|
|
From Doha to Riyadh: How Israel’s Strike Sparked the Saudi–Pakistan Defense Pact
Ishaal Zehra, Situation Reports, 10/06/25
On September 9, Israel’s airstrike on Doha jolted the region, violating Qatari sovereignty during ceasefire negotiations with Hamas. While the attack drew widespread condemnation, its deeper consequence may be less about the hostages it endangered and more about the structural shifts it has triggered in Middle Eastern security.
The air strike was more than an act of military aggression against Qatar—it was a wake-up call for the entire Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). For the six monarchies, the attack underscored a sobering reality: if Qatar, host of the US Central Command at al-Udeid Air Base and a designated Major Non-NATO US Ally, could be targeted with apparent impunity, none of them were truly safe anymore.
The attack catalyzed rare Gulf unity. Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed flew to Doha within 24 hours, as the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman condemned Israel’s “brutal aggression” and pledged support for Qatar “without limit.” Leaders from across the Arab and Islamic world soon convened in Doha under the Arab League and the OIC to issue a collective denunciation. What was once a fractured GCC—still healing from the 2017–21 Saudi-Emirati blockade of Qatar—suddenly presented a united front. Just days later, Riyadh announced a historic defense pact with Islamabad—an agreement that could redefine the Gulf’s security architecture.
Pakistan-Saudi Mutual Defense Agreement
The Israeli strike on Qatar became a turning point. Just eight days after, on September 17, Riyadh signed a landmark defense treaty with Pakistan. While the two nations have shared military cooperation since 1967, the new pact represented a significant shift from informal ties to a formal security alliance, fostering a level of trust unique among Gulf partnerships.
The new pact explicitly ensures mutual defense against external threats, ranging from Israeli adventurism to broader foreign interference in Gulf affairs. Observers noted that the agreement offers Riyadh a hedge against both Israel’s imprudence and Washington’s selective engagement. For Islamabad, they believe, the deeper economic and military ties with the Gulf could strengthen its geopolitical profile, reinforcing Pakistan’s relevance beyond South Asia.
However, another interesting viewpoint notes that this pact should not be seen as a threat to Washington’s interests in the region; rather, it enables the US to offload some regional security burdens. By having Saudi Arabia and Pakistan reinforce each other’s security, the pact helps deter aggression from regional rivals more autonomously, stabilizing the Gulf, while reducing Washington’s direct exposure. Importantly, the pact may institutionalize what is often called “buck-passing” — letting regional actors assume more responsibility for their security — which aligns well with a broader US strategy of encouraging regional burden-sharing.
The nuclear implications of the pact remain ambiguous. As it is often seen that ambiguity is deliberate in defense diplomacy, adding psychological weight without triggering direct escalation. However, it may be noted that while this deliberate ambiguity may serve as a deterrent, there is no indication of a doctrinal change in Pakistan’s nuclear policy.
Multipolar Drift in the Gulf
The agreement itself reflects a broader trend: Gulf security is drifting toward multipolarity. For the GCC, it offers a template for alternative security arrangements at a time when Western deterrent credibility is under question.
For decades, the U.S. was the indispensable guarantor in the region. Today, Saudi Arabia had been hedging its bet—investing with China, buying drones from Turkey, and now with Pakistan for a strategic comprehensive defense agreement that encompasses all military means. Israel’s strike on Doha likely accelerated this drift. Gulf leaders saw a US ally attacked, wrecked negotiations, and a distant Washington. The message sounded clear: security needs to be owned and autonomous.
Defense analysts suggest after Saudi–Pakistan pact the Gulf states, long reliant on Washington, may evolve into distributed defense models that leverage regional partnerships. This agreement could become a blueprint for broader alliances, potentially forming a new “Asian NATO” to enhance collective security in the region.
Iran and India in the New Security Equation
The pact reshapes regional dynamics on multiple fronts. For Iran, it deepens strategic complexity. Although Tehran has tried to capitalize rhetorically on Arab frustration with Washington, the emergence of a Saudi–Pakistan axis could complicate Iran’s calculus. However, the visit of Iran’s Supreme Security Council secretary to Saudi Arabia just a day before the announcement of the pact suggests that diplomatic engagement may still be on the table.
For India, the pact adds a new layer of uncertainty. As Saudi Arabia’s second-largest trading partner, New Delhi must now consider a Saudi-aligned Pakistan when reassessing its deterrence posture in South Asia. Such a prospect unsettles New Delhi’s connectivity ambitions through IMEC and could drive it closer to Israel.
A Redrawn Security Map
Israel’s strike on Doha may have intended to pressure Hamas, but it inadvertently triggered something larger: a reordering of Gulf security. The Saudi–Pakistan pact is more than a bilateral deal; it represents a decisive step toward autonomy and multipolarity in the region.
For Islamabad, it is a leap in strategic reach; for Riyadh, a shift towards a multipolar architecture grounded in regional partnerships. For Washington, it is not a loss but an adjustment — a chance to share burdens while partners shoulder more responsibility.
If other Gulf states follow, the region could witness the rise of an Islamic defense bloc born not of US diplomacy but of regional necessity. Whether this architecture brings stability or rivalry will depend on how major players — from Tehran to Washington — respond.
As Trump’s recent executive order guaranteeing Qatar’s security sends further signals of Washington’s shift toward burden-sharing, one thing is clear: Israel’s strike on Doha will be remembered less for the immediate damage it caused and more for the chain reaction it set off — one that permanently redrew the Gulf’s security landscape.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author(s) alone and do not necessarily reflect those of Geopoliticalmonitor.com.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
本城市首頁
等級：8
