Anatolia in Crosshairs:

Türkiye’s Strategic Response to Israeli Belligerence and Regional Upheaval

Professor Habib Al-Badawi

Palestinian schoolboys hold a poster depicting Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during a rally at Gaza Seaport calling on Erdoğan to visit the Gaza Strip. September 13, 2011. (REUTERS/Ismail Zaydah)

In the wake of escalating Israeli belligerence across Gaza and Lebanon, Türkiye finds itself at a critical juncture, forced to recalibrate its regional security strategy in response to rapidly shifting geopolitical dynamics. The events of October 7, 2023, marked a watershed moment, revealing the extent of Tel Aviv’s expansionist ambitions and catalyzing a series of strategic reassessments across the Middle East.

As the conflict unfolds, Türkiye’s response has been both nuanced and resolute, reflecting the complex interplay of historical memory, national interest, and regional aspirations that define Ankara’s foreign policy in an era of unprecedented volatility.

Erdogan’s rhetorical offensive: framing the conflict.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s response to the unfolding crisis has been characterized by a potent blend of historical analogy, nationalist sentiment, and pan-Islamic solidarity. By drawing explicit parallels between Palestinian resistance and Türkiye’s own struggles for independence, Erdogan has skillfully reframed the conflict not as a distant geopolitical concern but as a direct threat to Türkiye’s national security and historical legacy. This rhetorical strategy serves multiple purposes: it galvanizes domestic support, positions Türkiye as a leader in the Muslim world, and signals to regional and international actors that Ankara views the conflict through the lens of its own strategic imperatives.

Erdogan’s invocation of the “Kuva-yi Milliye”—the v vanguard of Türkiye’s war of independence—is particularly significant. By equating the Palestinian struggle with this foundational moment in Turkish history, he elevates the conflict from a regional dispute to an existential battle for national survival.

This framing resonates deeply with Turkish nationalist sentiment and serves to justify a more interventionist stance in regional affairs. Moreover, by declaring that “the epic struggle waged by Hamas in Gaza is also for Türkiye,” Erdogan effectively collapses the distinction between Turkish and Palestinian interests, creating a powerful narrative of shared destiny that transcends geographic boundaries.

The Turkish president’s warnings about Israeli intentions have grown increasingly stark as the conflict has progressed. His assertion that Israel “has Turkish territory in mind after Palestine and Lebanon“ represents a calculated escalation of rhetoric, designed to alert both domestic and international audiences to the perceived scope of the threat. By framing Israeli actions as part of a broader strategy of regional domination—one that ultimately targets Türkiye itself—Erdoğan seeks to legitimize a more assertive Turkish foreign policy and to rally support from other regional powers who may share similar concerns about Israeli expansionism.

Coalition Politics and National Unity

The gravity of the perceived threat is underscored by the remarkable alignment between Erdogan and his coalition partner, Devlet Bahceli, of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). Bahceli’s statement that “the issue today is not Beirut but Ankara, and the ultimate goal is Anatolia“ echoes Erdogan’s framing of the conflict and demonstrates a rare moment of unity in Türkiye’s often fractious political landscape. This convergence of rhetoric between the government and a key nationalist ally serves to reinforce the narrative of national peril and marginalize domestic opposition to a more interventionist foreign policy.

Bahceli’s call for “the urgent use of force to stop Israel” and his characterization of Israeli actions as “genocide” represent a significant hardening of Türkiye’s official stance. By using such unequivocal language, the Turkish leadership is not only expressing its moral outrage but also signaling its readiness to consider more direct forms of intervention if the conflict continues to escalate. The invocation of genocide carries profound historical and legal implications, potentially paving the way for more robust Turkish action under the auspices of international law and humanitarian intervention.

Diplomatic maneuvers and regional realignments

Türkiye’s diplomatic response to the crisis has been marked by a series of bold and sometimes surprising initiatives. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s revelation of his meeting with the late Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah just days after the outbreak of hostilities is particularly noteworthy.

This high-level engagement with a non-state actor traditionally viewed as hostile to Turkish interests underscores the fluidity of regional alliances in the face of perceived common threats. By bypassing traditional diplomatic channels and engaging directly with Hezbollah, Türkiye demonstrates its willingness to pursue unconventional strategies to safeguard its interests and influence the course of events.

The significance of this outreach to Hezbollah cannot be overstated. It represents a tacit acknowledgment of the group’s significant role in any future regional security architecture and signals Türkiye’s intention to position itself as a key mediator in the complex web of Middle Eastern politics. Moreover, this diplomatic gambit serves to differentiate Türkiye’s approach from that of its Western allies, particularly the United States, which continues to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. By engaging with actors across the ideological spectrum, Türkiye seeks to maximize its strategic flexibility and enhance its regional influence.

Anticipating Strategic Threats: The Syrian Dilemma

Türkiye’s strategic calculus extends far beyond the immediate theater of conflict in Gaza and Lebanon. Ankara’s leadership has demonstrated acute awareness of the potential for the conflict to spill over into Syria, with profound implications for Turkish security. The prospect of Israeli military intervention in Syria, ostensibly to counter Iranian influence, presents Türkiye with a complex set of challenges and potential opportunities.

Erdogan’s warning that “Israel will come to northern Syria the moment it occupies Damascus“ reflects a deep-seated fear of strategic encirclement. The Turkish leadership is acutely aware that any significant Israeli military presence in Syria could alter the delicate balance of power in the region and potentially embolden Kurdish separatist movements along Türkiye’s southern border. The historical memory of the destabilizing effects of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq looms large in Turkish strategic thinking, informing a heightened sense of vulnerability to external interventions in neighboring states.

The potential for Kurdish groups, particularly the YPG (People’s Protection Units), to exploit any power vacuum created by Israeli intervention in Syria represents a nightmare scenario for Turkish planners. Ankara has long viewed the establishment of an autonomous Kurdish entity in northern Syria as an existential threat, fearing that it could serve as a springboard for separatist ambitions within Türkiye itself. The close ties between certain Kurdish factions and Israel only serve to heighten these concerns, creating a combustible mix of geopolitical and ethno-nationalist tensions that threaten to upend regional stability.

The refugee dilemma: Balancing humanitarian concerns and national security

Official estimates say at least 38,345 people have been killed in Gaza since the start of Israel’s offensive in October last year. | Omar Al-Qattaa/AFP via Getty Images

The prospect of further regional destabilization also raises the specter of a new refugee crisis, a scenario that Türkiye—already host to millions of Syrian refugees—views with grave concern. The announcement by UNHCR spokesman Matthew Saltmarsh that Lebanon is hosting over 1.5 million refugees, many of whom may face the risk of secondary displacement, underscores the potential for a cascading humanitarian crisis that could have far-reaching implications for Türkiye and Europe.

Türkiye’s experience with the Syrian refugee crisis has profoundly shaped its approach to regional conflicts. The social, economic, and political strains caused by the influx of millions of refugees have left deep scars on Turkish society and informed a more cautious approach to humanitarian interventions. As the conflict in Gaza and Lebanon threatens to spill over into neighboring countries, Türkiye finds itself walking a tightrope between its humanitarian obligations and its national security imperatives.

The potential for a new wave of refugees presents Türkiye with a complex set of challenges. On the one hand, Ankara is keen to maintain its image as a compassionate regional power and to uphold its international obligations. On the other hand, the domestic political costs of accepting more refugees could be significant, particularly at a time when economic pressures and social tensions are already running high. This dilemma is further complicated by the fact that any large-scale refugees could alter the demographic balance in sensitive border regions, potentially exacerbating existing ethnic and sectarian tensions.

Military Posture and Preemptive Action

In response to the evolving regional threat landscape, Türkiye has adopted a proactive military posture, signaling its readiness to take preventive action to safeguard its interests. The visit by Commander of the Turkish Land Forces, Selcuk Bayrakdaroglu, to the “Olive Branch“ area of operations in northern Syria is a clear demonstration of Türkiye’s commitment to maintaining a robust military presence along its southern border. This show of force serves multiple purposes: it deters potential adversaries, reassures domestic constituencies, and signals to regional actors that Türkiye remains a formidable military power capable of projecting force beyond its borders.

The Turkish Ministry of Defense’s announcement that it is closely monitoring developments in the region, particularly considering increasing Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Syria, suggests that Ankara is preparing for a range of contingencies. This heightened state of military readiness reflects a strategic calculus that prioritizes preemption over reaction. By maintaining a forward-leaning posture, Türkiye seeks to deter potential threats before they materialize and to preserve its ability to shape regional outcomes through the credible threat of force.

The possibility of further Turkish military operations in northern Syria and Iraq looms large as Ankara seeks to neutralize perceived threats from Kurdish militant groups. These potential interventions, while ostensibly aimed at countering terrorist activities, also serve broader strategic objectives.

By establishing a buffer zone along its southern border, Türkiye aims to prevent the emergence of an autonomous Kurdish entity and to maintain leverage over the future political settlement in Syria. Moreover, these military actions allow Türkiye to demonstrate its willingness and ability to act unilaterally in defense of its national interests, even in the face of international criticism.

Diplomatic Outreach and Regional Leadership

Recognizing the limits of military power alone in addressing complex regional challenges, Türkiye has simultaneously pursued an ambitious diplomatic agenda aimed at positioning itself as a key mediator and regional leader. Erdogan’s call for a unified Muslim response to Israeli actions reflects Türkiye’s aspiration to lead a coalition of like-minded states in reshaping the regional order. This appeal to Islamic solidarity serves multiple strategic objectives: it enhances Türkiye’s soft power, challenges the legitimacy of rival regional powers, and provides a moral framework for more assertive Turkish action on the global stage.

Türkiye’s diplomatic efforts extend beyond the Muslim world, encompassing outreach to major powers with stakes in the region. Erdogan’s call for Russia, Iran, and Syria to take more effective measures against separatist organizations reflects a pragmatic recognition of the need for broad-based cooperation to address shared security challenges. By engaging with a diverse array of actors, including those with whom it has had historical tensions, Türkiye seeks to maximize its strategic flexibility and to position itself as an indispensable player in any future regional security architecture.

Domestic Cohesion and National Mobilization

The perceived gravity of the external threat has prompted a recalibration of Türkiye’s domestic political dynamics, with Erdogan adopting a more conciliatory approach towards opposition parties and seeking to foster a sense of national unity in the face of common danger. The symbolic handshake between nationalist leader Devlet Bahceli and members of the Party for Democracy and Peoples’ Equality (DEM) in parliament, despite long-standing animosities, exemplifies this push for domestic cohesion.

By framing the external threat as an existential challenge to the “thousand-year-old brotherhood” of the Turkish nation, Erdogan seeks to transcend partisan divides and mobilize broad-based support for a more assertive foreign policy.

This drive for national unity serves multiple strategic purposes. It enhances Türkiye’s resilience in the face of external pressures, reduces the potential for domestic opposition to constrain foreign policy options, and projects an image of strength and resolve to both allies and adversaries. Moreover, by fostering a narrative of shared national purpose, Erdogan seeks to preempt potential social and political fractures that could be exploited by external actors seeking to destabilize Türkiye.

Conclusion: Navigating an Uncertain Future

As the conflict in Gaza and Lebanon continues to evolve, Türkiye finds itself at a critical juncture, forced to navigate a complex and rapidly shifting strategic landscape. The challenges ahead are formidable: preventing regional fragmentation, mitigating the risk of refugee flows, countering separatist threats, and asserting Turkish influence in a multipolar Middle East. Yet, in these challenges lie opportunities for Türkiye to redefine its role on the global stage and to shape the future of regional security.

Türkiye’s response to the crisis has been characterized by a multifaceted approach that combines military readiness, diplomatic outreach, and domestic mobilization. By framing the conflict as a direct threat to Turkish security and historical legacy, Erdogan has sought to galvanize national support for a more assertive foreign policy. The alignment between government and nationalist forces on this issue suggests that Türkiye is prepared to take bold action to safeguard its interests, even at the risk of tensions with traditional allies.

Looking ahead, Türkiye’s strategic priorities are likely to focus on several key areas:

  1. Fostering domestic unity and resilience in the face of external challenges while navigating the complex social and economic pressures associated with potential refugee flows.
  2. Intensifying diplomatic efforts to build a coalition of regional powers capable of counterbalancing Israeli and Western influence in the Middle East.
  3. Maintaining a robust military posture along its southern border to deter potential threats and preserve strategic flexibility.
  4. Positioning Türkiye as a key mediator and power broker in regional conflicts, leveraging its unique geopolitical position and cultural ties to project influence beyond its borders.
  5. Pursuing preemptive action against perceived security threats, particularly in northern Syria and Iraq, while carefully managing the risk of escalation.

As the region grapples with the fallout from the Gaza conflict and the specter of wider instability, Türkiye’s actions will play a crucial role in shaping the trajectory of events. Ankara’s ability to balance its strategic ambitions with the realities of regional power dynamics will be put to the test in the coming months and years. The outcome of this strategic recalibration will have profound implications not only for Türkiye’s national security but for the future of the entire Middle East.

In this volatile environment, Türkiye’s leadership faces the daunting task of charting a course that safeguards national interests while avoiding the pitfalls of overreach or strategic isolation. The stakes could not be higher: the decisions made in Ankara in the coming weeks and months may well determine the shape of the regional order for years to come. As Türkiye navigates these turbulent waters, its actions will be closely watched by friends and foes alike, each seeking to gauge the extent of Ankara’s resolve and the depth of its strategic vision in an era of unprecedented geopolitical flux.

Footnotes

  1. Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye. (2024). Official website. https://www.tccb.gov.tr/en/
  2. Wikipedia contributors. (2023, October 11). Kuva-yi Milliye. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuva-yi_Milliye  
  3. Pamuk, H., & Spicer, J. (2023, October 25). Turkey’s Erdogan says Hamas is not a terrorist organisation. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkeys-erdogan-says-hamas-is-not-terrorist-organisation-2023-10-25/ 
  4. Karagül, I. (2023, August 8). Is Israel a national security threat for Türkiye? Daily Sabah. https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/columns/is-israel-a-national-security-threat-for-turkiye
  5. Nationalist Movement Party. (2024). Devlet Bahçeli. https://www.mhp.org.tr/htmldocs/genel_baskan/5/hayati/devlet_bahceli.html
  6. Caliber.Az. (2023, October 25). Turkish MP: Israel’s hidden agenda targets Türkiye. Caliber.az. https://caliber.az/en/post/turkish-mp-israel-s-hidden-agenda-targets-turkiye
  7. Al Mayadeen. (2024, October 5). By day 373 of Israeli genocide in Gaza—42,227 killed. Al Mayadeen. https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/by-day-373-of-israeli-genocide-in-gaza–42-227-killed–98-46
  8. Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye. (2024). Minister of Foreign Affairs. https://www.tccb.gov.tr/en/cabinet/minister-of-foreign-affairs
  9. Türkiye Today. (2023, October 27). Turkish FM Fidan reveals meeting with late Hezbollah chief Nasrallah. Türkiye Today. https://www.turkiyetoday.com/turkiye/turkish-fm-fidan-reveals-meeting-with-late-hezbollah-chief-nasrallah-59142/
  10. Hürriyet Daily News. (2023, October 31). Erdogan warns against Israel’s aggression, says Türkiye closely monitoring developments. Hürriyet Daily News. https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/erdogan-warns-against-israels-aggression-says-turkiye-closely-monitoring-developments-201481
  11.  United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2024). International media contacts. https://www.unhcr.org/news-and-stories/media-centre/international-media-contacts
  12. Turkish Gendarmerie General Command. (2024). Commander of the Turkish Gendarmerie. https://www.kkk.tsk.tr/en/kkksablonmaster/header/commander/commander.aspx
  13. A.  Olive Branch Operation: Launched in January 2018, this operation focuses on eliminating threats from groups like the YPG and ISIS in northern Syria. The Turkish military’s presence in this region is part of its broader strategy to secure national borders and support local communities. 
  14. B. Significance: Such visits by high-ranking officials reinforce the commitment to ongoing military operations and demonstrate leadership engagement with troops stationed in critical areas

Author

  • Professor Habib Al Badawi

    Habib Badawi is Professor of International Relations and Japanese History at Lebanese University. He is also the coordinator of American Studies and a sought-after academic consultant. Professor Al-Badawi was awarded "The Academic Figure of 2018" by the "Asian Cultural Center" for his persistent efforts in promoting Japanese studies worldwide. Dr. Habib Al-Badawi has published multiple books and research papers on contemporary topics related to international relations and geopolitics.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *