Middle East Peace Agreement Analysis

Concluding such an agreement

sends an important message for world peace.

And I say

an important message for world peace,

because choosing Mecca

in a country that takes a pro-peace stance

like Turkey was an important step

for this peace.

And during

this process between Iran and America,

we have continually emphasized this as supporters

of peace.

And we constantly

explained that we stand on the side of peace.

And as countries striving hard for such a process for

peace,

we have taken

our place as protectors of peace:

Pakistan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia.

Does it

look like a Sunni alliance? Major Islamic

countries with a Sunni majority?

Let me put it

this way.

These three countries,

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey,

have indeed always been protectors of peace.

And as

protectors of peace,

we will continue our path in the coming period with the same approach

as countries striving for peace.

Mr. President,

there is a great welcome across the Arab and Islamic world for this tripartite alliance

and this agreement, with high hopes pinned on it.

There is a question about the effectiveness of the clause on mutual defense

in the event that any of the three

countries faces external aggression. There are possibilities for such a scenario,

whether regarding the Kingdom and the ongoing war in

Iran, or even Pakistan and the issue of India.

Will the three countries engage or take part

in a war, in direct military action, if any country

faces external aggression?

I would like to express

that as follows:

As is well known,

what Article Five of the North Atlantic Alliance entails,

NATO,

applies similarly to the concept of mutual defense

established in this case.

So that in the event of any

problem

or aggression,

these three countries will be

able to take the necessary steps together.

This could be against Turkey or against Saudi

Arabia, or against Pakistan,

and whichever country is targeted,

if any attack occurs against one of these three countries,

and since there is a mutual defense pact,

the three countries will be able to defend

one another against any kind of

aggression.

Mr. President mentioned an important point:

the three countries are non-expansionist. Turkey is not expansionist,

Saudi Arabia has no expansionist ambitions, and Pakistan

as well. In the region, two countries are active beyond

their borders: Israel and Iran.

Is this agreement aimed at these two

countries?

At the present time, of course,

I believe it is possible at any time

for other countries to join these three.

That is, it is not limited only to Saudi Arabia,

Turkey, and Pakistan,

but other countries may also join us.

We have already announced this when we made this

agreement,

and we said that if there are other countries

wishing to join in the next phase, our doors

are open to them.

Egypt is a candidate. There was talk about

Egypt extensively.

Egypt,

too, if it wishes, can enter into

an agreement with these three countries, which open their doors to Egypt

as well.

Here, the question is just problematic: did it not want to participate, or was

the agreement only between the three countries, with joining later?

Up to this moment, Egypt too,

if it wishes, can join the agreement

in place between these three countries,

and the door will be open to Egypt as well.

Mr. President, the American-Israeli-Iranian war,

what is President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's assessment?