Sadaf Noreen Awan
SAUDI Arabia’s approval of a civil nuclear cooperation framework with the United States under the “123 Agreement” marks a defining moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Officially, Riyadh’s motivations align with its Vision 2030 framework: diversifying its economy, preserving oil reserves for export and exploiting domestic uranium deposits. Yet, beneath the veneer of energy transition lies a complex web of regional rivalries and structural constraints. These underlying dynamics explain why despite historical grievances and a shifting global order Saudi Arabia remains firmly anchored to the West. Observers often wonder why Saudi Arabia continues to look toward Washington despite past American foreign policy inconsistencies. Over the past two decades, Washington’s abrupt policy shifts ranging from the abandonment of regional allies during the 2011 Arab Spring to its hesitation to respond forcefully to the 2019 Aramco drone strikes have deeply unnerved Gulf monarchies.
However, through the lens of Structural Realism (Neorealism), Riyadh’s persistence is driven by a strategic calculus of survival rather than blind trust. In an anarchic international system, states act to balance existential threats. For Saudi Arabia, the primary threat is regional encirclement by an assertive, non-state-actor network led by Iran. While the West is viewed with strategic skepticism, it remains the only global entity capable of offering what Riyadh truly desires: formal, legally binding bilateral security guarantees. For the Saudi leadership, the proposed nuclear deal is a geopolitical anchor designed to bind Washington irrevocably to the defense of the House of Saud. The necessity of this American anchor is magnified by Iran’s grand strategy, which demands the eviction of U.S. military power from the Middle East. While Tehran envisions a regional security architecture managed exclusively by local states, Riyadh views this as a recipe for Iranian hegemony. Iran’s strategic depth has expanded significantly, establishing a formidable presence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.
This asymmetric encirclement poses a direct threat to Saudi territory. More critically, Iran maintains a chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow maritime corridor through which a fifth of the world’s petroleum passes. Any escalation that disrupts this transit route threatens the economic lifeblood of the Saudi kingdom. By securing an American defense pact alongside a nuclear program, Saudi Arabia establishes a dual-layered deterrent: it signals to Tehran that an attack on Saudi infrastructure is a tripwire for U.S. military intervention, while simultaneously matching Iran’s nuclear latency. A pivotal question is why Saudi Arabia did not simply pivot to China to fulfill its nuclear and security ambitions. China possesses the financial muscle and advanced technology to build reactors and it has actively engaged in mapping Saudi uranium deposits without attaching human rights conditions to its deals.
However, China’s foreign policy is strictly guided by strategic ambiguity and economic pragmatism. China is the largest buyer of Iranian oil and maintains a 25-year strategic partnership with Tehran, refusing to pick a side in the Sunni-Shia regional rivalry. If a conflict erupts in the Strait of Hormuz, China will not deploy its military to defend Saudi interests against Iran. Pakistan, by contrast, presents a uniquely powerful and deeply attractive historical alternative. As the only Muslim nation equipped with a proven nuclear arsenal and a formidable military, Islamabad shares a long-standing defense brotherhood with Riyadh. For decades, the Pakistani defence forces have served as a vital pillar of the Kingdom’s security architecture, offering tactical training, elite personnel deployment and foundational hard-power deterrence.
From a strategic standpoint, Pakistan is an irreplaceable, trusted ally whose military prestige provides a reliable shield for the Gulf. While Pakistan thoughtfully balances its complex regional borders and focuses on domestic economic consolidation, its role as a premier nuclear power means it remains a vital cornerstone of Saudi defence. Riyadh views Pakistan not as an alternative to choose against, but as a permanent guarantor of its sovereignty that seamlessly complements its global diplomatic maneuvering.
Ultimately, Saudi Arabia’s pursuit of a U.S. nuclear and security deal is a masterclass in hedging. By threatening to sign a nuclear contract with China and leveraging its deep defence alignment with powerful regional allies like Pakistan, Riyadh successfully triggered Washington’s fear of geopolitical displacement. This pressure forced the U.S. to lower its barriers and approve the civil nuclear cooperation framework. Riyadh has not failed to learn the lessons of the past; rather, it recognizes the harsh realities of the present. Until another global superpower emerges that is both willing and capable of deploying a navy to patrol the Strait of Hormuz, the road to Saudi security will continue to run through Washington, even as its historic reliance on Pakistan’s military might remain a non-negotiable anchor for the House of Saud.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Islamabad.
