India’s strategic calculations in the Middle East could become increasingly complicated as relations between Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan deepen, according to retired Indian Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi.
Speaking to Republic World, Bakshi described the emerging alignment as a potential strategic challenge for New Delhi and referred to the possibility of a “Sunni NATO” taking shape around the three countries.
His comments also carried a message for Israel.
While describing India and Israel as important friends, Bakshi argued that New Delhi would not abandon its relationship with Iran simply because Jerusalem and Tehran are engaged in conflict.
A New Regional Alignment Raises Concerns
Bakshi pointed to an agreement involving Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that emerged in Mecca as evidence of a changing regional balance.
From India’s perspective, he argued, closer cooperation between the three countries deserves serious attention because of Pakistan’s existing role in New Delhi’s security calculations.
The retired general believes the relationship between Ankara and Islamabad has already moved beyond diplomatic symbolism and developed into practical military cooperation.
He described the three-way alignment as a development that India cannot afford to ignore.
Why Iran Matters to New Delhi
At the centre of Bakshi’s argument is India’s longstanding strategic interest in maintaining relations with Iran.
He sees Iran as an important counterweight to Pakistan, which he described as one of India’s biggest security concerns alongside China.
That makes Tehran’s position particularly important for New Delhi.
While Iran is viewed by Israel as a major security threat, Bakshi argued that India evaluates Tehran through a different strategic lens.
His position is that New Delhi cannot simply adopt another country’s assessment of Iran when its own national interests are involved.
Bakshi Draws a Sharp Comparison With Pakistan
Bakshi also questioned what he sees as a difference in how Iran and Pakistan are viewed from the security perspectives of Israel and India.
He argued that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, while Pakistan has a substantial nuclear arsenal.
From his perspective, Pakistan’s nuclear capability and its relationship with militant Islamist movements make it a particularly serious concern for India.
He used that comparison to underline why New Delhi is reluctant to treat Iran simply as an adversary because of Israel’s confrontation with Tehran.
Turkey and Pakistan Already Have Close Military Links
Bakshi further argued that the relationship between Turkey and Pakistan has already demonstrated a practical military dimension.
He cited Turkey’s alleged assistance to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, claiming that Ankara supplied Pakistan with large numbers of unmanned aerial vehicles and helped with their operation.
He also pointed to the presence of a Turkish warship at Karachi during the confrontation as another indication of the two countries’ growing defence relationship.
For Bakshi, these developments suggest that a formal agreement is not necessarily required for Ankara and Islamabad to function as close strategic partners.
Turkey’s Military Reach Could Still Face Limits
Despite his concerns about Turkey’s relationship with Pakistan, Bakshi questioned whether Ankara could realistically deploy major military forces in support of Islamabad during a conflict with India.
He highlighted the geographical distance separating Turkey from Pakistan and the maritime routes that any Turkish naval force would have to cross.
Bakshi argued that an attempt to move significant Turkish naval forces towards Pakistan would encounter the Indian Navy.
His comments suggest that while he considers Turkey-Pakistan cooperation strategically important, he does not believe geography should be overlooked when assessing the practical military consequences of such an alliance.
India’s Relationship With Israel Has Limits
Bakshi’s strongest message was directed toward India’s relationship with Israel.
He stressed that New Delhi considers Israel a friend but rejected any suggestion that India should act as a subordinate partner.
According to Bakshi, India’s foreign policy must ultimately be driven by its own strategic requirements rather than the priorities of another country.
That principle becomes particularly important when Israel’s security concerns intersect with India’s relationship with Iran.
New Delhi Will Not Abandon Tehran Because of the War
Bakshi argued that Israel cannot expect India to sever or significantly sacrifice its interests with Iran simply because the two Middle Eastern powers are at war.
He said India should remain free to maintain relationships that serve its own economic and strategic objectives.
For New Delhi, that includes maintaining access to Iranian energy as well as preserving important transport connections through the country.
The argument reflects India’s broader tradition of pursuing strategic autonomy rather than permanently aligning itself with one geopolitical bloc.
Iran Provides India With Critical Routes
Beyond energy, Bakshi highlighted Iran’s geographical importance.
Iran provides India with potential overland access towards Central Asia and Afghanistan, making the country strategically valuable far beyond its role as an energy supplier.
Those routes can help India expand economic and strategic engagement with landlocked regions while reducing its dependence on alternative corridors.
Bakshi therefore argued that India cannot simply close those channels because Israel and Iran are engaged in military confrontation.
Strategic Autonomy Remains New Delhi’s Priority
The comments underline the difficult balancing act facing Indian policymakers.
India has developed close defence and strategic relations with Israel while simultaneously maintaining important ties with Iran.
At the same time, New Delhi must monitor Pakistan’s relationship with Turkey and the broader regional cooperation involving Saudi Arabia.
These competing relationships mean India has strong reasons to preserve flexibility.
Rather than choosing between Israel and Iran, Bakshi’s argument is that India should continue pursuing its own interests with both countries wherever possible.
The Turkey-Pakistan Factor Could Make Iran More Important
Bakshi’s assessment ultimately turns the conventional argument about India and Iran on its head.
Instead of viewing the conflict between Israel and Iran as a reason for New Delhi to distance itself from Tehran, he believes growing Turkish-Pakistani cooperation could make India’s relationship with Iran even more strategically valuable.
A stronger connection between Turkey and Pakistan, particularly if supported by Saudi Arabia, could alter the regional balance in ways that India would need to monitor closely.
That makes maintaining alternative partnerships and transport routes increasingly important for New Delhi.
What’s Next for India’s Middle East Strategy?
India is likely to continue balancing its relationships rather than committing itself completely to any single regional camp.
The challenge will be maintaining close cooperation with Israel while protecting its economic, energy and connectivity interests involving Iran.
At the same time, developments in Turkey-Pakistan-Saudi relations will remain significant for Indian security planners, particularly if military cooperation becomes more institutionalised.
Summary
Retired Maj.-Gen. Gagan Deep Bakshi has warned that closer cooperation between Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan could create a new strategic challenge for India.
He argues that Iran remains an important counterweight to Pakistan and that New Delhi has compelling economic and geopolitical reasons to maintain its relationship with Tehran.
Bakshi also stressed that India’s partnership with Israel does not mean New Delhi will subordinate its foreign policy to Israeli interests.
For India, the emerging regional landscape may therefore require an even more careful balancing act — maintaining its friendship with Israel while preserving its strategic partnership with Iran and closely monitoring the expanding ties between Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
