Just one month ago, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan declared a new defense alliance in Mecca: an attack on one would be considered an attack on all. Now, much sooner than expected, that pledge is being put to the test.
Saudi Arabia may be facing its most severe security crisis since Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and the threat then posed to the kingdom’s oil fields. From the east, the war with Iran and the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz are damaging its economic lifeline; from the north, pro-Iranian militias in Iraq are attacking Saudi territory and have even struck the East-West pipeline; and from the south, the Houthis are targeting sites in the kingdom and have established a foothold allowing them to threaten the Bab al-Mandab Strait.
The United States is providing intelligence and targeting assistance, but Trump has rejected the Saudis' request to use force against the Houthis. This is precisely the moment when the "Mecca Alliance" is expected to prove it is more than just a declaration.
If Turkey and Pakistan settle for mere condemnations, the clause stipulating that "an attack on one is an attack on all" will be rendered meaningless.
This poses a difficult dilemma. Pakistan already declined to join the Saudi-led war in Yemen in 2015, while Turkey is in no hurry to adopt Riyadh’s enemies as its own. Behind the mutual defense declaration lies a fundamental problem: the three countries do not share the same threat perception, nor do they necessarily share the same willingness to pay a price.
And this is also a test for Israel. While Washington hesitates and Riyadh's new partners deliberate, Israel should offer quiet assistance—unconditionally and without demanding immediate political payback. Aid provided in a time of distress could help build something with Riyadh that is far more difficult to achieve through declarations: trust.
Just one month ago, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan declared a new defense alliance in Mecca: an attack on one would be considered an attack on all. Now, much sooner than expected, that pledge is being put to the test.
Saudi Arabia may be facing its most severe security crisis since Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and the threat then posed to the kingdom’s oil fields. From the east, the war with Iran and the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz are damaging its economic lifeline; from the north, pro-Iranian militias in Iraq are attacking Saudi territory and have even struck the East-West pipeline; and from the south, the Houthis are targeting sites in the kingdom and have established a foothold allowing them to threaten the Bab al-Mandab Strait.
The United States is providing intelligence and targeting assistance, but Trump has rejected the Saudis' request to use force against the Houthis. This is precisely the moment when the "Mecca Alliance" is expected to prove it is more than just a declaration.
If Turkey and Pakistan settle for mere condemnations, the clause stipulating that "an attack on one is an attack on all" will be rendered meaningless.
This poses a difficult dilemma. Pakistan already declined to join the Saudi-led war in Yemen in 2015, while Turkey is in no hurry to adopt Riyadh’s enemies as its own. Behind the mutual defense declaration lies a fundamental problem: the three countries do not share the same threat perception, nor do they necessarily share the same willingness to pay a price.
And this is also a test for Israel. While Washington hesitates and Riyadh's new partners deliberate, Israel should offer quiet assistance—unconditionally and without demanding immediate political payback. Aid provided in a time of distress could help build something with Riyadh that is far more difficult to achieve through declarations: trust.