SINCE the beginning, the United States has opposed and adopted coercive measures against Pakistan’s nuclear and missile programs. Therefore, the imposition of sanctions against the four Pakistani entities during the last week is a customary politically oriented prosecution of the lame-duck Biden Administration against an erstwhile major non-NATO ally. However, the alarming development is the American official’s intuition that Pakistan’s long-range missile could strike targets in the United States. Though Islamabad immediately rebuffed fictitious concerns about its long-range missiles’ potential to reach the US heartland, it added a very puzzling variable in Pakistan and the United States’ complex relationships.
The Biden Administration imposed sanctions on Pakistan’s state-owned missile development agency—National Development Complex (NDC), and three of its vendor companies—Akhtar and Sons Private Limited, Affiliates International, and Rockside Enterprise, on December 18, 2024. Matthew Miller, the United States Department of State, Spokesperson announced that “In light of the continuing proliferation threat of Pakistan’s long-range missile development, the United States is designating four entities for sanctions under Executive Order (E.O.) 13382, which targets proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.” The following day, another Biden Administration official opined that Pakistan is developing long-range ballistic missile capabilities that could eventually allow it to strike targets outside of South Asia, including in the United States.
On December 19, 2024, Deputy National Security Adviser Jon Finer said at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “Candidly, it’s hard for us to see Pakistan’s actions as anything other than an emerging threat to the United States.” He added, “Pakistan has developed increasingly sophisticated missile technology, from long-range ballistic missile systems to equipment that would enable the testing of significantly larger rocket motors.” His claim is based on the fact that the motors, with diameters larger than the 1.4m and 1.7m used in the Shaheen-III and Ababeel missiles, could potentially support longer-range ballistic missiles. He failed to realize that longer-range missiles are neither intermediate nor intercontinental ballistic missiles. Secondly, these motors could be used for civilian space programs.
The critical examination of the strategic literature published nationally and internationally, especially by American South Asian experts and think tanks, reveals that Pakistan’s defence policy, weapons development and procurement planning, missile tests, military exercises, nuclear doctrine, and posture are aimed to create and sustain a credible minimum deterrence potential to prevent India’s military adventurism. Despite Pakistan’s declaratory policy that its long-range ballistic missile program is defence-oriented and India-specific, the U.S. imposed new sanctions against Pakistan. One understands the rationale behind the imposition of sanctions in the rapidly transforming global geostrategic environment to please India, its threshold ally. The Biden administration has acted to obstruct Pakistan’s military capability, which is imperative to deter India’s aggressive designs against it. It had levied seven times sanctions against Pakistan’s missile program. However, a concocted claim that Pakistan has developed missile capability to strike targets inside US raises an important question. Has the Biden administration concluded to bracket Pakistan with a newly perceived adversarial quad—China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia?
Pakistan does not possess the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capability. It neither intends nor is interested in threatening the United States because it does not harbour hostile feelings against Washington. Realistically, it has struggled to improve its cooperation with the United States. Islamabad responded to set the record straight about its missile capability, which is only India-focused. Pakistan foreign office spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch said that “the alleged threat perception from Pakistan’s missile capabilities and delivery means, raised by the US official, is unfortunate.” She added that these allegations are unfounded, devoid of rationality and sense of history.” Ironically, Jon Finer is alarmed by a state that does not possess the ICBM capability and mums the word about a nuclear-armed state that is developing and testing a diverse range of missile systems, including ICBM, submarine-launch ballistic Missiles, hypersonic cruise missiles to deliver nuclear weapons. It seems that Washington is comfortable with India’s missile capability that could undermine Western nations or its heartland security. For instance, India developed and tested Agni-V, a solid propellant three-stage missile with a range of 5000-8000 kilometres. On March 11, 2024, India successfully tested multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) technology on Agni-V. It also claimed the development of the Agni-VI, a solid propellant three-stage missile with a range of 8000-10,000 kilometres. Precisely, Agni-V and VI would be used to strike targets in the United States instead of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles, having a maximum range of 2750km.
In summary, the current Indo-U.S. threshold alliance boosts the regional and global arms race and contributes constructively to New Delhi’s strive to establish its strategic autonomy in global geopolitics and hegemony in South Asia. Simultaneously, the said sanctions and baseless propaganda against Pakistan’s missile capability endanger the strategic stability in South Asia.
—The writer is Prof at the School of Politics and IR, Quaid-i-Azam University.
