{"id":204735,"date":"2026-03-20T06:01:21","date_gmt":"2026-03-20T06:01:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/gabbard-says-pakistan-missiles-a-future-threat-to-us-but-experts-push-back-al-jazeera\/"},"modified":"2026-03-20T06:01:21","modified_gmt":"2026-03-20T06:01:21","slug":"gabbard-says-pakistan-missiles-a-future-threat-to-us-but-experts-push-back-al-jazeera","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/gabbard-says-pakistan-missiles-a-future-threat-to-us-but-experts-push-back-al-jazeera\/","title":{"rendered":"Gabbard says Pakistan missiles a future threat to US, but experts push back – Al Jazeera"},"content":{"rendered":"

The US raises concerns, but analysts say Pakistan\u2019s missile programme is focused on India, which has longer-range missiles.<\/em>
Save
Share
Islamabad, Pakistan \u2013<\/strong> The United States\u2019 top intelligence official has placed Pakistan alongside Russia, China, North Korea and Iran as a country whose advancing missile capabilities could eventually put US territory within reach.
Presenting the 2026 Annual Threat Assessment [PDF]<\/a> before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said the five countries were \u201cresearching and developing an array of novel, advanced or traditional missile delivery systems with nuclear and conventional payloads, that put our homeland within range\u201d.
On Pakistan specifically, Gabbard told lawmakers that \u201cPakistan\u2019s long-range ballistic missile development potentially could include ICBMs with the range capable of striking the homeland\u201d.
The written assessment went further, placing Pakistan across multiple threat categories.
On missiles, it said Pakistan \u201ccontinues to develop increasingly sophisticated missile technology that provides its military the means to develop missile systems with the capability to strike targets beyond South Asia, and if these trends continue, Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) that would threaten the US\u201d.
On weapons of mass destruction, it assessed that Pakistan, alongside China, North Korea and Russia, would \u201cprobably continue to research, develop, and field delivery systems that will increase their ranges and accuracy, challenge US missile defenses, and provide new WMD-use options\u201d.
The report also flagged South Asia as a region of \u201cenduring security challenges\u201d, warning that India-Pakistan relations<\/a> \u201cremain a risk for nuclear conflict\u201d<\/a>.
It referenced last year\u2019s Pahalgam attack<\/a> in Indian-administered Kashmir as an example of how violence by armed groups can trigger crises, while noting that \u201cPresident Trump\u2019s intervention de-escalated the most recent nuclear tensions\u201d and that \u201cneither country seeks to return to open conflict\u201d.
The assessment projected that threats to the US homeland could expand from more than 3,000 missiles today to at least 16,000 by 2035.
On Thursday, Tahir Andrabi, spokesman for Pakistan\u2019s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said: \u201cPakistan categorically rejects the recent assertion by a United States official alleging a potential threat from Pakistan\u2019s missile capabilities.\u201d
Pakistan\u2019s strategic capabilities are \u201cexclusively defensive\u201d in nature, he said, and are \u201caimed at safeguarding national sovereignty and maintaining peace and stability in South Asia\u201d.
\u201cPakistan\u2019s missile programme, which remains well below intercontinental range, is firmly rooted in the doctrine of credible minimum deterrence vis-a-vis India. In contrast, India\u2019s development of missile capabilities exceeding 12,000 kilometres [7,460 miles] reflects a trajectory that extends beyond regional security considerations and is certainly a cause of concern for the neighbourhood and beyond.\u201d
Pakistan, he said, remains \u201ccommitted to constructive engagement with the United States, anchored in mutual respect, non-discrimination, and factual accuracy. We urge a more measured and considered approach that aligns with South Asia\u2019s strategic imperatives and advances peace, security and stability across the region.\u201d
Tughral Yamin, a former army brigadier and specialist on arms control and nuclear affairs, said Gabbard was not the first US official to raise such concerns, however.
\u201cSimilar remarks have been made in the past. Officially, Pakistan has countered such rhetoric by pointing out that Pakistani deterrence \u2013 both conventional and nuclear \u2013 is meant against India. Even with India, Pakistan seeks peace at honourable terms and not because US chose to identify Pakistan is a threat,\u201d he told Al Jazeera.
Gabbard\u2019s remarks were framed around the future potential of Pakistan\u2019s missile programme, rather than existing capability. But even from that futuristic prism, experts question the logic of the US intelligence assessment.
Pakistan\u2019s longest-range operational missile, the Shaheen-III, has an estimated range of roughly 2,750km (1,710 miles), sufficient to cover all of India.
An intercontinental ballistic missile is generally defined as having a range exceeding 5,500km (3,420 miles), which Pakistan does not currently possess.
But even with shorter-range ICBMs, Pakistan would not be in a position even close to reaching US shores: The distance between the two countries exceeds 11,200km (7,000 miles). Only Russia, the US, France, China and the United Kingdom have ICBMs that can travel that distance, while India and North Korea are developing missiles of that range. Israel is speculated to possess an ICBM \u2013 the Jericho III \u2013 that can travel a comparable distance.
In January last year, senior US officials, speaking anonymously at a briefing for nongovernmental experts cited by the Arms Control Association, assessed that Pakistan\u2019s ability to field long-range ballistic missiles was \u201cseveral years to a decade away\u201d. Gabbard\u2019s latest testimony suggests that assessment has not significantly changed.
Washington has nonetheless been closely monitoring Pakistan\u2019s missile programme.
In December 2024, the administration of former US President Joe Biden sanctioned<\/a> Pakistan\u2019s National Development Complex, the body responsible for its ballistic missile programme, along with three private companies.
The US accused them of procuring items for long-range missile development, including specialised vehicle chassis and missile testing equipment.
Jon Finer, then US deputy national security adviser, said at the time<\/a> that if current trends continued, Pakistan would have \u201cthe capability to strike targets well beyond South Asia, including in the United States\u201d.
While Pakistan has previously described US sanctions as \u201cbiased and politically motivated\u201d, accusing Washington of relying on \u201cmere suspicion\u201d and invoking \u201cbroad, catch-all provisions\u201d without sufficient evidence.
\"Interactive_Pakistan_India_Missiles_August25_2025-1755868832\"
Jalil Abbas Jilani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington, rejected Gabbard\u2019s new remarks in a post on X.
\u201cTulsi Gabbard\u2019s assertion at the Senate hearing that the US homeland is within range of Pakistan\u2019s nuclear and conventional missiles is not grounded in strategic reality,\u201d he wrote. \u201cPakistan\u2019s nuclear doctrine is India-specific, aimed at maintaining credible deterrence in South Asia, not projecting power globally.\u201d
Abdul Basit, a former Pakistani high commissioner to India, also criticised the comparison.
\u201cPakistan\u2019s nuclear programme has always been India-specific. Such self-serving and groundless assertions only betray Gabbard\u2019s incorrigible biases,\u201d he wrote on social media.
Pakistan has long maintained that its nuclear and strategic programmes are calibrated solely to deter India. Three months after<\/a> its May 2025 conflict with India, Pakistan announced the formation of its Army Rocket Force Command (ARFC).
It has also accused Washington of double standards, pointing to deepening US strategic cooperation with New Delhi, including advanced defence technology transfers, while penalising Islamabad for pursuing what it sees as necessary deterrence.
Yamin said Gabbard \u201cquite conveniently\u201d overlooked India\u2019s longer-range missile capabilities.
He pointed to systems such as the Agni-V, with a range of more than 5,000km (3,100 miles), and the Agni-IV, which can travel about 4,000km (2,485 miles). India\u2019s Defence Research and Development Organisation \u2013 its government military R&D institution \u2013 is currently developing the Agni VI missile, an ICBM that could have a range of up to 12,000km (7,460 miles).
Nevertheless, in a June 2025 article in Foreign Affairs magazine, Vipin Narang, a former US Department of Defense official, and Pranay Vaddi, a former US National Security Council official, wrote that US intelligence agencies believed Pakistan was developing a missile \u201cthat could reach the continental United States\u201d.
They suggested Islamabad\u2019s motivation might not be India, which its current arsenal already covers, but rather to deter Washington from intervening in a future India-Pakistan conflict or from launching a preventive strike against Pakistan\u2019s nuclear arsenal.
Pakistani analysts have challenged that premise.
Rabia Akhtar, a nuclear security scholar, said Gabbard\u2019s statement reflected \u201ca persistent flaw in US threat assessments, which is substituting worst-case speculation for grounded analysis\u201d.
\u201cPakistan\u2019s deterrence posture is India-centric. Folding it into a US homeland threat narrative is misleading. The claim that Pakistan is pursuing capabilities to target the US ignores decades of evidence. Its nuclear programme, doctrine, and missile development have remained India-centric. Even its longest-range systems are calibrated to deny India strategic depth, not project power beyond the region,\u201d she told Al Jazeera.
Still,\u00a0Christopher Clary, a political scientist at the University at Albany, said Gabbard\u2019s assessment clarifies an open question about the Trump administration\u2019s stance.
\u201cIt was unclear up until now whether the Trump administration\u2019s [decision to stay] quiet on alleged Pakistan ICBM development arose because the issue had gone away, perhaps because Pakistan quietly had settled US concerns,\u201d he wrote on X.<\/a> \u201cBut the US intelligence community assesses apparently that the issue persists.\u201d
Akhtar, who is also the director at Centre for Security, Strategy and Policy Research, University of Lahore, reiterated that there is no evidence that Pakistan is designing missiles to reach beyond targets associated with India\u2019s present or future capabilities.
\u201cA more serious conversation would move beyond worst-case speculation and engage with the regional logic that actually drives nuclear decision-making in South Asia,\u201d she said.
Gabbard\u2019s assessment comes at a complex moment in US-Pakistan relations.
Over 2025, the two countries underwent a diplomatic reset, driven in part by the four-day conflict<\/a> between India and Pakistan in May.
US President Donald Trump has repeatedly cited his administration\u2019s role in brokering the ceasefire between the nuclear-armed neighbours that brought the fighting to a halt, claiming credit on dozens of occasions. The episode helped open the door to a broader recalibration in ties, including Pakistan\u2019s nomination<\/a> of Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. India has maintained that the ceasefire occurred without third-party involvement.
Relations appeared to warm further when Trump hosted Pakistan\u2019s army chief<\/a>, Field Marshal Asim Munir, for a private White House lunch in June. It marked the first time a US president had hosted a Pakistani military chief who was not also the head of state.
Munir visited Washington twice more later in the year, including a September meeting that also involved Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
At the Sharm el-Sheikh summit in October aimed at ending Israel\u2019s genocidal war in Gaza, Trump described Munir as \u201cmy favourite field marshal\u201d<\/a> and has praised him repeatedly.
Pakistan\u2019s strategic relevance has also extended to the Middle East. Its ties with Gulf states and working relationship with Tehran have made it a useful interlocutor<\/a>, including during the continuing US-Israeli strikes on Iran. In September, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed a mutual defence agreement, days after Israel struck Doha, Qatar\u2019s capital, with a missile, raising concerns across the Gulf over whether regional nations could continue to depend on a US security umbrella.<\/p>\n

Follow Al Jazeera English:<\/p>\n

source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The US raises concerns, but analysts say Pakistan\u2019s missile programme is focused on India, which has longer-range missiles.SaveShareIslamabad, Pakistan \u2013 The United States\u2019 top intelligence official has placed Pakistan alongside Russia, China, North Korea and Iran as a country whose advancing missile capabilities could eventually put US territory within reach.Presenting the 2026 Annual Threat Assessment […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":204736,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-204735","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-us","8":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204735","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=204735"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204735\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/204736"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204735"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204735"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204735"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}