US approves F-16 sale to Pakistan

[SwordFish_13]

Hi,

Source:BBC News


The US government has approved the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan, Bush administration officials say.

US President George W Bush called Indian premier Manmohan Singh to tell him about the decision, which is to be announced later on Friday.

Indian government spokesman Sanjay Baru said that Mr Singh had expressed "great disappointment" at the decision.

The premier told Mr Bush it would exacerbate India's security concerns for the region.

But an unnamed US official told AP news agency that the sale would not change the overall balance of military power in the region.

"[The F-16s] are vital to Pakistan's security as President Musharraf prosecutes the war on terror," the official said.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discussed the F-16 issue with Indian officials during her recent visit to the region.

Successful fighter

Pakistan's information minister, Sheikh Ahmed Rashid, confirmed to the BBC Urdu service that Pakistan would be getting F-16s.

Correspondents say that the Indian government fears the arms deal will disturb the military balance between the long-time rivals and affect the current peace dialogue.

Pakistan signed a deal to buy F-16s in the late 1980s but they have not been delivered because the US imposed sanctions in the 1990s over Pakistan's nuclear programme.

The United States did sign a separate $1.3bn arms package with Pakistan last year.

The F-16 is built by Lockheed Martin and is one of the world's most successful fighter aircraft.

About 4,500 are in commission with air forces around the world.

Peace
-=SF-13=-

 

[Boobies]

hmmm...

a step to contain India's progression?

 

[Monster]

Or a push by Lockheed Martin?

 

[behemoth79]

it seems to me that america is sending weapons to pakistan and india. we love to start :cen: dont we? next nuclear attack is going to happen between india and pakistan.

 

[Charge 7]

Start? The India/Pakistan rivalry has been going on since each country gained independence from Britain and we haven't had a thing to do with that. Just another arms sale. India is far from being short on quite capable jets of her own. Also, I doubt the Pakistanis will be getting the same F-16s the US flies. Some components will not be there.

 

[Xion]

Yeah of course, they aren't getting the best and the latest versions of the F-16's ... ( i think its cos of the fear that they eventually may find their way into 'the dragon's' mouth )....and they are only getting 25 of those.

I also heard this sale will secure the job of about 5000 people working in Texas.

The reason India is concerned about this sale is that F-16's are capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

Pakistan , earlier, did not have this capability, they did not have planes which could carry out this task, though their newly painted ballistic missiles occupied from China can do this job.

This sale surely will make the region more unstable.

 

[chewie_nz]

i wonder if this is the cancelled order origionally mean't for pakistan, then for NZ, and now it's going back to pakistan.


hmmmmm

 

[SwordFish_13]

Hi,

i wonder if this is the cancelled order origionally mean't for pakistan, then for NZ, and now it's going back to pakistan.

Yes they are the Same............ but form what i know the Ones made for Pakistan has been Employed byt the USA into their own AF and Navy ......... After waiting for 10 years and can't finding a new buyer and finally the last deal with NZ cancelled .

Source:Pakistani F-16 Jets Going to U.S. Navy, USAF

Fighters Find New Top Gun Home After 10 Years

The U.S. Navy "Top Gun" school, long neglected and nearly disbanded during the Clinton years, is finally getting some new life. The Naval Air Station at Fallon, Nev., is slated to obtain 14 of 28 F-16 Lockheed-Martin Fighting Falcons originally sold to Pakistan.

So i wonder if they will be Supplieg thoes Used ones or Producing new ones ......... i am not sure Producing new Ones would be Fesiable .


This Deal was made in 1980 ................... In December 1981, the government of Pakistan signed a letter of agreement for the purchase of up to 40 F-16A/B (28 F-16A and 12 F-16B) ( Total deal was about 111 aircrats )........... that was the Period if the Cold war and these were to counter Soviet Union.

Here is the Detail of the Deal Named Peace Gate:


Peace Gate I :

Model Block........ Qty. Delivered
F-16A Block 15.... 2 1983
F-16B Block 15 .... 4 1983

Peace Gate II

F-16A Block 15.... 26 1983-1987
F-16B Block 15 .... 8 1983-1987

Peace Gate III

F-16A Block 15OCU.... 6 embargoed
F-16B Block 15OCU.... 5 embargoed

Peace Gate IV

F-16A Block 15OCU.... 7 embargoed
F-16B Block 15OCU.... 10 embargoed
F-16A Block 15OCU.... 41 stop-work
F-16B Block 15OCU.... 2 stop-work





Pakistan Paid the Full Money in Advance for 111 F-16's to be delivered in the above said phazes.. .......Around 40 of them were Delivered to the Pakistan by 1987........ rest of the Onces were Stoped due to the embargo.

Then came this big problem of Selling these 28 emorgoed planes which were already made for Pakistan.......9 of the Total made for Pakistan were Sold to Indonesia ......... However Indonesia a year later cancelled the Order ........At the end of 1997, with chances of finding a buyer close to zero, it was decided to take the PAF F-16s out of flyable hold and into the Boneyard............The airframes were offered to the Philippine Air Forc........... however Philippine could not pay the money so the deal was scrapped.

Finally, on December 1st, 1998, the New Zealand Government announced that it would lease-buy the 28 Pakistani F-16s.

In 1999 a new New Zealand government cancelled the Order...... after that USA stopped it's effort to sell these Aircrafts to Pay back Pakistan . and The 28 aircraft were thus evenly split between the USAF and the US Navy.

USA has already Paid back $157 million back to Islamabad, raising the money by selling aircraft components to other countries.


Now the 15 years old Deal has been revived .


Peace
-=SF_13=-

 

[Boobies]

So...

waht was the reason for the US embargo? What was the reason that contributed to the lifting of the embargo?

 

[SwordFish_13]

Hi,

waht was the reason for the US embargo?

Pakistan was long Suspected of having a Active Nuclear Program..

And the Kind of Statements that were coming form the Pakistani Side like then MIllitary Ruler of Pakistan General Zia told in a interviewer "It is our right to obtain the technology. And when we acquire this technology, the Islamic world will possess it with us."

So he gave a clear indications of his intentions of Building a Islamic Bomb ...... and NOt just a Bomb for Pakistan but for the Whole Islamic Organisations and Countries.


Keeping in Mind alll these Developments .......In 1985 Pressler Amendment was passed which requires a total cut-off of U.S. aid to Pakistan unless the US President can certify that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear weapon.

This Amendment was named after Larry Pressler, a former Republican senator.

In 1990 President Bush announced that he could no longer provide Congress with Pressler Amendment certification that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear weapon............... Economic and military aid was halted in 1990 .......... though the Bush administration continued to permit a limited number of commercial military sales to Pakistan.


Larry Pressler the same senetar Spoke out yesterday regardig the F-16 sales to Pakistan ......... here is what he had to say :-

ONE big story from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's trip to South Asia was that once again Washington's policymakers are trying to send F-16 jet fighters to Pakistan. This is like a broken record - the argument has come up repeatedly since 1990, when an amendment I wrote quashed a deal involving 28 of the planes - but unfortunately this time the sale may well happen.

Pakistan is a declared ally in the fight against terrorism, and thus we give it huge amounts of military aid. But F-16's have nothing to do with fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban. So what is really going on here? The answer is entwined in two decades of misguided United States policy toward India and Pakistan.

The truth is, we should have a robust pro-India stance. India is a democracy with a free market and a highly developed system of human rights. It could become our major bulwark against China in East Asia. It also has a large Muslim minority and, generally speaking, is an example of tolerance. And we have a mutually beneficial trade relationship with India that is helping us keep our technological edge. (Disclosure: I am on the board of Infosys Technologies, an Indian software company.)

Pakistan, on the other hand, is a corrupt, absolute dictatorship. It has a horrendous record on human rights and religious tolerance, and it has been found again and again to be selling nuclear materials to our worst enemies. It claims to be helping us to fight terrorism, although many intelligence experts have suggested that most of our money actually goes to strengthening the rule of Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

Yes, during the cold war India often sided with the Soviet Union while Pakistan went with the United States. Some old hands at the Pentagon still seem to think we should be rewarding Pakistan for that. But the cold war is long over. We have given the Pakistanis their due many times over.

From the late 1970's to the mid-1990's, as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I repeatedly warned that Pakistan was selling nuclear materials to other nations. Administrations, both Democratic and Republican, turned a blind eye; they even got leaders of our intelligence community to say that I didn't know what I was talking about. Well, everything I said has been proved absolutely true - to an even more worrisome degree than I had described.

Our military-industrial complex, which I believe dominates our foreign policy, favors Pakistan not only because we can sell it arms, but also because the Pentagon would often rather deal with dictatorships than democracies. When a top Pentagon official goes to Pakistan, he can meet with one general and get everything settled. On the other hand, if he goes to India, he has to talk to the prime minister, the Parliament, the courts and, God forbid, the free press.

Meeting with Pakistani leaders last week, Secretary Rice did say she looked forward to "the evolution of a democratic path toward elections in 2007." But she neither asked for nor received any sort of guarantees about elections, human rights or freedom of the press. She did bring up nuclear proliferation, but only in a perfunctory way. Likewise, President Bush had General Musharraf as a guest at Camp David in 2003, apparently without ever mentioning the administration's democracy program. This all makes a mockery of President Bush's inaugural speech in January, and is a prime example of the sort of dictator-coddling that, eventually, always comes back to haunt us.

We need a fundamental policy shift for the subcontinent. First, we should enthusiastically improve our treatment of India. We should not reject Pakistan entirely - we need it as an ally - but to treat India and Pakistan the same is a great mistake. Instead, we need to speak frankly in public about Pakistan's democratic and human-rights failures, as well as acknowledge that we can achieve our objectives in Pakistan with a much lower level of aid and a closer eye to ensuring that it goes toward the fight against terrorists. And we should not sell it any F-16's.

We should also make it clear that we will favor India in all major regional disputes. Without American support, Pakistan would be forced to drop its claims to the disputed region of Kashmir, as well as end its support of the region's Muslim militants (whom many in our intelligence services feel have ties to Al Qaeda).

Freeing ourselves from our profitless Pakistan policy would allow us to look clearly at the biggest problem in the region: China. We should tell Beijing that we will help India match China's arms buildup and that we will work toward a modified free-trade agreement with India to help it offset China's state-dominated trade practices.

The Bush administration is right to put the expansion of liberty and democracy at the center of its foreign policy. But as long as we favor dictatorships like Pakistan over free countries like India, the world will be right not to take our words seriously.

Larry Pressler is a former Republican senator from South Dakota.

Source:New York Times

"Larry Pressler, a former Republican senator from South Dakota who gave his name to the amendment that halted the F-16 transfers to Pakistan in the 1990's, said Friday that the decision to go ahead with the jet-fighter deal "is a mistake."
"I know that we want to be friends with Pakistan because of the terrorism thing, but you don't fight terrorism with F-16's," he said in a telephone interview. "F-16's are capable of nuclear delivery. That's about the only reason Pakistan wants them. The only people they are in a fight with are in India. India now will have to get the same thing somehow. So it raises tensions and stakes without meeting any of our objectives.""

Source:The Ledger

Peace
-=SF_13=-

 

[cPFC/SAJROTC]

Im not entirely sure that selling the F-16s to Pakistan would significantly destabilize the region. Granted the F-16s may be used by Pakistan to bomb Kashmir and Indian targets in the region, but I doubt that either Pakistan nor India is stupid enough to retaliate with nuclear arms. Im sure the US, the EU and UN would make all efforts to intervene before the conflict resulted in a nuclear exchange, espically in the middle east where a nuclear war could result in increased tension across the board.

However, I will be the first to admit, Im not an expert on India-Pakistan relations, I only know what I've been taught as part of Naval History and US Military History.