Turkey's Interests Map Behind Erdogan's Unusual Attack on Israel

Turkey's President came out against Israel, saying it was threatening his homeland. Jerusalem and Ankara have conflicting interests in several different arenas, and the statement was also intended for domestic consumption.

Tomer Almogor, N12, published: 11.06.26, 13:38

News in brief: Relations between Turkey and Israel have been escalating over the past two years, and Erdogan's statement may signal a further step up. The two countries are active in Syria and deeply involved in developments there. At the same time, their interests clash in the eastern Mediterranean. An Israeli source told N12, “We are in a low-intensity confrontation with Turkey.”

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan launched an exceptionally harsh attack on Israel yesterday (Wednesday), declaring that it was “threatening Turkey.” His remarks come against the backdrop of increasingly escalatory Turkish rhetoric toward Israel, as Ankara's map of interests collides with Jerusalem's on a range of issues, from the eastern Mediterranean, through Iran, to Syria.

“We are in a low-intensity confrontation,” an Israeli source told N12. “Turkey is a very big challenge for Israel. The echoes of that challenge are at the rhetorical level. It has gone beyond the accepted diplomatic level and become unbearable, you can say anything.”

“The things Erdogan says are not entirely new, they are refurbished,” the Israeli source added. In his view, Turkey has no interest in entering a regional confrontation with Israel, especially not as a NATO member, but it does have other means to act against Jerusalem. “Erdogan has ways to deal with Israel. In the economic arena, he stopped trade, in the international arena, wherever the Turks can block us, they do.”

The Syrian-Lebanese arena

In his unusual remarks before the Turkish parliament, Erdogan said Israel's strikes in Syria and Lebanon had reached a point where they also directly threatened Turkey. Syria is a very important country for Turkey, which borders it and has invested heavily there, especially since the fall of the Assad regime and the rise of al-Sharaa.

“Turkey sees Syria as a sphere of influence and would like some kind of little sister, a client state, something the Syrians do not necessarily want,” explains Nimrod Goren, president and founder of the Mitvim Institute and co-director of Diplomeds. “Over the past year there has been tension between Turkey and Israel regarding Syria,” he adds, noting that over the years Israel and Turkey knew how to coordinate red lines and policy in Syria in order to avoid confrontation.

Erdogan's reference to Lebanon is different, since Lebanon is not a Turkish sphere of influence and Hezbollah is far from close to Erdogan, Goren explains. In his view, Erdogan is “riding” the situation created in Lebanon, where Israel is constrained by the United States and is facing sharp international criticism over its activity in the country.

The eastern Mediterranean arena

Alongside the Syrian-Lebanese arena, Erdogan also referred in his threats to the clash of interests with Israel in the Mediterranean. “We are seeing mischievous initiatives led by Israel also in the Mediterranean. No one should be chasing adventures in this region,” the Turkish leader said, adding, “Our response will be clear and strong if the rights of the Turks and Turkish Cypriots are violated in the eastern Mediterranean.”

“The eastern Mediterranean is a much more challenging arena for us in relation to the Turks,” the Israeli source said. “For Turkey, there is an open confrontation with Greece in the eastern Mediterranean, over sovereignty on islands and maritime territory, and Turkey has very good naval warfare capabilities.” The source added that Cyprus is also critical for Turkey.

These arenas in Erdogan's rhetoric collide with the warming ties between Israel and Greece and Cyprus. At the end of 2025, the leaders of the three countries met in Israel and announced the deepening of their political and military cooperation, with Turkey in their sights.

Goren explains that Israel has an alliance with Greece and Cyprus that threatens Turkey. “Turkey sees that the architecture of the eastern Mediterranean still exists after the war, it thinks this is a mechanism being used against it. And it is making sure to display power in the Mediterranean space,” the expert says, defining this alliance as a “strategic problem” for Turkey.

The Israeli source who spoke with N12 made clear that in none of the arenas is the confrontation expected to spill over into military means, but that “if you look at the map of probabilities and risks, it is higher in the eastern Mediterranean than in Syria and Lebanon.” In his view, this arena has a greater chance of a “mistake” that could lead to escalation.

Erdogan's ambitions, and the American backing

In recent years Erdogan has intensified his efforts to expand Turkey's power and position it as a regional power, and he sees Israel both as an obstacle to that goal and as a means to achieve it. He would like to weaken its power to ensure he is one of the strongest players in the region, while also distinguishing himself and strengthening his standing through confrontations with Jerusalem.

“It is also part of Turkey's policy to distinguish itself from other Arab states, and to be the more aggressive and active country toward Israel,” Goren says, explaining that this is a move intended to place Turkey in a stronger position in the region. At the same time, Erdogan's remarks are aimed at his domestic audience, much of which is hostile to Israel.

Turkey's strength stems in large part from American backing and the good relations between Trump and Erdogan. “Erdogan is very dependent on the Americans. The source of his power is the trust Trump places in him,” the Israeli source said.

The source estimates that the Turkish leader's rhetorical escalation will continue, but will not necessarily produce a change in actual policy: “The Americans easily absorb the Turkish rhetorical level. As long as the US does not set Turkey red lines on the rhetorical issue, and it does not, then the unbearable rhetoric will remain and intensify.”