A dispute between Israel and US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to Syria, Tom Barrack, intensified this week after comments he made on the Golan Heights and Turkey’s role in Syria prompted criticism from Israeli officials and Trump allies who said his positions conflict with the president’s stated policy.
Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar criticized Barrack following the comments, saying they were “full of inaccuracies” and included positions that “contradict the position of Trump himself regarding the Golan Heights.”
Conservative activist Laura Loomer also joined the criticism. Loomer, who maintains close and regular ties with Trump and is considered to have the president’s attention, pointed to the proclamation Trump signed in 2019 and called on Barrack to resign over what she described as a lack of understanding of US foreign policy.
This was not the first time this week that Loomer criticized the envoy. Following Barrack’s condemnation of the Israeli strike on the Abu al-Duhur base in Syria, she wrote that “Tom Barrack is without a doubt one of the worst choices of the Trump administration,” adding: “He always sides with the bad guys.”
Turkey attempted to deploy Russian defense systems, Loomer claims
Loomer claimed that Turkey attempted to deploy advanced Russian air defense systems at bases in Syria ahead of a possible deployment of Turkish aircraft in the country. A source familiar with the details confirmed to The Jerusalem Post that Turkey is indeed seeking to deploy radar systems there and, in the future, air defense systems operated by Turkish soldiers.
Barrack, however, offered a nearly opposite assessment. He described the government of Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa as one that does not take an aggressive approach, said Ankara is not interested in a military confrontation with Israel, and described the Israeli strike on the Syrian base as an “unnecessary escalation.”
According to Barrack, Turkey was not warned about the strike, and its aircraft could have been scrambled toward Israeli aircraft, a scenario that could have led to a direct confrontation between Israel and a NATO member.
Turkey researcher Sinan Ciddi described Barrack in an editorial in the New York Sun as “a man of his own” who at times acts independently from the State Department. The newspaper’s editorial board went further, saying that Barrack sometimes appears more like “Erdogan’s man in Washington, and not the other way around.”
The Sun also pointed to a gap between Barrack and Trump himself. While the envoy quickly condemned the strike in Syria, the president avoided doing so when asked about it.
Israel's concerns extend beyond the Syrian border
Behind the exchange of statements lies a broader strategic struggle. Turkey has become one of the most important allies of the new regime in Damascus and is assisting in training the Syrian army, rebuilding state institutions, and developing infrastructure. Israel, meanwhile, fears that the Turkish presence could gradually become a permanent military deployment and alter the balance of power in Syria.
Israel’s concerns extend beyond the Syrian border. Turkish or Russian radar and air defense systems deployed in Syria could restrict the Israeli Air Force’s freedom of action in Syrian airspace, an area that is strategically important for operations against Iran.
Barrack himself highlighted the importance of the issue in recent interviews, describing Syria as a space that effectively provides Israel with an important air route toward Iran. From Israel’s perspective, the establishment of a Turkish military presence in Syria is therefore not merely a dispute over the future of a neighboring country, but an issue directly affecting Israel’s ability to act against the Iranian threat.
In contrast, Barrack has portrayed Turkey’s growing role in Syria in a much more positive light. He said Ankara does not seek to take control of Syria and recounted that Trump asked Erdogan why Turkey had not “taken” Syria for itself after assisting forces that toppled Assad’s regime. According to Barrack, Erdogan responded that he wants to see “a sovereign and independent Syria.”
Israel has claimed that Syria was preparing to violate the security status quo and allow a Turkish deployment at the base after ignoring repeated warnings. Barrack, however, said the Americans examined information regarding a planned Turkish deployment and concluded that it was not taking place.
He also raised the possibility that the strike was intended “to lure the Turks” into a confrontation and may have been linked to political considerations ahead of the Israeli elections. The dispute over the Turkish presence was also at the center of a rare conversation between Mossad chief Roman Gofman and the Syrian foreign minister days before the strike.
The result is an unusual situation: One of Trump’s senior Middle East envoys is engaged in a public dispute with the Israeli government, while figures in the president’s own political camp accuse him of being too close to Erdogan. At the same time, the envoy’s position appears to contradict Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli territory.
For now, Trump has not reversed the historic recognition he signed in 2019. That means that, at least on the Golan issue, the position presented this week by his Syria envoy does not align with the official policy set by the president himself, raising questions over the envoy’s stance and the administration’s approach.