Can Israel & Turkiye Manage Their Escalating Rivalry In Syria?
The “deconfliction mechanism” that they’re reportedly discussing would likely be insufficient for resolving their security dilemma and might thus only delay what could be an inevitable clash.
Israel and Turkiye held talks in Azerbaijan last week on the creation of a so-called “deconfliction mechanism” for preventing an accidental conflict between them in Syria. No details were disclosed but it might resemble the one that Israel and Russia agreed upon in September 2015 and which is still in use. Unlike its precedent, however, this new one that’s reportedly in the works has much higher stakes given the escalating Israeli-Turkish rivalry in Syria since the fall of the Assad Government last December.
Israel never regarded post-Soviet Russia as a threat, and in fact, relations between them are closer than ever under Putin due to his lifelong passionate philo-Semitism. Their “deconfliction mechanism” therefore wasn’t all that difficult to negotiate and maintain since Russia had no ideological or strategic reason to interfere with Israel’s regular bombing of the IRGC and Hezbollah in Syria. Israeli-Russian relations sharply contrast with Israeli-Turkish ones, however, in the ways that’ll now be explained.
Israel and Turkiye’s mutual threat perceptions worsened after October 7th. Turkiye believes that Israel’s military operation in Gaza is a genocide that could one day be replicated against Muslims everywhere and can only be averted by restoring a regional balance of power. Israel suspects that Turkiye might try to achieve the aforesaid by ordering its Syrian clients to host ideologically aligned Hamas militants who’d be defended from Israeli airstrikes by Turkish air defense systems (even if they’re only Syrian-manned).
Turkiye abuts Syria so it can bolster its new authorities’ military capabilities and those of their shared Hamas allies much easier and quicker than Iran was able to bolster the Assad Government’s and their shared “Resistance Axis” allies’. This represents a much greater national security threat than the one that Israel earlier mitigated via its “deconfliction” mechanism with Russia, not least because Turkish systems might be used to defend Hamas, while Russian ones were never used to defend the “Resistance Axis”.
The potential downing of an Israeli jet by Turkish air defense systems (even if they’re only Syrian-manned) during an anti-Hamas bombing mission in the Arab Republic could spark a regional crisis that they want to avoid for now. Neither can be sure whether the US would take their side against the other, both over that hypothetical incident and whatever they choose to do afterwards, and the worst-case scenario of a direct Israeli-Turkish clash – let alone a conventional war – is fraught with uncertainties.
At the same time, such a scenario could become more likely if the newly exacerbated Israeli-Turkish security dilemma in Syria isn’t responsibly managed, but the root cause is arguably more connected to regional leadership aspirations than it is to Hamas. Israel and Turkiye are vying to fill the void left by the unexpected expulsion of Iran’s on-the-ground influence in Syria, which both envisage achieving via a hybrid approach, but their methods differ.
Israel wants to retain its freedom to bomb whoever it wants there together with strengthening the Druze and Kurds in order to facilitate the creation of a decentralized Syria that could be more easily divided-and-ruled for thwarting latent threats. Turkiye wants military bases and Hamas militants in a centralized Syria, which are tangible returns on its 14-year-long investment into regime change there, and to symbolically lead the Ummah by positioning its forces to strike Israel from Syria (even if it never does).
Each is convinced that their national security interests can only be ensured by filling the void left by Iran in Syria through their respective abovementioned methods, which they consider to be a zero-sum competition, but one that doesn’t have to lead to an accidental war if it’s responsibly managed. To that end, they might agree to a compromise whereby Turkiye entrenches itself in the north while Israel maintains freedom of action in the south, but such an arrangement would likely prove unsustainable.
Israel would feel uncomfortable with Hamas possibly operating training camps in Turkish-defended northern Syria while Turkiye would feel uncomfortable with Israel holding the Damocles’ sword of airstrikes above the head of Syria’s new authorities in Damascus. Turkish air defense systems could also secretly be deployed in proximity to the Golan Heights for defending Hamas militants that might launch missiles against Israel from there. A regional crisis might therefore only be delayed instead of averted.
As such, whatever imperfect “deconfliction mechanism” might be agreed to between Israel and Turkiye would be insufficient for responsibly managing their escalating rivalry, thus perpetuating regional instability as they continue vying for leadership in Syria. These dynamics raise the risk of a direct Israeli-Turkish clash that could quickly spiral into a conventional war unless creative diplomacy succeeds in reshaping them. It’s here where Syria, Russia, and the US could possibly play positive roles.
To explain, Syria wants to replace some of its military equipment that Israel destroyed right after Assad’s fall, which Russia could help it do in exchange for privileged economic (reconstruction, resource, etc.) contracts and so long as this is within Israeli-approved limits. Israel doesn’t regard post-Soviet Russia as a threat and has a decade-long history of successfully interacting with it in the context of their “deconfliction mechanism” so Israel would accordingly prefer for Russia to rearm Syria than for Turkiye.
This accounts for why Israel is reportedly lobbying the US to keep Russia’s bases in Syria as a way for Moscow to help West Jerusalem balance Turkish influence there through these means. Damascus would have to agree, however, but it would do well to go along with the abovementioned arrangement since this is the only realistic pathway for partially rearming, liberating itself from Turkish tutelage, and eliminating the pretext for more Israeli bombings. It’s unclear how interested it is in this though.
The new authorities came to power due to the leading role that their Turkish patron played in the 14-year-long rolling regime operation in Syria so they’re indebted to Ankara and trust it a lot too. These factors reduce the likelihood that they’d agree to rely on Russia instead of Turkiye for (at least partially) rearming, not to mention within Israeli-approved limits that would amount to tacitly subordinating themselves to its interests, though the US could offer phased sanctions removal as an incentive.
The problem though is that Turkiye wants tangible returns on its lengthy investment in overthrowing Assad, so it probably won’t accept not being able to at least set up a few bases in Syria and secure the right to use its airspace for military purposes, both of which Israel doesn’t want Damascus to provide. Just like the US could offer incentives to Syria for agreeing to this, so too could it offer some to Turkiye after Trump volunteered to mediate between it and Israel, though it’s unclear what he might propose.
All in all, the insight that was shared in this analysis suggests that more than a “deconfliction” mechanism is required for responsibly managing the escalating Israeli-Turkish rivalry in Syria, with the most effective solution being the proposal that was just forth with regard to Russia. Damascus might not agree, however, while Turkiye could unilaterally establish more bases in Syria even if it does. Trump might therefore try to broker a deal, but if he fails, then an Israeli-Turkish clash might be inevitable.
I’ve been saying this for two years. The Ukraine Russia war is fake. Part Christian genocide part killing of the protential future resistance to the NWO depopulation agenda. USSR was created by American Khazerian fake Jews cloaked among the Ashkenazi. They funded and led the Bolshevik revolution. Which led to the creation of KGB and Putin. The KGB still exists and Putin Is still controlled by them and KGB is still controlled by the NWO Khazerians. Mao Zedong was also created by the Khazerians NWO globalist elite. Through Russia they funded the CCP and the cultural revolution. These khazerians also manipulated Hitler and had many of their own people pushing the Jewish Holocaust narrative created to garner western support for the creation of Israel. All the wars for many years have been created by these khazerians. They are the nobility of Europe. The Royal families. They have infiltrated Christianity to the very top via Catholicism. They have infiltrated Islam to the top and were instrumental in the creation of all of the Islamic extremest “terrorist organizations.” Presently they are controlling all sides of the narrative throughout the world. Putin, Trump, Biden, Netanyahu, Trudeau, Carney, Macron etc are all controlled 3 levels above by the same Khazerians, whether they realize it or not. Most don’t but they all know they are puppets to their controllers one level up. It’s all being done through multiple levels of blackmail (honeypot operations like Epstein, PDiddy and many more), through greed and manipulating the egos or power hungry individuals that willingly sell their souls to the devil. We are seeing lots of talk of war preparations with NATO countries and Arab countries and China. IMO we will see all of this escalate to WW3. Countries around the world will implement mandatory military conscription. It’s all fake at the top and the main purpose is as I said to kill as many of fighting age men as possible to decrease the chances of successful resistance to the NWO depopulation agenda as it plays out and becomes obvious to the masses. We have been told many times in recent history that future wars because of technology will not involve foot soldiers so if Nations introduce mandatory conscription to the military we will know why. That’s my rant.
Same people, same bos :When observing the conflict in Ukraine, it’s important to note the outcome; the genocide of Ukrainian Christians, dispersion of women and children across Europe and ultimately, the depopulation of Ukraine.
The West finances the war, Zelensky sends young men into the meat grinder,
Putin finishes the job with his military.
No matter how you look at the conflict, all parties serve the Jewish agenda of relocating to Ukraine.
Why would Putin serve the Jewish agenda?
In 1999, Putin initiated a scheme with his Jewish allies, Israeli diamond tycoon Lev Leviev and Jewish oligarch Roman Abramovich, who would later become significant benefactors of Chabad globally.
Together, they established the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, with Chabad rabbi Berel Lazar at the helm. Lazar is commonly referred to as "Putin's rabbi."
“He (Putin) sends a message of not tolerating anti-Semitism."
-Putin’s Rabbi, Berel Lazar,Following a conflict with Jewish oligarch Gusinsky, Putin sought the creation of a Jewish organisation that aligned with his interests.
Gusinsky had established the Russian Jewish Congress (REK) in 1996, a non-Orthodox entity aimed at uniting Jewish groups in Russia and fostering Jewish culture, education, and welfare.After a controversy involving Gusinsky owned NTV’s coverage of Russia’s war with Chechnya, Putin perceived the organisation to be untenable.
Putin then established the Federation of Russian Jewish Communities.
Putin's Israeli associate Leviev helped establish the new organisation, with Abramovich, another close friend of Putin, serving as its chair. In 2000, Gusinsky was apprehended, separated from most of his assets, and compelled to seek refuge in the United Kingdom.
Rabbi Berel Lazar, an American-born Chabad rabbi originally from Milan, Italy, sprang out of nowhere, was swiftly granted Russian citizenship and designated chief rabbi of the newly formed federation.
Putin had chosen to align with the most ostensibly Jewish looking people, those with beards, side-curls, and a lengthy history of cooperation with the ruling Jewish bankers.
Putin had effectively surrounded himself with court Jews.
“My call to fame is actually being Mr. Rothschild's friend and it is a pleasure to honour Mr. Rothschild and David Slager for what they have done here in Oxford for the Oxford University Chabad Society”
- Chief Rabbi of Russia Rabbi Berel Lazar
As per the testimony of the late oligarch Boris Berezovsky in a London high court, Putin’s other Jew Abramovich held considerable political sway in Moscow from the latter half of the 1990s. He attended Putin's birthday celebration in October 1999, and soon after, purchased a $50 million yacht for Putin.
"There's a lot of quiet deals between Russia and Israel that you know nothing about…Putin may not be good for Russia, but he's definitely good for the Jews of Russia.”
-Chabad Rabbi Dovid Eliezrie Upon Putin's ascension to the presidency in 2000, Abramovich played a role in shaping his administration, as per Berezovsky's testimony:
He claimed that Abramovich was responsible for selecting members of Putin's cabinet, that Abramovich wielded the power to open and close criminal cases and authorise arrests.
“Not only has he surrounded himself with Jews, but he donated a month of his presidential salary to the Jewish Museum in Moscow, and his name is prominently marked on the list of funders on the Museum wall. This is as clear a signal of official policy as can be.”
- Anton Nossik