The Houthis’ advance in Yemen and the growing number of attacks against Saudi Arabia can no longer be viewed as merely a resurgence of the Yemeni civil war. They reveal a profound shift in the balance of power across the Middle East.

Threatened along its southern border, struck at its energy infrastructure, and increasingly concerned about its export routes, the kingdom is discovering, all at once, the limits of its military power, Washington’s hesitations, and the fragility of its new alliances.

Above all, the crisis is subjecting the defense agreement concluded in Mecca among Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan to its first real test. Presented as the beginning of a new regional security architecture, the pact was meant to establish that an attack on one of its members would concern the other two.

Saudi Arabia is now under attack. Yet, for the moment, each of its partners is consulting, watching, and playing for time.

The Promise in Mecca, the Test in Yemen

The contrast is striking. The agreement proclaims collective solidarity, but appears to have neither an integrated command structure, nor forces assigned in advance, nor an automatic mechanism for intervention. Its full text and operational protocols have not been made public.

Pakistan’s caution provides the first illustration. Islamabad does not want to jeopardize its relations with neighboring Iran or be drawn into a regional confrontation alongside Saudi Arabia and, indirectly, the United States. Pakistani public opinion would also have difficulty accepting an operation that could be portrayed as serving Israeli interests.

Turkey, too, intends to preserve its freedom of action. Ankara may offer intelligence, equipment, training, or mediation. It does not appear willing to commit its forces to a war whose objectives or duration it would not control. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will most likely seek to turn Saudi vulnerability into an instrument of Turkish influence rather than a military obligation.

The Mecca Pact is therefore not entirely hollow. It can facilitate joint exercises, industrial cooperation, arms sales, and intelligence sharing. Above all, it allows Riyadh to display its determination to diversify its partnerships and remind Washington that the kingdom has other options.

But the crisis exposes the crucial difference between a declaration of solidarity and a genuine military alliance. For now, the pact looks more like a document to be brandished than a mechanism designed to act.

In Mecca, the signatories proclaimed that an attack on one would be the concern of all. In Yemen, each is discovering that it remains, first and foremost, the concern of the country under attack.

Mohammed bin Salman’s Strategic Solitude

Saudi Arabia has one of the most expensive and best-equipped militaries in the Middle East. It possesses modern aircraft, air defense systems, and immense financial resources. But the war it launched in 2015 demonstrated that technological superiority alone was not enough to defeat a movement deeply rooted in Yemeni territory.

After seven years of a costly and politically fruitless campaign, Riyadh has no desire to plunge back into a war with no clearly defined endgame. Yet allowing the Houthis to advance toward southern ports and positions controlling the Bab el-Mandeb Strait would pose a direct threat to the kingdom’s vital interests.

Saudi vulnerability now stems from the convergence of three dangers: Iranian disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi pressure on Bab el-Mandeb, and attacks on the East–West........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)