U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Sparks Israel Diplomatic Crisis

Tom Barrack, the U.S. ambassador to Turkey and President Donald Trump's special envoy for Syria, finds himself at the heart of an unprecedented crisis that could end his diplomatic career. In a lengthy podcast interview with Mario Nawfal last week, he addressed an Israeli airstrike on the Syrian air force base Abu al-Duhur.

Rather than defending America's closest Middle East ally, the ambassador cast doubt on Israeli intelligence, hinted at ulterior political motives, and used language that directly contradicted President Trump's official foreign policy.

The most explosive statement concerned the Golan Heights. Barrack claimed Israel "still holds the Golan Heights in violation of UN resolutions and contrary to the entire international order." This was no academic observation. In 2019, Trump himself signed formal U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, one of the most symbolic and significant decisions of his first term.

He later attempted to clarify his remarks. In a statement to the Associated Press, he insisted that U.S. policy "was set by President Trump in 2019 and has not changed," and that he was merely describing the UN's historical position. But the clarification came too late. The damage was done.

Equally troubling was his assertion that Israeli intelligence about Turkish intentions to deploy forces at the Syrian base was false. According to Barrack, the United States investigated the information and found it baseless. He even floated a theory that Israel was trying to "lure" Turkey into war, an aggressive move designed to serve Israel's domestic election calendar. He also accused Jerusalem of failing to provide adequate advance warning to Washington before the strike.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz issued a rare Shabbat statement calling Barak's remarks "full of inaccuracies" and contradicting President Trump's own position. Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar joined the criticism.

Laura Loomer, a conservative activist close to Trump, launched a fierce public attack demanding Barrack's resignation. Senator Rick Scott accused him of either forgetting the president's policy or not bothering to check it. Diplomatic sources reported that Barak was summoned to Washington this week for urgent "consultations"—a term that typically signals severe reprimand and sometimes the beginning of the end.

Sources in the State Department and White House expressed deep displeasure. One was quoted making a particularly cutting remark: the State Department might "hire packers to box up his belongings", a clear hint that Barrack might not return to Ankara at all. Despite his long friendship with Trump, it appears a line has been crossed.

The affair exposes deeper tensions in American Middle East policy. Barrack, a Lebanese-American businessman and personal friend of the president, was sent to Ankara to balance between Turkey and Israel and assist in Syria's reconstruction. Instead, he is perceived by many in Jerusalem as having adopted the Turkish narrative. His repeated criticism of Israel, alongside relative silence on Turkish moves in Syria, created a sense of dangerous bias.

Will Barrack survive? The answer remains unclear. Trump is known for loyalty to old friends, but also for impatience with those who damage his policy or create unnecessary crises. In the sensitive Middle East of 2026, with Israel facing multiple threats and Turkey seeking to expand its influence, there is no room for an ambassador who undermines Washington's foundational positions.