Hakan Fidan Says Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia Pact Mirrors NATO Article 5

Turkish leaders have insisted that the new trilateral defence pact with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is not directed at Iran. Turkiye’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Saturday that the pact does not identify Iran, or any other country, as a common threat. Recommended Stories list of 4 items- list 1 of 4Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkiye defence pact challenges US role - list 2 of 4Iran deliberates Hormuz arrangement amid uncertain prospects with US - list 3 of 4Yemen’s government forces attack Houthis amid renewed shelling of Marib - list 4 of 4What are the challenges facing the Mecca agreement? The Mecca Joint Defence Agreement was signed on Friday by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, stating that an armed attack on one of the three countries would be considered an attack on them all. “There is no common threat that we have put in writing,” Fidan told Turkey’s state-run Anadolu agency, adding that countries that do not attack the signatories would not be considered targets. An Article 5-style commitment Fidan described the pact as “technically” similar to NATO’s Article 5 collective-defence clause, under which an attack on one member is treated as an attack on all. But the response would depend on the circumstances. A country under attack would have to request assistance and specify what kind of support it needed, Fidan said. That could range from intelligence and logistics to ammunition or the deployment of military units. The alliance will also establish political and military committees, bringing together foreign and defence ministers and military chiefs, as well as a secretariat in Saudi Arabia. Fidan said the three countries would work on joint training, intelligence sharing, logistics, threat assessments and military interoperability. Defence-industry cooperation is also expected to be a notable part of the pact. Fidan said it was one of the main issues discussed by the three leaders in Mecca, including how the countries could benefit from each other’s military technologies. The Turkish minister said preparations for the agreement had been under way for nearly two years and eight months, suggesting it was not drawn up simply in response to the current tensions involving Iran. Iran pushes back Despite Ankara’s assurances, some Iranian officials have questioned the agreement and warned Saudi Arabia against relying on its new partners for security. Mahmoud Nabavian, a member of Iran’s parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, said Saudi leaders should understand that cooperation with Turkiye and Pakistan would not guarantee their security. Another commission member, Ebrahim Rezaei, similarly dismissed the pact as a “paper agreement”. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi did not directly mention the agreement in a message on X on Friday, but he called on regional states to rely on themselves and pursue what he described as “true brotherhood”. At the same time, he stressed the strength and readiness of Iran’s armed forces. Egypt could join next Fidan portrayed the agreement as part of a broader effort to give regional countries greater responsibility for their own security. “External hegemons coming into the region do not solve the problems; they make them more acute,” he told Anadolu. He described Turkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as the “core countries” of the initiative and made clear that Ankara wants the arrangement to expand. “Under our president’s vision, we should not remain limited to three countries,” Fidan said. “We should grow and, if necessary, bring all countries under this umbrella.” Several countries have already expressed interest, according to Fidan, who said he expected Egypt, which he described as a “natural partner”, to join once outstanding technical issues were resolved. For now, many of the practical details remain to be worked out, including how the three militaries would coordinate in a crisis. But the planned committees, permanent secretariat and focus on interoperability and defence-industry cooperation suggest the pact is intended to develop beyond a simple mutual defence declaration.

The Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hakan Fidan, stated that the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement is technically equivalent to Article 5 of the NATO treaty on collective defense: “That is why a security pact is established. That is why other countries decide to join an alliance: to benefit from mutual protection.” During his remarks at Aatölye, the Anadolu Agency (AA) editorial team reported, Fidan said that signing the agreement “was a truly historic day. In our foreign policy, which we have advanced under the leadership of our president [Recep Tayyip Erdoğan], there are some fundamental pillars we have pursued for many years. We witnessed an event related to achieving one of them.” Fidan noted that the region has suffered instability for many years, affirming that wars, occupations, exiles, and displacement of people have been constant in the Middle East and across Türkiye’s southeast region, in the geographic area generally known as “the Middle East.” Fidan emphasized that this systemic disorder has been subject to thorough monitoring and analysis by the AK Party governments, which have been in power for many years, and that they have considered how to provide lasting solutions to these problems. He stated that in recent years they have refined their positions on this issue and focused on practical measures that can be adopted. He added that after initial evaluations, these were shared with stakeholders and that a concretion stage has finally been reached. On Türkiye’s objectives, Fidan noted that “it is important to increase our regional autonomy. Because external hegemonic powers do not resolve the region’s problems; they aggravate them, and the cost is very high. The countries of the region need to move toward stronger institutional structures that guarantee their own security, economic stability, development, and prosperity.” Fidan affirmed that Türkiye maintains very good relations with almost all countries in the region, “but these relations were based on conjunctures, political perceptions, and understandings—relations that could change at any moment. However, Türkiye’s foreign policy has remained unchanged for a long time under our president’s leadership. We have always believed that strengthening it would be more beneficial. The ‘fraternal’ relationship or ‘relationship’ we refer to should be more structural, more professional, and more self-sustaining for the stability of the entire region.” “In a region, there is a need for a defense alliance. Countries cannot build overlapping economic structures without guaranteeing mutual security. This is something history has shown. We also saw it in the European Union. The European Economic Community emerged under the umbrella of U.S. security and then evolved. Here too there is a strong will to eliminate, or at least curb, regional instability and to promote the well-being of its inhabitants through greater economic and social integration.” Fidan said they are aware that it is not an easy task and that they are just beginning, adding that all necessary mental and conceptual preparations and plans have already been made. He also said they are working on the institutional implementation of these agreements: “We know what kinds of problems we will encounter in doing this. I have been continuously discussing these topics with our partners, with those with whom we have signed agreements, and with other countries in the region for exactly two years and eight months. Of course, our president always raises them in leadership-level meetings.” In response to a question about the agreement, which has been in preparation for two years, Fidan said: “Of course, it is about moving from idea to concept, and from concept to agreement.” Noting that it imposes an obligation on the signatory countries, Fidan reiterated that Türkiye has been part of NATO since 1952 and has participated in its meetings for many years, and recalled that the last NATO summit was held in Ankara, indicating that NATO has only taken joint intervention decisions and launched operations on one or two occasions in its history. “First, it supported Afghanistan, and second, Kosovo. Moreover, NATO’s preparation, its greater deterrence capability, consists of developing a defensive deterrence capability. “If I am attacked, I am prepared; I have a strong military force. Do not test my might. Therefore, they do not attack me. The region I am in is developing and moving along a more normal path, addressing all political and economic problems.” Emphasizing the importance of this, Fidan stressed that what hinders progress is violence, war, and suffering. “They are increasing their deterrence capability. Secondly, the way to enter such alliances is not primarily to send a message to the outside world, but for the signatory countries of the agreement to demonstrate and commit to not threatening each other’s security, but to guaranteeing it. That is the starting point. When one joins a security alliance, it is not against an external actor, but an internal matter of mutual solidarity, of ensuring that none harms the other.” While noting that this is an important starting point, Fidan added that work must be done in light of existing threats. In response to the question “Does an immediate obligation arise in case of attack? How will this obligation be implemented?” Fidan replied: “According to the text of the agreement, there are general commitments. As I have always stated, the manner in which these general commitments will be implemented in practice depends on the debate and decisions of the relevant bodies.” Fidan added that a country should request assistance and that the nature of such assistance would be defined by that country. “It says: ‘I need intelligence, I need logistics, I need ammunition, and if that is not enough, I need military units at a more advanced phase.’ These are multi-phase processes, varying according to the scale of the threat. The perspective we have laid out in the work done so far is this: we will have a ministerial committee as a structure. Just like in NATO, there is a political-military committee composed of foreign ministers, defense ministers, and the chief of the general staff. This political-military committee is responsible for concretizing the vision proposed by the alliance’s leaders and implementing it. There will be a general secretariat, an organization, that will implement the vision of this committee.” “This is not a case of ‘we sign here and we leave.’ This Secretariat will closely supervise matters related to this defense alliance among the three countries and the implementation of the decisions taken. We have not started working yet; signatures have just been affixed. After the first meeting of the committee, we will probably present to the leaders for approval the topics related to establishing the secretariat, its structure, functioning, and the initial tasks to be assigned to it. Of course, there are many aspects to consider, particularly militarily, such as interoperability, a fundamental concept in NATO. This means that countries with different military structures can work together, cooperate, provide mutual training and support, address logistical issues, conduct threat analyses, share intelligence, and, above all, cooperate in the defense industry. Yesterday, the most debated topic among the leaders was defense industry cooperation and the mutual benefits these technologies bring to the countries.” Fidan stated that this is a serious and ongoing institutional initiative, and indicated that it will become an automated process. “Countries will not be able to ask, ‘What were we going to do together?’ when they face difficult situations. What we must continually emphasize in foreign policy or any other matter is that success must not be left to chance; it must be institutionalized. It must be sustainable.” Fidan added that countries should forge alliances around certain interests and concluded: “These three countries are the main ones.” Responding to a question about the alliance’s deterrence objective, Fidan said: “As I already said, there is currently no written agreement or signature on a common threat. We commit to ‘addressing each other’s security closely.’ This is a starting point.” After noting that discussions on this topic began “before the current war,” Fidan indicated that at that time there was no war between Iran, the United States, and Israel, but they foresaw that the United States would modify its security concerns in the region, that other developments would occur, and that Türkiye’s fight against terrorism would gain greater prominence. Regarding the agreement’s signatory countries, Fidan stated that, “if you analyze the foreign policy positions of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey, you see that they are not expansionist states. They are countries concerned with their own borders, their own problems, their development, and, to the extent possible, that they wish to contribute positively to their surroundings through good relations and neighboring relations.” After stating that these countries have different styles and capabilities, Fidan declared: “When we join these countries, we naturally become a defensive organization. It is not an approach of ‘let’s go on the offensive and do this or that together.’ Therefore, while the region is not attacked, whether from within or from outside, this alliance cannot have problems with any country. But, of course, this power composition we have created will contribute constructively to regional stability.” Fidan emphasized that this is the reason to move forward and alluded to the fact that Iran “is not a target” of this agreement and noted that countries that do not attack the signatories of the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement “are not targets.” The minister stressed that the alliance is an issue that is examined thoroughly—legally as well as politically and strategically—and noted that there are no problems in this realm. After noting that other countries have also signed similar agreements, Fidan cited examples of NATO countries that have already signed comparable agreements. Fidan stressed that this is not a new phenomenon within NATO, stating: “Türkiye is, of course, a country aware of its responsibilities. We are by no means in a position to keep these different geographies and priorities in conflict.” Identifying this aspect as an area that requires management, Fidan explained that he also expressed this during his meeting with his German counterpart. Fidan said Türkiye’s objective in this regard is based on regional appropriation and that Ankara has a significant presence in many strategic locations, conveying the message that a similar initiative should also be undertaken in Europe. He stated that serious discussions are taking place about what can be done in Europe’s security architecture, and he added: “Because of its geography, Türkiye has a strategic orientation toward Europe and European geography in general through the Caucasus, the Middle East, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and the Balkans. In this context, it is necessary to develop a perspective for each strategic basin and harmonize these perspectives, even if areas of tension arise.” Explaining his experience on this issue, he said that Ankara, within NATO, is a country with particular geographic conditions in relation to the Middle East and the Caucasus, and that this has been analyzed. Referring to the breadth of Türkiye’s strategic basin, Fidan said that each strategic basin has different positions and conditions. Drawing attention to the development of a security and economic architecture related to these, Fidan said: “Since we are not proceeding with a hegemonic approach, we must do it together with the regional countries. After the agreement in the Caucasus, we expect that there is currently a ceasefire, a ceasefire that works properly. Armenia and Azerbaijan are moving toward a permanent peace agreement, and we support that. At the same time we support this, we keep in mind a security and economic architecture perspective.” Regarding whether a similar structure could be built in regions like the Caucasus and Central Asia, Fidan stated: “These structures can be built when necessary. Sometimes economic need may be greater. But the main problem in the Middle East at this moment, as you know, are wars, insecurity, and conflicts, so it is necessary to start with a security architecture. A security architecture is also being sought in Europe.” He replied, “It is possible to harmonize Europe’s and the Middle East’s security architectures in the long term, even in the medium term. In fact, the necessary intellectual and ideological preparations already exist. When we work on scenarios in this regard, since Europe does not have an expansionist mindset either, a state-centric mindset that seeks to avoid attacks from neighbors, strengthen its economy and development, and be competitive prevails. We firmly believe that these strategic positions can be harmonized. But, as I have already said, the issues we have been debating with our partners in both the Middle East and Europe for a long time are bearing fruit little by little. They are generally accepted points, but their practical implementation takes time. The transformation in Europe will be a long-term transformation.” Concerning the meeting of 40 chiefs of staff from various countries, convened by invitation of Saudi Arabia to discuss Red Sea security, Fidan stated: “The Saudis raised the issue from the perspective of global trade security and the Bab el-Mandeb strait’s security. They did not frame it as a ‘help’ situation related to their bilateral conflict with the Houthis.” Fidan emphasized the need to analyze trade data and technical details, stating: “As we have said, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to war and the ongoing conflict in the Persian Gulf does not directly affect our energy supply in a significant way, because we have secured it through pipelines for the coming years.” He added that it is necessary to analyze trade data and technical details on this matter in depth. Fidan affirmed that closing the Red Sea’s commercial zone is directly related to Türkiye’s interests, and added: “Therefore, it was entirely normal for us to show military interest in this matter, precisely when the international community was gathered there, debating what measures to take. Our president also gave the necessary approvals in this regard. Our Chief of Defence Staff is participating in the meetings. Thus, Türkiye needs to have a broad security perspective in this area.” Fidan noted that the Red Sea connects to the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal, and added: “Who is the most important country in the Mediterranean? It is us. It is a port where all Mediterranean cargo ships that carry goods from one place to another inevitably call. Therefore, we must be present to have a voice in the…”

(CNN) -- Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan predicted that Egypt would join the Mecca Agreement defense pact after his country signed onto it alongside Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in Mecca on Friday. In an interview with the Turkish official Anadolu Agency on Saturday, Fidan said: "Egypt is already a natural partner for us in all matters. And I believe that in the next phase Egypt will be among us as part of the alliance." He pointed out that "there are technical points; once they are applied and activated, there will be no reason preventing Egypt from joining." He added: "We are currently dealing with each other as if we are already members of a alliance, and relations with all countries are like this." Fidan noted that the Mecca Agreement for collective defense is technically similar to Article 5 of the NATO Charter on collective defense. He pointed out that no common threat has been identified within the Mecca Agreement, and he stressed that "no country that does not attack us will be our target." He said that under the agreement, "there will be trainings and maneuvers, and these things are naturally included in joint military alliances; you cannot prove interoperability and joint operations without undertaking these matters." Fidan added that "Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey are not expansionist states," considering the agreement "the most important step that will bring lasting stability to a region whose name has been associated with instability over the past hundred years since the Ottoman state withdrew from it." The Saudi Foreign Ministry had previously clarified that "under the agreement any external armed attack on any of the three countries constitutes an attack on all." The ministry noted that the Mecca Agreement for collective defense enables the three founding states to develop joint defensive capabilities and deterrence and raise readiness, and works to develop and integrate the defensive capabilities of the three countries to jointly counter any threat to their security and territorial integrity.

Türkiye on Friday firmly rejected claims that its new joint defense agreement with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan conflicts with NATO commitments or creates a rival alliance, calling such assertions a deliberate attempt to manipulate public perception. The Presidential Communications Directorate issued the statement in response to claims circulating on social media that the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement signed by Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan contradicts NATO's Article 5 and establishes a parallel alliance structure. The directorate described the claims as “completely false,” saying their origin and intent were evident and accusing those behind them of seeking to shape public perception through misinformation. It stressed that the agreement does not contradict any of Türkiye's existing international alliance commitments, including its obligations as a NATO member. Instead, Ankara views the pact as a complementary cooperation mechanism designed to strengthen regional security, the directorate said. “Türkiye's development of regional partnerships is not an alternative to its NATO membership,” the statement said. The directorate also rejected portrayals of the agreement as an aggressive military bloc, saying it is a defense-oriented arrangement aimed at strengthening deterrence. It said the pact does not target any third country or alliance and is instead intended to deepen defense industry cooperation, military training and technology sharing while contributing to regional stability. The directorate urged the public to disregard what it described as baseless claims and manipulative social media posts surrounding the agreement.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said this Saturday (08.08.2026) that the Mecca Defense Co-Defence Agreement, signed yesterday by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey, is not directed at Iran, while noting it could include Egypt in the future. "No country that does not attack us will be our target," Fidan told the Turkish official news agency Anadolu, specifying that the Islamic Republic "is not the target of this organization." He also clarified that efforts to finalize the pact had been underway for two years and eight months, i.e., long before the outbreak of the war between Israel, the United States, and Iran. Like Article 5 of the NATO treaty, the trilateral agreement is a mutual defense pact according to which an attack against one member is considered an attack against all, the Turkish minister said, similar to Article 5 of NATO. Turkey, which has the second-largest army in the Allied Forces, has noted that the new pact was open to the inclusion of other regional countries and did not intend to replace any existing alliance. "NATO is a gigantic military alliance composed of 32 countries. We have started here as three nations and we must take very humble but concrete steps," he said. He also indicated that as part of the alliance a Ministers’ Committee would be established, similar to the one that exists in NATO, and a General Secretariat based in Saudi Arabia. Open to other nations: "The vision of our president is not to limit ourselves to three countries, but to grow and bring together all nations (in the region) under this same roof," he stated, adding that Egypt could join the pact once certain technical issues are resolved. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt had already held meetings and formed the so-called "Group R4" in recent months. Through this initiative, the four states seek closer coordination in the face of regional conflicts, such as the war led by the United States and Israel against Iran. Fidan also stressed today that Turkey should participate in an international coalition to protect navigation in the Red Sea from attacks by the Houthi militias. Securing sea lanes is of interest to the Ankara government, he said.

Current section Turkey said Egypt could join the Turkey-Saudi-Pakistan defense pact after technical issues are resolved, adding the NATO-style alliance does not target Iran unless Tehran attacks a member, and will have a Saudi-based secretariat Print in a simple, ad-free format Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said that Egypt may join the regional defense pact signed on Friday together with Current section Turkey said Egypt could join the Turkey-Saudi-Pakistan defense pact after technical issues are resolved, adding the NATO-style alliance does not target Iran unless Tehran attacks a member, and will have a Saudi-based secretariat Print in a simple, ad-free format Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said that Egypt may join the regional defense pact signed on Friday together with Haaretz.com, the online English edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, gives you breaking news, analyses and opinions about Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.© Haaretz Daily Newspaper Ltd. All Rights Reserved Your Perspective Belongs Here Want to reply? Subscribe to join the conversation Already signed up?Log in

Turkey says Mecca defense pact mirrors NATO’s collective defense principle Fidan says the agreement with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan targets no country unless a member state is attacked, while Egypt could potentially join ERBIL (Kurdistan24) — Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said Saturday that the Mecca Mutual Defense Agreement signed by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is technically similar to NATO’s collective defense principle, while stressing that the pact does not target Iran or any other country unless one of its members comes under attack. Speaking to Anadolu Agency, Fidan said the agreement follows the principle of collective defense outlined in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), under which an armed attack against one member is considered an attack against all. Fidan emphasized, however, that the Mecca agreement is not directed against Iran or any other country as long as member states are not attacked. The Turkish foreign minister said the agreement establishes a ministerial committee similar to mechanisms operating within NATO, as well as a general secretariat tasked with coordinating the pact’s activities and implementing its mechanisms. He also said Egypt could potentially join the agreement if several technical issues are resolved. Pact signed by Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan The Mecca Mutual Defense Agreement was signed Friday in the Saudi city of Mecca by Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Pakistan in a move aimed at strengthening defense cooperation and establishing a framework for collective deterrence. The agreement was signed during a high-level Mecca summit attended by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. The leaders discussed the strategic ties between the three countries as well as a range of regional and international issues of common interest. Under the agreement, an armed attack against any one of the three countries is to be treated as an attack against all member states, reinforcing their commitment to collective defense and joint action against threats to their security and sovereignty. The pact also seeks to expand defense and military cooperation and strengthen coordination among the three countries, with the stated aim of improving their readiness and capabilities to respond to shared security challenges. The agreement comes as Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Pakistan seek to deepen their strategic partnership and strengthen political and defense coordination amid rapidly changing regional security dynamics. Türkiye seeks role in Red Sea security Fidan also addressed maritime security in the Red Sea, saying the protection of maritime navigation is directly linked to Türkiye’s interests. He stressed the importance of Türkiye participating in an international coalition led by Saudi Arabia aimed at protecting maritime traffic and securing key maritime routes. The comments come amid heightened regional concerns over the security of commercial shipping routes in the Middle East and the wider Red Sea region. Fidan’s remarks underline Ankara’s effort to expand its security role beyond bilateral defense cooperation and contribute to emerging regional mechanisms focused on collective security and the protection of international maritime trade.

EN 30 SECONDS - What happened? Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed yesterday the Mecca Defense Agreement, which equates an attack on any of them with an attack on all three. - Who’s behind it? Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif signed the pact. - What impact does it have? The three-nation alliance, with nuclear arsenals, a defense industry, and energy financing, alters the balance of power in the Middle East and challenges the U.S. security umbrella. Yesterday, August 7, 2026, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan sealed in Mecca a mutual defense pact that many observers already compare—with caution—to a ‘Muslim NATO.’ The Mecca Defense Agreement, signed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, states that “an armed attack against any of the three countries will be considered an attack against all,” according to a statement from Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry. The wording recalls Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, but the text does not clarify whether the military response would be automatic and combined. Analysts consulted by Reuters emphasize that the ambiguity is deliberate: it is more a deterrent signal than an immediate operational commitment. In fact, it is not the first attempt to articulate a similar bloc in the region, although conditions have never been as favorable. The three pillars of the new bloc: nuclear power, industry, and finance The pact brings together strategic assets that multiply its deterrent weight. Pakistan is the only Muslim country with a nuclear arsenal (about 170 warheads, according to SIPRI), and it already maintains several thousand troops, JF-17 fighter jets, drones, and Chinese-origin air defense systems deployed in eastern Saudi Arabia since the 2025 bilateral defense agreement. Turkey, with the second largest army in NATO and an expanding defense industry—Bayraktar drones, armored vehicles, naval systems—already works closely with Islamabad on arms programs. Saudi Arabia, the world’s top crude oil exporter, provides the financial capacity to sustain a prolonged military effort without relying on third parties. “The trilateral framework could strengthen the diplomatic and defensive weight of the three countries and contribute to a regional security architecture,” Abdulaziz Sager, president of the Gulf Research Center, told Reuters. The Washington view, however, ranges from official indifference to concern about the erosion of its influence in the Gulf. Erosion of the U.S. umbrella and the security vacuum The immediate trigger for the agreement is the volatile security situation in the Middle East following U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iran. Iran’s retaliation against Gulf monarchies—historically allied with Washington—has underscored the limits of the U.S. security umbrella and has forced Arab capitals to seek alternative frameworks. Ankara, for its part, resents Washington’s support for Kurdish militias used against Tehran, while Islamabad aims to project itself as a regional actor in Central Asia and the Middle East. Loss of faith in U.S. deterrence is the glue of the new axis. The Mecca Agreement is, essentially, a response to the power vacuum created by the war against Iran on the NATO southern flank and in the northern Indian Ocean. It is not an Islamic NATO, but it shows that the U.S. security umbrella no longer convinces the Gulf’s traditional partners. Tehran has reacted with disdain. Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security Committee, called the pact a “paper agreement” and warned Riyadh that “years of unilateral pampering from the Americans did not bring them security, and a paper agreement with Turkey and Pakistan will not.” India, which maintains tense relations with both Pakistan and Ankara, said it is watching the developments “closely,” but foreign ministry sources said there will be no immediate impact on its own defense doctrine. Balance of Power The reshaping of alliances in the Gulf has direct implications for NATO and for Spain. The new Sunni axis—with Pakistan nuclearized, Turkey inside the Atlantic Alliance, and Saudi Arabia as a pillar—introduces an unknown variable into European security architecture. If Ankara decides to invoke NATO solidarity in a regional conflict with Iran, the Alliance could be dragged into a war it is not politically prepared for. And if, on the other hand, the tripartite deterrent works, the southern flank will be even more militarized without Brussels being able to influence command. For Spain, the Mecca pact raises the stakes of the southern border. Morocco—Saudi Arabia’s first arms buyer in the Maghreb—welcomes any weakening of the Iran–Algeria axis, but Pakistan’s rapprochement with Riyadh adds a nuclear factor in a neighborhood that is already complex. The bases at Rota and Morón, parts of the U.S. anti-missile shield, could come under unprecedented diplomatic pressure if the Saudi-Turkish-Pakistani axis demanded alignment that Madrid is not in a position to grant without fracturing its traditional balance with the Arab world, Israel, and Iran. In the medium term, the agreement accelerates multipolarity in a region where Russian and Chinese military presence was already increasing. Beijing, a key mediator in the Riyadh–Tehran talks, watches with interest as its partners in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor integrate into a security alliance that could, in the end, facilitate its own projection into the Indian Ocean. The next summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, planned for fall, will measure the real support the bloc can garner.

ANKARA, Aug 8 (Reuters) - A defence pact signed between Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is technically the same as NATO's Article 5 mutual defence agreement, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Saturday, adding the accord was not targeting Iran. Fidan also said Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan wanted to see the alliance expand, and that Egypt was a potential candidate to join, among others. Sign up here. The regional powers signed the "Mecca Joint Defence Agreement" on Friday, wedding Sunni Muslim U.S. allies alarmed at a regional conflagration that has brought Iranian missile fire onto Gulf oil exporters. In a joint statement, they said the accord intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression and stipulates that an armed attack against any of the three would be regarded as an attack on all. Speaking to the state-run Anadolu news agency, Fidan said the new alliance was not directed against Iran or any other country, but rather served as a general pledge to support the three allies' security. He added that the allies would decide through consultations what degree, form, and format of support they would ask for in the event of an attack, but that no country would be considered a threat as long as a member state is not attacked. Turkey, which has NATO's second-largest army, has said the pact was open to expansion to other regional countries and did not seek to replace any existing alliances. "NATO is a giant military alliance where there are 32 countries. We have started here as three countries and we have to take very humble but concrete steps," he said, adding efforts to finalise the pact had been underway for two years and eight months. He added that a committee of ministers similar to that within NATO would be formed as part of the alliance, as well as a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia, but that operational details would be set at the first committee meeting. "Our president's vision is that we don't remain limited to three countries, that we grow and bring together all (regional) countries under this roof," he said, adding Egypt could potentially join the pact once certain technical matters are resolved. In recent months, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt formed a group to address regional issues, namely the war on Iran. Turkey has said the group - dubbed the R4 - aims to solidify its partnership through concrete mechanisms. Fidan also said Turkey should be involved in an international coalition to protect shipping in the Red Sea from Houthi attacks because shipping safety concerned Ankara's interests. Reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu; Editing by Susan Fenton and Toby Chopra Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

A defense pact signed between Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is technically the same as NATO's Article 5 mutual defense agreement, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Saturday, adding the accord was not targeting Iran. Speaking to the state-run Anadolu news agency, Fidan said a committee of ministers similar to that within NATO would be formed as part of the alliance, as well as a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia. Egypt could potentially join the pact once certain technical matters are resolved, he said. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey signed the agreement on Friday, bringing together the three countries' leaders: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. 'An attack against one is an attack against them all' The agreement says that any armed attack on any one of the three countries will be regarded as an attack against them all, according to a statement from Pakistan's foreign ministry. A spokesperson for Pakistan's Foreign Ministry stressed that, despite tensions in the Gulf, the visit has "significance that goes beyond the immediate crisis and short-term considerations." "This agreement, based on the principle of collective deterrence, will contribute to cooperation in the fields of security and defense, joint projects in the defense industries, and the fight against terrorism," stated Erdogan before the official signing. The move marks a significant step in efforts by the three regional powers to deepen security cooperation amid growing tensions and the ongoing war between the United States and Iran. Eli Leon contributed to this report

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Saturday that Egypt could join the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement, emphasizing that Ankara envisions expanding the new regional security pact beyond its three founding members. Speaking about the agreement, Fidan said President Recep Tayyip Erdogan envisions the initiative growing over time rather than remaining limited to Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. "Our president's vision is for this initiative not to remain limited to three countries, but to grow and, if necessary, bring all countries under this umbrella," he said. Fidan added that several other countries have also expressed interest in joining the framework. Signed by Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan on Aug. 7, the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement is a mutual defense pact under which an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. It also provides for closer military cooperation, joint planning and defense coordination, while remaining open to new members with the consent of the founding countries. Fidan described the agreement as the result of nearly three years of continuous discussions with the partner countries, arguing that the region needed a collective defense arrangement to help improve stability and prosperity. He noted that the pact would function in a way that is technically similar to NATO's Article 5, with a ministers' committee, political and military committees, and a permanent secretariat responsible for overseeing implementation of decisions. The secretariat will be based in Saudi Arabia, while joint military exercises and training programs are also planned. Rejecting suggestions that the alliance is aimed at Iran, Fidan stressed that the agreement is defensive in nature. "When we come together with these countries, it naturally becomes a defense organization. Unless it is attacked from inside or outside the region, this alliance will not take action," he said. "I want to underline that Iran is not the target of this alliance. No country that does not attack us is our target." He also said Iranian officials are familiar with the initiative through previous discussions and argued that Türkiye could continue to serve as a mediator if requested by the parties involved. Turning to wider regional issues, Fidan said securing even a temporary agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz remains the most urgent priority, noting that countries across the Middle East, Europe, Asia and the United States are pushing for maritime traffic to resume. He said negotiations have advanced significantly and expressed confidence that a final agreement could be reached once procedural issues between Oman and Iran are resolved. "We are talking to all sides. Wherever we think the process has stalled, we are trying to unblock it," Fidan said, adding that regional countries, the United States, Europe and Asian nations all want the strategic shipping route reopened as soon as possible. On Gaza, Fidan accused Israel of delaying the second phase of the peace plan despite Hamas accepting conditions linked to disarmament. He asserted that Israel's long-term objective remains the displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and maintained that sustained political pressure is the only way to alter its course. "The thing Israel fears most is international isolation," he said, arguing that growing global awareness is making it increasingly difficult for Israel to maintain international backing. Addressing security in the Black Sea, Fidan warned that attacks have expanded from military targets to commercial shipping, affecting Turkish-owned and Turkish-flagged vessels as well as ships carrying Turkish crews. "They first targeted military ports and military ships. Now they are striking all commercial vessels without distinction," he said, adding that Ankara has proposed a moratorium on attacks against commercial shipping to both Russia and Ukraine and is awaiting their response. Fidan warned that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is becoming increasingly destructive as neither side is prepared to make concessions. He said continued attacks on civilian infrastructure risk pushing the war into an even more dangerous phase, warning that Russia could ultimately resort to its "last option" if the conflict continues to escalate. "We have to do whatever it takes to stop this war," Fidan said. "Everything that was once considered impossible has already happened," he added, warning that the conflict has expanded in geography, targets and methods and could escalate further unless diplomacy prevails.

Photo- Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan meets Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, ahead of the expected signing of a defence deal between Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey, in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, August 7, 2026. Murat Cetinmuhurdar/Turkish Presidential Press Office/Handout via REUTERS - Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said the newly signed Turkey–Pakistan–Saudi Arabia defense pact functions like NATO’s Article 5 (an attack on one is treated as an attack on all) but is not directed against Iran. - The agreement will create a ministerial committee and a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia; Fidan indicated Egypt and other countries could eventually join once technical issues are resolved. - Ankara insists the pact does not conflict with Turkey’s NATO obligations and is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against regional threats such as terrorism, arms smuggling and attacks on maritime routes. Turkey’s foreign minister claimed a defense agreement signed by Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia is not targeting Iran, although he said it is technically the same as NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense pact that means an attack on one is an attack on all. Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan on August 8 added that the pact — signed a day earlier by leaders of the three nations — could eventually be joined by Egypt and other countries once a number of technical matters were resolved. “NATO is a giant military alliance where there are 32 countries. We have started here as three countries and we have to take very humble but concrete steps,” he said. Fidan told state-run Anadolu news agency that a committee of ministers similar to that within the NATO alliance would be established, as well as a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia. Fidan did not immediately disclose the issues that needed to be resolved to clear the way for Egypt to joint the accord, led by mostly Sunni Muslim nations. Iran is majority Shi’ite Muslim. On August 7, the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan came together in the Saudi city of Mecca to sign the joint defense pact aimed at strengthening “collective deterrence against any act of aggression.” In the initial announcement, the Turkish government said the “agreement is not in contradiction with the commitments of Turkey’s existing international alliances, including those at the heart of NATO.” Turkey is a member of the Western military alliance. “The agreement is of particular importance in light of the escalating challenges and threats facing the region, foremost among them terrorist attacks, arms smuggling, and threats targeting neighboring countries and international maritime routes,” the minister added. He stated: “The maritime security in the Red Sea is vital to our interests, and we must be part of the Saudi-led international coalition.” The development came amid growing uncertainty in the Middle East, with no immediate end in sight to the confrontation between Tehran and Washington. Separately, Saudi Arabia last year signed a Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement with Pakistan that included a clause along the lines of NATO’s Article 5, which states “any aggression against either country shall be considered an aggression against both. Saudi Arabia, a US ally and long a bitter rival of Iran for regional influence in political, military, and religious matters, has often been a target of Iranian missile and drone launches after the US and Israel struck Iran beginning on February 28. Eurasia Review

Egypt could join the new defense alliance signed by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey once several technical issues are resolved, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said Saturday. Speaking to Turkey’s state-run Anadolu news agency, Fidan said Cairo was a potential addition to the pact, which he described as effectively modeled on NATO’s Article 5 principle that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. Fidan said the alliance would also establish a ministerial committee and a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia. The Turkish foreign minister insisted that the agreement, signed Friday, was not directed against Iran. “Iran is not the target of the defense alliance,” Fidan said. “No one is a target as long as they do not attack countries that are members of the alliance.” He also tied Turkey’s participation to maritime security in the region. “Safety of navigation in the Red Sea concerns our interests, and therefore Turkey must be involved in Saudi Arabia’s international coalition,” he said. Fidan said Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey do not harbor expansionist ambitions and suggested the alliance could eventually grow well beyond its three founding members. “Our president’s vision is not to limit the agreement to these three countries, but to expand it and, if necessary, bring all nations under its umbrella,” he said. Fidan identified cooperation in defense industry and technology as the most important component of the agreement. “Cooperation in the defense industry and defense technology is the most important clause in the defense agreement,” he said. He added that discussions over the defense agreement in Mecca had been underway for two years and eight months with Turkey’s partners and other regional countries with which agreements had been signed. The pact was formally signed Friday in Saudi Arabia during a meeting between Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Named the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement, the pact is the result of months of negotiations among the three countries. Its signing comes as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan seek greater room to act independently amid continued upheaval across the Middle East. Reuters reported that alongside growing concern over Iran and its proxies, the three countries are also increasingly uneasy about Israel’s military policy in the region, while doubts have grown over the ability of their longtime ally, the U.S., to contain further escalation. Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif earlier turned his criticism directly toward Israel, calling on the Muslim world “to unite in confronting the common threat posed by Israel.” “Israel poses a threat to all of us,” Asif said. “Islamic countries must adopt a coordinated approach to confront this threat.” According to Pakistan, the agreement also calls for strengthening all aspects of defense cooperation among the three countries: oil-rich Saudi Arabia, nuclear-armed Pakistan and Turkey, which commands NATO’s second-largest military and has a rapidly expanding defense industry. Turkish media reported that the pact is likely to lead to joint military exercises and training, as well as increased intelligence sharing and cooperation on defense technology. The alliance is already drawing a response from Tehran. CNN reported Saturday that amid exchanges of fire between Saudi Arabia and the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, Iran sent Riyadh a warning that its defense alliance with Turkey and Pakistan would not be enough to guarantee its security. A senior Houthi official quoted by CNN, meanwhile, insisted that the group does not wait for instructions from Tehran before escalating against Saudi Arabia. “The orders against Saudi Arabia do not come from Iran,” the official said. He accused Riyadh of imposing an economic and aerial blockade on Houthi-controlled territory in Yemen, saying it had created “the world’s worst man-made humanitarian crisis.” “That reason alone is enough to compel us to act with great determination,” he said. The official also claimed that Houthi attacks against Saudi targets this week had been preventive, alleging that Riyadh was preparing for a ground invasion of rebel-held territory. First published: 21:17, 08.08.26

Marzouq: The Absence of Cairo from the Mecca Agreement Needs Interpretation Jahed Tuzo considered Turkey's accession to be an important development On Saturday, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said that Egypt could join the Mecca Agreement for mutual defense between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan “at a later stage after completing some technical issues.” Egyptian sources familiar with the matter told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that Cairo does not consider joining the agreement signed in Mecca, yesterday (Friday), a priority at the moment, and expects that Cairo will not join in the near term, given the lack of direct Egyptian interests that would require entering into this defense arrangement. According to Egyptian sources, although Cairo recognizes the shared interest with the Gulf states, the new agreement could put Egypt in direct confrontation, specifically with the Houthi movement in Yemen, as well as with factions in Iraq, which does not align with Egypt’s direct interests. The sources say one of Egypt’s main reservations concerns the situation in Yemen and the Red Sea, since joining a defensive alliance of this kind could make Cairo a party to any military confrontation that might erupt between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis, while Egypt has maintained good communication channels with the group and has not treated it as a direct foe. Egyptian sources: Cairo sees that the Mecca Agreement could place Egypt in direct confrontation, especially with the Houthis Cairo believes, according to sources, that maintaining lines of communication with various regional parties is a matter of interest in itself, especially given Egypt’s sensitive position regarding the Red Sea, Bab al-Mandab, and the Suez Canal. It explained that engaging in a military axis could transform Egypt from a mediator or a party capable of communicating with different parties into a party in an regional conflict. The sources consider that the different motives of the three states from Egypt’s calculations provide an additional reason not to rush Cairo into joining, as they do not see that the interests that drove Riyadh, Ankara, and Islamabad to the agreement apply to Egypt to the same extent. Turkish Foreign Minister: Mecca Agreement mirrors a NATO treaty clause and Egypt may join In turn, former Egyptian Foreign Ministry Assistant Minister Masoum Marzouq told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that Cairo’s absence from the Mecca agreement requires interpretation, especially since Cairo hosted an important consultative meeting on June 21 between the foreign ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, which reflects an existing path of political and security consultation among the four countries. Masoum Marzouq: Cairo’s absence from the Mecca agreement needs interpretation According to Marzouq, this development means a framework for dialogue among the four countries had already begun to take shape, so Cairo’s absence from signing the Mecca Agreement raises questions that require clear answers. He does not believe that this absence will necessarily be permanent, or that it means Cairo’s permanent withdrawal from this path. He views the Mecca defense agreement as an important development in the security and military architecture of the region, but at the same time it does not fully align with the vision he has long advocated for establishing a regional security system capable of achieving strategic balance and deterrence against Israel. Marzouq stressed the importance of Cairo not being absent from this path, noting that the agreement markedly goes beyond conventional military cooperation, considering the political and military weight of the three states, Turkey’s position in NATO, Pakistan’s military and nuclear capabilities, and Saudi Arabia’s role in regional balances. In contrast, Jahed Toz, an academic and former adviser to the Turkish Prime Ministry, said in an interview with Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that the defense agreement among Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan appears open to expanding participation, pointing out that it follows a prior agreement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, later developed with Turkey’s accession, which could indicate the possibility of expanding this framework in the coming phase to include other Muslim countries that see in collective security cooperation a way to enhance their capabilities and strategic interests. Jahed Toz: Egypt is among the leading candidates to join the agreement He added that Turkey’s accession represents an important development not only because of Ankara’s political and military weight but also due to its wide network of relations with a number of Muslim countries and Central Asian states, which could make future expansion of the agreement more open to discussion, especially if the initial experience among the three countries proves capable of achieving its goals. Iranian Readings of the Mecca Agreement: Is it a defensive arrangement or a new axis? The former Turkish Prime Ministry adviser predicted that Egypt would be among the leading countries to join this framework at a later stage, along with others, considering that the agreement could over time transform from a tripartite understanding into a broader security system including a number of Islamic countries. He noted that Egypt’s geographic, political, and military status makes it a country that could receive special attention when considering any future expansion of the agreement, alongside other countries that might see in the new framework an opportunity to strengthen security and defense cooperation. He added that the scope of expansion will remain tied to regional developments and the ability of the current three countries to develop clear mechanisms for joint cooperation, noting that the success of the initial phase will be a decisive factor in determining the chances for new parties to join. In this context, Ammar Fayed, a researcher in political science and international relations, told Al-Araby Al-Jadeed that Cairo’s calculations about the impact of joining on its partnership with the United States and its relations with Israel, two interlinked paths, may be the main reason for not joining the agreement, despite being one of the quad parties that preceded the agreement. Ammar Fayed: Cairo weighs its steps more by their potential impact on its relationship with Israel He explained that the Israeli threat is more sensitive for Egypt than what could be described as the Iranian threat, so Cairo weighs its steps more by their potential impact on its relationship with Israel. He added that Egypt may be concerned that taking such a step at a time when Israeli concerns about Turkish influence are increasing could escalate those concerns, and thus translate into American pressure on Cairo. He pointed to another factor related to the level of trust between Egypt and Turkey, noting that the two countries are moving toward developing defense and military cooperation, but regional differences remain and cannot be ignored when evaluating the possibility of Cairo joining such defense arrangements. Fayed concluded by saying his best estimate is that Egypt has not been excluded from this path, but is currently taking a cautious stance, preferring to monitor the alliance’s developments and its regional impact before deciding to engage more deeply.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan revealed on Saturday that Egypt may join the Mecca Agreement for Collective Defense signed between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, once some technical issues related to the agreement are resolved. In a interview with Anadolu Agency, Fidan explained that the agreement signed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan yesterday, Friday, in Mecca includes the formation of a ministerial committee and a general secretariat to coordinate its work and oversee its mechanisms, noting that its operating method will be similar in some aspects to the collective defense mechanisms in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The Turkish foreign minister stated that a ministerial committee will be formed under the Mecca Agreement for Collective Defense, along with a general secretariat to coordinate the agreement’s activities and monitor its implementation mechanisms. He noted that the agreement is based on identifying a common threat among the member states, stressing that Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey are “not expansionist” states, and that any country that does not attack the signatories to the agreement “will not be our target.” Fidan explained that the Mecca Agreement for Collective Defense is technically similar to Article Five of the NATO Charter, which is based on the principle of collective defense. NATO’s Article Five states that an armed attack against one or more European or North American members is an attack against all, obligating member states to assist in facing the attack. The Turkish foreign minister affirmed that Egypt’s accession to the Mecca Agreement remains possible, clarifying that this could happen once the technical issues related to joining the defense pact are resolved. The Turkish disclosure comes after Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed the Mecca Agreement for Collective Defense in Mecca, within the framework of new defense arrangements between the two countries. In a related context, Fidan announced the importance of Turkey’s participation in the Saudi-led Multinational Maritime Defense Alliance, stressing that the security of navigation in the Red Sea is tied to Turkey’s interests. He said that Turkey should participate in the maritime alliance led by the Kingdom as part of efforts to protect navigation and secure sea routes in the Red Sea.

Turkey announced on Saturday that Egypt could join the joint defense treaty it struck with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, “as soon as some technical issues are resolved.” This came during remarks by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to Anadolu Agency on Saturday, who noted that other regional countries want to join the Mecca Agreement. The Turkish foreign minister said that the agreement with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is technically akin to Article 5 of the NATO Charter, which concerns collective defense. He added that it does not target Iran, and no one is considered a target as long as they do not attack the member states. He also mentioned that there will be a general secretariat and a ministerial committee within the framework of an agreement modeled after NATO. The Turkish foreign minister stated that Egypt may join the joint defense treaty as soon as some technical issues are resolved. He stressed that securing navigation in the Red Sea is important to our interests, and we must be part of the US-led international coalition. In a related matter, the Turkish foreign minister announced that Turkey has urged Russia and Ukraine to suspend attacks targeting commercial ships in the Black Sea. Fidan said that in light of the escalating attacks, “Turkey called for the establishment of an mechanism that would allow announcing a suspension” of the attacks. He added that the conflict has widened to affect the entire Black Sea. Initially, they were targeting ports and warships; now they are attacking all commercial ships without distinction, noting that “ships owned by or flying the Turkish flag are also targeted.” Turkey maintains close relations with both Moscow and Kyiv. Ankara condemned on Tuesday a drone attack on Monday in the Black Sea, which targeted two ships belonging to Turkish companies and caused injuries among their crews. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed a joint defense treaty on Friday stating that any armed attack targeting one of the three states will be considered an attack on all of them, laying the groundwork for a new trilateral defensive framework based on deterrence and mutual support amid rapid security shifts and rising tensions in the region. The official statement issued after the “Mecca Summit for Collective Defense,” which brought together Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif at the Al Safa Palace in Mecca, stated that the leaders signed the “Mecca Defense Treaty,” reflecting the three countries’ shared commitment to continue strengthening their collective security and to promote peace and security in the region and beyond. The treaty, according to the statement, aims to enhance collective deterrence in response to any act of aggression, and any armed attack against any of the three states will be considered an attack on all of them. It also calls for strengthening all aspects of defense cooperation among the three countries, although the published statement did not include additional details about the military mechanisms for implementing the agreement or the operational commitments that would apply if one country were attacked.

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed, on Friday in Mecca, a joint defense agreement that considers any attack against any of the three states as an attack against all three. The agreement comes amid great regional tension, with the war between the United States and the Israeli occupation on one side, and Iran, the Houthi movement, and Iraqi factions on the other, where Saudi Arabia and Gulf states have been targeted since last February. Nevertheless, the joint statement did not include specific details about the military commitments that each country would incur in the event one of the states is attacked, or the nature of the response each would provide. The agreement brings to the forefront the experience of several alliances and mutual defense pacts around the world, which have varied greatly in their ability to translate written commitments into practical actions when one of their members is attacked. The Saudi-Pakistan-Turkish defense partnership does not begin with the Mecca Accord, as Riyadh and Islamabad had separately signed a joint defense agreement in September 2025 that strengthened a security and military partnership spanning decades. Developments in the following year showed that the cooperation extended beyond the political sphere, as Reuters revealed in May that Pakistan deployed about 8,000 troops in Saudi Arabia, in addition to fighter jets, drones, and a air defense system, amid regional conflict. In this report, Arab21 reviews the most notable historical alliances, but first, it is important to note a crucial point related to the issue of “collective defense.” What does this mean legally? The concept of collective defense rests on a simple idea: an attack on a member state is treated as an attack on the rest of the members, resulting in an obligation to assist the attacked state. But this principle does not necessarily mean that every member state will automatically enter war with the same military force. NATO provides a clear example: Article 5 of the Washington Treaty states that an armed attack on a member is an attack on all members, but it leaves each country free to determine the “measure it deems necessary,” including the use of armed force. NATO emphasizes that Article 5 has been invoked only once in the alliance’s history, following the September 11 attacks in 2001. This was followed by steps to support the United States, before the alliance later took command of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan (ISAF) in 2003. Egypt and Syria In the Arab region, military relations between Egypt and Syria presented a different model. The two countries signed a mutual defense pact in 1966, before Arab cooperation arrangements expanded in the period leading up to the June 1967 war against Israeli occupation. In the October 1973 war, the Egyptian and Syrian armies conducted a synchronized assault on the Sinai and Golan fronts. Kuwait–Abu Ali In January 1991, roughly half a year after the Kuwaiti invasion, Iraqi forces entered the Saudi city of Khafji during the Gulf War. Forces from Arab states participated in the liberation operations alongside Saudi forces and the Coalition, with notable participation from Qatari forces. The entry of non-Saudi forces into that battle occurred within the framework of a broad international military coalition formed to confront Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and secure the Gulf states. Bahrain 2011.. “Arab Shield” In March 2011, forces from “Arab Shield” entered Bahrain at the request of the Bahraini government amid the turmoil the kingdom experienced. This case also differs from the NATO Article 5 model, as the intervention was not an automatic application of a clause that says an attack on a member is an attack on all, but came within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council arrangements and the official request of the Bahraini government. Related news Kazakhstan 2022 In January 2022, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) sent forces to Kazakhstan at the request of its President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, following internal unrest in the country. The operation was short and time-limited, ending with the withdrawal of troops after the situation stabilized. The CSTO, born in the era of the Soviet Union, was later developed by Russia as a rival alliance to NATO, and includes Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Armenia. The Arab Joint Defense Treaty In contrast, the “Treaty of Joint Defense and Economic Cooperation among the Arab states of the [Arab] League” of 1950 presents a more complex model. The treaty provided a framework for collective defense and military cooperation among Arab states, but turning this framework into a unified military institution faced political and institutional obstacles. In January 1964, a unified Arab command was established, but it never evolved into a military command with real authority over Arab forces, and it was dissolved in 1970. The Baghdad Pact.. Divergent Alliance Goals One of the other prominent historical examples is the Baghdad Pact, established in 1955 and later transformed into the CENTO (Central Treaty Organization). Pakistan was a member of it, as well as a member of SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) founded in 1954. US and UK documents show that Washington and London saw these arrangements as part of a strategy to contain communism, while Pakistan also viewed them as a means to bolster its defensive capabilities vis-à-vis India. In the 1960s, Pakistan sought to treat its membership in these pacts as a guarantee that could help it face India, while Washington asserted that the pacts were not originally created to fight an India–Pakistan war. The Tripartite Alliance European history also provides an early example that defense agreements do not erase a party’s national interests. The tripartite alliance among Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy from 1882 did not prevent Italy from declaring neutrality at the outbreak of World War I in 1914. Italy later entered the war on the side of the Allies in 1915. This situation was also linked to the nature of the obligations stipulated in the agreement, and Italy’s belief that conditions for entering the war alongside its two former allies had not been met.