The past is the past, and that’s exactly why I responded to Watandar the way I did. He keeps implying that “it failed before so it will fail again,” but that logic doesn’t hold up. It failed in the past because Muslim countries produced nothing. Everyone was a customer, nobody was a producer. You can’t build a serious alliance when every member is dependent on foreign weapons and foreign permission. Things are different now ...but honestly, this kind of alliance still feels about a decade too early.
And when it comes to Pakistan and Türkiye, we don’t need a piece of paper to be close. When India attacked, we helped. We didn’t need a treaty, a pact, or some fancy acronym. We helped so much that India launched a “boycott Türkiye tourism” campaign out of frustration. That’s what real partnership looks like. Now imagine what that looks like in five years when our weapons programs fully mature. Like I said: we don’t need any damn treaty to help Pakistan.
Saudi Arabia is a different story. How are we supposed to trust them? They’ve openly seen us as rivals for a century. We had no cooperation because they didn’t need us... they had the US and the West as their protectors. Türkiye wasn’t even in their strategic thinking. Suddenly, after Iran humiliated them, we’re in an alliance together? That’s not a foundation built on trust; that’s a reaction to vulnerability.
And this idea that Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan, Syria, and whoever else might join… that’s how you accidentally turn this into a NATO-style mess. NATO is a perfect example of what happens when you add states that bring no real weight. If Russia attacked some of those smaller members, the big powers wouldn’t actually do anything. So what happens here? If Iran attacks Kuwait, are we supposed to come to their aid? How do you rally your population behind defending a country we share nothing with? That’s the core problem with oversized alliances ..they look strong on paper but collapse when real obligations appear.
I hope for the best, but I expect nothing. Alliances only work when they’re built on genuine shared interests, not panic, not symbolism, and not sudden shifts after decades of distance.
