10 Aug Makkah Pact: A New Security Triangle and Its Implications for India

UPSC 2027 | GS Paper II – International Relations | GS Paper III – Internal Security & Defence

Why in the News?

On 7 August 2026, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Pakistan signed the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement (MJDA) in Makkah. The agreement states that an armed attack against any one of the three countries will be regarded as an attack against all three.

The pact has emerged amid continuing instability in West Asia, including tensions involving Iran, the Gulf region, Yemen and the Red Sea. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister has described the arrangement as “purely defensive” and not directed against any particular country.

Therefore, the agreement is important not merely as a defence pact but as an indication of a changing regional security architecture.

Which Subject is Related to This News?

What is the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement?

The Makkah Joint Defence Agreement (MJDA) is a trilateral security arrangement involving:

• Saudi Arabia
• Türkiye
• Pakistan

Its central principle is collective defence — an attack on one member is treated as an attack on all three.

The agreement also envisages greater cooperation in areas such as:

• military exercises,
• defence technology,
• interoperability,
• counter-terrorism,
• military coordination and
• defence production.

However, the full operational details of the agreement are not publicly available. Therefore, it would be premature to treat it as a complete military alliance comparable to NATO.

Is the Makkah Pact a “Muslim NATO”?

The comparison with NATO is useful but should be made carefully.

NATO’s Article 5 establishes the principle of collective defence: an armed attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all. However, each member determines the action it considers necessary.

Türkiye’s Foreign Minister has said that the MJDA is technically similar to NATO’s Article 5, while also stressing that the agreement complements rather than replaces existing alliances.

Why “Muslim NATO” may be misleading

The three countries do not have identical strategic interests.

• Saudi Arabia is primarily concerned with Gulf security and protection of critical infrastructure.
• Türkiye seeks greater strategic autonomy and has a growing defence industry.
• Pakistan brings substantial military experience and strategic deterrence capabilities.

Moreover, the agreement is not an agreement of all Muslim-majority countries. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is a broader intergovernmental organisation and is not equivalent to a collective military alliance.

Why Did These Three Countries Come Together?

1. Saudi Arabia’s Search for Strategic Alternatives

Saudi Arabia has traditionally depended heavily on the United States for security. However, recent regional conflicts and uncertainty about the reliability of external security guarantees have encouraged Riyadh to diversify its security partnerships.

The Kingdom faces multiple threats, including:

• missile and drone attacks,
• risks to oil infrastructure,
• instability in Yemen,
• tensions involving Iran,
• threats to maritime routes.

Consequently, Riyadh increasingly wants greater regional self-reliance.

2. Türkiye’s Growing Defence Role

Türkiye has emerged as an important defence producer, particularly in:

• drones,
• unmanned combat systems,
• missiles,
• electronic warfare,
• naval systems.

Türkiye’s defence and aerospace exports crossed $10 billion in 2025, demonstrating the growing international reach of its defence industry.

Therefore, the pact can provide Türkiye with opportunities for deeper defence-industrial cooperation with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

3. Pakistan’s Strategic Position

Pakistan already had a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement with Saudi Arabia, signed in 2025. Under that arrangement, an attack on one was to be treated as aggression against both.

The new trilateral agreement expands this security relationship by adding Türkiye.

Pakistan also has a unique geographical position:

West Asia ↔ Iran ↔ Pakistan ↔ South Asia

This gives Islamabad relevance in both Gulf and South Asian security calculations.

The Geography Behind the Pact

The agreement becomes more significant when viewed geographically.

Important strategic locations

Strait of Hormuz

• Connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman.
• Critical for global oil shipments.

Bab-el-Mandeb

• Connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden.
• Important for shipping between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal.

Red Sea

• Major route for Europe–Asia maritime trade.

Arabian Sea

• Connects the Gulf region with the Indian Ocean and South Asia.

Therefore, instability in this region can have consequences far beyond West Asia.

Significance of the Makkah Pact

1. Emergence of a New Regional Security Architecture

The pact reflects a shift from dependence on a single external security provider towards multiple regional partnerships.

Saudi Arabia is simultaneously strengthening relations with different powers instead of relying exclusively on Washington.

This represents a broader trend of strategic hedging in West Asia.

2. Greater Defence Cooperation

The three countries possess complementary strengths:

Consequently, deeper defence cooperation could lead to joint exercises, technology transfers and greater interoperability.

3. Possible Impact on Iran

Although the three countries have said the pact is not directed against Iran, Tehran is likely to monitor it carefully.

Iran has important relations with Pakistan, while Saudi Arabia and Iran have historically been strategic competitors.

Therefore, the real test of the pact will be whether it becomes a mechanism for deterrence and stability or contributes to a regional security dilemma.

4. Red Sea and Maritime Security

The pact has implications for maritime security because Saudi Arabia is connected to the Red Sea while Pakistan sits on the Arabian Sea and Türkiye has access to the Mediterranean and Black Sea.

Moreover, Türkiye has expressed interest in international efforts to secure Red Sea shipping routes against Houthi attacks.

Hence, the agreement could gradually acquire a maritime-security dimension.

What Does It Mean for India?

1. India Must Watch the Saudi–Pakistan Dimension

India has traditionally maintained strong relations with Saudi Arabia while simultaneously managing difficult relations with Pakistan.

The emergence of a formal Saudi–Türkiye–Pakistan security arrangement therefore requires careful monitoring.

However, India should avoid viewing Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Pakistan through a purely India–Pakistan lens.

2. Saudi Arabia Remains Crucial for India’s Economy

Saudi Arabia is highly important for India’s energy security and trade.

According to the Indian Embassy in Riyadh, bilateral trade between India and Saudi Arabia reached $41.88 billion in FY 2024–25. Saudi Arabia is India’s fifth-largest trading partner, while India is Saudi Arabia’s second-largest trading partner.

Saudi investments in India, including investments linked to the Public Investment Fund, have also reached around $10 billion.

Therefore, India has a strong incentive to preserve its strategic relationship with Riyadh.

3. Energy Security is a Major Concern

India remains highly dependent on imported crude oil.

Government data indicates that India’s crude-oil import dependence remained around 88% during FY 2023–24 to FY 2025–26.

Consequently, instability involving Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Strait of Hormuz or the Red Sea can directly affect:

Oil prices → Import bill → Inflation → Current Account → Rupee → Economic growth

This makes West Asian geopolitics an important economic-security issue for India.

4. India–Türkiye Relations Need Greater Attention

Türkiye’s growing defence relationship with Pakistan is another concern for India.

Ankara has historically taken positions on issues concerning Pakistan and Kashmir that differ from New Delhi’s position.

At the same time, India should avoid allowing bilateral differences with Türkiye to damage its wider economic and diplomatic interests.

Thus, India’s approach should be based on issue-based engagement rather than bloc politics.

Could the Pact Become a Long-Term Alliance?

At present, three possibilities exist.

Scenario 1: Limited Defence Cooperation

The pact remains primarily focused on:

• military exercises,
• defence technology,
• intelligence sharing,
• counter-terrorism.

This would have relatively limited implications for India.

Scenario 2: Strong Regional Security Bloc

If military coordination deepens and more countries join, the pact could become a significant West Asian security arrangement.

This would substantially change the regional balance.

Scenario 3: Regional Conflict Escalates

If conflict involving Iran, Saudi Arabia or another regional actor expands, the collective-defence provision could be tested.

This is the most challenging scenario for India, particularly because of India’s energy dependence and relations with both Gulf countries and Iran.

Major Challenges Before the Makkah Pact

1. Different Strategic Interests

The three countries do not have identical threat perceptions.

Türkiye’s priorities in the Mediterranean, Syria and broader Eurasia differ from Saudi Arabia’s Gulf-focused security concerns.

Similarly, Pakistan must balance its relations with Iran, China, Saudi Arabia and Türkiye.

2. Risk of a Security Dilemma

When one group increases military cooperation, neighbouring countries may feel compelled to respond by increasing their own military capabilities.

Consequently, a defensive arrangement can sometimes unintentionally contribute to an arms race.

3. Unclear Operational Mechanism

The phrase “attack on one is attack on all” sounds strong, but its practical meaning depends on:

• decision-making mechanisms,
• military obligations,
• rules of engagement,
• command structures,
• intelligence sharing,
• financial commitments.

Therefore, the effectiveness of the pact will depend more on implementation than on its political symbolism.