Since the end of the Second World War and till now there has been numerous security and defence agreements and pacts involving countries in Europe, Asia, and in other continents. Except North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) all the rest have been declaration of intent, expressing pious wishes about defence and security co-operation in the region concerned. These agreements have not led to an integrated army stationed in specific places bearing a supranational standard. Nor has there been any written commitments to come to the help of a member country facing aggression. Only NATO has a specific provision under Article 5 stipulating that an attack on any member country will be considered as attacks on all the members and as such dealt with by collective response. This ironclad provision has set NATO apart from the myriads of security and defence agreements that have sprouted at regular intervals in four corners of the world. While NATO so far has had no need to invoke Article 5 and engage in a shooting war on behalf of a member country under attack, the new-fangled security and defence agreements made great fanfare of their existence by holding joint military exercises and annual conferences in health resorts where highfalutin statements were made about maintaining peace and stability in the region and the world.
On August 7 this year a new security and defence agreement was signed by three countries — Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – that has left the beaten track of pro forma security pacts of the past that had no teeth. The most significant provision of the defence and security pact signed in Mecca on 7 August is the declaration that member countries will defend themselves against any attack by an enemy or enemies and any attack on one member will be considered as attacks on all members. This is the first time that a regional defence agreement has echoed the ultimatum about collective response enshrined in Article 5 of NATO. That the three countries are oil rich Saudi Arabia, defence tech savvy Turkey and nuclear- armed Pakistan should make any political observer and security analyst to look seriously at the causes belli for the coming together of these desperate countries and analyse the implications in the short and long terms. A modest effort at this is done below.
At first sight the member countries look like strange bedfellows, having no common ground in the form of powerful belligerent countries from which attacks are apprehended in the near future and call for collective response. Pakistan, of course, has India as the perennial adversary with whom two major wars have been fought and in both cases lost. But it is now a nuclear power which outweighs its weakness in conventional warfare. Besides, it has strong military ties with China which not only ensures regular supply of military hardware, but also helps in the event of a war breaking out between the arch enemies. In addition, of late, it has endeared itself with Trump administration with its role as a mediator between America and Iran and thereby has won America’s support. The country is not feeling diplomatically helpless and militarily weak to feel any urgency about entering into a comprehensive defence agreement with two other countries having different agendas and compulsions. So, why does Pakistan join the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement? Possible reasons will be given later.
Turkey, officially the Republic of Türkiy, also faces no imminent attack from any country in the region. It has issues with Greece over Cyprus and territorial waters in east Mediterranean but both being NATO members, a shooting between them is not likely. Of course, Israel has been sabre-rattling over president Erdogan’s strong words of criticism and scathing condemnations over genocide committed by it in Gaza. But though Israeli politicians have been saying with hubris that after Iran, Israel should turn its guns towards Turkey as the next target, it has not graduated beyond rhetoric. Besides, as a member of NATO Turkey already enjoys the collective protection under Article 5. So, Turkey, too, does not need the protective umbrella from a regional defence organisation. Then why does it find itself as a member of the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement? The answer may be awaited.
Only Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is in urgent need of a collective umbrella to defend itself from Iran and its proxies. In the beginning, Iran targeted the American military bases in KSA which elicited the routine condemnation of violation of sovereign space by Saudi spokespersons. But when Iran and its proxies targeted power and civilian infrastructures in retaliation of American bombing of the same in Iran, Saudi Arabia faced existential threat. To its rulers dismay the supposed American protection did not work out as their bases were bombed and crippled. The sudden realisation that having American bases on its soil were not going to protect it from missile attacks by Iran and as a result bring its economy to a halt, made the Saudis panicky. Last year they entered into a general and vague type of security agreement with Pakistan which has its armed forces stationed in Saudi Arabia mainly for the protection of the royal family. But the America-Iran war and its spillover into the kingdom required a more robust defence alliance. It can be reasonably assumed that the urgency for concluding the three- nation defence pact was accelerated by Saudi Arabia, extending the 2025 mutual security agreement with Pakistan and bringing in Turkey as the third member.
Having pointed out the motive and urgency of Saudi Arabia for the recently signed Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, also dubbed as Mecca pact, it is now in order to speculate what may have been the driving factors that led Turkey and Pakistan to join this alliance with urgency equal to that of Saudi Arabia.
Turkey has been fighting a war with the Kurds on different fronts for a long time. But it has not received any help from NATO as the war does not satisfy the requirement of NATO’s Article-5. Turkeye also knows that in the event of a war with Greece over Cyprus or the oil- rich territorial waters in the eastern Mediterranean, NATO will remain neutral. For sympathy over holocaust victims during the second world war, NATO countries, perhaps with the exception of Spain, will not come to the aid of Turkey if Israel launches a land invasion in future. So, Turkey concluded that Article 5 of NATO is not going to meet all its security needs and it required another layer. Secondly, Turkey has embarked in modernising its armed forces with state-of-the-art arms and equipment for which it needs large funds. Saudi Arabia is floating on petro dollar and it can invest in Turkey’s armament industry as a partner under the defence agreement. Finally, though not a nuclear power, Turkey has the second biggest army in NATO. If equipped with modern arms and equipment it can be the backbone of a regional superpower, a goal that Erdogan has set his sights on. As the head of a grand alliance, he can challenge the lebensraum policy of Israel’s biblical promise. He has called Netanyahu several times modern day Hitler in public and it will not be far-fetched to think that he is serious about punishing Netyanhu and his government for his genocidal killings and ethnic cleansing in Gaza.
In the case of Pakistan, the India factor has been the strongest motive. Its leaders know that being a nuclear power does not allow a country to be trigger happy. As such future wars with India will continue to be conventional. Being a member of a regional alliance gives the country security depth, transferring assets to safer havens. The second factor working as a motive is to build on the defence co-operation that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia has enjoyed over many years. The third interest for Pakistan to become a member of the alliance is to have access to Turkey’s drone, missile manufacturing and upgrading of F- 15 fighter jets. The fourth consideration behind signing the pact may be the pragmatism of Pakistani leaders to wean itself away from exclusive dependence on China and diversify its defence strategy. Finally, like Turkey it also needs funds to modernise its armed forces. Joining the defence alliance will make it easy to have petro dollar from Saudi Arabia for collective development of armed forces of the three countries.
The three-nation defence pact must have taken a long time in thrashing out the details. Perhaps the preparatory discussion took place before the American-Israeli war in February this year as evidenced by the fact that a security agreement was reached between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in September 2025. The war against Iran and the latter’s subsequent retaliation by attacking Saudi Arabia must have accelerated the process. But if America succeeded in providing protective umbrella from Iranian attacks, it is doubtful if Saudi Arabia would have forged an alliance of this nature which in fact is an indictment of America and condemnation of its failure to live upto its assurance for protection in exchange for having military bases.
Has the defence pact of the three countries surprised Trump administration and irked it, too? At the moment all the three countries have cordial relations with America. KSA has been America’s trusted ally for many years and only recently it was granted permission by president Trump to set up nuclear facilities for civilian use with the proviso to enrich uranium, something Trump is chary about allowing Iran. So, in all likelihood Saudi Arabia must have informed president Trump and got his green light, even if it was given grudgingly. Trump is effusive about the leadership of president Erdogan and has recently promised to deliver F-35 fighter jets, which were put on hold because Turkey bought Soviet SU- 400 anti-missile batteries. So, Turkey may have also informed president Trump in advance and got his favourable nod. Pakistan, as the present poster boy pampered by Trump for its role as mediator, did not have to strive hard to have Trump’s blessing. The hardliners in his cabinet may have been dismayed at the rapid fire development in the Middle-East but in view of the stalemate in the Iran war they did not have much leverage to speak against the defence pact among three American allies.
Now, what does the defence pact portend for the future in Middle-East? Even before explicating the details of the pact it can be safely said that the geo-politics and security architecture of the region will not be the same again. Before long, the Gulf countries like Kuwait, Qartar, Bahrain will make a beeline to become members of the defence alliance for the same reason as that of Saudi Arabia viz collective protection. Even Egypt would not like to remain an outlier. In course of time, the fledgling defence alliance will become the equivalent of NATO, a Muslim one.
How will Iran and Israel react? As Iran’s and its proxis attacks on energy installations being the reason for Saudi Arabia’s haste in finalising the defence pact, it cannot be happy over the development. But if the war is declared over by president Trump claiming victory, Iran is expected to cease its attacks on Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries. It will follow a period of reconciliation, Iran arguing that it had attacked Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries because of the unjust and unprovoked war unleashed by America and Israel. Relations with Iran will not revert back to what was before the war, not in the near term. The defence alliance will continue without Iran as a member. If Iran does not launch attacks against any member country belonging to the defence pact the provision of collective retaliation will not be invoked. In fact, till now Iran’s military preparedness has been keeping America and Israeli aggression in mind. If that factor is removed under changed circumstances, Iran will have no reason to engage in an asymmetric war, as has been the case now.
Israel and India will rage in fury because they will be the targets of the defence pact after the Iran war is over. The damage to India’s interests will be limited as it does not have any expansionist policy. The only cause of war, between Pakistan and India, Kashmir, will be frozen by accepting the Line of Control as the international border.
The greatest loser will be Israel. Its grand plan of occupying the land described in Old Testament will be thwarted by the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement of Muslim countries. It will have to recognise Palestine accepting the two-state solution. Trump’s plan to build Mediterranean Riviera in Gaza will also come to naught because after the fiasco in Iran and setting up their own defence umbrella,
the Middle-Eastern countries will not be beholden to the American president as in the past. The defence pact of Muslim countries will usher in a new dawn in Middle-East based on unity and co-operation. At long last peace and stability will prevail.
For the golden days awaiting them, the Muslim Ummah should thank president Trump and Netanyahu. The new era will appear soon because the two of them began the unjust war against Iran.
