The recent imposition of United States (US) sanctions on several entities associated with Pakistan’s missile program has ignited a firestorm of controversy. In the latter half of December, the US announced additional sanctions targeting Pakistan National Development Complex, the government missile development agency, along with three commercial entities. Washington justifies these measures as necessary to curb the proliferation or delivery of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but Islamabad vehemently rejects them as discriminatory and unjustified. This move risks not only undermining regional stability but also hindering the very non-proliferation efforts it purports to advance.
Pakistan Foreign Office (FO) maintains that the recent sanctions are “biased” and threaten regional and international peace. Islamabad asserts that Pakistan’s strategic program, a “sacred trust bestowed by 240 million people upon its leadership,” reflects a unified national resolve. This program is dedicated to defending Pakistan’s sovereignty and promoting peace and stability in South Asia. FO asserted that this program will be defended at all costs. The latest round of sanctions, designed to widen military disparities, runs counter to the pursuit of regional security and carries grave risks for strategic stability both regionally and globally.
A day after the US State Department announced the new round of sanctions, Deputy National Security Adviser Jon Finer, speaking to Reuters, stated that Islamabad’s conduct raised questions about the purposes of its ballistic missile programme. He maintained that Pakistan has developed progressively sophisticated missile technology which is becoming an “emerging threat.”Finer surprisingly claimed that if such developments persisted, Pakistan would have the ability to attack targets well outside South Asia, even the US.
The latest round of sanctions, designed to widen military disparities, runs counter to the pursuit of regional security and carries grave risks for strategic stability both regionally and globally.
Earlier, in September 2024, the US imposed sanctions on Chinese firms and a Pakistan-based firm “for knowingly transferring equipment under missile technology restrictions.”The US underlined that its relationship with Pakistan, while one of alliance, would not preclude the use of sanctions when deemed necessary to safeguard its interests.
Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry has fervently rejected the recent assertions made by the US. Its spokesperson, Mumtaz Zahra Baloch, described the accusations as historically inaccurate. She expressed that these unsubstantiated claims directed at a major non- North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) ally could harm mutual relations. Islamabad has never harboured any ill intentions towards Washington and this fact remains unchanged.
Besides, Pakistan’s pursuit of missile technology is rooted in its unique security calculus. Sandwiched between two nuclear-armed rivals, India and China, Pakistan views a credible nuclear deterrent, delivered by a robust missile system, as essential for its survival. This perspective is further compounded by historical conflicts and enduring mistrust.
More importantly, Islamabad contends that its program adheres to international standards and safeguards, a claim supported by its engagement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Yet, the US sanctions paint a different picture, one that Pakistan perceives as deeply unfair. Islamabad asserts that, despite claiming strict adherence to non-proliferation norms, there are past examples when licensing requirements for advanced military technology to other countries have been waived.
This perceived discrimination stems from Washington’s contrasting approach to other states with advanced missile capabilities. India, for instance, a strategic competitor of Pakistan and a country with a growing missile arsenal, enjoys close ties with the US, including cooperation in defence and space technology. This disparity fuels resentment in Pakistan, reinforcing the narrative that it is being unfairly targeted.
Islamabad is apprehensive of the expanding defence ties between the US and India. Over the past few years, the US has been transferring sophisticated technologies to India, including cutting-edge systems, through agreements like the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) and the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA). The countries have also collaborated on missile development, jointly producing systems under the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) and, the US-India initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET). These actions have strengthened New Delhi’s capabilities, leading Islamabad to criticise what it sees as preferential treatment that destabilises the situation.
Thus, the regional implications are troubling. The sanctions risk escalating tensions between Pakistan and its neighbours, particularly India. In a region already rife with geopolitical complexities, this could trigger a dangerous arms race, diverting resources from crucial development needs and further destabilising the region.
Furthermore, these measures could backfire. Rather than curbing Pakistan’s missile development, they might push it towards alternative partnerships. Also, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan has led to a perceived decline in Washington’s strategic interest in Pakistan, and some believe the sanctions could further push Islamabad towards China and Russia. This shift could become a strategic imperative for Pakistan in light of increasing US-India cooperation. Meanwhile, the sanctions have been met with approval in New Delhi, underscoring the strengthening of the US-India bond.
Such sanctions are not new for Islamabad. Though the latest US sanctions on Pakistan’s missile program might appear as a strategic miscalculation, they are largely politically motivated. In any case, the sanctions are likely to achieve the opposite of their highlighted purpose, undermining regional stability and possibly hindering non-proliferation efforts. Nevertheless, the fact remains that Pakistan has unequivocally declared its focus on the threat posed by its eastern border. For the US, a more balanced and even-handed approach to non-proliferation, one that acknowledges the security concerns of all states and avoids the perception of double standards, is essential.
