Nournews: West Asia is experiencing new developments under sensitive conditions resulting from the aggression and crimes of the United States and the Zionist regime, and, in contrast, the resistance of the resistance front. In the meantime, news and reports indicate an escalation of tensions between Turkey and the Zionist regime. Turkish officials have stated that this regime cannot live without an enemy after Iran and is seeking to portray Turkey as a new enemy. On a broader level, this regime has been introduced as a threat to the security of the entire region. In response, Zionist officials, using harsh rhetoric, have criticized the President of Turkey and raised accusations against him. Claims have also been made by this regime regarding Turkey’s alleged role in influencing Italy’s defense industries and pushing the country toward suspending military cooperation with Tel Aviv. On the other hand, reports indicate that part of the objectives behind the Zionist regime’s military agreements with Greece and Cyprus has been directed against Turkey. This set of developments reflects a growing trend toward confrontation.

Turkey’s pendulum policy and its strategic consequences

Due to its membership in NATO and its hope of gaining greater benefits from the European Union, Turkey has consistently pursued a pendulum-like policy toward the United States and the Zionist regime. On the one hand, the country has hosted U.S. and NATO military bases, and on the other hand, despite widespread domestic opposition, it has maintained multi-layered relations with the Zionist regime; to the extent that even after the developments of the Al-Aqsa Storm, interactions in certain areas—such as supplying food and military needs—continued. This dual approach has placed Turkey in a complex position between global objectives, religious inclinations, and public demands. Although this policy has brought short-term benefits, it has generated heavy long-term costs. Turkey’s role in the overthrow of the Syrian system ultimately led to increased attacks and influence by the Zionist regime in that country and produced numerous security consequences for Ankara—bringing the two sides to the brink of direct military confrontation.

Crisis-engineering, energy competition, and the confrontation scenario

The behavioral nature of the Zionist regime suggests that its political survival is tied to crisis-creation and the securitization of the region. From the genocide in Gaza and actions in the West Bank to movements in Lebanon and Syria, as well as aggressions against Iraq and Iran, all reflect this pattern. At the same time, this regime has faced serious challenges in achieving its objectives in Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen, while simultaneously seeking full dominance over Syria. Under such circumstances, defining a new war centered on Turkey as a tool for sustaining power is not far-fetched. This scenario is reinforced as tensions in Syria rise and the Zionist regime views Turkey as a major rival in Mediterranean energy resources. There is also the possibility of actions targeting Turkey’s internal security; as in recent months, Turkish intelligence agencies have reported the arrest of elements affiliated with Mossad. An important point is that this regime has not remained committed even to its aligned actors, and experiences such as Oslo, Camp David, Wadi Araba, and the current situation in Syria illustrate this approach. Therefore, the possibility of repeating similar patterns toward Turkey also exists.

The role of the United States and the necessity of changing security equations

For years, regional countries, including Turkey, have relied on relations with the United States as a guarantor of their security; however, recent developments have shown that this approach is ineffective. The experience of the Ramadan War demonstrated that for the United States, there is no priority other than supporting the Zionist regime, even if this conflicts with the interests of other countries. Emphasizing that this regime is considered a key ally of the United States reflects Washington’s consistent orientation. Accordingly, in the event of confrontation between Turkey and the Zionist regime, the likelihood of U.S. alignment with Tel Aviv would be very high, and even cooperation against Ankara would not be unexpected. Under such circumstances, the necessity of revising regional security equations is increasingly felt.

Moving from dependence on external security toward indigenous security based on regional convergence could pave the way for the formation of a new order with political, economic, and security dimensions. Existing capacities for stabilizing security and confronting external threats have demonstrated that the creation of such a structure is possible. The intelligent management of strategic passages such as the Strait of Hormuz and the holding of regional negotiations with an inclusive approach—not merely within the framework of national interests but at the regional level—could help create a coherent defense structure. Support from regional countries for such approaches could strengthen collective security and reduce the role of interventionist actors. Ultimately, countries such as Turkey and Arab states, by abandoning exclusive reliance on the United States and moving toward regional cooperation, could play an effective role in achieving sustainable security. Experience has shown that concepts such as peace within the frameworks of U.S. and Zionist-regime approaches have not held genuine standing, and that only reliance on indigenous power and capability can guarantee security.