Here's what I think.
Firstly, you have to realize that the area you are calling Turkey but has been under quite a few names, classically Anatolia is a region naturally suited for conflict. It is a natural pathway between Asia and Europe. Thus, it would be contested and if you look at history, you'd see it is to be the case. However, the Turkish civilization has never been keen on just being a bridge: they wanted to be a power and throughout history, they've reasonably accomplished the goal.
That tendency has never died down. After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and emergence of the current iteration of Turkey; they weren't keen on just being a pawn. They wanted to be a power but at the time, Turkey was in a bit of a unique position. You see, the decolonialization period saw the infusion of regional-religious-ethnic nationalism: the rise of PanArabism and Pan-Islamism. Turkey was a forward looking nation, joining it were two other key players, Pakistan and Iran. That's why they aligned with the West and regionally cooperated because they couldn't ride the same surge. Turkey's foreign policy was in contrast to the world; it recognized Israel and tried a more tactful solution to the problem. The reason may have seemed counterproductive at the time; why was Turkey alienating culturally closer allies for a potential rival in the region for allies who are not working for their complete interests? The answer was simple, Turkey wanted to pursue an independent course of action.
Secondly, you have to take into account what the world has become geopolitically. There are clear cut dominating powers under a fascade of appropriated power to various nations of the world. However, that's not the case, if you stand against any regionally aligned nation, you'd bring in the big bosses of the game. Disturb Israel's interests, have the US on your back. Take out Syrian targets and have Russia knocking at your door. Back a militia and have either one of the sectarian/ethnically divided power curb you. Therefore, every move would have ended up making things harder for the Turks no matter what action they pursued. In that scenario, they've done the ballsiest move: they went for their interests over all others and ended up disturbing everyone. I think this move does two things, first of all, it keeps Turkey aligned internally under the status quo leadership structure because of an external pressure. Additionally, it taps into the strenght of the Turkish national character and that's pride (due to their ability to pursue independent actions).
Third, being a very neutral assessor of the situation, I wouldn't call it a bad move. You see, in order to appease everyone in this situation and play it ultra tactfully would be hard at this moment in time. The world is experiecning a right wing reflux: Russia, USA and some of the West is being ruled by strongmen. The Turkish government is used to dealing with a more tactful opponent but tact breaks down with such a leadership if you're not coming on strong since the start. Strength talks here. That's why Turkey seems to pursue a shift of cooperation between smaller regional powers instead of the big players. This is a brilliant move because the major powers of the world back regional powers in one way or another and cannot afford to destablize regional status quo. Therefore, smaller cooperative and economic ties may play out well in the end. Instead of having one big supplier who monopolizes things, why not have many smaller suppliers and thus have versatility? I think Turkey is feeling confident enough in its ability to handle things and is exercising this change in strategy to see how far they can push it.
Fourthly, look at this way as well. Which nation was the best military power in the NATO alliance? The USA. Which one after that? The UK. Ever since 2016 these two have de facto left NATO or at least are perceived to be relatively independent now. Which nation should take up the mantle? Germany but their history and continuous strategy has been the exact opposite of becoming a military power; plus, France is weary of a stronger Germany. What threatens Europe? Russia. Whoever faces the Russians and proves to the world that they can hold the giant at bay would automatically take a central role to Europe's future. If Turkey can play an independent policy and antagonize Russia while engaging in a military operation (let's face it this has become a proxy war more than a civil war) and tricking the Americans to support them on Turkey's rather than the US's term. Then Turkey would be in a position to reorient the direction in which Europe is headed. If Turkey pulls this off, they may take an important powerful position, which I believe is their intent all this while.
Hence, I believe that the situation should be monitored to see what's going to happen. I hope whatever does that the region experiences peace after a very long time.
Regards!
