By Suresh Unnithan
The Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement (SMDA) between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, inked on September 17, 2025, formalizes a mutual defense commitment and deepens an already robust alliance, including Pakistan’s explicit offer to make its nuclear capabilities “available” to Riyadh if needed. This pact has triggered alarm bells in New Delhi, posing multifaceted challenges for India. Beyond the specter of nuclear proliferation, the agreement could enable Pakistan to access advanced US weaponry indirectly through Saudi Arabia, amplifying India’s strategic concerns. This updated analysis examines the dimensions of India’s unease, focusing on the nuclear threat, Pakistan’s potential arms acquisitions, diplomatic setbacks, and New Delhi’s response options, while incorporating fresh reactions from India and the international community as the pact’s ripples spread.
Pakistan’s explicit offer to make its nuclear capabilities “available” to Saudi Arabia, as articulated by Defense Minister Khawaja Asif, remains a primary source of India’s concern. With estimated 170-180 warheads, Pakistan’s arsenal is designed to counter India’s conventional military superiority. The prospect of this capability extending to Saudi Arabia raises fears of a nuclearized Middle East complicating India’s regional calculus. Indian strategists worry that a Saudi-Pakistan nuclear axis could embolden Islamabad in future border skirmishes, particularly after the May 2025 ceasefire violations along the Line of Control (LoC).
While logistical barriers—such as the complexity of transferring mobile nuclear launchers across regions—temper immediate proliferation risks, the rhetoric alone destabilizes India’s security environment. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has privately expressed concerns over potential Chinese involvement, with speculation that Beijing could use Pakistan as a conduit to supply nuclear technology to Riyadh, further tilting the regional balance. Such a scenario would not only challenge India’s nuclear deterrence but also strain its non-proliferation advocacy on global forums. Asif’s bold claim that Saudi forces would support Pakistan against Indian aggression, though likely hyperbolic, underscores the pact’s provocative tone.
A more immediate concern for India is the pact’s potential to circumvent U.S. sanctions on Pakistan’s arms acquisitions. Washington has restricted Pakistan’s access to advanced platforms like F-16 upgrades since the early 2010s, citing ties to militant groups. However, Saudi Arabia, a major buyer of U.S. arms with over $60 billion in deals during the Biden administration, could act as a conduit. Indian defense analysts describe this as a “game-changer,” warning that Saudi-funded acquisitions—potentially including precision-guided munitions or drone technology—could enhance Pakistan’s asymmetric capabilities against India.
This indirect access to U.S. weaponry exacerbates India’s military planning challenges. Pakistan’s bolstered arsenal could narrow India’s conventional edge, particularly in air superiority and precision strikes, forcing New Delhi to accelerate its own modernization programs. The Indian Air Force, already stretched with aging fleets, faces increased pressure to counter a reinvigorated Pakistani military backed by Saudi financial muscle—potentially including $3.4 billion in fresh Saudi aid to Islamabad.
The pact also represents a diplomatic setback for India, which has cultivated strong ties with Saudi Arabia. Bilateral trade exceeds $100 billion annually, driven by energy imports and remittances from 2.6 million Indian workers in the Kingdom. High-level engagements, including Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s 2019 visit and joint military exercises, had signaled a warming relationship. However, Pakistan’s nuclear offer and the defense agreement threaten to tilt Riyadh closer to Islamabad, potentially positioning Saudi Arabia as a mediator in Indo-Pak disputes—a role India vehemently opposes.
Indian policymakers fear that Saudi Arabia’s alignment with Pakistan could embolden Islamabad to internationalize the Kashmir issue, a long-standing irritant. It risks portraying India as regionally isolated, especially as its Gulf partnerships—particularly with the UAE—face new complexities in a multipolar Middle East. Analysts note that while India’s defense ties with Saudi Arabia are nascent compared to Pakistan’s long standing military training pacts, the SMDA could accelerate Riyadh’s pivot away from New Delhi.indianexpress.com
India’s official response has been restrained but pointed, evolving in the days since the pact’s signing. The MEA’s first statement urged Saudi Arabia to “mind sensitivities” in bilateral relations, emphasizing that New Delhi expects Riyadh to consider “mutual interests and sensitivities” in its strategic partnerships. In a follow-up briefing on September 19, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated that India is “closely studying the implications” of the pact, both politically and strategically, without issuing direct condemnation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has avoided public escalation, but internal recalibrations are underway.
To offset Saudi-Pakistan proximity, India is prioritizing stronger ties with other Gulf states, notably the UAE and Oman, through expanded joint exercises and economic corridors. New Delhi is also leveraging its Quad partnerships—comprising the U.S., Japan, and Australia—and deepening defense cooperation with Washington, including potential co-production of advanced munitions. On the military front, India is expediting indigenous programs like the Tejas Mk2 fighter jet and accelerating arms imports, such as additional Rafale jets from France and S-400 systems from Russia.
Diplomatically, New Delhi may push for stricter non-proliferation enforcement through the IAEA and UN bodies, though it treads carefully to avoid antagonizing Riyadh. Some Indian commentators, like former ambassador Talmiz Ahmad, argue the pact isn’t “bad news” for India per se, as it reflects Saudi diversification rather than hostility toward New Delhi, but warn of indirect risks to regional stability. Overall, India’s approach balances economic pragmatism with strategic hedging, viewing the SMDA as a “watershed” moment that demands vigilance without overreaction.
The SMDA has elicited a spectrum of responses from key global players, underscoring its potential to reshape alliances beyond South Asia.
Washington views the pact with unease, seeing it as a sign of eroding U.S. reliability in the Gulf amid Israel’s recent strike on Doha. U.S. officials have downplayed nuclear risks, insisting the agreement is defensive and not a proliferation trigger, but analysts warn it could complicate arms sales and counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan. Speculation on social media links the pact to U.S. interest in reclaiming Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan as a potential missile intercept site against Pakistani nukes aimed westward. The Biden administration has urged restraint, emphasizing shared non-proliferation goals.
Iran: Tehran has reacted sharply, labeling the pact a “dangerous escalation” that could fuel a regional arms race. Iranian officials fear it positions Pakistan as a Saudi proxy in proxy conflicts like Yemen, straining recent diplomatic thaws between Riyadh and Tehran. Despite recent high-level visits, including Ali Larijani’s trip to Riyadh, the SMDA has heightened Tehran’s suspicions of a Sunni nuclear bloc.middleeasteye.
While not issuing an official statement, Jerusalem is reportedly alarmed by the nuclear undertones, viewing it as an indirect threat amid escalating tensions post-Doha. Israeli media speculate the pact could deter aggressive actions but also embolden anti-Israel rhetoric from the Saudi-Pak axis.
Beijing has remained neutral publicly, welcoming the pact as a “positive development for regional stability” via state media, but privately supports it as a counterweight to U.S. influence—leveraging Pakistan as a key Belt and Road partner. Speculation persists on Chinese tech transfers via Islamabad.
The UAE has expressed cautious support, with Abu Dhabi eyeing potential expansion of the SMDA into a broader “Islamic NATO.” Oman and Qatar have signaled interest in joining, viewing it as insurance against faltering U.S. commitments. This could fragment India’s Gulf outreach.
In Pakistan, reactions are euphoric, with military leaders hailing a “strategic victory,” though critics warn of Middle East entanglements. Globally, the pact is seen as Riyadh’s hedge against U.S. unreliability, but it risks proxy escalations and non-proliferation setbacks
In short, the Pak-Saudi defense pact, with its nuclear undertones and arms implications, is a worrying concern for India. It is likely to augment Pakistan’s military capabilities, embolden its regional posture, and complicate India’s Gulf diplomacy. While immediate nuclear proliferation remains improbable, the strategic and symbolic weight of the SMDA demands a robust Indian response—one that integrates enhanced Gulf diversification, Quad synergies, and global advocacy. As international voices from Washington to Tehran echo New Delhi’s apprehensions, the pact’s true test will lie in whether it stabilizes or destabilizes an already volatile region.
