In an exclusive interview with Israel Hayom, Turkish researcher Burak Can Celik delivered a pointed critique of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's policy in Syria, describing it as a strategic quagmire that has entangled Turkey with few tangible results. The Istanbul-based political scientist condemns what he terms Erdogan's "neo-Ottoman" approach while simultaneously cautioning that Israel's increasingly aggressive ground operations in Syria could potentially trigger dangerous escalation, despite Israel's legitimate goal of securing its strategic depth.
"While Ankara initially entered the Syrian arena with ambitious goals – toppling Assad, preventing Kurdish autonomy, and projecting regional leadership – it became caught in a complex web of military occupations, unstable proxy governance, and diplomatic isolation," Celik said. "The so-called 'security zones' in northern Syria provide neither genuine security nor political leverage. Turkey now finds itself overextended, diplomatically constrained by Russia and the US, and with few tangible achievements after nearly a decade of involvement."
In contrast, Celik believes that Israel's approach has proven more effective. "Tel Aviv never sought territorial control or regime change, but focused solely on undermining Iranian influence and preventing weapons transfers to Hezbollah," he explained. "Through precise strikes and intelligence superiority, Israel maintained its red lines without getting bogged down in the quagmire of ground wars."
"Israel maintained strategic freedom of action – while operating in coordination with Washington and Moscow," Celik added. "The bottom line is clear – while Turkish involvement increasingly looks like an exhausting and unsolvable entanglement, Israel has demonstrated how limited but strategic use of force can bring tangible security results and influence in the region."
However, Celik noted significant recent changes in Israel's operational stance. "There has been a notable shift in Israel's position in Syria. While its strategy was very limited to precision strikes and intelligence operations, recent developments show a more aggressive and multi-dimensional approach, including limited ground raids. This signals Israel's transition from a 'shadow war' doctrine to an assertive and preemptive stance," he said.
"Several factors likely drove this change – Iran's entrenchment near the Golan Heights, Hezbollah's logistical depth in southern Syria, and regional uncertainty following the Gaza war," Celik continued. "Israel appears to be recalibrating its rules of engagement – expanding the scope of military operations to disrupt Iranian networks, not just from the air but also through elite units on the ground. This development naturally carries risk with greater exposure and potential for escalation and complications with Russia's presence in Syria. But it reflects Israel's willingness to act decisively to ensure its strategic depth, even as the regional chessboard becomes more volatile."
Q: We've seen another massacre in Syria in recent days carried out by forces linked to the regime – this time targeting the Druze community. Does this indicate al-Julani's inability to control his forces? What do you think Erdogan's view of him is?
"That's precisely the irony and tragedy. In areas where Assad's regime collapsed, we haven't seen the rise of democracy or stability, but the consolidation of a new form of authoritarian regime under Abu Mohammad al-Julani," Celik said. "The supposedly 'liberated' areas in Syria are controlled by a man who pledged allegiance to al-Qaida and now plays the role of a statesman. He still operates through fear, repression, and rigid ideology. What we're seeing in Idlib and surrounding areas is not a post-Assad victory for the Syrian people, but the replacement of one authoritarian regime with another."
Celik asserted that Turkey actively supports this arrangement. "President Erdogan continues to see al-Julani as a strategic asset – a buffer against the remnants of the Assad regime, the Kurds, and even unwanted political currents," he noted. "Erdogan's support for al-Julani is not coincidental or born of necessity. It's part of a broader strategy to shape northwestern Syria through an Islamist government under control. However, the price is enormous – ethnic tensions, sectarian violence, and long-term fragmentation of Syria's social and political fabric. The fall of the Assad regime in parts of Syria didn't pave the way for freedom – it created a vacuum that al-Julani was ready to fill. And Turkey helped him."
Q: Given this context, let's discuss Israel-Turkey relations, which have deteriorated throughout Erdogan's tenure. Do you see potential for improvement if he leaves office?
"What began as a strategic alliance in the 90s has turned into a charged ideological rivalry, driven mainly by Erdogan's neo-Ottoman aspirations and his populist identification with Islamist goals – especially on the Palestinian issue, where his rhetoric has often bordered on incitement," Celik explained. "Erdogan has used anti-Israel sentiment as an internal political tool, not only to appeal to his conservative base but also to present himself as a regional leader of the Muslim world. This came at the cost of strategic dialogue, military cooperation, and regional synergy, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean.
"Still, there is a realistic chance for improved relations – if and only if there is a change at the top of government," he emphasized. "Post-Erdogan leadership, especially one with a more pragmatic or Western outlook, would likely seek to normalize ties with Israel, not just for geopolitical balance but also for economic and technological cooperation. In other words, the hostility is not structural – it's personal and ideological. Once Erdogan is no longer in the equation, the door to restoring relations will open."
Q: Do you believe the March protests revealed cracks in Erdogan's power structure?
"Indeed, the March protests were more than just a response to the arrest of a Turkish mayor – they were an expression of deep and growing discontent in Turkish society," he observed. "Erdogan's system, once praised for its efficiency, now shows signs of fatigue and internal tension. The fact that a local political arrest could trigger nationwide unrest highlights how fragile the regime's grip has become."
Q: Aren't you afraid to speak out against Erdogan?
"I'm not afraid. Fear is the currency of authoritarianism," he declared. "Silence in the face of creeping autocracy is far more dangerous than raising one's voice. Millions of Turks are quietly waiting for political change. And every voice, however small, adds to this momentum. The cracks in Erdogan's system are no longer hypothetical – they are visible, irreversible, and growing wider."
