The defense pact recently concluded between Islamic Republic of Pakistan and kingdom of Saudi Arabia allows Riyadh to benefit from Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella without building its own arsenal. For Saudi, it’s strategic security; for Pakistan, it’s dangerous exposure, tying its nuclear credibility to Gulf politics. Ordinary Pakistanis gain nothing, while risk of sanctions, isolation, or being dragged into Saudi–Iran hostilities grows.
Pakistan was pressured to join Saudi’s Yemen war (2015), but Parliament voted “no.” The current pact bypasses Parliament, showing military overrule. Imagine Pakistani soldiers or assets deployed in Yemen-like adventures again, ordinary Pakistanis pay in blood, refugees, sectarian blowback, and regional hostility.
The pact gives the military regime quick cash, energy, and political legitimacy. But this is like a payday loan: elites pocket benefits while citizens inherit instability, inflation, and regional hostility.
Pakistan becomes a “security contractor” for Saudi needs rather than a sovereign state. Riyadh fears U.S. abandonment after events like Israel’s attack on Qatar. To hedge, Saudis buy Pakistani guarantees. But this places Pakistan on the frontline of a Saudi–Iran rivalry that has nothing to do with Pakistan’s core interests.
Israel will also see this suspiciously and would target Pakistan clandestinely and overtly. Internal security maybe further compromised and fault lines to expand in the active presence of such actors.
Ask yourself, will Saudi Arabia defend Pakistan if India attacks? Unlikely. Will Pakistan be asked to defend Saudi if Iran retaliates? Almost certainly. This is a one-way pact dressed up as “mutual defense.”
Historically, Pakistan balanced between Gulf states, Iran, and the wider Muslim world. By tying itself so tightly to Riyadh, Pakistan risks losing credibility as a mediator and burns bridges with Iran and even Turkey. The loss of neutrality reduces Pakistan’s bargaining power in the Islamic world.
Saudis view the deal as a pivot into China’s orbit while hedging against the U.S. But Pakistan’s institutions were bypassed, decisions made by generals, not the people. Instead of navigating multipolarity with strategy, Pakistan is being monopolized into one camp, limiting foreign policy options.
Already facing inflation, unemployment, climate crises, and debt, Pakistanis don’t need new geopolitical fires. Military ownership of the pact means profits for the elite (defense deals, contracts, aid packages) but higher risks of terrorism, sectarianism, and foreign entanglement for citizens. The public foots the bill for wars that aren’t theirs.
The Saudi-Pakistan pact looks like “strategic depth” for Riyadh but is really “strategic debt” for Islamabad. For the generals, it’s money and leverage; for the people, it’s more instability, more war risk, and less sovereignty.
