A Day for Reflection
By Dr. Shireen M. Mazari
There is general euphoria in Pakistan
over the US decision to sell F-16s to the country.
General Musharraf has stated that acquiring the
state-of-the-art platforms will enhance “the
offensive punch of our defense”. The F-16s
will undoubtedly be a major force multiplier for
us, revamping our air force capabilities in an age
where air power has really come into its own and
new types of warfare are evolving.
However, one must look at the matter more guardedly
because Pakistan will have to cross many hurdles
before the F-16s make their way into the PAF. After
all, we have been down this path before where we
paid our dues and waited expectantly. So what happened?
The US producers effectively kept most of our money
and eventually we got lumped with wheat and soya
beans. Worse, we had to pay parking charges for
those F-16s while waiting for the US Government
to change its mind.
So what is so different this time? Yes, we are the
frontline state in the ‘war on terror’
in Afghanistan but that will not last forever. After
all, we were the frontline state in the war to rid
Afghanistan of its Soviet invaders, when Pakistan
paid for the first F-16s. But before we could get
the whole paid-for consignment, the ground realities
altered in the region and the US reneged on its
commitment. The nuclear issue was the pretext then
and, given how the WMD issue is evolving, it may
prove to be the excuse to renege on the commitment
once again.
The Indians certainly seem to think so, judging
by their international diplomatic blitzkrieg against
Pakistan on the nuclear proliferation issue. Indian
External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh fired the
latest salvo in this regard with his allegation
that the world powers are turning a blind eye to
nuclear commerce in South Asia, adversely impacting
India’s security. This logic is truly absurd,
but Mr Singh forgot that the international community
has also ignored India’s role in Iran’s
nuclear development.
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal (March
24) recalls several visits to Iran by Indian scientist
Prasad in 2002 when, according to the US State Department,
he illegally passed nuclear secrets to the Iranian
government. The State Department also alleged that
another Indian nuclear scientist, Chaudhary Surendar,
provided Tehran with technology that “could
make a material contribution to the development
of weapons of mass destruction”. No matter
how much pussy footing the US does, India is clearly
linked to the Iranian nuclear program. So why has
the IAEA not demanded any equipment inspection from
India? Surely this must be the blind eye the international
community is turning on the nuclear issue on South
Asia. Mr Singh should thank his stars, since India
has been spared the scathing international scrutiny
it deserves on the proliferation issue. One wonders
what our decision makers are doing keeping silent
on this when they have shot from the hip on the
A.Q.Khan issue?
In any event, India’s niggardly attitude towards
Pakistan on the issue of arms supplies from the
US will be a major factor in the whole F-16 purchase.
The first major hurdle will be Congressional approval
and anyone who thinks the new Pakistan-India detente
will prevent India from lobbying against the deal
is living in a fool’s paradise. Indian objections
were voiced even at the mere announcement of the
deal. One should expect the extremely powerful Indian
lobby to begin its work on Capitol Hill; this will
test the Bush Administration’s degree of political
commitment towards Pakistan.
It is strange that while we are going out of our
way to cozy up to the Indians, India continues to
maintain a belligerent posture towards Pakistan
on critical issues. Cricket diplomacy clearly has,
at best, a limited value as was apparent when the
military dictator Gen. Zia was busy on that front.
What happened then? Siachin and incursions into
Chor Batla and Qamar sectors along the LoC. In other
words, India violated, with impunity, the 1972 Simla
Agreement and the LoC that it agreed to.
If by some miracle we actually get Congressional
approval for the F-16s sale, the true military worth
of these planes will depend on two main factors.
First, what they actually have in terms of avionics
and weapons systems. Two, what India acquires from
the US, apart from F-16s and F-18s. The first will
apparently be negotiated in discussions between
Pakistan and the USA, so we can only hope we get
updated planes and not just outmoded avionics of
the eighties that are now part of children’s
computer games. The second issue is particularly
important. The F-18s, which are specifically for
aircraft carriers, will be a major force multiplier
for India against Pakistan because they will allow
India access to targets in the interior of Pakistan
through the sea route. More critical is the sale
of the Patriot missile system to India. This is
a long-range, all-altitude, all-weather air defense
system that effectively counters not only missiles
but also advanced aircraft. The Bush Administration
has, in principle, agreed to sell the PAC-2 system
as part of the Next Step in Strategic Partnership
(NSSP -- the same acronym as the National Security
Strategy Paper of the US!) agreement between the
US and India. The PAC-2 system has been upgraded
by the manufacturer, Raytheon, with the development
of the Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missile (GEM-T).
Even before we acquire the new F-16s, the Indians
are being provided with weapon systems that nullify
the military advantage for us of these planes.
So why would the Indians make such a fuss? Because
they have a compulsion to ensure that Pakistan remains
vulnerable militarily in the conventional field.
More important, they are hoping to detract Pakistan
from objecting to the lethal systems the US is providing
to India -- systems that directly destabilize the
nuclear deterrence in South Asia and lower the nuclear
threshold. And, true to form, we have barely whimpered
any protest on the US decisions to sell the new
weapon systems to India.
An additional problem linked to the F-16 purchase
will remain the matter of supply of spares. This
issue held us hostage in the 1965 war with India
and it has been a constant headache for our military
since the various embargoes imposed by the US. So
what will be the US position on the supply of spares
this time? Will there be any guarantees on this
point?
Finally, if the US Administration pursues our case
in Congress with commitment, what would be the political
asking price from Pakistan? What will be the political
and military price, in addition to the monetary
price, that Pakistan will pay for the F-16s? Will
we again pay it before all the planes are delivered?
So before we see the Bush Administration’s
decision on the F-16s as a “success of our
foreign policy”, let us see how the issue
evolves over time. We have been burnt before.
(The writer is Director General of the Institute
of Strategic Studies, Islamabad. - Courtesy The
News)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
