Phylo
Legendary member
- Messages
- 5,575
- Likes
- 439
source: Israel Hayom is Israel's most widely read Hebrew-language daily newspaper, and it is owned and published by billionaire Miriam Adelson and her family. Together with her late husband Sheldon Adelson, she has been one of the largest financial backers of Donald Trump's political career and administration. - Wikipedia
Turkey's strategic depth is now part of Israel's military calculus
Just because Turkey is a member state in NATO doesn't mean it is protected in Syria. Israel allegedly struck Syria's Abu al-Duhur air base before Turkish forces arrived. The doctrine: deny infrastructure before the flag lands – because once Turkish troops arrive, striking also risks Turkish casualties, retaliation, American intervention.
The defining fact of Israel's alleged strike on Abu al-Duhur is what was absent from the target: Turkish troops.
Eight hits targeted the runway and military facilities of the Syrian air base on August 18. No casualties were reported. Abu al-Duhur lies in Idlib, roughly 70 kilometers from the Turkish border. Israel later stated that Syria was about to breach an agreed security status quo by permitting Turkish forces to deploy there despite repeated Israeli warnings. Ankara denied that a deployment was planned.
Israel did not wait for Turkish troops, aircraft, radar or air defense systems. It destroyed the infrastructure required to receive them before the threat became entrenched. The operational rule is denial before things are entrenched. Before Turkish troops arrive, the target is infrastructure; once they arrive, striking it also risks Turkish casualties, retaliation, American intervention and confrontation with a NATO member. Those costs alter the calculation, not Israel's authority to decide.
The first Turkish soldier changes the price of every Israeli bomb that follows. He does not decide whether it falls. Jerusalem has studied not only how NATO's Article 5 operates, but where it applies. The treaty protects Turkish territory; Turkish troops do not carry that territory with them onto Syrian or occupied Cypriot soil. Turkish vessels and aircraft operating in the Mediterranean raise separate treaty questions, but even where Article 5 applies, collective action is not automatic. NATO acts by consensus, and each member state determines the response it deems necessary.
Ankara cannot carry NATO protection abroad in a uniform. Tom Barrack's response to Abu al-Duhur inverted responsibility. The US ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria called the strike an unnecessary escalation, cited Turkey's lack of warning and called for stronger deconfliction. Israel had identified the prospective Turkish deployment as the threat, warned Damascus against permitting it and allegedly acted when Damascus ignored the warning. The escalation did not begin with the destruction of the runway; it began with the attempt to alter the military status quo on it.
Barrack repeatedly turns Turkish sensitivities into constraints to be managed and Israeli security requirements into escalation to b........
Turkey's strategic depth is now part of Israel's military calculus
Just because Turkey is a member state in NATO doesn't mean it is protected in Syria. Israel allegedly struck Syria's Abu al-Duhur air base before Turkish forces arrived. The doctrine: deny infrastructure before the flag lands – because once Turkish troops arrive, striking also risks Turkish casualties, retaliation, American intervention.
The defining fact of Israel's alleged strike on Abu al-Duhur is what was absent from the target: Turkish troops.
Eight hits targeted the runway and military facilities of the Syrian air base on August 18. No casualties were reported. Abu al-Duhur lies in Idlib, roughly 70 kilometers from the Turkish border. Israel later stated that Syria was about to breach an agreed security status quo by permitting Turkish forces to deploy there despite repeated Israeli warnings. Ankara denied that a deployment was planned.
Israel did not wait for Turkish troops, aircraft, radar or air defense systems. It destroyed the infrastructure required to receive them before the threat became entrenched. The operational rule is denial before things are entrenched. Before Turkish troops arrive, the target is infrastructure; once they arrive, striking it also risks Turkish casualties, retaliation, American intervention and confrontation with a NATO member. Those costs alter the calculation, not Israel's authority to decide.
The first Turkish soldier changes the price of every Israeli bomb that follows. He does not decide whether it falls. Jerusalem has studied not only how NATO's Article 5 operates, but where it applies. The treaty protects Turkish territory; Turkish troops do not carry that territory with them onto Syrian or occupied Cypriot soil. Turkish vessels and aircraft operating in the Mediterranean raise separate treaty questions, but even where Article 5 applies, collective action is not automatic. NATO acts by consensus, and each member state determines the response it deems necessary.
Ankara cannot carry NATO protection abroad in a uniform. Tom Barrack's response to Abu al-Duhur inverted responsibility. The US ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria called the strike an unnecessary escalation, cited Turkey's lack of warning and called for stronger deconfliction. Israel had identified the prospective Turkish deployment as the threat, warned Damascus against permitting it and allegedly acted when Damascus ignored the warning. The escalation did not begin with the destruction of the runway; it began with the attempt to alter the military status quo on it.
Barrack repeatedly turns Turkish sensitivities into constraints to be managed and Israeli security requirements into escalation to b........