Makkah Pact: Trilateral Defence Agreement Signals Shift in Gulf Security Architecture
Leaders in Mecca sign mutual defence accord stipulating collective response to attacks, prompting debate over burden-sharing and regional realignment
Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan have formalised a landmark mutual defence agreement in Mecca, establishing a collective security framework wherein an armed attack on any signatory is regarded as an attack on all three. The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement was signed at al-Safa Palace by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkiye President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. The pact introduces a collective defence mechanism reminiscent of NATO’s Article 5, aiming to strengthen deterrence among the three nations.
The United States administration, led by President Donald Trump, has offered no official response to the deal as of Saturday. Analysts suggest the muted reaction reflects the complex implications for US strategy, with some viewing the pact as a strategic shift away from American influence and others seeing it as an alignment with Washington’s goals for greater allied burden-sharing. The agreement builds on a previous mutual defence arrangement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed in September 2025, following increased regional instability.
Security experts describe the accord as a strategic signal designed to create uncertainty for adversaries rather than an operational alliance with fixed military obligations. Muhammad Faisal, a security and foreign policy analyst, noted the agreement’s value lies in strengthening collective deterrence. Kamran Bokhari, a senior resident fellow at the Middle East Policy Council, characterised it as a strategic signal, adding that any integration of forces remains untested. Officials in Riyadh, Ankara and Islamabad have stressed that the agreement supplements existing alliances rather than supplanting them.
The pact is expected to significantly hinder Arab-Israeli normalisation under the Abraham Accords, particularly regarding Saudi-Israeli relations. Sina Toosi, a senior fellow at the Centre for International Policy, described the development as a setback for US and Israeli efforts to reshape the regional balance of power. Toosi noted that the emergence of a defence initiative among three major Muslim powers seeking greater strategic autonomy contrasts with the goal of accelerating regional integration through initiatives like the Abraham Accords.
Despite assurances that the deal does not represent a sectarian bloc or a military axis, observers connect the alliance to a broader weakening of Washington’s strategic sway. Harlan Ullman, chairman of the Killowen Group, warned that the basis for alliances in the Middle East has been shaken. However, Burcu Ozcelik of the Royal United Services Institute argued the deal fits the US preference for regional burden-sharing, with powers assuming more responsibility for deterrence while remaining embedded in a US-centred security architecture.
