-->

Pakistan Condemns US Sanctions on Missile Program as Biased and Threatening Regional Peace

 Pakistan Condemns US Sanctions on Missile 

Pakistan Condemns US Sanctions on Missile Program as Biased and Threatening Regional Peace

On Thursday, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry lashed out against the United States for the new sanctions on its ballistic missile program, terming these as "discriminatory" and warning of their potential to destabilize the South Asian region. According to the statement carried by the Foreign Ministry, the sanctions threaten strategic stability not only in the region but even beyond, raising serious questions about intent and fairness.

Dangerous Implications for Regional Stability

The statement by the Ministry emphasized that the "implications of these actions are dangerous" as they "impact negatively on peace and security in South Asia." Pakistan also questioned the validity of the allegations made by the U.S., pointing out that previous sanctions targeting its entities were often based on "doubts and suspicion without any evidence whatsoever.

This time, sanctions have hit four entities: Islamabad-based National Development Complex that the US alleges to be procuring material related to the development of Pakistan's long-range ballistic missile program, namely the SHAHEEN series; Akhtar and Sons Private Limited, Affiliates International, and Rockside Enterprise. The sanctions freeze any U.S. property belonging to the firms targeted and bar American citizens from conducting transactions with them.

Accusations of Double Standards

The Pakistan Foreign Ministry also accused the U.S. of applying "double standards" in its approach to global arms proliferation. The Ministry pointed to instances where the U.S. has waived licensing requirements for advanced military technology for other nations, highlighting the perceived inequity in its policies. "This selective approach undermines trust and raises questions about the real motives behind such measures," the statement read.

U.S. Position on Sanctions

In response, the U.S. State Department defended itself, with a spokesperson named Matthew Miller repeating the U.S.'s long-standing concerns about weapons proliferation. In a posting on X, formerly Twitter, Miller wrote that the U.S. would "continue to engage constructively with Pakistan on these issues.

But Pakistani analysts have described the sanctions as "short-sighted" and "destabilizing." According to security expert Syed Muhammad Ali, these actions overlook the peculiar strategic imperatives of South Asia where the Pakistani missile and nuclear programs exist largely to address regional challenges, namely from rival neighboring country India.

Historical Context of the Rivalry

The longstanding rivalry between Pakistan and India has dictated the course of their defense policies for decades. They became nuclear powers in 1998, conducting underground nuclear tests just weeks apart from each other. An arms race has been carried out since then, with almost periodic testing of short, medium, and long-range missiles to build up their respective defenses.

The disputed area of Kashmir is a major flashpoint between the two countries, with two of three wars since independence in 1947 fought over the territory. Analysts argue Pakistan's missile program is part of a broader set of answers to perceived threats from India, making the U.S. sanctions particularly problematic in a regional context.

Strategic Fallout

The sanctions risk further inflaming tensions in an already volatile region. By targeting Pakistan's missile program while appearing to ignore similar activities by other nations, critics say the U.S. undermines its credibility as a neutral actor in global arms control.

As the situation unfolds, the recent condemnation of the sanctions imposed by Pakistan underlines that non-proliferation must be a balanced and just policy-one that takes into account the regional realities and should not be allowed to jeopar¬dise peace and stability in South Asia. Whether the two nations will be able to constructively engage to resolve their differences remains to be seen, but the stakes for regional and global security could not be higher.

Disqus Comments