Skeptics warn that the trilateral defence pact could inflame already volatile Middle‑East dynamics by drawing Iran and its proxies into a broader confrontation. By formalising a NATO‑style collective defence clause, Riyadh, Ankara and Islamabad risk being perceived as forming a hostile bloc, prompting Tehran to bolster its own military posture and potentially expand support for Houthi operations.
The pact also raises concerns about duplication of existing security arrangements with the United States, which already provides extensive military assistance to Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Adding a new multilateral framework may create coordination gaps, duplicate command structures and strain US‑led supply chains.
From an economic perspective, the agreement could divert limited defence budgets toward joint exercises and procurement that may not align with each country's most pressing needs. Pakistan, for example, faces internal security challenges that compete with overseas commitments.
Finally, critics point out that the pact lacks transparent oversight mechanisms, making it difficult for regional actors and civil societies to assess its impact on civilian populations in conflict zones like Yemen. The absence of clear dispute‑resolution procedures could lead to unintended escalations if a member perceives an attack as insufficiently addressed by the others. Observers will monitor whether the agreement deepens mistrust or contributes to a security dilemma in the Gulf.