“But, of course, weapons that fire only in one direction have not been made.” These were the words of V.K. Krishna Menon as he was addressing the United Nations as India's permanent representative to the world body on December 6, 1956.
Menon would repeat the same statement, with few modifications, in other speeches, mainly on the issue of the US supply of arms to Pakistan on the pretext of helping defend it against Soviet invasion. Menon’s statement seems apt in describing the current discourse of outrage in India over claims that Pakistan used US-supplied F-16 fighters and missiles on an offensive mission against Indian forces across the Line of Control.
The Indian government’s allegations that Pakistan ‘misused’ F-16 fighters and missiles meant for fighting terrorists challenge the notion that the US has been strict about the use of its exported weaponry. Retired air vice marshal Mohan John explained, “the US has been known for having strict control to modifications, storage and inspection access to its weapons. It is a moot point as to how strict they would be about implementing this with respect to Pakistan.”
Referring to the history of the US sale of the AMRAAM to Pakistan, John said it was part of a deal to upgrade Pakistan’s fleet of F-16 fighters in the past decade.
“This (deal) was ostensibly to help Pakistan in her fight against terror. India had immediately expressed her concern to the US that such potent weaponry could and would be used against it. The US had, at that time, assured India that this military assistance was being done under strict conditions and stipulations, including an assurance from Pakistan, that the aircraft would be used only for anti-terrorist operations and not be used in any conflict with India,” John recalled.
This, he explained, showed that the claim the F-16 upgrade and weapons were solely for the purpose of fighting terror, was “correct”. However, John added the worries raised by India a decade ago were very relevant. “While the other weapons (sold to Pakistan) were air-to-ground weapons, which could well be used in anti-terrorist operations, the AMRAAM was—and is even today—a very sophisticated air-to-air missile with an engagement range of up to 100km and was a 'fire and forget' missile. Such a missile had no relevance whatsoever for anti-terrorist operations.”
Habitual offenders
The deployment of the F-16 and AMRAAM missile is not the first instance of misuse of a US-supplied weapon by Pakistan against India. In 2018, the Indian government complained to the US that Pakistan was using the TOW-2A anti-tank missile against bunkers across the Line of Control. The US provided Pakistan over 2,700 TOW-2A missiles in late 2006 for use against terrorist groups in its tribal areas.
Arguing that the use of the F-16 highlighted the limitations of ‘intrusive’ US influence, retired rear admiral Sudarshan Shrikhande noted that when Washington supplied F-104 Starfighters to Pakistan in the early 1960s, similar 'restrictions' on not using the aircraft against India were placed. Despite this, Pakistan used the F-104 against India in both the 1965 and 1971 wars, albeit with poor results.
“The problem with becoming so restrictive (about arms sales) is that people will go elsewhere to buy weapons; or make it themselves,” Shrikhande argued. After the US embargoed arms sales to Pakistan briefly following the 1965 war, Pakistan turned to China as its main source of weaponry. The Sino-Pakistan defence relationship continues to this day.
John opined the real reason behind Pakistan’s ‘denial’ in acknowledging the use of the F-16 in the recent engagement was fear of upsetting the US, as it had assured such weapons would be employed against terrorists, not for conflict with India. “This becomes all the more a possibility considering how President Donald Trump has been overtly critical about Pakistan's anti-terror efforts,” he added.
The Afghan shadow
Larger geopolitical considerations may well upset India’s hopes that the US-Pakistan relationship will suffer on account of the misuse of the F-16. The planned US withdrawal from Afghanistan, announced by President Trump, has meant the Taliban will become an influential player again and Pakistan would be seen as a major player in ensuring stability.
Shrikhande questioned the larger US game plan for Afghanistan, and, by extension, Pakistan. “What was the strategic aim of America’s longest war, which began 18 years ago, is still difficult to determine,” Shrikhande opined and questioned the long-term direction of the US-Pakistan relationship.
John said the US will “certainly be displeased” to know its F-16s were misused by Pakistan and would convey its 'displeasure' to Islamabad.
“However, the issue about Pakistan's role in ensuring Afghan stability will be a factor that would shape the reaction from the US. The same factor will also influence future US arms sales/support to Pakistan,” he explained. While not foreseeing major changes in existing policies of the US towards Pakistan, John added, “with President Trump at the helm of affairs, we could just be surprised!”
Perhaps, India will have to continue paying the price for Washington’s lack of strategic clarity in the region.
Focus on the big picture
“Whatever the restrictions the US places on Pakistan on use of its weapons, they are a small matter for India at the end of the day,” declared Shrikhande. He added India should “assume the Pakistan military would use everything, supplied by anyone, at its disposal” against its larger neighbour.
Shrikhande felt that India should not read “too much” into the equipment used in the skirmishes on February 26-27, which would not shed light on Pakistan’s plans. He was perplexed by the media outcry about India raising the misuse of the F-16 with the US government. He warned it was “premature” to think there were substantial restrictions imposed in US-Pakistan arms deals, adding, “Why would any country in its senses accept such constraints?”
Shrikhande concluded it would be easy to get carried away by the outrage caused by Pakistan's use of the F-16 and think sending “dossiers” to Washington would help. Rather than extrapolating the technicalities of the 'MiG-21 versus F-16 engagement', he emphasised the need to continue beefing up India's defence capabilities.
“India must maintain robust vigilance and have the capability and vigil to shoot down and engage in hot pursuit of any platforms, from any country of origin, that Pakistan deploys. The larger lesson for us is that great powers are essentially self-reliant in military hardware. You don’t become great otherwise,” Shrikhande contended.
