| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 20 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
> Egypt is aligned with the KSA It’s complicated [1]. My low-key guess is cutting off Pakistan was intended to send a message to Cairo. > Already aligned with the UAE Aligning. To my understanding there isn’t a treaty yet. > the Pakistan aspect is overstated Pakistan isn’t the cause. It’s the canary. These moves happening in quick succession (strategically, over the last year, and tactically, in the timing of these announcements) speaks to previous assumptions being fair to be questioned. [1] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/egypts-t... | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | alephnerd 19 hours ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> My low-key guess is cutting off Pakistan was intended to send a message to Cairo Abu Dhabi and Cairo have been misaligned for years since the Sudan Civil War began (UAE backs the RSF and KSA+Egypt back the Army) as well as the UAE backing Abiy Ahmed in Ethiopia at the expense of their traditional partner KSA. > To my understanding there isn’t a treaty yet. This is as close as it will get. New Delhi doesn't "sign" defense treaties unless pushed to a corner, because it reduces maneuverability. The Pakistan-KSA alignment was already cooking after IK was overthrown. I think I mentioned it before on HN (need to find the post I wrote) but given the primacy Pakistan has had in US-Iran negotiations well before the war as well the PRC's increasingly miffed attitude at Pakistan following the CPEC attacks, the US most likely brokered a back-room realignment between PK and KSA. A neutral-to-ambivalent India with a pro-America Pakistan is better for the US than a completely aligned India with a pro-China Pakistan. TODO: citations | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||