The Mecca Agreement: Deterrence Paths and Its Effectiveness

Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed the Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense, which embodies a long-term partnership based on the principles of deterrence, coordination, and defensive integration among the three countries. This agreement aims to consolidate the pillars of stability, deepen security mechanisms in the region, and eliminate sources of confusion and unrest. The signing took place in the holy city of Mecca, the birthplace of Islam and the home of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

In truth, this tripartite alliance, born in the capital of Islam, illuminates the path to a future filled with light, radiating from the nobility of its mission. The trio bearing responsibility for this document does so with a sense of satisfaction and relief, deepening their commitment to the robustness of stability and the continuity of prosperity, not only within the framework of the three signatory states but also across all regions where the lights of Islam have shone brightly. The initiators’ requirements for security and stability in the vast Islamic world, extending across borders into Asia, Africa, and other areas, cannot be overlooked. This achievement, which we are pleased to have witnessed its birth, serves as an invitation from the three initiators to all Islamic nations to join this organization, which will strengthen the threads of connectivity and interdependence for everyone, regardless of geographical distance.

Among the key indicators accompanying the announcement of the agreement were those clearly articulated by the Turkish President, who emphasized that the agreement is open to the participation of all sister nations seeking to achieve peace, prosperity, and stability in the region. The Turkish President further noted in his comments that the agreement affirms the right to self-defense, as stipulated in Article 51 of the UN Charter, while intensifying the call for resolving disputes through dialogue and diplomacy, in harmony with international law.

Similarly, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif affirmed that the agreement was born out of mutual trust, a shared destiny, and a belief in the importance of consolidating security and stability and preserving regional peace. The Pakistani Prime Minister added: “The signing of the agreement in Mecca, adjacent to the Two Holy Mosques, imparts a historical and symbolic dimension to it, reflecting the depth of shared responsibility toward the security of the signatory states, the sanctity of their people’s interests, and the contribution to enhancing stability in the Islamic world.”

Dr. Raed Qarmali, Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, commented that the agreement does not come at the expense of Saudi Arabia’s strategic and strong relations with Gulf, Arab, and international partners, nor does it pose a threat to the security of any country in the region or escalate tensions between any two states. He clarified that it does not nullify or replace any bilateral or multilateral agreements between these countries or with other parties. The agreement has received praise and welcome from various intellectual and political analysis platforms, which viewed it as a gain for the world, as it deepens the foundations of stability in a sensitive region that serves as a source of energy and major navigation routes between the East and the West. It enhances opportunities for regional security, stability, and peace. Furthermore, analyses and observations have continued regarding the responsibilities borne by the three countries, with reaffirmations of their sovereign rights, noting that they do not form axes but rather seek only to preserve their own security and stability.

Here, I recall the first session of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in May 1981 in Abu Dhabi, where leaders met to sign the agreement establishing the Council. Through the reaffirmation of each state’s position, indicators emerged showing the Council’s expanding responsibility toward ensuring security and stability in Gulf states. The Council’s responsibilities broadened with the addition of military cooperation to its Basic Agreement, as there can be no guarantee of continued prosperity without ensuring the ability to maintain the security of member states. The Council’s charter was expanded to include security and military and security cooperation.

At this stage, the GCC’s stance on this development, which was born in Mecca through arrangements spearheaded by Saudi Arabia—the prominent host of GCC states, which enjoys deep and historical relations with both Turkey and Pakistan—is noteworthy. I do not envision the GCC remaining content with bilateral diplomatic ties alone. Questions will inevitably increase regarding the absence of GCC states from the agreement, which emerged from Saudi initiative and effort. As the host of the GCC, Saudi Arabia is keen on the integrity of its path and the assurance of its successes. I do not believe that GCC states will be content merely with monitoring the alliance from the sidelines, while Saudi Arabia remains the influential foundation in both the GCC’s trajectory and the new tripartite alliance, without participation from other GCC members.

In truth, anyone reading the agreement will recognize the important aspects of its contribution to ensuring peace and stability in the Gulf region, which is a rare piece in the puzzle of global collective security. I believe that GCC members will continue their consultations to determine how to deal with this strategic tripartite agreement, which is expected to affirm regional security and contain risks that may threaten it. I do not rule out the holding of meetings and consultations within the GCC, initiated specifically by Saudi Arabia, to explain the discussions during the Mecca summit and what the GCC might gain through coordination with the three parties signatory to the Mecca document. I also do not rule out steps emerging that would contribute to convergence and cooperation with the developments in Mecca, especially since all GCC states enjoy positive relations with both Turkey and Pakistan.

Certainly, we will continue to monitor communications between the GCC and the Saudi Foreign Ministry regarding the historical facts generated by the tripartite security alliance and their impact on the GCC states’ sphere, alongside the historical role played by Saudi Arabia in the reality of this tripartite security gathering born from the tripartite security agreement. There is no room to ignore the inevitability of connectivity that future realities will impose. Perhaps we will read about the desire of some GCC states to join the tripartite agreement, and the days will reveal the truths of the future.

Abdullah Basharah