F-16s to Pakistan—Why Now?
Karamatullah K Ghori April 5, 2005
#17 Posted by ballukhan on April 5, 2005 6:27:44 am
Come On ! All Ye Idiot Brown Coolies on the Chowk can`t you see the link between F-16 and Bush?
Lockheed Martin & the Bush arms gravy train
Lockheed Martin is now reputedly the world`s largest weapons manufacturer. George W. Bush`s direct connection with this huge ``defence & aerospace`` corporation began when he was Governor of Texas. There Lockheed attempted to gain a contact to become official benefits screeners for welfare and Medicaid in that state, a privatisation policy ``Dubya`` supported but could not get passed. Not surprisingly, for if the arms makers are to both dominate foreign policy and control social welfare as well, there seems little point in having a US government at all.
Later, Lockheed Martin Vice-President for corporate strategy & development Bruce Jackson served as Finance Chairman for the 2000 Bush campaign - and also as Chair of the Republican Party foreign policy platform committee, about as blatant a conflict of interest as an arms company executive could attempt. ``I wrote the Republican Party`s foreign policy platform,`` Jackson is reported as boasting. Unsurprisingly he is also a board member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
Bruce Jackson
Presumably it was on the basis of enormous additional profits expected during a Bush administration rather than mere executive greed that the CEO`s pay at Lockheed Martin rose more than fourfold from US$5.8 million in 2000 to US$25.3 million in 2002.
Some ``Lockheed people`` on board with Bush
*Peter B. Teets, former Lockheed Martin Chief Operating Officer, has been appointed Undersecretary of the Air Force and Director of the National Reconnaissance Office.
*Former Lockheed executive Everet Beckner has been appointed administrator for defence programmes at the National Nuclear Security Administration. (Lockheed Martin jointly with the Bechtel Corporation and a third company has a contract to run the NNSA Nevada Test Site where it is planned to test nuclear weapons again. Lockheed will also earn almost two billion per year running the Sandia Laboratories nuclear weapons design facility in New Mexico). ***
*Stephen Hadley, formerly a lawyer with Shea & Gardner representing Lockheed Martin, was appointed Deputy National Security Advisor.
*Otto Reich, formerly a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin when they were seeking to reverse the ban on US hi-tech weapons sales to Latin America, was nominated for Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs.
*Norman Mineta, Secretary for Transportation, and Michael Jackson, Deputy Secretary for Transportation, were both Lockheed Martin vice-presidents before their appointments by President Bush.
*Lynne V. Cheney, wife of US Vice-President Dick Cheney, was a board member of Lockheed Martin for the period 1994-2001, picking up a handy US$120,000 per year for the privilege. (Mrs Cheney other lucrative directorship`s include AXP Mutual {an American Express subsidiary}, the Union Pacific Resources Group, & the Reader`s Digest Association. As a director of Union Pacific when it merged with Anadarko Petroleum, Lynne Cheney received Anadarko stock worth $250,000 to $500,000. Her husband`s major source of vast wealth, Halliburton, had done business with Anadarko Petroleum since 1959.
***The grand architect of this new nuclear strategy, the Dr Strangelovian figure Keith Payne, believes that a full-scale nuclear war could reasonably be fought and won, since America might suffer ``only`` twenty million casualties. Payne`s National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP) receives substantial funding from arms makers and has a Lockheed Martin executive on its board.
Lockheed Martin & the Bush arms gravy train
Lockheed Martin is now reputedly the world`s largest weapons manufacturer. George W. Bush`s direct connection with this huge ``defence & aerospace`` corporation began when he was Governor of Texas. There Lockheed attempted to gain a contact to become official benefits screeners for welfare and Medicaid in that state, a privatisation policy ``Dubya`` supported but could not get passed. Not surprisingly, for if the arms makers are to both dominate foreign policy and control social welfare as well, there seems little point in having a US government at all.
Later, Lockheed Martin Vice-President for corporate strategy & development Bruce Jackson served as Finance Chairman for the 2000 Bush campaign - and also as Chair of the Republican Party foreign policy platform committee, about as blatant a conflict of interest as an arms company executive could attempt. ``I wrote the Republican Party`s foreign policy platform,`` Jackson is reported as boasting. Unsurprisingly he is also a board member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
Bruce Jackson
Presumably it was on the basis of enormous additional profits expected during a Bush administration rather than mere executive greed that the CEO`s pay at Lockheed Martin rose more than fourfold from US$5.8 million in 2000 to US$25.3 million in 2002.
Some ``Lockheed people`` on board with Bush
*Peter B. Teets, former Lockheed Martin Chief Operating Officer, has been appointed Undersecretary of the Air Force and Director of the National Reconnaissance Office.
*Former Lockheed executive Everet Beckner has been appointed administrator for defence programmes at the National Nuclear Security Administration. (Lockheed Martin jointly with the Bechtel Corporation and a third company has a contract to run the NNSA Nevada Test Site where it is planned to test nuclear weapons again. Lockheed will also earn almost two billion per year running the Sandia Laboratories nuclear weapons design facility in New Mexico). ***
*Stephen Hadley, formerly a lawyer with Shea & Gardner representing Lockheed Martin, was appointed Deputy National Security Advisor.
*Otto Reich, formerly a lobbyist for Lockheed Martin when they were seeking to reverse the ban on US hi-tech weapons sales to Latin America, was nominated for Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs.
*Norman Mineta, Secretary for Transportation, and Michael Jackson, Deputy Secretary for Transportation, were both Lockheed Martin vice-presidents before their appointments by President Bush.
*Lynne V. Cheney, wife of US Vice-President Dick Cheney, was a board member of Lockheed Martin for the period 1994-2001, picking up a handy US$120,000 per year for the privilege. (Mrs Cheney other lucrative directorship`s include AXP Mutual {an American Express subsidiary}, the Union Pacific Resources Group, & the Reader`s Digest Association. As a director of Union Pacific when it merged with Anadarko Petroleum, Lynne Cheney received Anadarko stock worth $250,000 to $500,000. Her husband`s major source of vast wealth, Halliburton, had done business with Anadarko Petroleum since 1959.
***The grand architect of this new nuclear strategy, the Dr Strangelovian figure Keith Payne, believes that a full-scale nuclear war could reasonably be fought and won, since America might suffer ``only`` twenty million casualties. Payne`s National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP) receives substantial funding from arms makers and has a Lockheed Martin executive on its board.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#19 Posted by ferozk on April 5, 2005 8:16:59 am
Excellent article!
The F-16s will not help the security of Pakistan a whit, because the real threat to Pakistani security comes from internal reasons and not external sources.
Ciao
The F-16s will not help the security of Pakistan a whit, because the real threat to Pakistani security comes from internal reasons and not external sources.
Ciao
#20 Posted by vivek on April 5, 2005 8:18:10 am
The worry for India from this sale would not be its effect on the strategic balance, but rather the possibility of another Pakistani misadventure.
#21 Posted by mohar11 on April 5, 2005 8:56:31 am
Re: # 1
//..Manmohan Singh in 1995 , said the 21st century will be India`s century.Abdul Kalam in 1995 laid out the road map in his book ``India 2020``.These two gentlemen have ended up holding the reins of government at this time!!...//
yeah - don`t hold your breath for ``India`s century``. Leaders in india love to talk and they talk big. They have been talking big for last 60 years.
Manmohan Singh can`t even build a modern city in Mumbai. As soon as he started to do so - Italian widow cracked the whip and that`s end of his dream of modern Mumbai. And then he talks about ``India`s century``.
What a f***ing joke!!!
//..Manmohan Singh in 1995 , said the 21st century will be India`s century.Abdul Kalam in 1995 laid out the road map in his book ``India 2020``.These two gentlemen have ended up holding the reins of government at this time!!...//
yeah - don`t hold your breath for ``India`s century``. Leaders in india love to talk and they talk big. They have been talking big for last 60 years.
Manmohan Singh can`t even build a modern city in Mumbai. As soon as he started to do so - Italian widow cracked the whip and that`s end of his dream of modern Mumbai. And then he talks about ``India`s century``.
What a f***ing joke!!!
#22 Posted by bongdongs on April 5, 2005 9:06:59 am
talk is cheap, for example, lets see:
- civilian reactors: is the US willing to convince other members of the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) that it will supply nuclear reactors without India signing NPT and agreeing to full scope safegaurds? That is a lot of leg-work and a lot of opposition from countries that signed NPT as the have-nots (Brazil, Sweden etc). Is that state dept willing to stick its neck out so far, that too for poor ole India?
- ``dual-use`` technology: NSSP has dragged on for years without any significant gains, are things going to change suddenly?
- civilian reactors: is the US willing to convince other members of the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) that it will supply nuclear reactors without India signing NPT and agreeing to full scope safegaurds? That is a lot of leg-work and a lot of opposition from countries that signed NPT as the have-nots (Brazil, Sweden etc). Is that state dept willing to stick its neck out so far, that too for poor ole India?
- ``dual-use`` technology: NSSP has dragged on for years without any significant gains, are things going to change suddenly?
#23 Posted by bongdongs on April 5, 2005 9:11:40 am
The battle is ON!
China promises more military aid to Pak
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/apr/05china.htm
China promises more military aid to Pak
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/apr/05china.htm
#24 Posted by kaurasach on April 5, 2005 9:12:08 am
The sale of F16 is a non issue. It is shameful when Indian leaders squealed like rats. US is playing a bigger game. Pakis didn`t gain an advantage. Remember the Pattons.
The F16s are just like throwing a bone with little or no meat to their favorite pet.
Recently, China is showing its muscle. Indo/US millitary agreements will wage at least a psychological pressure on the Chinese.
Besides, the sales is generating revenue for the US.
The F16s are just like throwing a bone with little or no meat to their favorite pet.
Recently, China is showing its muscle. Indo/US millitary agreements will wage at least a psychological pressure on the Chinese.
Besides, the sales is generating revenue for the US.
#25 Posted by mohar11 on April 5, 2005 9:26:54 am
Ghori
//....The hyphenated policy in regard to India and Pakistan demanded that Pakistan’s pot be sweetened before stocking the larder for India. ...//
Well - for once, it`s the pakis who are unhappy about the ``hyphenated policy`` :)
But come on. Don`t make mountain out of molehill. There is no conspiracy going on here...... It`s a simple case of service and payments. Mushy provided some arguably ``valuable`` services and he wanted some goodies in return. For some reason he is obsessed with F16s and he wants to have `em. So he got it. [ He could have asked for so many other things - more FDI, more industry from US to setup shop, more grants for schools etc. But then Mushy is Mushy ]
And as usual, impotent mofos sitting in Delhi started whining like little girls....what do you expect Uncle Sam do? What any other uncle would do - he offered F-18 to the whining fools in delhi. [60 years down the drain, numerous speeches on ``brain power`` and ``human capital`` India still can`t build a plane on its own. Heck, india can`t even build a modern city]
Anyhoo - that`s the end of the story. And for all you know - the whole deal may just fall thru - congress will pass a bill and that would end of Mushy`s F16 fantasy.
+++
So all this talk about ``Regional Superpower``, ``China-India rivalry``, ``neo-con agenda for India`` and what not is just pure BS. Just like the politicians in the subcontinent, the journos also love to talk and talk big. This just another example such compulsive desire to talk big and weave elaborated high-intrigue theories.
//....The hyphenated policy in regard to India and Pakistan demanded that Pakistan’s pot be sweetened before stocking the larder for India. ...//
Well - for once, it`s the pakis who are unhappy about the ``hyphenated policy`` :)
But come on. Don`t make mountain out of molehill. There is no conspiracy going on here...... It`s a simple case of service and payments. Mushy provided some arguably ``valuable`` services and he wanted some goodies in return. For some reason he is obsessed with F16s and he wants to have `em. So he got it. [ He could have asked for so many other things - more FDI, more industry from US to setup shop, more grants for schools etc. But then Mushy is Mushy ]
And as usual, impotent mofos sitting in Delhi started whining like little girls....what do you expect Uncle Sam do? What any other uncle would do - he offered F-18 to the whining fools in delhi. [60 years down the drain, numerous speeches on ``brain power`` and ``human capital`` India still can`t build a plane on its own. Heck, india can`t even build a modern city]
Anyhoo - that`s the end of the story. And for all you know - the whole deal may just fall thru - congress will pass a bill and that would end of Mushy`s F16 fantasy.
+++
So all this talk about ``Regional Superpower``, ``China-India rivalry``, ``neo-con agenda for India`` and what not is just pure BS. Just like the politicians in the subcontinent, the journos also love to talk and talk big. This just another example such compulsive desire to talk big and weave elaborated high-intrigue theories.
#26 Posted by Romair on April 5, 2005 9:27:08 am
Pakistani acquistions on the Air Force side, historically, have been very good. Pakistan has been able to buy middle of the pack aircraft and has been able to upgrade them locally with top of the line avionics and missile systems. And it has the capabililty to rebuild them locally and efficiently. This combined with extremely high training standards is what has given the Air Force a large edge.
Pakistan should continue to follow the above-mentioned formula, which has proved so successful for it, since the early 70s. Before then, Pakistan was a complete US product shop. The USA used to sell Pakistan the latest equipment. Pakistan was flying T-37 trainers when the USAF started flying them. It was one of the largest recepients of F-86s. It had a Mach-2 fighter (F-104) before any European country got it. It had state of the art C-130 cargo aircraft.
Then the USA stopped delivering aircraft to Pakistan. And Pakistan had no indigneous set-up to get them either. This was the best thing that could have happened to Pakistan. It was forced to reorganize. It started acquiring French and Chinese equipment. This was inferior to the USA equipment. But it allowed much better logistics. And the poor Chinese equipment, forced Pakistan to indigenously update it with US/French missiles, British ejection seats and HUD(s) and US avionics. This resulted in aircraft that were far superior to their original prototype.
Then the Afghan war started and Pakistan started gettting US equipment, fully manufactured, again. This is where the F-16 came in. Pakistan now has a full set-up to fly and maintain F-16s. It will take a lot of logistical effort to switch that to another new generation aircraft. Most of all, it has some of the best trained pilots in the world on this aircraft.
This is the dilemma. Every Air Force needs at least, one next generation aircraft, like an F-16, F-18, Mig-28, Mirage-2000 etc. If for no other reason, then to ensure its own pilots are allowed to train against it, so that they gain some experience.
However, the USA has a tendency to make a country, either completely dependent on USA equipment, or cut off supplies, when needed most, through Pressler amendments.
I think Pakistan needs to make a clear break from the USA, on buying fully assembled aircraft, at some stage. It should push the JF-17 project with China, to the fullest (and even export it). And it should switch to French Mirages, for the next generation aircraft (though they are more expensive than F-16s).
Pakistan is, currently, the largest operator of previous generation Mirages (III, IV) in the world. It buys them used from countries, and rebuilds them. It co-produces Karakoram-8 trainers with China. And has the F-7 as its main defensive aircraft. This should be augmented with JF-17s (which are probably somewhere in between F-7 and F-16s).
Pakistan should only purchase avionics and missile systems from the USA..............Which is generally what it was doing, until this F-16 deal went through.
Pakistan should continue to follow the above-mentioned formula, which has proved so successful for it, since the early 70s. Before then, Pakistan was a complete US product shop. The USA used to sell Pakistan the latest equipment. Pakistan was flying T-37 trainers when the USAF started flying them. It was one of the largest recepients of F-86s. It had a Mach-2 fighter (F-104) before any European country got it. It had state of the art C-130 cargo aircraft.
Then the USA stopped delivering aircraft to Pakistan. And Pakistan had no indigneous set-up to get them either. This was the best thing that could have happened to Pakistan. It was forced to reorganize. It started acquiring French and Chinese equipment. This was inferior to the USA equipment. But it allowed much better logistics. And the poor Chinese equipment, forced Pakistan to indigenously update it with US/French missiles, British ejection seats and HUD(s) and US avionics. This resulted in aircraft that were far superior to their original prototype.
Then the Afghan war started and Pakistan started gettting US equipment, fully manufactured, again. This is where the F-16 came in. Pakistan now has a full set-up to fly and maintain F-16s. It will take a lot of logistical effort to switch that to another new generation aircraft. Most of all, it has some of the best trained pilots in the world on this aircraft.
This is the dilemma. Every Air Force needs at least, one next generation aircraft, like an F-16, F-18, Mig-28, Mirage-2000 etc. If for no other reason, then to ensure its own pilots are allowed to train against it, so that they gain some experience.
However, the USA has a tendency to make a country, either completely dependent on USA equipment, or cut off supplies, when needed most, through Pressler amendments.
I think Pakistan needs to make a clear break from the USA, on buying fully assembled aircraft, at some stage. It should push the JF-17 project with China, to the fullest (and even export it). And it should switch to French Mirages, for the next generation aircraft (though they are more expensive than F-16s).
Pakistan is, currently, the largest operator of previous generation Mirages (III, IV) in the world. It buys them used from countries, and rebuilds them. It co-produces Karakoram-8 trainers with China. And has the F-7 as its main defensive aircraft. This should be augmented with JF-17s (which are probably somewhere in between F-7 and F-16s).
Pakistan should only purchase avionics and missile systems from the USA..............Which is generally what it was doing, until this F-16 deal went through.
#27 Posted by ntsyed on April 5, 2005 9:32:13 am
I think some (including the author) have rightly pointed out that the arms to India and Pakistan are not for use again each other, it is primarily to counter China to prevent her regional hegemony... if there`s any hope left for that.
India`s noteworthy ambition to become a superpower notwithstanding, she has a long way to go, even if US manages to get her on the UNSC.
Her claim of being world`s largest democracy has yet to be proven tangible vis a vis domestic alleviation of poverty, AIDS, etc.
It comes down to money. It`s the same formual as during the cold war... the played both sides of the board: they sold tanks to one party and RPGs to the other in order to make money from both sides.
The Republicans have a tremendous lobby behind them - NRA, and most of its financiers are linked to the American defense industry. The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon to come elsewhere in the ME are links of that chain. There are plenty of statistics and articles available on the net about the American defense industry raking $$$ (Carlyle Group, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Halliburton, etc), while the rest of industries are struggling to rebound from the recession.
I think both Indians and Pakistanis are foolish to get into the arms race when their people are experiencing continuous decline in their peanuts for income. If the leaders of both countries had more sincerity towards their populace vis a vis the foreign power brokers, together they could be a formidable force to be reckoned with. The operative word here is ``sincerity``. Of course, neither China nor US nor Europe nor Russia could bear to let that happen.
As vivek`s eloquent qoute demonstrates
``Pakistan, in the words of a retired Paki general, is simply a condom that US uses and discards at will``
Now that Soviet-Afghan war is over and China is too coy to be exploited in the aforementioned manner, guess who is it the US uses this condom on before discarding it ;-)
India`s noteworthy ambition to become a superpower notwithstanding, she has a long way to go, even if US manages to get her on the UNSC.
Her claim of being world`s largest democracy has yet to be proven tangible vis a vis domestic alleviation of poverty, AIDS, etc.
It comes down to money. It`s the same formual as during the cold war... the played both sides of the board: they sold tanks to one party and RPGs to the other in order to make money from both sides.
The Republicans have a tremendous lobby behind them - NRA, and most of its financiers are linked to the American defense industry. The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon to come elsewhere in the ME are links of that chain. There are plenty of statistics and articles available on the net about the American defense industry raking $$$ (Carlyle Group, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Halliburton, etc), while the rest of industries are struggling to rebound from the recession.
I think both Indians and Pakistanis are foolish to get into the arms race when their people are experiencing continuous decline in their peanuts for income. If the leaders of both countries had more sincerity towards their populace vis a vis the foreign power brokers, together they could be a formidable force to be reckoned with. The operative word here is ``sincerity``. Of course, neither China nor US nor Europe nor Russia could bear to let that happen.
As vivek`s eloquent qoute demonstrates
``Pakistan, in the words of a retired Paki general, is simply a condom that US uses and discards at will``
Now that Soviet-Afghan war is over and China is too coy to be exploited in the aforementioned manner, guess who is it the US uses this condom on before discarding it ;-)
#28 Posted by vivek on April 5, 2005 9:48:14 am
ntsyed,
India`s ambition for superpower is overstated in the media. Most Indian people have their feet firmly on the ground and know that they have a very long way to go.
India`s ambition for superpower is overstated in the media. Most Indian people have their feet firmly on the ground and know that they have a very long way to go.
#29 Posted by bbabu on April 5, 2005 9:52:57 am
`` Conventional wisdom says it’s a ‘reward’ for General Musharraf’s loyalty to George W. Bush’s ‘cause’ in this part of the world. The question is why now? General Musharraf has been loyal and steadfast to Bush’s open-ended war in Afghanistan and elsewhere from day one. Logic suggests that he should have been rewarded for his commitment early in the stint in order to pre-empt those lampooning him for getting not much in return for his services. Why delay the ‘reward’ for so long? ``
Because Mushy insisted on it. Pakistan has been playing a double game on the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Hence the delay in the F-16s.
`` The simple answer is that Washington has tested General Musharraf long enough, found him unwavering in his commitment to the Bush agenda and, finally, decided that it was time to put a tangible reward like F-16s where their mouth has been for such a long time. ``
Possible
`` But the ‘reward’ theory loses all its thrust of argument when put against the other half of the Bush administration’s decision to give much more to India to balance its reward to Pakistan. India is not a front line soldier in Bush’s war on terrorism the way Pakistan has been for so long; why should Bush, then, be so munificent in promising not only advanced weaponry but sophisticated technology and state-of-the-art military industrial manufacturing know-how to India? ``
The bottom falls out of the reward barrel when what Pakistan is going to get is placed against what India is being offered in the realms of defence co-operation, defence-production and transfer of technology. You don’t reward a loyal and steadfast ally and, simultaneously, beef up, manifold, the defence potential of the adversary against whom Pakistan’s award-winning F-16s are most likely to be deployed? ``
Technology transfers to India are only a promise. The simple question to you if India cannot influence American policy completely with respect to Pakistan. What is the probability Pakistan can influence policy wrt India ?
`` There is, on top of it, the added comfort for India that U.S. is prepared to sell it a more sophisticated and versatile aircraft—F-18—than what is being offered to Islamabad. The icing on the cake for India is that it will be making these aircrafts under license and will not be dependent for spares on Washington. Islamabad, on the other hand, will not be able to evade the supplier-client dragnet that had sapped all the thunder out of its earlier-vintage F-16s. There are no guarantees that Islamabad will not have to scrounge for spares for the new-age F-16s, as it was made to for the old ones. ``
F-18 are more versatile than the F-16. They are more suited for defense requirements of India. They can be used on aircraft carriers, short air strips on Andaman islands etc. I take a F-16 over a F-18 anyday for air superiority missions.
#30 Posted by Romair on April 5, 2005 9:58:00 am
Pakistan needs to start turning its defence industries into export industries. Having seen some of them from the inside, they are quite well-established, well-regarded and efficient. There is a well-established ordinance factor at Wah, which supplies equipment to one of the largest armies in the world. Interestingly, the Wah factory is run almost completely by civilians. There is well-established aircraft rebuild center at Kamra, which has a great track-record for flight safety. And is a major center for Mirage Aircraft rebuild (perhaps worldwide). And Pakistan is co-producing fighters with China. I think Paksitan also assembles submarines and stuff.
What they lack is marketing and sales. Perhaps a good way to go is to privatize the industry to some extent. Much of the Middle East forces have been trained by Pakistanis. They would probably be very interested in buying inexpensive equipment from a reliable source.........rather than relying on the USA for everything........
What they lack is marketing and sales. Perhaps a good way to go is to privatize the industry to some extent. Much of the Middle East forces have been trained by Pakistanis. They would probably be very interested in buying inexpensive equipment from a reliable source.........rather than relying on the USA for everything........
#31 Posted by CoolAL on April 5, 2005 9:59:00 am
Seriously...
What will it take to convince Pakistan and Pakistanis that India has never been a threat to Pakistan? If you want peace, all you have to do is focus on your country`s development and quit sponsoring anti-India activities -- these are NOT in your country`s best interests.
Try this approach for a couple of decades -- that is less than half the time that you guys have spent trying to screw with India -- and then see how easily the Kashmir problem will resolve itself.
Please understand, Kashmir will not be solved by force. It can only be solved by development of trust between India and Pakistan. Threats, one upmanship and trash talking will not lead to development of trust but will just bring enormous amout of grief to Pakistan.
You guys seriously need a paradigm shift in your foreign policy.
What will it take to convince Pakistan and Pakistanis that India has never been a threat to Pakistan? If you want peace, all you have to do is focus on your country`s development and quit sponsoring anti-India activities -- these are NOT in your country`s best interests.
Try this approach for a couple of decades -- that is less than half the time that you guys have spent trying to screw with India -- and then see how easily the Kashmir problem will resolve itself.
Please understand, Kashmir will not be solved by force. It can only be solved by development of trust between India and Pakistan. Threats, one upmanship and trash talking will not lead to development of trust but will just bring enormous amout of grief to Pakistan.
You guys seriously need a paradigm shift in your foreign policy.
#32 Posted by vivek on April 5, 2005 9:59:05 am
babu,
About the F-18 part, nothing`s been promised to India. The media is just building a hype around it. I hope India does not stupidly buy American weaponary, and indirectly open the doors of Russian weaponary to Pakistan.
About the F-18 part, nothing`s been promised to India. The media is just building a hype around it. I hope India does not stupidly buy American weaponary, and indirectly open the doors of Russian weaponary to Pakistan.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- anil: Re: # 111 Kaal: "...they call... Government Wins Manmohan Singh
- quin: Re: # 52 thanks... Translation of a (Love)
- quin: I would like to... Translation of a (Love)
- Naqshbandi: The hadith are the... Translation of a (Love)
- dost_mittar: Eklavya#118: "The other option is... Government Wins Manmohan Singh
- guru: Vedas(knoweldge of manifest) and... Dhokha and Being a
- guru: Many of the Hindu... Dhokha and Being a
- guru: Namaskar: My humble pranams to... Dhokha and Being a
