**Saudi Arabia and Pakistan Sign Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement: A New Chapter in Regional Security**
On September 18, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement, marking a significant milestone in regional geopolitics. Under this pact, any attack on either nation will be considered an attack on both countries. Sparked by Israel’s attack on Qatar, the agreement reflects a strategic pivot by both states to counter the perceived unreliability of traditional Western security guarantees.
**A Historic Milestone with Strategic Nuance**
Hailed as a historic milestone, the agreement establishes a reciprocal defence framework, committing both nations to support each other in countering foreign aggression. However, will this pact automatically result in military support whenever either nation is threatened? Such agreements are best understood through historical context.
Pakistan, with its long history of forming strategic alliances—especially during the Cold War when it joined US-led security arrangements like SEATO and CENTO—did not receive automatic military assistance during its wars with India in 1965 and 1971. Ambassador Naghmana Hashmi highlighted Pakistan’s tradition of strategic restraint, noting its decisions to refrain from deploying troops in the Korean War to avoid confrontation with China, and its choice to decline participation in the 2015 Saudi-led intervention in Yemen.
She further indicated that, given Saudi Arabia’s growing ties with New Delhi, Saudi support in an India-Pakistan conflict would likely be diplomatic or economic rather than military. Saudi Arabia’s trade volume with India is 10 to 14 times larger than with Pakistan, offering considerable economic leverage to deter aggression.
**Strengthening Pakistan’s Strategic Position**
Analyst Michael Kugelman observed that while the pact is unlikely to deter India from aggressive actions, it significantly strengthens Pakistan’s regional stance. The backing of Saudi Arabia, China, and Turkey could elevate Pakistan’s strategic standing, potentially encouraging India to reconsider its regional policies to avoid economic repercussions.
Thus, the agreement’s political significance arguably outweighs its immediate military utility. It functions as a multi-layered signal—reassuring Saudi citizens of Pakistan’s support, warning Israel and other actors that Saudi Arabia is not isolated, and nudging the United States to give Gulf security concerns greater priority.
Salman Bashir, former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, describes the pact as “a strategic political gesture and deterrent signal, rather than an operational blueprint for military integration.”
**Maintaining Traditional Security Partnerships**
Riyadh has long sought a US defence pact and nuclear cooperation as part of normalizing relations with Israel. However, progress in these areas was disrupted by the Gaza conflict. Bashir clarified that this pact does not signal a departure from Saudi Arabia’s longstanding security partnership with the United States.
“The US remains close to Saudi Arabia. They understand the significance and context of this agreement between two of its allies,” he stated.
The primary purpose of the pact is to project solidarity and deter aggression by signaling that an attack on one nation is an attack on both. As Bashir puts it, “It serves as a strong declaratory warning to potential adversaries, emphasizing that any aggression will face a unified response.”
**Historical Defence Cooperation**
Defence collaboration between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan dates back to the 1960s, beginning with training agreements. It expanded notably after the 1979 incident, with Pakistani troop deployments including a brigade in 1983 and over 20,000 personnel through the 1980s. Pakistan also sent 11,000 troops during the 1990-91 Gulf War.
Cooperation continued with arms purchases and participation in the 2015 Islamic Military Counter-Terrorism Coalition, which was led by a former Pakistani army chief.
**Responding to a Collapsing Regional Security Framework**
The pact responds to a collapsing regional security framework, particularly following Israel’s attack on Qatar—a non-NATO US ally—which exposed the fragility of American security guarantees. The US’s failure to protect Gulf countries during the Doha attack drove Saudi Arabia to seek alternative alliances.
In the Middle Eastern context, where many nations lack the capacity to counter Israeli aggression, Pakistan emerges as a natural, practical, and credible partner. This perception stems not only from Pakistan’s military capability—a battle-hardened, professional force—but also from the profound reverence its people hold for the Haramain Sharifain (the two holy mosques in Saudi Arabia).
For Saudi Arabia, this alliance also supports Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s domestic transformation agenda.
**Ambiguity Over Nuclear Dimensions**
The publicly released text of the defence agreement employs general language such as “strengthening joint deterrence” and avoids referencing specific weapon systems. The notion of a nuclear umbrella remains speculative.
Salman Bashir asserts that Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine remains exclusively oriented toward deterring India, with no indication that this posture has changed. The pact is a diplomatic instrument designed to reinforce deterrence and stability, not to enable the sharing or deployment of nuclear capabilities.
Ambassador Naghmana Hashmi suggests the agreement was designed with deliberate ambiguity regarding the employment and deployment of strategic assets. In the case of an existential threat, depending on circumstances, the nuclear option “cannot be ruled out.”
Nonetheless, she clarifies that such assets are unlikely to be stationed in Saudi Arabia. Similar to how the US deploys nuclear weapons in Europe—including non-NPT signatories—while retaining full control, Pakistan, a non-signatory that respects the NPT, mirrors this stance. Saudi Arabia, by contrast, is an NPT signatory.
Ultimately, the extension of the nuclear umbrella remains uncertain, as the official text contains no mention of nuclear weapons.
**Pakistan’s Emerging Role in Middle Eastern Security**
The agreement formally acknowledges Pakistan’s vital role as a security provider, integrating it into Middle Eastern defence architecture.
Bashir commented, “Essentially, it brings Pakistan to the fore in the Middle Eastern situation. Pakistan becomes as much a Middle Eastern power as it is in South Asia.”
This elevated role carries inherent risks. Pakistan must proceed with strategic caution to avoid entanglement in intra-Arab disputes.
China’s mediation facilitated a Saudi-Iranian detente, with Iran acknowledging Saudi and Pakistani support during its conflict with Israel. This was demonstrated by Saudi Defence Minister Prince Khalid’s urgent meeting with Iran’s Supreme Leader to pledge solidarity, alongside Riyadh’s successful lobbying against US-led regime change efforts pushed by Israel.
Following a meeting between Iranian official Ali Larijani and Saudi leadership, Islamabad must actively address Tehran’s concerns to maintain this diplomatic momentum.
Ambassador Javed Hafiz reaffirmed Pakistan’s longstanding policy of never initiating aggression against Iran—a stance maintained for decades. Despite challenges from India and Afghanistan, Islamabad’s policy has been to avoid a “hot border” with Iran. Pakistani armed forces have never been deployed along the Iranian border, though there have been occasional spikes in counter-terrorism operations, which Ambassador Hafiz characterized as border management issues rather than hostility.
This clarification has come amid a recent thaw in Islamabad-Tehran relations, underscored by Pakistan’s full support for Iran in the UN Security Council.
He also pointed to Iran’s strategic challenges, surrounded by Azerbaijan, GCC states, and Pakistan. Even before recent Israeli attacks, Iran’s regional influence had waned due to the weakening of its proxy forces in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.
**Potential Risks and Regional Security Dynamics**
Ambassador Hafiz warned that the defence agreement could make Pakistan a target for Israel. While an attack on a nuclear-armed state with strong conventional forces is unlikely, Israeli policy has historically opposed Muslim nuclear powers, as seen in its destruction of Iraq’s Osirak reactor and similar attempts against Iran.
An Israeli attack on Pakistan could trigger massive retaliation and risk all-out war. Pakistan must therefore strengthen its counter-terrorism efforts and safeguard its national interests in light of intelligence suggesting Israel used Indian agents to prepare for attacks on Qatar and Iran.
Should Israel contemplate an attack on Saudi Arabia, the risks escalate dramatically. Such a move could ignite a massive, uncontrollable regional war expanding beyond previous engagements in Qatar and Iran.
Having already targeted several neighbours, Israel must carefully reassess the prohibitive risks and consequences of initiating conflict with a state of Saudi Arabia’s stature and alliances.
**Pakistan Air Force Preparedness Against Israeli Threats**
The historical rivalry between the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and Israel includes notable victories for Pakistani pilots.
– In the 1967 Six Day War, Flight Lieutenant Saif-ul Azam, flying a Jordanian Hawker Hunter, downed three Israeli jets—Dassault Mystere IV, Vautour IIA, and Mirage III—setting a record for the most Israeli Air Force aircraft shot down, according to Air Marshal Arshad Aziz Malik (retired).
– In 1973, Flight Lieutenant Sattar Alvi, flying a Syrian MiG-21, destroyed an Israeli Phantom.
For decades, the PAF has prepared and rehearsed contingency plans against potential threats from Israel alongside its primary focus on India.
Air Marshal Malik noted that Israel had at least three times planned to attack Pakistan’s nuclear facilities. The PAF regularly conducts rehearsals with aircraft and sensors, practicing war plans to counter threats from all directions.
Pakistan has repeatedly thwarted potential airstrikes by Israeli forces. On one occasion, a timely alert from an ally exposed an Israeli Air Force strike package using a civilian airliner as cover to evade radar. PAF fighter jets were scrambled immediately, forcing the Israeli mission to abort.
In another instance, Israeli Defense Forces jets reached Afghanistan with a refueller aircraft to attack Pakistan. However, PAF air controllers vectored the pilots to border areas, causing the Israeli strike package to quickly withdraw.
These successes followed earlier threats of a joint Israeli-Indian plan to attack the Kahuta nuclear facility in the 1980s. Ahead of the 1998 Chagai nuclear tests, the PAF kept fighters airborne on high alert. Jets also rehearsed sending a one-way strike package to retaliate against critical Israeli facilities and naval platforms using Exocet missiles—demonstrating Pakistan’s strategic reach and resolve in an era before long-range missiles.
Today, an arsenal of missiles and integrated air defence provides Pakistan with greater assurance and sustainability in projecting power.
“Israel is part of our threat spectrum; we have always prepared against them and have the intent, resolve, and capacity to hit where it hurts the most,” said Air Marshal Malik.
Recent Israeli support to India through Harop drones and technical advisory assistance has further underscored the importance of this preparedness.
**International Reception and Future Outlook**
Regarding global reactions, Ambassador Hashmi noted that the agreement arrived with tacit blessings from both the United States and China.
– China views the pact as a stabilizing force safeguarding its massive Belt and Road Initiative investments.
– The US, recognising Saudi security anxieties, may tolerate the agreement given its alliances with both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. However, Washington will firmly oppose any arrangement that threatens or undermines Israel’s security.
Significant diplomatic work lies ahead, including clarifying expectations and operational boundaries to ensure both countries can manage future crises effectively.
Barring extreme and direct threats, this pact is unlikely to compel either country into military actions instigated by the other.
The term “strategic” now encompasses broad domains aligned with Saudi Vision 2030’s economic and social transformation goals. Unlike Cold War-era alliances, this agreement could meld Saudi financial resources, Pakistan’s skilled workforce, and Chinese technology.
**Economic and Defence Collaboration Prospects**
The pact opens avenues for defence collaboration, with Saudi investment potentially funding joint production of Pakistani military systems such as Al-Khalid tanks and JF-17 fighter aircraft, reducing reliance on US supplies.
Such cooperation could catalyse Pakistan’s economic growth by creating jobs and expanding vocational training—mutually supporting the development ambitions of both nations while promoting regional stability.
By integrating Pakistan into Middle Eastern security architecture, the agreement enhances regional stability, pressures global powers like the US to prioritize Gulf security, and supports China’s Belt and Road investments as a strategic deterrent.
Nonetheless, Pakistan must clearly define its operational boundaries to avoid entanglement in Middle Eastern conflicts or becoming an unnecessary target for Israel and its Western allies.
—
This defence pact marks a transformative shift, underscoring evolving alliances in a turbulent region and highlighting the complex interplay of military, economic, and diplomatic interests shaping the future of Middle Eastern and South Asian security.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/1346524-strategic-alignment