On October 13, 2009 Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) participated in the rolling out ceremony of the first of 18 F-16C Block 52, one of the most capable versions of the aircraft, which is flown by the U.S. Air Force and numerous other countries.
U.S. Congressman Rep. Kay Granger (R-Fort Worth) said that Pakistan “is the point of the spear” in U.S. efforts to combat terrorism in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Pakistan has paid nearly $2 Billion for the aircrafts and parts. Between the Egyptian and Pakistani orders, the Lockheed plant should remain humming till 2012, employing 2,100.
ACM Suleman said that this type of aircraft has been valuable in delivering munitions with precision.
I am sure that the choice of type and number of planes must have been made with due considerations by the senior PAF staff and the Pakistan parliament. But there is something that deeply troubles me about this photograph (more photos here).
Does Pakistan really need $80Million aircraft to bomb the terrorists hiding in FATA and elsewhere?
As an ex-PAF officer myself and coming from a PAF family, I am a strong opponent of using air power to bomb civilian targets in the first place; as it causes unnecessary civilian deaths. The strengths of this plane are superior radar, long endurance and ability to deliver beyond visual range missiles. None of these attributes are needed for the troubles at hand.
The current PAF inventory could easily have been upgraded to handle newer precision weapons at a fraction of the cost. An even better option would be to spread the $80M over a combination of COIN (Counter Insurgency) aircrafts like those from Pilatus or Embraer, helicopters and Unmanned Aircraft Vehicles UAVs. These types of planes would provide the eyes (uavs), mobility (helicopters) and teeth (COIN aircrafts) to an organization like Army Aviation or Frontier Constabulary Air Force. Air power should only be used for close air support of security forces.
Moreover, there is no transfer of technology involved that I am aware of. PAF should focus on evolving JF-17 that it has developed in collaboration with China. Modern jet fighters are a combination of platform, avionics and weapons. JF-17 is an adequate platform. We tend to suffer from short memory. It was only 1965 when US embargoed all military support and PAF had to replace its predominant US inventory with Chinese jets. My father was the first air attaché to Beijing and over saw the incredible Chinese support at the time of our needs.
Even better, given the sad state of primary education in Pakistan, this money could have educated half the school going kids for an year. Right now we only provide money for one out of forty children in our budget.
Additionally, this ceremony could not have come at a worse time as Pakistanis are actively debating the nature of US Pakistan relationship under the Obama administration. There are many in Pakistan who feel that the Kerry-Lugar bill’s language is an interference in the internal affairs of the country. F-16 could come to represent the Symbol of Subservience rather than that of pride.
Article 245 of the Constitution of Pakistan states:
The Armed Forces shall, under the directions of the Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war, and, subject to law, act in aid of civil power when called upon to do so.
Right now Pakistanis are being bombed by an external aggressor (US Drones flown by CIA) and being blown up in terrorist attacks from an internal aggressor on a nearly daily basis. Would ACM Suleman be present in Fort Worth if he was fulfilling his Constitutional obligation?
Imran Khan is an ex-PAF officer and technology entrepreneur who blogs at Planet Earth.
On the whole, this piece makes a lot of sense: Focus resources on human development and counter-insurgency rather than buying new, expensive fighter aircraft from US.
But it also raises a lot of basic questions, such as:
1. Does India remain an existential threat to Pakistan, in spite of Pak nukes and ballistic missiles?
2. If Pakistan so chose, could it actually get or build the sophisticated and effective armed drones from US or anywhere else for COIN?
3. If the money were not spent on this project and allocated to primary education instead, would it actually be spent on educating kids, or simply end in ghost schools lining the pockets of corrupt politicians and officials?
4. Can Pakistan learn more about the latest and highly sophisticated technology on US F-16s, and use it to significantly improve JF-17 aircraft along with the Chinese?
In my view, it’s not such a simple call, based on our history and experience. But I do think we need to carefully balance and calibrate our response to these various threats and needs that stare us in the face.
@Anwer
Pressler Amendment was passed in 1985 and was in fact written by Pakistanis themselves to counter an earlier amendment that restricted US military and economic aid to countries “that imported or exported un-safeguarded nuclear enrichment or reprocessing materials, equipment or technology.” I am actually quoting from Khalid Hasan, of Friday Times and Daily Times. http://www.khalidhasan.net/2007/12/02/come-back-la rry-all%E2%80%99s-forgiven/
That earlier amendment was called the 1977 Glenn-Symington Amendment, under which Pakistan’s assistance was blocked twice; first in September 1977 and then in April 1979 for nuclear-related activities. Then in 1981, the Reagan administration changed their laws in favor of Pakistan due to War in Afghanistan and 1985 saw the passing of Pressler Amendment, which “required the president to certify that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear explosive device and that US aid would greatly cut the risk of its getting one.” This of course was done for 4 years despite all evidences pointing to the contrary.
Under these terms, Pakistan got aid worth $4bn and 40 F-16s. Later, in 1989, Bush the senior denied granting further waivers to Pakistan and hence the sale of 77 additional F-16s was blocked. Pakistan was later reimbursed the money (Khalid Hasan claims so) in 1995 under the Brown Amendment. I think only 28 of those 77 were made and were later used by USAF and US Marines. Some of these (14 I think) were later given to (some are still under process) Pakistan starting 2005.
Of course in current era of increased US partnership, we can compare nuclear-related penalties of the 1980s to penalization related to assisting non-state actors and (still) nuclear-related activities in the future. Relationship with Uncle Sam can be a tricky business, or we have made it tricky ourselves. Your call!
I just don’t know… this issue has so many different dimensions to it. Yes, China’s a dependable ally, the US has a history of abandoning it’s “allies” as soon as it didn’t need them anymore. Education and welfare is very important, but that doesn’t belittle the very important need to maintain the ability to defend oneself.
India’s one country that has a colorful past destabilizing all their neighbors, they annexed sikkim in the 70’s, regularly interfere with Bangladesh, have alot of beef to pick with the Chinese, regularly blow stuff up in Pakistan, widely believed to have supported the LTTE terrorists in Sri Lanka, block food supplies when land-locked Bhutan doesn’t comply to their whims.
India recently positioned most of their MiG-29 fleet to Pakistan’s eastern border. A year ago they crossed the border with a pair of fully armed SU-30 MKIs to “bomb terrorist havens inside Pakistan”, if the US can do it, they felt they could too.
Even if Pakistan focuses on the JF-17 project, the F-16 Block 52 is a much better aircraft, in pretty much every way. The F110 engine’s much more reliable than the Russian RD-93, it’s got better avionics, better payload, endurance, etc. Chinese technology is improving rapidly, but it still has a ways to go before competing with US stuff. Our airforce really needs these aircraft, rightnow their premiere front-line fighter’s around thirty years old(F-16A). India’s got some of Russia’s latest and best tech. I just hope we get these in time, before the US embargoes us again, for the third time.
PAF ACM gave a political statement. It was wise to do so. Its quite well known why the new birds are being bought. But another wise decision was to cut down the numbers from almost 55 to 18. Rest of the money can be used for further development of JF-17, improvement and modernization of J-10 to culminate in form of FC-20. Both fighters are a reality and only a matter of time when they will start serving in frontline squadrons.
In my view, the late 80s and early 90s Pressler sanctions imposed on Pakistan proved to be a blessing in disguise.
The answer is No to buy those expensive toys with spy devices custamized to spy on Pak skies.I suggest that Pakistan and Hindustan accept each other as respectable neighbours,make a no war pact and divert all money from buying western weapon of mass destruction to the good of their people in science,technology, and social uplifting.Let’s Pakistani … Read Moreand Hindustani like minded peace loving majority take a first step. Let’s make a forum here and now for paece in our part of the world,just remember remember taking a small step for peace is a bigger step than man’ step on moon :)