18 thoughts on “RT: Israel Used Turkish Military Base in Latakia Attack – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Thanks again for timely reporting. I just viewed the RT story and was much surprised by its implications.

    RT did make use in the video to criticize the Turkey-Israel Alliance and add a bit of Kremlin propaganda. What about the Dolphin story and cruise missiles?

    From this linked article there were multiple strikes at the facility near the village of Samiyah, south/east from Latakia – Israel Defense: analysis of the satellite photography.

    As for ME politics, the Muslim Brotherhood has been frozen out of Egypt’s leadership with the military overthrow of Morsi. The axis Egypt-Hamas-Turkey-Qatar is facing defeat. Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait have asserted regional power in opposition to the MB regimes. If the story is true, Erdogan must have been desperate to turn the chances for Assad’s opposition rebel forces after the fall of Qusayr. With the military confrontation in recent weeks between FSA and the Al-Nusra and ISIS fighters, Erdogan is losing the battle.

  2. NATO’s Eastern Anchor, 24 NATO bases in Turkey

    Most likely an Israeli sortie out of NATO’s Incirlik base:
    Located eight kilometers (five miles) east of Adana, Turkey’s fifth largest city, and 56 kilometers (35 miles) from the Mediterranean Sea, is an important regional logistical air base of the alliance.

    IAF doing the dirty work for western powers who have been handtied by International Law and the veto from Russia and China at the UN Security Council.

    Israel’s military command has been invited to join in training exercises at its NATO Allied HQ command centers in Germany and/or Turkey. NATO Air HQ at Ramstein Air Base becomes the single Allied Air Command.

    1. Report: Turkey still barring Israel from major NATO exercises – The Atlantic Council on Dec. 23, 2012

      Israel to join NATO activities amidst Turkey tension – Jerusalem Post on Dec. 23, 2012

      “The officials said the approval had come as Turkey’s request that NATO station Patriot missile batteries along its border with Syria was granted, leading them to assess that NATO was using the deployment as leverage to induce Ankara to thaw its relations with Israel.

      Israel is a NATO partner and has accordingly participated in seminars, exercises and training as part of that status. But over the course of the past year, as new NATO activities were planned for cooperating countries such as Israel, Turkey objected to their going forward, according to Israeli sources.”

  3. FYI, from Ynet:

    Rusiya Al-Yaum, a Russian TV news channel broadcasting in Arabic, reported that the Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has denied reports that Israel used a Turkish military base to launch one of its recent airstrikes against Syria from the sea. Davutoglu noted that the information is baseless.


    And from Hurriyet Daily News:

    “Turkey will neither be a part nor a partner of such ‘attacks.’ The ones who claim this want to damage Turkey’s power and reputation,” he said. “It is out of the question that Turkey and Israel are part of a joint military operation.”


  4. It would be naive to think that this was done bilaterally between Turkey and Israel. The USA has more skin in this game than any other. I would speculate that the US leaned on Turkey to facilitate this action. The US has many points of leverage against Turkey.

  5. The advantage of attacking from the North wouldn’t simply be on of “surprise” but possibly of a low-level approach through favourable screening terrain. The very first version of the Popeye missile was designed to be launched from quite low level and then climb higher to dive onto the target, while the launch aircraft stayed low. I’d always thought that a submarine attack for any target in Syria made little sense other than as a sort of demonstration. The first version of Popeye was also far too big to be launched from the F16 and it took a lot of revision to make it work from an F15, so the original launch platform was the Phantom. Retired by the IDF but still operated and supported in Turkey. The more recent Popeyes are based on a 1,000lb rather than a 2,000lb warhead, to make them launchable by an F16 or similar aircraft. If you wanted to ensure the destruction of P-800 missiles in a store designed to limit the risk of explosions propagating from one munition to another, the biggest possible warhead would make the most efficient trigger for secondary explosions. Taking an Israeli Phanthom out of mothballs for one special raid might be an instructive exercise for a Turkish ground crew, perhaps preparing them to operate similar weapons from their own Phantoms. Just a thought.

  6. I see no operational need for such a joint venture. Both Tratus and Latakia are within the operational range of Israel’s Airplanes (F16’s & F15’s) and flying the profile mentioned in the article, Re: Delivering a BVR (beyond visual range) attack using guided weapons is possible even if the airplane flies out of it’s Israeli air bases. As for your notion of the surprise attack for the north….on June 22nd 2012 the Syrian forces shut down a Turkish air-force F4, so i think it’s safe to assume that they are watching that direction – north – as well. Besides Israeli jet’s can mount an attack from that direction flying out of any Israeli air base, without penetrating the Turkish airspace. In Short great story of a Russian with an extreme developed imagination.

      1. Of course they did, the point is that Syria’s northern border is a boarder of war, with many fire incidents between the Syrian and Turkish army.(http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57586876/turkey-returns-fire-after-shots-fired-from-syria) Assuming anyone attacking from over the Turkish border will gain any type of surprise because “Syria would not have expected an attack on Latakia from the north and therefore might not have defended against it” is extremely naive.

        1. @EladR: There is a huge difference between an artillery bombardment and an air assault. Turkey has never launched an air attack on Syria nor have I heard that Syria has used its air force to attack Turkey (though there have been artillery exchanges). So Syria would not have expected an Israeli attack originating in Turkish airspace & this would give Israel an element of surprise in its attack.

          1. Huge difference ? So your claim is that if side A will
            attack Side B using infantry alongside a border in turmoil, Side B
            shouldn’t be expecting an Armored Corps/Artillery/Air Force
            involvement ? Since the rebels logistic backbone is in turkey,
            allot of Syrian military & intelligence resources are
            focusing on Turkey. Doing anything less would be negligence on
            behalf of the Syrian Armed forces (and their Iranian’s command) and
            i don’t think they are.

  7. An interesting analysis with the open option for Israeli-Turkish alliance in a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

    RT: Israeli Strike on Syria Launched from Turkey – The Jewish Press by Yori Yanover

    “(July 15, 2013) – Relations between Turkey and Israel were strained until last March, following the Turkish flotilla incident off the coast of Gaza. But the two countries have normalized their relationship after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to Erdogan. Turkey is providing training grounds for French and American sponsored anti-President Bashar al-Assad rebels, before helping them infiltrate into Syria.

    Anyone reading today the report on this level of cooperation between the Turkish military and Israel (not necessarily with the prior approval of the Turkish prime minister) has to be thinking about the same cooperation against another common enemy – Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Since there may already be an operational IAF base inside Turkey, it would be an excellent place for Israeli attack planes to launch their attack against the Iranian nuclear facilities, as well as to stop there for refueling on their way home.”

    IAF squadron in Italy for joint exercise with NATO partners – YnetNews on Nov. 2, 2011

    Recent controversy over the Israeli military presence in Azerbaijan:

    A Forward Attack Base (JCPA)
    Iran’s progress in its nuclear program and the failure of the nuclear talks with the West have raised Tehran’s threshold of sensitivity about a military attack on its nuclear facilities, and it increasingly fears that Azerbaijan may serve as a base for such a strike. Notably, a 2012 article in Foreign Policy quoted senior U.S. intelligence officials saying Azerbaijan would serve as a base for attacking Iran or for rescue operations after an Israeli attack.

    And the common interest of NATO partners with Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan are the pipelines for transport of natural gas and oil from the Caspian Sea basin. The Kurdish pipeline from Kirkuk has been added to the wanted list of EU nations. Solving the problem with the Assad regime remains high on the To Do list.

  8. If the air base in Turkey is İncirlik (outside Adana), people should know that this is also a base much used by the U.S. Air Force. I have read allegations that the U.S. stocks nuclear weapons at that base.

  9. Nobody is considering the obvious?

    Israel doesn’t much like when the spotlight is turned on it, much preferring to go BANG! on something and then pulling that arrogant “What? Me?” smirk.

    Well, spreading a cock’n’bull story about Israeli jets flying out of Turkish airbases (Why, exactly? Doesn’t Israel have its own tarmac?) ensures that this gets yet another run in the media, much to Israel’s annoyance.

    As far as Putin is concerned he wouldn’t care if the story is true – or even plausible – the important thing is to spread a rumour that keeps the story in the news, because doing that makes Israel uncomfortable.

    After all (as Richard has already noted) Israel doesn’t NEED to use Turkish airbases to launch a raid of this kind. So why would the Israelis WANT to overly-complicate the operation, since doing so adds risk.

    Just go with the K.I.S.S. principle: scramble from Ramat David Airbase, launch the missiles from way out at sea, then scoot back home.

  10. I don’t see Erdogan visiting Gaza any time soon. AFAIK Hamas are supporting the Brotherhood uprising in Gaza due to the military taking out 90% of the tunnels. So it would be a political faux-pas to visit any time soon. As for Turkey allowing Israel to use its territory… you could be correct and Israel could capitulate on the Mavi mara Issue. Though it would be interesting if Kerry Played a hand in convincing Turkey to Play ball. America is trying to convince Bibi that they are serious about Israels security and by getting a hostile government to allow the use of its sovereign land for its defense could give bibi political leverage to enact a semi-construction freeze which would restart negotiations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *