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

[Oscar]

I still didn't get it... what has, what you described, got to do with geopolitical issues? Does that weigh on US Pakistan relations, now or in the past? The kind of alliances that Pakistan was a part off or was dumped...
What you're describing instead is "perverse incentive" or "Cobra effect", on how people reconcile with regulations and their perception of benefits they can accrue from otherwise an ordinance set in good faith...
Some would blame the incentive structure others who attempted to benefit from it regardless of the end goal set forth by the administrator.

I have been to both Saudi Arabia and Turkiye multiple times... and have had interactions with locals where some shystie locals attempted to swindle a naive tourist. Not uncommon for ones with a check engine light in a town or place you're unfamiliar with and get burned by a mechanic at a shop or roadside in US. These wouldn't implicate the whole town much less a state or reflection of a whole people.

That is your assumption - that I am solely addressing geopolitical issues .

Here is what I quoted
"It's quite funny that at the same time the Turkish-Pakistani mutual defense understanding, which isn't even written on a piece of paper, goes unchallenged and nobody questions it substance or relevance. Why? The relationship is so profound, interconnected, and enduring that it is well understood both regionally and globally that they will stand by each other in all circumstances. This kind of relationship is worth a 1000 official mutual defense agreements."

in which this part also exists:

"People in Turkey aren't questioning Pakistan's loyalty BTW. Rather, everybody is talking about how trustworthy Saudi Arabia is in case of an emergency..."


I have addressed the "unchallenged and unquestioned" from the perspective of the common individuals understanding of Turkish-Pakistani defense and geopolitical relations which tie to the way the people's percieve each other.
Even there I mentioned the mechanisms of WHY that "better" impression exists which is NOT A FUNCTION OF COLLECTIVE TURKS OR PAKISTANIS.

And why - the perception at least in Pakistan of Saudis and even vice versa in many ways is a function of how that relationship between the peoples formed over the years.

Happy to copy about 20 posts from when the Saudi-Pakistan pact was signed when so called "mohib-e-watan" members were questioning it actual weight in oil - let alone any F-15SAs. Even though, just as here - NO ONE ACTUALLY READ THE TEXT OF THE AGREEMENT.

Neither of it reflects on whether Pakistanis are all druggies, Saudis are all bigoted racists or that Turks are the nicest people to Pakistanis west of Islamabad highway.

It only addresses why these lopsided perception formed which have nothing to do with the overall reality of how Saudis treat every Pakistani or how every Pakistani revers Saudi Arabia or not.

Nor does it have commentary on whether actual trust, goodwill and resilience in relationship exists at a state to state level between the parties signatory.

 

[Oldenwisdom...قول بزرگ]

That is your assumption - that I am solely addressing geopolitical issues .

Here is what I quoted
"It's quite funny that at the same time the Turkish-Pakistani mutual defense understanding, which isn't even written on a piece of paper, goes unchallenged and nobody questions it substance or relevance. Why? The relationship is so profound, interconnected, and enduring that it is well understood both regionally and globally that they will stand by each other in all circumstances. This kind of relationship is worth a 1000 official mutual defense agreements."

in which this part also exists:

"People in Turkey aren't questioning Pakistan's loyalty BTW. Rather, everybody is talking about how trustworthy Saudi Arabia is in case of an emergency..."


I have addressed the "unchallenged and unquestioned" from the perspective of the common individuals understanding of Turkish-Pakistani defense and geopolitical relations which tie to the way the people's percieve each other.
Even there I mentioned the mechanisms of WHY that "better" impression exists which is NOT A FUNCTION OF COLLECTIVE TURKS OR PAKISTANIS.

And why - the perception at least in Pakistan of Saudis and even vice versa in many ways is a function of how that relationship between the peoples formed over the years.

Happy to copy about 20 posts from when the Saudi-Pakistan pact was signed when so called "mohib-e-watan" members were questioning it actual weight in oil - let alone any F-15SAs. Even though, just as here - NO ONE ACTUALLY READ THE TEXT OF THE AGREEMENT.

Neither of it reflects on whether Pakistanis are all druggies, Saudis are all bigoted racists or that Turks are the nicest people to Pakistanis west of Islamabad highway.

It only addresses why these lopsided perception formed which have nothing to do with the overall reality of how Saudis treat every Pakistani or how every Pakistani revers Saudi Arabia or not.

Nor does it have commentary on whether actual trust, goodwill and resilience in relationship exists at a state to state level between the parties signatory.

I don't think the leadership in any country is set in idealism of any kind. In fact, far from it... Saudis fear that as a form of decent to their authority. Turkiye, the polar opposite, ran away from it all... relinquished it's role and took a leap instead with what Europe was running with... as if they're on to something and the whole thing fell apart to a not.
Pakistan with it's joy ride on a roller-coaster, hitting lows of low and highs of high... some simultaneous others gradual... one extreme to the next. We have globally reached a point where geopolitics is dictating terms after the joy rides are over... euphoria is gone and the reality has set in... last few years were a reality check... Bigger and deeper than one let on... the skeptical and the believer... got to know their place and more importantly learned, why!
The details will be worked overtime but the test may yet come sooner... and as some Turkish members already said... they could have gone without an agreement with Pakistan... after all they have been consistent with their position about Pakistan and it's political realities... stance in Kashmir and Pakistan has kept it's stances regardless of where it was on the roller-coaster. Be it Cyprus, Karabakh, Armenia, Chechnya and now with Iran. No one will come and blame the position that Pakistan took... how Balafraj of Morocco got his Pakistani passport or Ahmed Ben Bella of Algeria his...
The future is about to become more volatile as unsettled scores are about to be settled and the screen is sifting through the chaff. We'll have to overlook the minutiae to keep eyes on the ball. Skip that and who knows where everything will land... who knows another hundred years of bondage.

 

[Yasser76]

Nothing to confirm nor deny - the issue isn't compatibility with the protocol but with keys generated
link-17 is mix of Link-16 and Link-22. But message compatibility does not translate to whether the PAF has (whether by their own or OEM agreement) decided to keep the keys for the two pieces of the net apart.

There are benefits to that as well - Link-16 is shared - Link-17 is proprietary. Pakistan does not invent Link-16 crypto on its own and runs an approved key mgmt which then they fill through using AN/PYQ-10C systems.

Now this is assumption and I cannot say for certain - but there are mechanisms that could be part of wider PAF(or OEM) security concerns on isolating the two subnets within the wider PAF net(or rather Link-16 is the subnet within Link-17 or its current successor).

Because of how sensitive Link-16 is as it is still primary used net even with additional links within NATO you likely signed agreements to:
1. Allow the U.S. to observe and verify compliance with FMS. This means recurring on-site inventories, physical security reviews, and key-control checks. We already know that this happens for US hardware(and on a side note why no one in the US who isnt looking for a quick buck will every echo Indian claims on F-16s.. because the US audits them regularly )

2. Key generation and key usage within terminals as to be kept modernized(part of the recent upgrade package) to be relevant. Which means without support - loaded keys and fielded jets can keep working for a while until it starts hitting reliability and sustainment issues. So, you can still fly against enemies - just not effectively for too long.

3. If you digested Link-16 directly within Link-17 terminals - and if the key material is U.S.-releasable Link-16 COMSEC that Washington holds (lets say even if used during a coalition exercise) then basically that potentially opens your national network wide open. VERY UNLIKELY BUT I AM GIVING THIS HERE AS A REASON

4. Lets say if nodes (which theoretically can) run BOTH link-16 and 17, and basically copy paste information from one message to another for the lack of a better analogy you have another leak.

By using a gateway - you also add a separation layer - keep everything secure even if it adds a small(negligible in overall context) latency.

Considering the paranoia the military has about US access to the net - making it a primary "adversary" in red vs blue infosec scenarios - to my read what the competent could do - they have done - now it is up to adversaries of Pakistan to exploit what the incompetent left open or the dishonest can open.

Really informative. Thanks

 

[GoatsMilk]

Turkiye, the polar opposite, ran away from it all... relinquished it's role and took a leap instead with what Europe was running with... as if they're on to something and the whole thing fell apart to a not.

I think the problem with the common Muslim is he doesn't understand how bad things had gotten for the Ottomans. The last 100 years were a complete and total disaster. Yeah at the Ottoman peak they were an absolute war machine, but that last 100 years was hell on earth.

We had a thing where Christians could only be tried by their own courts. So if a christian armenian/greek murdered a Muslim, he could only be tried in a christian court. Naturally the Christian court would always protect the Christian against his Muslim victim. So basically Christian subjects of the Ottoman state felt free to terrorise the Muslim subjects. All happening within the "Caliphate" of the Muslims.

The debts were so bad that the British Rothschilds controlled the Turkish central bank and had bailiffs who would go around collecting debts from citizens and regularly beating ones who couldn't pay and on occasion they would murder citizens and the state had no control to do anything. The sultan couldnt turn on the bank that controlled his economy.

The Ottomans had next to no industry, no science, no technology. The reforms that that Ataturk enacted with the creation of the Turkish state were actually a continuation of the tanzimat reforms attempted by the Sultan previously and truth be told had these things come 50 years earlier i suspect the empire still exists today. So the caliph himself understood that the empire needed to westernise.

"The Tanzimat reforms (1839–1876) were a period of dramatic modernization and reorganization in the Ottoman Empire. Promulgated under Sultans Abdülmecid I and Abdülaziz, these sweeping changes sought to halt the empire's decline by centralizing rule, adopting European legal models"

Then you get world war 1, which reduces the Ottoman state to this. What this map doesnt show you is the conditions imposed on the Turks. For example that small Ottoman state wouldnt be allowed no army, no navy, it would be forced to produce munitions for the British at the Turkish taxpayers cost etc etc.

Now keep in mind that the Turks had a tiny population comparative to her imperial enemies of just under 10 million people. Ataturk comes along and wins the independence war for the Turks and enacts reforms creating the Turkish state. His reforms at various points were rolled back and shut down by western state assets like menderes. Since the enemy never stops working to undermine her enemies. So it wasn't a smooth 100 years of Ataturks principles.

Anyway while nearly the entire Muslim world has come under white man occupation and tyranny, the Muslims in Turkiye are given an independent state. The white man failed to do to Turkiye what they had done to Al-Andulus.

A hundred years after the foundation of the Turkish state, we are starting to produce things like this.

So in reality when you consider where we before Ataturk and where we are today, things have been a massive success relatively speaking.

The 4 major powers involved with occupying Turkiye at the end of world war 1 was Britain, France, Russia and Italy. The USA navy was involved with blocking Turkish ports and supporting the Greek invasion of Anatolia logistically.

Today neither the British, the French, the Italians, the Greeks or the Russians could launch a successful invasion of Turkiye. Only the USA remains a credible threat. Incredible when you think were Turks were just a hundred years ago and where the these european powers were.

So if you consider where we were to where we are today, its been an incredible success Ataturks Turkiye. rolling with what the west had in terms of industrialisation and education was the way to go, kind of still is the way to go.

Now in terms of the Turks role as historically being the leaders of the Muslim world, that role has always rested on power. If Turks obtain power again they will return to it and Muslims will gravitate towards that power. In that sense it would be history repeating itself.

 

[hyperman]

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

 

[Meengla]

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

Makes sense. This new alliance is not going to be another worthless OIC like organization. The Middle East has become much more dangerous and is certainly in a flux where different countries are jockeying for their roles to protect or advance their geopolitics as there is certainly at least some American retreat from the region.

The countries part of this new alliance know the risks and the rewards--and I dare say, both the risks and the rewards are big, especially for Turkey and Pakistan; Saudi Arabia is essentially trying to use its money to protect itself from an Israel attack on Qatar last year. What choice would the Saudi have given how the Americans had hoodwinked the attack on Qatar and given how during the ongoing war on Iran, the Americans prioritized the protection of Israel over even Saudi Arabia?
Only Pakistan and Turkey have the teeth in the Islamic world to deter Israel against Saudi Arabia. The Saudis know that, and hence this new alliance. Hopefully, Israelis too know that!

 

[Ali_Baba]

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

I would love to see PAF F16s(and/or JF17C's) there alongside the Turks at the same base, but I think PAF would need a "large" injection of new jets in the J10CE/J-35AE fleet before PAF can think of letting the F16s deploy overseas like that.

If there was ever a reason for Saudi to fund the sale of Iraqi F16s to the PAF, then this use case would be it.

 

[maxpane]

I would love to see PAF F16s(and/or JF17C's) there alongside the Turks at the same base, but I think PAF would need a "large" injection of new jets in the J10CE/J-35AE fleet before PAF can think of letting the F16s deploy overseas like that.

If there was ever a reason for Saudi to fund the sale of Iraqi F16s to the PAF, then this use case would be it.

paf f 16s are there in ksa along with jf 17s. @AeronautIR sir said that in one of his videos

 

[hyperman]

If there was ever a reason for Saudi to fund the sale of Iraqi F16s to the PAF, then this use case would be it.

This is the first im hearing of this. Got any more details?

 

[MMM-E]

Turkiye has officially deployed a total of 20+ F-16s abroad under permanent or long-term military cooperation agreements


Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus : 6
Qatar : 6
Somalia : 3

Estonia : 5 ( NATO's Baltic Air Defense mission )

and now Saudi Arabia

----------------------------------------------------------------------

While the permanent, full scale basing of a Turkish F-16 squadron in Saudi Arabia is being evaluated for Tabuk's King Faisal Air Base which would formalize an even higher total of permanent deployments

Hahaha, my little Israel wanted to play a big match against the Turks!

lets deploy TAYFUN hypersonic Ballistic Missiles too

 

[Ali_Baba]

This is the first im hearing of this. Got any more details?

PAF had previously toyed with the idea of getting the F16s from Iraq(who have well known maintenance issues in keeping them flying) in return for providing JF17C's and also providing enhanced local maintenance training for the Iraqi airforce.

The airframes are of very low flying hours and can be upgraded to the latest standard for the PAF, etc

Iraq’s Perennial Third World Air Power Problem

Iraq may still face the same problem that plagued it decades ago: namely, its inability to adequately maintain and field such sophisticated equipment independently.

www.forbes.com

This Week in Iraq: Failing F-16s highlight corruption; Baghdad-Erbil budget talks

National News Iraq's vaunted fleet of F-16 fighter jets can no longer fly combat missions. In an exclusive investigation, Iraq Oil Report reveals a

www.iraqoilreport.com

The issues of the F16s itself is well documented.

Issue has been approvals(from the USA), lack of funding within the PAF and changes in Iraq on the decision making for their airforce.

 

[hyperman]

PAF had previously toyed with the idea of getting the F16s from Iraq(who have well known maintenance issues in keeping them flying) in return for providing JF17C's and also providing enhanced local maintenance training for the Iraqi airforce.

The airframes are of very low flying hours and can be upgraded to the latest standard for the PAF, etc

Iraq’s Perennial Third World Air Power Problem

Iraq may still face the same problem that plagued it decades ago: namely, its inability to adequately maintain and field such sophisticated equipment independently.

www.forbes.com

This Week in Iraq: Failing F-16s highlight corruption; Baghdad-Erbil budget talks

National News Iraq's vaunted fleet of F-16 fighter jets can no longer fly combat missions. In an exclusive investigation, Iraq Oil Report reveals a

www.iraqoilreport.com

The issues of the F16s itself is well documented.

Issue has been approvals(from the USA), lack of funding within the PAF and changes in Iraq on the decision making for their airforce.

It doesn't make sense for Pakistan, why would they not just acquire more J-10Cs, around the same price as F-16s, similar performance(arguably better), less strings attached and restrictions. I guess, maybe depending on how cheap they sell it, maybe you can justify it, but I doubt they sell barely used F-16s cheap, especially when they are so in demand right now, in Ukraine and elsewhere. They have better buyers who desperately want F-16s like Ukraine.

Plus you kinda don't want these F-16s, they are cucked. The avionics package was deliberately stunted to just short range capabilities and anti insurgency functions, to give Israel a qualitative edge, and they aren't configured for BVR packages, and the US didn't seen anything outside of short range missiles to take down drones and helicopters.

Iraq made a mistake buying these in the first place, but then again, Iraq is run by fools.

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

"Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkiye will establish a joint political and military mechanism under the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, signed on August 7, according to the Turkish Defence Ministry. These new frameworks are to bring together the defence ministers, foreign ministers and military chiefs of the three countries."

 

[Ali_Baba]

Iraq made a mistake buying these in the first place, but then again, Iraq is run by fools.

They are indeed run by fools!

 

[Ravenman]

This is must needed framework before The Greatest Battle, Al-Malḥamat Al-Kubra.

Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia must have this in mind.

Al-Malhama Al-Kubra - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org