Missiles are an important capability for offensive set of capabilities that can be used for counterforce and counter-value strikes. Russia-Ukraine conflict and Iran-Israel’s 12-day conflict are recent examples of it. In this context, Pakistan also emphasizes on developing a credible missile force, commensurate with its legitimate security needs. Vaddi and Vipin Narang’s article in Foreign Affairs magazine has sparked a renewed debate about the contours of Pakistan’s national threat spectrum and its military capabilities. It claims that Pakistan is developing Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) that can reach the mainland US. The rationale given behind such technological developments is that Pakistan wants to deter the US from a preventive disarming strike and deterring America from aiding India in the wake of India-Pakistan conflict. The scaremongering surrounding Pakistan’s defense capabilities have often unjustifiably rattled western security and strategic analysts since Pakistan’s achievement of nuclear capability. Consistent efforts have been made to demonize Pakistan’s limited conventional and strategic capabilities. The lack of evidence and sound reasoning in the Foreign Affairs magazine article has drawn sharp criticism from Pakistan’s diplomatic, and strategic community.
The aforementioned article mentions no proof or sources that can prove Pakistan’s technological advancement in the journey of making such extended range strategic weapons. So far, no satellite imagery or any testing site or even the type and nature of the missile has been mentioned. To develop such technology, the prerequisite infrastructural development is vital, but no such evidence has been presented in this regard. This is the most visible lacuna in the narrative that has been tried to construct around Pakistan’s missile capability.
Technological advancements have always been subservient to the doctrinal postures in Pakistan’s security and strategic landscape, not the other way around. Pakistan has shown no intent or need to build such long-range weapons in its defense posture. This shows that Pakistan’s threat perception has not changed, and the threat gaze is still focused on India alone. The claim in the Foreign Affairs’ article is not backed by any policy or doctrinal evidence or any such statement by Pakistan.
The only shred of evidence that has been given in the article about Pakistan’s development of such missiles is the alleged “US intelligence report”. If deconstructed properly, even the US has not provided any source, data, or any sort of official attribution that may convincingly make a case for such accusations against Pakistan. Thus, this information does not qualify as evidence against Pakistan’s making of ICBMs. It might be a part of certain objectives of Biden’s administration to sanction Pakistan while it was on its way out.
Pakistan’s nuclear strategy and doctrinal posture has always been India-centric, and its technological development and acquisitions are a proof of it. Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is based on ‘Full Spectrum Deterrence’ (FSD) policy under the concept of ‘credible minimum deterrence.’ Pakistan’s missiles have a maximum range of 2750 kms, as noted by General Khalid Kidwai, the former head of Strategic Plans Division (SPD) that covers every nook and corner of Indian territory.
The most convincing evidence of Pakistan’s defense posture being India-centric comes from the recent report of Federation of American Scientists (FAS) report on the targeting strategies of nuclear armed states published in June 2025. It argues that “Pakistan’s nuclear targeting strategy is relatively unique because, in contrast to the majority of nuclear-armed states, it appears to be aimed exclusively at one country: India. Pakistan’s doctrine is thus designed solely to deter an overwhelming conventional or nuclear attack from a single adversary.”
Moreover, if Pakistan looks at the Indian threat spectrum, India claims to have two military adversaries i.e. Pakistan and China. But Indian missile ranges exceed far beyond the regional threats with Agni V having almost 7000 kms range that can target even in Europe and the Far East. It makes absolutely no sense for Indian security planners to have such long-range weapons in their inventory when they do not consider any nation as an adversary other than Pakistan and China. But unfortunately, no such objective analysis has been developed to view Indian advancements and strike capabilities far beyond its threat spectrum.
According to the article, the rationale behind Pakistan’s building ICBMs has been to deter US’s involvement in a future India-Pakistan conflict in support of India. It basically exposes Indian claims of being a net security provider in Indian Ocean Region (IOR) that it can’t even counter and deter Pakistan in the military confrontation and needs US’ help. If India needs US’ help to militarily engage Pakistan, then America should seriously rethink the Indian role in the US’ Indo-Pacific strategy.
This biased and hypocritical treatment of Pakistan’s missiles program irrespective of their avowed intentions and capabilities should be dismissed and rejected. Creating such narratives can fuel insecurities and trust deficit between Pakistan and the US. There remains a dire need on the part of the US to clear any such misgivings as evidence to counter such claims coming out of Washington itself as the FAS’ report argues. Pakistan has always made sure that its nuclear and conventional capabilities are primarily to deter India and not target any other state. As stated earlier, Pakistan’s capability being solely to deter India shows Pakistan’s responsible state behavior and a genuine commitment to the stated goals of its nuclear policy. It also exposes the Foreign Affairs’ article as a baseless allegation against Pakistan which aims at scaremongering regarding Pakistan’s missile program.
