Bipin Deo

On August 7, 2026, the highly discussed Mecca Security Agreement was concluded. Various think tanks and media outlets have been analyzing this security pact signed between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.

Under the agreement, a commitment has been made that if any one of the three countries is attacked, all three will stand together. To be sure, a security pact between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan existed previously as well. Since the 1950s, Pakistani armed forces have undertaken efforts to guarantee the security of the Saudi royal family. Amid tensions in the Middle East, this agreement between Pakistan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia carries several dimensions. Iran had previously shown maximum aggression toward Saudi Arabia.

Feeling insecure under the U.S. security umbrella, Saudi Arabia had entered into an agreement with Pakistan. About 25,000 Pakistani soldiers were deployed to tighten security arrangements in Saudi Arabia. However, India's former Minister of State for External Affairs and well-known journalist M.J. Akbar raised questions about the Pakistan-Saudi arrangement. Pointing out how Pakistani soldiers remained mere bystanders when Iran-backed Houthi rebels fired missiles into Saudi Arabia, he argued that the pact was little more than political rhetoric. He reasoned that if Saudi Arabia were to deploy Pakistani troops against Iran, a domestic backlash among the Pakistani public could bring Karachi and Islamabad to a standstill.

In the current context, no primary adversary has been identified for this triangular agreement between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Experts argue that any strategic or security agreement that does not target a specific enemy is meaningless and ineffective. Turkey is a member of NATO. Saudi Arabia remains under the U.S. security umbrella. Furthermore, Pakistan’s military leadership acts largely as a puppet of the United States.

Under these circumstances, none of these three powers possesses the capability or resolve to declare Israel as their primary enemy. Given complex Islamic geopolitics, these three countries cannot directly target Iran either. Historically, Saudi Arabia and Turkey do not share deep ties: as early as 1918, Saudi Arabia rejected the Turkish Ottoman Caliphate to draw closer to the U.S., and in 2018, Turkey put political pressure on the Saudi Crown Prince over a high-profile murder.

Experts have evaluated the Mecca Accord on practical grounds. Former Indian Ambassador and strategic analyst Shyam Saran has also shed light on the treaty. According to Saran, tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan are currently escalating, yet Turkey and Saudi Arabia are in no position to deploy military forces against Afghanistan. Until 1918, while nearly all Islamic nations were under the grip of colonialism, Afghanistan was not; experts often refer to Afghanistan as the "Graveyard of Empires."

Against this backdrop, analyzing the impact of the Mecca Accord on India yields interesting insights. Bilateral trade between India and Saudi Arabia stands at $41.88 billion USD, and roughly 2.5 million Indian citizens work in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, Saudi investment in various Indian development projects totals $100 billion USD.

Given these circumstances, experts believe that in the event of a war between India and Pakistan, Saudi Arabia will not take sides with Pakistan. Even at the societal level, ties between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are not especially deep; recently, Saudi Arabia deported 25,000 Pakistani nationals back to Pakistan.

Experts have also analyzed the impact this Pakistan-Turkey-Saudi alliance could have in Central and South Asia. At present, the Pakistani military leadership is consumed by internal conflict and domestic instability. Pakistani security forces maintain minimal presence in Balochistan, while a surge of unrest is visible in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Pakistan-administered Kashmir is similarly witnessing movement and popular outrage.

In this surrounding landscape, the Pakistani military leadership is actively seeking to expand its influence and redefine its role within international politics and global alliances. The military leadership recently concluded a separate security agreement with Kuwait as well. Domestically, the military regime in Pakistan faces widespread infamy and public dissatisfaction, alongside growing international pressure demanding the release of former Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Through the Mecca Agreement, the Pakistani military leadership stands to secure substantial financial backing from Saudi Arabia. Prominent scholars and political commentators like M.J. Akbar have characterized the Mecca Agreement as a classic example of "checkbook diplomacy." In essence, Saudi Arabia is leveraging its financial resources to support the Pakistani military in exchange for security guarantees.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s diplomatic and strategic calculations present a distinct posture. Although Turkey remains a key member of NATO, it actively seeks to assert its leadership role and expand its geopolitical influence across the broader Islamic world. Ultimately, while this trilateral arrangement allows Pakistan's military junta to secure external financial bailouts and project regional relevance, its internal political instability and deep economic vulnerabilities mean the agreement poses minimal direct strategic threat to India's long-term security posture.

(The writer is Nepal based geopolitics expert)