05. Saba Abbasi-Bio-Tech-NS-Oped thumbnail-March-2025-AP

Biotechnology has been in use by humans for over 10,000 years. Ancient bioscience incorporated processes like fermentation and cross breeding, while contemporary biotech could design an altogether new breed of flora or fauna. In present age, biotechnology contributes to scientific as well as, traditional and non-traditional domains of national security.     

At the outset, biotechnology has revolutionised global health security. The emergence of mRNA vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic is a testament to the innovative, transformative solutions that biotechnology can offer to improve global health outcomes. During the rapid pace of a pandemic, mRNA technology shortened the vaccine development timeline, resulting in agile immunisation tools to combat the virus.

Notably, DARPA played a significant role in the development of the mRNA technologies used to counter COVID-19. The US Department of Defence (DOD) heavily invests in vaccine research, underscoring the importance of biotechnological products for national defence.

Agriculture is another area where biotechnology has proven beneficial, particularly through the development of genetically engineered crops. The genetic modification of crop DNA to achieve desirable traits is a common application of biotechnology. Crops developed through genetic alteration are resistant to insects, herbicides, and viruses. These features improve crop productivity by preventing crop loss and yielding cleaner, chemical-free food. Furthermore, biofortification—enhancing the nutritional content of crops—is an additional benefit of agricultural biotechnology, contributing to food security, particularly in developing countries.

Around 2018, the genetic modification of Bangladesh’s staple eggplant resulted in increased insect resistance and boosted agricultural revenue for farmers adopting the GMO variety. Meanwhile, in Pakistan, where poultry is a major source of protein, the previous ban on GMO soybean imports plunged the poultry industry into crisis and reduced consumer purchasing power. Recently, the withdrawal of this import ban by the Pakistan National Biosafety Centre has been well received by the poultry industry, although it has sparked debate about the unforeseen effects of GMOs on human and environmental health.

In an environmental context, the production of biofuels is gaining traction as a source of clean, renewable energy; and understandably so. Given the unprecedented spike in global energy demand and the overreliance on fossil fuels, which have created many environmental challenges, diversification of energy sources is imperative.

Biofuels are a promising energy source produced from biomass, such as crops. Biotechnological techniques enhance the ability of crops to produce biofuel precursors. Simply put, these biotechnological techniques help develop energy crops with improved yields and enhanced composition. For instance, sugarcane is Brazil’s leading bioenergy crop, playing a key role in the country’s dominance in global bioethanol production. In 2023, a Brazilian Biotech Company used gene editing tools to develop sugarcane varieties with higher sugar content, thereby enhancing biofuel production.

On the flip side, there are various risks associated with biotechnology as well. One of the potential risks of biotech is the unintended use of genetically modified organisms leading to potential damage or disruption of natural ecosystems.

Furthermore, theintentional release of pathogenic organisms into the environment to harm ecology and human lives represents a perilous outcome of biotechnology. The usage of biological agents in warfare is not a new concept and has various examples in recorded history. However, advanced biotechnologies can be used to engineer malicious bio-agents with enhanced virulence and strong resistance to vaccines. The use of engineered pathogens by non-state actors or terrorist outfits to fulfil political and social objectives poses a grave threat to national security.

Following the Anthrax incident in the United States, the government augmented its resources and efforts towards national biodefence research. This renewed focus on biotech research underscores the inevitability of fighting fire with fire, countering aggressive pathogens by developing even more potent vaccines. This signifies that the research and development in biotechnology is not only important for multiple facets of national security but also for countering both unintentional and intentional ramifications of its products.

Nevertheless, furthering biotech research must be balanced with regulatory frameworks. In this regard, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is a pivotal legally binding instrument that obligates its signatories to handle GMOs/LMOs securely and manage them in compliance with biosafety standards. It also underscores risk assessment and public awareness for protecting ecological and human health. However, given rapid advancements in gene editing technologies such as CRISPR, the scope of the Cartagena Protocol should be broadened to include organisms that have been gene-edited endogenously.

Ultimately, harmonising regulatory frameworks with research and development in bio-innovation is essential for realising the full potential of biotechnology in the core areas of national security. Moreover, harmonising regulatory frameworks with bio-innovation will help safeguard both human populations and the environment against the potential exploitation of biotechnology by non-state actors.

Saba Abbasi is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in Daily Times.She can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »