Iran and Turkey moved to de-escalate tensions between them in the immediate aftermath of the downing of an Iranian missile over Turkey on Wednesday, but the development signals dangerous potential if the conflict heats up between them, experts said.

NATO air defense systems shot down an Iranian ballistic missile heading for Turkish airspace on Wednesday. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan spoke with his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, warning Araghchi not to allow the conflict to spread across the region. Turkey summoned the Iranian ambassador to Ankara for a reprimand.

“All necessary steps to defend our territory and airspace will be taken resolutely and without hesitation,” including consulting with NATO allies to protect the country, Turkey’s Defense Ministry said in a statement.

Officials told The Wall Street Journal the missile was targeting the Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, which hosts American troops. At the same time, a Turkish official told Agence France-Presse that the missile was likely aimed at Cyprus, where Iran has struck British military assets.

Zvi Yehezkeli, an Arab affairs expert for i24 News, interpreted the missile over Turkey as mostly symbolic, meant as an Iranian message to Ankara to stay out of the war. 

Though Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he was saddened by the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the war, his response “was viewed in Tehran as hypocrisy,” and they see Erdogan as “playing a double game,” according to Yehezkeli.

“Ankara knows that this symbolic shot was mostly meant for domestic needs in Tehran,” Yehezkeli stated. “For Turkey, silence and containment are the most comfortable way at the moment.”

Gallia Lindenstrauss, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University specializing in Turkish foreign relations, told Jewish Insider that there were “efforts on both sides to minimize the significance of the event.”

In Ankara, she said, “some said [the missile] was meant for Cyprus, some said it was shot by independent groups and not under orders from Tehran. The Iranians said there was no attempt to harm Turkey.”

Lindenstrauss said that while Iran’s intentions are hard to confirm, they may have aimed at the Ceyhan port, through which Azerbaijan ships oil to Israel, especially in light of Iran’s strike on Azerbaijan the following day.

“The attempt to strike Turkey is part of an Iranian policy of trying to get everyone involved in the conflict. They are shooting in all directions. I don’t think [targeting Turkey] is a one-time thing,” she said.

Lindenstruass said she sees several possible negative consequences for Turkey from the war.

“Turkish commentators who understand the severity [of the missile attack] say that Iran is suicidal,” she said. 

In addition, Ankara is very concerned about the “spillover of destabilization,” including the possibility of the Kurds getting involved in the conflict, of European navies sending ships to the region to defend Cyprus, and a wave of refugees attempting to enter Turkey from Iran.

Turkey has long had a wall on its border with Iran, and hundreds of Iranians have successfully crossed the border since the start of the war on Saturday, according to Reuters.

“For Israelis, what is most concerning is a growing view [in Turkey] of Israel as a threat that has grown too strong,” Lindenstrauss said. “They have the idea that Israel is behind the events. They don’t blame the U.S.; they blame Israel for a provocation and sabotaging the negotiations.”

At the same time, Turkey is making gains from the conflict in its defense industry, she said.

“Turkey is supplying drones to Gulf States, and Saudi Arabia and Egypt are interested in the fighter jet that Turkey is building. The Gulf States are not happy with Turkish behavior, but they will not isolate Ankara because of its defense industry. That is seen [in Turkey] as a game-changer,” Lindenstrauss said.

David Wurmser, former Middle East advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney and a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, warned in a message, obtained by JI, that he sent to Israeli and American officials that Turkey may choose to join the war against Iran, expressing a broader concern about the involvement of radical Sunni countries.

After Iranian missiles struck Qatar, the Gulf state’s foreign minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, rejected Iran’s claim that they were aiming for American assets and said Tehran “was seeking to inflict harm on its neighbors and drag them into a war that is not theirs.” 

Pakistan publicly warned that Iran “should keep … in mind” that it signed a mutual defense pact last year with Saudi Arabia, which has been struck repeatedly by Iranian missiles and drones in recent days. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. 

“Any intervention by Turkey, Pakistan or Qatar is extremely dangerous,” Wurmser said. “It adds nothing, but transforms the texture of this war in extreme, dangerous ways. Even to the point that it can complicate or potentially even make [Israel and the U.S.] lose this … If a Sunni shark-feeding frenzy emerges, Iranians will hunker down, and become passive in fear, perhaps passive even against this regime.” 

Intervention by those countries would “transform the narrative of this war,” Wurmser said. “Right now, the war [is] one of the civilized world defending itself and returning Iran to the Iranian people from a lunatic, evil and sadist regime. It cast the Iranian people as our allies and part of our team in battle.”

“The Sunni threat to Iran, however, is seen by Iranians in their gut and bones as a matter of threatening death,” he added.

Wurmser noted that most Sunni states in the region “opposed this war; they tried to sabotage it.” He accused Turkey, Pakistan and Qatar of now “try[ing] to swoop in on the prey.” 

Yehezkeli also wrote about the role of deep-seated divisions between Sunni and Shi’ite states. 

The Shi’ite leadership of Iran “has a clear accounting of who supported [them], who was silent and who is the real enemy,” Yehezkeli wrote. “The background goes deeper than recent events. The hatred between the Sunnis and the Shi’ites, which began in Islam’s early days, never disappeared. It was only hidden at times behind political interests and temporary alliances.”

Lindenstrauss, however, said she thinks “the Turkish context is more complex” when it comes to the Sunni-Shi’ite divide.

“The largest minority in Iran is Azeris, and they’re Shi’ite and so is [Turkey ally] Azerbaijan,” she noted. “The Kurds are Sunni and that doesn’t calm the Turks down about them. … I don’t see Sunni cooperation against Iran.” 

Lindenstrauss said she thinks “Turkey’s interest is for the Islamic Republic to stay in charge [of Iran] but weaker, yet not so weak that there will be a wave of refugees and a Kurdish uprising.”

Two roads diverged for Israel’s security cabinet in a Sunday night meeting about Gaza, and since they could not travel both routes, the cabinet decided not to make a decision.

The Security Cabinet met to discuss Israel’s next steps in Gaza after 633 days of war: ceasefire or escalation. 

Some in the IDF high brass argued that the Gaza war’s objectives have been met — noting that the army had destroyed Hamas’ military infrastructure, killed nearly all of the senior Hamas commanders on its target list, dismantled tunnels, seized 60% of Gaza, blocked key smuggling routes — leaving Hamas weaker than it has been since its 2007 takeover of Gaza. They argued that now is the time to pursue an exit strategy, according to military analyst Amir Bohbot.

If there is no ceasefire, the IDF plans to continue its current operation in Gaza, calling up tens of thousands of IDF reservists and moving to conquer 80% of the territory. Officers in the cabinet meeting reportedly warned that doing so could bring about a large number of casualties, including some of the hostages. In the past week, the army has suffered near-daily losses of soldiers in Gaza. 

On Monday, the IDF called on the residents of several neighborhoods in northern Gaza to evacuate, warning that military operations in their areas would escalate and intensify.

President Donald Trump’s choice is clear: “MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!” he wrote on Truth Social on Sunday. Two days earlier, he said there could be a ceasefire within a week.

What a ceasefire would mean is unclear. The parties could agree to a temporary ceasefire, which Israelis have called the “Witkoff outline,” after Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff. Such a ceasefire would last 60 days, with the release of half of the remaining 50 hostages, 21 of whom are thought to be alive, in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, including terrorists, and increased humanitarian aid flow into Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denied a report last week that he and Trump discussed a sweeping plan to end the Gaza war and expand the Abraham Accords, but a source with knowledge of the matter told Jewish Insider on Monday that much of the details are, in fact, currently in talks, even if they may still be far from fruition. 

Among the elements under discussion are the exile of remaining Hamas leaders from Gaza, and for Israeli troops to remain along Gaza’s perimeter — the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border is still under debate — and for the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to take a central role in Gaza’s administration. In addition, there have been talks about normalization between Israel and Syria.

Netanyahu’s rush to deny the original report — which included Israeli acknowledgment of a future Palestinian state — underscores the degree to which he believes such a move would be politically toxic and could threaten to break up his governing coalition.

Of course, the U.S. and Israel can make plans, but Hamas has ideas of its own. Negotiators have on multiple occasions leaked the details of past ceasefire proposals, only for Hamas to reject the deals on the table. As Michael Milshtein, an expert on Palestinian affairs at Tel Aviv University, told Israel’s Kan Radio on Monday morning, “even after Iran blew up, Hamas is sticking to the same stance … [that] the IDF must fully withdraw” from Gaza.

More recently, Trump has found a different culprit for the lack of a ceasefire: the Israeli judiciary. For the second time in recent days, the president took to his social media network to lament that “it is terrible what they are doing in Israel to Bibi Netanyahu … How is it possible that the Prime Minister of Israel can be forced to sit in a Courtroom all day long, over NOTHING  (Cigars, Bugs Bunny Doll, etc.). It is a POLITICAL WITCH HUNT, very similar to the Witch Hunt that I was forced to endure. This travesty of ‘Justice’ will interfere with both Iran and Hamas negotiations.”

One part of Trump’s Truth Social post raised alarm bells in the Israeli commentariat, with some interpreting the president’s words as a threat: “The United States of America spends Billions of Dollar a year, far more than on any other Nation, protecting and supporting Israel. We are not going to stand for this,” he wrote. “This greatly tarnishes our Victory [in Iran].”

The judge in Netanyahu’s trial was not convinced by Trump’s first post on social media, nor by a confidential letter from Netanyahu saying that there are urgent security matters requiring the postponement of the prime minister’s planned cross-examination this week. However, when the head of the Mossad and the head of IDF intelligence showed up at the courthouse hours after Trump’s second post on Sunday, Netanyahu received the deferral that both he and Trump wanted.

Asked whether Netanyahu’s trial is holding up a possible ceasefire in Gaza, Amichai Cohen, head of the Israel Democracy Institute’s Program on National Security and the Law, told JI that “it’s common sense that if critical things are happening in the war in Gaza, there won’t be proceedings. You don’t need the [resident of the United States for that to happen; the Israeli system knows how to handle it.” 

Marc Zell, an international lawyer who is the chairman of Republicans Overseas Israel and a frequent defender of Trump in Israeli media, took issue with the interpretation that Trump is tying the issue of the hostages and the war in Gaza with to the trial, beyond the fact that “President Trump is quite understandably concerned that the prime minister is being distracted by what he considers silly political proceedings, which he understands because Trump himself was the object of a similar campaign … Trump is highly motivated to get this thing done and take advantage of what could be a sea change in the politics of the Middle East.”

Cohen and Zell were both skeptical that Trump’s entreaties would have much of an impact on Netanyahu’s case. 

Cohen said that Trump may be trying to get a plea deal for Netanyahu. However, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, whom Netanyahu’s cabinet ministers are currently trying to fire, would have to sign off on it. “I don’t think Trump would influence her,” Cohen said.

However, Trump could pressure Israeli President Isaac Herzog to pardon Netanyahu, which Cohen said was “the only place where politics could play a role. However, he added, “according to past rulings by the High Court, a pardon can only apply to someone who admitted wrong doing” — which Netanyahu has not done.

Zell called the proceedings against Netanyahu “specious,” but defended the independence of Israel’s judiciary. He told JI that Trump’s attempted intervention is “a direct affront to [Israel’s] sovereignty” and that “this is not the business of the U.S.; it’s the business of the State of Israel.”

Of Netanyahu supporters who cheered Trump’s posts, he said: “If we’re inviting a foreign state to interfere in our own proceedings, however misguided they may be … it opens the door to subsequent administrations. This is what the Biden administration did; it tried to interfere in our political processes and stop judicial reform.”