How many are we talking here? All weapon systems go through prototype phases, and these prototypes are rarely put into operational service (JF-17, for instance). If we were to lose a few, but veerify its acuracy, it's a pretty damn good ROI isn't it?
Also, you don't really have to fire it off into another country, fire it into the sea. Or, if you really want to, launch it from the North and gather it up in the South, and extrapolate the data to calculate its accuracy over a longer distance. Errors are most likely to occur during the launch or final stages, and those are really not dependent on the distance travelled.
Worst case scenario, we ask the Chinese for assistance. Being unable to launch and recover it, or throwing a few away for the sake of RDTE and V&V are not reason enough to scrap a program of this magnitude, if it exists.
On the other hand, the area that such a project will benefit most is our Space Program. I have always believed that we had the know-how in missile-tech to work towards a space system launch vehicle, but were constrained due to funding and political short-sightedness. If this program turns out to be true, then surely, an SLV must be in the works as well. Space, in my opinion, is a much more beneficial (and a lot more justifiable) target to aim for than anyone 7000KM away from us.
Not as simple as you think.
One of the most common problems in missile design and construction, regardless of type, is the thrust-body angle alignment. Basically, the issue is about if the direction of thrust is in line with the body and it is more problematic than most people realize. The rocket motors cannot be bolted to the missile body, their vibration will catastrophically fail the missile the moment it start. They must be isolated to some degree yet remain structurally integral to the missile so as not their thrust go out of alignment during flight. The higher the misalignment, the sooner and therefore shorter distance the error will manifest itself. If this issue is not addressed then it is irrelevant on how powerful and how far the missile can go. It will embarrassingly miss the target.
As the missile design is being refined, assuming the thrust-body angle alignment being minimized, it will be necessary to remove onself from launch to that X distance to verify if the thrust-body angle alignment is being properly addressed. If there are some misalignment that cannot be repaired then it must be compensated. The methods can be through aerodynamics such as fins to exploit aerodynamics forces to counteract the misdirection that misalignment induces, or to use lateral thrust mechanisms to effect the same counteractions. There are plenty of publicly available sources that shows those small side rocket bursts. They are for stabilization and to compensate for the missile's own thrust-body misalignment.
These items cannot be extrapolated as you cannot predict if those fins will actuate to the degree you want or those side thrusts will be constant over time. After you perform those repairs or install those compensation measures, you must run out to that 5000 km or 6000 km point and check if your fixes works as your suppliers claim they should. You must perform these tests on random, from launch times to distances.
Another issue that must be verified at the target point, meaning
YOU have to be there, is when should the missile perform a 'gravity turn'...
Gravity turn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The gravity turn is commonly utilized with launch vehicles such as a rocket or the Space Shuttle which launch vertically. The rocket begins by flying straight up, gaining both vertical speed and altitude. During this portion of the launch gravity acts directly against the thrust of the rocket, lowering its vertical acceleration. Losses associated with this slowing are known as gravity drag, and can be minimized by executing the next phase of the launch, the pitch over maneuver, as soon as possible. The pitch over should also be carried out while the vertical velocity is small to avoid large aerodynamic loads on the vehicle during the maneuver.
If the missile travels mostly endoatmosphere, it is more vulnerable to interception. So do you really want to perform this gravity turn 'as soon as possible'? May be or may be not. But regardless of when you want your missile to make this turn, the only way you can verify is with the final result and that mean you have to be at the target point.
In order for Pakistan to have an effective 7000 km ballistic missile force, much money must be allocated to testing this capability and that require Pakistan to have a 'blue water' navy force
IF the intention is to test over water. The Chinese does not have a 'blue water' navy.
Because a missile is essentially a throwaway weapon, it would be criminally wasteful to have anything less than a full testing regime that would involve Pakistan to be at all points throughout the entire 7000 km distance. If the missile is acceptably accurate, based upon a certain CEP figure, at 6000 km and goes wildly out of tolerance beyond that, then the claim is 6000 km, not 7000 km even though the missile is capable of traveling that far. Of course, that tolerance is arbitrary but as far as those who are experienced at ICBM deployment, and that would include US and Russia, if the missile's CEP is beyond 100 meters, might as well go nuclear in order to have a good ROI.
Portents of that are present in Sahih Ahadith, meaning the established by research true words of the Prophet PBUH are present as evidence that say exactly what "graphican" said. As Muslims this is part of our Faith and you don't have to be a Fanatic to believe what the Prophet said. Any and every Muslim will tell you, whether from the traditional Muslim areas or Western countries, they believe the words of the Prophet PBUH and accept them to be more true than you and I being alive or here 
.
