Pakistan's alliance power

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Türkiye signed their first trilateral defence pact – Makkah Joint Defence Agreement – during a summit in Makkah, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), on August 7, 2026. The text of the pact stipulates that Prince MBS, President Erdogan and PM Shehbaz Sharif signed the 'Defence Agreement', "reflecting the three States' shared commitment to further strengthening their collective security and to promoting peace, security and stability in the region and beyond, in pursuit of a secure and prosperous future." It further states that the Agreement "is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression and stipulates that any armed attack against any one of the three States shall be regarded as an attack against them all." And the last line reiterates that the Agreement "provides for the enhancement of all aspects of defence cooperation" among these countries.

This Agreement had been in the works for quite some time, following the signing of the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement (SMDA) between Pakistan and KSA on September 17, 2025. SMDA was covered in my opinion pieces, 'Pak-Saudi defence pact: an old brotherhood recast for a dangerous age', published here on September 21, 2025; and 'Pak-Saudi defence pact: necessary elaboration' on September 25, 2025. Diplomatic activity continued among Pakistan, KSA and Türkiye, and the emergence of Quartet (Pakistan, Qatar, Egypt and Türkiye) to facilitate the recent mediatory efforts between the US and Iran further augmented the momentum that resulted in this Agreement. Some pointers.

First, the 'Core Principle' enshrined in the Agreement is 'collective security and mutual defence', patterned after NATO; hence an attack on one is an attack against the entire trilateral alliance. There are ostensibly comprehensive back-up plans. Calling it a Muslim NATO or otherwise is pure and inconsequential semantics. Later iterations by the Alliance make it open to the entire region; Egypt, Azerbaijan and perhaps Qatar may be interested in joining. Kuwait and Pakistan formally ratified a comprehensive 'Defense Cooperation Agreement' in July 2026 to update their five-year pact signed on June 11, 2023 that focuses on military training, logistics, intelligence-sharing and capacity-building, excluding troop deployment in combat.

In an ideal environment, Tehran should also be part of this very important security arrangement in West Asia/Middle East. This may be possible after the present round of war between Iran and the US is over. Presently, Iran's strategy of raising the cost of war for the US by targeting Arab nations, and its threats of a tit-for-tat response to US strikes - indicating the targeting of these nations' industrial sites - make such an inclusion unlikely. Hormuz blockade also severely affects the Arab Gulf economically.

Senior Saudi officials and Pakistan's leadership have reiterated the 'defensive nature' of the Agreement, ensuring sustainable regional deterrence and stability, as this is not an offensive grouping, against 'any nation or any sectarian bloc or military axis'. Saudi Deputy Minister for Public Diplomacy Rayed Krimly reiterated, shortly after the deal was inked, that the Agreement is not "linked to any nuclear ambitions or arms race, rather it is focused on building sustainable capabilities."

Second, the Agreement brings together Saudi financial/strategic backing and petroleum clout, Türkiye's NATO-standard aerospace/defence technology, and Pakistan's military prowess and nuclear deterrence, especially after its demonstrated performance against much larger India in May 2025. For decades, the GCC/KSA security was outsourced to the US, and to some extent, the West Plus. The Iran War seemed to have altered these dynamics, given the declining US military capabilities reportedly due to munition crunch, especially the AD interceptors and the stand-off 'Beyond Visual Range' (BVR) missiles. Depletion of 20-80% stocks is forcing Washington to relocate military assets from Europe etc to the Gulf. This leaves America militarily vulnerable to potential adventurism by China and Russia. CENTCOM's inability to bend Iran to its will in the planned time window has resulted in the loss of confidence in the US-led regional security architecture. Major Middle East/Gulf nations are looking elsewhere for security.

Third, Türkiye needs to be protected from an expansionist and overconfident Israel, and Russia in distant future; KSA wants to deter Iran and possibly Israel; Pakistan needs financial clout and oil coming in case of another India-imposed conflict; and Egypt might try to enhance its deterrence vis-à-vis Israel. In one's reckoning, the agreement would not be invoked in situations short of all-out war - such as Islamabad's border skirmishes with Kabul, Saudi Arabia's Yemen or Houthi engagements, and Türkiye's Kurdish unrest - as these are well within the means and resources of these states to handle.

Yes, signatory states could invoke the agreement to safeguard maritime trade, energy networks and other critical infrastructure. In its present formulation, the Agreement, however, is an attempt at 'joint deterrence' rather than a muscular combat alliance. Its future direction is open-ended, given its language that leaves room for enhanced combat collaboration. Cooperation in the joint defence production is also a possible manifestation of this intent. Importantly, under present iteration, besides collective and enhanced deterrence, the Agreement would contribute to regional stability and global peace.

Fourth, as identified previously, Middle East is the only major part of the world without formal military-economic alliances, like ASEAN, SAARC, SCO, NATO, etc. Its security rests upon the US, with no alternative arrangements. Washington now might relish being absolved of Middle East's security responsibility, for which it is increasingly incapable and unwilling. However, as per an article 'The Multipolar Delusion' published in the March-April 2026 issue of Foreign Affairs magazine, multipolarity is a dream, and the US still remains a dominant power, albeit with limitations.

The US under Trump is also consciously divesting from the regional security responsibilities, transferring these to regional powers to preserve and concentrate resources for military intervention as and when America's core interests are threatened, like in Venezuela and Iran. Additionally, peace means business, and business suits businessman Trump. This Agreement fits in the US security framework, if not coloured by Israel and the American Jewish lobby, citing religious/Islamic undertones.

Lastly, an economic alliance following joint defence collaboration and production, as stipulated, and for which there is immense scope, may usher in an unprecedented economic windfall for the agreement's signatories.

So, in a nutshell the Agreement is an epoch-making trailblazer.

With that, Happy Independence Day!