FO rejects US intelligence chief’s claims about Pakistan missile threat

Published March 19, 2026
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard attends a US House Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on March 19, 2026. — Reuters
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard attends a US House Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on March 19, 2026. — Reuters

The Foreign Office (FO) on Thursday categorically rejected the statement by US Dire­ctor of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard over Pakistan’s missile capabilities posing a threat to the country.

Gabbard had listed Pakistan among states that pose a significant threat to the United States, warning US lawmakers that Islam­abad’s evolving missile capabilities could potentially put the American homeland within range.

In a statement, FO spokesperson Tahir Hussain Andrabi said, “Pakistan categorically rejects the recent assertion by a United States official alleging a potential threat from Pakistan’s missile capabilities.”

He highlighted that Pakistan’s strategic capabilities were exclusively defensive in nature, aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty and maintaining peace and stability in South Asia.

“Its missile programme, which remains well below intercontinental range, is firmly rooted in the doctrine of credible minimum deterrence vis-à-vis India,” he said.

“In contrast, India’s development of missile capabilities exceeding 12,000 kilometres reflects a trajectory that extends beyond regional security considerations and is certainly a cause of concern for the neighbourhood and beyond,” he said.

“Pakistan remains committed 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’s strategic imperatives and advances peace, security, and stability across the region,” he said.

Earlier on Thursday, former caretaker foreign minister Jalil Abbas Jilani had also dismissed Gabbard’s statement.

In a post on X, the former foreign minister maintained that the assertion that the “US Homeland is within range of Pakistan’s nuclear/con missiles is not grounded in strategic reality”.

He said that Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine was “India-specific, aimed at maintaining credible deterrence in South Asia, not projecting power globally”.

On Wednesday, Gabbard, presenting the 2026 Ann­ual Threat Assessment before the United States Senate Intelligence Comm­ittee said, “Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and Pakistan have been researching and developing an array of novel, advanced, or traditional missile delivery systems with nuclear and conventional payloads, that put our Homeland within range.”

“Pakistan’s long-range ballistic missile development potentially could include ICBMs with the range capable of striking the Homeland,” she said.

Gabbard said that the nations identified in the threat assessment report “will likely seek to understand US plans for advanced missile defence… for the purpose of shaping their own missile development programmes and assessing US intentions regarding deterrence.”

She said the intelligence community foresees a sharp rise in missile threats over the next decade. “Threats to the Homeland will expand collectively to more than 16,000 missiles by 2035, from the current assessed figure of more than 3,000 missiles.”

Analysts have Pakistan’s inclusion among the principal nuclear threats as a continuation of previous US policy trends.

In December 2024, a similar claim was made by a senior White House official accused Pakistan of developing long-range ballistic missile capabilities that could eventually allow it to strike targets outside of South Asia, including in the US.

The same month, the US said it was imposing additional sanctions related to Pakistan’s ballistic missile programme, targeting four entities that it alleged were contributing to the proliferation or delivery of such weapons.

Opinion

A changed world

A changed world

The phrase ‘security provider’ sounds impressive but there is little clarity on what it means for the country.

Editorial

Bannu attack
Updated 12 May, 2026

Bannu attack

The security narrative and strategy of the KP government diverges considerably from the state’s position.
Cotton crisis
12 May, 2026

Cotton crisis

PAKISTAN’S cotton economy is once again facing a crisis that exposes the country’s flawed agricultural and...
Buddhist heritage
12 May, 2026

Buddhist heritage

THE revival of Buddhist chants at the ancient Dharmarajika Stupa in Taxila after nearly 1,500 years is much more ...
New regional order
Updated 11 May, 2026

New regional order

The fact is that the US has only one true security commitment in the Middle East — Israel.
A better start
11 May, 2026

A better start

THE first 1,000 days of a child’s life often shape decades to come. In Pakistan, where chronic malnutrition has...
Widening gap
11 May, 2026

Widening gap

PAKISTAN’S monthly trade deficit ballooned to $4.07bn last month, its highest level since June 2022, further...