Arms to Pakistan - a good idea?
Is anyone else concerned about the Bush administration's decision to reverse a 15 year policy banning arms sales to Pakistan, and sell them F-16's?
Musharraf, who declared himself president after he took over the country in a coup, was quoted as saying "This country is more important than democracy", when justifying why he wouldn't step down as the nation's military leader once he became its political leader. The Pakistani government pardoned the head of their nuclear program, after he sold nuclear secrets to our buddies in North Korea, Iran and Libya.
Of course, we are making the same offer to India, so they aren't upset. These two countries have repeatedly threatened each other with their nuclear programs.
Why are we contributing to this dangerous arms race when we are supposed to be supporting stability in the region? Isn't there another way to help Pakistan?
The Pakistani government has spent so much money on weapons proliferation, it is unable to afford adequate spending on education and job-creation. Those seem like good, productive ways to help the country. Maybe I'm being too simplistic - can someone make this make sense to me?
posted by Carolyn P @ 3/29/2005 11:12:00 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Point of information: is the U.S. Government *allowing* the sale of F-16s to the Pakistan Government by private, commercial (U.S.) companies -OR- is the U.S. Government itself selling F-16s to the Pakistan Government?
The way I read it, the US is "authorizing the sale" of F-16s to Pakistan--which would imply that it's not a direct sale from the US gov't. In reading about this deal, I also learned that in 2003, Bush extended a 5-year, $3 Billion "financial aid package" to Pakistan (I guess Pakistan is going back to college) and last year, Bush signed a $1.3 Billion arms package for Pakistan.
By most accounts, this new sale of fighters is payback for Pakistan's help after September 11. Stephen Cohen, an analyst at the Brookings Institute sees it this way: "'This gives us leverage on Musharraf in pushing him in the direction of accommodation over Kashmir and other disputes,' Cohen said. Pakistan, he added, remained a top priority for Washington: 'It's got nuclear weapons, it's in a critical part of the world, and we can't afford to let it go down the drain.'"
On the other side of the coin, "former senator Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), who sponsored the 1985 law that ultimately forced the cancellation of the original F-16 sale [we were supposed to sell Pakistan fighters before but we cancelled the sale b/c of their persistence in developing a nuclear arms program], called Friday's decision 'an atrocity' that goes against 'everything the Bush administration has stood for.' 'This is just a disastrous thing,' said Pressler. 'It raises Pakistan, a country that doesn't stand for anything we stand for, to the level of India,' the world's largest democracy. 'It has nothing to do with fighting terrorism.' Instead, he said, 'it gives Pakistan a delivery vehicle for its nuclear weapons.'"
You make the call...
I appreciate the additional information. My understanding is that we are authorizing the sale, but reversing our position by doing so.
But the comment from Cohen doesn't make sense to me. How does allowing the sale of arms to Pakistan prevent it from "going down the drain", which I don't totally get anyway?
And, I think Sen. Pressler is right on when he points out that India is a democracy and Pakistan is nowhere near that. It just seems to contradict what the administration is supposed to be working towards in that area.
Anyway, thanks for the additional information. It still scares the you-know-what out of me.
You think that's unsettling? How about the E.U's push to lift the ban on the sale of arms to China. Talk about losing sleep at night. Anyone else smell another Cold War in the not too distant future?
You think that's unsettling? How about the E.U's push to lift the ban on the sale of arms to China. Talk about losing sleep at night. Anyone else smell another Cold War in the not too distant future?
Post a Comment
<< Home