Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
|
 |
11-23-2005, 12:31 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Postmaster General
Military Professional
Join Date: 08-20-03
Country: 
|
PAF chief for purchase of F-16 planes now
Quote:
PAF chief for purchase of F-16 planes now
Islamabad, Nov 21, IRNA
Pakistan-Planes
The chief of Pakistan Air Force Kalim Saadat has called for purchase of F-16 planes from the United States now, indirectly opposing the deferment as announced by President General Pervez Musharraf.
Local private television channel, Geo, reported on Monday that the PAF chief was of the view that if Pakistan did not go for the planes now, the nation would have to wait for another 10-12 years.
"We will have to start again scratch negotiations, if now we decide to postpone the purchase of the planes. This will also cost us more," he maintained.
It is upto the nation to take a decision, he added, saying earlier the nation wanted the planes and now they wanted the deal's deferment.
Pakistan looks to acquire 25 used F-16 planes and 50-55 new ones.
However, in the wake of earthquake that struck Pakistan and Kashmir last month, President Musharraf announced the postponement.
As part of its assistance to Pakistan, the United States has announced US dollar 3 billion package, including the fighter planes and helicopters.
The opposition parties had also called for the deferment of planes and the purchase of surveillance planes from Sweden besides suspension of work on the new general headquarters.
The opposition wants diversion of more funds for the relief and rehabilitation of the millions of quake victims.
The tragedy killed more than 73,000, injured over 0.1 million, besides rendering over 4 million homeless.
President Musharraf told foreign journalists last week that other defence-related deals were also being considered for review.
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu...0553162752.htm
|
The Pak Air Chief does raise a valid point.
There is no doubt that there is every possibility that if the deal is deferred, there can be another govt with another set of Senators, with totally divergent views and they may stop the deal at that later point of time!
The sacrifice Musharraf has made to support the War on Terror, going against the majority view of Pakistan (notwithstanding what the educated elite wish to convey here on this forum and elsewhere), will come to nought.
Therefore, the aircraft deal has to go through NOW.
It is nearly a NOW or NEVER scenario.
However, it will go down badly with the donor nations for the EQ relief and may totally reverse the pledges.
It is a Catch 22 situation for Musharraf.
What should Pakistan do?[/quote]
__________________
"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."
I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.
HAKUNA MATATA
|
|
|
|
11-23-2005, 12:40 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
The One
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 04-06-05
Location: Amsterdam
Country: 
|
Difficult situation indeed but the chief has valid points.
Imo, we should go ahead with the deal early next year. We do have a defence budget for the purchase.
As far the donors are concerned, they have been promised full transparency about the their aid.
We should also not forget that twothird of the pledged money is loan, not aid.
__________________
Administrator @ Defence.pk
|
|
|
|
11-24-2005, 01:57 AM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Contributor
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Neo
Difficult situation indeed but the chief has valid points.
Imo, we should go ahead with the deal early next year. We do have a defence budget for the purchase.As far the donors are concerned, they have been promised full transparency about the their aid.We should also not forget that twothird of the pledged money is loan, not aid.
|
Its stupid to wait and moreover the decision to elay it was just a part of window dressing.It was meant to address the worries and concerns of locals and kashmirirs.To show then that GOP is bothered and worried.
The donor nations wont care a **** as they know,that the money has been already allocated for.
__________________
What's the difference between people who pray in church and those who pray in casinos?
The ones in the casinos are serious.
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2005, 07:06 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Real Madrid CF
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 03-07-05
Location: Mumbai
Country:
|
Is this speculation or PAF will go ahead & get 26 f16 A/B from belgium & holland for the time being.
pak obserevr
__________________
Hala Madrid!!
|
|
|
|
|
11-27-2005, 12:04 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Contributor
|
It looks like pakistanis think F-sola(16) is an elixer for every one of their problems. 
__________________
saw this in some site dont remember the name tough
Quote:
|
Opinions are like a$$ holes, everyone has one. everyone thinks others stink
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-27-2005, 14:26 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Real Madrid CF
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 03-07-05
Location: Mumbai
Country:
|
Quote:
Some one by the name austin posted this news in keypub.
US should scrap plane deal with Pakistan
By Selig S. Harrison | November 27, 2005
PAKISTAN'S decision to postpone the US-subsidized purchase of 77 nuclear-capable F-16 fighter planes from the ailing Lockheed-Martin Corporation provides an opportunity for the Bush administration and Congress to call off a disastrous deal that the United States should never have proposed in the first place.
In economic terms, it would be reckless for Pakistan to pile on new foreign debt by spending $3.5 billion on F-16s. Even before the earthquake, Pakistan was a poor country, with per capita gross national income of $600 per year. Pakistan ranked 68th out of 103 third world countries surveyed in the 2005 UN Poverty Index, which measures longevity, living standards, education, and health. Now, Islamabad will have to spend $5.8 billion in foreign earthquake aid just to avert further impoverishment, not to mention billions more in the decades ahead on long-overdue development programs.
For the United States, the damaging strategic consequences of the F-16 deal have become increasingly apparent since the White House offered to sell the planes last March. It is fueling an arms race between New Delhi and Islamabad just when a delicate peace process has begun to ease tensions in Kashmir, and it is rekindling anti-US sentiment in India just when the administration has started to move toward a ''strategic partnership" with New Delhi to strengthen India as a counterweight to China and Iran.
The Manmohan Singh government is already under fire domestically for siding with the United States against Iran in the Sept. 24 International Atomic Energy Agency vote to take the Iranian nuclear issue to the United Nations Security Council. Pakistan abstained in the IAEA vote.
The White House spin that Islamabad can pay for the F-16s out of its ''national funds" is laughable. Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves have resulted from a cornucopia of post-Sept. 11 US aid and debt relief. A US-led aid consortium has rescheduled $14.1 billion in debt, and $3.9 billion of the earthquake aid is in the form of new loans. The administration has provided Islamabad with $1.7 billion in economic and military aid grants, including $300 million just approved by Congress, plus $1.5 billion in loans and billions more in multilateral aid based largely on US contributions.
When Islamabad decides to start buying F-16s, it is likely to dip first into $750 million of unexpended US military aid grant funds to pay for some of the planes and to seek US government credits and loan guarantees for the rest.
The administration rationale for the F-16s is that Pakistan needs and deserves the planes in order to play its role as an ally against Al Qaeda and Taliban. But Pakistan makes no secret that it wants the planes for use against India. Islamabad gives only tepid support to the search for Osama Bin Laden, lets Al Qaeda and Taliban cells operate freely within Pakistan, and carefully limits its operations against Taliban forces hiding out along the Afghan border. In any case, to carry out military operations against the Taliban, Pakistan needs helicopters and communications equipment, not F-16s, and this type of aid is already being provided by the United States.
President Pervez Musharraf's importance as an ally against terrorism is sharply restricted by his unwillingness or inability to rein in Islamic extremist groups entrenched within the Pakistan armed forces and security services. Two of these groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, are aiding the destabilizing insurgent operations now going on in Kashmir and openly take credit for bombing attacks in Srinagar and New Delhi that have killed more than 70 people in recent weeks.
The damaging impact of new F-16 sales to Pakistan on US relations with India can only be understood against the backdrop of $7.2 billion in earlier US gifts of military hardware to the cold war military dictators in Islamabad who preceded Musharraf.
Pentagon assurances that US military aid to Pakistan relates only to the ''war on terrorism" revive Indian memories of earlier reassurances by Dwight Eisenhower in 1954 that the program of ''limited" weapons aid to Pakistan then unfolding was solely for use against communist aggression. By 1965, the United States had provided $3.8 billion in military hardware to Pakistan. This led General Ayub Khan to launch cross-border raids in Kashmir that triggered a broader war, in which Pakistan, predictably, relied primarily on its US planes and tanks.
India had just begun to forgive and forget when the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan prompted the United States to supply Pakistan with $3.5 billion in new weapons aid as a reward for serving as a ''front-line state." The nature of this aid package, centering on F-16s and heavy tanks, made clear that it was not intended for use on the mountainous Afghan border but rather to bolster Pakistan's balance of power in open-plains warfare with India.
Announcing the latest F-16 deal, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice declared that ''we are trying to break out of the notion that this is a hyphenated relationship, somehow, that anything good for Pakistan is bad for India, and vice-versa." On economic aid issues, that is a viable goal, but not when it comes to military aid. As C. Raja Mohan, India's leading pro-US voice, warned a couple of weeks ago, ''while de-hyphenation sounds good in theory, there is no way of ignoring the Pakistan factor in thinking about Indo-US relations."
What arouses ''growing concern" in India, Raja Mohan declared, is the current US drift to ''a long-term military relationship with Pakistan that would not take India's sensitivities into account and would overwhelm the proclaimed long-term US commitment to a strategic partnership with India."
The United States is seeking to appease India by offering comparable or superior aircraft. But history shows that US efforts to orchestrate a military balance between New Delhi and Islamabad embolden Pakistan to stir up trouble with India by giving it artificially inflated military power that it could otherwise not afford.
The size and character of American military aid to Islamabad should reflect Pakistan's transitory importance to the United States as a regional power adjacent to Afghanistan. It should be limited to hardware directly related to operations against Al Qaeda and Taliban forces. Military sales to India, a subcontinental giant eight times larger than Pakistan, should reflect the much broader US stake in an enduring strategic partnership with a rising economic and military power increasingly important to the United States in the global geopolitical balance.
Selig S. Harrison, author of four books on South Asia, is director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy in Washington.
|
This is what i was talking all about that pakistan is getting these AC free & not paying anything. How can a country spend 3+ billion US$ on a single contract when its whole defence budget is not more than 4 +/- billion US$.
To americans, just read the article & u will know why indians are so circumspect of US & any defence dealing with US. |
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
 Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:26 AM.
|
| 
Similar Threads
