Turkey’s Shocking Silence: 5 Powerful Reasons Erdogan Won’t Condemn US Strikes on Iran

Turkey refrained from condemning the US strikes on Iran primarily because President Erdogan is actively pursuing a high-stakes diplomatic role. He aims to host direct US-Iran negotiations, leveraging his relationship with Trump to position Istanbul as the peace venue—a goal nearly achieved days earlier. While Ankara fiercely criticized Israeli attacks as “banditry,” it distinguishes the US action within the nuclear dispute framework, opposing Iran’s weapons program but insisting talks are the only solution.

Erdogan prioritizes preserving vital US ties and preventing catastrophic regional war over symbolic anti-US solidarity. His calculated silence reflects cold pragmatism: safeguarding Turkey’s security, economic stability, and ambition as an independent power broker. This isn’t neutrality, but a risky gambit for maximum diplomatic influence where condemnation would destroy his mediator role. Ultimately, Turkey wields its unique NATO-and-regional position to serve core national interests above all else. 

Turkey’s Shocking Silence: 5 Powerful Reasons Erdogan Won’t Condemn US Strikes on Iran

While regional powers and Iran’s allies swiftly condemned the recent US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, Turkey’s response stood out for its restraint. Ankara’s measured statement, expressing “deep concern” about destabilization but stopping far short of condemnation, reveals a complex geopolitical balancing act driven by President Erdogan’s distinct strategic goals. 

Beyond the Headlines: The Nuances of Turkey’s Stance 

• The Mediator’s Mantle: Erdogan isn’t staying silent out of apathy; he’s actively positioning Turkey as the indispensable peacemaker. His flurry of calls to both President Trump and Iranian President Pezeshkian, coupled with the explicit offer of Istanbul as a negotiation venue, underscores his core objective: hosting direct US-Iran talks. Condemning the US outright would instantly torpedo this ambition and alienate Trump, a relationship Erdogan has painstakingly cultivated and leveraged before (notably in Syria sanctions relief). 

• A Stark Contrast: Israel vs. USA: Turkey’s reaction to the US strikes was deliberately muted compared to its fierce condemnation of Israeli attacks just days prior. Ankara labeled Israeli actions “banditry” and “unprovoked,” emphasizing intelligence assessments doubting Iran’s active pursuit of a bomb. This distinction is critical: 

• Israel: Seen as an aggressive actor escalating conflict without clear justification, directly threatening regional stability Turkey relies on. 

• USA: While risky, the action is framed (by Ankara) within the contentious nuclear dispute. Turkey opposes Iran’s nuclear ambitions, viewing them as a dangerous catalyst for regional proliferation. Its statement explicitly called the nuclear issue resolvable only through talks – the door Erdogan wants to open. 

• The High-Stakes Diplomatic Dance That Almost Was: Reporting confirms Erdogan‘s intense mediation efforts came very close to fruition. He reportedly convinced Trump to send VP Vance and Envoy Witkoff to Istanbul for talks with Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi – with Trump even hinting he might attend. This high-level potential meeting collapsed only because Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei couldn’t be reached for final approval. This near-success fuels Erdogan’s belief that mediation is viable and worth protecting through careful rhetoric. 

• Walking the Tightrope: Interests Over Ideology: Erdogan’s approach is a masterclass in pragmatic statecraft over ideological alignment. Despite his fiery rhetoric on Israel and Islamic solidarity, Turkey’s actions are dictated by core national interests: 

• Preserving the US Relationship: Vital for NATO security, access to markets, and managing regional conflicts (especially Syria). 

• Preventing Catastrophic Regional War: An all-out conflict directly threatens Turkey’s borders, energy supplies, economy, and internal stability. 

• Elevating Turkey’s Global Profile: Successfully mediating a US-Iran deal would be a monumental diplomatic coup, cementing Ankara’s claim as a major independent power broker. 

• Managing a Complex Neighbor: Turkey needs a stable, predictable Iran on its border, even while opposing its nuclear program and regional activities. 

The Human Insight: Erdogan’s Risky Gambit for Relevance 

Erdogan isn’t merely avoiding condemnation; he’s making a calculated bet. He believes the potential rewards of brokering peace between the US and Iran – enhanced global stature, strengthened relationships with both powers, regional stability dividends – outweigh the domestic and regional criticism for not joining the anti-US chorus. 

The Real Value for Readers: Understanding the “Why” Behind the Silence 

Turkey’s stance isn’t hypocrisy or indecision. It’s a deliberate strategy born from: 

• A unique position: Leveraging NATO membership and regional ties. 

• A specific goal: Becoming the architect of US-Iran de-escalation. 

• Cold pragmatism: Prioritizing tangible national interests (security, economy, influence) over symbolic gestures of solidarity. 

The risk for Erdogan is clear: if his mediation push fails and Turkey is seen as too soft on the US strikes, he faces criticism from multiple fronts. However, his history suggests he values the potential high-stakes reward of a diplomatic breakthrough above all else. His silence on condemning the US is, therefore, not an endorsement, but the quiet hum of intense diplomatic machinery at work, straining to pull two adversaries back from the brink and position Turkey firmly at the center of the solution. The world watches to see if this high-wire act succeeds.