Shifting Sands of Strategy: Why Washington Is Arming Saudi Arabia, Appeasing Muslim Leaders & Favoured India — And What It Means for Pakistan and Afghanistan

Introduction: A Geopolitical Chessboard

In recent months, the foreign-policy decisions emanating from Washington have taken on a striking pattern: the Donald Trump-era U.S. is publicly promising major weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, signalling deeper alignment with regional Muslim leadership, yet also intensifying its strategic embrace of India. Simultaneously, America’s posture toward Pakistan and Afghanistan appears more transactional and even coercive — urging Pakistan to act against Afghanistan and distancing itself from China. At the same time, Trump’s highly-publicised peace plan for Gaza has so far floundered. Is there a hidden agenda behind these moves? What promises are being made, to whom, and why?

In this article we will examine:

• What the U.S. is offering Saudi Arabia and why

• Why Trump’s Gaza peace initiative appears to be failing

• Why Trump is seen as engaging with Muslim leadership in a new way

• How and why Pakistan is being asked to take a tougher stance toward Afghanistan and China

• Why India is being promised more weapons by the U.S.

• What logically ties these actions together — and what Pakistan should make of it

1. The Saudi Arabia Promise: F-35s & Strategic Leverage

What’s on the table

The U.S. has announced plans to sell advanced F‑35 Lightning II fighter jets to Saudi Arabia — something that previous administrations had resisted or conditioned heavily. Air & Space Forces Magazine+3AP News+3Al Jazeera+3

According to Reuters: the jets to Saudi Arabia will be less advanced than those given to Israel, in order to preserve Israel’s “qualitative military edge”. Reuters

Al Jazeera explains: Saudi Arabia wants these jets to upgrade its air-force capability, while the U.S. sees an opportunity to deepen cooperation. Al Jazeera

Why the U.S. is doing it

There are multiple motivations:

• Regional alignment: Saudi Arabia is a pivotal player in the Middle East. A stronger Saudi-U.S. defence tie bolsters America’s regional posture against Iran, proxies, and instability. The Times of India

• Economic and technological deals: Alongside the jets, Saudi Arabia is expected to invest heavily in U.S. technology, AI infrastructure, nuclear cooperation, which advances U.S. economic interests. The Guardian

• Rebalancing power: By selling jets to Saudi Arabia, the U.S. signals that it’s willing to share advanced capabilities with a key Arab partner — shifting older assumptions about who gets U.S. weapons and on what basis.

• Pressure on Israel’s monopoly: Although the U.S. claims to preserve Israel’s edge, the sale nonetheless shakes Israel’s exclusive status and may link to Arab states normalising ties with Israel under U.S. terms. Israel itself is reported to lobby for conditionality. New York Post

• 

What’s in it for Saudi Arabia

• A long-sought modernisation of its air-force — elevating Saudi Arabia’s military prestige and deterrence capability.

• A signal of improved relations with the U.S., possibly opening the door to broader normalisation with Israel (subject to the Palestinian issue).

• Technology and investment deals that go beyond pure arms sales — boosting Saudi Arabia’s domestic economic ambitions (e.g., “Vision 2030”).

The catch: what the U.S. demands

• In order to sell, the U.S. must ensure that Israel’s military edge remains intact — hence the jets will have less advanced features. The Times of Israel+1

• Congress and regional stakeholders (especially Israel) will scrutinise the deal heavily. Air & Space Forces Magazine

Why this matters for Pakistan

From Pakistan’s perspective, the U.S. is reinforcing a new alignment: Arab-U.S. defence cooperation strengthened, while the Pakistani dimension is comparatively weak. As Saudi Arabia deepens its partnership with the U.S., Pakistan may risk being sidelined unless it redefines its strategic value to the U.S.

2. Why Trump’s Gaza Peace Initiative Is Faltering

What was promised

The U.S. under Trump launched a plan to broker a peace settlement to the Israel-Gaza conflict, including a two-state pathway and regional integration of Arab states. Atlantic Council+1

Why it’s failing

• Imbalanced power dynamics: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is deeply asymmetric; a U.S. plan that is seen as favouring Israel will lack credibility among Palestinians and the Arab world.

• Lack of enforcement and buy-in: Regional major actors (Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah) are either excluded or adversarial to the process. A superficial framework lacks the backing to implement real change.

• Domestic U.S. politics and human rights contradictions: The U.S.’ earlier deals (such as with Saudi Arabia) undermine its moral standing to mediate.

• Regional backlash: Key Arab states demand tangible Palestinian progress before they normalise with Israel. Without that, the peace package lacks impetus.

Why Pakistan’s role is limited

Pakistan, though a vocal pro-Palestinian actor, lacks major levers in this theatre compared to Gulf states or Iran. The U.S. focus in the Middle East is shifting toward Arab-Israel-Gulf alignments, rather than South-Asia-based actors like Pakistan.

Hidden agenda?

There are suggestions that the peace initiative is as much about consolidating a U.S.-Arab-Israeli axis (and countering Iran) as it is about Palestinian rights. Thus, the emphasis is shifting from ending the conflict to reframing the regional security architecture — one that aligns with American and Arab-Israel interests.

3. Appeasing Muslim Leadership: Why Is Trump Doing It?

At first glance, the notion of Trump engaging more actively with Muslim-majority states might look like a shift. But the logic reveals strategic design:

• By deepening ties with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, the U.S. is repositioning its alliances in the Middle East.

• Trump’s cordial attitude toward some Muslim leadership (e.g., Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman) can be read not as appeasement but as transactional diplomacy: “we’ll sell you defence, you invest in U.S. tech; you align with our regional strategy.”

• By forging these ties, the U.S. also signals to regional Islamist actors: “We can partner with you, but according to our terms.” This can degrade alternative influence (e.g., Iran, Turkey) in the Muslim world.

In South Asia, this dynamic can mean that Pakistan’s traditional role as a Muslim-majority state with historical ties to the U.S. is being supplanted by states that align more directly with U.S. strategic goals (Saudi Arabia, UAE, even India).

4. Pakistan, Afghanistan & China: What Washington Expects

Pakistan and Afghanistan

The U.S. evolving South-Asia strategy under Trump increasingly treats Pakistan more as a tactical partner rather than a strategic one. For example:

• Trump earlier urged Pakistan to do more on Afghanistan, and signalled that the U.S. would rely more heavily on India in the Afghan equation. Dawn+2Council on Foreign Relations+2

• The term “AfPak” (Afghanistan + Pakistan) once used to define the theatre has been expanded to include India, reflecting the shift in U.S. priorities. Wikipedia

• Pakistan is thereby being asked to act against Afghan-based militant groups, align pressure on Afghanistan, and distance itself from Chinese influence (given U.S.–China competition).

China factor

In the broader U.S. strategy, China is seen as the peer competitor. By asking Pakistan to “be away from China”, Washington is attempting to reduce China’s influence in South Asia. However, Pakistan’s economic and strategic links with China are longstanding (e.g., CPEC). Therefore, the U.S. approach to Pakistan is conditional: you cooperate with us, or risk marginalisation.

Why India is preferred

India is being treated as a “rising power” and a key anchor of U.S. strategy in Asia. By promising weapons and deeper defence ties to India, the U.S. can build a partner that counters China’s influence, projects maritime power, and has democratic legitimacy. Pakistan, by contrast, is viewed as less dependable in the U.S. calculus, often criticised for dual-track policies vis-à-vis militant groups.

5. The India Promise: More Weapons, More Partnership

The U.S. has signalled a readiness to deepen weapons sales and strategic cooperation with India. This is part of a broader shift:

• Recognising India’s population, economy, strategic location (Indian Ocean), and willingness to partner.

• Using India as a counter-weight to China in the Indo-Pacific theatre and South Asia.

• Offering Defence technology transfer, advanced platforms, and mutual interoperability to align India with U.S. and allied systems.

For Pakistan, this means: the U.S. is consciously bolstering India’s military capability while its own relationship with Pakistan lacks similar momentum. That asymmetry is strategic, not coincidental.

6. Connecting the Dots: Is There a Hidden Agenda?

Yes — a strategic realignment under U.S. leadership. The pieces fit into a broader pattern:

• The U.S. is fortifying alliances with Arab states (Saudi Arabia) + India, thereby forming a bloc that can counter Iran, China, and any regional adversary.

• Weapons sales (to Saudi Arabia and India) are both economic (supporting U.S. defence industry jobs) and geopolitical (ensuring aligned partners).

• Pakistan is being nudged into a more constrained role — supporting U.S. aims on Afghanistan, distancing from China, and accepting reduced strategic primacy.

• Trump’s Middle East diplomacy (Saudi-Israel normalisation; Gaza plan) is less about end-state peace and more about reshaping regional architecture in favour of U.S./Arab/Israeli interests.

In short, the hidden agenda is diversification and re-ordering of alliances, with the U.S. repositioning itself and its partners for the next era of global competition — especially versus China and Iran.

7. What Pakistan Must Watch and Do

Given this landscape, Pakistan should carefully evaluate its strategy — with these considerations:

• Reaffirm strategic value: Pakistan must clarify what unique geographic or political role it offers the U.S., beyond just counter-terrorism.

• Balance China and the U.S.: Rather than being forced to choose outright, Pakistan might explore how to remain a regional bridge rather than marginalised actor.

• Defence and diplomacy upgrade: Pakistan must consider diversifying its partnerships (Russia, China, Turkey) and strengthen its defence posture as India’s capabilities grow.

• Regional narrative control: Since Washington’s narrative is tilting toward India + Arab states, Pakistan must shape its own diplomatic voice regarding Kashmir, Afghan refugees, and India-Pakistan cease-fire issues.

• Long-term vision: Short-term transactions won’t suffice. Pakistan needs a long-term strategic roadmap that aligns with shifting global power dynamics, not simply reacting to U.S. demands.

Conclusion: A Pivotal Moment

The U.S.’ recent moves — promising F-35s to Saudi Arabia, engaging with Muslim leadership, allying more closely with India, and pressing Pakistan to toe a line — represent more than isolated decisions. They signal a pivot in U.S. foreign policy: away from older frameworks toward a new configuration of alliances designed for the multipolar era. For Pakistan, this is a critical inflection point. Without strategic clarity and proactive diplomacy, it risks becoming a bystander rather than a shaper. The time to act is now.