Analyzing U.S. Sanctions on Pakistan’s Ballistic Missile Program: Implications, Biases, and Regional Stability

The Biden administration has imposed new sanctions on Pakistan’s ballistic missile program, targeting four entities alleged to be contributing to the proliferation or delivery of such weapons. These sanctions represent another attempt to pressure Pakistan’s defense framework. However, their actual impact and transparency have raised significant questions.

These recent sanctions are not an isolated event. Over the past four years, the Biden administration has imposed similar sanctions on Pakistan six or seven times. Despite these repeated measures, they have failed to hinder Pakistan’s missile development or nuclear policies. Pakistan’s strategic capabilities are designed to safeguard its sovereignty and ensure national security, and these sanctions are unlikely to alter the country’s trajectory in this regard.

The decision to sanction Pakistan’s National Development Complex (NDC) and three associated commercial entities has been described as biased and unjust. Critics argue that these measures are discriminatory because similar actions have never been taken against India, despite its more advanced ballistic missile program. India has developed ballistic missile defense (BMD) systems with assistance from the U.S. and Israel, yet it has faced no comparable sanctions.
Such double standards undermine the credibility of global non-proliferation regimes. By selectively applying sanctions, the U.S. risks exacerbating regional tensions and jeopardizing international peace and security. The inconsistency highlights the political motivations underlying these measures, rather than a genuine commitment to non-proliferation principles.

Impact on Regional Stability

Pakistan’s strategic capabilities, including its nuclear and missile programs, are defensive in nature. They aim to protect the country’s sovereignty and maintain peace and stability in South Asia. Pakistan has consistently emphasized that its programs are not intended for aggression but to ensure a balance of power in a volatile region.

The sanctions, therefore, are unlikely to achieve their intended objectives. Instead, they risk undermining regional stability by further polarizing relations between key stakeholders. The imposition of such measures also raises concerns about the U.S.'s role as a neutral arbiter in global affairs, particularly in the South Asian context.

The selective application of sanctions reflects a broader pattern of double standards in global politics. While Pakistan faces restrictions, countries like India continue to expand their strategic capabilities with implicit support or silence from major powers. These practices erode trust in international non-proliferation frameworks and create a sense of injustice among nations subject to unequal treatment.

The recent U.S. sanctions on Pakistan’s ballistic missile program are yet another example of a flawed and politically motivated approach to non-proliferation. These measures, while symbolic, will have little practical impact on Pakistan’s strategic capabilities or defense policies. Instead, they expose the double standards and geopolitical biases that undermine the credibility of global non-proliferation regimes.

If the international community is truly committed to preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, it must adopt an impartial and consistent approach. Selective enforcement of non-proliferation norms not only endangers regional and global peace but also weakens the foundations of cooperative international security. Pakistan, for its part, remains committed to defending its sovereignty and contributing to peace and stability in South Asia.