A fresh diplomatic dispute has emerged between the United States and Israel after US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy to Syria Tom Barrack accused Israel of carrying out a military strike in Syria without providing advance warning to Washington. Barrack described the attack as an “unnecessary escalation” and suggested that the strike on the Abu Duhur military base in northern Syria may have been intended to provoke Turkey.
The comments, reported by Al Jazeera, have added another layer of tension to an already complicated situation involving Israel, Turkey, Syria and the United States. Barrack said the Israeli operation could have risked triggering a confrontation with Turkey, which maintains significant influence and military interests in Syria. He warned that such actions could further destabilise the region at a time when Washington is attempting to promote dialogue and prevent a wider conflict.
US envoy raises concern
Barrack said Israel did not provide the expected warning before carrying out the strike this week. According to his assessment, the operation against the Abu Duhur military base could have been aimed at “baiting the Turks” and creating conditions for a possible confrontation.
The remarks are particularly significant because Turkey has expanded its involvement in Syria and has repeatedly expressed concern over Israeli military operations in the country. Ankara has described some of Israel’s recent actions as reckless and has opposed moves that could further complicate Syria’s security situation.
Israel disputes US claim
Israel has rejected Barrack’s account. Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel had shared intelligence information with authorised US officials before the strike.
Katz strongly criticised the US envoy’s comments, arguing that they contained inaccuracies and did not reflect the position of President Donald Trump’s administration. The Israeli government has also maintained that its military operations in Syria are linked to its security concerns and regional threats.
The disagreement highlights differences within an otherwise close US-Israel relationship over how military activity in Syria should be handled, particularly when Turkish forces and interests are involved.
Turkey’s role in Syria
Turkey has become an important regional player in Syria, particularly since the fall of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. Ankara has maintained close political and security links with Syria and continues to monitor developments along its southern border.
Israel, meanwhile, has stepped up military operations in Syria and has expanded its military presence in parts of the country’s south. The situation has increased the possibility of an indirect confrontation between Israel and Turkey, despite efforts by Washington to keep tensions under control.
Golan Heights remains disputed
The latest dispute also comes against the backdrop of the long-running controversy over the Golan Heights. Israel captured the territory from Syria during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War and later annexed it. The annexation is not recognised under international law.
Barrack has previously described the Golan Heights as occupied territory, making him a notable figure within the Trump administration on the issue. His position has also brought him into disagreement with Israel’s established stance on the territory.
US pushes for de-escalation
The United States has been attempting to facilitate dialogue between Syria and Israel and prevent further military escalation. Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa has repeatedly said Damascus does not want a direct conflict with Israel.
However, continuing Israeli strikes, Turkey’s growing role in Syria and competing security interests are making the diplomatic situation increasingly difficult to manage. Barrack’s latest remarks could further expose the differences among the countries involved over how Syria’s fragile security environment should be handled.
The immediate focus will now be on whether Washington can contain the disagreement and prevent further Israeli-Turkish tensions from spilling into a broader regional confrontation.
