jasdooit

The assault on Doha has led to extensive and serious consequences across various levels. At the geopolitical level, it has resulted in significant division. The Arab monarchies or states are now moving away from the US, as its pro-Israel stance has begun to dangerously affect their sovereignty, indeed their very survival. Challenging Israel effectively means challenging the Israel-US-Western Europe alliance. Therefore, to achieve a degree of strategic equilibrium in the Middle East and Gulf region, it is necessary for the Arabs to unite, establish regional and extra-regional strategic alliances, and involve the China-Russia alliance as well. Only in this way can a genuine balance of power emerge in the region to prevent this unilateral, relentless, merciless, and senseless aggression. However, this situation risks further dividing the world, placing major global powers against each other and potentially sparking another World War—all due to the recklessness of an imprudent, self-centered leader in Israel!

At the international level, the SMDA is expected to draw in all GCC nations, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, and Iran. If realized, this could form a powerful Muslim alliance, possessing the human resources, economic strength, military capabilities, technological expertise, and political influence to prevent aggression against it. In this context, a binding, steadfast commitment of “an attack on one ally is considered an attack on all” takes on even greater strategic significance. All that is needed is a clear strategic vision, foresight, and strong political determination to pursue it!

A highly complex scenario is expected to arise at the Pakistan-KSA-India tripartite level. The KSA maintains a strong economic relationship with India, accommodates millions of its workers, and exports billions of dollars in crude oil to it. Under the SMDA, the KSA will be restricted from supporting Pakistan in the event of any attack against it. Pakistan may not anticipate Saudi forces arriving in Kashmir or other regions to defend its borders; however, the KSA can certainly assist in strengthening Pakistan’s military and technological capabilities. This would create a more balanced regional power dynamic and impose clear limits on India’s regional dominance. This is the main concern for the Indians!

At the bilateral level, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia maintain a long-standing relationship. It is likely that Pakistan would be expected to deploy specific numbers and types of formations, units, and weapon systems (notably of Chinese origin!) in Saudi Arabia to address shared threat perceptions. Would the US permit US-origin weapon systems (such as F-16s) to be stationed in Saudi Arabia, supposedly to deter and/or combat all ‘perceived threats’? Stationing Pakistani forces in Saudi Arabia would have several strategic implications. First, it would contribute to stabilizing the regional geopolitical landscape. Second, their presence would strengthen the strategic balance, deter external aggressors, and restrict their options. Third, it would promote the expansion of the SMDA, both regionally and beyond. This would enhance the mutual security of all members within the larger bloc. Fourth, ominously, it would compel aggressors to broaden their aggressive strategies to include Pakistan, its military and intelligence agencies, as well as its assets, both nuclear and conventional, in their plans. Fifth, Pakistan’s economic vulnerability will remain its critical weakness, which aggressors can easily exploit. Sixth, importantly, it would help stabilize Saudi Arabia’s internal situation, preventing ‘externally inspired movements’ aimed at destabilizing, undermining, and polarizing society, and critically attempting to ‘introduce democracy’ and/or incite a regime change!

At the geostrategic level, the SMDA will carry significant and extensive consequences. As an initial step, it needs to establish a realistic, collaborative understanding of threats and build upon that foundation. If the idea of a Greater Israel is to be taken into account, then, regardless of the rhetoric, Israel alone lacks the military strength and ability to execute such a plan. Crucially, it does not have enough personnel to capture and maintain control over large areas for any considerable period. Will the US-backed Western nations then supply the essential manpower, additional military assets, multi-domain capabilities, leadership, command and control systems, among other things, for this purpose? Or will they engage in a conflict on behalf of Israel’s vision of a Greater Israel? Either scenario would lead to massive and catastrophic consequences at both regional and global levels.

Finally, the nuclear factor. In the Indo-Pakistan scenario, Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities are referred to as ‘The Equalisers,’ as they balance the odds for Pakistan against any aggressor. They counteract the numerical gap in conventional forces as well as in military technology. Maintaining the option of ‘First Use’ is an essential necessity and crucial to Pakistan’s security. It aims to prevent all forms of aggression against the country. However, Pakistan’s nuclear policy concerning India is tailored to the current strategic situation in the Indo-Pak subcontinent. It does not have to be applied elsewhere. In the case of the SMDA, the strategic environment changes completely, along with its dynamics, needs, and pressures. Therefore, the policy must stay adaptable and adjust itself, if necessary, to the new strategic conditions. Crucially, it must remain entirely ambiguous; for within ambiguity lies deterrence and security!

The SMDA, which has taken a long time to materialize, formalizes the ongoing, existing strategic alliance between Pakistan and the KSA. It is a beneficial agreement where Saudi economic strength is combined with Pakistan’s military capability to create a powerful and influential force in the region. The SMDA does not have any aggressive intentions; however, it will make any actions against it militarily, economically, and politically unviable and highly expensive!

Tailpiece: It is said that approximately 40,000 to 50,000 American soldiers are deployed throughout the Middle East, located in major bases as well as smaller forward operating posts. Could it be possible that, in a critical situation, they might effectively serve as launching points for deeper operations, act as Trojan Horses, function as fifth columnists, or potentially, ominously, become occupiers?

Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).