The signing of the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement by Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye is rightly being hailed as a major shift in the region’s security landscape. Under the agreement, signed on Friday at the Makkah Al-Mukarramah Summit for Joint Defence, an armed attack against any one of the three countries will be regarded as an attack against all three. The summit was attended by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. The agreement brings together three countries with distinct but complementary strategic strengths. Saudi Arabia has major financial resources and enormous defence procurement capacity. Turkiye brings advanced defence manufacturing, including high-end drone technology, as well as considerable military strength. Pakistan contributes specialised military personnel, extensive defence training experience and nuclear deterrence capabilities. Together, these capabilities offer the foundations of a potentially significant regional security arrangement. Some have described the pact as a precursor to a ‘Muslim/Islamic Nato’. That may be premature. What is clearer is that the agreement represents a realignment of regional security arrangements at a time when the old security architecture is under considerable strain. Experts have described it as the “foundation of an alternate security architecture for the region”. The experience of recent conflicts has demonstrated why regional states may no longer be willing to rely on the US as their sole security provider.
The US military presence in the Gulf has not necessarily translated into protection for its regional allies. During the recent US-Israel war on Iran, it became clear that Washington’s overriding priority was the protection of Israel, rather than the security of the countries in the region that host US military bases. This has inevitably encouraged regional powers to look for ways to strengthen their own defence and security capabilities. The trilateral agreement can therefore also be read as a signal of mutual solidarity to potential aggressors. The pact builds on the formal mutual defence agreement signed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia last September. That Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement sought to expand defence cooperation and strengthen joint deterrence against aggression, explicitly stating that aggression against either country would be considered aggression against both. Turkiye’s inclusion now gives that arrangement a broader regional dimension. The significance also goes beyond military cooperation. There was a time when Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye were competing for influence in the Muslim world. Today, the world order is shifting and states are being forced to reassess both their strategic priorities and their economic interests.
It is also simplistic to characterise the agreement as the formation of a ‘Sunni bloc’ or an anti-Iran alliance. A post on X by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s suggests otherwise: “When Muslims stand together, we can face every challenge by malicious outsiders head-on. Time to rely only on ourselves and embrace true brotherhood”. Those portraying the pact as being directed against Iran are therefore either misunderstanding the emerging regional dynamics or viewing them through a narrow sectarian lens – or worse: trying to sow seeds of distrust within the region. The agreement is fundamentally about regional cooperation, deterrence and security at a time when the existing order is being tested. Whether the pact will eventually attract other regional countries remains uncertain, but the possibility cannot be dismissed. As states seek to protect their economic interests, stronger security arrangements will become increasingly important. The speculation that other countries could eventually enter similar arrangements may therefore prove prescient. Pakistan has shown both military capability and diplomatic know-how, making it an important middle power in any emerging regional security architecture. The Makkah agreement may not herald a ‘Muslim Nato’, but it does signal something arguably more consequential: regional countries are increasingly prepared to take responsibility for their own security.
