Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry briefing media at the General Headquarters, Rawalpindi, December 27, 2024. — ISPR
Makkah Defence Pact Has No ‘Regional Aspirations’, Built for Collective Deterrence, DG ISPR Says
By Sadaf Sundas Riaz — SCN News
RAWALPINDI, Sept 16 (SCN News) — Pakistan’s military said on Wednesday that its new trilateral defence pact with Saudi Arabia and Türkiye is intended solely for collective deterrence and carries no aggressive or broader regional ambitions, as questions mount over how the agreement could operate amid escalating security tensions in the Middle East.
Director General Inter-Services Public Relations Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry said the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement formalised decades of security relationships among Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye but should not be interpreted as the creation of an offensive military bloc.
“It is defensive,” Chaudhry told Al Arabiya English in an interview aired on Wednesday. “There’s nothing aggressive. There are no regional aspirations. It is a collective deterrence.”
The agreement was signed by Islamabad, Riyadh and Ankara on August 7 and establishes a framework for collective security and defence cooperation among the three countries. Publicly reported provisions include the principle that an attack against one member would be treated as an attack against all three.
Chaudhry described the arrangement as “complementary”, saying the three members maintain their own relationships with other countries, alliances and international blocs and that the new agreement was not designed to compete with those ties.
His comments provide one of Islamabad’s clearest explanations yet of the strategic boundaries it sees around the pact. Türkiye is a NATO member, Saudi Arabia maintains extensive security relations with the United States and other Western countries, while Pakistan has longstanding defence relations with Saudi Arabia and close strategic ties with China.
Asked whether the agreement imposed a mutual-defence obligation, Chaudhry pointed to the text already released by the three governments. But he declined to explain exactly how Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or Türkiye would respond if one of them were attacked, saying operational details of military commitments were classified.
The method by which the pact would be activated would be determined by the three countries themselves, he said. That leaves a distinction between the publicly declared political commitment to collective defence and the classified military arrangements that would determine what assistance each country could provide during an actual crisis.
The clarification has assumed greater significance following the sharp deterioration in security around Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has reported attacks by Yemen’s Houthis against Saudi cities and energy infrastructure, opening another theatre of confrontation as the wider Middle East remains under intense military pressure.
Saudi Arabia said this week that its forces intercepted a Houthi drone south of Makkah before it entered prohibited airspace around Islam’s holiest city. The Houthis denied targeting Makkah. Pakistan strongly condemned the incident as described by Saudi Arabia, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif saying Islamabad stood “shoulder to shoulder” with the kingdom while also calling for restraint and diplomacy.
Against that backdrop, questions have emerged over whether the collective-defence provisions of the Makkah agreement could be invoked if attacks on Saudi territory continue. Chaudhry did not specify whether the latest incidents met any threshold for activation, instead stressing the defensive nature of the alliance and keeping potential operational responses confidential.
The DG ISPR also rejected characterising the arrangement as an exclusively Muslim military alliance. He said there was nothing in the agreement defining it as a Muslim bloc and described its objective instead as regional stability based on non-aggression, non-interference and collective deterrence.
He left open the possibility that other countries could eventually participate, saying willing partners sharing those principles could potentially be included. Any expansion, however, would be a political decision for the leadership of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye rather than an automatic process.
That position is consistent with explanations given after the pact was signed. Türkiye said in August that the agreement was defensive, did not designate any country as a common enemy and should not be viewed as an alternative or competitor to NATO. Ankara said it was intended instead to complement existing international security arrangements and contribute to regional stability.
The arrangement nevertheless represents a significant development in regional defence cooperation because it brings together three militarily important states: nuclear-armed Pakistan, NATO member Türkiye and Saudi Arabia, one of the world’s largest oil exporters and a central Gulf power.
For Islamabad, defining the pact as complementary rather than competitive also allows it to maintain existing strategic relationships without formally positioning the new alliance against another state or bloc. Chaudhry specifically noted the members’ independent international relationships and said the agreement was not directed against those partnerships.
The distinction could become increasingly important if Middle East hostilities continue. A collective-defence agreement carries its greatest strategic significance when one of its members faces an external attack, but the extent of any military response depends on how the parties interpret their commitments and what operational arrangements they have established behind the publicly released framework.
Chaudhry’s comments therefore clarify the pact’s declared purpose but deliberately leave its military mechanics undisclosed: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye have committed themselves to collective deterrence and defence, while decisions about exactly how those commitments would be implemented during a crisis remain with the three governments.