What Pakistan’s defence pact with Saudi Arabia and Turkey means for the Middle East

A historic new collective defence agreement signed last Friday in Mecca is dramatically reshaping the strategic landscape of the broader Middle East, uniting three of the Muslim world’s most powerful and influential nations under a mutual security framework that echoes Nato’s core collective defence principle. Dubbed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, the landmark pact includes a binding clause stating that any armed aggression against one signatory will be considered an attack against all three – a provision that immediately elevates the agreement’s geopolitical weight, despite the joint statement leaving specific military commitments intentionally undefined.

For Pakistan, the world’s only nuclear-armed Muslim-majority nation, the accord marks a sharp break from its longstanding policy of cautious neutrality as a regional diplomatic mediator. By aligning formally with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Islamabad is repositioning its well-trained, combat-proven armed forces as a potential security anchor for an emerging strategic axis stretching across South Asia and the Gulf Cooperation Council region.

This new pact reflects a far broader shift in regional power dynamics. As the decades-old regional security order anchored by the United States faces mounting strain from ongoing wars, shifting alliances and escalating tensions, major Middle Eastern powers are increasingly moving to take control of their own security futures, with Pakistan’s unique combination of nuclear deterrence and conventional military strength offering a new regional stability pillar.

The agreement emerges at a moment of unprecedented upheaval for the Middle East’s traditional security architecture. The ongoing US-Israeli confrontation with Iran has remade the regional strategic map, with direct strikes reaching Saudi territory and critical commercial shipping lanes – including the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea – suffering widespread, costly disruptions. A senior anonymous Pakistani security official with expertise in regional affairs explained to Middle East Eye that all three signatory nations share overlapping economic and security priorities focused on stopping further regional escalation, a common interest that directly drove the decision to formalize the pact. Disruptions to Hormuz shipping have already hit Saudi energy and fertilizer exports, sending ripples through global markets, while import-reliant economies like Pakistan and Turkey have faced particularly severe economic fallout from these disruptions.

The strategic calculations behind the agreement run even deeper. Both Saudi Arabia and Turkey have suffered attacks tied to the broader regional conflict, while Pakistan and Turkey both face growing concerns over cross-border instability spilling over from their extensive shared borders with Iran. For Ankara, an additional risk looms: external backing for Iranian Kurdish militias threatens to unravel the years-long fragile peace process with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The wider regional conflict has also emboldened Iran and its Houthi allies in Yemen, who have stepped up direct attacks on Saudi territory.

For Gulf leadership, the repeated failure of long-standing US security guarantees to deter these attacks has sparked growing doubts over Washington’s reliability as a security partner. The result has been a clear, decisive push by major regional powers to build new defence arrangements that reduce reliance on external security commitments. Former Pakistani ambassador Asif Durrani framed the pact as the “first concrete building block of an emerging regional security architecture”, noting that it signals a clear shift toward greater regional control over security affairs. On X, Durrani added that if this cooperative momentum holds, it could open the door to resolving decades-long conflicts – including the intractable Israeli-Palestinian issue – through a process led and driven by regional actors themselves.

Regional analysts emphasize the pact is not an out-of-the-blue development, but rather the natural culmination of years of deepening trilateral cooperation between the three nations. Michael Kugelman, senior fellow for South Asia at the Atlantic Council, called the agreement “a logical outgrowth of deepening security ties” between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey that has accelerated over recent months. The new pact builds on pre-existing bilateral foundations: Riyadh and Islamabad signed a separate bilateral mutual defence agreement in late 2025, which saw roughly 8,000 Pakistani troops, fighter aircraft and advanced air defence systems deployed to the kingdom, while Turkey has long been a leading defence equipment supplier for both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Interestingly, Kugelman notes the pact is likely to be well-received in Washington, which has long pushed for greater security burden-sharing among its key regional allies, given the agreement’s core focus on collective deterrence focused on Iran.

For Pakistan, however, the pact is about far more than just geopolitics – it is deeply tied to the country’s ongoing economic vulnerabilities, analysts point out. Islamabad spent months positioning itself as a neutral diplomatic bridge between Washington and Tehran, and even helped broker the June Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding to temporarily pause regional hostilities. But subsequent waves of escalation have squeezed the space for Pakistan’s neutral stance. For Pakistan’s ruling government, which is grappling with persistent high inflation and severe fiscal instability, strategic defence policy is now increasingly intertwined with pressing economic needs.

Historically, Pakistan has leveraged its military strength to secure critical economic support, most notably from the United States and Saudi Arabia. This new collective defence framework formalizes that model, allowing Islamabad to monetize its decades of operational military expertise – from joint training exercises and troop deployments to arms exports – in exchange for much-needed Gulf investment, discounted energy access and diplomatic support. For Riyadh, the partnership grants access to a large, experienced military with decades of counterinsurgency and combat experience, while for Islamabad, closer security ties open the door to transformative investment, financial assistance and deeper economic integration with one of the region’s wealthiest and most powerful states. “In this sense, Pakistan’s military strength is becoming an economic asset as well as a strategic one,” the anonymous Pakistani security official told Middle East Eye.

The emerging trilateral partnership brings together three complementary forms of national power, as political analyst Sheharyar Khan, senior adviser at Pakistan’s Ministry of Law and Justice, explained. Khan framed the dynamic as a division of complementary strengths: Saudi Arabia contributes the financial capital, Turkey brings cutting-edge defence technological innovation, and Pakistan provides core military capability. “Together, the three countries could form a security partnership whose capabilities extend far beyond traditional troop deployment,” Khan noted. Each nation brings unique, complementary assets to the table: Saudi Arabia, home to Islam’s holiest sites, offers vast capital reserves, outsized influence over global energy markets and significant regional diplomatic clout; Turkey, which commands Nato’s second-largest standing military, boasts a rapidly advancing, increasingly self-sufficient domestic defence industry with world-leading expertise in unmanned aerial systems, electronic warfare and precision-guided munitions that reduces reliance on foreign suppliers; and Pakistan contributes a large, combat-hardened ground force and the Muslim world’s only operational nuclear deterrent.

Despite these potential benefits, experts warn the agreement carries significant strategic risks for Pakistan. Iran’s response to the pact was swift and sharply critical. Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, dismissed the arrangement in a post on X, writing “The Saudis should know that a paper agreement with Turkey and Pakistan does not bring them security, just as years of unilateral milking of the Americans did not bring them security.” This reaction underscores Islamabad’s core strategic dilemma: deepening integration into Gulf security architecture risks damaging its delicate, long-cautious relationship with Tehran.

Analysts also warn of the risk of “entrapment” – the very real danger that Pakistan could be pulled into foreign conflicts that do not align with its own national interests. Historically, Pakistan has intentionally avoided direct entanglement in Middle Eastern power rivalries: in 2015, the country’s parliament famously rejected a request to join the Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen over domestic political and sectarian concerns. Pakistan is also home to a large Shia minority, many of whom look to Iranian clergy for political and religious guidance, meaning the government must avoid having its closer alignment with Riyadh and Ankara perceived as an anti-Iranian stance that could reignite internal sectarian tensions.

The agreement has already sparked widespread debate over whether it could eventually expand into a broader multi-national security bloc encompassing additional Muslim-majority nations across the globe. Retired senior Pakistani military official Muhammad Saeed has suggested that additional Muslim countries from the Middle East and beyond could eventually join the framework. But Saeed also cautioned that military strength alone will not determine the pact’s long-term success. “For Muslim states, the real and collective strength will not come only through military capabilities but primarily through long-term investments and collaboration in knowledge, innovation, discipline, character, and tolerant interpretation of sectarian sentiment,” he wrote on X.

The prospect of a more cohesive Muslim-majority security bloc has already drawn sharp attention from Israel. In February, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett explicitly warned against Turkey forming what he described as a “hostile axis” leveraging Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities “to surround Israel”. Analysts note, however, that Pakistan’s nuclear status inevitably reshapes the strategic calculations surrounding the entire pact. For Saudi Arabia, closer defence ties with Islamabad add an extra layer of deterrence at a time when the kingdom faces persistent threats from Iran while navigating its fragile normalization process with Israel.

The pact’s implications stretch far beyond the Middle East. For Pakistan, closer alignment with Saudi Arabia and Turkey creates a new strategic counterweight to neighboring India. While Saudi Arabia maintains extensive economic and trade ties with New Delhi, the new collective defence framework further solidifies Pakistan’s role as a core security partner for key Gulf powers. Though India’s Ministry of External Affairs has responded cautiously, saying only that New Delhi is “closely following developments”, Indian national security analysts are monitoring the shift with growing concern. “While most are obviously seeing this from a Middle East lens, it impacts other theatres as well. Pakistan’s conflict-laden relationship with India [is] at the top of that list,” Kabir Taneja, executive director of the Middle East programme at New Delhi-based think tank Observer Research Foundation, wrote on X. Former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal went further, calling the pact “a very negative development for Indian interests” in an X post, and suggesting India should expand its own strategic partnerships with the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Greece, Cyprus and Afghanistan to counter the shift.