Spoiling Pakistan’s Arms Shopping

Pakistan OBSERVER, Wed, December,29, 2004.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema


Given the nature of rapidly increasing imbalance in the conventional arms between India and Pakistan, Pakistan’s quest to reduce the gap is quite understandable. However what are somewhat surprising is the Indian efforts to scuttle Pakistan’s efforts to procure arms. This is not the first time that India has not only objected to Pakistan’s efforts to secure weapons for its defence needs but has systematically organised a campaign against such acquisition. Not only the Indian government along with overseas Indians have been lobbying with the United States but have also been engaged to influence the Belgium government to spoil the deals. Not only the Indian leaders have been issuing statements against the proposed sale of weapons to Pakistan, but have also communicated their concerns to the visiting American Defence Secretary Rumsfeld.

The proposed sale of weapons to a country that has a far smaller conventional arsenal by a country which is enjoying superiority both in quantitative as well as qualitative terms does appear ludicrous. According to the latest issue of  Military Balance which is published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies the total Indian armed forces are 1,325,000 (active) and  535,000 (Reserve), Pakistan has only 619,000(Active) and 513,000(Reserve). Compared to Indian army of 1,100,000, Navy of 55,000, Air Force of 170,000, Pakistan has an army of 550,000, Navy of 24000, and Air Force of 45,000.

Not only India enjoys massive edge over Pakistan in terms of tanks, aircrafts, and naval ships etc. but a comparative analysis of the past few years defence allocations also clearly indicates how rapidly the Indian defence budge has increased whereas the Pakistani defence budget froze most of the time. In fact Pakistan has even reduced the number of troops by 50,000. Compared to Pakistan Indian armed forces continue to register unnecessary increase.

During the last few years India has repeatedly stated that it is going to spend around $95 billions over the next 10 to 15 years in order to acquire the most sophisticated weapons for its arsenal. The Indian quest to acquire the latest sophisticated weapons is already manifesting in the forms of defence contracts with countries like Russia, US, Israel, UK and France etc. Negotiations for latest and most sophisticated weapons systems are well underway. For example India is negotiating with the Americans to acquire PAC-3 Patriot anti-missile system while the Americans are willing to sell PAC-1 version that was used in both Gulf wars.

It is indeed difficult to point out what possible threats India is catering for by acquiring so many sophisticated weapons from all over the world. India is trying to get Arrow-ABM system which was jointly developed by US and Israel, India has already acquired Green Pine radar that is integrated with Arrow-2. India will be acquiring an aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov from Russia in addition to its own Viraat. According to Indian writings China and Pakistan are quoted as possible sources of threats. However it is commonly known that neither Pakistan nor China has any aggressive design against India. In fact both are engaged in a process of normalisation of relationships with India.

Compared to the Indian acquisitions, Pakistan is only striving to acquire eight P-3C Orions, six MK Phalanx guns and two thousand Tow missiles (a wire guided anti-tank weapon). Negotiations for 25 F-16 aircrafts are well underway. While negotiations for F-16 have not yet been finalised the Indians have already started a campaign to dissuade the US government to prevent the deal. In this connection they have activated the Indian lobbies as well as their Congressional Caucus. Already letters have been sent to US lawmakers asking them to join in a campaign to prevent Pakistan from acquiring these weapons. In India the Foreign Minister Natwar Singh categorically told the Indian parliament that India would use all resources to oppose the sale.

Discussing the arms issue with the visiting American Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, the Indian officials warned him that providing F-16s to Pakistan would sour Indo-US relations. According to a respected Pakistani newspaper this is nothing but ‘a thinly veiled blackmail’. This needs to be stressed here that Pakistan has never tried to block Indian’s acquisition of weapons even if those weapons may strengthen India’s offensive capabilities against targets like Pakistan. Compared to Pakistan, India never misses an opportunity to oppose Pakistan’s efforts to acquire weapons despite the fact that it fully comprehends Pakistan’s defence needs.

The main Indian arguments are advanced in support of desired prevention of arms sale to Pakistan include the likely adverse impact on the growing Indo-US relation and impact sale could have on the ongoing Indo-Pak peace process. It is difficult to see the logic of the argument that the sale of weapons to Pakistan would influence the relationships between US and India. Does this mean that these relationships are dependent upon Indian desires and American compliance to Indian policy pursuits especially in South Asia?

If the Indian arguments are analysed within the context of American assertions that they would like to have long term relationships with both of them, they deserve to be quickly dismissed. Efforts were made to impress upon the visiting American officials that pro-American sentiments would be bruised if it decided to go ahead with the sale to Pakistan. Such argument is no different than what as been referred above as thinly veiled blackmail. Although the Indian diplomats refrain from employing words/phrases like the Monroe Doctrine, the logic the Indians are demonstrating appears to be no different than what was pushed by the Monroe doctrine. Perhaps that is what South Asian analysts refer as the Indira Doctrine.

Equally unconvincing argument revolves around the notion that the proposed sale would have adverse impact on the ongoing Indo-Pak peace process. Again one fails to understand Indian logic that why Pakistan’s likely arms acquisition would have an adverse impact on the peace process whereas Indian massive acquisition would not. One needs not to go into the details how the arms race has been once again initiated in the region by the Indians. Both in conventional as well as nuclear area the undesired race has been initiated by India. For instance Pakistan had consistently offered to sign the NPT provided India does the same. Instead India opted to go nuclear tests forcing Pakistan to follow. Some Indians are also advancing the argument that the sale of weapons to Pakistan would start the arms race.

When the massive budget is allocated to the Indian defence sector and massive orders for arms purchases are put in gear, it is inevitable that the smaller regional countries are going to wonder why more acquisition is needed when it already enjoys massive superiority both in quantitative as well as qualitative terms. It becomes a matter of concern especially for those countries that have been continuously experiencing India’s aggressive or as some prefer to call it hegemonistic pursuits.

Given the anarchic nature of the operative international political system, each country has a right to remove the incumbent sense of insecurity and strengthen its defences as it deems fit. The Indians seem to believe differently and stress that while they have legitimate right to increase their capabilities, others must toe to their dictates. Not only they make sure that no outsider should pursue a policy in this region that runs contrary to Indian thinking and desires but they also apply pressures upon the regional countries. Since no body is questioning how India should spend its money on massive defence acquisitions, it is only logical to expect that India should also allow the other regional countries to undertake policies that they think would strengthens their defences in accordance with their requirements.

A careful examination of Indian expressed concerns amply reveals that India would like to see all regional countries to have capability that is deemed barely sufficient but not enough to generate confidence among the target countries. The hysterical reaction demonstrated both by the Indian government officials as well as the non-resident Indians in United States point more towards hidden hegemonistic designs of India rather than demonstrating a rational approach to Pakistan’s defence requirements. Given the existing atmosphere and the ongoing dialogue between India and Pakistan, such policy pursuits could reflect that India is not really interested in the regional peace and stability unless it is in total congruity with the Indian terms and conditions.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy Research Institute.