American strategic deception

The US also maintains massive nuclear deterrence capability in comparison with which Pakistan's assets are miniscule.

Listen to article

Speaking at an American think-tank on 19 December, Jon Finer, the Deputy National Security Advisor in the Biden Administration, claimed that Pakistan's development of long-range missiles "will have the capability to strike targets well beyond South Asia, including the United States". He added that it was "hard for us to see Pakistan's actions as anything other than an emerging threat to the United States".

This sweeping and speculative assertion coming only two days after the US imposed sanction on Pakistani entities allegedly involved in missile development could hardly be a coincidence.

This is obviously part of a well-orchestrated charade intended to deny Pakistan the capability to ensure credible deterrence against India's rapid development of its strategic arsenal including long range air, land and sea based missiles to be deployed on offshore Indian assets and nuclear powered submarines.

This blatantly discriminatory American policy behind the smoke-screen that Pakistan seeks to threaten the US itself is patently ludicrous and disingenuous. Even objective Americans would find this hard to digest. Indeed, this is strategic deception at its worst.

The US is well aware that ever since Pakistan's nuclear tests in response to India's in 1998, its strategic doctrine is focused on ensuring credible deterrence exclusively against India.

Accordingly, Pakistan's strategic capabilities are not directed against any other country except India, least of all the US. Besides, there is no rationale for Pakistan to threaten the US with which it has no dispute and where millions of Pakistanis reside.

The US also maintains a massive nuclear deterrence capability in comparison with which Pakistan's assets are miniscule. For Pakistan to attack the US would, therefore, be suicidal.

In open forum discussions on this issue over the recent past with American officials and experts, Pakistani interlocutor, myself involved, have sought clarity and rational arguments that would explain American concern. But none have been offered.

There have been vague and weak arguments that since Pakistan is China's ally, its strategic capabilities are a part of the threat from China. This begs the question as to why Pakistan, even as a Chinese ally, would jeopardise its own existence by attacking the US?

The truth is that these American allegations are a ploy and an obvious deception. The objective is to protect India's strategic interests against China. To achieve this, the US wants India to focus on China and not be distracted by competition from Pakistan.

But from Pakistan's perspective, Indian capabilities ostensibly against China can also be used against Pakistan. In fact, after the thrashing India received from China in 1962, it has no inclination whatsoever to engage in a conflict with the Chinese. But New Delhi will continue to exploit the threat from China to benefit from American hand-outs as Washington's 'Net Security Provider'.

However, for Pakistan, the Indian military build-up presents an existential threat. India has used the American supported nuclear waiver to increase its nuclear arsenal. It has developed short, medium and long range air, land and sea based missiles. It has acquired nuclear powered and nuclear armed submarines. In 2019, India tested an anti-satellite missile (ASAT) and has developed a multi-layered Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) System, involving American Patriot, Israeli Arrow and Russian S-400 missiles.

India is also developing hypersonic missiles while inducting new and emerging technologies into its weapon systems with American assistance. At the same time, Indian strategic bases are being set up in the Indian Ocean, most notably in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and possibly in the Indian Ocean. Additionally, as a part of the US-backed Quadrilateral alliance in the Asia-Pacific, India may obtain basing facilities in the territories of its alliance parties - the US, Japan and Australia.

For Pakistan these developments present existing and potential challenges in the future for which it must be prepared to ensure credible deterrence. Pakistan has already ensured, through its full spectrum deterrence policy, deterrence at the operational, tactical and strategic levels.

It maintains credible second strike capability adequate for its needs. Its land, air and sea based Babur cruise missiles and the MIRVed Ababheel missiles provide capability to penetrate Indian BMD systems. The Shaheen 2 and 3 long range missiles cover the Indian mainland and offshore assets.

However, since deterrence is dynamic depending on changes in technologies and policies, Pakistan cannot afford to foreclose its future options. For instance, development of Indian bases with nuclear armed missiles deep in the Indian Ocean would require Pakistan to develop longer range missiles.

Similarly, Pakistan's space assets including satellites which are becoming increasingly vital for civilian and military purposes, may come to be threatened by ASATs which India has already tested.

Therefore, for effective deterrence to protect its satellites in future, Pakistan would need an ASAT capability for which long range missiles are essential. Also, to benefit from future space operations, Pakistan would need the capability to launch satellites which require developing a Space Launch Vehicle (SLV) capability. For all these reasons, Pakistan has a legitimate right to develop its long range missile/rocket programme.

If the US has legitimate concerns about Pakistan's missile development programme, even as the assertion that Pakistan would threaten the US is nonsensical, a reasonable arrangement based mutual non-attack assurances can provide a logical solution. But, since the US does not seek this option, the conclusion is inescapable that America's true motives are different and the allegations made by the likes of Jon Finer are nothing but an elaborate deception.

America's true intentions are betrayed by its discriminatory sanctions imposed on Pakistani entities as was done again a few days ago. There are more than 160 such entities that have been sanctioned since 1998 while none in India.

If Washington was truly interested in South Asian security and protecting its own national interests, it should pursue a non-discriminatory and balanced policy towards Pakistan and India. Instead, India has been given a free pass to build up its strategic capabilities while restraint is only being sought from Pakistan. History has demonstrated that discrimination has never succeeded with Pakistan.