Turkey doesn't seek conflict with Israel in Syria. Here's why
The collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria has alarmed many regional countries, including the UAE and Egypt - but Israel is particularly concerned by this development.
An Israeli government committee has even suggested that a Syria ruled by Sunni Islamists who don’t recognise Israel’s right to exist could potentially pose a bigger threat to the country than Iran, Israel’s archenemy.
The committee was particularly unnerved by Turkey’s influence in Syria, claiming that Ankara could use the new Syrian government as a proxy force “to restore the Ottoman Crown to its former glory” - whatever that means.
The report noted that Ankara could rapidly rearm the new Syrian government, potentially triggering a direct conflict between Israel and Turkey.
But is this a realistic scenario? In short, the answer is no.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Although Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has gradually weakened Turkish-Israeli bilateral relations - cutting trade ties, denying air travel to senior Israeli officials, accusing Tel Aviv of genocide at the International Court of Justice, and delivering fiery populist speeches hinting that the Turkish army could one day aid the Palestinian people - there is no indication that Ankara seeks a military confrontation with Israel.
Apart from the fact that both Turkey and Israel are US allies, and the two sides have never engaged in a military conflict, Ankara has no appetite for such adventures - especially while the region is already grappling with an ongoing war between Iran and Israel, alongside the catastrophe unfolding in Gaza.
Turkey's objectives in Syria
Turkey’s aims in Syria are very clear, and they have been communicated both publicly and privately to all actors involved.
Firstly, as Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan noted, Ankara wants a stable Syria that poses no threat to other nations. Secondly, Turkey envisions a democratic, unitary and civil state in Syria - one that embraces minorities and all ethnic groups, while preventing the formation of a Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) statelet.
After hosting millions of Syrian refugees for more than a decade and conducting multiple military operations, which have cost Turkish lives and hundreds of millions of dollars, Ankara wants a Syria that can economically and socially flourish. A conflict with Israel, whether direct or indirect, does not align with that goal.
An Israeli report recently suggested that Tel Aviv prefers a fragmented Syria to safeguard its security interests. This is a mistake
So far, Turkey’s actions have supported these objectives.
Ankara initially - and to a large extent - turned a blind eye to Israel’s aerial campaign to destroy remnants of the Assad regime’s military facilities. But after Israel expanded its targets significantly, Fidan announced that Turkey had relayed a message to Israel that such attacks must stop.
Fidan acknowledged Israeli concerns that arms, such as chemical weapons, could fall into the wrong hands. Notably, Israel has avoided striking any Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) targets.
Furthermore, Turkey has reportedly taken the first steps to establish a deconfliction mechanism with the Israeli military in Syria. Reports also point to routine engagements between Turkish and Israeli intelligence agencies.
In addition, according to my sources, Ankara has encouraged HTS leaders, including Ahmed al-Sharaa, to issue statements advocating calm with Israel. Several HTS figures have publicly said they are not seeking a clash with Israel.
Risks of fragmentation
Meanwhile, according to my Turkish contacts, there are indications that Damascus may seek to engage Ankara militarily, potentially moving Turkish advisers to Syrian military academies and airbases, to help re-establish a unified Syrian army under the Syrian defence ministry.
Turkey is mindful of Israeli concerns regarding such cooperation. What I hear is that Turkey's deployments will be limited. They would not go beyond Hama and, to some extent, Damascus - an effort to reassure Israel that Ankara’s actions are not hostile.
But Israel must come to terms with the fact that Ankara will not tolerate a PKK-controlled statelet in northern Syria. Turkey has consistently insisted that Kurdish groups must be integrated into a unified Syrian state.
An Israeli report recently suggested that Tel Aviv prefers a fragmented Syria to safeguard its security interests. This is a mistake.
Another report in Israel Hayom this week also talked about Israel's plan for an international conference to divide Syria into canons.
A fragmented Syria would be a breeding ground for armed groups, further destabilising the region and creating long-term risks for Israel. By contrast, a democratic and inclusive Syria serves everyone’s interests.
Unfortunately, it is clear that Israel’s leadership prefers dealing with autocratic regimes, which are more transactional and reliable in their oppressive policies - making Israel’s war on Gaza and the occupied West Bank easier to justify and swallow.
It is true that Turkey now has a friend in Damascus. Erdogan stands to benefit from this relationship on multiple fronts: domestically, economically and regionally.
But this does not mean that the new Syrian government will become a Turkish proxy. On the contrary, if fortune is on our side, Syria will - for the first time - have a legitimate administration focused on one thing only: rebuilding the country as a place of peace and prosperity.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
