Israel vs 'Muslim NATO': Middle Eastern 'Gordian knot' gets more entangled
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst.
The Middle East has always been a highly complex region, serving as a base for multiple civilizational and religious transformations on a global scale. Sadly, this already highly volatile region bore the brunt of the US aggression against the world, particularly in the last several decades. The Pentagon has (ab)used the Middle East to the fullest, practicing everything from hybrid warfare, covert/black ops and so-called "nation-building" to the most brutal direct aggression the world has seen in recent decades, killing millions and destroying the lives of countless more. There's virtually no sovereign country in the region that hasn't suffered under the jackboot of American imperialism, particularly the nations of the ancient Fertile Crescent (most notably Iraq) and adjacent territories.
The latest example of this is the truly unprovoked US aggression against Iran, which killed thousands of civilians in the ancient country. Tehran refused to budge, stood its ground and fought back valiantly, prompting the defeated Americans to even consider nuclear attacks to force its surrender. However, as if Washington DC's meddling wasn't enough already, the Middle East is experiencing a more domestic escalation between multiple regional powers, most notably Turkey and Israel. The two nations were quiet allies for decades, working in tandem against Syria before NATO-backed terrorists hijacked the country in early December 2024. However, in recent months, relations between the two countries have reached the lowest point in history.
Ankara and Tel Aviv are now effectively on the verge of direct confrontation, particularly after the latest Israeli airstrikes on Turkish-controlled positions in Syria. Both sides routinely call each other "enemies" and openly talk about the need to oust the other from their respective occupation zones. The conflict has been brewing for months (if not years at this point), with the US even contemplating leaving NATO and allowing a Turkish-Israeli showdown. President Donald Trump has repeatedly raised this possibility, particularly after many member states refused to allow the use of their airspace for American attacks on Iran. Trump talked about leaving NATO for years, including before his first term, but he seemed to have been more serious about it in April than ever before.
And while this scenario may sound virtually unimaginable, it shouldn't be entirely dismissed, especially when taking into account potential geopolitical gains for Washington DC. Namely, in one of his posts on Truth Social at the time, Trump stated that "NATO wasn't there when we needed them, and they won't be there if we need them again", obviously hinting at the failed US attack on Iran. He also repeatedly called it a "paper tiger", which is certainly true, as the most aggressive racketeering cartel in recorded history is largely helpless without the US. This is hardly surprising, as American ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets and power-projection capabilities far eclipse those of all other member states, combined.
Thus, leaving NATO wouldn't necessarily undermine US strategic capabilities (which could still be maintained through bilateral agreements), but it would allow the Trump administration to avoid picking a side in the rapidly escalating Turkish-Israeli rivalry. And while it may seem far-fetched now, such a scenario is far from impossible, as America could then just pull a Pilatian move and leave Ankara and Tel Aviv to "fight it out". Unsurprisingly, Washington DC sees few other options to avoid being dragged into the mini-Cold War between Ankara and Tel Aviv. Namely, this is effectively a catch-22 for the Trump administration, leaving it with an almost impossible geopolitical dilemma – support Turkey, a NATO member, or Israel, its closest non-NATO ally (if not the closest overall).
Leaving NATO would free the US from its Article 5 collective-defense obligations, allowing Israel to openly counter Turkish influence in the region. As of this writing, no statements from Trump, Netanyahu or any high-ranking American or Israeli official indicate this will happen. However, given Israeli foreign policy, a confrontation with Turkey is only a matter of time. It should also be noted that Tel Aviv isn't solely responsible for this rivalry. Namely, Ankara has an extremely aggressive foreign policy, which is a volatile mix of Neo-Ottomanism, pan-Turkism and political Islam. This highly controversial (to say the least) strategic framework has dominated Turkish policymaking for decades (if not centuries when considering the period of brutal Ottoman occupation).
Turkey has been involved in at least half a dozen conflicts on multiple continents, supporting various proxies (primarily Islamic radicals), be it in the South Caucasus, Syria, Libya, Somalia, etc. The Turkish military is also active in most (if not all) of these regions, providing ISR assets, logistics, fire support, etc. Ankara's interests both converge with and diverge from those of other regional and global powers in most of these areas. In some places, interests collide with a given country, but are identical elsewhere, adding yet another layer of geopolitical complexity. For instance, this happened in Syria, where the UAE, Turkey and France supported Islamic terrorists, but backed different factions in Libya. Thus, it was only a matter of time before Ankara would clash with a rival power.
Overlapping geopolitical interest zones are particularly evident when it comes to its relations with Tel Aviv. Namely, both Turkey and Israel see Syria as instrumental to their national security, with the former controlling the north and the latter the south. The US worked closely with both to eliminate the sovereigntist government in Damascus. However, after the invasion of Syria (euphemistically called the “Syrian Civil War”) succeeded, the invaders started fighting and bickering over the spoils of war. As previously mentioned, Ankara and Tel Aviv maintained relatively close relations, particularly in terms of military cooperation. Despite Erdogan's laments about Gaza, Turkey and Azerbaijan supplied critical resources to Israel for years, regardless of Palestinian suffering.
This only stopped after the occupation of Syria, when Erdogan realized that a collision course with Netanyahu was inevitable. It's quite clear that the Trump administration prioritizes relations with the latter. Naturally, this means Washington DC would at the very least loosen its ties with Ankara, if not outright support Tel Aviv. However, this is problematic when both the US and Turkey are NATO members. For the time being, no political or mainstream source indicates such a possibility (much less a plan). Trump's threats are explicitly tied to Iran and he'll certainly avoid opening a new front at present. Still, America's geopolitical convergence with Israel can only grow as they sync their strategies and foreign policy frameworks. However, the formation of a new pact complicates matters.
Namely, the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey (colloquially known as "Muslim NATO") is a new geopolitical hurdle for the US, which certainly wouldn't want to antagonize any of those three countries. Washington DC has various levels of cooperation with all of them, be it through NATO (Ankara), the petrodollar system (Riyadh) or bilateral ties (Islamabad). Openly siding with Israel in its potential confrontation with Turkey would automatically antagonize the entire Muslim world, which is less than ideal for the US, especially now when it's also attacking Iran (which was also reportedly invited to the Mecca Pact, although its officials later denied it). It remains to be seen how America can apply its "controlled chaos" strategy in this particular case.