An Islamic NATO?

Saudi Arabia on Tuesday announced the formation of a 34-nation Islamic military alliance intended to confront extremism and terrorism, most notably that of the Islamic State group. The Associated Press has more:

"The new counterterrorism coalition includes nations with large and established armies such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt as well as war-torn countries with embattled militaries such as Libya and Yemen. African nations that have suffered militant attacks such as Mali, Chad, Somalia and Nigeria are also members.

"Saudi Arabia's regional rival, Shiite Iran, is not part of the coalition. The two support opposite sides of in the wars raging in Syria and Yemen. Saudi Arabia is currently leading a military intervention in Yemen against Shiite rebels, known as Houthis, and is part of the U.S.-led coalition bombing the Sunni extremist Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria."

Other notable absentees include Algeria and Afghanistan, both of which have been contending with Islamic militant groups of their own for years now. The news also came as a bit of a surprise to some of the new club's reported member states.

"We came to know about it (the alliance) through news reports. We have asked our ambassador in Saudi Arabia to get details on it," said one senior Pakistani official to The Express Tribune.

The new alliance, said Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman, "will develop mechanisms for working with other countries and international bodies to support counterterrorism efforts," and would "not be limited to only countering the Islamic State group."

Calls for an "Arab NATO" are certainly nothing new, and the idea is one that has been bandied about in international affairs circles for years now. But the deputy crown prince's comments suggest that this new organization -- rather than being a truly inclusive Islamic alliance against terrorism -- may simply be an extension of the predominantly Sunni Arab coalition currently waging a war against Shiite rebels in Yemen. The Bloomberg View editorial board had this to say about that particular force earlier this year:

"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was first and foremost a defensive alliance against potential Soviet aggression. It was generally interested in sustaining the status quo: It had no interest in inflaming Moscow, lifting the Iron Curtain or battling the global spread of communism. And while the U.S. was undoubtedly its leader, it was ... truly a joint body in terms of decision making."

The collection of nations fighting against Yemen's Houthi rebels, on the other hand, appears to be little more than "a global Sunni Muslim alliance against Iran," the board concluded.

The sectarian composition of this new alliance is equally troubling. The Nigerian military, for example, was accused just this week of targeting and killing members of its own Shiite minority community, drawing condemnation from Tehran.

Saudi Arabia, moreover, finds itself bogged down in the Yemen conflict, and its inability to dislodge the Houthis from the country's capital calls into question its ability to take on an even more ambitious regional project.

"Considering Saudi can't easily hold its own border posts and its allies are struggling vs Houthis, good luck w/ISIL," added international affairs analyst Dan Trombly on Twitter.

Still, there is some reason for optimism. The many problems plaguing the Middle East will undoubtedly require Middle Eastern solutions, and greater coordination and action between Sunni Muslim states could represent a step in the right direction. Whether or not this new grouping will be a positive force in the region remains to be seen.

More on this:

Is the New Saudi Alliance a Game Changer? -- NBC News

It's All About Countering Iran -- Foreign Policy

How Saudi Arabia Is Expanding Its Mideast Influence -- Wall Street Journal

Did Nigeria's Army Just Commit a War Crime? -- Ventures

Around the Region

Iran's October missile test violated a U.N. resolution. "The Security Council's Panel of Experts on Iran said in a confidential report, first reported by Reuters, that the launch showed the rocket met its requirements for considering that a missile could deliver a nuclear weapon." Read more here.

Republicans offer nothing new on Mideast. Bloomberg View's Josh Rogin wasn't impressed by last night's Republican presidential debate: "The establishment Republicans ... all made the argument that the fight against the Islamic State and the Syrian civil war are connected and must be approached as one problem. But their plans amount to an intensification of the strategy that the Obama administration is pursuing now on the ground, similar to what Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has proposed."

Is the U.S. changing its tune on Assad? "The United States, [Secretary Kerry] said, was not seeking Mr. Assad's ouster per se, but rather considers it unlikely that he could preside over a successful settlement." The New York Times has more.

Why Washington ignores Iraqi torture. Reuters' Ned Parker investigates a troubling U.S. policy trend in sectarian Iraq.

Who is Oren Hazan? And why are some Israeli pols afraid of him? Al-Monitor reports.

Feedback

Questions, comments, or complaints? Feel free to send us an email, or reach out on Twitter @kevinbsullivan.