Turkey’s National Intelligence Academy (MIA) has issued a startling report urging a significant national security overhaul, drawing lessons from a simulated 12-day armed conflict between Iran and Israel. The analysis suggests Ankara must bolster its ballistic missile and air defense capabilities to prepare for potential escalations directed at Turkey, signaling a clear ambition to close the military technology gap with regional rival Israel.
The report, titled “The 12-Day War and Lessons for Turkey,” advises Ankara to prioritize the mass production of its own air defense systems, expand its arsenal of ballistic missiles, and advance its development of hypersonic weapons. It specifically recommends deploying low-altitude air defense systems to protect critical security headquarters and implementing special security protocols around key facilities to guard against close-range drone attacks.
Further recommendations include establishing a nationwide early-warning system and creating well-equipped public shelters, potentially utilizing existing metro stations in major cities. The authors warn that the future of warfare is already here and that while new technologies may not guarantee a traditional victory, they can paralyze an adversary’s defenses and deliver a strategic advantage. The report also stressed the need to counter sophisticated intelligence operations, citing the “pager war” allegedly conducted by Israel’s Mossad against Hezbollah as a cautionary tale.
This call for enhanced military readiness comes amid growing anxieties about regional stability. The MIA report anticipates another wave of Middle East tension if nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States fail, projecting that a future conflict could see Israel targeting Iran’s critical civilian infrastructure and senior political figures. The analysis suggests that unlike in previous encounters, Iran would likely respond more effectively, striking critical targets within Israel.
Interestingly, the Turkish concerns mirror those from Israel. A January report from the Nagel Committee, an Israeli government commission, had already advised leadership to prepare for a potential direct conflict with Turkey. The Israeli analysis pointed to the changing power dynamics in Syria, where the dominance of pro-Turkish factions following the fall of the Damascus regime could create a new front for attacks against Israel.
Experts note that while militaries routinely plan for low-probability scenarios, the recent increase in public reports and analyses from both Turkish and Israeli sources signals a genuine and mutual strategic assessment. While a direct war remains unlikely due to Turkey’s NATO membership and economic dependencies, this exchange serves as both a warning to political leaders and a lobbying tool for increased defense spending amid economic challenges. Ankara is clearly striving to match the high bar for air power set by Israel, advancing its own missile programs like the Hisar systems, which could potentially give it the range to strike its regional competitor.
Ultimately, Israel appears more focused on the immediate threat of Turkish proxies and arms transfers in Syria than on a direct confrontation. However, the dueling strategic reports from Ankara and Tel Aviv underscore a new and more volatile phase of competition. This emergent rivalry, fought through military planning and public warnings, is reshaping the security landscape of the Middle East.