Over the past few days, Pakistan has gone to considerable lengths to reassure Iran that the Makkah Joint Defence Agreement, signed last week with Saudi Arabia and Turkiye, is not directed against Tehran. Islamabad’s efforts reflect the sensitivities surrounding the agreement at a time when relations between Iran and several Arab states remain shaped by deep mistrust and competing security interests.
In a recent telephone conversation, Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, that the agreement was “not an instrument of confrontation”. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif also told the federal cabinet that the pact was “entirely for defence purposes”. These assurances are important, particularly because any new military arrangement involving Saudi Arabia and Turkiye is likely to attract scrutiny in Tehran.
Iran, for its part, appears to have taken note of Islamabad’s message. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said Tehran had no reason to believe that the agreement was intended to encircle Iran. He also suggested that the pact demonstrated that countries in the region could not indefinitely rely on the American security umbrella for their defence. This response provides an opportunity for the signatories to clarify that the agreement is intended to strengthen regional security rather than create another bloc against a neighbouring state.
Much of the speculation surrounding the pact stems from its mutual defence provision, under which an attack on one signatory is treated as an attack on all. Given the recent confrontation between Iran and the United States, and attacks on American military assets in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, questions have naturally arisen about whether the provision could oblige the signatories to become directly involved in a future conflict with Iran. The assurances from Islamabad and Tehran are therefore welcome. But the larger question is whether the agreement can eventually become part of a broader and more inclusive regional security framework.
Such an arrangement would be difficult to establish. The Gulf states have traditionally depended heavily on the United States for their security, while Iran has long viewed the American military presence in the region as a source of instability and a direct threat. Yet circumstances may eventually compel the states of the Gulf and the wider Middle East to assume greater responsibility for their own collective security. If the American military footprint in the region declines over time, regional countries will have little choice but to develop mechanisms for preventing conflicts and responding collectively to security threats.
In this context, the Makkah agreement could potentially serve as a starting point rather than an endpoint. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has already indicated that the pact is open to other countries. An inclusive framework that eventually brings Iran into the process could fundamentally alter the region’s security landscape. Instead of dividing the Middle East into competing camps, such a framework could encourage dialogue, confidence-building and collective responses to common threats.
For that to happen, however, the deep mistrust between Iran and the Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, must first be reduced. Pakistan and Turkiye are relatively well placed to contribute to this effort because both countries maintain relations with Iran as well as with the Arab Gulf states. Their diplomatic role could go beyond reassuring Tehran about the Makkah pact and extend towards developing confidence-building measures between the opposing sides.
Iran, too, would need to demonstrate its willingness to reduce tensions. As an initial confidence-building measure, it could consider reopening the Strait of Hormuz, whose continued closure is causing significant disruption to Gulf economies and international trade. At the same time, the Arab states could provide reciprocal assurances that their territories would not be used by outside powers to launch aggression against Iran. Such commitments would address some of Tehran’s core security concerns while reassuring the Gulf states about their own vulnerabilities.
A sustainable regional security system cannot be built solely around military alliances. It would require political dialogue, economic interdependence and mutually agreed rules governing the use of force. The countries of the Gulf and the wider Middle East have shared interests in protecting trade routes, energy supplies, territorial sovereignty and economic stability. A collective framework could help them address these concerns without constantly turning to extra-regional powers for protection.
An effective regional security architecture could also serve as a deterrent against external military interventions. Israel’s attacks on Iran and its allies, as well as strikes involving countries such as Qatar, have demonstrated that even states with close ties to Washington are not necessarily insulated from military action. A credible regional defensive arrangement, based on collective commitments and clear rules, could raise the political and strategic cost of unilateral aggression.
The Makkah pact should therefore not be viewed simply as another military alliance. If handled carefully, it could become an opportunity to begin building a broader regional security order in which Arab states, Iran, Turkiye and other countries have a stake. The objective should not be to create another camp in an already divided region, but to develop a system in which regional states themselves take responsibility for peace and security. Pakistan’s efforts to reassure Iran are a useful first step; the real challenge is to turn those assurances into a wider process of regional reconciliation and cooperation.
Shafaqna Pakistan
pakistan.shafaqna.com
Note: Shafaqna do not endorse the views expressed in the article
