A recently published military report has raised concerns in Tel Aviv after it revealed a new ranking of military power that places Egypt ahead of Israel, citing Cairo's advantage in quantitative and logistical factors.
The Israeli platform "Natsiv Net" said that the Global Firepower Index for 2026 issued its new ranking of the strongest armies in the Middle East, with Turkey coming in first place, followed by Egypt in second place, then Israel in third place and Iran in fourth place.
The platform explained that at the global level, Türkiye ranked ninth and Egypt ranked twelfth, while Israel dropped to fifteenth place globally.
The Hebrew platform added that the ranking was based on an analysis of the capabilities of the top five powers in the region, noting that Turkey benefits from having the second largest army in NATO and a huge defense industry, while Egypt is distinguished by having a huge manpower force, the largest in the Arab world, in addition to a naval fleet and extensive armored forces.
In contrast, Israel was ranked based on its technological superiority, advanced air force, and multi-layered defense systems, while Iran's ranking was based on its massive fleets of drones and missiles, and Saudi Arabia's on its high defense budget.
She pointed out that the index methodology gives preference to countries with large geographical areas, demographic depth, and logistical resources that enable them to wage long wars of attrition, which explains Israel's decline in the overall ranking due to its small size and small population compared to its neighbors.
She noted that the index does not take into account nuclear capabilities or the quality of strategic alliances, which means that the actual strength of Israeli technology and intelligence is not fully reflected in this traditional ranking that places it behind Cairo and Ankara.
The "Global Firepower" index relies on more than 60 factors to measure the conventional military strength of countries, without taking into account nuclear capabilities.
Egypt has one of the largest armies in the region in terms of numbers, equipment, and the diversity of its arms sources, which combine American, Russian, French, and local equipment, giving it great strategic and logistical depth that smaller armies find difficult to match in terms of quantitative indicators that favor size and endurance.
