Addressing the emergency Arab-Islamic Summit hosted by Qatar in response to the Israeli attack on Doha, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan called for economic sanctions on Israel for its genocide of the Palestinian people. “This mentality survives only through impunity. Genocidal Israel must be stopped,” he said.
Erdoğan used the occasion to remind attendees of the actions his government has taken in response to the ongoing genocide. For over a year, Turkey has incrementally increased its trade sanctions against Israel. Then, in late August, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan announced that Ankara had cut off all trade relations with Israel, barred Israeli ships from docking in Turkish ports, and closed its airspace to Israeli aircraft.
Describing Netanyahu as the “Hitler’s ideological kin”, Erdoğan added, “just as Hitler could not foresee the defeat that awaited him, Netanyahu will face the same ultimate fate.”
During this period, Israel has notched up its invective against Erdoğan and the Turkish regime, hurling such labels as “dictator”, “ingrate”, and “antisemitic” at the Turkish leader. Then, in late August, Netanyahu officially recognised the Armenian Genocide of 1915, making him the first Israeli prime minister to do so.
At one point, occupied East Jerusalem became a focus of Netanyahu’s rhetorical escalation. Speaking at a ceremony in an archaeological park built over the destroyed Palestinian neighbourhood of Silwan, Netanyahu referenced remarks made by Erdoğan in 2020. “Jerusalem is our city, a city from us,” the Turkish president said at the time. “Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock are sacred symbols for the Islamic world, and Jerusalem is a city Palestinians have lived in for thousands of years.” Apparently responding to this, Netanyahu said, “this is our city, Mr Erdoğan. It’s not your city. It will always be our city. It will not be divided again.” Netanyahu took the occasion to recall that, in the 1990s, Israel had sought the retrieval from turkey of an ancient stone artifact inscribed with the name of King Hezekiah. However, the then Turkish prime minister Mesut Yılmaz refused.
Friction between Ankara and Tel Aviv has mounted steadily since Israel launched its war on Gaza nearly two years ago. Israel’s recent attack on Qatar – the first time Israel targeted a US ally – has fuelled speculation that Turkey could come next. Turkey has previously exposed Mossad-linked networks that were spying on Palestinian resistance figures, including Hamas members, hosted by Turkey. It has complained of frequent incitements against it by Israeli officials. Moreover, both the Lebanese Al-Akhbar newspaper and The Jewish Chronicle reported that Israel had initially planned to strike Hamas leaders in Turkey. However, according to Egyptian sources, Israeli officials revised this initial plan due to Turkey’s NATO membership and fear of angering Washington.
Israel appears to have no qualms about striking Turkish targets in Syria. Israeli missile strikes in Latakia and Homs reportedly hit Turkish Air Defence equipment that had just been transferred to the region. The strikes took place only hours after the Syrian Air Force commander visited Ankara and met with Turkey’s chief of general staff to discuss expanding military cooperation in training and arms supplies.
The situation in Syria itself is another source of tension between Turkey and Israel. Ankara is troubled by Israeli moves to support Syrian minorities, notably the Druze in southern Syria and the Kurds in the northeast. Israel has been pressing Washington to support a federal solution to the question of governance in Syria. It is also feeding secessionist tendencies in the Druze and Alawite communities, by encouraging the creation of such entities as the West and Central Syria Political Council and the Druze National Guard. Such plans are diametrically opposed to Turkey’s efforts to restore and uphold Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Yet, despite the undisguised mutual antagonism between Ankara and Tel Aviv, it is unlikely their relationship will reach a breaking point. Turkey has deliberately confined its sanctions against Israel to the economic domain. It has not severed political ties or even downgraded diplomatic representation. Nor has Ankara fully enforced the airspace ban announced by Fidan on 29 August: Israeli commercial flights have continued on schedule. It appears, then, that Turkey is calibrating its moves carefully and avoiding rash decisions.
According to news reports, some representatives of the economic and investment sectors in both countries are urging their governments to reduce tensions. They argue that the economic difficulties faced by both sides require them to safeguard bilateral relations. Indeed, despite Turkey’s May 2024 ban on exporting goods to Israel, trade has reportedly continued informally through intermediaries, with the tacit approval of both governments. Trade between January and May 2025 reached around $393 million.
In addition, the two countries are bound by joint energy projects. Israel receives Azerbaijani oil via Turkey through the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline. Both governments are acutely aware of the political and economic costs of any direct confrontation, making it likely that, with US mediation, they will try to defuse or at least contain their disputes. Increasing this likelihood is the fact that the Trump administration is keen to alleviate the current tensions between two American allies. While Israel is Washington’s closest strategic ally, Washington’s alliance with Turkey – a fellow NATO member – has become increasingly valuable, given how it can offset the current strains in US–European relations, act as a mediator in the Ukraine crisis, and leverage its influence in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East to safeguard American interests in the region.
While the general geopolitical environment will continue to foster intense Turkish-Israeli friction, several factors are pushing both sides to keep their conflict off the brink. They may deeply distrust each other and bare their teeth, but Ankara and Tel Aviv still appear determined to set clear rules of engagement and prevent escalation. Common interests and a shared awareness of the high cost of open confrontation will continue to ensure that rational strategic thinking prevails over shortsighted impetuousness.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 25 September, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: