Saudi-Pakistan Defence Pact Rattles India’s Gulf Stakes

The defence pact signed this week between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has jolted India’s carefully cultivated position in the Gulf. For a quarter century, New Delhi invested in peeling Riyadh away from Islamabad’s embrace, building a relationship rooted in energy, trade, and a three-million-strong diaspora. That slow, deliberate diplomacy has been upended by a deal that pledges each country will treat aggression against the other as its own. The symbolism alone is damaging; the strategic implications could be worse.

The agreement did not emerge in a vacuum. It comes months after the May conflict between India and Pakistan, when cross-border fire and aerial incursions exposed once again the fragility of deterrence on the subcontinent. For Riyadh, the timing was not accidental. Saudi leaders are watching Israel’s strikes in Doha and its new doctrine declaring that “any host of Hamas is a target.” They also see an America less willing to underwrite their security. In that climate, turning to Pakistan makes sense. Islamabad offers what Washington no longer guarantees: a battle-tested army, nuclear ambiguity, and a military establishment accustomed to Gulf deployments.

For Saudi Arabia, the pact is also leverage. By drawing Pakistan closer, Riyadh signals to Washington that its options are not limited to US arms and intelligence. It sends Israel a warning not to assume unchecked freedom of action in the Gulf. And it reassures a domestic audience that the kingdom is not standing alone in an increasingly volatile neighborhood. Yet this embrace carries its own risks. Riyadh has spent years cultivating India as a partner critical to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030, which depends on Indian investment, technology, and labor. Alienating New Delhi could cost billions. Saudi Arabia will try to compartmentalize, keeping Pakistan as a security partner and India as an economic one. But when conflicts escalate, compartmentalization collapses. In a future India-Pakistan war, Riyadh would struggle to honor treaty commitments without endangering its economic stake in India.

For New Delhi, the deal is a strategic setback with few upsides. It strengthens Pakistan’s diplomatic hand and narrows India’s options. Even if Riyadh never lifts a finger militarily, the mere existence of the pact tilts perception: Pakistan is no longer isolated, it is backed by the most powerful monarchy in the Gulf. In a crisis, a Saudi statement of solidarity with Islamabad or a flow of financial aid would shift the balance of narrative and morale. India’s energy security and remittance flows would suddenly appear vulnerable to political currents far beyond its control.

The danger goes beyond Riyadh. Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar has already hinted that other Gulf states are exploring similar pacts. If the UAE, Qatar, or Kuwait were to sign, the region could edge toward a loose Islamic security bloc – financed by Gulf coffers, staffed by Pakistani forces, and framed as a collective deterrent. Such a development would not be a NATO overnight, but even a partial replication would leave India facing a hostile alignment across its western flank. In a region where symbolism often hardens into reality, the possibility cannot be dismissed.

India has little choice but to rethink its playbook. It can demand assurances from Riyadh that the pact is not directed against it, though such words are unlikely to calm deep unease. It can deepen ties with the UAE, Oman, and Qatar, hoping to dilute Saudi-Pakistan dominance. It can rely more heavily on the US, France, and Israel for advanced weaponry and diplomatic cover. It can accelerate military modernization to blunt the sense that Pakistan’s confidence has been bolstered by Saudi endorsement. But it cannot afford to dismiss the pact as empty symbolism. Symbolism is precisely what shapes deterrence and decision-making in South Asia.

The deeper problem is that India’s Gulf strategy has rested too heavily on economics. Oil imports, labor migration, remittances, and investment projects created an assumption that trade would override geopolitics. The Saudi-Pakistan pact is a reminder that in the Gulf, security still trumps commerce. Pakistan understood this; India did not. Riyadh did not turn to Islamabad for workers or markets. It turned to a military it could trust to bleed alongside its own.

Whether the pact proves durable or largely declaratory is still an open question. For Riyadh, it is as much a signal to Washington as it is a promise to Islamabad. For Islamabad, it is a lifeline at a time of domestic crisis and economic fragility. For India, it is a wake-up call. The Gulf is no longer a space where it can assume economic weight translates into political influence. If New Delhi wants to safeguard its interests, it must present itself as a credible security partner, not just a buyer of oil and builder of malls.

The Saudi-Pakistan pact may not yet be the foundation of an Islamic NATO. It may remain more posturing than pivot. But posturing, repeated and reinforced, creates its own momentum. If Riyadh pushes smaller Gulf states to follow suit, if Pakistan markets the pact as an extension of nuclear deterrence, and if Indian politicians frame it as a betrayal, perception could congeal into policy. And perception alone can alter calculations in Islamabad, Riyadh, and New Delhi in ways that make crises more dangerous.

This is not just about Saudi Arabia choosing Pakistan over India. It is about a region in flux, where Israel acts with impunity, the US withdraws, and middle powers scramble to improvise their own security orders. In that scramble, Pakistan has reinserted itself into Gulf geopolitics with a force India cannot ignore. The comfort zone New Delhi believed it had built over two decades has narrowed, and the rules of the game are being rewritten – not in boardrooms and trade forums, but in defence pacts signed behind closed doors.

India must decide quickly whether it wants to be a bystander to that rewriting, or a participant shaping the new security order. The price of passivity is already clear: its rivals will fill the void.