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

Israel will have issues with Turkiye with or without Syria, but yes they are seeing Turkish military presence in Syria as "Threat". But Pakistan should be careful when dealing with Syria, the current leadership of Syria is walking on a crack glass, they are mostly ex-AQ. And if they breach whatever agreement they have with Israel it will be bad for them, Syrian deserve peace after a long devastating Civil war, and Pakistan needs to take every step carefully.

Firstly, I don't know how relevant this Al Qaida or ISIS labels are valid in Syria's leadership. Maybe they were in the past but, like other rebel groups and non-state actors, once they taste the power, they job is to run a state and they become statesmen, diplomats, presidents... Even George Washington may have been called a 'terrorist' during the American War of Liberation.
I think Syria's leadership would not be meeting the Pakistanis had they not had some kind of 'backing'. Israel has already stolen even more fertile land from them and thus placing Israelis closer to Damascus, and the Syrians would want that and the Golan Heights back. In the backdrop of the Turkiye joining the tri party alliance and the Turkish foothold in Syria, I think the Syrian engagement with Pakistan is very important.
 

'We will tear you to pieces': Indian general warns Erdogan about pact with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan​

Retired Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi says India needs Iran as a counterweight to Pakistan and will not sacrifice its interests to accommodate Israel.


AUGUST 20, 2026 11:47

Retired Indian Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi warned that the growing alignment among Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan could pose a strategic threat to India, while stressing that New Delhi would not sacrifice its ties with Iran to accommodate Israel’s security concerns.

Speaking to the New Delhi-based network, Republic World, Bakshi argued that the emergence of what he calls a "Sunni NATO" in the Middle East is a source of strategic concern for India.

At the same time, he sent a clear message to Israel: The alliance between the two countries is important, but New Delhi will not give up its interests with Iran simply because of the war between Jerusalem and Tehran.

According to Bakshi, the agreement that took shape in Mecca among Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan has created a new regional reality from India's perspective. "A Sunni NATO comprising Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan has been established in the Middle East, in Mecca, and that is a serious cause for concern," he said.

Bakshi stressed that, from India's perspective, Shi'ite Iran serves as an important counterweight to Pakistan.

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


Iran as a counterweight to Pakistan

"We very much need Shi'ite Iran to be on our side because Pakistan is our primary security headache. China may be the main threat, but together with it, Pakistan is our biggest security headache," he said.

Bakshi compared the threat Iran represents in Israel's eyes with that posed by Pakistan from India's perspective.

"Iran does not have even a single nuclear bomb, and yet it is perceived as an existential threat to Israel. And what about Pakistan? A fundamentalist, jihadist Islamic state that possesses 180 nuclear warheads," he claimed.

He added that India had not seen Israel display similar concern over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

"We have not seen Israel losing sleep over the bombs in Pakistan's hands because they are considered a threat only to India," he said.

According to Bakshi, the rapprochement between Ankara and Islamabad is not merely theoretical. He cited Turkish assistance to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, claiming that Turkey supplied it with nearly 1,000 unmanned aerial vehicles and helped operate them.

"This was already a 'Sunni NATO,' with or without an agreement. Turkey and Pakistan are already in an undeclared practical alliance," he said.

Bakshi also noted that during the confrontation, Turkey sent a warship to the port of Karachi, arguing that this was another expression of the close security ties between the two countries.

"Turkey has the largest army in NATO," he said, while questioning its ability to intervene directly in a war between India and Pakistan because of the geographical distance.

According to Bakshi, any Turkish force attempting to come to Pakistan's aid would have to travel through the Mediterranean Sea and the Arabian Sea.

"The Indian Navy can tear apart any Turkish armada that tries to come to Pakistan's aid," he said.

India will not sacrifice its interests with Iran

A central part of Bakshi's remarks was directed squarely at Israel. He stressed that India views Israel as a friend, but would not agree to subordinate its own interests to Israeli needs, particularly when it comes to Iran.

"I am afraid that at some point Israel will also have to be sensitive to Indian concerns," he said. "We are not the 51st state of the United States, and for that matter we are also not an appendage or client state of Israel. We are friends, certainly. But vassals? No, sir."

"You cannot simply whistle and make our senior leaders go here and there, and ask us to sacrifice our interests," he said.

Bakshi specifically addressed possible pressure on India to distance itself from Iran because of the war.

"You cannot tell us: Throw Iran away because you are at war with it. When it comes to Iran, you cannot ask us to sacrifice our interests."

According to Bakshi, relations with Iran are vital to India economically and geostrategically as well. He pointed to the possibility of purchasing Iranian oil at low prices, refining it at Indian refineries, and subsequently exporting the products to other markets.

Beyond that, he stressed Iran's importance as an overland route for India.

"Iran provides India with the land bridge to Central Asia and the land bridge to Afghanistan, and these are of vital importance to us."

India cannot afford to give up those routes because of the war between Israel and Iran, he said.

"We cannot close these land routes because Israel is at war with Iran."

Bakshi concluded that the friendship between India and Israel remains important, but that from New Delhi's perspective, it has clear limits when major security and economic interests are at stake. Against the backdrop of growing ties between Turkey and Pakistan, and Indian concerns over a broader Sunni alliance, he believes that India's relationship with Iran is becoming more important, not less.


Iran and India are buddies and yet Pakistanis have a fetish for Iran. Its hilarious and more proof this Mecca Pact is nonsense. :ROFLMAO:
Saudi Arabia is also very close to India too.

What a waste of time this all is.
 
Firstly, I don't know how relevant this Al Qaida or ISIS labels are valid in Syria's leadership. Maybe they were in the past but, like other rebel groups and non-state actors, once they taste the power, they job is to run a state and they become statesmen, diplomats, presidents... Even George Washington may have been called a 'terrorist' during the American War of Liberation.
I think Syria's leadership would not be meeting the Pakistanis had they not had some kind of 'backing'. Israel has already stolen even more fertile land from them and thus placing Israelis closer to Damascus, and the Syrians would want that and the Golan Heights back. In the backdrop of the Turkiye joining the tri party alliance and the Turkish foothold in Syria, I think the Syrian engagement with Pakistan is very important.
Very, you can save my post that as soon as Syrian leadership did something that goes against the Status quo, then those old AQ labels will be used to create a public opinion to bomb Syria, there is a reason why Jolani was brought into power, because he will remain under that thumb of West, cause at any moment they can dig up old war crimes or his old AQ partnership to undermine Syrian leadership. Syria is a easy target and non threat to the Israeli's and Jolani Govt will never had the same credibility as the any regular Govt will have, we can see that in Taliban case too, America talks with them, pay them and withdraw but Taliban are still extremists/terrorists and at any moments their fundings will get cut or they will get bombed.

There is no way Syria is getting Golan heights back, not in near future. And we have seen that what will happen if Syria even as much as hint towards building a credible military, IAF not few days ago bombed a airbase multiple times, that's basically bibi showing the Syrians what we call in Karachi (Urdu) - Auqaat mai raho. my whole Argument is that we should not get too cozy with Syrian Jolani govt, lets not play dumb here and pretend that Syrian leadership is infected with the same mentality that we are fighting in Pakistan, the Shariah/Jihadi types, the cut throats and women beaters. We should just focus on building this tri-country alliance, focus on economy and keep the relations to bare minimum, it would be stupid of PA to invite Syrian troops for some training...
 
Iran and India are buddies and yet Pakistanis have a fetish for Iran. Its hilarious and more proof this Mecca Pact is nonsense. :ROFLMAO:
Saudi Arabia is also very close to India too.

What a waste of time this all is.
India betrayed Iran and wouldn't even offer a word of disproval when Iran was bombed. Furthermore India stopped buying all Iranian oil and abandoned its key strategic port of chabahar.

Some Pakistanis i have seen have been super pro Iran but I have seen many also super pro arab. I am not pakistani so I don't know if its a religious or ethnic thing but that doesn't have anything to do with this new pact.
 
Iran and India are buddies and yet Pakistanis have a fetish for Iran. Its hilarious and more proof this Mecca Pact is nonsense. :ROFLMAO:
Saudi Arabia is also very close to India too.

What a waste of time this all is.


I think Iranians should not forget that Indian PM Modi was in Israeli Parliament holding hands with Israelis and saying India is fully and completely standing with Israel. It was just a day before Israelis killed Supreme leader and started war by bombing Iran. India also supplied small arms and munitions to Israel during its war with Iran's "proxies".

KSA is not "very close" to india when it comes to strategic alignment. India has a lot of trade with China too. It does not mean China and india are strategically aligned. Infact they are opposite of each other.

Some Pakistanis who have literally "fetish" for Iran are a minority. They don't represent the nation as a whole. I think Pakistanis as a whole overall support Iran in this war. But the ones who prefers Iran over KSA and even their own country or have a "fetish" as you worded it are a very small minority. On the other hand, Pakistanis have deep religious, economic & military linkages with KSA as well.
 
India betrayed Iran and wouldn't even offer a word of disproval when Iran was bombed. Furthermore India stopped buying all Iranian oil and abandoned its key strategic port of chabahar.

Some Pakistanis i have seen have been super pro Iran but I have seen many also super pro arab. I am not pakistani so I don't know if its a religious or ethnic thing but that doesn't have anything to do with this new pact.
We are pro Iran because Iran has not hurt our interest the way India and Afghanistan has and we can not see another destabilized country to our west.
 
Once upon a time,I thought Saudi Arabia could take on Iran in a one-on-one war. Maybe have some help from Qatar,UAE and Kuwait at most. But after seeing Saudis doing almost nothing the last year and not being able to kick out the Houthis and establish their will in their own backyard,all that money and good equipment they got is just for parades.
 

'We will tear you to pieces': Indian general warns Erdogan about pact with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan​

Retired Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi says India needs Iran as a counterweight to Pakistan and will not sacrifice its interests to accommodate Israel.


AUGUST 20, 2026 11:47

Retired Indian Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi warned that the growing alignment among Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan could pose a strategic threat to India, while stressing that New Delhi would not sacrifice its ties with Iran to accommodate Israel’s security concerns.

Speaking to the New Delhi-based network, Republic World, Bakshi argued that the emergence of what he calls a "Sunni NATO" in the Middle East is a source of strategic concern for India.

At the same time, he sent a clear message to Israel: The alliance between the two countries is important, but New Delhi will not give up its interests with Iran simply because of the war between Jerusalem and Tehran.

According to Bakshi, the agreement that took shape in Mecca among Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan has created a new regional reality from India's perspective. "A Sunni NATO comprising Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan has been established in the Middle East, in Mecca, and that is a serious cause for concern," he said.

Bakshi stressed that, from India's perspective, Shi'ite Iran serves as an important counterweight to Pakistan.

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


Iran as a counterweight to Pakistan

"We very much need Shi'ite Iran to be on our side because Pakistan is our primary security headache. China may be the main threat, but together with it, Pakistan is our biggest security headache," he said.

Bakshi compared the threat Iran represents in Israel's eyes with that posed by Pakistan from India's perspective.

"Iran does not have even a single nuclear bomb, and yet it is perceived as an existential threat to Israel. And what about Pakistan? A fundamentalist, jihadist Islamic state that possesses 180 nuclear warheads," he claimed.

He added that India had not seen Israel display similar concern over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

"We have not seen Israel losing sleep over the bombs in Pakistan's hands because they are considered a threat only to India," he said.

According to Bakshi, the rapprochement between Ankara and Islamabad is not merely theoretical. He cited Turkish assistance to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, claiming that Turkey supplied it with nearly 1,000 unmanned aerial vehicles and helped operate them.

"This was already a 'Sunni NATO,' with or without an agreement. Turkey and Pakistan are already in an undeclared practical alliance," he said.

Bakshi also noted that during the confrontation, Turkey sent a warship to the port of Karachi, arguing that this was another expression of the close security ties between the two countries.

"Turkey has the largest army in NATO," he said, while questioning its ability to intervene directly in a war between India and Pakistan because of the geographical distance.

According to Bakshi, any Turkish force attempting to come to Pakistan's aid would have to travel through the Mediterranean Sea and the Arabian Sea.

"The Indian Navy can tear apart any Turkish armada that tries to come to Pakistan's aid," he said.

India will not sacrifice its interests with Iran

A central part of Bakshi's remarks was directed squarely at Israel. He stressed that India views Israel as a friend, but would not agree to subordinate its own interests to Israeli needs, particularly when it comes to Iran.

"I am afraid that at some point Israel will also have to be sensitive to Indian concerns," he said. "We are not the 51st state of the United States, and for that matter we are also not an appendage or client state of Israel. We are friends, certainly. But vassals? No, sir."

"You cannot simply whistle and make our senior leaders go here and there, and ask us to sacrifice our interests," he said.

Bakshi specifically addressed possible pressure on India to distance itself from Iran because of the war.

"You cannot tell us: Throw Iran away because you are at war with it. When it comes to Iran, you cannot ask us to sacrifice our interests."

According to Bakshi, relations with Iran are vital to India economically and geostrategically as well. He pointed to the possibility of purchasing Iranian oil at low prices, refining it at Indian refineries, and subsequently exporting the products to other markets.

Beyond that, he stressed Iran's importance as an overland route for India.

"Iran provides India with the land bridge to Central Asia and the land bridge to Afghanistan, and these are of vital importance to us."

India cannot afford to give up those routes because of the war between Israel and Iran, he said.

"We cannot close these land routes because Israel is at war with Iran."

Bakshi concluded that the friendship between India and Israel remains important, but that from New Delhi's perspective, it has clear limits when major security and economic interests are at stake. Against the backdrop of growing ties between Turkey and Pakistan, and Indian concerns over a broader Sunni alliance, he believes that India's relationship with Iran is becoming more important, not less.


Iran can't afford another enemy... especially not one that is a neighbor with nukes.
...yes it would equally bad for Pakistan to have a second front and be sandwiched between hostile countries.

As for India trying to win back Iran..that's just hilarious. Iran saw how India abandoned it at a moment's notice. Even Sri Lanka stepped up to help the Iranian sailors in need of help.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top