Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
On December 19, 2024, U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Jon Finer described Pakistan’s missile developments as an “emerging threat,” noting the increasing sophistication of its missile technology and the potential to reach targets beyond South Asia, including the United States. In response, the U.S. has imposed new sanctions on Pakistan’s ballistic missile development, including on the state-run defence agency overseeing the program. This recent imposition of sanctions by the United States on Pakistan’s missile program has raised significant concerns about the trajectory of their bilateral relationship. Once regarded as a strategic ally in the Cold War and the War on Terror, Pakistan now finds itself under renewed scrutiny as Washington seeks to address emerging security threats. These developments not only highlight the growing apprehension in the U.S. about Pakistan’s missile capabilities but also reflect broader geopolitical shifts and challenges in maintaining regional stability.
The Rise and Fall of a Partnership. The U.S.-Pakistan relationship has seen dramatic shifts over the decades. During the Cold War, Pakistan emerged as a critical ally for the United States in its containment strategy against the Soviet Union. The alliance shaped regional geopolitics, from military aid to intelligence sharing. One key event was Pakistan’s facilitating the U.S.-China rapprochement in the 1970s. Islamabad’s diplomatic efforts, particularly under leaders like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, earned it significant goodwill from Washington. Following the events of September 11, 2001, Pakistan became a “frontline state” in the U.S.-led War on Terror. Billions of dollars in military and economic aid flowed to Islamabad as it supported American operations in Afghanistan. However, the relationship began to sour due to allegations of double-dealing. U.S. officials accused Pakistan of harbouring militant groups like the Haqqani network, which targeted American forces in Afghanistan.
Missile Development in Pakistan: A Strategic Imperative. Pakistan’s missile program’s evolution reflects Pakistan’s desire to maintain strategic parity with India while deterring external threats. The program began in earnest during the 1980s, driven by its strategic rivalry with India. The need for a credible deterrent grew more acute following India’s advancements in ballistic missile technology and its nuclear tests in 1974. Early development relied heavily on foreign assistance, with China and North Korea playing significant roles. The Hatf missile series, for example, showcased the fusion of indigenous efforts and imported technology. Over the decades, Pakistan’s missile arsenal expanded to include short-range, medium-range, and cruise missiles capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear payloads. Key missile developments include:-
Ghauri Missile. A medium-range ballistic missile developed with North Korean assistance.
Shaheen Series. A family of solid-fueled missiles with improved accuracy and range.
Babur Cruise Missile. A subsonic cruise missile with advanced targeting capabilities.
Recent Advancements in Pakistan’s Missile Program. Pakistan has made significant strides in its missile program, enhancing its strategic capabilities by developing Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) and exploring hypersonic technologies.
MIRV. A notable advancement is the development of the Ababeel missile, designed to carry MIRVs. The Ababeel is a medium-range ballistic missile with a reported range of approximately 2,200 kilometers, capable of delivering multiple warheads to different targets independently. This capability enhances Pakistan’s deterrence by enabling it to penetrate advanced missile defence systems. The first publicly announced test of the Ababeel was conducted on January 24, 2017, with subsequent tests, including one on October 18, 2023, confirming its MIRV capabilities.
Hypersonic Technologies. While Pakistan does not currently have an indigenous hypersonic weapons program, there have been developments suggesting interest in this area. The Pakistan Air Force has indicated the development of a hypersonic-capable missile as part of a broader modernisation effort to counter evolving threats. A video released by the Pakistan Air Force featured the CM-400AKG anti-ship missile, a Chinese-manufactured missile that allegedly travels at hypersonic speeds.
Strategic Implications and Proliferation Risks. These recent advancements have raised concerns internationally. U.S. officials fear these capabilities could destabilise the region and enable Pakistan to project power beyond South Asia. The U.S. has long been wary of Pakistan’s role in global proliferation networks. The infamous A.Q. Khan network, which supplied nuclear technology to countries like Iran, Libya, and North Korea, underscored the risks of unchecked development. One of Washington’s primary concerns is the intensifying arms race between India and Pakistan. Both countries have developed increasingly sophisticated missile systems, raising the risk of miscalculation and escalation.
Involvement of Pakistani Firms. The United States imposed sanctions on four Pakistani firms for their involvement in aiding Pakistan’s ballistic missile program, which is closely linked to its nuclear program. The sanctioned entities were found to be involved in the transfer of critical technologies and materials used in the development of ballistic missile systems. These technologies included components necessary for guidance systems, propulsion, and control mechanisms, which are vital for both missile and nuclear weapons development. The transfer of these technologies represents a significant concern for the U.S., as they could potentially enhance Pakistan’s ability to develop more advanced nuclear delivery systems. Some of these Pakistani firms were collaborating with foreign entities and institutions that are under U.S. and international sanctions. This collaboration allowed the transfer of sensitive technologies and expertise, which accelerated the development of Pakistan’s missile capabilities. These firms were directly involved in the design, development, and testing of ballistic missile systems. The U.S. identified these entities as providing essential support, including material assistance and technical expertise, which allowed Pakistan to improve its missile technology. This development raised concerns about the potential for these missile systems to be used in a nuclear context, thereby complicating global security dynamics.
Sanctions. These sanctions are aimed at curbing the spread of missile technology and preventing the enhancement of Pakistan’s military capabilities that could pose risks to regional stability and U.S. security interests. The latest sanctions specifically target entities involved in Pakistan’s missile development. These include National Development Complex (NDC), a state-owned organisation central to missile research and production, and Karachi-based Companies (Akhtar and Sons Private Limited, Affiliates International, and Rockside Enterprise), accused of supplying critical components and technology. The sanctions include freezing U.S.-based assets of the targeted entities, prohibiting American businesses and individuals from conducting transactions with them, and restricting access to international financial systems. These sanctions aim to disrupt Pakistan’s ability to acquire advanced technology and materials critical for its missile program.
Pakistan’s Response. Islamabad has strongly condemned the sanctions, describing them as “discriminatory” and counterproductive. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry issued a statement arguing that the sanctions undermine regional peace and stability. Pakistan claims that its missile program is purely defensive and aimed at maintaining strategic balance, and the U.S. is applying double standards, as similar concerns are not being raised about India’s missile developments. Within Pakistan, the sanctions have sparked a wave of nationalist rhetoric. Political leaders and media outlets have framed the U.S. actions as an affront to Pakistan’s sovereignty, bolstering anti-American sentiment.
Broader Implications and Realignments. The U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 marked a turning point in U.S.-Pakistan relations. Washington’s diminished reliance on Islamabad for logistical support in the region has led to a reassessment of the partnership. As U.S.-Pakistan relations cool, Islamabad has sought closer ties with China and Russia. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and growing military cooperation with Beijing underline this shift. At the same time, Pakistan’s increasing engagement with Moscow signals a diversification of its strategic alliances. The sanctions could exacerbate tensions in South Asia. With Pakistan feeling cornered, there is a risk of accelerated arms development or even closer alignment with adversaries of the U.S., such as China.
The U.S. sanctions on Pakistan’s missile program mark a significant moment in their bilateral relationship. While Washington’s concerns about proliferation and regional stability are valid, the move risks further alienating Islamabad at a time when global alliances are shifting. For Pakistan, the sanctions underscore the possibility of diversification of partnerships. For the U.S., they reflect the delicate balancing act of addressing security threats while maintaining influence in a critical region. As the two nations navigate these challenges, the question remains: Can they find common ground, or will their paths continue to diverge?
Please Do Comment.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
Landay, Jonathan S. “U.S. Imposes Sanctions on Pakistani Firms over Missile Proliferation.” Reuters, December 14, 2024.
Haider, Kamran. “Pakistan Criticizes U.S. Sanctions, Calls Them Unjustified.” Dawn, December 15, 2024.
Burns, John F. “Pakistan’s New Missiles Worry U.S. and India.” The New York Times, October 20, 2024.
Tellis, Ashley J. “The Evolution of US-Pakistan Relations: Prospects for the Future.” The Washington Quarterly 34, no. 4 (2011): 109–123.
U.S. Department of Defense. Military and Security Developments Involving the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 2023. Washington, DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2023.
Federation of American Scientists (FAS). Pakistan Missile Program Overview. Washington, DC: FAS, 2022.
Arms Control Association. “Pakistan’s Missile Capabilities.” December 2024. https://www.armscontrol.org
Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI). “Pakistan’s Nuclear and Missile Programs: A Profile.” Updated October 2024. https://www.nti.org
Kampani, Gaurav. “Pakistan’s Evolving Missile Strategy: Implications for Deterrence and Security.” South Asian Strategic Review 18, no. 2 (2023): 22–34.
Tariq, Mohammad. “US-Pakistan Relations: From Strategic Alliance to Mutual Distrust.” Pakistan Horizon 71, no. 3 (2024): 15–37.
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
MY Article was published on the EurasianTimes Website
on 12 Feb 25.
On January 28, 2025, an F-35A Lightning II fighter jet crashed at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska during a training exercise. The pilot experienced an in-flight malfunction but ejected safely. The accident has caught the world’s attention. As a possible follow-up, the US has called off the F-35 air display during the forthcoming Aero India 2025.
The F-35 Lightning II, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, is the world’s most advanced multirole stealth fighter, used by several nations for various air combat missions. With its sophisticated technology, the F-35 was designed to be a revolutionary leap in aerial warfare, offering advanced stealth, sensor fusion, and unprecedented combat versatility. However, despite its promise, the aircraft has had its share of incidents that raise questions about its safety and operational readiness. Are these incidents simply part of the evolutionary process of integrating a complex new weapon system, or do they point to deeper, systemic issues that could undermine the fighter’s effectiveness in the long term?
A Brief Overview of the F-35 Program. The F-35 program began in the late 1990s as part of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) initiative, which aimed to develop a next-generation aircraft that could serve the needs of multiple branches of the U.S. military and those of allied nations. The F-35 comes in three variants: the F-35A (conventional take-off and landing), the F-35B (short take-off and vertical landing), and the F-35C (carrier-based). The aircraft boasts advanced stealth features, an unparalleled sensor suite, and the ability to operate in highly contested environments. The F35 development program faced delays, cost overruns, and technical challenges in the earlier phases of its deployment. Nevertheless, the aircraft has entered service with multiple air forces and naval fleets, including the U.S., the U.K., Israel, Japan, and others.
Notable Accidents and Incidents. Over the years, some accidents and incidents involving the F-35 have raised concerns about its safety. Some of these accidents have been relatively minor, while others have resulted in significant damage to the aircraft or loss of life. Notably, the F-35 has experienced problems with its engine, landing gear, and software systems. Overview of F-35 accidents and incidents, according to open media sources, is as follows:-
19 May 20. A U.S. Air Force F-35A from the 58th Fighter Squadron crashed during landing at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The pilot ejected and was rescued in stable condition. The accident was reportedly attributed to a combination of pilot error induced by fatigue, a design issue with the oxygen system, the aircraft’s complex and distracting nature, a malfunctioning head-mounted display, and an unresponsive flight control system.
29 Sep 20. A U.S. Marine Corps F-35B collided with a KC-130 during air-to-air refuelling over Imperial County, California. The F-35B pilot was injured during ejection, and the KC-130 crash-landed in a field without deploying its landing gear.
12 Mar 21. During a night flight near Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, a round fired from the belly-mounted 25mm gun pod on an F-35B detonated shortly after leaving the barrel. The pilot was uninjured, but the aircraft was grounded for maintenance for more than three months.
17 Nov 21. A Royal Air Force F-35B crashed during routine operations in the Mediterranean. The pilot was safely recovered to HMS Queen Elizabeth. The crash was determined to have been caused by an engine-blanking plug left in the intake.
4 Jan 22. A South Korean Air Force F-35A made a belly landing after all systems failed except the flight controls and the engine. The pilot landed the plane without deploying the landing gear and walked away uninjured.
24 Jan 22. A U.S. Navy F-35C suffered a ramp strike while landing on the USS Carl Vinson and was lost overboard in the South China Sea. Seven crew members were injured, while the pilot ejected safely and was recovered from the water. The aircraft was recovered from a depth of about 12,400 feet with the aid of a remotely operated vehicle.
19 Oct 22. An F-35A crashed at the north end of the runway at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The pilot safely ejected and was unharmed. The crash was caused by errors in the air data system from the wake turbulence of a preceding aircraft.
15 Dec 22. An F-35B crashed during a failed vertical landing at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth in Texas. The government test pilot ejected on the ground and was not seriously injured.
17 Sep 23. An F-35B crashed after the pilot ejected over North Charleston, South Carolina, following a mishap during a training flight. The pilot was unharmed, and the wreckage was found the following day.
28 May 24. A developmental test F-35B crashed shortly after take-off from Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. The pilot ejected and was reportedly injured.
28 Jan 25: An F-35A crashed at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska. The pilot was reported uninjured.
Focus Areas. The F-35 program has provided several valuable lessons learned from its accidents and incidents. These lessons span design improvements, pilot training, maintenance practices, and operational considerations. Some of the key takeaways are as follows:-
Improved Pilot Training and Situational Awareness. The complexity of the F-35’s systems requires advanced training to ensure pilots can effectively handle the aircraft in emergencies.
Enhanced Mechanical and System Design Improvements. The F-35’s advanced technology provides unprecedented capabilities but has led to integration and system reliability challenges. Hardware and software fixes are periodically needed to address these.
Aircraft Maintenance and Logistical Support. Aircraft maintenance plays a critical role in ensuring aircraft safety and reliability. Maintenance-related issues have been a contributing factor in a few cases.
Design Flexibility and Rapid Response to Failures. The ability to quickly address design flaws and technical failures is critical for maintaining the aircraft’s operational capability.
The Evolutionary Process: Accidents as Part of Development. From the perspective of aviation development, accidents are not uncommon. History is replete with examples of military aircraft programs that experienced growing pains. Technical issues and mishaps are expected early in any new aircraft’s operational use, particularly with as many advanced features as the F-35. The F-35 is a highly complex system, and as with any cutting-edge technology, teething problems are inevitable. The F-35’s early struggles might be necessary to perfect a revolutionary design. In this sense, the F-35’s accidents can be considered part of the normal process of advancing a new weapon system toward full operational capability.
Cause for Alarm: Systemic Issues and Risks. However, the continued incidents involving the F-35 cannot be entirely dismissed as part of the evolutionary process. As the aircraft enters full-scale service across multiple countries, the sheer number of accidents and technical problems may suggest deeper systemic issues. Moreover, the safety concerns surrounding the F-35 could have strategic consequences. If accidents continue to occur significantly, it could undermine the aircraft’s ability to perform in combat scenarios, potentially putting both pilots and missions at risk. The loss of an aircraft, particularly in a combat zone, could have severe consequences for the military.
Balancing Optimism with Realism. The F-35’s complexity is its greatest strength and weakness. While providing cutting-edge capabilities, the aircraft’s advanced systems also create a dependency on maintenance crews, spare parts, and software systems. If any of these elements fail, it could lead to operational delays or mishaps. A continued lack of readiness or failure to address recurring technical problems could strain military resources and decrease confidence in the aircraft’s long-term viability. While the accidents involving the F-35 can be seen as part of the normal evolution of a complex and cutting-edge aircraft, the continued problems cannot be ignored. The F-35’s development mirrors the typical challenges of revolutionary military technology, but the program must move quickly to address the emerging issues.
The question remains: will the F-35 overcome its growing pains to emerge as the next generation of air dominance, or will it be remembered as a cautionary tale of technological overreach and mismanagement? The answer lies in how effectively the program addresses its ongoing challenges and whether it can evolve from a series of accidents into a proven, reliable asset for the world’s military forces.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: DOD Needs to Address Affordability Challenges. GAO-20-505, 2020. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-505.
Congressional Research Service (CRS). F-35 Joint Strike Fighter: Background and Issues for Congress. R44124, 2022. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44124.
Axe, David. “The F-35: A Story of Delays, Cost Overruns, and Controversy.” The National Interest, 2020. https://nationalinterest.org.
Air Force Times. (2020, October 5). Investigators find that the Eglin F-35 crash resulted from a tired, distracted pilot and an unresponsive tail glitch. Retrieved from airforcetimes.com
29 September 2020: F-35B Collision with KC-130 in California. USNI News. (2020, September 29). Marine F-35B Crashes After Collision with KC-130 Over California; All Aircrew Recovered Safely. Retrieved from usni.org
12 March 2021: F-35B Gun Pod Detonation near Yuma, Arizona. Military.com. (2021, March 24). Marine Corps F-35B Damaged After Round Fired from Jet Cannon Detonates. Retrieved from military.com
17 November 2021: RAF F-35B Crash in Mediterranean. Avweb. (2021, November 22). Forgotten Intake Plug Downed RAF F-35B. Retrieved from avweb.com
4 January 2022: South Korean F-35A Belly Landing. Defense News. (2022, January 6). South Korea Grounds F-35A Fleet After Belly Landing. Retrieved from defensenews.com
24 January 2022: F-35C Ramp Strike and Loss Overboard from USS Carl Vinson. Navy AirPac. (2022, January 29). Investigation into 2022 F-35C Crash Aboard Carl Vinson Complete. Retrieved from airpac.navy.mil
19 October 2022: F-35A Crash at Hill Air Force Base, Utah. Air Force Judge Advocate General (AFJAG). (2022, October 19). F-35A Crash Investigation Report. Retrieved from afjag.af.mil
15 December 2022: F-35B Crash at Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth. Military.com. (2022, December 16). F-35 Crashes on Runway in North Texas After Failed Vertical Landing. Retrieved from military.com
17 September 2023: F-35B Crash Near North Charleston, South Carolina. 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing (2nd MAW). (2023, September 18). 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing Releases Investigation into F-35B Crash. Retrieved from 2ndmaw.marines.mil
28 May 2024: Developmental F-35B Crash at Kirtland Air Force Base Kirtland Air Force Base. (2024, May 28). F-35B Fighter Jet Crashes Near Albuquerque International Sunport. Retrieved from kirtland.af.mil
28 January 2025: F-35A Crash at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Associated Press (AP). (2025, January 29). F-35A Crash at Eielson Air Force Base; Pilot Reported Uninjured. Retrieved from apnews.com
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
