Nournews: The leaders of Pakistan, Türkiye and Saudi Arabia have stressed that the defense agreement between the three countries is directed against no country. Donald Trump, however, has strongly welcomed the deal and sought to frame it as part of his administration’s efforts to build regional security. In a post on Truth Social, the US president said he was “very pleased” with the signing of the trilateral defense agreement between Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and Pakistan, describing it as a sign of closer ties and greater unity among the countries of the region.
Yet behind this welcome lies a different reality. The region’s growing push for security cooperation and the localization of defense arrangements stems less from Washington’s policies than from the bitter experience of recent years, particularly the consequences of the Ramadan War — an experience that once again exposed the ineffectiveness of America’s model of “selling security.” For this reason, the agreement cannot simply be portrayed as an achievement of US foreign policy.
A Rush to Manufacture an Achievement
Trump is presenting the agreement as a major achievement at a time when his record, both at home and abroad, falls significantly short of his campaign promises. This is particularly true as developments in the war and Iran’s effective management of the Strait of Hormuz have challenged many of Washington’s calculations.
In such an environment, even the smallest regional development can become an opportunity for the White House to manufacture a political achievement. Trump’s response to the trilateral agreement can also be viewed from this perspective. Alongside the projection of success, the move could, by suggesting the emergence of new alignments in West Asia, contribute to divisions among regional countries and create a security buffer for the United States and the Israeli regime.
The more important reality, however, is that the agreement is less a product of Washington’s security policy than a sign of growing concern among US allies about the future of relying on the United States for their security.
The End of the ‘Rented Security’ Dream
Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have spent billions of dollars in recent years on weapons purchases and military cooperation with the United States. But developments over the past year have shown that, at critical moments, Washington’s strategic priority remains the preservation of the Israeli regime’s interests.
The Ramadan War also raised a fundamental question for regional countries: If the United States faces challenges in securing its own bases and interests, how can it serve as a guarantor of security for others?
In practice, bases and weapons that were supposed to serve as instruments of security became part of the threat equation during wartime. The US use of the territory and military capabilities of regional countries also exposed them, unwillingly, to the direct consequences of the conflict, imposing heavy political, economic and security costs on them. Thus, “rented security” not only failed to provide lasting security; at times, it itself became a factor contributing to greater insecurity.
Indigenous Security Requires Independence
Contrary to Trump’s narrative, building indigenous security cannot be achieved simply by forming military alliances. Its prerequisite is genuine independence in security, political and strategic decision-making. A country cannot remain militarily and security-dependent on the United States while simultaneously claiming to be building an independent regional security architecture.
From this perspective, the Saudi-Türkiye-Pakistan agreement can be seen as an indication of regional countries’ efforts to find new avenues for cooperation — a path that, if it is to lead to lasting security, must begin with the real roots of insecurity in the region.
Accordingly, indigenous security only becomes meaningful when the region moves away from dependence on US military bases and West Asian countries take responsibility for their own security. Genuine regional convergence will not come through alliance-building favored by extra-regional powers, but through reducing dependence, identifying the roots of crises and establishing independent security arrangements. This is a reality Trump has chosen to overlook in his polished narrative about the agreement.
NOURNEWS