Makkah Joint Defense Agreement: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, news & updates

[mythbuster]

Iran has to be reasonable and understanding, they are not hegemon

It also needs to look into the mirror at it's own actions

Saudi Arabia for what it is good and bad is still the home of Mecca medina

So a Pakistani Saudi bond can in no way be considered as a green light to make nice with India

Yet we have seen this, as if one allowsthe other


And did Pakistan not protect and work towards peaceful and Iranian outcomes?


So what does Iran want, why does it want anything is a better question?

does Iran need a nation or people to prove itself to mirror their revolutionary martyrdom approach to statehood?

The Turks picked their way, the Arabs and Pakistan grappled through, can you have a perpetual revolutionary state?


The Iranians chose their concept of heroic martyrdom, potentially chose it on behalf of hisb.... They discarded deterrence, this is what Pak Turkey and Saudi are doing, kill the ideas of war at the earliest.

Any Muslim country that doesn't clean up after Iran is an American / zio lackey.... right now Iran is squealing like a mouse caught in a trap .

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Then this is not worth the paper its written on.

Pakistan does NOT NEED extra troops or military personnel from other nations. We need weaponry, financial backing and resources. Which the defence pact will give us. Pakistan has MORE than enough soldiers and fighting people to subdue and defeat sh*t-land india.

 

[Pakistan First]

The western ideal of a rules based order has been destroyed by the Americans. Might is right and now every country looks out for its self interest. In the case of India many countries are now somewhat dependent on India's economy and trade. Just look at the numbers:

KSA India trade: ~40 Billion
KSA Pakistan trade: ~5 Billion

Turkiye India trade: ~8 Billion
Turkiye Pakistan trade: ~1 Billion

Nobody wants war to wreck things up and cause uncertainty - but when it hits the fan both KSA and Turkiye will have to consider their interests. The disparity is simply too big to ignore...

What's india and China trade ? Comparison to Pakistan and China Trade ?

Even though india china trade is enormous Yet Pakistan and China are Strategically aligned on all fronts. On other hand despite the trade volume India itself feels threatened by Chinese.

So strategic alliance is something else. Trade is something else.

 

[RocketLaw]

@Watandar

I totally respect you, our own Pakistani brother. Please I just need you to look at the positive side and cool down.

You don't always have to be so negative about everything including politics, sports, army, people, technology, etc.

You should respect our country's decision and focus on the POSITIVE PATH, we will improve it.

It's also time for you to change your profile picture silly, just saying it might be time for a fresh one and new mindset.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Even if we can just foward deploy a quarter of those assets, it would be game over Israel, game fu*cking over......

It would have technical challenges for now IMO. Yes there are some assets(e.g. F16s, artillery) that would have no problem working seamlessly together with the military assets of the other two members...
...and there has been joint trainings/exercises before...but if all 3 want to be an effective fighting force. They would hopefully go the way of NATO and make sure all they acquire from now on would work together..while increasing/constantly training with each other. It would take a long time and serious commitment.

God forbid...we wouldn't want to see something like the 6 day war(an exaggerated example...used here to illustrate a point). There were multiple Arab countries(allied) on one side and Israel on the other...but due to a lack of coordination, intelligence sharing, and a host of other problems..it ended in a disaster for the Arab side.

 

[RocketLaw]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

From the heart of the capital of the Arabs and Arabism.. Riyadh
It adorns itself with the flags of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Makkah Summit, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia Defence Agreement | Faisal Warraich​

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Hazard]

So if India attacks Pakistan again, will Turkey and Saudi respond?

They don't need to. Pak is quite capable of handling India on its own. This pact greatly benefits Saudi, that's all.

On a side note, I wonder if Turkey is now taking the Israeli threat seriously, given it has become signatory to this pact? The news isn't that surprising but given Turkey is a NATO member...I wonder if they're now realising that nato won't come to their aid if Israel decides to take a shot?

 

[Feroze]

Let me guess this is anti-Shia alliance.

Anyways Saudi Arabia is wise to make this alliance.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Pakistan does NOT NEED extra troops or military personnel from other nations. We need weaponry, financial backing and resources. Which the defence pact will give us. Pakistan has MORE than enough soldiers and fighting people to subdue and defeat sh*t-land india.

Rather Pakistan can "proliferate" the KSA/gulf with troops, gadgets etc. to ensure their safety. The Bharatis must be dreaded at this fact....

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Let me guess this is anti-Shia alliance.

Anyways Saudi Arabia is wise to make this alliance.

NOTHING to do with Shia-Sunni. This is a "We are not going to let you murder our babies and children alliance".

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

Taking strategic risks is what Pakistan has to do, because the cost is greater not taking any


Why should the Iranians expect other countries to remain perpetually neutral and supportive for their revolutionary ambitions, at their own cost, sounds sociopathic

This move simply rearranges the chess board and puts aspiring hegemons into "check", signalling and diplomacy

Next move is theirs.

Saying Pakistan ‘must take strategic risks’ ignores the difference between calculated risk and self‑destructive risk. Not every risk is worth taking, and history shows Pakistan pays the highest price when it walks blindly into someone else’s conflict.

Iran may have its own ambitions but expecting Pakistan to permanently align against a neighbor at the cost of its own stability is not strategy, it’s recklessness. Calling neutrality ‘sociopathic’ is a strange argument, neutrality is exactly what prevents Pakistan from becoming cannon fodder in other people’s rivalries.

This pact doesn’t simply ‘rearrange the chessboard.’ Chess assumes rational players and controlled moves. The Middle East today is not a chessboard, it’s a minefield. Once a war starts, escalation is not in anyone’s control. Pakistan cannot assume it will stay limited, clean, or diplomatic.

And let’s be honest, once Iran is destroyed, the next targets won’t magically disappear. Power vacuums don’t create peace; they create new wars. After Iraq, Syria, Gaza, and Yemen, who is next? Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan become the next front lines. Weakening one Muslim country has never strengthened the others.

If Pakistan is pushed into a war with Iran to ‘support’ Saudi Arabia, the blowback at home will be catastrophic. Sectarian violence, internal insurgency, political collapse, these are not hypotheticals. The establishment cannot repeat 1971. They cannot kill their own people to enforce an unpopular foreign war. Pakistan barely survived the last internal fracture; it will not survive another.

With Pakistan's begging bowl syndrome, we don't have a foreign policy, deal is done somewhere else, we are only invited to sign the deal. Real strategy is not about proving loyalty to someone else’s agenda. Real strategy is protecting national cohesion, economic survival, and regional balance. Pakistan’s next move should be de‑escalation, not escalation.

Saddam Hussein wasn’t removed because he was irrational. He was removed because he didn’t fit into the 50‑year strategic architecture planned by the U.S. and its allies. He thought in 5‑year cycles; they thought in 50‑year cycles.

Same with Gaddafi. Same with Assad (attempted). Same with anyone who disrupts long‑term regional engineering.

We plan for tomorrow. They plan for the next half‑century. That’s why leaders who don’t align with their long‑term map get eliminated.

This is exactly why Pakistan must be careful, If Iran is destroyed, the next “strategic inconvenience” will be Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan because once the region is fragmented, the next step is controlling the remaining power centers.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

They don't need to. Pak is quite capable of handling India on its own. This pact greatly benefits Saudi, that's all.

On a side note, I wonder if Turkey is now taking the Israeli threat seriously, given it has become signatory to this pact? The news isn't that surprising but given Turkey is a NATO member...I wonder if they're now realising that nato won't come to their aid if Israel decides to take a shot?

White european christians will NEVER come to the aid of Turkish Muslims. Being a nato member means NOTHING anymore.

 

[Qaraca]

Then this is not worth the paper its written on.

Obviously it won’t include relatively limited fighting like the one you had in May 2025, but if there is a full-fledged war or a real threat to sovereignity and territorial integrity, like an invasion.

Makes total sense.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Inside Story of the Pakistan–Türkiye–Saudi Defense Agreement | Khalid Chishti​

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies