Turkey currently occupies some 3,500 square miles (about 5% of Syria’s total territory) in northern Syria through a series of military incursions over recent years.
By Hezy Laing
Israel recently carried out airstrikes hitting infrastructure at the Abu al-Duhur airbase in northwestern Syria after receiving intelligence that Turkey intended to station forces there.
The Turkish expansion has violated prior understandings brokered to freeze military positioning in Syria.
The recent move by Ankara in Syria is just the latest in a growing takeover of the area.
Turkey currently occupies some 3,500 square miles (about 5% of Syria’s total territory) in northern Syria through a series of military incursions over recent years.
Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter highlighted this footprint while contrasting it with Israel’s much smaller 78-square-mile security zone in southern Syria.
Turkey’s gradual entrenchment inside northern Syria has become one of the most consequential geopolitical shifts in the Middle East over the past decade, and analysts increasingly warn that this “creeping annexation” carries direct security implications for Israel.
Since 2016, Turkey has launched multiple cross‑border operations—Euphrates Shield (2016–2017), Olive Branch (2018), Peace Spring (2019), and subsequent deployments—establishing control over an estimated 8,000–10,000 square kilometers of Syrian territory stretching from Jarabulus to Afrin and down toward Tell Abyad.
According to research by Stephen J. Flanagan and Soner Çağaptay at the Washington Institute, Turkey now maintains more than 10,000 troops and oversees local Syrian militias numbering between 30,000 and 50,000 fighters, many organized under the Syrian National Army (SNA).
This presence has evolved from temporary military zones into a quasi‑administrative system.
Turkish authorities have introduced the Turkish lira, integrated local schools into the Turkish curriculum, built hospitals staffed by Turkish personnel, and connected towns such as Azaz, Al‑Bab, and Afrin to Turkish electricity grids.
Reports from International Crisis Group and Chatham House describe these areas as effectively governed from Gaziantep and Hatay, with Turkish police, intelligence officers, and civil administrators exercising day‑to‑day authority.
Syrian opposition figures and regional analysts increasingly refer to these territories as “Northern Cyprus 2.0,” invoking Turkey’s long‑term illegal occupation of northern Cyprus since 1974.
For Israel, the strategic concern is not territorial expansion per se but the military and ideological ecosystem emerging under Turkish patronage.
Turkey’s support for factions aligned with Muslim Brotherhood networks, including groups hostile to Israel, has created a corridor of influence stretching from Idlib to the Euphrates.
Intelligence assessments published by INSS (Institute for National Security Studies) warn that Turkish‑backed militias have facilitated movement of operatives linked to Hamas, whose leadership maintains a long‑standing presence in Istanbul.
Israeli officials have repeatedly raised concerns about Hamas financing, cyber activity, and logistical coordination occurring on Turkish soil.
A Turkish‑controlled northern Syria also complicates Israel’s freedom of action against Iranian entrenchment.
While Turkey opposes Iran’s presence, the fragmentation of Syrian sovereignty creates unpredictable zones where Iranian proxies, Turkish‑backed militias, and jihadist groups operate in close proximity.
Analysts such as Dr. Gallia Lindenstrauss argue that this increases the risk of miscalculation and limits Israel’s ability to strike Iranian assets without triggering Turkish responses.
Israel’s decision to draw a firm red line against Turkey’s latest move reflects a broader strategic concern: Ankara’s attempt to introduce an advanced air‑defense or radar system into northern Syria would have constituted a clear violation of the long‑standing status quo and posed a direct challenge to Israel’s regional freedom of action.
Analysts at the INSS, the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, and several Western defense journals have noted that Turkey has been steadily expanding its military footprint in Syria since 2016, but the introduction of high‑end systems—particularly those capable of tracking or restricting Israeli Air Force (IAF) operations—marks a qualitative escalation.
The system in question, according to Israeli defense correspondents and regional monitoring groups, was reportedly intended for deployment in territory controlled by Turkish‑backed militias near Tell Rifaat or Manbij, areas where Turkey already maintains radar stations, electronic‑warfare units, and forward operating bases.
Israel views this as an attempt to create a Turkish‑controlled air‑surveillance corridor that could monitor IAF flights heading eastward toward Iraq and ultimately Iran.
Israeli officials have repeatedly emphasized that maintaining unrestricted aerial access across the northern arena is essential for monitoring and striking Iranian weapons transfers, IRGC infrastructure, and long‑range missile development sites.
Turkey’s move was interpreted in Jerusalem as a blatant breach of the unwritten understandings that have governed Israeli–Turkish military deconfliction since the early 2000s.
Even during periods of political tension, both states avoided steps that would directly undermine each other’s strategic capabilities. By attempting to place an advanced system inside Syria—outside Turkey’s sovereign territory—Ankara crossed a threshold that Israeli defense planners could not ignore.
Israel’s response, described by senior officials, involved direct diplomatic messaging, military signaling, and coordination with the United States.
The message was unequivocal: Israel will not permit any regional actor, including Turkey, to alter the aerial balance in a way that jeopardizes Israel’s ability to counter Iran’s entrenchment.
This episode underscores a growing reality.
Turkey’s creeping annexation of northern Syria is no longer just a local or humanitarian issue; it is becoming a strategic challenge with direct implications for Israel’s security architecture and its long‑range deterrence posture.
