Quantcast
Pakistan seeking growth in defence ties with the UK
October 16, 2017
Minister of State for the Armed Forces of United Kingdom Mark Lancaster and Minister of Defence Production Rana Tanveer Hussain. Photo source: Associated Press of Pakistan

Pakistan seeking growth in defence ties with the UK

Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Production (MoDP) Rana Tanveer Hussain called for growth in defence ties between Pakistan and the U.K.

The MoDP is visiting the U.K. to attend the 2017 Defence and Security Equipment International (DSEI), a biennially-held defence exhibition being held in London. Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT), Pakistan Ordnance Factories (POF) and other Pakistani defence vendors are exhibiting at DSEI.

The MoDP met with the Minister of State for the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom Mark Lancaster.

“Rana Tanveer Hussain identified various fields in which both countries can … boost bilateral cooperation. He said that joint production projects should be started to expand ties,” the publicly-owned Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) reported on Wednesday, September 13.

According to the APP, the MoDP had met with the CEO of Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group, Alistair McPhee. Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group provides “conversion, modification, maintenance and support of civil and military aircraft, defence vehicle engineering, shelter manufacture, composite solutions and the provision of personnel, training and advice.”

Notes & Comments:

Pakistan’s most recent acquisition from the U.K. is of seven surplus Royal Navy Sea King helicopters, three of which are undergoing refurbishment at Vector Aerospace for delivery by end of 2017 (Monch).

Pakistan has not acquired any big-ticket armaments from the U.K. since acquiring the Royal Navy’s Type 21 frigates (with Lynx helicopters) in 1993-1994. However, British inputs and technologies could reach Pakistan through third-party companies, such as Leonardo. Leonardo owns AgustaWestland, which has a final assembly site in Yeovil for its various helicopter models, such as the AW139. The Pakistan Navy also chose Kelvin Hughes’ SharpEye radar system for the Agosta 90B and Fleet Tanker – Turkey’s STM is the main contractor for both programs.

Pakistan may also be interested in the Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) TFX next-generation fighter. The TFX is slated to involve technical support and design work from BAE Systems, which TAI – along with the Turkish Undersecretariat of Defence Industries (SSM) – contracted to engage in the TFX in January 2017.

Pakistan’s first official mention of the TFX came from the MoDP in August 2016, when he had told the national broadcaster PTV that Turkey invited Pakistan to assist in integration work on the TFX. In November 2016, then Secretary of the MoDP, Lt. Gen (retired) Syed Muhammad Owais, had informed MSI Turkish Defence Review that regarding the TFX, “details and scope of collaboration and participation is being worked between the two governments”.

In April of this year, the Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) Chief of Air Staff (CAS) Air Chief Marshal (ACM) Sohail Aman told Bol Narratives, “We are integrating our technology with friendly countries, including Turkey. We are thinking of producing the next-generation aircraft by pooling resources with them. For this, the basic framework and agreements have been made.” In subsequent statement, ACM Aman added, “We are also collaborating with Turkey for developing a next generation aircraft.”

The TFX notwithstanding, the U.K.’s expertise and experience in various aviation industry work could be of value to Pakistan, especially as it seeks to build adept industry capacities at home. The MoDP’s meeting with Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group could point towards that track, which may push the PAF to request consultancy and advisory support for initiatives such as the Aviation Design Institute (AvDI), Air University’s Kamra campus and Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) growth.

Pakistan is unlikely to be a market for big-ticket British systems, such as ships and aircraft. BAE Systems and other large British defence industry firms do not appear to view Pakistan as a major prospective market, indicative of their absence from the biennially-held International Defence Exhibition and Seminar (IDEAS) in Karachi. Pakistan’s fiscal constraints limit its ability to pursue big-ticket arms from Western vendors in general, and the U.K. is among the costlier markets. India also maintains considerable foreign relations writ and industry ties in the U.K. Collectively, these factors render direct big-ticket transactions with Pakistan unrealistic, though third-parties in Italy and Turkey could help propel indirect growth. In tandem, Pakistan could examine specific solutions – such as Cobham’s life-support and in-flight refueling solutions – to effectively strengthen its existing big-ticket platforms.

  • Shakeel

    Pakistan mainstay fighter aircraft will continue to be JF-17 variants for the next few years. Any talk of countering the Rafaele, SU-35 or finding a interim solution is both premature & unrealistic assumption, given the inefficient nature of our planners. A testimony to this incompetency is Rana Tanveer, who likes to raise ‘Zakat’ money for himself on his freebee trips abroad.It seems that precious resources from Pakistan National Kitty have already been squandered. This is an action replay of the ZARDARI era.

    • The MoDP is alright, he’s doing his job – i.e. forging ties with relevant gov’t counterparts and industry bodies. It’s the Pakistani MoD I’d be worried about, that guy basically insulted UK Chief of General Staff’s wife (by falsely implying that IK was hitting on her). Gen. Carter did Pakistan the courtesy of appreciating the armed forces’ efforts in FATA and even held track-two engagement with Pakistani politicians. Now there is NO way the current MoD can speak to him or any U.K MoD official, so talk about bridges burnt and progress undone.

    • The MoDP is alright, he’s doing his job – i.e. forging ties with relevant gov’t counterparts and industry bodies. It’s the Pakistani MoD I’d be worried about, that guy basically insulted UK Chief of General Staff’s wife (by falsely implying that IK was hitting on her). Gen. Carter did Pakistan the courtesy of appreciating the armed forces’ efforts in FATA and even held track-two engagement with Pakistani politicians. Now there is NO way the current MoD can speak to him or any U.K MoD official, so talk about bridges burnt and progress undone.

      • Shakeel

        For me there is no distinction between MODP OR MOD. Pakistani officials in both camps like to create a scene & then like to portray themselves as victims. They have no concept of self-respect. They are on par with those Rotherham thugs accused of grooming. Don’t expect any favours from UK now. Trump is going to have us for breakfast. Thanks to these lager louts from ROSHAN PAKISTAN.

      • Steve

        Well if he said that he is a bigger idiot than we thought. Typical Pakistani politician who open their mouth without first engaging their brain. Recently I can think of a certain American politician who does the same though lol. IK has certain history but that has nothing to do with his competence as a leader, provided he has stopped doing that as our public won’t like it. Even in the West the public demand a higher standard of morality from their leaders irrespective of how they themselves behave. MoD was probably scoring political points with our beloved clueless. Luckily Western countries follow well thought out policies rather than rely on personal interaction. He may be labelled an idiot but it won’t stop business as the British are traders above all else. All else being equal if you have cash they will sell. That’s also why a certain subcontinental politician’s inappropriate hugs add nothing to the discourse and business is on considered policy alone. Somebody tell him! Bilal, edit out Modi ref if you think it will be sensitive for our Indian friends lol!

  • Jigsaw

    He’s just shooting in the dark but I guess he is just one person doing what he can do best to his ability, resources, and situation at hand. Least is good for whatever diplomacy is going on. Nothing coming out of it anyway.

    • Salman

      If we want to do any real help to our country, we should overthrow extremism and make the country secular, and open it to change and real progress. I realise the “make the country secular” would raise fists in the air, but as long as we dont do that, there is no real stopping of extremism in our country. It is a disease that spreads on its very own, and the next year has less and less moderates in our country than the previous one.

      • It’s important to remember that the ones who brought in the ‘extremism’ were people born, raised and educated in a secular Pakistan. When it wasn’t an issue of Shia, Sunni and XYZ, then it was race (as Bangladeshis will aptly attest to). IMO things being secular or not is the issue, but the fact that a culture of corruption and exploitation has been ingrained among Pakistani leaders (and a willingness for the people to accept it) from the very beginning. It’s a virus with many shapes and tones, once secular, today religious, tomorrow something else.

        • 321

          Thank your for this Bilal. The secularists are simply a reactionary group that has gained a lot of influence only recently due to the lack of proper education of younger Pakistanis and the horrors of the WoT. Let’s not forget that other than Zia there has never been a “maulvi” that became a leader of Pakistan and yet Pakistan is not flowing with wealth and social progress.

          The “civilianists” are also reactionaries. They’re worship”democracy” so much that they blame everything on the military. No doubt military rulers have had their failures but obsessing over them and claiming they’re the reason for everything that is wrong with Pakistan is highly short-sighted, divisive and quite frankly, it’s completely untrue.

          Both of these groups have picked a target and scapegoated it for Pakistan’s problems. They completely ignore the fact that governance is not affected by whether it’s military or civilian. Nor by if a state is religious or secular. It’s affected by honest, hardworking and educated leaders, institutions and citizens.

          Unfortunately, the unsuspecting masses who belong to these groups don’t know or they’re in denial of that fact that the controlling forces behind these ideologies are corrupt and treasonous Pakistanis working with hostile foreign states. No other way to explain their obsession with army and islam.

      • Jigsaw

        What do you mean by “secular” exactly? Please elaborate in what sense you mean. Do remember that Musharraf has already tried something like that and turns out his era was the biggest blunder in notable history of Pakistan, dividing the whole nation in a dozen sub-ideologies, fruits of which we are still enjoying. I can say more if i understand from you what you mean that.

        • Moreover … Yahya Khan and Zulfi Bhutto were not maulvis by any stretch of the imagination either, and we know where their rule led as well.

          • Jigsaw

            Yep. Quite on the contrary actually than maulvis. I guess the proponents of secularism are one of the dozen sub ideologies planted by Mr Musharraf. Feel sad for the confusion that has plagued this nation. Some start worshipping the politicians and go to all extents, some start seeing military as the God sent angels and never dare to think otherwise…ugly it gets everyday now.

        • Shakeel

          Mushy called it “Enlightened Moderation”. A third rate imitation of secularism. You will find him in his booze parlour on Edgware Rd, London.

          Thanks, but no thanks Salman.

          • Jigsaw

            Pakistan has no choice but to return to the promise and ideology on which it was created. The longer it waits the bigger the damage and less chance of recovery. They’ve tried everything here in 70 years. Nothing has worked and nothing will. Can’t model it on any other country in the world.

          • Shakeel

            Excellent point Jigsaw.

      • Headstrong

        You do realise that becoming secular goes against the fundamental ideology of Pakistan? People would ask why Pakistan had to be a separate state in the first place.
        I understand where you’re coming from, and it would be good for the entire Indian subcontinent if it were to indeed happen. But you’ll understand why nobody’s holding their breath quite yet.

  • sami shahid

    Now Pakistan is looking for new markets when USA has betrayed it. Dear Pakistan, buy MIG-35 from Russia to replace with F-16 because the Turkish fifth generation aircraft program is going nowhere before 2025 & you can neither wait for the American approval for the sale of F-16 & nor you can trust USA. Buy something which is available like T-129 from Turkey !

  • Nadeem

    Pakistani politicians! the less said the better in my humble opinion.

    • Shakeel

      Yes you are right brother Nadeem, the less said the better. Nevertheless this old video speaks volumes about the mindset that we are dealing with.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erGeyztLGvM

      • Nadeem

        Great illustration of either Mr.Yousuf Raza Gilani’s lack of comprehension or a high degree of stupidity!

        • Steve

          He did not even answer the question. I would have a benevolent dictator with a democratic facade like Mathir Muhammad or Lee Kuan Yew any day. At least until the public have enough money and education to make informed choices. These bas…ds think by raising the slogan of “democracy” they can get away with anything. Sad fact is they actually do get away with it.

  • SP

    The UK is an extension of the US as is Turkey. Pakistan needs to look at hardware from China as India is the darling of the west and Pakistan cannot afford western weapons due to economic mismanagement by military dictators and political instability sponsored by ISI, and where it can India will make a lot of noises that will torpedo any sales. The only benefit from west can be military training but even here attempts are made to recruit people from Pakistan military that could serve the west in the future as they move to higher positions.

    • In alliances maybe, but politically Britain is its own force and it has its own interests. It’ll help the US where beneficial, and be indifferent when beneficial. That said, it’s because it is a conscious foreign relations actor that Pakistan will need to step with care. Commercial engagement and transactions are OK, but we don’t need generals angry at the US looking for new backers in other places.

      • SP

        The US and UK have the same interest which is to forge a closer union with India and to use India for economic and military benefits, Pakistan does not fit into any equation with the exception of fighting wars in Afghanistan for the West or to stop it falling outright into the camp of Russia or China or Iran. Commercial hardware is only provided when there is technologically equivalent option available to Pakistan from China, the only exception to this was during Cento period when Pakistan was a buffer state against USSR or when Pakistan was provided F-16’s in 1980’s to fight against USSR in Afghanistan.

        Pakistan needs to focus internal stability and on its economy as otherwise economically it will fall further behind India which it was on par with in the 1990’s.

    • 321

      Military dictators, whatever else you may say about them had a very good economic record. It’s the civilian governments who ruined the economy. Political instability sponsored by the ISI? ISI is only one domestic player amongst a whole bunch of corrupt, traitorous politicians and external hostile forces. Whether or not you believe it’s actions are correct or shortsighted, the ISI does what it believes is best for Pakistan.

      • SP

        Military dictators created a short term mirage with money flowing in from US to fight its wars, whilst the cost of the blowback and reversal of money flow was paid by civilian governments. Just for the sake of the khursi they sacrificed the national interest which was detrimental to the country in the long run.The basic of economy development is internal political stability, with the military agreeing to act as proxy for the US and trying to undermine democracy which are well documented facts, army in its tunnel vision caused the greatest harm to the country by failing to provide political stability. For your information only those that are corrupt and can be blackmailed and used by ISI are promoted to important positions. Not only civilians have been corrupt but also the military and no dictator has tried to fix the broken system and instead have worked and encouraged corruption to get loyalties. Today the country is polarised due to many factors and fragmented all thanks to the military for playing politics and power grab instead of doing their job.

        • 321

          You clearly don’t understand how an economy works. Growth came from the establishment of industries and building proper infrastructure which was done by the dictators and NOT the civilians. Money “flowing” from the US has never been enough to create a “mirage” of growth. FYI, money was also “flowing” from the US to civilian governments so clearly you don’t know jackshit what you’re talking about. The only difference is that military dictators actually put the money to good use, whereas there was widespread corruption and sometimes outright treason during civilian rule. There has always been on average more stability during military rule. Democracy doesn’t determine stability as shown by successive civilian governments.
          Where’s the proof that only corrupt ppl ISI can blackmail are promoted? Is this a tacit claim that NS is not corrupt, since ISI hasn’t been able to blackmail him apparently? It’s hilarious how you seem to think ISI is some omnipotent entity whose only job is to pull the strings of corrupt politicians. Sorry but the ISI has more important things to be doing. If the ISI truly was appointing corrupt officials then it wouldn’t be appointing those that go against it would it? Except we see many elite in the political, judicial and media class opposed to the ISI. So who promoted them?
          The country is polarized and fragmented due to the lack of civilian governance, politicization of law enforcement by politicians, corruption of bureaucracy and corrupt or outright traitorous politicians, media judiciary. The military is only a scapegoat for assholes like you who don’t have any legitimate excuse for the pathetic civilian governments.
          The only thing I can agree here is that neither civilian nor military governments attempted to fix the system.

          • SP

            I wonder which industries and infrastructure you are referring to. Only infrastructure projects I can think of is Tarbela and Mangla dams initiated during military dictatorships. Then there are the white elephants like Neelum Jhelum and New Islamabad Airport which still remain uncompleted despite costing hundreds of billions, which could have been better spent elsewhere. Oh then there is the Makran coastal highway that got washed away during the floods or the bridge in karachi that collapsed both built by army. As far as industries are concerned I guess there is the telecommunication industry and the media channels that sprung and that media is paid to conduct pyschological warfare against the population and to drive them to depression. The other industries that we have inherited from the military are drugs, weapons and smuggling.

            The paris club waived its loans and interest for a few years to encourage Pakistan to fight for US. The deaths , destruction, bomb blasts, costs and economic costs outweighed anything that Pakistan received in return. These costs are estimated to be around €100 billion.

            This post has become rather long so I shall end it there.

          • 321

            It is well known and acknowledged FACT that Ayub Khan was the one who industrialized Pakistan. Private business, FDI, power stations dams, nuclear energy, oil refinery were all some of the projects he initiated. He even tried to do education reform. Zia’s era saw Pakistan become food independent. Musharraf’s era also saw high growth.
            The only downside to their policies was that they failed to reduce inequality. HOWEVER, inequality has increased during civilian govs as well with the caveat being that with the possible exception of ZAB and his steel mill, they have never established any industry. It’s clear that instead of talking nonsense you should do some actual research. How someone can have so much blind hate for an institution that is no more guilty than any other is beyond my understanding.
            The military doesn’t deal with drugs. That is a serious allegation with no evidence. The FC burns tons of drugs being smuggled from Afghanistan. Media? Media is a good thing provided it is regulated, which of course the politicians never do.
            Again, loans don’t build economies, interest free or not. Establishment of industry and infrastructure do. Both military and civilian govs took loans. The difference is what they did with those loans.
            Our war with the TTP and its affiliates is separate from that of the US’s own war. We don’t fight TTP b/c the US made us. It’s b/c we wouldn’t have a state otherwise. Oh and you can thank the army you hate so much for keeping the country together, b/c Allah knows if it was left to the politicians, Pakistan wouldn’t be here today.

    • Jigsaw

      I guess the pathetic civilian (read political) class need to step up and exhibit that they are not only capable of running the country honestly and selflessly but also bring the ISI and military under strict civilian control. I am all up for it and so should every Pakistani be. There should be a strict control of military and ISI and they must be answerable to law and people for their shady activities – political or otherwise. And to some extent, I also believe that the military is ready to be led by civilians now (as they’ve proven it in last 10 years despite several calls) but every time they’ve (civilians) goofed up, thanks to thugs like Nawaz and their weak characters. The problem is, and i honestly believe in it, that the Pakistani military is professionally so good as an institution and self-dependent (financially and otherwise) that they will not and can not be controlled by any average joe or in this case any average sharif. This bunch of thugs will not do and must not. You need some class to be putting reins on this horse and these donkeys will not do. All they (military) are doing in their confused wisdom is trying to fill up the vacuums created by the up-for-sale politicians. Hardware is really no problem here. A minimum level of nuclear and conventional deterrence will always be kept. You will keep getting jets one way or another – capabilities will continue to progress. I’m least worried about that. The real problem is that every problem of Pakistan connects to massive corruption going on in Pakistan, at least for last 10 years, because that frankly has broken all records. Financial corruption (originating from moral corruption of our people) is THE core of all evils in Pakistan and honestly, all offshore companies and monies stowed in countries abroad belong to Pakistani politicians – not the military personnel. You must bring in a civilian leader who the military can look up to and take seriously. Really they don’t take anyone seriously currently with these jokers running around on a single point agenda 24/7: More looting.

      • 321

        I have to disagree. If anything, the last 10 years have shown that civilians are absolutely NOT ready to have strict control. Quite frankly, our present political class needs to be purged.

        • Jigsaw

          I agree with you. But my reference is not to the current class of politicians. At the end of the day, years, and century, Pakistan and Pakistanis will realise that only civilians are the ones to take this country forward and solve its problems. Military is never trained to do that and neither should be looked upon as such. I do not certainly hope and think that you are calling for yet another military intervention.

  • Specifically depends on what work BAE is doing. At this stage of the TFX, it’s design help, but bear in mind the Turks wanted control over the IP and ability to freely export (they’re paying for the help). This implies ITAR-free, which means no (decisive) US holds.

  • 321

    Going by SP’s logic, Nawaz sharif, zardari, altaf hussain, and husain haqqani, achackzai, asfandyar wali khan, etc must be paragons of justice and honesty.

    • SP

      The establishment raised these people and they then turn against the establishment. The lesson should be instead of trying to manage politics in the country let the people weed out the bad apples among the crop themselves through their votes. Establishment needs to create a system where there are adequate checks on balances on everyone.

      There is no point in giving them NRO’s and then having witchhunts later and then doing a full U turn again. If someone is corrupt then catch him there and then, dont wait for 10 or 15 years to take action. There is no point in allowing corruption to take place and then crying hoarse decades later, its better to fix the system but fixing the system would put a stop to military interventions.

      • 321

        Again, more allegations without proof. The big scary ‘establishment’ never ‘raised’ any of them with the sole exception of NS who in case you haven’t noticed has been elected TWICE after being kicked out by army and now his wife has become MP AFTER being exposed as corrupt by judges. So no, the army didn’t pick any of them nor did they turn against it. They have ALWAYS been anti-army. Which brings me to your second point. The whole problem with your thinking is that an uneducated, ignorant populace can weed out the bad apples by voting. This will never happen and you can’t even reprimand them b/c even the supposedly educated ones give them votes.

  • SP

    If we are to make progress then we need to learn to start telling the truth to our countrymen. No institution or person deserves to be put on a pedestal. All should be accountable and opento criticism where they fail the nation.

  • SP

    True but our enemies are serving their national interests and exploiting our every move. They encourage us to make certain moves and then are ready to take advantage of these moves to further harm us. Our elements have limited tunnel vision due to their training and are easy prey. Our enemies play both sides. On the one hand you have US generals meeting our Generals and playing pals and on the other you have them arming TTP and India against us.

    • Steve

      What’s stoppping us from playing a double game too. In statecraft you have to be ruthless and clever. Only your own interest matters, rest is all BS.

      • SP

        We should have a written national security doctrine that should not change based on flavour of the month and should be consistent whoever comes to power and it needs to be based on consensus between the various stakeholders. Problem is so far we as a nation don’t even know what are our national interests, and we have polarised our own society instead of uniting behind a common cause, as a society we are fragmented.

        • Steve

          Also a moratorium on people talking without thinking. A lot of loose talk has been used by our enemies to the extent that we are almost declared a state sponsor of terrorism. Every word said adds to the narrative.

      • Our leaders. The govt is generally too busy sledging IK than contemplating complex foreign policy doctrines. For them, they’ll label anyone who gives us a loan “an unconditional ally”, much to the humiliation of us who know the reality, that our people are going to get played, hard.

  • Headstrong

    This really wasn’t a thread about India, but I’m not surprised you brought it up…
    I don’t think you really believe that ideology is not a problem between India and Pakistan. In fact, it is the root of all problems, including Kashmir. You people are enraged that Kashmir, a Muslim majority state, chose to go with India. Even in 65, the hopes that Kashmiris would rise against India, in consonance with the unprovoked attack by Pakistan, were summarily dashed. It is only post the late 80s due to some stupid electoral politics by Indian leaders that things got out of hand. No worries, those issues will be sorted out internally. And those who attempt to cross the LoC and interfere will be summarily dispatched.
    And what you people say is so typical. ‘Others using Pakistan’ – Lol! Pakistan has always been a willing tool in the hands of others, because you people saw gains in being used. Sadly, short sightedness has done you people in.
    This started as a thread regarding the wisdom of allowing the Pakistan military to continue wielding power the way it is and about secularism. But obviously you had to bring India in. And then you want to claim that Indian media is promoting hatred?

    • Jigsaw

      @saqrkh:disqus / Adbul. Please take note on deliberate troll attempts made in this comment.

      @disqus_1y2MoYiK2O:disqus. Ignore it. Let’s not let the discussion get hijacked again.

  • Steve

    Interesting discussion, and a lot of frustration. IMHO it does not matter if the government is Islamist, secular, democratic etc etc. What would be good to have is:
    1. Writ of the state over every square cm of the country
    2. Violence to be ONLY the progative of the state
    3. Representative government as the people other start wingeing in a few years. What form it takes is irrelevant.
    4. Iron clad governance mechanism so state wealth can’t be stolen. Possibly via new competent anti corruption agencies totally free of political control and staffed by young highly educated trained people, specialists in financial fraud. Like the FBI, Justice etc.
    6. Independent free press and judiciary, but with strict internal oversight as these institutions are also Pakistani unfortunately.
    7. Reform of political system to weed out bad apples (99% of present lot).
    8. All institutions reformed (police, WAPDA, gas, customs, food & building inspection etc etc), and to have oversight.
    9. Armed forces to do their job only, but with some agreed role at high level.
    10. Separate religion and politics
    11. For Gods sake educate the people.

    Feel free to add suggestions. This can only start with anew committed government.

  • 321

    Not exactly true. Kashmir is simply the manifestation of the underlying problem: the fact that Indian establishment has never accepted an independent state and an Islamic one at that, being carved out of the subcontinent. Kashmir is the major conflict because as Jinnah said it’s the jugular vein of Pakistan. But resolving the Kashmir issue will not end Indian hostility towards Pakistan. Not until they make it either a puppet state or annex it.

    • Steve

      They won’t annex it but would certainly like it subservient like Bhutan.

  • Jigsaw

    Let me just say this in the context of the discussion going on – nothing really aimed personally at you. There was a time when Pakistan didn’t allow India to reach beyond its traditional relations with Russia (actually Soviet Union) with any of the countries in Middle east, or US – not beyond lip service. For a long time that was the order of the day. The point i’m trying to make is the diplomacy vacuum created by lack of Pakistani leadership in last 10 years has what India profited upon – nothing really genuine on India’s part itself. Good for you i’d say still. But I have really no doubt in the fact that anytime a change in leadership occurs in Pakistan, one that is for the country by the country, these diplomatic losses will be gained back in no time. Such stuff is normal in geopolitics in matters of decades and centuries – one’s loss is another’s gain. And if you truly don’t take it to heart, i see India no more significant than Nepal and Bhutan on geopolitical scale – (hence the “immaculate” relations), which is why any threat from India is a threat only as long as Pakistan keeps lacking leadership and allows it space – which it is doing badly now. So i see India’s relations boosting while Pakistan’s getting strained all the more in all future to come unless what needs done gets done.

  • Steve

    Well said

    • Jigsaw

      But just not this ruling lot. To clarify if someone takes it that way.

  • Steve

    Yup you were ‘friends’ with the Soviet Union and USA at the same time, and you all rue those as the “Congress years”. (Maybe not you personally…don’t get into the “look though my posts and give me evidence” nonsense please). You got beaten up my China and nobody came to your help. We can see how much the Saudis, Iranians and Turks love you. Pakistan has only one enemy. We have had difficulties with USA but those are almost routine and like arguments between friends. I agree Indian is unique in that it pretends to be friends with both parties of deadly conflicts (Iran/Israel) which means lukewarm on both or one side. Like the irans are backing off now that you are best friends with the Jews. Chabahaar is going nowhere and even Afghans asked you to make up your mind about that. Pakistan too is hated only by India and misguided Afghans who we helped for 30 years and still host 3 million of them in peace and dignity, which we all can agree on. People want to get their hands on your money that’s why they sell you stuff. Don’t mistake that for strategic alliances.

  • Steve

    Could not stop laughing at your dissection of ‘immaculate relations’. My only issue is the amount of work put in just to answer a rather silly assertion, which we already know is at best a wild exaggeration. However others may benefit from the knowledge.

Social Media

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter

Quwa Daily

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement