F-16s to Pakistan—Why Now?

rsridhar #88 I was merely pointing to what is obviously going in terms of military alliances and so on. If you read the last para. of my post, you will see I dont think these developments favor the citizens of any country - not India, not Pakistan, not China, not the US, not anywhere.

At best this is a necessary evil (i.e. in case of the US which must strengthen its military alliances with Pakistan and India in order to meet the emerging Chinese threat), and at worst it is a vainglorious attempt by an undemocratic regime to project military power (i.e. in case of China, whose fantastic growth has been despite the communist regime in place and not because of it - and because of the innate enterprise of the chinese people and the enormous capital that became available to the Chinese expatriate community by the mid-1970`s). Pakistan and India are in my view somewhere in the middle - engaging in military expenditures in part due to vainglorious attemps at building up military strength and in part as a necessary evil (to counter perceived threats).

Anyway, while I am aware of the common Indian need (that you also demonstrate) to portray pakistan as a mere pawn for one power or the other, this view flies of all reality. Pakistani leaders (despite their many faults) have proved to be far more pragmatic and imaginative than those in India in building strong relationships with other nations like the US and China while at the same time following their own path to nuclearization and exploiting Pakistan`s strategic location. And that is why Indian military ambitions - despite all the big talk - end where the wagah border begins.

#97 by Romair on April 7, 2005 12:18pm PT


This is what I cannot understand about varoius comments from our Indian colleagues. There seems to be very little introspection.


Yup...and there`s a lot of introspection in pakis because pakis watch Indian movies....sure...

please tell us why pakis think they were the victors in Kargil....or why pakis think they`re the victims of INdian aggression in 65...65-2005 is a lot of time for the introspecting pakis to introspect the reality out of what they`ve been told...


And then state that others should not consider India`s desires as aggressive.


consider is aggressive, consider it defensive...either way, indians don`t really give a t-shirt with a paki flag for what pakis think...


The onus lies on India to not purchase offensive weaponry, in the first place.........There is absolutey no reason for it to do so


As long as the majority of a billion Indians think it`s justified, it`s justified...Indians don`t go by what pakis think....you should know that by what Indians think of Indian Kashmir...

Dost-mittar #92: The correct way to look at defense spending is not as a % of GDP. The correct way to look at it is as a % of per capita income, i.e. how much of its money is a country spending on defense, and how much on each person. This should then be related to the threat perception of the country, i.e. Is another country buying weaponry to attack it and how much money is the other country spending? As well as to the offensive weaponry being purchased by the country.........

I can think of very few things that are more harmful than a dirt poor country buying more and more offensive arms to attack other countries.........(attacking other countries being the only purpose of offensive armament)

India has a per capita income around $500 and a military budget around $15 billion. Canada has a per capita income of $30,000 and military budget of around $11 billion............Canada purchases almost no offensive weaponry. India is the biggest importer of offensive arms in the world. Infact the biggest overall importer of any kind of arms.............Even though the only country that can be a threat to India is 1/7th its size, i.e. Pakistan........

South Asia is the second poorest area in the world, after Sub-Saharan Africa. The arms race in South Asia is useless and ridiculous. Anyone flaming it doing a huge deal of harm to the region. Even if South Asia was completely peaceful, with no one threatening the other, there would still be no justification for anyone buying so much armament.........

Re: # 99 by Romair.

[Canada has a per capita income of $30,000]

It is more like $25,000. That too $ here stands for Candian $. Personal Disposable Income is around CA$20,000. The argument that you are using this figures for is also not correct. Canada and Pakistan are not comparable. Pakistan is hostile country to India, Canada is not hostile to USA. Canada has more or less accepted hegemony of USA. Who is the real boss in North America is an issue more or less settled. Not so in our subcontinent.

#97 by Romair on April 7, 2005 12:18pm PT

..........Yes!!!.We indians will have a 5-to-1 superiority over `pakistan or what- have- you.We can afford `it`, we have the in-house technology to maintain `it`, and improve upon `it`.We have even started building our own aircraft carrier in-house at either the Mazegaon docks or on the east coast.We have one or two fully operational and we are acquiring a couple from outside too.We will attack anyone who wants to cause us harm , if we want to.As for poverty we are working on it.Our economic growth will address that.All this is none of your business.Really.

dost-mittar #92: ``I believe that Pakistan has every right to purchase any weapons it wants and can afford, as does India. India spends 2.3% of its GDP on Defense which is not considered excessive by any means. I think even Canada does not spend much less, and we have no enemies at all.``

This is a strange commment. If India and Pakistan should purchase any equipment they want, then obviously other countries will make money off it. What else do you expect the other countries to do? And how can you complain about it then? One cannot have it both ways.

India and Pakistan should not purchase anything they want. It is ridiculous. Comparing them to Canada is even more ridiculous. Canada does not have hundreds of million of people living below the poverty line, like India. Or tens of millions living below the povery line, like Pakistan. How can one simply look at just % of total GDP as a criteria?

You are infact justifying the arms race........

``You are doing exactly what I want Indians and Pakistanis to get away from - in other words seeing India as your enemy and your security in being able to have some sort of balance of arms between the two countries.``

I am not looking at India as the, ``enemy.`` I am merely saying that other countries will sell to South Asia, as long as India remains the biggest importer of arms. The other thing I am looking at are the actual purchases India makes. If you are my neighbor and can already kill me three times, then you go on an buy more arms that specifically target me, then who is at fault?

This is what I cannot understand about varoius comments from our Indian colleagues. There seems to be very little introspection. At some stage, Indians have to look at their ballooing arms purchases, and realize the harm it is doing to peace in South Asia. One cannot have one`s cake and eat it too, i.e. continue to purchase tanks, ships, fighter-bombers etc. than can only be used against Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. (not China) in an offensive manner. And then state that others should not consider India`s desires as aggressive.

The onus lies on India to not purchase offensive weaponry, in the first place.........There is absolutey no reason for it to do so............And this is what is keeping South Asia in an arms race, which is useless.........Why in the world does India want to go from a 3-1 superiority over Pakistan to more than 5-1? And whom else can it use all this equipment against, which cannot be used anywhere else except on the plains of Sind and Punjab?

Is it planning to attack China? And how will it do so with tanks or aircraft carriers, even if it wanted to?

Faruk #69

`` Please don’t quarrel about the insignificant. We have to work hard to enrich the white man :)``

What is your problem

Romair #89

`` Pakistan has kept its defense budget constant at approximately 3 billion dollars for quite a few years. In the meanwhile, India has turned into the biggest importer of arms in the world. ``

The 3 billion dollar figure is bogus. It does not account for land grabbing the Pakistani Army does at the expense of civillian population.

`` The situation is (was) reaching a point where Pakistan would have no conventional defense against India. This would result in an immediate nuclear war. Which is why Pakistan is now forced to enhance some of its conventional forces. ``

Having 550,000 personnel on your payroll and not being able to wage a conventional war is pathetic.

`` The solution to this problem is simple. A freezing of defense budgets (which Pakistan has done). And a reduction of the Indian defense budget back to a 3-1 ratio. Until that happens, any country - be it France, USA, etc. - will be able to sell weapons to both sides, because one side (India) will always be willing to buy them..........Forcing the other side to buy some, also..... ``

Why should India freeze its budget ? Why shouldn`t India invest in anti-ballistic missile defenses ?

`` Infact, the biggest beneficiary of aircraft sales to India and Pakistan, by far, is France. Not USA.............Unfortunately, one rarely hears of any criticism, in India, of India`s fast rising defense budget. I believe you, yourself, support this rise...........One cannot support the rise, and then state, ``outsider is taking advantage of their mutual hostility to line its own pockets.````

France has sold 70 Mirage-2000s to India. That includes 40 plus aircraft delivered in the 1980s. France is the third largest weapons supplier to India after Russia and Israel.

Pakistan has bought minesweepers, submarines and old Mirages from France. France is the second most weapon supplier to Pakistan.

To Romair........

Economics experts and various studies conducted across the globe envisage India and China to rule the world in the 21st century. For over a century the United States has been the largest economy in the world but major developments have taken place in the world economy since then, leading to the shift of focus from the US and the rich countries of Europe to the two Asian giants- India and China.

The rich countries of Europe have seen the greatest decline in global GDP share by 4.9 percentage points, followed by the US and Japan with a decline of about 1 percentage point each. Within Asia, the rising share of China and India has more than made up the declining global share of Japan since 1990. During the seventies and the eighties, ASEAN countries and during the eighties South Korea, along with China and India, contributed to the rising share of Asia in world GDP.

According to some experts, the share of the US in world GDP is expected to fall (from 21 per cent to 18 per cent) and that of India to rise (from 6 per cent to 11 per cent in 2025), and hence the latter will emerge as the third pole in the global economy after the US and China.

By 2025 the Indian economy is projected to be about 60 per cent the size of the US economy. The transformation into a tri-polar economy will be complete by 2035, with the Indian economy only a little smaller than the US economy but larger than that of Western Europe. By 2035, India is likely to be a larger growth driver than the six largest countries in the EU, though its impact will be a little over half that of the US.

ref:http://www.economywatch.com/indianeconomy/indian-economy-overview.html

Romair, much as it may eat your innards away, face it.We indians have earned our rightful position and we can only get better, not worse, `cause that was our starting position.We are as a country larger than western europe.All this is inspite of hostile and jealous neighbours who just cannot fathom our well being.In 2004 our PPP GDP was $3.564 trillion, actual GDP of $650 billion plus.I don`t understand all these figures that much, but i know that we got the money to fortify ourselves and we are free to spend it as we like `cause we bloody well earned it.Who cares what you guys or anyone else thinks or whines about.

#85 by rsridhar on April 7, 2005 7:25am PT


The author is right in saying that F16 being given to Pak is not going to be of much use to that country.


It`s like a impotent man being given viagara and then dropped on a deserted island....can`t do anything but jerk off...

I think it`s dawning on the pakis that the F-16s are for coming on board the new world order...where India keeps Indian Kashmir and Pakistan keeps Paki kashmir and nobody rocks uncle sam`s boat(which is actually a destroyer headed towards china).....

Romair:

I believe that Pakistan has every right to purchase any weapons it wants and can afford, as does India. India spends 2.3% of its GDP on Defense which is not considered excessive by any means. I think even Canada does not spend much less, and we have no enemies at all.

You are doing exactly what I want Indians and Pakistanis to get away from - in other words seeing India as your enemy and your security in being able to have some sort of balance of arms between the two countries. I am almost certain that even if the Kashmir issue is resolved tomorrow through some miracle and both countries have a free trade agreement with borders like between Canada and the US (although that too is changing), India still will continue to spend 2-3% of its GDP on defense. This is because India`s defense is not exclusively meant to defend itself against Pakistan.

I really would like the strategic thinkers (not the politicians) to think of a future where Pakistan sees a strong India as a protection for itself and India asks Pakistan to increase its defense expenditure to assume its ``fair share`` of the subcontinental defense, just as the US keeps bugging Canada to do so for North American defense.

rshridar,
You are right on the dot about what India needs to do, but about China-Pak, I think Pakistan would not even have a blue water navy had it not been for China. Let`s face it, this talk about Ind-Pak helping each other out is plain nonsense. Pakistan cannot help India become a regional power, and India cannot help Pakistan have a bigger reach as much as China can.

taqat-e-parvaaz #81

`` actually, thats not true. do not underestimate pakistan, ever. first of all, pakistan has been producing sophisticated weapons and electronic components now for several years. dont think that because india has gotten `ahead` pakistan has fallen behind. lest i remind you that its `mighty` india that has yet to produce a successful tank. its last project, the arjun, has been a bumbling disaster, where taxpayers money was flushed down the toilet. pakistans latest MBT, the al-khalid, has been hailed and is widely respected. anyone can look this up. there is already talk of an al-khalid 2 in pakistani defence circles. as was mentioned, pakistan has been producing things at Air Weapons Complex that is usually produced in industrialized western nations. the US recently contracted with pakistan to purchase UAV, unmanned aerial vehicles for its border security. in addition, pakistan is one of the few countries in the world that has the ability to produce nano technology and micro technology. heres a small snippet for proof: ``

Your Al-Khalid is a T-72 tank. India has 1500 of those in its inventory.


`` http://cndyorks.gn.apc.org/yspace/articles/overhorizon.htm
Microsatellites and nanosatellites: With the miniaturization of space system technologies, these small satellites range between 200 and 20 pounds and even come in sizes as small as a compact disc player. Highly maneuverable and packed with super-sophisticated electronics, they can zoom up beside other satellites, inspect them with cameras and transmit images back to Earth.

Weaponized microsatellites loaded with rockets or lasers are expected to emerge in the coming years, capable of disrupting, disabling or destroying enemy satellites. Among the countries that possess microsatellite technology are the United States, Russia, China, Israel and Pakistan. ``

Duh !!!

`` as for the private sector, pakistan has recently entered the age of semiconductor technology. for proof, visit the website of the pakistani owned US based company Palmchip, which has recently launched operations in pakistan. heres the proof of that: http://www.palmchip.com/press_Release_Detail.asp?id=36

pakistan CAN manufacture whatever it wants! stick that in your pipe and smoke it biatch, bbabu! ``

Nowhere in the website they claim to manufacture electronic components in Pakistan.
The company is based in San Jose.

There are at least 10,000 IC designers in Bangalore alone. It does not mean India can manufacture those ICs.

If Pakistan can manufacture whatever it wants you shouldn`t be begging USA and China.

dost-mittar #74: ``Why these two countries would so eagerly fall into this trap, where an outsider is taking advantage of their mutual hostility to line its own pockets is the real question?``

The answer to this is simple: India has gone on a massive buying spree of weapons, over the past decade. Most of which threaten only Pakistan. This is despite the fact that India already had a 3-1 advantage over Pakistan. It is now 5-1.

Pakistan has kept its defense budget constant at approximately 3 billion dollars for quite a few years. In the meanwhile, India has turned into the biggest importer of arms in the world.

The situation is (was) reaching a point where Pakistan would have no conventional defense against India. This would result in an immediate nuclear war. Which is why Pakistan is now forced to enhance some of its conventional forces.

The solution to this problem is simple. A freezing of defense budgets (which Pakistan has done). And a reduction of the Indian defense budget back to a 3-1 ratio. Until that happens, any country - be it France, USA, etc. - will be able to sell weapons to both sides, because one side (India) will always be willing to buy them..........Forcing the other side to buy some, also.....

Infact, the biggest beneficiary of aircraft sales to India and Pakistan, by far, is France. Not USA.............Unfortunately, one rarely hears of any criticism, in India, of India`s fast rising defense budget. I believe you, yourself, support this rise...........One cannot support the rise, and then state, ``outsider is taking advantage of their mutual hostility to line its own pockets.``

re: tahmed`s post
``Pakistan is happy because it has (once again) countered Indian attempts at extending its military reach.``
Really!
Just because China helped Pak build a base in Gwadar?
So, let us see, who is footing the bill for Pak`s bluewater navy in future? Certainly not Uncle Sam, for he does not gain.
China gains if Pak has a stronger Navy so China can influence the Indian Ocean area by proxy. This is where the real danger for Pak is. It is getting caught between the big powers, a pawn so to speak.
Surely, u should know by now that Pak is not in the same league as India, just like India is not in the same league as China.
Sridhar

re:#70 by Urstruly
``The common sense, however, tells hindu baniya that even if he is given American technology and manufacturing liscences he would still need oil to support its economy.``
Hindu Bania may have learnt that a better option is to be self reliant in Energy. If India can get the technology from US to utilise Thorium in Nuclear reactors to harness energy, that will make India self-sufficient.
Kerala has abundant of thorium deposits. Depending on Islamic despotic regimes (which is what Iran and Pak) are for oil is nonsensical. These countries can turn the tap off and on at will.
Sridhar