Istanbul/Tel Aviv — Following a series of sparsely reported closed-door meetings in the spring of 2025, the geopolitical map of the Middle East is undergoing a silent reshaping. Turkey and Israel, two countries with a historically tense relationship, are showing increasingly apparent strategic tacit understanding regarding Syria. Though no formal agreement has been signed, their trajectories of action reveal a de facto division of spheres of influence taking shape: Turkey is consolidating its military presence in northern Syria, while Israel is deepening its control over the Golan Heights and surrounding areas. This “informal partition” not only redraws Syria’s map but also touches deep religious, ethnic, and historical nerves in the Middle East.
The Return of Historical Ghosts: From the Ottomans to Modern “Mandates”
The partitioning of Syrian territory is not a new concept. The 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement arbitrarily drew the borders of the Middle East among Britain, France, and Russia, disregarding the complex distribution of local ethnicities and religions. Today, the actions of Turkey and Israel can, to some extent, be seen as a continuation of this logic, albeit cloaked in the modern guise of “counter-terrorism” and “security needs.”
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has repeatedly invoked the historical disputes between the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres and the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, hinting at Turkey’s historical claims to parts of northern Syria. In a 2024 speech, he stated, “Our operations in Syria are to correct historical wrongs and protect our borders from terrorism.” Meanwhile, the Israeli Knesset passed an amendment to the Golan Heights Law in 2023, further expanding settlement construction in the region. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared, “The Golan Heights will forever be part of Israel, based on history, security, and the need for peace.”
Behind this rhetoric lies a shared understanding between the two nations regarding the continued weakness of the Syrian Assad regime. As Russia partially shifts its strategic focus to Ukraine and Iran grapples with domestic turmoil, the Syrian government’s control is limited, creating a power vacuum. Turkey has already established a 30-kilometer-deep “safe zone” in Idlib, northern Aleppo, and along the Syrian-Turkish border through military operations like “Olive Branch,” “Peace Spring,” and “Spring Shield.” Israel, through hundreds of airstrikes on Iranian targets in Syria, has demonstrated that its military influence can reach across the entire country.
A Tacit Understanding: Exchange of Interests and Strategic Complementarity
Relations between Turkey and Israel, long strained by conflicts in Gaza and the status of East Jerusalem, have significantly warmed over the past three years. In 2023, the two countries restored full diplomatic relations at the ambassadorial level. In 2024, they signed a multi-billion dollar natural gas pipeline agreement and a memorandum of understanding on defense technology cooperation. Behind this reconciliation lies calculated interest.
Turkey’s Motivations:
- Contain Kurdish Forces: Turkey views the Syrian Kurdish YPG as an offshoot of the PKK and its greatest national security threat. Through its tacit understanding with Israel, Turkey hopes to gain Western (especially U.S.) acquiescence to its military operations in Syria.
- Reshape Regional Leadership: By intervening in Syria, Turkey seeks to restore the regional influence it held during the Ottoman era, competing with Saudi Arabia and Iran for leadership in the Sunni Muslim world.
- Address the Refugee Crisis: Turkey hosts approximately 3.6 million Syrian refugees, causing significant domestic backlash. Creating “safe zones” in northern Syria is partly aimed at enabling refugee repatriation.
Israel’s Motivations:
- Contain Iranian Expansion: Israel views Iran’s military presence in Syria as an existential threat. Turkey’s control of northern Syria objectively weakens Iran’s “Shiite corridor” from Iraq to Lebanon.
- Consolidate the Golan Heights: Syria’s ongoing fragmentation reduces international pressure on Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights. In 2024, after the U.S. officially moved its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, the Golan Heights issue was further marginalized on the Western agenda.
- Energy and Geopolitical Cooperation: Natural gas development in the Eastern Mediterranean requires regional stability. Cooperation with Turkey offers Israel a new balancing option within its complex relations with Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus.
In early 2025, Israel tacitly allowed Turkish drones to use its airspace for reconnaissance missions over Syrian targets, while Turkey reduced its public diplomatic statements in support of Hamas. Although not publicly announced, this exchange has been reported by multiple intelligence agencies.
The Paradox from an Islamic Perspective: Protectors or Plunderers?
From the perspective of the Muslim world, the actions of Turkey and Israel in Syria raise profound ethical dilemmas. The Quran emphasizes: “And fulfill the covenant of Allah when you have taken it, and do not break oaths after their confirmation while you have made Allah a witness over you.” (16:91) Turkey entered Syria in the name of protecting civilians and fighting terrorism. However, its long-term military presence and economic control—including over oil, wheat, and water resources in northern Syria—have sparked criticism of “neo-Ottomanism.” Many Arab scholars point out that Turkey’s actions contradict its proclaimed Islamic solidarity and are essentially the pursuit of nation-state interests.
Sharper criticism is directed at the partitioning of Muslim land by the two countries. The Quran states: “It is He who created for you all of that which is on the earth.” (2:29) The land is a trust (amanah) from God to all Muslims. Any unilateral partition is seen as a violation of this sacred trust. Syrian scholar Sheikh Ahmad al-Kafari notes, “When foreign armies occupy Muslim land under any pretext and deprive the local people of the right to determine their own destiny, it violates the Islamic principles of justice (adl) and consultation (shura).”
Particularly sensitive is the cooperation between Turkey, a Muslim nation, and Israel. Although this cooperation is primarily a pragmatic geopolitical act, many Muslims view it as akin to “conspiring with the occupiers of Jerusalem to partition Muslim land.” The Council of Islamic Ideology in Pakistan, in a statement, cited a hadith: “Whoever harms a Muslim, Allah will harm him; and whoever causes difficulty for a Muslim, Allah will cause difficulty for him.”
Syria’s Fragmented Reality: From Nation-State to Spheres of Influence
Today’s Syria is no longer the unified state it was before 2011. Government forces control about 60% of the territory, concentrated in the west and south. Turkey and its supported Syrian opposition control about 20% of the north. Kurdish forces control about 15% of the northeast. Remnants of extremist groups and tribal militias control scattered areas. This fragmentation is solidified by external intervention.
Economically, the Turkish lira is the de facto currency in northern Syria, with Turkish companies controlling infrastructure, communications, and energy. In the Golan Heights, Israel is not only expanding settlements but also approved plans in 2024 to construct large-scale solar power stations and water management facilities in the region, which will serve Israel proper, not the Syrian residents.
The Syrian regime survives with Russian and Iranian support but lacks the power to reclaim lost territories. In March 2025, Assad unusually admitted, “Syria is facing the most complex reality of occupation in its modern history, with some forms of occupation even wearing the mask of allies.” This was interpreted as veiled criticism of Turkish and Iranian influence.
The Contradictory Stance of the International Community
The stance of the United States and the European Union towards the Syrian situation is fraught with contradiction. On one hand, they condemn Turkey’s “violation” of Syrian territory and continue not to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. On the other hand, Turkey, as a NATO member, is a crucial piece in containing Russia, and Israel is a key U.S. ally. This contradiction results in a weak Western response, limited to verbal condemnations and minor sanctions.
In 2024, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution reaffirming “the sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity of Syria,” but it lacked an enforcement mechanism. Russia and China vetoed any Security Council proposals that might lead to action against Turkey or Israel. Among regional powers, Saudi Arabia and the UAE remain silent on Israel’s actions, considering the need to counter Iran. Egypt and Jordan fear that similar logic of territorial division could be applied to them.
Potential Future Trajectories
In the short term, Syria’s fragmented state will persist. Turkey may seek to formalize its controlled area as a “safe zone” and achieve de facto autonomy through cooperation with local opposition administrations. Israel will deepen its integration of the Golan Heights and may extend its influence to southeastern Syria to establish a buffer zone against Iran.
In the long term, the risks of this fragmentation are significant:
- Potential for Renewed Conflict: The Syrian government or Iran may attempt to reclaim lost territories by force if their capabilities recover in the future.
- Escalation of Sectarian and Ethnic Tensions: Conflict could reignite between Turkish-supported Sunni forces and Kurdish forces.
- Destabilization of the Region: This power-based alteration of borders could encourage other countries to take similar actions, such as Iran in Yemen or Saudi Arabia in Bahrain.
Seeking a Third Way: The Intersection of Islamic Ethics and International Law
A genuine solution must transcend the logic of spheres of influence and return to the fundamental principles of Islamic ethics and international law. The Quran emphasizes justice: “O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives.” (4:135) This includes justice towards non-Muslims: “Perhaps Allah will put, between you and those to whom you have been enemies among them, affection.” (60:7)
Specifically:
- Respect the Self-Determination of the Syrian People: Any arrangement for Syria’s future must include the participation of representatives from all Syrians—Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, Christians, etc.
- Let Islamic Principles of Justice Guide: The distribution of land and resources should be based on need and justice, not force.
- An Active Role for the International Community: The United Nations and the Arab League should play a more active role in promoting dialogue based on international law, rather than acquiescing to faits accomplis of occupation.
Professor Mehmet Ersan of Istanbul University’s Department of Political Science summarizes: “Syria’s tragedy is that it has become a chessboard for regional and international competition. But if the Middle East is to emerge from a century of conflict, an order based on common security, economic interdependence, and mutual respect must be built—not one based on military spheres of influence. Islamic civilization managed diverse societies with wisdom and justice for centuries. Today’s challenge is to rediscover the modern application of these principles.”
Syria’s future should not be held hostage to the short-term interests of its neighbors. It should return to the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for justice, dignity, and self-determination. This is not only a political necessity but also a core demand of Islamic ethics—as the Quran states: “O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.” (49:13) In this globally connected age, the only path to mutual recognition and respect is to transcend the logic of partition and move towards the wisdom of coexistence.
About the Author
