the news now
This is a new development in a story we have covered before · earlier coverage

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan Sign Mutual Defense Pact

9 sources across 8 countries · 1 of them is linked to a state

Who reported this

  • Haaretz Israel · Left · Schocken family and M. DuMont Schauberg
  • The Times of Israel Israel · Centre · Seth Klarman (majority backer)
  • CNN Brasil Brazil · Centre · Rubens Menin (MRV)
  • The Indian Express India · Centre · Indian Express Group (Goenka family)
  • The Japan Times Japan · Centre · News2u Holdings
  • Aftenposten Norway · Centre-right · Schibsted, Tinius Trust foundation
  • Al Jazeera Qatar · Centre-left · State-affiliated · Qatari government funded
  • Reuters United Kingdom · Centre · Thomson Reuters Corporation
  • Al-Monitor United States · Centre · Jamal Daniel

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed a mutual defense agreement in Mecca on August 7. The pact establishes that an armed attack against any one of the three states shall be regarded as an attack against them all. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan stated that the agreement is technically the same as NATO's Article 5. The alliance will include a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia and a committee of ministers. Fidan added that the pact is open to expansion and that Egypt could potentially join once technical matters are resolved.

The agreement comes amid heightened regional tensions involving Iran and its allies. While the joint statement describes the pact as a means to strengthen collective deterrence against aggression, Turkish and Saudi officials have stated that the agreement is not directed against any specific country. However, some analysts suggest the move reflects Saudi Arabia's desire to diversify its security partnerships due to doubts regarding the reliability of the United States as a protector for Gulf states.

Reactions to the pact have varied. Iran criticized the agreement, with one member of parliament stating that a paper agreement with Turkey and Pakistan does not provide Saudi Arabia with actual security. Conversely, Pakistan's Defense Minister Khawaja Asif called for a united military front of Muslim countries against Israel, which he described as an illegitimate state and a threat to the Muslim world.

Outlets with different political leanings framed the strategic implications of the pact differently. Center leaning sources focused on the military capabilities of the members, noting that Turkey has NATO's second largest military and Pakistan is the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons. Center left sources framed the deal as a potential shift toward strategic autonomy for Muslim powers and a challenge to US regional strategy. Center right sources emphasized the technical similarities to NATO and the potential for Egyptian membership. Left leaning sources highlighted the specific possibility of Egypt joining the pact. One center source questioned the credibility of the deterrent, noting that Pakistan did not intervene during previous attacks on Saudi infrastructure.

How each side framed it

Left
Highlighted the specific diplomatic possibility of Egypt joining the pact.
Centre-left
Framed the pact as a move toward strategic autonomy and a potential challenge to US influence in the region.
Centre
Focused on the military capabilities of the members and the practical deterrence value of the alliance.
Centre-right
Emphasized the structural similarities to NATO and the potential for the alliance to expand to Egypt.

Sources

100% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.