26/08/2026
By Ayaz Ahmed| Mentor. Editor, Columnist and Commentator of International Relations
Last part
One of the greatest tests for the Mecca Agreement, and for its possible evolution into a future Muslim NATO, will be Israel's countermeasures. Over the decades, Israel has developed highly sophisticated intelligence capabilities. It has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to conduct covert operations, pe*****te hostile networks and shape regional security dynamics through both kinetic and non-kinetic means.
One likely strategy would be to sustain an environment in which Iran is held responsible for every major security crisis in the region. Given Israel's demonstrated intelligence reach, including its ability to pe*****te adversarial organisations and, according to various public reports, conduct covert operations inside Iran, it is conceivable that Israel will continue seeking opportunities to influence the regional security environment. If attacks are launched by Iran-backed militias or proxy groups against Saudi Arabia or other members of the Mecca Agreement, Tehran is likely to bear the immediate political and diplomatic blame, regardless of the full complexity of the circumstances.
The information domain has become equally important. In an era of information warfare, perceptions often shape strategic outcomes as much as military actions. Rapid attribution of attacks to Iranian-backed actors, coordinated media narratives and digital influence campaigns( which Israel will likely design) could generate pressure on the members of the Mecca Agreement to adopt a more confrontational posture towards Iran. Whether such attribution is accurate or premature, the political consequences could be significant.
The final, and perhaps the most formidable, challenge to the Mecca Agreement's transformation into a future Muslim NATO would be the United States. It is an established principle of international politics that no superpower, even a declining one, willingly permits the emergence of an independent strategic bloc within a region that has long remained under its political, military and economic influence. Any meaningful strategic autonomy achieved by the Muslim countries of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf would inevitably diminish America's sphere of influence in the region.
Such a development would also have significant economic repercussions. As the member states gradually reduce their dependence on American weapon systems, they may increasingly procure defence equipment from China, an emerging defence supplier, and Pakistan, whose defence industry, particularly in the field of aircraft production, is also gradually expanding. Such a shift would adversely affect American economic and strategic interests.
History provides several examples that continue to shape this perception. In 1973, King Faisal of Saudi Arabia imposed an oil embargo against the West. Two years later, in March 1975, he was assassinated by one of his nephews. The CIA and Mossad were behind the assassination, although no conclusive public evidence has established such involvement. Likewise, one can argue that the removal of Pakistan's Prime Minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who sought to revive the idea of an Islamic bloc through the 1974 OIC Summit in Lahore, which should also be viewed in a broader geopolitical context. Similarly, Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, was removed from power in 1953 after attempting to nationalise Iran's oil industry. This episode remains one of the most widely cited examples of foreign intervention in the domestic affairs of another state. John Perkins, in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, also argues that the United States has repeatedly employed political, economic and covert instruments to influence governments across the world.
Therefore, if the United States concludes that the Mecca Agreement, or any future Muslim NATO, is becoming sufficiently powerful to assert its strategic autonomy, it may resort to various overt and covert measures to counter such a development. The CIA, together with Mossad and Britain's MI6, possesses extensive operational experience, sophisticated intelligence capabilities and substantial financial resources. These agencies have both the experience and the capacity to conduct covert operations, influence political developments and facilitate regime change where they perceive their strategic interests to be at stake.
Consequently, this may prove to be the most formidable challenge confronting the Mecca Agreement in its evolution into a future Muslim NATO. The member states must, therefore, take this possibility into serious consideration and formulate appropriate contingency plans to safeguard themselves against any future attempts aimed at engineering political change, weakening the alliance or ultimately disintegrating the Mecca Agreement and any future Muslim NATO.
