NATO-style pact signals doubts over US commitments

The Mecca Joint Defense Agreement, signed recently by Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan, reflects the security pressures facing the three countries amid the deteriorating situation in the Middle East and their growing doubts about the reliability of US security commitments, while its practical impact and effectiveness remain uncertain, experts said.

The agreement was signed by Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif during a joint defense summit held in the Saudi city of Mecca on Aug 7.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Aug 8 in an interview with Turkiye's Anadolu Agency that several countries have shown interest in joining the deal, voicing confidence that Egypt, which he called a "natural partner", will "be among us in the next stage". He said the agreement does not target Iran, clarifying that the deal is defensive in nature and aimed at protecting signatories from external "attacks".

The pact stipulates that an armed attack on any one of the three countries would be regarded as an attack on all. However, few details have been made public so far regarding the specific commitments of each country, and it remains unclear to what extent the pact would require them to take concrete military action in one another's defense.

According to a joint statement issued after the summit, the agreement reflects the three countries' commitment to strengthening their collective security and safeguarding regional peace and stability.

It seeks to bolster collective deterrence against any act of aggression and deepen defense cooperation across all sectors, the statement read.

Ding Long, a professor at Shanghai International Studies University's Middle East Studies Institute, said the agreement reflects growing doubts among Gulf states about the reliability of US security commitments, as well as their efforts to seek "additional security protections" amid an increasingly uncertain regional security environment.

As the conflicts involving the US, Israel and Iran spill over into the wider region and clashes between Yemen's Houthi militants and Saudi Arabia escalate, doubts are growing over Washington's security commitments to its Gulf allies, he said.

The fact that US military bases themselves have come under attack has further exposed the limitations of Washington's ability to provide security in the region, he said.

"The new trilateral defense agreement reflects growing dissatisfaction among Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia, with the limitations of the US security umbrella, as well as increasing doubts over the reliability of US security commitments," Ding said.

He said the agreement signals a gradual shift away from the US-led security framework in the Middle East, as countries across the region increasingly seek greater security autonomy and diversify their security partnerships.

Ding also said the agreement does not signal a move toward "de-Americanization", but rather reflects efforts to reduce reliance on the US as the sole security provider.

"All three countries maintain long-standing security ties with the US, but have emphasized that the agreement will neither terminate nor replace their existing bilateral and multilateral security commitments," he said.

Regional influence

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay, CEO of the Asian Institute of Eco-Civilization Research and Development in Pakistan, said the agreement will undoubtedly influence regional dynamics, alliances and strategic alignments.

"Current trends suggest that the US and the West could face setbacks as a result of policies that have fueled perceptions of interference, prolonged conflicts, hegemonic ambitions and the extraction of benefits at the expense of regional countries," he said.

"Most importantly, there is a growing trust deficit, compounded by what many regional countries view as Washington's excessive and unjustifiable support for Israel," Ramay said.

The agreement may face numerous practical challenges in implementation, and its future remains uncertain, experts said.

"Government officials will meet to discuss future policies and actions, while a permanent secretariat will be established to oversee the implementation of the agreement. So, we need to wait for the outcome of the committee's meeting to see how the agreement will actually be implemented," Ramay said.

At present, the three countries face primary security concerns in different geographic theaters. If intense hostilities were to erupt, it would be difficult to mount a coordinated military response, Ding said.

Meanwhile, according to a joint statement issued by the three countries, the pact is open to other members. However, further expansion could make it more difficult to coordinate joint defense efforts amid potentially divergent security interests and priorities, he added.

"At this stage, therefore, the alliance remains more political than security-oriented and, as some analysts put it, is 'more form than substance'. While it could serve as a prototype for an 'Islamic NATO', it still has a long way to go before becoming a formal and operational security alliance," Ding said.

Xinhua News Agency contributed to this story.

liujianqiao@chinadaily.com.cn