Washington should not dismiss Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s comments tying his country’s security to that of Lebanon and Syria as simply another chapter in his hostility toward Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Turkey has long expressed ambitions tied to territories that were once part of the Ottoman Empire, but even more so under Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party. Turkish officials invoke Ottoman documents to refer to Iraq’s Mosul as Turkish soil and speak of Syria’s Damascus and Aleppo with nostalgia. Such rhetoric reflects a worldview that shapes Ankara’s regional policies and strategic outlook.
Turkey has long expressed ambitions tied to territories that were once part of the Ottoman Empire, but even more so under Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party.
Erdoğan now appears to envision a Middle East in which Islamist movements dominate. In pursuing this vision, he has benefited from a U.S. administration that places trust in diplomats who see Turkey as the anchor of regional stability and influence. From this perspective, Jerusalem represents the main obstacle to Ankara’s broader regional ambitions.
Following the October 7, 2023, terrorist attacks, Ankara understood that Israel was serious about taking security matters into its own hands across the region to safeguard its interests. Indeed, the shifting regional dynamics that followed—many of them shaped by Israel’s actions—forced Turkey to confront this reality. It was this concern that prompted Turkish leaders to seek a rapprochement with the Kurds, believing that bringing Turkey’s Kurdish population closer to the state would help shield the country from emerging regional fault lines.
While most Kurds describe the current efforts as a peace process, Ankara views them through the lens of counterterrorism and national security. This divergence in expectation helps explain why the prospects for a lasting settlement remain limited. The Turkish government appears more interested in eliminating what it perceives as security threats than in addressing political demands of the Kurdish movement. Therefore, Ankara is likely to wait and see how regional dynamics evolve before considering even a modest opening for the Kurds.
With sustained pressure from Ankara and its regional allies, Kurdish groups in Syria and Turkey have weakened and the Turkish government sees an opportunity to expand its influence elsewhere in the Middle East. A regime loyal to Turkey now rules Syria, and Ankara appears hopeful that a weakened Lebanon will provide additional space to project its political and strategic influence across the region.
Islamists often use rhetoric as a precursor to concrete actions against their opponents.
In fact, Syria is becoming Turkey’s backyard, economically, politically, and strategically. Turkey’s support is underwriting the reorganization and rebuilding Syria’s military and security institutions. This expanding influence has emboldened Erdoğan’s government, fostering a sense of confidence, and, at times hubris, about Ankara’s ability to shape the future of the region and further plans to construct a Turkish-led regional order.
Turkish officials’ use of expansive and fiery language has become a regular occurrence. In a June 6, 2026, speech, Turkey’s Interior Minister Mustafa Çiftçi said, “Just as we witnessed the liberation of Damascus, Aleppo, and Karabakh, God willing, one day we will also witness the liberation of Jerusalem.”
Turkey’s hostile rhetoric is not mere posturing. If recent history involving Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other malign actors has shown anything, it is that the West should not dismiss such rhetoric. Islamists often use rhetoric as a precursor to concrete actions against their opponents.
Erdoğan and his allies at times may have projected power or engaged in regional adventurism to divert attention from domestic political and economic challenges. That is no longer the case. The Turkish government has consolidated its authoritarian rule and appears largely unconstrained by political opposition. Therefore, Washington and Jerusalem should view Ankara’s increasingly aggressive rhetoric as an expression of an ever-growing expansionist strategy.
