This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
by Ahmed Asmar
The 81st United Nations General Assembly session once again exposed a diplomatic rupture that has been taking place for several years. In his address to the world body, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan deliberately refused to name Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a calculated diplomatic strategy that Turkish analysts describe as a “legal and moral quarantine” designed to strip the Israeli leader of any legitimacy or diplomatic standing. Instead, Erdoğan focused his remarks on Gaza, the Palestinians, and the dysfunction of the international system, calling for greater pressure on Israel and the recognition of Palestine as an independent state.
Netanyahu, by contrast, responded with a direct and personal attack. From the UN podium, the Israeli prime minister called Erdoğan a “tyrant,” accused Turkiye of being “the latest country to become a super spreader of antisemitic lies,” and claimed Ankara hosts the Palestinian Hamas resistance group leadership. He further incited against Turkiye, accusing it of “illegally occupying northern Cyprus,” violating the rights of Greece, and seeking to govern Jerusalem. However, as he started his speech dozens of delegates walked out of the chamber, reflecting growing international outcry against him and his government policy whether in Palestine or in the entire region.
Erdoğan’s response was swift and unequivocal. Speaking in Istanbul, he declared that the place for “war criminals” is not the UN platform but the courtrooms where they stand trial for their crimes.
The contrast in rhetorical strategy—one leader focused on the system and the principles, the other on personal attacks and aggressiveness—reflects a deeper divergence. The policies of each indicate that Ankara and Tel Aviv have reached an almost irreversible divergent point on every file of contention between them.
Already collapsing bilateral ties
The deterioration of Turkish-Israeli relations has moved far beyond diplomatic rhetoric. In August 2026, Turkiye’s Justice Ministry formally requested that Interpol issue a red notice for Netanyahu and another Israeli official, following arrest warrants issued by an Istanbul court on 14th July 2026, on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity. The case stems from Israel’s armed interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla in international waters, which had set sail to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. Turkish Justice Minister Akın Gürlek stated that proceedings involve 35 defendants and that Ankara “will not allow the crimes committed in Gaza to be covered up or those responsible to be protected by a shield of impunity.” Furthermore, Turkiye also took economic measures against Israel, severing trade ties and closing its airspace to Israeli officials.
On the other side, Israeli officials don’t hide their enmity and incitement against Turkiye, according to Israeli media, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich revealed that Israel has been working “openly and behind the scenes” to block the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkiye, stating that “Erdoğan’s access to weapons that would change the rules of the game must not be allowed.” Smotrich further claimed that “Erdoğan is a very dangerous man” and that “Turkiye, in its current state, is a very significant threat to Israel,” clearly adopting the language of an adversary.
In a retaliatory move, Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and genocide in Gaza, ordered an official Israeli legal team this week to prepare a case against President Erdoğan over alleged Turkish policies against the Kurds and for hosting Hamas.
Netanyahu has neither the standing as himself a fugitive from international justice nor the legal basis to sue on behalf of the Kurds. It is nothing but a further demonstration of how Israel and Netanyahu are obsessed with confronting Turkiye.
READ: Turkiye rejects East-West divide, says Mecca defense pact not aimed at Iran or Israel: President
Clashing over regional files
The rift is most visible in the regional arenas where Turkish peace-building efforts directly collide with Israeli expansionism and aggression.
In Gaza, Turkiye has repeatedly expressed readiness to contribute to an international stabilization force, with Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan confirming Ankara’s willingness to send troops as part of such a mission. Yet Israel has categorically rejected any Turkish role. Netanyahu declared that Israel would not permit Turkish or Qatari soldiers to participate in the International Stabilisation Force. Fidan later confirmed that Turkiye had received no request to deploy forces, attributing this to Israeli opposition. While Turkiye seeks to calm the situation and support reconstruction, Israel blocks every Turkish effort.
In Syria, the dynamic is equally stark. Turkiye has invested heavily in supporting Syria’s transition and stability. Israel, by contrast, has expanded its military occupation in Syrian territory, including airstrikes on a military airbase near the Turkish border in August 2026, which Israeli officials claimed was intended to prevent Turkiye from expanding its military presence. The strike was widely interpreted as a direct message to Ankara that Israel will not tolerate Turkish influence in Syria. Netanyahu’s allegations that Turkiye sought to deploy troops in Syria—denied by both Ankara and Damascus—further illustrate the depth of Israeli hostility toward Turkish involvement in Syria.
In Lebanon, Turkiye has expressed readiness to contribute to post-UNIFIL security arrangements once the UN mission’s mandate expires at the end of 2026. Erdoğan stated that Turkiye wants to participate in any plan to support regional security and guarantee Lebanese sovereignty after the international force withdraws. Yet Turkish analysts note that Israel is “very unlikely” to agree to any Turkish role, and that it would veto such a role for Ankara. Israel has made clear it will spend significant diplomatic pressure to distance Turkiye from any post-war security arrangements in Lebanon.
On Cyprus, the confrontation takes a different but equally dangerous form. Israel has deepened its military partnership with Greece and the Greek Cypriot Administration (GCA), signing a 2026 military cooperation plan that includes joint naval and air exercises, training, and strategic dialogue. Greece has acquired Israeli missile systems worth billions of euros, including the €3.5 billion “Achilles Shield” air defense system, and has approved the purchase of 36 PULS artillery systems specifically to strengthen its defense along the border with Turkiye. A trilateral rapid reaction force involving Israel, Greece, and GCA has been discussed with the explicit aim of deterring Turkish military activities in the Eastern Mediterranean. By this move, Israel is effectively seeking to encircle Turkiye through different schemes and tactics.
Conclusion: Recognizing the adversary
It is clear that Israel is doing everything in its power to harm and confront Turkiye, and it is no longer hiding these policies. From lobbying against Turkish F-35 acquisition to bombing supposed “Turkish interests” in Syria, from vetoing Turkish participation in Gaza stabilisation to building a military bloc with Greece and GCA against Ankara, Israel treats and classifies Turkiye as a strategic obstacle that must be contained and weakened.
Turkiye must recognise these adversarial policies and incitement for what they are, and to realise much more clearly that expansionist Israel – seeking to dominate the region – will go further in its hostility toward Turkiye.
This is not a temporary dispute that can be resolved through diplomatic means or restrained by bilateral agreements. The trajectory of Israeli policy points to an irreversible rift, whereby Israel would not stop from working against and harming all those it believes would stand against its expansionist designs in the region.
The question is no longer whether such rift is limited or temporary, as it has almost reached a point of irreversibility, with Israel having chosen confrontation in every sphere, necessitating that Turkiye fully recognize this reality, react accordingly, and prepare for a future in which confrontation is not merely likely, but inevitable.
OPINION: The Board of Peace: The same old prejudice and injustice of the US administration
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Leave a Reply