Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan are getting closer — and Israel has reason for concern | Michael Harari
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan, which signed a defense agreement, look with concern at the 'day after' and are aware of the opportunities that have opened up.
The tripartite security agreement, signed in Mecca between Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan, reflects the consequences of the war against Iran for the entire region. The three countries look with concern at the 'day after' and are aware of the opportunities that have opened up, at least for some of them.
"The joint defense agreement is based on the common interests of the three countries and is intended to strengthen security, stability and peace... The agreement seeks to strengthen joint defense against any threat. Any attack against one of the countries will be considered an attack on all of them."
A big question is how each of the three will interpret its obligations in the event of an attack on one of them, for example, Iranian attacks against Saudi targets. It is to be assumed that the other two will not rush into war despite the wording of the agreement. However, one should not underestimate the common motivation that pushed them to this agreement.
Each of the countries came to the signing ceremony from a different direction. Saudi Arabia came from a position of weakness given the fact that the war with Iran did not bypass it, despite its strategic relations with the USA. Moreover, the results of the war so far are not encouraging, which forces Riyadh to prepare for the future. From the Saudi perspective, security cooperation with Turkey and Pakistan may provide an additional defensive and deterrent component.
Saudi Arabia has maintained close cooperation with Pakistan for years. With Turkey, its relations are volatile, although both countries have managed to overcome differences and cooperate in the region. Turkey is indeed concerned about the ambiguity regarding the direction in which the Middle East is heading, but sees — rightly, from its point of view — an opportunity to strengthen its regional status, including vis-a-vis NATO and Europe in general.
Pakistan is the main beneficiary of the war. Islamabad quickly and wisely exploited the vacuum created in the field of mediation, and continues to act intensively between Tehran and Washington, and also with the countries of the region. The United States is perceived in many respects as being in a position of weakness. Its lack of success in the war and the emerging achievements for Iran are pushing countries in the region to prepare for what is to come. In the absence of a superpower alternative, what remains for them is to rely more on each other, even when it is unclear if this will be enough.
Israel's place in the strategic calculation is not absent. Its aggressive and adventurous conduct, in the view of the three countries, poses many questions regarding the policy that should be shaped towards it. One thing is clear: Israel's stock in Riyadh is falling. The rest of the countries in the region are following the developments with concern. It is worth noting the regional activity of Egypt, which indicates that Cairo feels the deep concern in Riyadh. The Egyptians are leading, as expected, the mediation regarding the Gaza Strip, but they have also rolled up their sleeves regarding Syria and Lebanon. Qatar continues to engage in the familiar work of mediation, but with a much lower profile, a lesson from the consequences of the war and from the sour feelings in the USA and Israel towards it.
