The United States, often regarded as a key player in shaping the global nuclear order and advocating for a “rules-based” international system, reveals complexities and contradictions in its strategic policies that could impact international security dynamics. For scholars focused on security and international relations in South Asia, understanding the rationale behind American sanctions policies in this region can be challenging. The United States’ sanctions framework in South Asia reflects a strategic tilt toward India, while imposing restrictions on Pakistan’s defense and missile programs. This approach has significant implications for regional stability and threat perceptions.
Pakistan has , on many instances, has made it publicly clear that its nuclear program is exclusively designed to deter threats to its territorial integrity from a larger and a overbearing neighbour India . Yet, Pakistan’s program that is deemed to be threatening whilst a country buying nuclear submarines and operationalizing ICBMS ( with known long ranges) is not percieved as a threat. his also includes a vehement vertical proliferation ( supersonic cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles, SSBNs and Ballistic Missile defence) by India. During last Trump tenure, the USA imposed CAATSA sanctions on India for purchasing the Russian S 400 air defence system. Ironically, the sanctions are yet to be passed, awaiting approval from the senate signalling a tacit waiver due to strategic alignment with India. Ironically the “ responsible behaviour” is subject of defenestration when a cruise missile is fired into Pakistan, a scenario had it not been for strategic prudence from Islamabad, would have led to unforeseen outcomes. Imagine if a Russian Kinzhal missile enters Alaska unannounced as a result of a “misfire” , how would US have responded? But somehow its Pakistan nuclear Program that has to bear the brunt of Realpolitik.
The recent set of sanctions, while not new, came as a surprise when the US Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer , while justifying these sanctions stated that Pakistan is developing larger rocket motors that can provide it with capability to strike targets well beyond South Asia, including the United States.
This lacks strategic coherence as no weapon in Pakistan’s strategic arsenal (which been primarily tailored to address threats from India) can target US mainland. While we can consider intermediate-range missiles that cover Indian territories, including the mainland and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, this assessment still falls short of fully addressing the complexities of regional security dynamics in relation to the US presence. This suggests that any nation or actor with short-range missile capabilities could potentially impact US assets. However, it is important to note that Pakistan’s missile arsenal does not currently include systems designed to reach the US, and significant developments would be necessary should the country seek to pursue missile technology intended for targets outside South Asia.
On the other hand, statements from US military, the Pentagon, reflected strategic rationality. Pentagon’s spokesperson Major General Pat Ryder opted not to provide direct criticism regarding the U.S. sanctions that have been applied to Pakistan’s state-owned missile development agency and three associated private vendors. He stated, “We value Pakistan as a key partner in the region and have historically collaborated closely with them on counterterrorism efforts.” This statement underscored the Pentagon’s established relationship with Pakistan’s military, reflecting a commitment to ongoing cooperation in matters of mutual interest. For those familiar with the workings of the US foreign policy establishment, particularly how the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Pentagon pursue a unified approach to foreign relations, the entire sanctions debate can become quite perplexing.
It is striking how the United States frequently grants waivers or chooses to overlook certain actions when it comes to India—a nation that has been closer to Russia and is actively pursuing a reorientation of its relationships with China. As part of the American crafted Indo-Pacific strategy, India is positioned as a crucial player in the effort to “contain” China. Unfortunately, this strategic alignment often sidelines the legitimate security concerns of Pakistan.
Pakistan’s nuclear establishment has been overly direct in symbolizing its threat perception that has been exclusively Eastwards towards India, not any other actor. This too was due to India introducing nuclear weapons in South Asia by carrying out tests in 1974 and then 1998. This careful posture reflects Islamabad’s awareness of the regional balance of power, how nukes can shape threat perception among non adversarial states and its determination to safeguard national security.
With the return of Trump to the political scene, we can anticipate a revival of trade wars, the imposition of tariffs, and the reinstatement of sanctions, all coupled with intensified efforts to counteract China’s increasing influence in the global arena. For Washington, this appears to be part of a broader zero-sum mentality—an approach that seeks to undermine nations that maintain strong ties with Beijing.
In the contemporary geopolitical landscape, the United States is strategically shifting its alliances, increasingly favoring India while adopting a confrontational approach toward Pakistan, particularly in relation to its strategic defense and military programs. This short-termism poses significant concerns regarding the potential for the U.S. to impose even more stringent sanctions on countries it perceives as adversarial threats to its geopolitical objectives and interests. However, the real effectiveness of such a strategy remains a highly contentious issue, warranting a deeper exploration of its possible ramifications and consequences for the region.
A critical question arises: Do sanctions actually achieve their intended goals? An examination of historical evidence strongly suggests that they often fail to deliver the desired results. Throughout history, countries have developed various methods to circumvent sanctions, driven by pressing national security imperatives. This circumvention not only nullifies the intended effects of sanctions but often leads to unexpected innovations and breakthroughs in military and technological capabilities. This reality underscores how the diffusion of arms—especially among nations under sanctions—can thrive, frequently with the tacit endorsement of Western powers that paradoxically facilitate horizontal proliferation of military capabilities.
Moreover, the implications of American sanctions extend far beyond merely disrupting strategic stability in South Asia. They carry the potential to fundamentally alter public perception within Pakistan, the fifth most populous country in the world, where the effects of foreign policy decisions resonate deeply among the populace. These sanctions risk demoralizing Pakistan’s inherently West-oriented political elite, who traditionally advocate for stronger ties with Western powers. The adverse consequences may inadvertently create fertile ground for non-U.S. actors to expand their influence in Pakistan, further eroding U.S. standing in the region.
Ultimately, the critical question remains: Will the imposition of these sanctions disturb the delicate equilibrium that Pakistan has painstakingly sought to maintain in its foreign relations, or will it give rise to a distorted narrative ( about missile program) that confounds the already intricate strategic calculations at play? Such miscalculations about Pakistan’s missile and nuclear program by the United States, could lead to destabilizing outcomes that threaten not only South Asian stability but also broader geopolitical dynamics.
Author
Hammad Waleed is a Research Associate at Strategic Vision Institute, Islamabad. He graduated with distinction from National Defence University, Islamabad. He writes on issues pertaining National Security, Conflict analysis , Strategic forecast and Public policy . He can be reached at hammadwaleed82@gmail.com
