Firstly congrats to the project managers in PAC and CAC for their first export. That being said, I just want to point out a few issues with respect to points raised here.
1. Why these birds are having the final assembly in CAC and being shipped from China and not Pakistan and what role Pakistan had in their construction? There are a number of reasons why the jets are in CAC and not PAC first and foremost being that it will be politically imprudent for GoP and PAC to be seen by their local population to be supplying weapons for the slaughter of Muslims in another nation (backlash would not be good, just as if Pakistan had sold weapons to Serbia or Croatia during the Bosnian or Kosovar War, or sold weapons to Israel). It is politically safer for Pakistan to have China sell these aircraft. It in now way means Pakistan a) did or didn't play a role in their construction, and b) could have played a role in their construction if it wanted to. We have seen pictures of Ruby 1, 2, and 3 in PAC AND we have seen the construction pictures of the PAF's own JF-17s at PAC so whether or not they produced a single screw in these planes has no bearing on PACs ability to produce the plane. Can it produce large components of the plane? YES. Will PAC still recieve $128M of the $256M+ that this deal is worth (50%)? YES. All other positions on the subject is foolish and stupid. Its like arguing that Lockheed-USA produced the PAF's F-16 so that means Turkish Aerospace Industries was incapable of producing the aircraft (which is can produce under license).
2. Does the fact that the launch costumer being Myanmar represent a tarnish on Pakistan's foreign policy and mean that it chased the all-mighty dollar instead of sticking to its principals of speaking out for oppressed Muslims, even if the entire sale was arranged through CAC and Pakistan played no role in the sale or production of the aircraft? In a word, YES. The arrangement through CAC/China does not obfuscate Pakistan responsibility to protect innocent people be they Muslim or otherwise (1) in Islam, (2) under the Geneva convention, (3) or the grounds of basic human decency. In my Pakistan should have talked China out of the sale or tried to block it. Failure to do so shows a lack of fortitude and that Pakistan has adopted a level of subservience to China, and even if it tried to stop the sale and failed at least you could say you made an effort. Hiding behind notions of developing leverage while on the other trying to say that the Chinese did the sale because we had moral objections to it is hypocritical AND furthermore shows cowardice on the part of Pakistan to own up to the truth of the situation. Especially when PAC will see 50% of the funds (a revenue of $128 Million for PAC on the initial 16 units with a potential for another $128M if further 16 are sold). We may have to accept that Myanmar a costumer, and there may not be anything Pakistanis or their well wishers (such as myself) can do about it at this stage, but we should at least celebrate the news with a little sanguinity in that yes we may be happy PAC will get revenue, but we are not happy about the source and wont pretend to be. That is my opinion, I have no problems with others having your own, THAT's OK. We can disagree.
3. No-one has discussed the fact that the Myanmar military Junta has strong ties to India. What protections has China /Pakistan built into this sale to prevent India from getting a "closer look" at this bird? I actually have no idea and for the level of fighter this is, I cant imagine China placing the tight controls on JF-17 as US placed on Pakistan's Blk 52s .
