Connect with us

Uncategorized

Pakistan-Afghanistan Clashes Highlight Limits of Saudi-Pakistani Defense Pact: Experts

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif embrace each other on the day they sign a defense agreement, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Sept. 17, 2025. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS

Amid rising tensions along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, experts say the newly signed Saudi-Pakistani mutual defense pact is largely symbolic and unlikely to alter the regional balance of power.

On Friday, Afghanistan accused Pakistan of carrying out airstrikes on its territory, shattering a temporary ceasefire after days of escalating clashes that marked the deadliest fighting along the border in years.

“The truce has been broken and Afghanistan will retaliate,” a spokesman for the Taliban-led Afghan government said in a statement, announcing that Pakistan had “broken the ceasefire and bombed three locations in Paktika,” a province in the country’s eastern region.

Earlier this week, the two nations had agreed to a 48-hour ceasefire after border clashes killed dozens of troops.

The conflict erupted after Pakistan accused its neighbor of harboring and supporting terrorist groups responsible for attacks on its territory, while Afghanistan accused Pakistan of violating its airspace and carrying out strikes in the country’s eastern regions.

The fragile ceasefire came after appeals from major regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, with which nuclear-armed Pakistan signed a mutual defense pact last month, further solidifying a decades-long security partnership.

According to experts, the recent regional escalation shows how the Saudi-Pakistan partnership is largely symbolic, offering diplomatic backing and condemnation but unlikely to be tested in practice.

“”The recent Pakistan-Afghanistan clashes are unlikely to lead to invocation of the Saudi-Pakistan defense pact,” Edmund Fitton-Brown, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based think tank, told The Algemeiner.

He explained that the threat from Afghanistan, while politically serious, is not strong enough to push Pakistan to seek support from a third party, since the country is far stronger than the hostile forces along the contentious border.

“The Saudis, as central players in the Islamic world, will also want to be seen as welcoming Afghanistan’s gradual rehabilitation,” Brown said, noting that even if the pact were invoked, it is unlikely they would want to intervene in the conflict.

More broadly, he argued that this recent escalation underscores the limits of the Saudi-Pakistan defense pact, emphasizing that “most of the challenges that both countries face do not rise to the level of war between states.”

“”The possible war scenarios that do exist — Pakistan with India, Saudi Arabia with Iran — are not ones in which the other party to the pact would want to get involved, and it is inconceivable that Pakistan is offering a nuclear guarantee to the Saudis,” Brown told The Algemeiner.

Pakistan has repeatedly argued that its nuclear weapons are intended solely as a deterrent against India.

As the only nuclear-armed, Muslim-majority nation with the Islamic world’s largest army, Pakistan’s newly signed defense pact has raised questions about shifts in Middle East power and regional dynamics.

“”The agreement states that any aggression against either country shall be considered an aggression against both,” the Pakistani Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement following the signing of the pact.

While no further details have been disclosed, the partnership reportedly “encompasses all military means,” ranging from armed forces and nuclear cooperation to intelligence sharing.

Pakistan has even openly declared that it “”will make available” its nuclear program to Saudi Arabia if needed.

However, experts maintain that Pakistan’s ability to provide a nuclear umbrella to Saudi Arabia is dubious, as its longest-range missile cannot reach most potential threats to the country.

“The deal’s military value appears negligible beyond its symbolic photo-op,” Brown told The Algemeiner. “Pakistan lacks the capability to project power over 2,600 miles to Saudi Arabia.”

The pact is also designed to strengthen Saudi Arabia’s long-term defense autonomy, with defense industry collaboration, technology transfer, and military co-production and training, among other key initiatives.

Although the Saudi-Pakistani relationship has long been close, Brown explained that mutual support between the two nations has faced significant limitations.

“This new mutual defense pact is likely to remain a symbolic agreement, with its main applicability in nonbelligerent arenas, such as training and procurement,” he told The Algemiener.

Experts have also noted that the new pact could heighten regional tensions, strengthening Saudi Arabia’s defenses against Iran and its allies while also signaling its strategic posture toward Israel.

Yet, Brown argued that it makes little sense to suggest the pact is directed at Israel, given there is no realistic prospect of conflict between the Jewish state and either Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, whereas Iran remains far more active against both countries.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Uncategorized

As voting nears, Israeli democracy is not healthy

When Israel’s Supreme Court upheld the right of Arab parties last week to run in the country’s Oct. 27 election, they didn’t only provide Israel’s 2 million-plus Arab citizens a reason to vote. They also sent yet another signal in the incredible noise of these elections: Israeli democracy is not healthy.

Every time Israel has held elections in the last two decades, this cycle repeats: The Central Elections Committee — a body mostly made up of politicians — bars Arab parties or candidates, the Supreme Court puts them back on the ballot, and the country congratulates itself that its democratic guardrails held up to the pressure. But when Israel’s political representatives think democracy means disqualifying parties representing 20% of its electorate, the guardrails are not holding. When that 20% of the electorate is told its voices are unwanted and its opinions suspect enough to ban, it is nearly impossible to call Israel a healthy democracy.

And there’s a deeper story here, too — one that came to a head in 2023, connected to the decades-long march of the populist far-right in Israel against the Supreme Court. Recall that one of the first things that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government did upon taking power was to announce a “judicial overhaul plan” built on the populist claim that the elected politicians are the only true representatives of the people, and the unelected, elitist, liberal-leftist Supreme Court ought to be subservient to them.

Since then, they have tried to eliminate the Court’s ability to review the quasi-constitutional Basic Laws, left the court’s top positions unfilled and languishing, and managed to pass a bill putting judicial appointments in political hands. In short, the Court is not simply a neutral referee in the fight over whether Arab parties can run. Its independence and authority are themselves at the center of Israel’s political struggle.

When the court restored Arab parties to the ballot, and liberals breathed a sigh of relief, the right went to work. It is telling its base that the Court, by simply upholding the most basic tenet of a democratic system — that parties be allowed to run regardless of their political positions — is in bed with the enemy: Arabs. In other words, it weaponizes the court ruling as proof of what it has been saying all along: that this is not the court of the Israeli people, it is the Arab’s court, the left’s court, and it must be brought to heel.

This is the double bind the Israeli Supreme Court has existed in for years. It is more hostage than guardrail. I have spent my career in Israeli civil society, and now lead an organization that funds a good deal of it, which is a long way of saying I have watched this cycle from close enough to know that the relief is a trap.

The court recognizes the part  it plays in this game of political football, and it is caving to pressures and changing its own internal approach. The discussions it held last week were not limited to the Elections Committee’s decision to disqualify all the Arab parties. It went further. The court recommended Sami Abu Shehadeh of the Balad party withdraw his candidacy so that it would not have to disqualify him. Yes, Sami wrote an appalling article on Oct. 8 — one that I find deeply repugnant. But for many years, the court held that disqualification required extensive and consistent evidence of support for terrorism or opposition to democracy. On that basis, it allowed both Jewish and Arab candidates to run, even when they had written or said things that were unpopular, racist, or dangerous. And when it came to Abu Shehadeh, there was no solid evidence of a sustained pattern showing that he supported violence or opposed democratic principles. The court did not want to depart from its own precedent, but it could not withstand the pressure of public sentiment, so it asked Sami not to run. He withdrew.

It is clear to me that if Sami were Jewish, he would never have been disqualified. Jewish politicians have said things just as horrifying as he has, and they are consistently allowed to run. People fighting for Israeli democracy — both here in the U.S. and in Israel — can’t go to the mat for Israel’s democratic institutions without dealing with the essence of what democracy is.

In a democracy, the majority does not extend equality to the minority as a kindness. And for members of the minority, democracy is a bargain: You choose to live with the outcome because you had a real chance to shape it — by voting for politicians who represent your interests. With these bans, Israel asks two million citizens of the country to hold up their end of this bargain — to pay taxes and vote— while informing them every few years that the state’s end of the bargain is actually negotiable. That equality is not assured. That their parties could be barred from running.

Democracy is only more than a word if every citizen has both the right to vote and the right to govern. Israel simply is not a democracy if it fails to offer Palestinian citizens full participation. Period. Israel’s Palestinian citizens are not a test Israeli democracy has to pass, where the Supreme Court is a cheat code. Israel’s Palestinian citizens and their rights are what Israeli democracy ought to be made of.

Yes, it is a relief to know that Israel’s Supreme Court restored the Arab parties to the ballot, but we ought to notice what we are relieved about: that judges had to stop Israel’s elected representatives from cutting out a fifth of the electorate just five weeks before a general election. A democracy that has to be rescued from its own politicians on a regular basis is not a healthy one.

The post As voting nears, Israeli democracy is not healthy appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

‘Remember 7.10.23’: In Israel, Hostage Square bears few remnants of a national crisis – but trauma lingers 

(JTA) — TEL AVIV – In the days following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, the families of the hostages held in Gaza turned the plaza next to the Tel Aviv Museum of Art into what became known as Hostage Square.

Filled with “Bring Them Home” signs and hostage posters, yellow ribbons and yellow balloons, the square hosted demonstrations and press conferences.

It was here that the families created a replica of a Hamas tunnel and established the Empty Shabbat Table, a haunting art installation to remind visitors – and especially the Israeli government – that their loved ones still languished in Gaza. And it was here, two years later, that the families and thousands of other Israelis gathered to watch the last of the living hostages return to Israel.

Three years after the attack on Simchat Torah, there are few remnants of the hostage families’ encampment: the tunnel replica, a few yellow ribbons and a sign bearing the words “Remember 7.10.23.” During the days leading up to the third anniversary, some paid respects to the few hostage families who set up a sukkah on the square, but the plaza was nearly empty.

By all outward appearances, Israelis have moved on.

Yet beneath the surface, many are still grappling with the trauma of Oct. 7 and the multifront war the attack triggered.

In a Channel 12 TV poll in June, 74% of respondents said they fear that terrorists will carry out another large-scale attack, and 66% said they want the Oct. 7 attack to be investigated by a state commission of inquiry.

Last month, in an Israel Democracy Institute survey, 68% of Jewish Israelis and 32% of Arab Israelis said the Oct. 7 attack is a “central factor” in deciding which party to vote for, behind security and the high cost of living.

In the café at the edge of Hostage Square, Isaac Badra, a 33-year-old realtor, recalled how he and his wife opened their home to their upstairs neighbors because the Badras live on the “safer” ground floor and their Tel Aviv building has no bomb shelter. The trauma persists, he said.

He vividly remembered the air-raid sirens, reserve soldiers rushing to base on Simchat Torah and the frantic phone calls with his wife’s family near the Gaza border as Hamas attacked Sderot, where they live.

“My wife’s mother said she saw terrorists in the street, but I couldn’t grasp what she was saying,” he recalled. When he turned on the TV, he realized the scale of the attack. “I locked all of our doors and our windows and prayed.”

Three years later, Badra said, “When I hear noises outside, I jump. When Arab construction workers shout out to each other, I jump. And now I doubt whether my friends abroad really have our back.”

Roni Shoval, a defense industry worker from northern Israel not far from the Lebanon border, said the trauma of the past three years “is still inside me.” He called the attacks “a modern Holocaust for Israel.”

Even three years later, “I’m not ready to visit Nova,” he said, referring to the memorial at the site of the music festival where Hamas murdered 378 people and abducted dozens more. “Look, I’m getting goosebumps now just talking about it.”

Shoval, 54, is still doing IDF reserve duty, years beyond the maximum age because the IDF needs his expertise. He doesn’t want the same for his children.

“My son will be drafted soon,” he said. “Back in the day, I served in Gaza and Lebanon. I don’t want him sent to Gaza and Lebanon.”

At a nearby table, 24-year-old Yael Meyer sat with classmates from Tel Aviv University. The attack the previous day aboard a flydubai flight bound for Tel Aviv, they said, only reinforced the trauma of Oct. 7 and the war that followed.

“I’m always aware that there could be another terror attack. But I always had the sense that the security services would protect us.” Since Oct. 7, that trust in the government is gone, she said.

Her friend Talia Zecler, also 24, said she felt “helpless” after the attack. “I was angry at my country. Entire families were killed or kidnapped,” she added. “It feels like we’re living in an endless war.”

Her heart races when the sound of a passing motorcycle resembles an air-raid siren. But at the same time, she still marvels at the bravery and solidarity of ordinary Israelis in the months after the attack.

“People became more connected after Oct. 7. They volunteered everywhere, including at Hostage Square,” she said. “There was a sense of unity, that we’re in this together, and we saw it on the flydubai flight.

“This is the Israeli spirit.”

Sitting in the café with her parents, S., a 19-year-old IDF soldier, said the trauma she experienced on Oct. 7 at her home in Jerusalem “is minuscule” compared to the experience of those whose families were directly harmed by the attacks on the Gaza border and, later, attacks by Hezbollah, Iran and the Houthis.

“Sure, when I hear a plane flying in the sky, I think, will there be another war with Iran? I immediately go there,” said S., whose name could not be published due to military protocol.

But as the country prepares to vote for the next government on Oct. 27, she plans to channel her hopes and dreams in the voting booth.

“The most important things for me right now are to have a national investigation of what happened on Oct. 7 and to repair our relations not only with our immediate neighbors but everywhere. We don’t live in a vacuum,” she said.

The post ‘Remember 7.10.23’: In Israel, Hostage Square bears few remnants of a national crisis – but trauma lingers  appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Antisemitic flyers turn up in Ontario neighborhood where a man charged at a synagogue two weeks ago

(JTA) — Police in the Ontario town where a gunman charged the Sons of Jacob synagogue on Yom Kippur are investigating antisemitic flyers distributed around the synagogue’s neighborhood..

In an Oct. 1 press release, Belleville, Ontario, police encouraged those with tips or video evidence to contact police.

“We recognize that incidents such as this can cause concern within our community,” the police said. “Hate has no place in Belleville, and the Belleville Police Service remains in contact with community leaders and are taking proactive steps to support the safety and well-being of residents.”

Police have not identified the distributor of the flyers, and no arrests have been made.

The Canadian Jewish News published photos of the flyers, which included antisemitic conspiracy theories, such as “every single aspect of the Covid agenda is Jewish” and “every single aspect of abortion is Jewish.”

Coming so soon after the attack, the flyers rattled Sons of Jacob congregant Sari Watson, 40. “It’s so incredibly concerning to see this sort of antisemitic rhetoric surface, less than two weeks after the shooting,” said Watson, who skipped attending services the night of the shooting because she was wary of the increase in antisemitic violence in Canada. “This is a sign that this sort of hatred has infiltrated the public consciousness here.”

Belleville police chief Murray Rodd has confirmed the Sept. 20 attack was deliberate.

“This was an exclusive threat to our Jewish community,” he said soon after the attack. “There is no indication there was a threat to any other population or segment of our community, and it was a hate-motivated crime.”

According to police and Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit, the shooter, identified as 29-year-old Sean Ward of nearby Quinte West, Ontario, opened fire on Const. Jeff Smith, who was stationed outside the synagogue as security. Smith, who was seriously wounded, returned fire, and another officer who arrived at the scene also fired at Ward. Ward later died of his injuries. Smith remains hospitalized.

A GoFundMe site dedicated to Smith’s recovery has raised nearly $1 million on behalf of the Canadian Jewish community.

This article originally appeared on JTA.org.

The post Antisemitic flyers turn up in Ontario neighborhood where a man charged at a synagogue two weeks ago appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News