US Government vs Congress: Sale of F16s to Pakistan

[Gentelman]

Pakistan will just buy second hand f sola in more numbers and upgrade them..
If PAF buy these then i would say that we could have invested that money in JFT to make structural upgrades (i.e more hardpoints and internal fuel capacity) with AESA, HOBS and IRST(planned in block 3)...

No country can sell their F-16s to any other country without US approval.

US don't have any issue with PAF using F-16 apparantly they just want us to pay...

 

[VCheng]

US don't have any issue with PAF using F-16 apparantly they just want us to pay...

It is up to Pakistan to decide how much they can afford to pay for its jets, and from what course. Any deal from a third country will need US approval if it involves F-16s, but not otherwise. Again, it is up to Pakistan.

 

[Paksanity]

But you have other aircraft in pretty good numbers,don't you??

You want to see barrel bombing? How about using precision weapons so that innocent lives may be spared?

BTW, search up total numbers of NATO aircraft in Afghanistan at its peak. It will be very revealing to you.

No agreement or contracts were signed for the finalization , you Can't just throw a b.s biased contract to a democratic government & expect it to pass. No matter how the ambassador sugarcotes it , politics is more than just 2 people . Both the left & right wing tore the deal into a new .

Negotiations are a long process , once done ,either agree or move on .blackmailing the U.S. government with "threats?" does nothing but embarrass the whole problem even further .anyway the clocks ticking .

Don't you worry sweetheart. We have way with doing things.

 

[Cool_Soldier]

No agreement or contracts were signed for the finalization , you Can't just throw a b.s biased contract to a democratic government & expect it to pass. No matter how the ambassador sugarcotes it , politics is more than just 2 people . Both the left & right wing tore the deal into a new .

Negotiations are a long process , once done ,either agree or move on .blackmailing the U.S. government with "threats?" does nothing but embarrass the whole problem even further .anyway the clocks ticking .

Were you there when talk were held between govt officials?
Why your breath is holding as clock is ticking ?

Be calm as we are because we know only 8 plane wont make a big difference whether they come in or not.

 

[cloud4000]

You call Pakistanis a fool for opting for F16. We call you a genius for making Tejas.

PAF is dedicated to the JF17 program, and the program is doing extremely well, which cannot be said about our LCA programs going on in the region. As the innovations of JF17 will hit the news and forums like these, some of you will only be critical and deny, but what you cannot deny, is that JF17 is filly operational, and propagating.

To assume that JF17 can replace a Block 50 level f16 is unrealistic. JF17 and F16 is a good mix that is sufficiently capable to defend the Pakistani airspace.

I don’t know why you are comparing F-16s to Tejas. Not only are you comparing apples to oranges, it has nothing to do with the point I was making. In fact, I wasn’t even commenting on the merits of the F-16s, which is superb, but the fact that Pakistan insists on getting them even after all the restrictions and sanctions US has placed.

And no one is denying JF-17 is a good platform and, unlike the Tejas, is operational. JF-17 is also an immature platform, at the moment, but it’s getting better with each block. Block II is currently in production and Block III will be arriving soon. With every new block the aircraft is getting better, to the point it might reach parity with the F-16s. I’m not the only one saying this, but it has been repeated here on PDF.

 

[leftfordead]

1st day , 30 day's its over .. sorry we did not have money to pay .. now dump these F-16's

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

I don’t know why you are comparing F-16s to Tejas. Not only are you comparing apples to oranges, it has nothing to do with the point I was making. In fact, I wasn’t even commenting on the merits of the F-16s, which is superb, but the fact that Pakistan insists on getting them even after all the restrictions and sanctions US has placed.

And no one is denying JF-17 is a good platform and, unlike the Tejas, is operational. JF-17 is also an immature platform, at the moment, but it’s getting better with each block. Block II is currently in production and Block III will be arriving soon. With every new block the aircraft is getting better, to the point it might reach parity with the F-16s. I’m not the only one saying this, but it has been repeated here on PDF.

You call PAF a fool and you expect we will not bring Tejas to the table? must be Friday again.

 

[dy1022]

Try J10C (AESA+BVR+IRST+ECM+14T WS-10B engine)

 

[MastanKhan]

I don't understand you guys....you don't want pay 700mil for 8 jets it's ok....but saying you can buy su35 for the same....is stupidity!!
Su35 is completely new platform in paf....with new weapons...new logistics...lol...even hypothetically considering Russians gonna offer...!!

Hi,

Because it was a part of the agreement---the U S offered it to do from the funds---. They did not need to offer it in the first place---and there would be no drama---.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

WASHINGTON: The United States has ‘absolutely no intention’ of diminishing its relationship with Pakistan in any way, says the US State Department.

At the Tuesday news briefing, the department’s spokesman refused to criticise Pakistan for saying that it would look for other options if a deal for buying eight F-16 fighter jets from the United States fails.

“These are sovereign decisions that nations make with respect to their defence needs, and it’s up to Pakistan to speak to how they’ll fulfil their defence needs,” said spokesman John Kirby when asked if Pakistan bought fighter jets from China, would it strain its relations with the United States.

“As for the relationship, as I’ve said many, many times, it’s an important one. It’s critical; it’s vital in that — particularly in that part of the world; and it’s a relationship we have absolutely no intention of losing focus on or diminishing in any way,” he said. “But these are obviously sovereign decisions that Pakistan has to make,” he added.

State Dept spokesman refuses to criticise Pakistan over F-16 deal comments
When another reporter reminded him that a Pakistani minister had described the US aid to Pakistan as “peanuts,” Mr Kirby said: “I would just simply say that, again, it’s an important relationship. We’re going to continue to support that relationship”.

The official defended the assistance that the United States has provided to Pakistan despite a strong opposition from certain lobbies in Congress.

“We fully stand behind the kinds of support that we have provided to Pakistan over the last many years with respect specifically to their counterterrorism capabilities and counterterrorism needs,” he said. “And we’re going to continue to look for ways to improve that cooperation as best we can”.

Last week, Congress prevented the US administration from subsidising the $700 million F-16 deal.

Under the arrangement, Pakistan was to pay $270m for the eight aircraft while the US was to provide about $430m from its foreign military financing facility.

Pakistan has expressed its inability to pay the entire amount.

Published in Dawn, May 5th, 2016

 

[Rehan khan 1]

The discord between Washington and Islamabad over the sale of F-16 jets and related issues has welled up to the surface even as New Delhi began preparatory discussions regarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s state visit to the United States. This is fortuitous coincidence.
New Delhi argues for ‘de-hyphenated’ US policies respectively toward India and Pakistan, but ground realities point otherwise.
The US-Pakistan discord over the F-16 sale essentially devolves upon the financing package for the sale, with the US Congress demanding that Islamabad must find the money to procure the 8 jet aircraft. But there are sub-plots here – such as the US demand for handing over Dr. Shakeel Afridi (who helped the US intelligence trace Osama bin Laden to his hideout in Abbottabad) or Pakistan’s ambivalence over a crackdown on Haqqani Network.
The discord highlights that Pakistan holds a strategic prism to view the Afghan situation and terrorism, India and regional security and stability, which is out of sync with the US’ regional strategies and priorities.
Of course, it is tempting to see this discord as a fracture in the US-Pakistan relations that would work to India’s advantage. But then, US-Pakistan discords have a long history and what lends enchantment to the view is often their eventual, inevitable denouement. The present case is no different. Why so?
One, the current discord results rather from a confusion in Washington between the Obama administration and the US Congress regarding the aims and expectations of the military assistance program for Pakistan. While the Administration is realistic about the leverage generated by US assistance, lawmakers tend to exaggerate.
Two, the lawmakers see the assistance exclusively in terms of the imperatives of the Afghan situation and out of a sense of frustration that Pakistan has been fooling the US and it is about time to read the riot act.
They either don’t get it or tend to overlook that the US assistance is being offered to Pakistan in a broader context, which is laden with geopolitical considerations. Three, the lawmakers are harking back in time by flagging the Haqqani problem, whereas, American diplomacy has moved much further down the road to take Pakistan’s help (both within the Quadrilateral format and outside of it) to facilitate a reconciliation package with the Taliban, which is inclusive and envisages the participation and involvement of all Taliban factions without exception, including the Haqqanis.
Four, the lawmakers forget that the US’ credibility in the region is very low and Pakistan will be exceedingly foolish to take the American word of eternal commitment to the stabilization of Afghanistan at its face value. Put differently, Pakistan won’t give up its ‘strategic assets’. (Besides, Pakistan also has its legitimate security interests to secure.)
Finally, the US state department has a historical memory, which reminds it that holding out threats of curtailing assistance to Pakistan involves deft calibration and total clarity of purpose so as to ensure that significant gains can be extracted out of such moves, which have an inherent risk element of being overplayed. In short, there should be a realistic promise of success. True Pakistan hasn’t always withstood US threats of sanctions, but, equally, when its core interests are affected, such as when the Pressler Amendments failing utterly to force Pakistan to cap and roll back its nuclear program.
Therefore, the big question is whether the US is really gearing up to pick up a fight with Pakistan, and if so, what is it that it realistically hopes to achieve – a) winning the war in Afghanistan; b) bringing Taliban to the negotiating table; c) extracting the last ounce of cooperation from present army chief Gen. Raheel Sharif (who retires in November around the same time as President Obama); d) forcing Pakistan to go slow on China’s One Belt One Road projects; e) coaxing Pakistan to soft pedal its nuclear weapon program; and, last but not the least, f) placating Kabul which is reeling under the pressure of Taliban attacks?
An utterly fascinating presentation of the Pakistani case by Pakistan’s Advisor on foreign affairs Sartaj Aziz brings out the state of play. Aziz has conveyed that Pakistan will insist on the US picking up the tab on the F-16 sale and cannot be browbeaten. He has gently reminded Washington’s need for Pakistan’s help in the stabilization of Afghanistan and preservation of regional security outweighs the latter’s dependence on the US military assistance and the US-Pakistan cooperation in Afghanistan is not a one-way street. (Nation)
In a speech in Islamabad yesterday, Aziz also took stock of the regional security paradigm to warn that the US needs to be careful while encouraging India’s militarization or overlooking its aspirations to gain strategic superiority over Pakistan and shift the regional balance in its favor, which of course Pakistan will not allow to happen. (Transcript)
To be sure, Aziz factored in that the US state department is working hard to find a way out of the discord over F-16 sale. Spokesman John Kirby reiterated during briefings in the past two consecutive days that the relationship with Pakistan is far too critical and vital “particularly in that part of the world” so that the Obama administration has “absolutely no intention of losing focus on or diminishing in any way.” He underscored that “effective management with Pakistan… is critical.” Kirby distanced the Administration from the move in the US Congress:

• As a matter of longstanding principle, the Department of State opposes conditions to the release of appropriated foreign assistance funds. We believe that such conditions limit the President and the Secretary’s ability to conduct foreign policy in the best interest of the United States… Given congressional objections, we have told the Pakistanis that they should put forward national funds for that purpose.

The bottom line is that Kirby pointedly refused to field a question as to whether the US is “looking for other options” to transfer the F-16 to Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Pakistan has disclosed that a $5.2 billion contract was signed last week in Beijing for the construction of the two main road projects of the eastern alignment of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, covering a distance of 600 kms. (Express Tribune)
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2016/05/04/pakistan-wont-blink-on-f-16-discord-with-us/

 

[Hyperion]

First sane article on the bro-code between the US and Pakistan....... let's see in the F16-funding saga, on which side of the divide will the proverbial camel sit........

@Quwa @Oscar @Horus your views?

@MastanKhan, calm down bro......... if anyone can play the leverage game, we can..... our whole existence, to this date, has been on playing this game...... and we've played it very well indeed!

 

[M.AsfandYar]

Oh yes? We all know who played this game and who was jealous for this deal? When we know we can buy same jets from different countries. Then what is the point to beg USA?
Self respect is not limited to an individual, but a nation as well.
We have another option and we can avail it. Then why?

Yes that will Cost even More for now before they become operational and that would be years. Thats a risk.

 

[That Guy]

The US will pay for the F-16s, one way or another. It may not even be direct, but Pakistan will not pick up the tab.

It could very well be a case of Pakistan buying from a secondary country, and the US paying for those, thus circumventing congress. It has happened before with Pakistan buying from Jordan and upgrading them in Turkey, with US paying for most of the upgrade; this all happened under the radar and without congressional approval.

 

[Tipu7]

Pakistan will get F16 from Europe instead.
USA will release FMF ........
We will be allowed to give them MLU via Turkey.

Problem solve.......

Europe route is even better.