Analysis of sales to India and Pakistan
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
<CLIP>
By offering to sell Lockheed Martin F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan and India, the U.S. government is trying to cultivate alliances with two countries that not only dislike each other but also have nuclear weapons.
Some observers have questioned the wisdom of selling the jets to either nation, saying it would add to their arms race.
But foreign-policy experts experienced in the region say the Bush administration needs to walk this geopolitical tightrope to cultivate friends in a vital part of the world.
The United States needs a friendly, stable Pakistan to remain a bulwark in the war on terrorism. Better relations with India are desirable because it is a rising global economic power and, some say, a potential military counterbalance to China.
"We need to have a very solid set of ties in the region," said Frank Wisner, U.S. ambassador to India from 1994 to 1997. "These are the two major players."
It remains to be seen whether the U.S. overtures to Pakistan and India will result in a boon for sales of F-16s that would keep the airplane's production line in Fort Worth running through 2010 or longer.
Consummating a sale of 24 F-16s to Pakistan is likely, experts say, but persuading India to buy the U.S. jets could be more difficult.
Pakistan has older F-16s in its arsenal. Congress barred a pending order for more jets in 1990 because of Pakistan's pursuit of nuclear weapons. India, which was long friendly with the Soviet Union, has not bought U.S. planes. The U.S. cut off arms sales to India in 1998 after its nuclear tests.
U.S. relationships with India and Pakistan have been rocky in the past. Or, as Wisner put it, "uneven is about the nicest thing you could say." Succeeding U.S. administrations have sanctioned both nations for pursuing nuclear weapons.
But times have changed. Relations between the United States and India have improved since the end of the Cold War. India and Pakistan, each of which has enough nuclear weapons to mortally wound the other, seem to be willing to coexist.
It wouldn't be the first time the U.S. government, professing an interest in maintaining a balance of power, has sold jets to two countries whose first inclination would be fight each other.
Greece and Turkey, historical and potential future adversaries, are among the 21 nations now flying F-16s. Israel and Egypt were allowed to purchase the jets after the 1978 Camp David peace accord.
Indian officials voiced only muted protests over the announcement last week that President Bush had approved selling the jets to Pakistan.
"India won the [conventional] arms race some time ago," said Stephen Cohen, a Brookings Institution scholar and former State Department official. India's air force is far larger, so selling Pakistan 24 F-16s will do little to alter the balance of power.
Selling fighters to Pakistan is "on balance a good idea," Cohen said, "if we can use this to enhance our leverage" on Gen. Pervez Musharraf and his government.
Musharraf should be rewarded for his cooperation against al Qaeda and the Taliban, Cohen said. Strengthening Pakistan is necessary to prevent the government from falling and being succeeded by a radical Islamist government that would provide a haven for terrorists, he said.
The quid pro quo, Cohen said, must include continued cooperation in the war against terrorism, curtailing the spread of nuclear weapons by renegade Pakistani scientists and democratization of Pakistan's political system.
The Bush administration has leverage with Pakistan that the United States hasn't had in the past, Cohen said. Even better, it has the "option of moving toward India, which we didn't have before."
The Soviet Union's demise led to a thaw in U.S.-India relations. The Indian government and military have cooperated with the State Department and Pentagon in toppling the Taliban and beginning to rebuild Afghanistan.
"We need a strategic relationship with India, no doubt in my mind," said Wisner, now vice chairman of external affairs for insurance giant AIG.
India has asked Lockheed and Boeing, through the U.S. government, for information on possible purchases of the F-16 or F/A-18 jets. But the competition for that business will also include Russia and France, both of which have long supplied warplanes to India.
Indian officials, who are shopping for up to 126 modern fighters, could conclude that the costs and complications involved in buying, operating and maintaining either U.S. aircraft would be higher than adding to their fleets of Russian or French planes.
"There's also the issue of trust and confidence," Wisner said. "We've offered arms to India in the past, then cut them off."
For all those reasons, closing a deal with India for F-16s could be a long shot, said Richard Aboulafia, aerospace industry analyst with the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va.
"But on the other hand, it's hard to beat" the combat record of the F-16, he said, which is still the world's best, most-effective fighter plane.
With its backlog of F-16 orders down to about 200 planes, Lockheed would love to have a deal with Pakistan signed by October. That's when the first slots in the production line will begin to open up.
Lockheed cut several hundred jobs on the F-16 production line last year and has announced plans to trim an additional 1,000 this year. Without more orders, additional jobs would undoubtedly be lost.
But the process of selling arms to foreign nations can be a torturous one, involving delicate negotiations between buying countries, and the Pentagon and State Department. Congress can also vote to block a sale.
"This is a government-to-government process," said Lockheed spokesman Joe Stout, "but we're ready to assist in any way we can."
Facebook
Twitter