#2

All three countries are Sunni-dominated authoritarian states without checks and balances.

Turkiye has the strongest military of the three, with power projection capability in the Middle East and North Africa -- and they have the most experience supported by a capable "CIA" (the MIT).

Saudi Arabia has the most money of the three and will buy armaments. They can also covertly fund jihadist groups to foment trouble in certain countries.

Pakistan is basically "an army with a country" and has nuclear weapons, something Ankara and Riyadh don't have.

Nuclear technology might be the "lure of the Siren" that drew Ankara and Riyadh into this military matrimony with Islamabad.

Iran is not the big loser here, Hindu-led India might be.

Turkiye and Saudi Arabia would be compelled to militarily respond at the next flashpoint between Delhi and Islamabad.

And China may be the biggest winner in this new arrangement, as they seem to have excellent economic relations with all three of these countries.

#5

Good point.

And on the "Middle Eastern street," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan clearly beats out MBS and the Saudi hypocrites as a "defender of the faith." In fact, it was Erdogan's faction of jihadists that won in Syria, not the Saudis.

Note that all three of these allies have Shia minorities and two have Kurdish minorities.

Pakistan: 21.5 million to over 40 million
Saudi Arabia: 10"15% of overall population
Turkiye: 1-2% (negligible)

The Iranians can covertly foment trouble in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but not so much in Turkiye. And why would they? These two powers continue a robust economic relationship and they cooperate against militant Kurds (PKK and PJAK).

Ankara has been cracking down on ISIS sympathisizers, so Riyadh is acting more prudent.

From a security standpoint, Ankara appears to gain the most from this cynical arrangement.

And there is always nuclear technology dangling like a carrot on a Pakistani stick in front of the noses of Ankara and Riyadh.