https://www.timesofisrael.com/turkeys-erdogan-appears-to-issue-open-threat-to-invade-israel-over-war-in-gaza/
This is an example of diversionary foreign policy, because he'll clearly do no such thing. This is fodder for his primary constituency in Turkey: rural conservatives.
Especially in geopolitics, actions speak louder than words: https://www.defensemirror.com/news/37388/Germany_Blocking_Eurofighter_Sale_to_Turkey__Eurofighter_CEO
If Turkey invades vis Syyria, Israel. Will NATO, US have to defend Turkey, a NATO member against Israel? Technically speaking?
quote: Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) treaty is the principle of collective defense. It states that if an armed attack occurs against one or more NATO member states in Europe or North America, it will be considered an attack against all members. In this case, each member will take the actions they deem necessary to assist the attacked member, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain security. All measures taken in response to the attack must be immediately reported to the Security Council. The way I read it is that if a NATO member attacked a non-NATO member then NATO members are not obligated to join in the fighting. It wouldn't make sense when a NATO member attacks others for NATO to have to help in the attack.
Moreover, I suspect that Erdogan and Modi are similar in that they want to see their countries become poles in an increasingly multipolar world. This explains some of their seemingly contrary behavior.
Just keep in mind that five nations are "known" to have used WMD against their own people in the last fifty years. Turkey and Sryia are two of them. Erdogan has even been convicted in absentia of crimes against humanity by the Hague.
