Washington is trying to counterbalance Israel and Turkey. Shahan Gantaharyan

17-07-2026 21:56 A comment

«Washington is trying to counterbalance Israel and Turkey». What messages are hidden behind the recent statements?

«Noyan Tapan» has spoken with political analyst Shahan Gantaharyan.

– What are the main messages contained in the statement of the Israeli Minister of Defense after the phone conversation with his American counterpart?

– The statement has at least two layers. The first is political. Tel Aviv is trying to neutralize the assessments that there are disagreements between the United States and Israel at this stage. The publication of the phone conversation emphasizes that American military operations in Iran and Israeli actions in Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon are presented as interconnected and coordinated processes.

– What is the most important part of the statement?

– The most essential part is the second section, where the Israeli Minister of Defense effectively states that Israel does not intend to withdraw from the security zones of Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon. This is not just a description of the situation but a political message that the presence is viewed as part of a long-term strategy.

– However, earlier Donald Trump stated that Israel should withdraw from Syria and Lebanon. Is there a contradiction?

– There is an interesting nuance here. The phrasing in Trump's latest statement has changed. Previously, there was talk of Israel's withdrawal, but now the term «redeployment» is used. He also noted that Syrian President Ahmad al-Shara will take on the issue of «Hezbollah» using neither Israeli nor military methods, while Israel can redeploy its forces focusing on Iran.

– What is the political significance of the difference between the terms «withdrawal» and «redeployment»?

– It is not just a change of words. «Withdrawal» implies a complete departure from the territory, while «redeployment» means the movement of forces without necessarily fully leaving the area. This also aligns with Washington's position, which speaks of redeployment, while Lebanon continues to demand the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces.

– How should Trump's statement regarding Syria be interpreted?

– Here, we are not talking about a proposal but a predetermined scenario. When Trump says that the Syrian president will take on the issue of «Hezbollah», it creates the impression that there is already some agreement regarding this division of roles.

– Where could this agreement have been formed?

– If such an agreement indeed exists, then the most likely platform is the United States-Turkey communication line. This still lacks public confirmation, but the logic of regional processes gives rise to such a conclusion.

– What is the significance of Israel placing Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon on the same level?

– It is a perception of a unified security zone. Israel presents all three directions as one strategic area. It is noteworthy that this approach is voiced in the context of a phone conversation with the U.S. military leadership, but it is also a response to the earlier statement by the Turkish president, according to which Turkey's security begins from Gaza, Syria, and Lebanon.

– So, do Israel and Turkey view the same region as their security environment?

– Yes. Both states perceive the Gaza-Syria-Lebanon triangle as their immediate security zone. This is where the clashes of interests arise. And Washington is trying to maintain the balance by limiting the deepening of contradictions on one hand, while on the other hand using the terms «withdrawal» and «redeployment» in different situations.

* This text was automatically translated by Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Noyan Tapan | A comment