Introduction

On 07 August. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif signed the Makah Defence pact during the ‘Makkah Al-Mukarramah Summit for Joint Defence’.

The signing has taken place at a time when the Iran war has settled into an unusual pattern, one that swings between talks and bombings. When talks reach an impasse, missile attacks start and when those fail to achieve a breakthrough negotiations resume while the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.

It also comes at a time when the American defence umbrella has proved of little help in protecting Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf Arab states which are caught in a mess of the US making. The presence of US military assets in these countries has instead pulled them into the war.

But the Iran War is only one context in which this agreement needs to be seen. While the pact aims at strengthening collective deterrence there many questions that surround it, specifically the fact that it is modelled on Article 5 of the NATO Agreement where an attack against one signatory is to be considered as an attack against all.

While the commonality between the three countries is that they are all Sunni Muslim countries, yet each brings to the table distinct assets; Saudi Arabia being the richest country brimming with oil revenues and custodian of the Holy shrines.

Turkey is the only Muslim NATO member and is trying to resurrect the position it held when the Ottoman Empire reigned and with its advanced military-industrial base is emerging as a leader in military drones. Pakistan on the other hand is the only Muslim nuclear state and has close relations with China. It also has a large, and experienced military with a history of defence ties with both Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

At the heart of the agreement is a single clause: any armed attack on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or Türkiye is to be treated as an attack on all three. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has compared the principle behind the agreement to NATO’s Article 5. The three states would decide through consultations what form and degree of assistance is required, while a ministerial committee and a permanent secretariat based in Saudi Arabia are expected to develop the alliance’s institutional and operational framework.

But the fact is that for each of these countries their adversary differs, for Saudi Arabia it is presently Iran, while for Turkey their issues are with Israel and Syria and for Pakistan their focus is India. Hence bringing nations together is not the same as aligning their interests.

Pakistan Prefers Enlarging the Equation

Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar said in a post on X that “the Makkah Accord is purely defensive in nature”. As far as Iran is concerned Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and is unlikely to open a permanent front by attacking Iran in case of an Iran - Saudi Arabia conflict. Pakistan’s interests lie in maintaining a balance in relations with both Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Similarly, both Saudi Arabia and Turkey are unlikely to declare war on Afghanistan under the provisions of this pact incase tensions increase between Pakistan and Afghanistan in the form of terror attacks and with regard to the disputed Durand Line.

Pakistan’s military ties with China add another dimension as its contribution brings to the table Chinese weapons, technology and infrastructure. There are many questions to be asked as if Turkish technology will now complement Chinese-origin systems in Pakistan’s drone, missile and air-defence capabilities. Will intelligence or maritime cooperation connect the pact more closely to China and will Pakistan now provide a nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia and Turkey? So far Pakistan’s deterrent remains solely oriented towards India. 

Pakistan’s focus has always been India and as happened prior to the 1965 conflict when it was part of both the CENTO and SEATO, the pact will embolden Pakistan as it feels it has the security backing of both Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

This may lead it to carryout certain actions against India under the guise of plausible deniability against which India needs to be vigilant. The fact is that Pakistan always likes to enlarge the equation as far as its relations with India is concerned.

Implications for India

India has reasons to be concerned about any enhanced military coordination, technological sharing and money for increasing Pakistan’s defence industry and capabilities from Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

Pakistan is now part of a formal security framework with two nations that possess financial resources, technology and diplomatic influence. This sits alongside Pakistan’s deeper strategic and defence relationship with China and transforms a bilateral rivalry into a wider network of alignments.

Saudi Arabia has so far been balanced in its stance towards India due to its economic ties and the presence of a large Indian diaspora. It is expected that Saudi Arabia will respect mutual interests and sensitivities.

However, Turkey has consistently taken a pro-Pakistan position on Kashmir at the UN and has also helped Pakistan militarily the most recent being Operation Sindoor when they not only supplied drones to Pakistan but also manned them with their operators. A tighter trilateral alignment may risk Saudi Arabia leaning towards Turkey’s aggressive stance towards India.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs stated that it is “closely following the development”. India needs to leverage its massive economy and develop its hard power by building its defence capabilities and capacities while deepening its strategic partnerships with countries like the UAE and Israel as well as strengthening its relationship with Saudi Arabia.

Conclusion 

While the three countries offer a combination of financial resources, manpower, military technology and strategic geography. The pact’s value will be measured in integration: joint air defence, early warning, intelligence, munitions, cyber defence, and a joint command able to function during conflict. Just as important will be defence cooperation to include co-producing and co-developing weapon systems. The maritime dimension will also be crucial. For Turkey and Pakistan, Saudi investment could help to finance new programmes while providing access to one of the world’s largest defence markets. The result could eventually be a defence-industrial triangle capable of jointly producing equipment particularly drones, missiles, air-defence systems, electronic warfare platforms and naval capabilities. But the pact has been already put to test by an Iranian proxy the Houthis by their attack on a Saudi refinery. Iran-aligned Iraqi militias could offer another route. Either could let Iran discover how far it can go while forcing Riyadh, Ankara and Islamabad to decide when an attack on one becomes a fight for all three. The agreement does not spell out what each country must do after an attack, and Pakistan and Turkey have their own relationships with Iran.

Unfortunately, the emergence of overlapping security arrangements in a volatile region where traditional guarantees by the US has been questioned is unlikely to provide stability. The emerging geometry has widened geography by reducing the strategic distance between the Gulf, Eastern Mediterranean and South Asia and has only added to the existing fissures. But the fact is that collective defence is only as effective as the operational readiness of forces and the political will behind them presently that arrangement appears loose.

Maj Gen Jagatbir Singh, VSM (Retired)

Major General Jagatbir Singh is an Armoured Corps Officer who commanded the First Armoured Division. He served in varied terrains and tenanted important command, staff and instructional appointments including a UN Peace Keeping Mission in Iraq and Kuwait. He co-authored ‘Armour 1971’ and edited ‘Valour and Honour’.