by Maryam Noureen Janjua
In recent years, the United States has increasingly imposed trade restrictions and blacklisted companies from various countries, including Pakistan, China and UAE. These actions, justified by the U.S. under national security concerns, are especially troubling for countries like Pakistan, which faces complex security challenges in its region. With defense needs that are genuinely geared towards its internal security rather than a global threat, Pakistan is particularly affected by these measures, which impact its technological and industrial development and strain U.S.-Pakistan relations.
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) website, a total of 26 entities to a trade blacklist. These additions are related to alleged violations of export controls, involvement in weapons programs of concern, and evasion of U.S. sanctions and export controls on Russia and Iran. These BIS actions were taken under the authority of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 and its implementing regulations, the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). According to a report by Dawn, “Six entities in China were added to the list for allegedly acquiring US-origin items to support China’s military modernization or to aid Iran’s weapons and drone programs, among other reasons”.
Interestingly, three entities in the UAE, one of the most reliable US partners in the Gulf region, alongside another in Egypt, were said to have acquired or attempted to obtain US components to avoid sanctions imposed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Regardless of the fact that each country, sanctioned by the commerce department, must have violated the US laws, such restrictions may not affect the Chinese or Emarati defense interests. However, defense analysts in Pakistan, believe that these sanctions can squeeze Pakistani defense firms to explore other options for defense procurement pushing Pakistan further into the Chinese bloc. A report by Drop Site in the recent past has just suggested that Pakistan was getting closer to China’s geostrategic interests in lieu of Gwadar port under CPEC.
The U.S. imposed restrictions on 16 companies from Pakistan adding into the U.S. ‘entities list’ making them ineligible to acquire U.S. items and technology without government authorization. According to a VOA report, “Nine of the 16 Pakistani companies added to the blacklist this week were accused of being front companies for a previously sanctioned company, Advanced Engineering Research Organization, deemed responsible for the country’s cruise missile and strategic drone programs.” Defense analysts in Pakistan think it might not create any huge impact on the ongoing missile program but it can affect Pakistan-US relations.
In the past, western defense community has accused Pakistan of facilitating illegal weapons trade with China and other nations, primarily focusing on concerns over technology transfer and arms proliferation in the region. Western analysts argue that Pakistan’s strong defense ties with China facilitate the transfer of military technology, including sensitive missile and aircraft systems. Pakistan’s defense exports to Middle Eastern and African nations have sometimes drawn scrutiny, with Western sources alleging that some transactions bypass strict international regulations. While Pakistan has consistently maintained that its defense trade complies with global non-proliferation norms, the country emphasizes its sovereign right to pursue defense partnerships.
One of the most contentious aspects of the U.S. blacklisting policy is its apparent pick and choose strategy in foreign relations. While the U.S. extensively supports and facilitates military and defense programs in countries like Ukraine and India, it frequently applies intense scrutiny to similar initiatives in Pakistan. The U.S. supplies Ukraine with advanced weaponry and security technologies, considering it a strategic need amid the Ukraine war. Similarly, India’s defense sector has benefited from U.S. assistance and collaborations, despite its regional conflicts and military posturing.
On the other hand, Pakistan, which has been a longstanding ally in the fight against terrorism and has suffered considerable losses as a result of its participation, finds its military and technological advancement under constant U.S. restrictions. This disparity not only reflects a lack of uniform policy but also strains diplomatic relations, creating an impression of bias that does little to support U.S. interests in fostering regional stability. Although Pakistan has been a frontline ally of the U.S. in the war on terror in Afghanistan, taking such decisions denotes a habit of leaving its allies in the lurch when the U.S. has no security interest.
When the U.S. blacklists Pakistani firms, it stymies the growth of Pakistan’s technology and defense industries. The restrictions prevent Pakistani companies from accessing essential technologies and resources needed for industrial and defense development. For Pakistan, a country with genuine security concerns, such limitations restrict its ability to become self-sufficient in defense production and technology. By perpetuating Pakistan’s reliance on foreign technology, these restrictions effectively limit the nation’s ability to independently manage its defense needs. This dependence reinforces a cycle where Pakistan has to constantly seek out foreign alliances for security needs, which, in turn, makes it more susceptible to foreign influence over its defense policies.
The implications of these blacklists go beyond technological limitations. Pakistan has been a critical ally of the United States in counter-terrorism efforts, particularly in South Asia, where both countries share common security interests. Yet, by imposing such restrictions, the U.S. risks deteriorating this relationship, fostering a sense of mistrust and frustration within Pakistan. While Pakistan may face pressures from the U.S. to curb specific activities or limit defense production, blacklisting is counterproductive as it can lead to increased resentment and a desire to seek alternatives.
Pakistan’s military programs, especially in missile and defense technology, are developed in response to pressing regional threats, not as part of an expansionist or aggressive agenda. With a history of regional tensions, particularly with India, Pakistan’s defense strategy is largely defensive, aiming to preserve sovereignty and protect its people. U.S. restrictions on Pakistani defense firms disregard these unique challenges, instead applying a blanket approach to restrictions without considering the context. Furthermore, Pakistan is a responsible state that follows international norms and regulations in its defense development, including nuclear non-proliferation.
By isolating Pakistan from technology access and defense collaboration, the U.S. inadvertently creates an opportunity for other nations, particularly China, to fill the void. Over the years, China has emerged as a reliable ally for Pakistan, especially in defense technology. Chinese companies have provided Pakistan with alternative resources, expertise, and equipment to enhance its defense capabilities. Consequently, U.S. restrictions on Pakistani firms often push Pakistan closer to China, strengthening Sino-Pakistani ties in areas where the U.S. could have maintained a cooperative relationship.
Pakistan’s security environment is far from stable, and its sovereignty depends on robust defense mechanisms. The country faces multiple external threats, including cross-border terrorism, which necessitates a comprehensive defense strategy. In this context, Pakistan’s military programs are not only legitimate but essential for its self-defense. Denying Pakistan the opportunity to strengthen its defense capabilities undermines its sovereignty, leaving it vulnerable in an increasingly complex regional landscape. Given these realities, the U.S. approach fails to align with the challenges faced by Pakistan, limiting its potential to develop self-sufficiency in defense.
Instead of imposing curbs and blacklisting Pakistani firms, the United States should consider a more diplomatic approach that emphasizes collaboration and mutual security interests. Diplomatic engagement allows for open discussions about security concerns and paves the way for partnerships that can address both countries’ interests without jeopardizing regional stability. By focusing on dialogue and cooperation, the U.S. can foster a better understanding of Pakistan’s security needs, helping to shape policies that address those needs while still considering U.S. security priorities.
U.S. restrictions on Pakistani, Chinese, and Emirati firms are rooted in national security concerns, but the blanket application of these policies fails to consider the unique security realities faced by countries like Pakistan. The U.S. approach reflects a double standard that strains relations and limits Pakistan’s ability to develop self-sufficient defense capabilities. By pushing Pakistan closer to China, the U.S. undermines its own influence in the region and risks losing a valuable partner. Instead of blacklisting, a strategy of engagement and cooperation would serve both countries’ interests, fostering stability and reducing the need for restrictive measures that ultimately hinder, rather than help, long-term security objectives.