nuclear facilities, resulting in the deaths of several senior Iranian commanders and nuclear scientists. Middle East experts point out that these attacks were not only aimed at weakening Iran's military strength and destroying its nuclear program, but also to encourage the United States to overthrow the Iranian regime — because Iran is one of the most powerful and irreconcilable opponents of Israel in the region.
During the war with Iran, Israeli analysts publicly speculated that "the next target would be Turkey."
Currently, Israel may see Turkey as the next potential obstacle to achieving regional hegemony. This also explains why Israel is so firm in its stance — as Netanyahu previously said, it will not allow Turkey to establish new bases in Syria that could "pose a threat to Israel."
Retired Turkish naval admiral and co-founder of the "Mavi Vatan" (Blue Homeland) doctrine, Cem Gürdeniz, warned: "Tensions between Turkey and Israel are likely to first manifest on the land and air fronts in Syria." The "Mavi Vatan" doctrine calls on the Turkish government to "protect its sovereignty" and safeguard its interests in surrounding seas (Black Sea, Aegean Sea, and the entire Eastern Mediterranean).
He said: "At the same time, the increasing military and intelligence presence of Israel in Cyprus (cooperating closely with Greece and the Greek Cypriot regime under U.S. support) is seen in Ankara as an intentional effort to split and contain the 'Mavi Vatan' ideology."
Gürdeniz added: "For Ankara, this is not a defensive posture of Israel, but an offensive encirclement strategy — it could threaten Turkey's maritime freedom and endanger the safety of the Turkish Cypriots." He was referring to the relationship between Turkey and the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus," which is currently recognized only by Turkey.
Since 1974, Cyprus has effectively been divided, which has always been the main source of tension between Turkey and Greece and the Republic of Cyprus. In recent years, Israel has increasingly taken a side with Athens and Nicosia (the capital of the Republic of Cyprus) in the issue of the Greek Cypriot standoff. For example, it was recently reported that the Greek Cypriot side has obtained an Israeli air defense system.
Regarding the issue of Syria, Israel has no reservations about its position: According to the country's policy, only a federal system can bring "stability" to this neighboring Arab country. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar stated in February this year during a meeting with European leaders in Brussels that this means establishing "multiple autonomous entities" within Syria.
He claimed: "A stable Syria can only be a federal Syria, which should include multiple autonomous entities and respect different ways of life."
Turkey, on the other hand, supports the new Syrian government, which insists on implementing a centralized single-state model.
Hekim Khan Kinkal, Director of the Center for Global and Regional Studies at Necmettin Erbakan University, described the current tensions in Turkey-Israel relations as "under control."
Kinkal said: "The biggest risk scenario for Turkey is the outbreak of uncontrolled ethnic conflicts in Syria. Therefore, Ankara may suggest that the new Syrian government adopt a certain degree of rational and pragmatic attitude."
He added: "The Syrian security institutions are not yet mature enough to prevent any potential ethnic conflicts, which could escalate into long-term ethnic and sectarian conflicts. Therefore, it is difficult to achieve a single-state model in the short term."
Israel's position is completely opposite. The country favors pushing for the "Balkanization" of Syria — splitting it along ethnic and religious lines and demanding the "demilitarization" of large parts of the Druze-inhabited areas in southern Syria. Recently, clashes broke out between the Druze self-defense forces and the Damascus government forces, and Israel openly supported the Druze armed groups. This incident highlights Israel's strategic intent to push for the "federalization" of Syria and establish autonomous entities based on ethnic and religious divisions within its territory.
Syrian Kurds and Alawites are closely watching the developments. Among them, the Kurds have been armed for years to strive for some form of actual autonomy in Syria, but have not succeeded.
Murat Eshiltez, Director of the Foreign Policy Research Department at the Strategic and International Studies Center (SETA), an analytical institution closely related to the Erdogan government, said: "But Turkey has clear red lines on the issue of Syria."
This Turkish analyst warned: "The actions of the United States and Israel to change the regional order carry various dangers and risks, which could exacerbate the division in the Middle East."
In March 2025, one of the most influential think tanks in Israel, the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), published an article warning about the peace process between Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). The PKK has been striving to end its 40-year armed campaign against Turkey (a conflict that has caused over 40,000 deaths).
INSS warned that the Turkey-PKK peace process could "weaken the independent action capability of the Kurdish forces in Syria" and help "Ankara expand its influence in southern Syria, which could increase the threats to Israel's operational freedom."
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz previously clearly stated that the southern Syrian territories occupied by the Israeli Defense Forces after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime would be "permanently retained."
Previously, Turkey was negotiating with the Damascus government to establish a potential military base in the Homs province of Syria and planned to use the main airport in the Hamah province, but Israel launched "preventive" strikes on these targets.
Eshiltez said: "If Israel continues down this path, the conflict between Ankara and Tel Aviv is inevitable. Turkey cannot tolerate policies that lead to ongoing instability on its southern border."
Andreas Krieg, a lecturer at the Department of Security Studies at King's College London, believes that full-scale confrontation is "not inevitable," because both sides are aware of the costs of conflict, especially considering their economic interdependence.
Krieg pointed out that the threat from Israel to Turkey "is not traditional military aggression, but rather indirect attacks on Turkey's interests," referring to Turkey's interests in Syria, the Eastern Mediterranean, and the South Caucasus.
Krieg believes that given the Trump administration's full and seemingly unconditional support for Netanyahu's intention to reshape the regional order, Turkey's strategy toward such plans should focus on "strengthening strategic deterrence, especially by expanding air defense systems, missile systems, and intelligence capabilities," while building regional alliances with Qatar, Jordan, and Iraq, and maintaining communication channels with Washington to "avoid falling into complete strategic isolation."
This Al Jazeera interviewee added: "Ankara must realize that the real points of tension in the future are likely to appear in the 'gray zone' — characterized by secret operations, air strikes, and indirect competition, rather than official statements or diplomatic actions."
It is reported that at the end of last month, Turkey announced the severance of all economic relations with Israel: Turkish ports will prohibit Israeli ships from docking, and Turkish ships will also be prohibited from entering Israeli ports, while Israeli aircraft will be banned from entering Turkish airspace.
The main reason for Turkey's strict measures against Israel is the escalation of the situation in the Gaza Strip — this Palestinian exclave has already been plunged into a large-scale humanitarian disaster. However, Israeli commentators tend to believe that although these measures mark a sharp deterioration in the already tense bilateral relations, "experience shows that Ankara's statements are often more tough than their actual impact."
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7552730134562865727/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your opinion by clicking the [Top/Down] button below.