ISLAMABAD: U.S. journalist Ana Kasparian has sparked intense debate by claiming that Israel has already prepared plans for its next major conflict once operations against Iran conclude, with Turkey emerging as the primary target.
Kasparian, co-host of The Young Turks, made the assertion during recent discussions on the ongoing Israel-Iran war, highlighting statements from former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett.
Bennett described Turkey under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as a sophisticated and dangerous new strategic threat, urging a shift in Israeli doctrine.
The comments have circulated widely on social media platforms, drawing attention from regional analysts who note growing friction between the two powers.
Israeli strategic assessments have increasingly framed Turkey as a rival capable of challenging Jerusalem’s regional dominance.
The Nagel Committee report on Israel’s defence budget, released in early 2025, explicitly recommended preparations for a potential direct confrontation with Turkey.
Turkish officials have echoed similar concerns, with senior figure Devlet Bahçeli warning that after weakening Iran, Israel may turn its focus toward Ankara.
Tensions stem from competing ambitions in Syria, where Israel has conducted repeated airstrikes on military sites to prevent Turkish influence from solidifying.
Turkey, meanwhile, has trained Syrian forces and signalled readiness to establish bases, clashing with Israel’s preference for a fragmented and weakened Syrian state.
In Gaza, Israel has firmly opposed any Turkish military deployment in potential stabilisation forces, viewing it as a direct threat to its security perimeter.
Eastern Mediterranean disputes further fuel the divide, with Turkey’s Blue Homeland doctrine asserting expansive maritime claims that intersect with Israeli energy partnerships involving Greece and Cyprus.
Israeli air force enhancements in Cyprus are reportedly aimed at countering Turkish capabilities in the region.
Data from defence analyses indicate Turkey possesses one of the region’s largest drone fleets and is advancing stealth fighter projects, narrowing the qualitative edge Israel has long maintained.
Turkey’s NATO membership adds complexity, raising questions about potential U.S. entanglement in any future escalation.
Kasparian argued that such a conflict would drag the United States into another costly war, following what she described as limited benefits from the Iran engagement.
She pointed to Israel’s geographic reach, noting Iran lies approximately 2,000 kilometres from Israeli borders, yet operations proceeded with significant U.S. support.
Regional media in Turkey and pro-Palestinian outlets have amplified these claims, portraying them as evidence of broader Israeli ambitions.
Some Turkish commentators link the narrative to notions of an expanded sphere of influence that could encompass parts of Turkish territory, though Israeli officials have not publicly confirmed any such plan.
Defence experts highlight that bilateral trade between Israel and Turkey exceeded several billion dollars annually before recent diplomatic strains, underscoring the high stakes of confrontation.
Military spending figures show Israel allocating substantial resources to maintain technological superiority, including advanced missile defence systems tested extensively in recent conflicts.
Turkey, with its population exceeding 85 million and a battle-hardened military from operations in Syria and beyond, represents a different scale of challenge compared to non-state actors.
Analysts tracking the Iran war, now in its third week according to some reports, suggest the conflict serves as a testing ground for tactics that could apply in a larger theatre involving Turkish forces.
Israeli strikes have degraded Iranian assets significantly, yet Turkish leaders continue advocating for de-escalation while bolstering their own regional alliances.
Kasparian’s critique extends to U.S. policy, asserting that American interests diverge from Israeli objectives in pursuing successive conflicts.
She questioned the rationale behind expanded U.S. military deployments, including F-22 aircraft, in support of Israeli operations.
International coverage of the specific Kasparian remarks remains limited, with most mainstream outlets focusing on the Iran theatre rather than speculative future scenarios.
However, Turkish and Middle Eastern media have treated the statements as credible warnings, citing Bennett’s public remarks as authentication.
Former Israeli officials have voiced concerns over Turkey’s assertive foreign policy, which combines military deployments with diplomatic outreach to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and African nations.
This multi-vector approach is seen in Jerusalem as encircling Israel through initiatives like the Neighbors of Syria platform.
Despite historical ties dating back to 1949, relations have deteriorated sharply over Gaza and broader ideological differences.
Erdogan’s strong rhetoric against Israeli actions has further polarised positions.
Defence analysts warn that any direct Israel-Turkey clash could destabilise NATO’s southern flank and disrupt global energy routes.
Casualty projections in a hypothetical large-scale war remain speculative, yet recent conflicts demonstrate the devastating potential of modern aerial and drone warfare.
Kasparian emphasised that ordinary citizens on all sides would bear the heaviest costs, urging caution against narratives that lead to wider escalation.
The unfolding dynamics continue to reshape Middle Eastern alliances, with both nations positioning for long-term strategic advantage.
Regional observers note that while direct war remains unlikely in the immediate term, underlying rivalries could ignite through proxy confrontations in Syria or maritime incidents.
As the Iran conflict progresses, the possibility of a subsequent focus on Turkey looms larger in strategic discourse, according to voices like Kasparian and aligned commentators.