Turkey Challenges Israel's Eastern Mediterranean Energy Project
Turkey is intensifying efforts to disrupt a major energy infrastructure project connecting Israel, Cyprus, and Greece, escalating regional tensions. The "Great Sea Interconnector" aims to link the electricity grids of the three nations, a development that Ankara views as encroaching on its interests in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey asserts that work in disputed waters requires its consent, a stance Greece interprets as an attempt to establish de facto control over the region.
According to Sinan Cidi, director of the Turkey program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, this is part of a broader Turkish strategy to create "faits accomplis" by unilaterally altering the status quo. This includes establishing maritime parks, issuing navigation warnings, increasing military presence in Northern Cyprus, and strengthening ties with eastern Libya, all aligned with the "Blue Homeland" doctrine of expanding Turkish maritime influence.
Ankara's actions extend to increased military flights, including fighter jets and drones, in disputed areas and Greek airspace near islands, further alarming Athens. The energy project is strategically vital for Israel, promising to integrate its power system with Europe via Cyprus.
Cidi also notes Turkey's growing engagement in Syria, particularly with Ahmed al-Shara's administration, involving security, reconstruction, and arms supplies. He suggests Turkey sees Syria as a means to expand its strategic reach and leverage against Israel, potentially utilizing military sites like Palmyra and T4, which Israel has previously targeted. While Turkey officially denies seeking direct confrontation and accuses Israel of violating Syrian sovereignty, Israel has signaled its intent to continue striking military infrastructure it deems a threat.
Expert analysis suggests that Turkey's perceived confidence is partly due to its relationship with the Trump administration, leading Ankara to believe Washington will not strictly curb its actions. However, this remains an expert assessment, not an official US stance.
