Pakistan-Saudi military alliance deepens: 13,000 troops deployed amid regional power vacuums and fossil fuel geopolitics

Indigenous Baloch and Pashtun communities in Pakistan’s western regions view Saudi-backed military operations as a continuation of colonial-era divide-and-rule tactics, where their lands are treated as battlegrounds for external powers. Gulf tribes, historically nomadic and decentralized, have long resisted centralized military control, making Saudi-Pakistani joint operations culturally alien to indigenous governance traditions. Neither narrative acknowledges how these deployments disrupt traditional resource-sharing systems in arid regions like Balochistan, where water and grazing rights are sacred.

This deployment echoes Cold War-era Pakistani-Saudi alliances, where Pakistan’s military was deployed to defend Gulf monarchies against perceived communist threats, particularly during the Soviet-Afghan War. The 1980s saw Pakistan’s military-industrial complex become deeply intertwined with Saudi oil wealth, creating a dependency that persists today. Historically, such alliances have been temporary, with Pakistan often withdrawing troops after economic crises or shifts in Gulf leadership, as seen in the 1990s post-Gulf War drawdown.

In West African Sahel regions, military deployments by former colonial powers are often framed as 'security assistance,' but local communities perceive them as neocolonial resource extraction, similar to how Pakistani troops are viewed in Yemen. Gulf states like the UAE and Saudi Arabia have increasingly relied on South Asian labor for military roles, reflecting a racialized hierarchy where non-Arab troops are seen as expendable. Meanwhile, in Latin America, military pacts with the U.S. have historically led to coups and civil conflicts, offering a cautionary parallel to Pakistan’s current trajectory.

Military deployments in arid regions like Yemen and Saudi Arabia exacerbate water scarcity by straining already-limited resources, with troop movements and airstrikes disrupting desalination plants and aquifers. Studies show that military activity in the Middle East contributes disproportionately to regional carbon emissions, with Saudi Arabia’s military alone emitting more CO2 than some small island nations. The deployment also risks spreading antimicrobial-resistant pathogens due to poor sanitation in conflict zones, a documented but underreported consequence of large-scale troop movements.

Pakistani folk poetry and Saudi nasheed traditions often critique military alliances as betrayals of Islamic unity, framing them as tools of corrupt elites rather than divine will. In both countries, Sufi shrines and tribal jirgas have historically mediated conflicts through spiritual rather than martial means, offering an alternative to state-led militarization. Artistic expressions in the region, from Pakistani truck art to Saudi calligraphy, often symbolize resistance to foreign military presence, though these voices are marginalized in mainstream narratives.

If current trends continue, Pakistan’s military may become permanently embedded in Gulf security architectures, reducing its strategic autonomy and increasing vulnerability to Saudi economic leverage. Climate change will likely intensify resource conflicts in the region, making military deployments more frequent but also more unsustainable due to water and food shortages. Scenario modeling suggests that a collapse in Saudi oil revenues could trigger a withdrawal of Pakistani troops, destabilizing both countries’ militaries and economies.

Pakistani migrant workers in Saudi Arabia, who send home $24 billion annually in remittances, face systemic wage theft, forced labor, and deportation risks tied to their employers’ ties to the military-industrial complex. Baloch and Pashtun activists in Pakistan argue that troop deployments are used to suppress their movements, with Saudi-funded counterinsurgency operations leading to extrajudicial killings. Saudi women’s rights activists, who have long criticized their government’s militarization, are silenced in both countries, their critiques erased from official narratives.