Turkey Can Advance Trump’s Foreign Policy Goals
U.S. relations with Ankara are undergoing a radical transformation.
President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan held last week their first phone call since the U.S. leader’s inauguration this January. The conversation took place against a significant geopolitical backdrop: The relationship between the two countries appears to be undergoing a dramatic transformation. Indeed, Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, described the call as “transformative” during a recent podcast conversation with Tucker Carlson.
The call has been overshadowed by developments pertaining to the Gaza war and the Russia–Ukraine conflict, but it may foreshadow even deeper geopolitical developments in the years ahead. Witkoff contends that the conversation signals forthcoming positive developments relating to Turkey and predicted major headlines. While the elliptical nature of his remarks leaves room for speculation, early indicators suggest a thaw in Turkish-American relations, with Trump reportedly seeking to lift sanctions and reinstate Turkey in the F-35 program—contingent on Turkey dismantling or relocating its Russian-provided S-400 missile defense system, due to concerns about spying.
Trump has sought a new foreign policy that reflects his penchant for deal-making and opposition to traditional U.S. interventionism. The president’s preferred framework prioritizes American interests over ideological commitments, signaling a retreat from extensive military engagements and a focus on domestic priorities. Turkey, a pivotal NATO ally, stands to benefit from this shift, as Trump’s administration appears less inclined to entangle the U.S. in Middle Eastern conflicts where direct gains are absent—meaning Ankara could fill the void.
Trump has shown a pragmatic willingness to mend ties with Turkey. By tasking his team with exploring legal and technical avenues to exempt Turkey from the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, Trump is signaling a desire to reset relations that had been strained, under the Biden administration, by the S-400 acquisition.
Now is a good time to improve relations with Turkey, whose geopolitical influence is growing in the new era of multipolarity. The conversation between Trump and Erdoğan coincides with notable diplomatic developments, including the first non-Ukraine-related U.S.-Russia talks, which were held in Istanbul following a summit in Riyadh. This positions Turkey as a facilitator of diplomatic normalization between the two nuclear superpowers, underscored by the U.S. extension of Turkey’s Gazprombank sanctions exemption until May 2025. Turkey’s potential participation in a Ukraine peacekeeping force highlights its capacity to provide security guarantees where the U.S. is reluctant to commit, enhancing its credibility as a reliable partner amid growing U.S.-Europe tensions.
Domestically, Turkey faces its own challenges that occasionally ripple outward. The arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu, mayor of Istanbul and the presidential candidate of the main opposition party CHP, has sparked anti-government protests across the country and some criticism from international media. While this remains a significant issue within Turkish public discourse and is likely to persist as a domestic agenda item, its impact on the Turkish-American relationship appears negligible.
Addressing the incident, a State Department spokesperson said that the U.S. refrains from commenting on other nations’ “internal decision-making” but expects Turkey to “behave in a manner that respects the rights of all of its citizens.” This aligns with the Trump administration’s broader foreign policy ethos, which eschews value-based alliances in favor of transactional relationships. The era of democracy promotion as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy is over, for now at least, rendering internal Turkish unrest a secondary concern to the pragmatic bilateral priorities driving the Trump-Erdoğan dialogue.
In the Middle East, Turkey’s stance on Gaza—viewing Hamas as Gaza’s legitimate political authority rather than a terrorist organization—sets it apart from much of the international community and places it at odds with Israel. Trump’s ambiguous rhetoric on Gaza, oscillating between envisioning the strip as a “Middle Eastern Riviera” and affirming Palestinian resettlement post-reconstruction, suggests an openness to unconventional solutions. The U.S. administration’s failed attempt at direct dialogue with Hamas may lead to collaboration with Turkey as a mediator, leveraging Ankara’s influence in the region.
This possibility aligns with insights from Witkoff’s recent interview, where he noted that Hamas is not “ideologically intractable.” Witkoff’s emphasis on Hamas’s pragmatic side could complement Turkey’s approach, positioning Ankara as a key interlocutor in bridging U.S. and Hamas perspectives. On the other hand, rising diplomatic tensions, exemplified by Turkey’s veto of Israel’s participation in NATO exercises until the Gaza crisis resolves, highlight a persistent fault line in Turkish-Israeli relations that could complicate U.S. mediation efforts.
Syria remains a critical arena where Turkish, American, and Israeli interests collide. Israel’s efforts to expand its buffer zone in southern Syria—aiding Druze groups and dismantling former regime bases—reflect a strategy to counterbalance Turkey’s influence. Turkey supports the new Damascus government, its closest ally in the region, and seeks to prevent Kurdish autonomy in northeastern Syria. Israel, meanwhile, is wary of the new Syrian government.
Under Trump, the U.S. appears poised to accelerate its withdrawal from Syria, a process prefigured by Biden’s limited engagement in the country and Trump’s effort, in his first term, to pull out American forces there. Turkey’s advocacy for a U.S. withdrawal aligns with its vision of assuming a stabilizing role, potentially overseeing security in ISIS detention camps and maintaining order generally. This model could reassure the U.S. regarding the safety of its Kurdish allies while unlocking Turkey’s geopolitical ambitions, fostering deeper bilateral cooperation.
The Turkish-Israeli rivalry extends beyond Syria. Israel’s diplomatic maneuvers—lobbying Russia to maintain its Syrian presence, engaging the U.S. to limit Turkey’s military footprint, and employing hybrid tactics like creating a Turkish-language IDF account—signal an intent to counter Turkey’s regional ascendancy.
Turkey’s closest ally, Azerbaijan, complicates matters even more through its deepening ties with Israel, notably in defense and energy cooperation. Speculation about Azerbaijan joining the Abraham Accords, the agreements between Israel and Muslim countries, could isolate Turkey unless Ankara also opts to engage in this framework. With Azerbaijan and Armenia still in the process of working out a durable peace, Turkey could play a pivotal role in facilitating an agreement and supporting Armenia’s economic recovery. This move, aligning Turkey with an anti-Iran coalition alongside Arab states and Israel, could cement a “complete Middle Eastern bloc” under Trump’s disruptive foreign policy vision—potentially easing Turkish-Israeli tensions over Syria through negotiation.
Iran is already facing acute pressure. Reports of its uranium enrichment capabilities bolster Israel’s case for military action, while America’s re-designation of the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization and its renewed Yemen operations are intended to weaken the Iran-funded group. Trump’s Iran strategy favors aggressive economic and political pressure over direct conflict, offering Tehran a two-month window for nuclear talks. Should a potential military operation against Iran materialize, the U.S. would likely expect Turkey to host air defense systems and open its airspace, leveraging the country’s strategic position to support the military campaign. Turkey could also help reduce Europe’s reliance on Iranian energy by reactivating the Iraq-Turkey oil pipeline.
The Trump-Erdoğan dialogue heralds a realignment in Turkish-American relations, driven by shared pragmatism and interest in reshaping the Middle East. From purchasing F-35s to mediating in Gaza, from stabilizing Syria to countering Iran, Turkey is set to emerge as a linchpin in Trump’s transactional foreign policy. Of course, challenges persist: Turkish-Israeli tensions, the S-400 impasse, and regional rivalries could derail this rapprochement, but there is more reason for optimism than pessimism.
A strengthening of U.S.-Turkey ties may lighten the burden on American taxpayers, as regional security demands less financial and institutional support from the U.S.—a cost-effective approach that aligns with Trump’s America First doctrine. This collaboration could bolster Trump’s position heading into the 2026 midterms, enhancing his domestic standing through foreign policy wins. The coming months will test whether this partnership can transcend its fault lines, delivering the radical transformation both leaders seem to envision.
The post Turkey Can Advance Trump’s Foreign Policy Goals appeared first on The American Conservative.
