Tensions between Turkey and Israel over Syria have sharply escalated after Israel carried out airstrikes on a Syrian airbase near the Turkish border, prompting Ankara to accuse Israel of using “untenable” claims to justify an attack on Syrian sovereignty.
The Israeli strikes targeted the Abu al-Duhur airbase near Aleppo on Tuesday. Syrian state media reported eight strikes on the runway and storage facilities, while Syrian and local sources said there were no casualties. The attack appeared to be Israel’s first strike on Syrian government assets since March.
The confrontation highlights the increasingly complicated strategic environment in post-Assad Syria, where Turkey has emerged as one of the main supporters of President Ahmed al-Sharaa while Israel remains deeply suspicious of Syria’s new leadership and its potential military partnerships.
Why Did Israel Strike the Syrian Airbase?
Israel said the strike was prompted by concerns that Syria was preparing to allow Turkish troops to deploy at Abu al-Duhur.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said Syria was on the verge of violating a security “status quo” agreed with Israel and warned that a Turkish deployment at the base would pose a threat to Israeli security.
Israel said it had repeatedly warned Syria against such a deployment and would not tolerate what it considered a new security threat.
Turkey, however, rejected Israel’s explanation and accused Netanyahu’s government of using the alleged Turkish deployment to legitimise what Ankara described as unlawful attacks against Syria.
The dispute therefore goes beyond a single airstrike. At its centre is a disagreement over what military presence should be permitted in post-Assad Syria and who has the right to determine the country’s security arrangements.
Why Is Turkey Supporting Syria’s New Government?
Turkey has become one of Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s main regional allies.
Ankara has been helping train Syria’s army, supporting the rebuilding of state institutions and infrastructure, and providing military and diplomatic backing to the new government.
Turkey views a stable Syrian government as important to its own regional security interests. Ankara also wants greater influence over Syria’s political and security reconstruction following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government.
That makes Israeli military action against Syrian government facilities particularly sensitive for Turkey.
Ankara has repeatedly accused Israel of attempting to destabilise Syria and undermine its new administration.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan recently said Israel continued to threaten Syria’s security through repeated attacks and called for international pressure on Israel to respect Syria’s territorial integrity.
Why Is Israel Suspicious of Syria’s New Leadership?
Israel’s concerns extend beyond Turkey.
Israel views Syria’s new rulers with deep suspicion because of their Islamist militant background. Although President Sharaa has developed warmer relations with Western governments, Israel has said it will not tolerate an Islamist military presence near its borders.
Since Assad was ousted in 2024, Israel has seized territory in southwestern Syria and destroyed significant amounts of Syrian military equipment.
Israel has also continued to conduct strikes against Syrian targets, building on a much longer campaign during Assad’s rule aimed at limiting Iranian influence and preventing weapons transfers to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
For Israel, therefore, the emergence of a stronger Syrian military backed by Turkey represents a potentially new security challenge.
For Turkey, Israeli attacks risk preventing Syria from rebuilding the military and state institutions necessary to establish long-term stability.
Why Is Turkey-Israel Tension Increasing?
The relationship between Turkey and Israel has already deteriorated sharply because of their opposing positions on the war in Gaza.
Syria has now become another major point of confrontation.
Both countries operate militarily in or around Syrian territory, but their objectives are increasingly different.
Turkey wants to strengthen Syria’s new government and help rebuild its military capabilities. Israel wants to prevent what it considers threatening military forces from establishing positions close to its borders.
That creates the possibility of direct friction even if neither government wants a broader military confrontation.
Last year, Turkey and Israel established a communication channel intended to prevent military incidents in Syria. But the latest strikes suggest that the existing mechanisms may not be sufficient to manage the growing competition.
Why Is Washington Trying to Prevent a Wider Conflict?
The United States has become increasingly concerned about the possibility of an unintended confrontation between its two partners.
Tom Barrack, the U.S. special presidential envoy for Syria and Iraq and ambassador to Turkey, said Washington was working to establish a formal deconfliction mechanism involving Turkey, Israel and Syria.
Barrack said Turkey had not been warned about the Israeli strikes and observed Israeli aircraft heading north toward Turkish territory. He said Turkey could therefore reasonably have prepared its own response.
According to Barrack, the situation was prevented from deteriorating further because officials managed to keep tensions under control. (Reuters)
Washington already facilitates information-sharing and dialogue among the parties, but the latest incident has increased pressure for a more structured mechanism.
The objective is straightforward: prevent military operations by one actor from being misinterpreted as an attack by another.
What Is at Stake for Syria?
The dispute comes at a particularly sensitive moment for Syria.
The country is attempting to rebuild its political institutions and military after more than a decade of civil war and the collapse of Assad’s government.
The presence of multiple foreign military actors complicates that process.
Israel continues to operate militarily in Syrian territory. Turkey is providing support to the new Syrian government. The United States remains involved diplomatically and militarily in the region, while Russia is also negotiating the future of its military presence in Syria.
For Damascus, the challenge is therefore not simply rebuilding the state.
It is doing so while navigating competing security interests among powerful regional and international actors.
Could Turkey and Israel Become Direct Rivals in Syria?
The risk of direct confrontation remains limited, but the possibility cannot be dismissed.
Turkey is a NATO member with one of the region’s largest militaries, while Israel possesses a highly capable air force and extensive intelligence capabilities.
Neither country has an obvious interest in entering a prolonged conflict with the other.
However, the danger lies in their competing operations.
A Turkish military deployment that Ankara views as support for Syria’s government could be interpreted by Israel as a new security threat. Conversely, an Israeli strike designed to prevent such a deployment could be viewed by Turkey as an attack on a partner government and a violation of Syrian sovereignty.
That creates a classic escalation problem in which defensive actions by one side can be perceived as offensive actions by the other.
Can a Deconfliction Mechanism Prevent Escalation?
The United States is now attempting to create mechanisms that can prevent such incidents from spiralling.
A deconfliction channel would allow Turkey, Israel and Syria to communicate about military movements and operations, reducing the risk of miscalculation.
The need for such a mechanism has become more urgent because the three countries increasingly have overlapping security interests in Syria.
Barrack said the priority was to lower tensions and allow space for a more measured approach.
Whether such a mechanism succeeds will depend on whether the parties are willing to communicate even when their strategic objectives remain fundamentally opposed.
Is Syria Becoming the Next Turkey-Israel Flashpoint?
The latest confrontation reveals that Syria is becoming an increasingly important arena for competition between Turkey and Israel.
The central problem is that both countries want fundamentally different security arrangements.
Turkey wants to help the Syrian government consolidate its authority, rebuild its military and establish greater stability. Israel, meanwhile, wants to ensure that neither Syria’s new leadership nor foreign forces operating alongside it create a new military threat on its borders.
The disagreement over Abu al-Duhur therefore represents something larger than a dispute over one airbase.
It is a struggle over who gets to shape Syria’s post-Assad security order.
Israel’s decision to strike the base demonstrates that it is prepared to use military force to prevent developments it considers threatening. Turkey’s response shows that Ankara increasingly sees attacks on Syria as a challenge to its own regional interests.
That combination could become dangerous.
The United States has an important role because it maintains relationships with both Turkey and Israel while also seeking to stabilise Syria. Washington’s effort to establish a deconfliction mechanism suggests it recognises that even a limited incident could produce consequences far beyond the original target.
The strategic challenge for Turkey and Israel is therefore not simply to defend their respective interests. It is to prevent their competing approaches to Syria from turning into a direct military confrontation.
Syria’s post-Assad transition is already a contest between competing regional visions. If Turkey and Israel cannot establish reliable channels to manage their military activities, Syria could become a new and increasingly dangerous flashpoint between two U.S. partners.
With information from Reuters.
