In the Middle East, strategies are not easily crafted. The economy is tested in the fire before the markets, and military doctrines are built on the roar of cannons.

Amidst this clamor, not many noticed Israel’s announcement of its most important project: to become the “Great Sparta,” a fortress self-sufficient in arms, to double its regional and international presence, and to end the era of “conditional dependency,” placing Arabs to the test in light of the lessons of the “Iran war” and others.

A self-sufficient military model

In December, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that his country would spend $110 billion over 10 years to develop its military industry and reduce reliance on allies — a nod to the United States — adding: “We have solidified our standing as a regional power, and in some fields as a global power, attracting many countries, since peace is made with the strong, not the weak.”

The project of self-sufficiency in armaments is not just an economic choice, but a philosophical shift in Israel’s conception of its security, identity, and global role, within a strategic vision to enhance its capacity to deter “enemies” and attract “followers,” with the belief that expanding the manufacturing base strengthens Israel’s position in the global arms market, where its military exports increased by 13% last year.

According to Israeli media, this approach comes amid Western allies imposing some restrictions on arms sales due to the war on Gaza and the lessons from confrontations with Iran and others.

It is also a precaution for a time when American support might decline for any reason, so that Israel becomes a “dinosaur” in a jungle filled with herbivores and carnivores, making it more fortified against the possibility of future supply cuts.

Israel ranks 15th in arms imports, accounting for 2% of global arms imports, mostly from the United States and Germany, and allocates 16% of its public spending in 2026 to defense, exceeding $45 billion annually, with plans to gradually increase it.

Israel’s project is not just about increasing the budget, but about redefining its role: from a weapons importer that relies heavily on its allies to an industrial-military fortress controlling production from the microchip to the long-range missile.

A developed local arms industry

Israel understands the lessons of modern wars, particularly the fragility of supply chains, even among its closest allies—primarily Washington—which are subject to political and manufacturing considerations when exporting certain weapons.

This has created within Israeli strategic thinking the belief that independence in armaments is as crucial as technological superiority, especially given the prospect of prolonged multi-front wars with Iran or other regional actors.

This necessitates a security concept that does not rely on external supplies, which could be delayed or restricted, thereby affecting military and political decision-making autonomy.

Meanwhile, local production provides a wider margin of maneuver, particularly in sensitive conflicts that may trigger international objections.

Moreover, developing modern military industries deepens Israel’s partnerships with major powers. It secures a prestigious place in the club of major weapon producers globally.

As the state’s arms exports expand, its international relations with importing countries become more positively sensitive, thereby redrawing the maps of political alliances, as well as bringing economic benefits.

Most importantly, transforming Israel into an “industrial-military fortress” achieves a scenario of stable superiority. Advanced weapons companies are not merely factories, but cross-border research and development systems linked with universities, technology companies, and elite military units, in a model that integrates security with the knowledge economy.

Israel is building a “military-industrial-political complex,” controlling the economy and becoming a lever for international influence and a hub for military innovation. All this supports its plans for expansion at the expense of others’ territories and regional dominance, acknowledging its regional isolation and fearing that Western support might one day cease (which is essential for its existence), thus striving for self-reliance, although its success still depends on an American umbrella, amid questions about funding, technology, and more.

A shifting security paradigm in the region

In conclusion, this Israeli shift represents a convergence between politics, economics, and regional and international security. In a world marked by ongoing conflicts and strategic calculations, arms manufacturing becomes a tool of influence, a guarantor of sovereignty, and leverage in the balance of power.

If Israel’s plan to produce high-capacity defensive and offensive systems succeeds, it would mark a qualitative leap in its security and defense strategy, widen its technological gap with its adversaries, alter regional balances of power, destabilize the Middle East, and potentially push its states—especially Arab ones—into an arms race.

The Israeli armament scheme adds further complexity to the already volatile situation in the Middle East, disrupting existing balances and policies, which Arab states must seriously take into account.

Some countries in the region—such as Turkey—are also developing their own defense industries or forming new regional alliances in an effort to balance Israel’s heavily armed posture with advanced arsenals.

History shows that fortresses, no matter how strong, do not exist in a vacuum; they influence and are influenced by their surroundings.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.