The drive to weaken Iran has, paradoxically for Israel, created the threat of an “Islamic NATO.” Can an alliance of Pakistan, Türkiye, and Saudi Arabia unite Muslims on an anti-Israeli basis?
Aims of the Triple Alliance
Naturally, such declarations are standard for international documents. No state will openly declare its aggressive intentions, for the classic formula of “if you want peace, prepare for war” remains relevant. A demonstration of strength is intended to deter a potential adversary from testing the strength of the alliance.
The Rhetoric of “Good-Neighborliness”
The pact’s signatories emphasize that their association is not directed “against any specific country.” On 8 August, in an interview with the Anadolu Agency, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan stated that Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan are not pursuing an expansionist policy. According to him, the countries are focused on internal development and seek to make a “positive contribution to their surroundings through good-neighborliness.”
Yet Fidan made an important clarification: “As long as the alliance is not subjected to attack –from within the region or from outside –it can have no issues with any other country.”
Mecca Pact Analysis: Aims, Motives, and Geopolitical Context
From the above, two key conclusions can be drawn:
Absence of regional limitations. The pact is not tied to a specific geography, as the inclusion of Pakistan takes it beyond the Middle East. The alliance presupposes a collective response to threats regardless of where they arise, inside the region or beyond its borders.
The universal character of the partnership. The new alliance positions itself as open to cooperation. Its activity is not directed against specific countries, religions, or political systems, so long as the actions of those states do not threaten the security of the pact’s signatories.
Hypothetically, any state could be considered the trio’s adversary, Muslim or non-Muslim. It is no coincidence that Mr. Fidan specifically stressed that Iran is not a “target” of the agreement, while adding an important caveat: any country is to become a military target of the alliance in the event of aggression against its members. It is obvious that this statement is addressed to Tehran considering the difficult relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Motives of the Signatories and the West’s Position
It is important to note that all three signatories to the pact, i.e., Türkiye, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, are allies or strategic partners of the United States and NATO. Ankara has already stated that participation in the Mecca Pact does not replace its membership of the North Atlantic Alliance. Nevertheless, NATO’s reaction to the new structure has so far been restrained. The West is concerned by two factors, namely the attitude of the pact’s participants towards Israel, and the growing distrust among the founders of the alliance regarding the ability of the United States and NATO to provide them with reliable protection.
Как отмечает иранский эксперт Мохсен Пакеейн, мотивация участников пакта существенно различается:
As Iranian expert Mohsen Pakaein notes, the motivation of the pact’s signatories differs substantially:
Pakistan: As a nuclear power, Islamabad seeks to strengthen its position in the confrontation with India and to raise its geopolitical standing in the Islamic world.
Türkiye: Ankara views the pact as an instrument for enhancing its agency inside NATO, a means of countering the new architecture of European security, and an opportunity for expansion in Asia.
Saudi Arabia: Riyadh is banking on the containment of Iran and the fight against the Yemeni Houthis, who threaten oil transit through the Straits of Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb. In addition, for the kingdom, this is a way of reducing dependence on the United States in matters of security.
Iran’s position: Tehran, which has strengthened its standing in the Middle East through confrontation with Israel and the United States, views the Mecca Pact from different angles. On the one hand, it is an instrument of pressure on the West; on the other, it is a potential foundation for the formation of a regional mechanism aimed at containing American-Israeli influence.
Israel: Target or Pretext for the Mecca Pact?
Is the aggressive policy of Israel, backed by the United States, the principal target of the new Mecca Pact? The answer is affirmative, but with some important reservations. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan noted that the path from the idea to the signing of this military alliance (structurally close to Article 5 of the NATO Charter) took two years. This period coincided with the escalation of the conflict in the Gaza Strip and the aggravation of Israel’s relations with Iran.
In Tel Aviv, the creation of a defensive bloc of three key Muslim powers – with each of which Israel has difficult relations – was received with alarm. The potential of the founding countries is impressive, as Saudi Arabia acts as a financial and energy donor, Pakistan possesses a nuclear arsenal and an imposing army, and Türkiye is a NATO member with a powerful military-industrial complex and leadership ambitions in the Turkic world. All three states are united by the Sunni faith, demographic growth, and a critical attitude towards Israel’s policies.
The participants of the Mecca Pact are aware that Israel’s strength rests not only on its economy and intelligence services, but also on its strategic alliance with the United States and on the influence of global Jewish capital. It is noteworthy that at the stage of “Islamic consolidation,” none of the founding countries provided direct military assistance to the Palestinians, limiting themselves to rhetoric. At the same time, Iran, which is not a member of the pact, chose fewer words and more action, extending military support to Gaza, for which it suffered retaliatory strikes from the Israeli-American tandem.
It is likely that the new alliance’s strategy rests not in direct military intervention but in building up economic and defense potential (perhaps even by creating its own “nuclear umbrella”) in order to deter further Israeli expansion.
Similar defense policy strengthens the military potential of the alliances’ participants. Türkiye does not plan to leave NATO; on the contrary, Ankara seeks to convert its status as the only Muslim state in the bloc with one of the most powerful armies in the region into an instrument of influence. Türkiye positions its participation in the Mecca Pact as a forced measure in response to global instability, the escalation of local conflicts, and the crisis of NATO’s collective security system. Ankara calls this a policy of “interoperability,” designed to create additional institutional security guarantees.
In essence, Türkiye is playing a multi-vector game, seeking to preserve its standing in NATO, to integrate into the new architecture of European security, to lead the defense alliance of the Organization of Turkic States, and to become the architect of a new Asian-Islamic military bloc.
The prospects of the Mecca Pact depend on the dynamics of the interests of Ankara, Islamabad, and Riyadh. But it is already clear that the creation of such a bloc is a symptom of the United States’ discreditation and a sign that NATO is ceasing to be the sole guarantor of collective security.
Alexander Svarants – PhD in Politics, Professor, specialist in Turkish Studies, expert on Middle Eastern countries
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
