A new article in The Telegraph in the UK argues that Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is the real winner of the Iran war. The argument is that Turkey’s leader has been cracking down on opposition while the world is focused on the war in Iran. This is an interesting argument. However, Turkey’s benefit from the conflict and how it may reshape Ankara’s policy are more complex than the issue of the domestic political opposition.

Turkey has sought to remain outside the Iran conflict. It’s not clear whether Ankara is posing as a neutral power or seeking to portray itself as similar to most European and NATO powers that also remained outside the war. Turkey has not come in for criticism from the White House. This contrasts with the critique of European countries and Oman. Ankara is also not stepping up to take on the mediation role that Pakistan and Qatar have sought.

As such, Turkey is in a unique position. This isn’t new for Ankara. It has often had its own policy. Even though it is a member of NATO, Turkey has remained outside of major world conflicts since the end of the First World War. It should be recalled that the Ottoman Empire did enter the First World War on the side of Germany and Austria-Hungary. Among the initiatives that convinced the Sublime Porte to enter the war was the dispatch of German warships Breslau and Goeben to Turkey, replacing ships that the Turks had ordered from Britain. Ankara joined the losing side in the war. It ultimately led to the collapse of the empire and the emergence of modern Turkey.

Perhaps because of this, modern Turkish nationalism has often sought to remain outside of major conflicts, avoiding the Second World War. In the Cold War, Turkey became a member of NATO and a friend of the US and the West. However, Turkey remained concerned about the direction of the Global War on Terror after 9/11, wary of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Since that time, Turkey has been ruled by the AKP, whose roots are Islamic and conservative and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. This contrasts with the secular nationalist CHP party, which led Turkey for much of the 80 years from 1923 to 2003. The AKP initially sought to make Turkey more economically successful and even entertained the concept of growing closer to the European Union. However, over time, the AKP became more authoritarian and also more interventionist abroad. This peaked in the years 2015-2020, during the Syrian civil war.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrive for a joint press conference at the Presidential Palace in Ankara, Turkey, February 4, 2025.
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrive for a joint press conference at the Presidential Palace in Ankara, Turkey, February 4, 2025. (credit: REUTERS/CAGLA GURDOGAN)
In recent years, Turkey has become slightly less aggressive abroad. It still has its interests in Syria and Libya and the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as a global posture that seeks to link Ankara to the Islamic and Turkish worlds. However, it views the changing world order with a mix of apprehension and attempts to exploit the resulting power vacuum.

Turkey seeks ties to US as Trump administration zig-zags
Turkey’s leader has sought to cultivate close ties to the Trump administration. However, it can also see how the White House sometimes zig-zags on policy. The administration was seeking to end the Gaza war and get peace deals in 2025. However, in 2026, the administration became more interventionist, with the Iran war. It is also very critical of traditional US allies. It is also very close to Israel, and Ankara is likely wary of this. Some articles have appeared in pro-Israel circles suggesting that Turkey is the “next” Iran. This has raised eyebrows in Ankara. They appear to fear that Israel is seeking regional hegemony. As a NATO power with a large defense industrial base, Turkey can imagine a potential clash.

How might the clash develop? It could develop over tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean. It could be in Syria. Ankara is aware of the realpolitik that leads regional powers to clash. Ankara has sought to improve ties with Saudi Arabia and the Sunni. This development has led to more concerns in Jerusalem that this “Sunni” bloc of countries might replace the Iranian-backed proxies or “Shia crescent.”

This is where Turkey is treading more carefully. Rather than bashing Israel, as Ankara did during 2024, using the Gaza war as a reason, Turkey’s politicians are taking a more ‘wait and see’ approach. The crackdown on domestic opposition is not new. The AKP has long sought to remove what it claims is a “deep state” via mass arrests of the opposition. It has targeted Kurdish left-wing political groups, students, European-linked NGOs, and also now the CHP. The latest target is Ozgur Ozel, leader of the CHP.

“Turkey is emerging as a long-term winner from the US-Israeli war against Iran, which has provided Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Turkish president, room to accelerate an anti-democratic backslide with no global repercussions,” The Telegraph says. “Not only has he seized the moment to stage a crackdown on his opposition while the world’s gaze was averted, but he has also managed to boost Turkey’s standing on the global stage.”

US ambassador to Turkey may play role in US Iraq policy
There are many issues for Turkey now. Ankara is working on a potential deal with the PKK, which would see the PKK dissolved. It is working on a deal with Armenia. It is balancing its support for Ukraine with its work with Russia. It is also seeking to help Syria emerge as a strong state. The US ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, was also the US Envoy to Syria until his term as envoy expired recently. It appears Barrack may play a role in US policy in Iraq. This would please Turkey as well. However, there are many critics of Barrack, including supporters of the Kurds in Syria and others.

“Erdoğan has led Turkey for nearly a quarter of a century, consolidating power at home, particularly in the periods immediately following political challenges – mass protests in 2013, and a military coup in 2016, both of which were halted by the authorities with deadly force,” The Telegraph notes. “More recently, major demonstrations erupted in March 2025 after Mr. Erdoğan’s main political challenger, Ekrem İmamoğlu, the mayor of Istanbul, was arrested. Under Mr. Erdoğan, Turkey – which boasts Nato’s second-largest military after the US – has become the world’s 11th largest arms exporter, particularly of drones, which have been shipped to numerous countries, from Ukraine to Libya.”

What comes next in the Iran conflict is unclear. Ankara is waiting to see what happens. US pressure on the Gulf countries and Turkey to join the Abraham Accords has certainly raised eyebrows in Ankara. Turkey has always said it could dial down rhetoric regarding Israel if the Gaza war ended and Israel moved to accept a two-state concept. This is also Saudi Arabia’s view. Israel’s current coalition government will never make this move. However, Turkey is willing to wait and see what the elections in Jerusalem may bring. Turkey will also have elections, and the opposition could perform well. Nothing lasts forever, and the current policies of Jerusalem and Ankara may both change. The Iran war, therefore, may play out differently than expected.