Riyadh moves to redress strategic imbalance by bringing Islamabad’s nukes into play

When the news broke last week that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan had signed a defence pact which declared an aggression against either country to be an aggression against both, it appeared to be a ground-breaking move.

With Israel's military dominance now extending to the Gulf, Riyadh's move for such a pact, which theoretically could bring Islamabad's nuclear arsenal into play, excited and worried people equally.

But the pact has not come out of the blue.

Pakistan has a long history of military involvement in the Middle East. Throughout the 1960s, Pakistan had military advisers and trainers in Saudi Arabia, helping to build up the Kingdom's defence capabilities.

"The agreement marks the outcome of years of sustained dialogue between the two allied states. It is not a reaction to any particular country or event," Dr Ali Awadh Asseri, a former Saudi ambassador to Pakistan, recently wrote in the Arab News.

According to Dr Asseri, whose book on Saudi-Pakistan relationship is due to come out in October, Pakistan's "sustained role in Saudi Arabia's defence" began in 1967 when the first formal defence cooperation agreement was signed in Islamabad.

At a time when India is trying to portray Pakistan as a sponsor of terrorism, the pact could elevate Pakistan's position in the Middle East and generate respect for its military leadership. That would be quite a reward.

Another agreement in 1982 paved the way for deployment of tens of thousands of Pakistani combat troops — not just trainers and advisers — to various sensitive regions of Saudi Arabia at critical times, such as the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s and Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

Yet, the news of the Saudi-Pakistan defence pact hit many people as something new, as something that might shift the strategic balance in the region. 

Way for Muslim countries?

The news certainly generated a great deal of excitement on Bangladeshi social media. So much so, that even an adviser in the interim government applauded the pact, suggesting it showed the way forward for Muslim countries.

"Alhamdulillah," wrote Dr Asif Nazrul, adviser for law and justice, on his Facebook fan page, run by an admin and himself. "Actually, Muslim countries have no other way than to conclude such pacts."

Such hopes are unlikely to come to fruition for a variety of reasons. For one thing, the "Muslim world" is not monolithic, and each Muslim-majority country has its own interests which may not be served by alignment with others.

The reaction elsewhere suggested that many people were viewing the pact in the context of Israel's recent attack on Qatar, which was launched on 9 September in a failed attempt to assassinate top Hamas leaders.

Qatar hosts the biggest US military base in the Gulf and yet, the Americans were unable or unwilling to assist Doha to either repel the attack or take retaliatory measures. This led many in the region to re-think their security needs and talk of a NATO-style Arab military alliance began to float in the air.

The Saudi-Pakistan pact, coming as it did within days of the Arab summit to discuss Israel's attack, falls neatly into this "new alliance" narrative. But the very idea of an "Arab NATO" is beset with problems.

Türkiye and Egypt shut out?

According to a report in the Middle East Eye, such a proposal for a joint Arab force was indeed floated by Egypt at the Arab summit on 15 September. But the paper quoted Egyptian officials as saying that the idea was torpedoed by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Egypt, with the largest and most battle-experienced military among Arab states, was keen to lead a joint rapid-response force. But Saudi Arabia, the most influential among the Gulf states, also laid claim to the leadership, leading to stalemate, reported the MEE.

Arab states did not entertain the idea of either Iran or Türkiye being part of any possible united force.

Türkiye and Egypt have two of the most powerful militaries in the region. But they have been at loggerheads ever since Egypt's first elected, Muslim Brotherhood-aligned president Muhammad Morsi was removed from power by the Egyptian military in 2013. But the two countries began a small-scale joint defence exercise in the Mediterranean this month, raising speculation about a possible military alliance.

Iran, which recently fought a long-range war with Israel, might have been interested in such an alliance. But Arab nations, particularly the kingdoms and sheikhdoms of the Gulf probably fear Iran even more than they fear Israel.

In the absence of unity of purpose among Arab states, the Saudi-Pakistan pact appears to be the only serious game in town.

For Israel, the main concern would be nuclear. Pakistan is the only country in the region, other than Israel, which has nuclear weapons, and is developing the means with which to deliver such warheads.

Currently, the Pakistani missile with the longest reach is the Shaheen III, with an effective range of 2,750km. This means, on paper, it can reach Israel. 

Hezbollah to Ansarallah

At present, an Israeli attack on Saudi Arabia — which could, theoretically, compel Pakistan to respond — seems unlikely. Israel's recent actions in the region have been against groups for whom the Saudis have little or no sympathy.

The Saudi royal family views radical Sunni groups such as Hamas, Shia militias backed by Iran such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Ansarallah in Yemen as existential threats. Their destruction by Israel did not create alarm in Riyadh, but the attack on Doha probably did. It was too close to home.

Hence the reach-out to Pakistan, as a signal to both Israel and the United States that Saudi Arabia would not be alone in facing any threat from the west.

But it is also, in all probability, a signal to Iran with which the Saudis have had serious enmity since Shah Reza Pahlavi was overthrown in the Islamic Revolution in 1979.

Iran has already demonstrated its resilience by absorbing Israeli attacks and then inflicting serious damage on Tel Aviv and Haifa. Whether the Saudi-Pakistan defence pact spurs Iran on to develop its own nuclear weapon remains to be seen.

Dr Asseri acknowledges that while defence relation between Riyadh and Islamabad has grown over decades, the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement also represents renewal.

"Renewal in adapting that partnership to the demands of an uncertain future," he wrote.

That uncertainty is being generated by a forceful Israel in the west which seems to have thrown caution to the wind. In the east, anxiety surrounding Iran's nuclear programme has added another layer of uncertainty. 

Strategic ambiguity?

It appears that, for the first time, Saudis may feel their sovereignty or even territorial integrity could be under threat. The attack on Doha has shown that the Israelis would go to any length to pursue its goals, and that the US cannot be relied upon to provide a protective umbrella.

To address this, the Saudi leadership has decided to raise their defence partnership with Pakistan to a strategic level. Saudis hope this will deter any nuclear blackmail by Israel or Iran, and create the possibility of Pakistan's conventional forces coming to Riyadh's aid in future.

However, there is still some ambiguity about the role Pakistan's nuclear arsenal may play in this.

Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told Reuters on 19 September that nuclear weapons were "not on the radar" of the pact. But in the same report, a Saudi official was quoted as saying the defensive agreement "encompasses all military means".

Many analysts believe such strategic ambiguity is a useful tool to ensure that deterrence works.

Pakistan's gain, India's loss?

But what does Pakistan get out of it?

It is most unlikely that Saudi Arabia will dispatch its state-of-the-art air force to assist Pakistan in the event of a conflict with its arch enemy India.

Saudis have deep economic and political relations with India going back decades. There are many more Indians living and working in Saudi Arabia than Pakistanis.

It is highly unlikely that Saudis would want to rapture relations with India.

But Pakistan can expect an economic life-line, in terms of investment, grants in social sectors, cheap loans, cheap fuel, contracts for their companies, closer collaboration in defence industry and more.

At a time when India is trying to portray Pakistan as a sponsor of terrorism, the pact could elevate Pakistan's position in the Middle East and generate respect for its military leadership. That would be quite a reward.

The writer is former Head, BBC Bangla and former Managing Editor, VOA Bangla. He can be contacted at: sabir.mustafa@gmail.com.