India and Pakistan’s Missile Program: A Strategic Review

Both India and Pakistan have invested heavily in modern missile technology. However, there is a significant difference in shaping the strategic scenario between the two countries; India started an arms race in the region and continued the campaign against Pakistan with intensity, collecting a large stockpile and increasing the range of missile technology, while any missile program of Pakistan was aimed at regional security concerns and strategic defense and never exceeded the range of the missile which is dangerous for any country except India.

India started its missile technology journey in the late 1950s, with the establishment of the “Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP)” in the 1980s under the leadership of “Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam.” Under this program, India increased the technology of many important missile systems. These include Prithvi, a short-range surface-to-surface missile; Agni, a series of medium-to-intercontinental-range missiles; Trishul, a short-range surface-to-air missile; Akash, a medium-range surface-to-air missile and Nag, an anti-tank guided missile. The Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP) provided opportunities to enhance India’s existing missile capabilities, allowing India to develop diverse missile systems for various strategic and tactical purposes.

Pakistan’s missile Programme, known as the “Hataf Programme,” was launched in the mid-1980s to counter-defense India’s missile technology, with the full and strong support of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, in view of the need to fill the gaps in missile technology vis-à-vis India.” Pakistan initially relied on the acquisition of foreign technology, acquiring ‘Soviet Scud technology,’ and later purchased Chinese DF-11 missiles. In the mid-1990s, Pakistan began developing short-range missile technology based on solid fuel locally and then added cruise missiles to its program in defense of India’s missile programs.

India has a comprehensive arsenal of missiles, ranging from the Agni series Agni-I (short-range) to Agni-V (intercontinental range) missiles (capable of carrying nuclear warheads), the Prithvi series (short-range ballistic missiles for battlefield support), BrahMos (a supersonic cruise missile developed in collaboration with Russia), the K series (submarine-launched ballistic missiles for maritime defense).In India’s Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) program, ‘Prithvi Air Defense (PAD)’ was developed to intercept the missile at the highest level and Advanced Air Defense (AAD) to intercept the missile at low altitude. India successfully tested these systems and deployed them around key strategic locations such as the capital New Delhi, adding that India has also acquired the Russian S-400 missile defense system to enhance its air defense capabilities.

Compared to India, Pakistan’s missile arsenal includes the Shaheen series (medium-to-long-range ballistic missiles), Ghori series (liquid-fueled medium-range ballistic missiles), Babur (surface-to-air cruise missiles), and Ra’ad (air-launched cruise missiles). Particular attention has been paid to systems that can cross missile defense shields. India’s BMD program for Pakistan was challenging for the strategic balance in the region, so Pakistan adopted the Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles (MIRVs) program in response to the BMD program to thwart India’s defense system. For this, Pakistan adopted cruise missiles (to exploit the gaps in the BMD system) and nuclear weapons (to reduce the nuclear threshold and counter India’s conventional military superiority). Pakistan has not yet tested a long-range intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), while India has developed and tested missiles with a range of more than 5,000 km. India also has the capability to strike the United States and Europe with nuclear weapons and currently has two nuclear ballistic missile submarines capable of reaching U.S. ports and attacking any American state. There is a clear contradiction in the strategy regarding India’s US defense plans.

Pakistan compared to India. Both India and Pakistan focused on investing heavily in advanced missile technology to balance the defense system against Indian aggression; Pakistan pursued a policy of self-reliance, while India pursued a multi-pronged defense system drawing on Russian, Western, and indigenous systems. India’s strategy identified China as a regional threat with a special attraction for the US. Pakistan has a policy of non-interference in international disputes. At the same time, India’s policy includes US-Russia or US-China disputes. The United States has at various times maintained sanctions against Pakistan, its strategic and non-NATO ally, and for the first time, a US official has called Pakistan’s missile program a “direct threat to the United States,” which is not hostile to the United States in any way. Experts say that Shaheen III and Ababeel are the most capable missile systems in Pakistan’s missile arsenal. The medium-range ballistic missile Shaheen-III can target up to 2750 km, and Ababeel can reach up to 2200 km. Both these missiles are called multiple re-entry vehicles (MRVs). According to experts, the United States has more complaints about the same two ballistic missiles, Shaheen III and Ababeel. And on the National Complex, which is under US sanctions, Washington alleges that the NDC is involved in the production of Pakistan’s other ballistic missiles, including the Shaheen series of missiles. The missile’s range proves it poses no threat to the United States.

Pakistan’s missile program, which is primarily focused on countering India’s capabilities, encompasses a wide range of strategic and tactical options. It is based on developing advanced systems to overcome India’s missile defense system. Pakistan has never expressed a policy of participating in any global conflict against the United States, which is not part of its defense and foreign policy. The international community, especially the United States, has expressed growing concern over the development of these missile programs. He certainly seems to be more than supportive and appeasing of India, as evidenced by the recent sanctions and diplomatic pressure. The continued development of missile technology requires a balance for the region’s stability. Unilateralism, arms control efforts, and supporting the other side of the global non-proliferation regime will likely have far-reaching effects. As new technologies such as hypersonic missiles and space systems emerge, maintaining strategic stability in South Asia is important for Pakistan. It is facing the aggression of a country that has attacked Pakistan on many occasions, and its proxy policy against Pakistan’s territory is also not hidden from anyone.