Israel monitoring Egypt’s military shift amid regional tensions

On February 5, 2026, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly told the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in a closed-door session that “the Egyptian army is building its strength, and this needs to be monitored.” He added that Israel must prevent an “excessive buildup” of Egyptian military power.

His remarks came despite the two countries having signed a $35 billion gas agreement in December 2025, the largest in Israel’s history.

Furthermore, a recent article published by Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv suggests that Egypt’s push to integrate artificial intelligence into its military architecture represents a strategic shift that is more difficult to monitor. According to these reports, the danger is not traditional weapons platforms, but Egypt’s effort to construct an independent command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) ecosystem powered by software, data, and rapid decision-making.

One of the central Israeli concerns, according to Ma’ariv, is not merely capability but opacity. Systems developed outside the Western technological ecosystem are harder to assess. If Egyptian AI architecture is built on domestic servers, trained on locally aggregated datasets, and integrated with Chinese hardware standards such as Beidou satellite navigation, it reduces transparency to Western intelligence frameworks accustomed to certain technical baselines.

A history of skepticism

For decades, the balance of power between Egypt and Israel was measured in tanks, fighter jets, and armored divisions. The wars of 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973 defined Israeli strategic thinking, embedding a doctrine centered on preemption, intelligence dominance, and rapid mobilization. The 1973 Yom Kippur War marked the Israeli need to maintain an intelligence superiority even after the signing of the Camp David Accords.

That legacy shaped the 1979 Camp David peace treaty, which imposed strict military limitations in Sinai. The peninsula was divided into security zones: Zone A permitting up to 22,000 Egyptian troops; Zone B limited to 4,000 border guards; and Zone C restricted to lightly armed police near the Israeli border, monitored by the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO). The purpose was to prevent another surprise attack and structurally limit Egypt’s abilities to near Israel’s southern frontier.

Yet in 2026, Israeli concern is no longer centered primarily on armored divisions in Sinai. It is focused on algorithms.

AI-driven systems are iterative and improve continuously. Their capabilities depend less on fixed inventories and more on data scale and learning cycles.

That introduces uncertainty.

Put differently, Israeli anxiety is evolving from counting battalions to decoding data systems.

A “digital army” in the making

Egypt’s modernization drive increasingly emphasizes technological sovereignty. Israeli reports highlight Cairo’s attempt to reduce dependence on Western systems and cloud infrastructures by building domestic data centers and training models locally. Cooperation with China has reportedly accelerated this trajectory, particularly in areas such as edge computing, model compression, Arabic-language AI systems, and integrated surveillance analytics.

A $300 million fund established in 2014 between Egypt’s Information Technology Industry Development Agency (ITIDA) and China’s Tsinghua Unigroup aimed to strengthen semiconductor and AI infrastructure. Over time, this effort appears to have expanded into broader defense applications.

Egypt’s unveiling of the HAMZA-3 long-range loitering munition at the 2026 World Defense Show in Riyadh symbolizes this evolution. Designed as a tailless flying wing with swarm functionality, the HAMZA-3 reportedly has a range of 1,800 km, endurance of 8 hours, a maximum speed of 220 km/h, and an operational ceiling of 5,000 meters. With a 210 kg maximum takeoff weight and a 50 kg warhead, it integrates AI-powered image recognition for terminal guidance, along with encrypted data links operating up to 250 km.

Earlier iterations, such as the Hamza-2, reportedly paved the way for increased domestic production, with some Egyptian analysts claiming up to 85 percent local manufacturing content in newer systems.

While these platforms are not unique globally, their integration into an indigenous AI-supported C4ISR backbone changes the calculus. AI-driven target recognition, swarm coordination, and decision-support systems can reduce latency between detection and engagement. Combined with data aggregation from UAVs, maritime sensors, and ground-based surveillance, such systems promise to compress operational timelines.

Why AI amplifies old fears

Israeli security culture is deeply shaped by surprise. The 1973 Canal crossing remains a traumatic exeprience for the Israelis. AI, by accelerating information cycles and enabling adaptive operations, potentially increases the difficulty of forecasting military intent.

However, none of this suggests imminent conflict. Israel and Egypt maintain formal peace and extensive security coordination. However, Israeli planners operate on worst-case assumptions. If AI reduces predictability, it challenges long-standing comfort derived from intelligence penetration and technological benchmarking.

Egypt’s strategic rationale

From Cairo’s perspective, the AI pivot is defensive modernization. Egypt fields a 450,000-strong army equipped with American, Russian, and French platforms. Diversifying partnerships aligns with a broader effort to avoid overdependence.

Egypt also faces asymmetric threats, border instability, an unclear future for Gaza, and maritime security challenges in the Red Sea and Eastern Mediterranean. These issues are easier addressed when equipped with AI-enhanced surveillance and improved decision-support systems.

Moreover, government readiness indices place Egypt first in Africa in AI preparedness, reflecting investments in digital infrastructure beyond purely military applications.

Underlying Israeli concern is Washington’s sensitivity to Chinese technological penetration. Israel itself has faced U.S. pressure regarding Chinese investments in infrastructure. Meaning, Egyptian-Chinese defense cooperation inevitably draws American scrutiny.

The cold peace, digitized

The Egypt-Israel peace remains intact. Both governments share security interests and in preserving regional stability. Yet the relationship has long been described as a “cold peace” and trust is not a defining characteristic of this relationship.

Artificial intelligence does not change that foundation. But it does alter the texture of vigilance.

In the 20th century, deterrence was visible: tank counts, air squadrons, missile ranges. In the 21st, power increasingly resides in data pipelines, training sets, model optimization, and secure networks.

Israel’s traditional qualitative edge depended on superior hardware and intelligence foresight. Egypt’s AI ambitions aim at software sovereignty and autonomous decision cycles. Whether this produces parity, deterrence stability, or new anxieties depends less on headline capabilities than on transparency and political intent.

The race for AI military integration showcases that the balance of power in the region is no longer measured solely by divisions in Sinai or fighter jets on tarmacs. It is measured in code and in the speed at which that code learns.

And that is precisely what Israel is watching.