博客

On Tuesday, the Turkish government formally transmitted the full text of a landmark mutual defence agreement, the Mecca Defence Pact, to the country’s national parliament for ratification. The 16-article accord, first signed in August by the governments of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, establishes a new collective defence alliance structured around mutual security guarantees that echo the core principle of NATO’s Article 5.

The full text of the agreement, obtained in an exclusive report by Middle East Eye, does not name any specific nation or geographic region as an explicit threat to the three signatory states. Instead, the pact’s opening articles anchor its core commitment to collective security. The first article mandates that if any member’s territorial integrity, sovereignty, or internationally recognized borders face threat or danger, all parties will deploy every necessary measure to neutralize that risk. The second article goes further, clarifying that any external armed attack against one signatory will be treated as an attack against all three.

In the event of military aggression against any member, the agreement requires all parties to provide immediate assistance to the targeted state, utilizing all available mutual support capabilities at their disposal. The scope and nature of this support will be determined following an objective assessment of the attacked party’s needs, with all cooperation aligned to each member’s available resources, including military assets and operational capabilities.

Beyond the core collective defence commitment, the pact outlines a broad framework for deepening multi-faceted security cooperation between the three nations. Provisions include joint development of domestic defence industries, standardized training for armed forces, cross-supply of military equipment, fuel and other critical defence material, and the establishment of formal protocols for cross-border intelligence sharing.

A key structural feature of the alliance is its indefinite duration: the agreement has no fixed expiration date. Withdrawal is only permitted after the pact has been in force for 10 years, and any member seeking to exit must provide written notification of their intent to the other signatories no less than three months in advance.

The full text of the accord opens by grounding the alliance in foundational principles aligned with the United Nations Charter and international law, including mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interference in internal affairs, and the inviolability of internationally recognized borders. Signatories emphasize their shared commitment to advancing regional and global peace and security, deepening coordinated counter-terrorism efforts, and aligning policy positions on shared international interests within multilateral organizations.

To govern the alliance’s operations, the agreement establishes a permanent Strategic Political and Defence Committee, composed of each member’s foreign minister, defence minister, and chief of general staff. The committee is tasked with setting strategic direction for the alliance, advancing security cooperation, and resolving implementation challenges. It is scheduled to meet twice annually, with rotating host duties among the three members, and annual leader-level summits can be convened if required. A permanent Secretariat will be based in Saudi Arabia, led by a Secretary-General that rotates every three years among the core parties; the first Secretary-General will be a Pakistani national. The committee also holds the authority, via consensus, to set terms for the accession of additional future members.

Additional provisions cover logistical support during peace, war, and emergencies, confidentiality protocols for classified information (obligations that remain in force even if a member withdraws), mechanisms for amicable dispute resolution, and rules for amending the pact via unanimous core party agreement. The accord will enter into force once all three original signatories complete their domestic ratification processes and deposit the final ratification instrument with the alliance Secretariat, and any pre-existing international obligations of member states remain unaffected by the new agreement.

The current UK government led by Prime Minister Andy Burnham has turned down a high-profile demand from independent MP and former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn to launch an independent public investigation into alleged British complicity in Israel’s military operations in Gaza that have sparked global humanitarian outrage.

Corbyn first tabled a legislative proposal in July, shortly after Keir Starmer stepped down as UK Prime Minister, reviving a bill that had already been voted down during its second reading in Parliament by Starmer’s outgoing administration. Modeled after the landmark 2016 Chilcot Inquiry into the 2003 Iraq War, the bill calls for a full public probe into all dimensions of British military, economic, and political collaboration with Israel throughout its ongoing offensive in Gaza, which first began in October 2023.

Specifically, the bill seeks to examine the UK government’s ongoing supply of weapons and surveillance aircraft to Israel, as well as Israel’s repeated use of United Kingdom Royal Air Force bases for operations tied to the Gaza campaign. In his letter to Burnham sent in July, Corbyn explicitly urged the new prime minister to reverse the previous government’s position and throw his support behind the independent inquiry push.

However, responding to a parliamentary written question on Monday, Burnham’s government confirmed it would not back the proposal. The administration argued that an ad-hoc independent inquiry is unnecessary, claiming that the UK already maintains a robust system of parliamentary accountability and oversight to review government actions related to the conflict.

In a public statement released the following day, Corbyn pushed back against the government’s decision, noting that Burnham himself had previously acknowledged that the last Labour government’s stance on Gaza was incorrect. “However, his words will mean very little if he doesn’t break with the last government’s shameful record of complicity, secrecy and evasion,” Corbyn said.

Verified on-the-ground data confirms that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza has killed more than 74,480 people to date, with widespread documentation of forced displacement that international observers have labeled ethnic cleansing of Palestinian residents from their homes across multiple areas of the besieged territory. Beyond arms exports, the UK has openly acknowledged that Royal Air Force aircraft have carried out hundreds of surveillance sorties over Gaza, and that British intelligence has been shared with Israeli forces to support their operations.

“Delaying scrutiny will not make questions about British complicity in genocide disappear,” Corbyn emphasized in his statement. “The public deserve to know the full extent of Britain’s military, economic and political cooperation with Israel, including arms supplies, surveillance flights and the use of RAF bases. It’s not complicated: if the government has nothing to hide, then why block our efforts to expose the truth?”

This reporting was originally distributed by Middle East Eye, a media outlet that provides independent, on-the-ground coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa, and wider global regions connected to the conflict.

On Monday, Iran’s foreign ministry issued an official travel advisory urging all Iranian citizens to cancel non-essential trips to France, Belgium and Italy, citing a sharp escalation of civil unrest and breakdowns in public order across the three European nations. The guidance goes further, asking Iranians already residing or traveling in the three countries to steer clear of tense protest hotspots and avoid all unnecessary movement through unstable areas.

The unrest prompting the advisory is most severe in France, where escalating mass protests driven in part by a deepening cost-of-living crisis have rocked cities across the country. As of the latest updates, the unrest has left at least two civilians dead, more than 2,000 people arrested by police, and multiple protesters with severe injuries – including two individuals who lost hands after being hit by police stun grenades. In one high-profile incident reported by Reuters, a 14-year-old boy named Eden suffered a broken jaw and shattered teeth after a police tear gas projectile struck him in the face in a Paris suburb.

French authorities in multiple major cities have already imposed formal bans on new demonstrations, and the national government has declined to rule out declaring a national state of emergency, a move that would grant law enforcement expanded powers to conduct searches and carry out arrests without standard judicial oversight. Human rights organization Amnesty International has publicly condemned French police for deploying unnecessary and excessive force against demonstrators, a large share of whom are high school and university students. Anne Savinel-Barras, head of Amnesty International France, emphasized that children and young people engaging in peaceful protest to demand their right to education deserve protection, not beatings, tear gas exposure, or arbitrary detention.

The travel advisory comes as Iranian officials have launched a blistering public rebuke of French President Emmanuel Macron over his foreign policy alignment. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi criticized Macron on social media platform X for siding with what the statement called the Israeli-U.S. campaign against Iran. “Macron made his bed when he assured POTUS that he welcomes atrocities against Iranians,” Araghchi wrote Monday. “Too late to blame the war his ilk helped cause. The French people demand wholesale change, including freedom of assembly. Listen to the future of France, Mr President.”

The criticism from Tehran centers on what Iran calls clear double standards from the French government when it comes to the right to protest. In comments made on October 6, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei called out Paris for its divergent reactions to demonstrations in Iran versus its own territory. Back in January 2026, Baghaei noted, France publicly called for the Iranian government to respect peaceful assembly and exercise restraint in the face of mass street protests in Iran, even as Paris labeled current student-led demonstrations in France “urban violence.”

Baghaei pointed out that France’s interior minister has rejected calls for restraint, instead demanding security forces deploy swift, decisive force to crack down on unrest and restore public order. “Why are the same behaviors and the same standards interpreted one way when the protester is in Iran and another way when the protester is in France?” he asked.

This public rebuke from Iran puts a spotlight on the contradiction inherent in France’s public position: Paris has openly supported mass protests in Iran while harshly cracking down on demonstrations in its own borders. The irony is underscored by the Iranian government’s own response to January 2026 protests in the country: independent reports confirm thousands of protesters were killed in a brutal security force crackdown that saw live ammunition fired into crowds and thousands more detained. Amnesty International noted at the time that even against Iran’s long record of severe human rights violations during protest waves, the scale and severity of the January 2026 crackdown was unprecedented.

In response to Iran’s criticism, Paris escalated the diplomatic conflict on October 7, when French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot summoned Iran’s ambassador to France to protest what Paris calls a “disinformation campaign carried out by the Iranian authorities regarding the high school student movement in France.” The ongoing exchange marks a sharp deterioration in already strained bilateral ties between the two nations, amplified by the overlapping crises of European domestic unrest and Middle Eastern geopolitical tensions.

A controversial execution carried out by Saudi Arabia has drawn sharp international condemnation from global human rights organizations after it emerged the person put to death was convicted for crimes he was accused of committing when he was a minor. The case has reignited widespread scrutiny of the kingdom’s use of the death penalty against people who committed alleged offenses before reaching adulthood, even after legal reforms purported to ban such practices.

Hassan Zaki al-Faraj was executed by Saudi authorities this past Saturday, according to a public statement released by New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW). Court documents and rights group investigations confirm al-Faraj was just 14 years old at the time of the alleged offenses, which included charges of “meeting and developing friendships with other detained and wanted individuals.”

Joey Shea, senior Saudi Arabia researcher at HRW, described the execution as unconscionable, noting the case relied heavily on evidence obtained through torture and followed a pattern of widely documented unfair trial proceedings in Saudi Arabia’s judicial system. Shea also warned that a second young man, Yousef al-Manasif, now faces imminent risk of execution after Saudi Arabia’s Supreme Court upheld his death sentence earlier this year. Al-Manasif was convicted for alleged offenses committed when he was between 15 and 16 years old.

According to HRW’s timeline of the al-Faraj case, he was first taken into custody by Saudi security forces in 2017. It was not until 2022 that the kingdom’s Specialized Criminal Court handed down the death penalty. His legal team has repeatedly alleged that al-Faraj was subjected to routine torture while in detention and was forced to sign a confession that was later used as the primary evidence against him at trial. HRW also confirmed that al-Faraj was held in prolonged solitary confinement throughout his detention, a practice widely criticized by international human rights bodies as a form of cruel and inhumane treatment.

The European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR), which has documented hundreds of death penalty cases in Saudi Arabia, has also corroborated details of al-Manasif’s case. Al-Manasif was arrested in April 2017 on charges related to participating in protests against the Saudi government’s treatment of the country’s Shia minority, as well as attending funeral processions in 2011 and 2012, when he was a minor. In 2024, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention released an official opinion finding that the detentions of al-Faraj, al-Manasif, and three other Saudi detainees – Jawad Qureiris, Abdullah al-Derazi, and Jalal al-Labbad – were arbitrary, and their judicial proceedings included severe violations of international fair trial standards. The UN body concluded that the detentions violated multiple provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and called for the immediate release of all five men, as well as financial compensation for their unlawful detention.

The UN working group’s report also detailed allegations from al-Manasif that he was subjected to both physical and psychological torture while in custody, and was coerced into signing confessions that were later used to secure his conviction. Multiple other detainees facing death sentences for alleged childhood offenses have raised similar claims. Ali al-Mabyook, another Saudi national, was sentenced to death for offenses that included attending funeral processions before he turned 18, according to HRW and unsealed court documents. Rights groups have raised alarm over his case as well, citing misuse of counterterrorism legislation and repeated allegations of coerced confessions. Jawad Qureiris, who was sentenced to death in 2022, was also convicted over acts he allegedly committed as a minor. The UN working group confirmed that Qureiris alleged he was tortured and held in solitary confinement for 270 consecutive days to force him to confess.

In April 2026, Saudi authorities executed Ali al-Subaiti, according to an official announcement from the Saudi Press Agency. HRW investigations found that al-Subaiti was sentenced to death for participating in a public demonstration when he was just 12 years old.

Saudi Arabia introduced legal reforms in 2018 with a new Juvenile Law, followed by a 2020 executive order, that were marketed to the international community as new protections against the death penalty for offenses committed by people under 18. However, HRW and other rights groups argue that these reforms contain critical loopholes that exclude many defendants prosecuted under the kingdom’s broad counterterrorism legislation. As a result, dozens of people convicted over alleged childhood offenses remain on death row and at imminent risk of execution.

In a statement following al-Faraj’s execution, Shea warned that Saudi Arabia’s ongoing wave of executions – particularly of people convicted for offenses committed as children – shows no sign of slowing in 2026. “This underscores the urgent need for the international community to press the Saudi government to immediately halt all executions and abolish the death penalty once and for all,” Shea said.

Saudi government officials have rejected all these allegations, stating that claims of systemic human rights violations in these cases are unfounded. The government maintains that all judicial proceedings and capital punishment practices in the kingdom comply with international human rights standards.