From The American Thinker:
March 29, 2011
Pakistan depends more on China for arms than US
Rick Moran
This is a decade long trend so it's not entirely a surprise, but Pakistan's chief military supplier now appears to be China.
It makes sense from the Pakistani point of view. Both nations are worried about the rise of India - a US ally to which the United States is moving closer. Also, we refuse to enable their nuclear program any further by supplying them with high tech weapons like nuclear capable missiles.
Fox News:
Pakistan earlier this month test-fired a nuclear-capable missile from an undisclosed location - the second in a month of try-outs for its short-range surface-to-surface Hataf 2 class rocket, co-developed with the Chinese. It was the latest in a series of arms collaborations between the two nations, which view their strategic partnership as a counterweight to a boldly confident India, which has American support.
Until the mid-1960s, the United States was the principal supplier of weapons to Pakistan, the world's eighth most-powerful nuclear nation. But the U.S. began to back away from the relationship after years of difficult and sometimes unpredictable relations following the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. no longer fully supports the military ambitions of a Pakistan that is being destabilized by an insurgency it cannot control, rising radicalism and anti-Westernism, and a government considered by some too weak and corrupt.
That led Pakistan to replace the U.S. with China as a main source of defense material, at least in terms of arsenals, development and training.
"China is perceived as not coming with nearly as many strings attached as relations with the United States," said Nate Hughes, director of military analysis at Stratfor, an intelligence website run by former CIA operatives.
This was starkly marked in November when on the same day the U.S. delivered some of the 18 F-16s it had pledged to Pakistan, Islamabad announced it had ordered an arsenal of SD10 mid-range homing missiles and radar systems to equip its JF-17 Thunder jet fighters from China.
We still need Pakistan as long as we're involved in Afghanistan. There's no other viable overland route for our supplies. If we or Pakistan were to pull the plug on this logistical train, it would take months to set up alternate arrangements.
The sad fact is, at the moment, we need Pakistan more than they need us - despite the $7 billion in aid we've pledged over the next 5 years. A strategic partnership with China might be more valuable to Pakistan than any amount of aid we can send them.
H/T: Chuck Sommerville
Posted at 09:52 AM
March 29, 2011
Pakistan depends more on China for arms than US
Rick Moran
This is a decade long trend so it's not entirely a surprise, but Pakistan's chief military supplier now appears to be China.
It makes sense from the Pakistani point of view. Both nations are worried about the rise of India - a US ally to which the United States is moving closer. Also, we refuse to enable their nuclear program any further by supplying them with high tech weapons like nuclear capable missiles.
Fox News:
Pakistan earlier this month test-fired a nuclear-capable missile from an undisclosed location - the second in a month of try-outs for its short-range surface-to-surface Hataf 2 class rocket, co-developed with the Chinese. It was the latest in a series of arms collaborations between the two nations, which view their strategic partnership as a counterweight to a boldly confident India, which has American support.
Until the mid-1960s, the United States was the principal supplier of weapons to Pakistan, the world's eighth most-powerful nuclear nation. But the U.S. began to back away from the relationship after years of difficult and sometimes unpredictable relations following the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. no longer fully supports the military ambitions of a Pakistan that is being destabilized by an insurgency it cannot control, rising radicalism and anti-Westernism, and a government considered by some too weak and corrupt.
That led Pakistan to replace the U.S. with China as a main source of defense material, at least in terms of arsenals, development and training.
"China is perceived as not coming with nearly as many strings attached as relations with the United States," said Nate Hughes, director of military analysis at Stratfor, an intelligence website run by former CIA operatives.
This was starkly marked in November when on the same day the U.S. delivered some of the 18 F-16s it had pledged to Pakistan, Islamabad announced it had ordered an arsenal of SD10 mid-range homing missiles and radar systems to equip its JF-17 Thunder jet fighters from China.
We still need Pakistan as long as we're involved in Afghanistan. There's no other viable overland route for our supplies. If we or Pakistan were to pull the plug on this logistical train, it would take months to set up alternate arrangements.
The sad fact is, at the moment, we need Pakistan more than they need us - despite the $7 billion in aid we've pledged over the next 5 years. A strategic partnership with China might be more valuable to Pakistan than any amount of aid we can send them.
H/T: Chuck Sommerville
Posted at 09:52 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment