‘Another shadow of NATO?’ DU professor urges caution over Mecca Pact

Bangladesh should carefully examine whether the Mecca Pact risks becoming “another shadow of NATO” before committing itself to the emerging defence arrangement, Dhaka University professor Sazzad Siddiqui has said.

Siddiqui, chairman of the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies at Dhaka University, said Bangladesh’s weak economy and political fragility made a rushed decision particularly risky.

He made the remarks during a program on the Mecca Pact organised by Voice for Reform at the BDBL Building in Dhaka’s Karwan Bazar.

Siddiqui argued that the growing demand for collective defence arrangements itself reflected a deeper failure of the United Nations.

The purposes for which alliances such as NATO, the Warsaw Pact and now the Mecca Pact emerged were, in principle, supposed to be addressed through the UN system, he said.

“The context for us to consider going into the Mecca Pact has been created because of the failure of the United Nations,” he said.

Siddiqui also questioned the geopolitical architecture surrounding the pact.

Turkey is already a NATO member, while Saudi Arabia has deep economic and strategic ties with the United States and Pakistan also maintains an important relationship with Washington, he said.

Against that backdrop, US President Donald Trump’s positive reaction to the pact deserved closer scrutiny, he argued.

“Whether it is another shadow of NATO — that is an important question,” Siddiqui said. His concerns about a possible “shadow alliance” of NATO were also raised at the discussion.

He said Bangladesh should be particularly cautious about arrangements built around the collective-defence principle that an attack against one member is treated as an attack against all.

Bangladesh should not assume that joining such an arrangement would allow it to develop deterrence overnight, he said.

Instead, Siddiqui called for a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis involving experts, parliament and wider public discussion before any decision is made.

“If necessary, form a commission with experts,” he said. “They should conduct a cost-benefit analysis.”

He also criticised what he described as a broader tendency to rush major foreign-policy decisions, citing Dhaka’s response during the Iran war and the speed and secrecy surrounding its trade negotiations with the United States.

“This is unprofessionalism,” he said.

Bangladesh must weigh traditional security needs against non-traditional threats such as unemployment and economic insecurity, Siddiqui said, warning against prioritising military deterrence at the expense of people’s everyday needs.

He invoked the “peace dividend” of the post-Cold War period, when falling military expenditure allowed governments to direct more resources towards social protection, healthcare and education.

An arms race in the Middle East or Asia could undermine that dividend, he warned.

Siddiqui said his position was not an absolute rejection of the Mecca Pact. Further study and sustained debate could change how its costs and benefits were assessed.

But any eventual decision must pass one fundamental test: whether it serves Bangladesh’s national interest.

“If the national interest is to be safeguarded,” he said, “it must be done on the basis of national consensus.”