The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement: A New Framework for Collective Security in the Muslim World

In the Name of Allah---the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement: A New Framework for Collective Security in the Muslim World

Introduction

On 7 August 2026, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Türkiye signed the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement in the holy city of Makkah, marking one of the most significant military and strategic developments in the contemporary Muslim world. Signed by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, the agreement establishes a formal trilateral collective defence framework among three of the Muslim world's most influential military powers. (AP News)

The treaty comes at a time when the Middle East is experiencing heightened geopolitical instability, including conflicts involving Iran, tensions in the Red Sea, attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure, and increasing uncertainty regarding regional security arrangements. Rather than relying exclusively on external powers, the three countries have opted to institutionalize a regional mechanism capable of deterring aggression through collective defence. (Reuters)

A Historic Agreement Signed in Makkah

The choice of Makkah as the venue carries profound symbolic significance. As Islam's holiest city, Makkah represents unity among Muslims beyond ethnic, linguistic, and national divisions.

Unlike ordinary defence agreements signed in national capitals, the Makkah venue conveys a message that security cooperation among Muslim nations is being framed not merely as a geopolitical necessity but also as a shared civilizational responsibility.

Analysts have noted that this symbolism reinforces the legitimacy and political weight of the agreement throughout the Muslim world. (Reuters)

The Collective Defence Clause

The central provision of the treaty is its collective defence clause, which declares:

An armed attack against any one of the three member states shall be regarded as an attack against them all.

This provision resembles the collective security principle found in other international defence alliances.

The agreement seeks to:

• strengthen collective deterrence,

• discourage military aggression,

• increase strategic coordination,

• enhance regional stability,

• improve crisis response capabilities.

Officials from all three governments emphasized that the treaty is purely defensive and is not directed against any specific country. It also remains open for participation by other regional states in the future. (AP News)

Military Cooperation Beyond Mutual Defence

The agreement extends well beyond a political declaration.

According to officials and regional reports, cooperation is expected in several areas:

• Joint military exercises

• Combined operational planning

• Intelligence sharing

• Counter-terrorism coordination

• Defence technology cooperation

• Military education and training

• Defence industrial collaboration

• Expansion of strategic consultations

Turkish media also indicated that technology transfers and broader defence-industrial cooperation are expected to become important components of the partnership. (AP News)

Strategic Strengths of the Three Members

One notable aspect of the agreement is that each participating country contributes complementary strengths.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia contributes:

• enormous financial resources,

• leadership within the Arab and Islamic worlds,

• control of the world's largest oil-export infrastructure,

• strategic geographic position overlooking both the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf.

The Kingdom has also become increasingly interested in diversifying its security partnerships while expanding domestic defence production.

Pakistan

Pakistan brings several unique advantages:

• the Muslim world's only nuclear deterrent,

• one of the world's largest professional armed forces,

• decades of operational military experience,

• extensive experience in counter-terrorism,

• long-standing military cooperation with Gulf states.

Pakistan has trained Saudi military personnel for decades and already maintains a significant military presence in the Kingdom under previous defence agreements. (Reuters)

Türkiye

Türkiye contributes:

• NATO's second-largest military,

• an advanced indigenous defence industry,

• world-class drone technology,

• modern naval capabilities,

• expanding aerospace and missile manufacturing.

Turkish defence exports have expanded rapidly over the past decade, making Ankara one of the leading defence manufacturers in the Muslim world. (AP News)

Why Was the Agreement Needed?

Several strategic developments appear to have accelerated the formation of the alliance.

Regional instability

The Middle East has witnessed:

• conflicts involving Iran,

• instability in Gaza,

• fighting in Lebanon,

• Houthi attacks,

• threats to maritime trade,

• missile attacks on Gulf infrastructure.

These developments have increased concerns among regional governments regarding collective security. (Reuters)

Protection of Critical Infrastructure

Saudi Arabia's oil installations, energy facilities, ports, and transportation networks have faced repeated threats during regional conflicts.

A collective deterrence arrangement increases the potential costs of any future aggression against these strategic assets. (Reuters)

Expanding Regional Security Architecture

Many analysts interpret the agreement as part of a broader shift toward greater regional responsibility for security rather than dependence on outside powers. (Reuters)

Economic Importance of the Agreement

Beyond military cooperation, the agreement has major economic implications.

The economies of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Türkiye, and the wider Gulf region depend heavily upon:

• uninterrupted energy exports,

• secure maritime trade,

• stable investment environments,

• protected transportation corridors,

• confidence among international investors.

By strengthening collective military deterrence, the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement seeks to reduce risks to critical infrastructure, safeguard oil and gas exports, and help maintain the uninterrupted flow of commerce through vital maritime routes such as the Red Sea and the Arabian Gulf. A more secure regional environment also supports Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030, protects Gulf investment projects, and contributes to broader economic stability across the Middle East. (Reuters)

Continuation of Existing Military Cooperation

The new treaty did not emerge in isolation.

It builds upon decades of defence cooperation:

• Pakistani military training missions in Saudi Arabia,

• Turkish defence exports to Gulf states,

• Saudi procurement of Turkish drones,

• earlier bilateral Saudi-Pakistan defence agreements,

• long-standing trilateral diplomatic engagement.

The Makkah Agreement therefore formalizes an already expanding strategic relationship into an institutionalized collective defence framework. (AP News)

Not Directed Against Any Particular State

Officials from all three governments have consistently emphasized that:

• the agreement is defensive,

• it does not replace existing bilateral or multilateral commitments,

• it is not directed against any specific country,

• additional regional states may join in the future.

This messaging seeks to portray the alliance as a stabilizing rather than confrontational development. (AP News)

Strategic Significance

The agreement is significant for several reasons.

It brings together:

• the Custodian of Islam's Two Holy Mosques,

• the Muslim world's only nuclear-armed state,

• NATO's second-largest military.

This combination creates one of the most capable defence partnerships ever established among Muslim-majority countries.

If expanded through institutional cooperation, joint procurement, integrated command mechanisms, and coordinated military planning, the agreement could evolve into a major pillar of regional security architecture.

Renaissance of the Muslim Ummah

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement can be interpreted not merely as a military arrangement but as a potential milestone in the strategic renaissance of the Muslim Ummah.

Its significance becomes clearer when viewed from a broader historical perspective. For centuries, the Muslim world has possessed enormous demographic, economic, geographic and military resources, but these resources have often remained fragmented among separate states. The cooperation of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye brings together three strategically important centres of the Muslim world: South Asia, the Arabian Peninsula and Anatolia.

From fragmentation to strategic cooperation

The importance of the agreement lies in its potential to move Muslim states from individual national security toward collective security.

Pakistan contributes substantial military and strategic capabilities; Saudi Arabia provides enormous economic resources, geographic importance and the spiritual centrality of Makkah and Madinah; while Türkiye contributes advanced defence technology, a powerful conventional military and a strategically important geopolitical position.

Their combined capabilities could eventually facilitate cooperation in:

• joint defence production;

• intelligence sharing;

• air and missile defence;

• naval security;

• drone and counter-drone technology;

• cyber defence;

• protection of energy infrastructure;

• and strategic research and development.

Thus, the agreement could become a foundation upon which a much broader Muslim security architecture is constructed.

Makkah as the symbolic centre

The fact that the agreement was concluded in Makkah gives it an extraordinary symbolic dimension.

Makkah is not merely the capital of Saudi Arabia; it is the spiritual centre of the Muslim Ummah. Associating a major strategic initiative with Makkah therefore conveys a powerful message: the security of the Muslim world must ultimately be connected with the security and dignity of its sacred heartland.

This also gives new relevance to the Qur'anic principle:

وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا
“And hold fast, all together, to the rope of Allah, and do not be divided.”
— Qur'an 3:103

The principle of i‘tisām does not require the abolition of national states. Rather, Muslim states can retain their sovereignty while developing mechanisms of mutual support, collective security and common interests.

From military renaissance to comprehensive renaissance

The real renaissance of the Ummah, however, cannot be limited to military power.

Military cooperation should ideally become one component of a much larger programme:

Defence cooperation → technological cooperation → economic integration → scientific advancement → educational collaboration → political coordination → civilizational renaissance

The Muslim world possesses enormous human and material resources. What has frequently been lacking is coordination.

If the Makkah initiative succeeds in creating trust among its participants, it could eventually demonstrate that Muslim states can pool their resources without surrendering their individual sovereignty.

A new balance of power

This becomes particularly important in the contemporary Middle East, where regional conflicts have demonstrated the consequences of military fragmentation.

A strong collective defence capability does not necessarily mean preparation for war. Its greatest achievement may be precisely the opposite: deterrence that prevents war.

A credible collective security system can tell potential aggressors that an attack against one member cannot easily be isolated as a purely bilateral conflict.

In this sense, the Makkah agreement could represent a transition:

from dependence to strategic autonomy,
from fragmentation to coordination,
from vulnerability to deterrence,
and ultimately from political weakness to collective confidence.

The beginning, not the destination

It would nevertheless be premature to describe the agreement itself as the complete renaissance of the Muslim Ummah. Renaissance requires institutions, economic strength, scientific excellence, technological independence, good governance and educational transformation.

But it can be regarded as an important beginning.

The real historical significance of Makkah will depend upon what follows.

If Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye transform their agreement into durable institutions of defence cooperation—and if other Muslim countries eventually participate in appropriate forms—the initiative could become much more than a military pact.

It could become the nucleus of a new Muslim strategic order.

In that sense, the most appropriate interpretation may be:

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement is not the renaissance of the Muslim Ummah itself; it may be one of the first significant institutional steps toward that renaissance.

And perhaps its most powerful message is that the future strength of the Muslim world need not arise from the domination of one Muslim state over another, but from cooperation among sovereign Muslim nations united by common interests, mutual security and a shared civilizational heritage.

Greater Israel Project vs. the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement

The Middle East is entering a new strategic phase in which the struggle is no longer confined to individual wars, borders, or territorial disputes. Increasingly, it concerns competing visions of regional order.

On one side stands the idea commonly described as the “Greater Israel” project—a broad and contested ideological concept associated with different forms of territorial expansion, Israeli sovereignty over occupied territories, and, in its maximalist interpretation, a biblical territorial vision extending from the Nile to the Euphrates. On the other side is the newly established Makkah Joint Defence Agreement between Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, which creates a framework for collective security among three major Muslim states.

The contrast is striking. One vision is associated with expanding strategic space around Israel, while the other seeks to strengthen the strategic space and defensive capacity of major Muslim states.

The comparison should nevertheless be made carefully. “Greater Israel” is not a single officially adopted Israeli military plan with a universally agreed map. The term encompasses several ideological and political interpretations, ranging from the retention or annexation of territories occupied by Israel to much more expansive biblical interpretations. (Al Jazeera)

The Makkah agreement, by contrast, is an actual interstate defence arrangement. Reports indicate that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye signed it in Makkah on 7 August 2026, building upon years of bilateral and trilateral defence cooperation. Earlier in 2026, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye had already prepared a draft trilateral defence agreement after nearly a year of negotiations. (Dawn)

The emerging strategic picture can therefore be understood as a contest between territorial expansion and collective deterrence.

1. What Does “Greater Israel” Mean?

The expression “Greater Israel” has several meanings, and conflating them can lead to analytical confusion.

The most expansive interpretation is associated with the biblical passage in Genesis 15:18, which describes territory extending “from the river of Egypt” to the Euphrates. Some modern maps interpret the “river of Egypt” as the Nile, although that identification itself is disputed among scholars. (Wikimedia Commons)

The concept has subsequently acquired political and ideological meanings within parts of the Zionist and Israeli nationalist spectrum.

A more immediate contemporary interpretation concerns Israeli control, annexation, settlement or military presence beyond the internationally recognized boundaries of Israel, particularly in:

• the West Bank;

• East Jerusalem;

• the Golan Heights;

• Gaza;

• parts of southern Lebanon;

• and areas of Syria affected by Israeli military operations.

The most maximalist version, however, goes far beyond these territories and imagines an Israel extending across substantial portions of neighbouring Arab states.

It is important not to describe every Israeli citizen, every Zionist, or the Israeli government as necessarily subscribing to the maximalist Nile-to-Euphrates concept. Contemporary scholarship and reporting distinguish between territorial expansionism, religious-nationalist “Greater Israel” ideology, settlement ideology, and the maximal biblical territorial conception. (Al Jazeera)

2. From Ideological Concept to Strategic Reality

The importance of the Greater Israel debate lies not simply in historical maps but in the question of whether territorial expansion can gradually become a strategic reality.

Israel's territorial history since 1948 provides the context for this concern.

Following the 1967 war, Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, Sinai and the Golan Heights. Sinai was subsequently returned to Egypt under the Egypt-Israel peace treaty, while Israel retained control over other territories to varying degrees. (Al Jazeera)

The Israeli settlement movement subsequently established a substantial presence in the West Bank. The Greater Israel movement became particularly influential among sections of the religious-nationalist right.

The historical development is therefore significant because territorial expansion does not necessarily occur through a single declaration of a grand plan. It can take place incrementally through:

1. military occupation;

2. establishment of settlements;

3. creation of security zones;

4. annexation;

5. demographic transformation;

6. infrastructure integration;

7. and eventual claims of permanent sovereignty.

This is one reason why the concept continues to generate concern throughout the Arab and Muslim world.

3. The Strategic Geography of Greater Israel

The maximalist interpretation of Greater Israel has enormous geopolitical implications.

A state possessing territory from the eastern Mediterranean deep into the Arab heartland would potentially gain access to:

• major transportation corridors;

• water resources;

• agricultural areas;

• strategic mountain ranges;

• energy infrastructure;

• Red Sea approaches;

• Mediterranean ports;

• and major land routes connecting Asia, the Levant and the Arabian Peninsula.

However, the most extreme maps circulated under the label “Greater Israel” should not automatically be treated as official Israeli government policy.

Some historical maps and ideological literature do depict extraordinarily large territories. The National Library of Israel documents the historical connection between maps of “Eretz Israel,” Zionism and territorial questions, while Cornell University's Persuasive Cartography collection preserves historical material associated with the idea of a Greater Israel. (National Library of Israel)

The analytical point is therefore not that Israel has formally announced a plan to annex the entire Middle East. Rather, it is that territorial maximalism exists as an ideological current and that Israeli military and settlement policies have produced concerns about incremental territorial expansion.

4. The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement represents a fundamentally different strategic concept.

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye have now moved from defence cooperation toward a more explicit framework of collective security.

The agreement is particularly significant because the three countries bring together three different forms of strategic capability.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia contributes:

• enormous economic resources;

• strategic geographic depth;

• energy resources;

• control of important Red Sea and Gulf approaches;

• and custodianship of the two holiest cities in Islam.

Pakistan

Pakistan contributes:

• one of the world's largest military forces;

• nuclear deterrence;

• ballistic and missile capabilities;

• a large defence-industrial base;

• extensive military experience;

• and geographical proximity to both the Middle East and South Asia.

Türkiye

Türkiye contributes:

• a large conventional military;

• NATO-standard military capabilities;

• an advanced and increasingly independent defence industry;

• drones and aerospace technology;

• naval capabilities;

• and a strategically important position between Europe, the Black Sea, the Caucasus and the Middle East.

This combination creates a strategic triangle extending from South Asia through the Arabian Peninsula to Anatolia.

Earlier trilateral defence-industrial discussions had already focused on pooling technological, financial, intellectual and human resources and developing greater defence self-sufficiency. (Dawn)

5. The Meaning of Makkah

The location of the agreement carries symbolic importance.

The agreement was concluded in Makkah, rather than simply in a conventional political capital.

Makkah is the spiritual centre of the Muslim world and the location of the Kaaba. Consequently, the agreement can be interpreted not merely as another military arrangement but as an attempt to associate Muslim collective security with the protection of the Islamic heartland.

This symbolism becomes even more significant when viewed against the security environment surrounding Saudi Arabia.

Pakistan's military leadership had already described the security of Saudi Arabia as intrinsically connected to the security of the two holy sanctuaries. (Dawn)

Thus, the Makkah agreement has both:

a strategic dimension — collective deterrence,

and

a civilizational dimension — security cooperation among major Muslim states centred around Makkah.

6. From Bilateral Defence to Trilateral Deterrence

The Makkah agreement did not emerge from nowhere.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed their Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement in September 2025, under which aggression against one country was to be regarded as aggression against both. Pakistan subsequently deployed military personnel and fighter aircraft to Saudi Arabia in 2026 to strengthen bilateral defence cooperation. (Dawn)

Türkiye's inclusion transforms the equation.

Instead of:

Pakistan ↔ Saudi Arabia

the strategic structure becomes:

Pakistan ↔ Saudi Arabia ↔ Türkiye

This creates a triangular security relationship.

The three countries also possess complementary capabilities:

Saudi financial power + Pakistani strategic deterrence + Turkish military technology

That combination is considerably more consequential than any of these capabilities considered separately.

7. Greater Israel vs. Makkah: Expansion and Containment

The most important conceptual difference can be expressed in two words:

Expansion versus deterrence.

The maximalist Greater Israel concept seeks, in its ideological form, to enlarge the territorial and strategic space available to Israel.

The Makkah agreement seeks to make the strategic environment of its members more resistant to external coercion or attack.

This creates an interesting geopolitical paradox.

If Israel's strategic objective is to maximize its freedom of action while keeping neighbouring states militarily fragmented, then the emergence of strong regional defence partnerships works in the opposite direction.

Collective defence makes unilateral military action more costly

8. The Three-State Triangle and the Israeli Strategic Environment

The geographical position of the three members is particularly important.

Consider their locations:

Türkiye
↓
Arabian Peninsula / Saudi Arabia
↓
Pakistan
↓
Indian Ocean

Together they create a strategic arc stretching across an enormous portion of the Islamic world.

This does not mean that the three countries have formed an anti-Israel alliance in the formal sense. The agreement should not automatically be described as a declaration of war against Israel.

Rather, its significance is that a stronger Muslim security architecture potentially reduces the strategic vacuum in which regional powers can operate without facing coordinated resistance.

That distinction is crucial.

9. The Palestinian Question

The Palestine issue provides the most obvious point of intersection.

Pakistan has consistently maintained a strong political position on Palestinian rights.

Türkiye has also been one of the most outspoken Muslim states regarding Gaza and Palestinian statehood.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, remains central to Arab diplomacy and has repeatedly linked normalization with Israel to Palestinian statehood and a political settlement.

The three states have also jointly condemned Israeli actions at Al-Aqsa Mosque. In July 2026, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye joined other Muslim states in condemning Israeli minister Itamar Ben-Gvir's incursion into the Al-Aqsa compound. (Dawn)

Therefore, while the Makkah agreement is not explicitly a “Palestine defence treaty,” its political environment is inseparable from the wider struggle over the future of Palestine and Jerusalem.

10. Why the Agreement Matters for the Gulf

The security of Saudi Arabia cannot be separated from the security of the Gulf economy.

Saudi Arabia is one of the world's principal energy producers and sits adjacent to several critical maritime routes.

The broader Gulf region depends on secure:

• oil exports;

• LNG shipments;

• Red Sea shipping;

• ports;

• pipelines;

• energy infrastructure;

• and international trade routes.

Recent conflicts have demonstrated how vulnerable these systems can be.

Attacks on energy infrastructure or shipping can rapidly affect global energy prices, insurance costs and supply chains.

A collective defence arrangement involving Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Türkiye therefore has an economic-security dimension.

It can contribute to deterrence by raising the potential cost of attacks against Saudi territory and critical infrastructure.

11. The Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb

The strategic importance becomes even clearer when the Red Sea is considered.

The Bab al-Mandeb connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and is one of the world's major maritime chokepoints.

Disruption there affects:

Asia ↔ Indian Ocean ↔ Red Sea ↔ Suez Canal ↔ Europe

Pakistan has a direct interest in maintaining freedom of navigation because much of its trade and energy supply depends upon maritime routes through the Arabian Sea and Red Sea system. Recent reporting has specifically identified Bab al-Mandeb as critical to Pakistan's trade and energy supplies. (Dawn)

Saudi Arabia has an even more immediate geographical interest because its western coastline lies along the Red Sea.

Türkiye, although geographically distant from the Red Sea, has major economic and strategic interests extending into the Middle East and Africa.

Consequently, the Makkah framework potentially provides a foundation for cooperation extending beyond conventional land warfare into:

• maritime security;

• air defence;

• drone warfare;

• missile defence;

• intelligence sharing;

• cyber security;

• and protection of energy infrastructure.

12. The Economic Dimension of the Strategic Triangle

Military alliances increasingly depend upon industrial capacity.

This is an area in which the three countries can complement each other.

Saudi Arabia possesses capital.

Türkiye possesses a rapidly expanding defence industry.

Pakistan possesses substantial engineering and military-industrial experience and has developed indigenous aircraft, missiles, drones and other systems.

The three countries had already discussed defence-industrial cooperation before the Makkah agreement, including the pooling of intellectual, technical, financial and human resources. (Dawn)

A mature trilateral defence industry could therefore evolve into something much more significant than military exercises.

It could potentially include:

joint research → joint production → technology transfer → common platforms → integrated defence systems

Such an evolution would gradually reduce dependence on external suppliers.

13. The Nuclear Dimension

Pakistan introduces another unique element.

Pakistan is a nuclear-armed state.

Neither Saudi Arabia nor Türkiye currently possesses an acknowledged independent nuclear arsenal.

Therefore, although the Makkah agreement does not automatically constitute a nuclear-sharing arrangement, Pakistan's participation gives the alliance a strategic dimension that conventional military alliances among non-nuclear states do not possess.

This creates a fundamental deterrence calculation.

An adversary considering military action against one member must potentially consider the possibility of escalation involving Pakistan.

That does not mean Pakistan would automatically employ nuclear weapons in response to every attack on Saudi Arabia or Türkiye. Nuclear deterrence operates principally by creating uncertainty and raising the potential cost of escalation.

14. Greater Israel's Strategic Challenge

If the Greater Israel concept is viewed through the lens of regional balance, the emergence of the Makkah defence architecture presents a significant challenge to maximalist expansionism.

A fragmented Middle East is strategically easier to dominate than a coordinated one.

A region in which states act separately allows an external power to:

• negotiate separately;

• pressure individual governments;

• exploit rivalries;

• establish military superiority;

• and conduct limited operations without immediately confronting a unified response.

A region containing strong defence partnerships presents a different calculation.

This is the classic logic of collective deterrence.

15. From Fragmented States to Security Networks

The Middle East historically lacked a NATO-like collective security architecture.

There have been many organizations:

• Arab League;

• Gulf Cooperation Council;

• Organization of Islamic Cooperation;

• various bilateral defence treaties;

• and temporary military coalitions.

But these have not produced a fully integrated Muslim defence system.

The Makkah agreement could represent a step toward a networked security architecture.

It does not need to become a formal “Muslim NATO” immediately.

A more realistic evolutionary path could be:

bilateral treaties → trilateral alliance → defence-industrial cooperation → intelligence integration → joint exercises → integrated air defence → maritime coordination → wider regional security network

If such a process develops, the strategic consequences could extend far beyond the three signatories.

16. Could Other Muslim States Join?

This is perhaps the most important question for the future.

The Makkah agreement currently centres on three states.

But its geographical logic could eventually attract other Muslim countries.

Potential areas of cooperation could include:

Gulf

Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman and the UAE possess important military and economic capabilities.

Arab heartland

Egypt and Jordan possess strategically important armed forces and geographical positions.

South Asia

Bangladesh and other Muslim-majority states could potentially participate in selected areas of defence cooperation.

Central Asia

Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and other Central Asian states possess strategic depth and growing defence interests.

However, expansion would also create political complications.

Different countries have different relations with:

• the United States;

• China;

• Russia;

• Iran;

• Israel;

• India;

• and European powers.

Therefore, the Makkah alliance will need to avoid becoming an instrument for unnecessary confrontation with every other regional power.

17. Iran: The Difficult Question

Iran represents one of the most complicated issues for the emerging alliance.

Saudi Arabia and Iran have historically competed for regional influence, although their relations have improved in recent years.

Pakistan shares a long border with Iran.

Türkiye also maintains extensive economic and political relations with Iran.

Therefore, if the Makkah agreement is interpreted narrowly as an anti-Iran alliance, it could undermine the interests of all three members.

A more sustainable interpretation would be:

collective defence against external aggression, regardless of its source.

Such a formulation would allow the three countries to maintain relations with Iran while simultaneously strengthening their own security.

18. The United States Factor

Another important question concerns the United States.

All three Makkah states have extensive historical relations with Washington.

Türkiye is a NATO member.

Saudi Arabia is a major US security partner.

Pakistan has maintained decades of military cooperation with the United States.

Therefore, the Makkah agreement should not automatically be interpreted as an attempt to replace the US security system.

Its deeper significance may instead be the emergence of greater strategic autonomy.

The three countries may increasingly seek the ability to defend their interests without depending entirely on outside powers.

This is especially significant in an era when regional states have become uncertain about the reliability and long-term priorities of great-power security guarantees.

19. A New Strategic Equation

The emerging strategic equation can be summarized as follows:

Greater Israel Concept	Makkah Defence Framework
Territorial maximalism in its most expansive interpretation	Collective security
Expansion of strategic space	Protection of territorial sovereignty
Israeli military superiority	Mutual deterrence
Fragmented regional environment benefits external dominance	Cooperation strengthens regional actors
Settlement/annexation associated with expansionist currents	Defence cooperation
Primarily centred on Israel	Pakistan–Saudi Arabia–Türkiye
Strategic depth through territorial control	Strategic depth through partnerships
Unilateral freedom of military action	Collective cost of aggression

This is not a simple clash between two military organizations.

It is a clash between two different approaches to regional power.

20. The Deeper Civilizational Significance

The greatest significance of the Makkah agreement may ultimately lie beyond military calculations.

For centuries, Muslim-majority states have possessed enormous:

• populations;

• natural resources;

• strategic territories;

• financial capital;

• military manpower;

• and cultural influence.

Yet these assets have often remained politically fragmented.

The Makkah agreement brings together three states with complementary strengths.

Pakistan represents South Asian Muslim strategic power.

Saudi Arabia represents Arabian economic and spiritual centrality.

Türkiye represents Anatolian military-industrial and geopolitical power.

Their cooperation therefore creates an unusual geographical bridge:

South Asia — Arabian Peninsula — Anatolia

This is potentially the foundation of a new Muslim strategic corridor.

21. From Military Pact to Regional Architecture

The real test of the Makkah agreement will not be the signing ceremony.

It will be implementation.

The agreement could remain a political declaration if the three states fail to develop:

1. permanent coordination mechanisms;

2. intelligence sharing;

3. joint military exercises;

4. integrated air-defence arrangements;

5. missile-defence cooperation;

6. drone and counter-drone systems;

7. naval cooperation;

8. cyber-security mechanisms;

9. defence-industrial projects;

10. strategic communications;

11. rapid-response mechanisms;

12. and clear procedures for determining when collective defence obligations are activated.

If these mechanisms emerge, the agreement could become a genuine regional security institution.

22. The Greatest Advantage: Deterrence Without War

The ultimate objective of a successful defence alliance should not be to fight wars.

It should be to prevent them.

A credible defence alliance communicates a simple message:

An attack on one state will not remain a bilateral conflict.

This is the central logic behind collective defence.

The attacker must calculate not merely the military strength of the target but the combined strength of its partners.

That is precisely why the Makkah agreement could alter the strategic calculations of potential adversaries even if its forces are never deployed in combat.

23. Greater Israel and the Makkah Response

The relationship between the two concepts can therefore be expressed as a strategic sequence:

Greater Israel ideology
↓
Expansion of Israeli strategic space
↓
Pressure on neighbouring states
↓
Fear of regional fragmentation
↓
Search for collective security
↓
Makkah Joint Defence Agreement
↓
Pakistan + Saudi Arabia + Türkiye
↓
Collective deterrence
↓
Potential wider Muslim security architecture

This does not mean that the Makkah agreement was created solely as a response to Greater Israel.

Its origins are broader and include the changing regional security environment, threats to Saudi Arabia, military tensions across the Middle East, and the three countries' longstanding defence cooperation.

But the agreement undoubtedly acquires additional geopolitical meaning when viewed against Israeli territorial ambitions and the wider struggle over the future regional order.
Watch this video to know how the Zionists look at the Makkah agreement:

24. The Historical Choice Before the Muslim World

The deeper question is therefore not simply:

“Will Israel expand?”

The deeper question is:

“Will the surrounding states remain strategically fragmented?”

If Muslim states remain divided, militarily dependent and strategically disconnected, external powers will continue to possess disproportionate influence over the region.

If, however, major Muslim states develop mechanisms for:

collective defence + economic integration + technological cooperation + energy security + maritime security + diplomatic coordination

the balance of power could gradually change.

The Makkah agreement could be the beginning of such a transformation.

Two Visions, One Region

The debate surrounding Greater Israel and the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement represents two fundamentally different visions of the Middle East.

The maximalist Greater Israel concept envisions an expanded Israeli strategic and territorial space, rooted in religious-nationalist interpretations and, in its most expansive form, the biblical territory between Egypt and the Euphrates. It should not, however, be mistaken for a single officially adopted Israeli government blueprint. (Wikimedia Commons)

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement, by contrast, is a concrete interstate security arrangement bringing together Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye. It builds upon years of defence cooperation and a 2025 Pakistan-Saudi mutual defence agreement. (Dawn)

Its historical significance may ultimately depend upon whether it develops beyond a three-country pact.

If it remains limited to military consultations, its impact will be important but contained.

If it develops into joint defence production, intelligence cooperation, integrated air and missile defence, maritime security and wider Muslim strategic coordination, it could mark the beginning of a new regional security architecture.

The fundamental contrast can therefore be summarized in one sentence:

The Greater Israel vision seeks greater strategic space through expansion, while the Makkah vision seeks greater strategic security through cooperation.

The future of the Middle East may depend substantially on which of these competing dynamics proves more powerful: territorial expansion or collective deterrence; fragmentation or coordination; unilateral dominance or regional balance.

And the most consequential question emerging from Makkah is perhaps not whether three Muslim countries can defend themselves individually, but whether they can transform their new partnership into a durable architecture of collective security for the wider Muslim world.

Conclusion

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement represents far more than another bilateral defence treaty. It is a landmark effort by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Türkiye to institutionalize collective security at a time of profound geopolitical uncertainty. By combining Saudi Arabia's economic strength and strategic location, Pakistan's military experience and nuclear deterrence, and Türkiye's advanced defence industry and operational capabilities, the three countries have created a framework designed to deter aggression, strengthen military cooperation, and enhance regional stability.

Equally important, the agreement has significant economic implications. By protecting Gulf energy infrastructure, securing vital maritime trade routes, and fostering a more stable regional security environment, it supports the economic resilience of Gulf states and contributes to the uninterrupted flow of global commerce. Whether it evolves into a broader multilateral security organization will depend on future regional developments, but its signing in Makkah already marks a historic milestone in defence cooperation among leading Muslim nations. (AP News)