Pakistani Military Patronage Of The Arab Kingdoms Would Advance American Interests

“Major Non-NATO Ally” Pakistan would replace its American patron’s regional role in containing Iran while also serving as its proxy for controlling the “Islamic NATO” that’s emerging at the crossroads of Afro-Eurasia.

Kuwait’s belated ratification of a three-year-old defense cooperation agreement with Pakistan in late July lent credence to Reuters’ report from earlier that month alleging that Kuwait also wants a Saudi-like mutual defense pact with Pakistan as do Bahrain and Jordan. The outlet cited a Pakistani security official with knowledge of the talks as clarifying that his country won’t consider dispatching troops there “at this stage”, but the wording of their statement suggests that it could indeed happen in the future.

Some Alt-Media commentators have presented the scenario of Pakistani military patronage of the Arab Kingdoms as being against American interests because it would supposedly lay the basis for a collective security mechanism between them and Iran for sustainably ensuring regional stability. That’s wishful thinking since Pakistan is a “Major Non-NATO Ally” whose de facto military dictatorship that entered into power after April 2022’s post-modern coup against former Prime Minister Imran Khan is very pro-US.

So close are they that Trump nowadays refers to Asim Munir, the man who really runs Pakistan, as “my favorite Field Marshal”. Their personal relationship is built upon Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s obsequiousness towards Trump. One example of their practical cooperation is the suspicion that Pakistan funnels terrorists and arms into Afghanistan in coordination with the US, which advances Islamabad’s goal of taming the Taliban and Washington’s of returning US troops to Bagram Airbase.

Pakistan has also reportedly requested a multibillion-dollar bailout from the US in exchange for mediating talks with Iran and is thus dependent on remaining within its patron’s good graces to avoid bankruptcy (once again). The country’s traditional Sino-US balancing act still officially remains in place, but it’s currently tilted very heavily in the latter’s favor, which further raises the odds that any military patronage of the Arab Kingdoms would only be agreed to with the US’ approval and coordinated with it.

This would advance American interests by replicating the “NATO 3.0” model of regional allies taking on more responsibilities and burdens in support of their shared interests. As regards the Gulf, nuclear-armed and highly experienced Pakistan’s military patronage of the Arab Kingdoms would deter Iranian attacks as all parties might believe (whether rightly or wrongly), with the Damocles’ sword of an all-out regional war making Iran think twice. The US could then focus on more muscularly containing China.

The consequently greater role that Pakistan would then play in a de facto expanded “Islamic NATO” – the emerging regional military-security coordination platform between itself, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkiye – would further ensure that this bloc serves US interests at the crossroads of Afro-Eurasia. Seeing as how “The US Is Waging A Hybrid World War Against Russia, China, & Iran”, the “Islamic NATO” could contribute to “security guarantees” for Ukraine, meddle in Central Asia, and contain and undermine Iran.

From those three’s perspective, it might be better for the US to continue overextending itself through military deployments in the Gulf that also place its troops in harm’s way than to fully withdraw and have Pakistan serve as its proxy there, thus eliminating the physical costs to the US if war breaks out again. In that event, the US would “Lead From Behind” by controlling the “Islamic NATO” through Pakistan, which would bathe in the false glory of superficially leading this pro-American transregional military bloc.