- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Messages
- 5,719
- Likes
- 11,620
If SCS goes full after burner then every asian power will get involved.
Almost every asian country has a stake in it.
==============================================
US Denies Transfer of Critical Technology and F-16 Fighter Production in India
- Thread starter square
- Start date
Almost every asian country has a stake in it.
==============================================
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2017
- Messages
- 5,575
- Likes
- 21,376
Trump administration to Congress: Defence cooperation with India important for Indo-US ties
HIGHLIGHTS
"We need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific," an official said
Trump regime has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" transfers of F-18 and F-16 fighter proposals
US eyeing energy and aviation as sectors with high trade potentials
WASHINGTON: The Trump administration has told US Congress that defence cooperation with India would be an important pillar in the bilateral relationship as it needs the country to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region.
The Trump regime has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" transfers of F-18 and
F-16 fighter proposals put forth by Boeing and
Lockheed Martin respectively.
These proposals have the potential to take Indo-US defence ties to the next level, it said.
"The reason why defence cooperation with India is so vital to US interests is because we need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific, a region that serves as the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world's 90,000 commercial vessels - many sailing under the US flag, and two-thirds of traded oil travelling through the region," Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for the South and Central Asian Affairs told a Congressional subcommittee in a written submission.
Wells is scheduled to testify before the House foreign affairs subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on "Maintaining US Influence in South Asia: The FY 2018 Budget," on Thursday.
She said in her submission that the Indo-Asia Pacific region is also home to nearly half of the planet's population and some of the fastest growing economies on earth.
Wells said India is among America's most important strategic partners in the Indo-Pacific region.
"In the words of President Trump, the relationship between India and the United States has never been stronger, has never been better," she said in the testimony.
"The President's first meeting with Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi in June set a positive tone and ambitious agenda for strengthening bilateral ties, particularly in the areas of defence, energy and trade," she added.
Talking about the trade between the US and India in her written submission, Wells said the economic relationship has largely been on a positive trajectory and America needs to do more to balance the trade deficit between the two countries, which totalled nearly USD 30 billion last year.
http://m.timesofindia.com/india/tru...ant-for-indo-us-ties/articleshow/60403494.cms
HIGHLIGHTS
"We need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific," an official said
Trump regime has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" transfers of F-18 and F-16 fighter proposals
US eyeing energy and aviation as sectors with high trade potentials
WASHINGTON: The Trump administration has told US Congress that defence cooperation with India would be an important pillar in the bilateral relationship as it needs the country to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region.
The Trump regime has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" transfers of F-18 and
F-16 fighter proposals put forth by Boeing and
Lockheed Martin respectively.
These proposals have the potential to take Indo-US defence ties to the next level, it said.
"The reason why defence cooperation with India is so vital to US interests is because we need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific, a region that serves as the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world's 90,000 commercial vessels - many sailing under the US flag, and two-thirds of traded oil travelling through the region," Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for the South and Central Asian Affairs told a Congressional subcommittee in a written submission.
Wells is scheduled to testify before the House foreign affairs subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on "Maintaining US Influence in South Asia: The FY 2018 Budget," on Thursday.
She said in her submission that the Indo-Asia Pacific region is also home to nearly half of the planet's population and some of the fastest growing economies on earth.
Wells said India is among America's most important strategic partners in the Indo-Pacific region.
"In the words of President Trump, the relationship between India and the United States has never been stronger, has never been better," she said in the testimony.
"The President's first meeting with Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi in June set a positive tone and ambitious agenda for strengthening bilateral ties, particularly in the areas of defence, energy and trade," she added.
Talking about the trade between the US and India in her written submission, Wells said the economic relationship has largely been on a positive trajectory and America needs to do more to balance the trade deficit between the two countries, which totalled nearly USD 30 billion last year.
http://m.timesofindia.com/india/tru...ant-for-indo-us-ties/articleshow/60403494.cms
Scarface
Regular Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2015
- Messages
- 443
- Likes
- 246
I've been expecting the F-35 push for quite some time but it just doesn't seem to be materialising.
When LM offers we don't show interest, when we show interest LM doesn't have offers
lcafanboy
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2013
- Messages
- 5,813
- Likes
- 37,290
Trump administration strongly supports sale of F-16, F-18 jets to India
Thursday, September 07, 2017 By: ET Source Link: CLICK HERE
The Trump administration has told Congress that it "strongly supports" the sale of F-18 and F-16 fighter jets to India and asserted that the proposals have the potential to take Indo-US defence ties to the next level.
Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for the South and Central Asian Affairs, told a Congressional Subcommittee in a written submission that defence cooperation with India would be an important pillar in the bilateral relationship as it needs the country to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region.
In this context, the Trump administration has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" the sale of F-18 and F-16 fighter proposals put forward by Boeing and Lockheed Martin respectively.
These proposals have the potential to take India US defence relationship to the next level, the official said.
"The reason why defence cooperation with India is so vital to US interests is because we need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific," Wells said
She highlighted that the region serves as the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world's 90,000 commercial vessels, many sailing under the US flag, and two-thirds of traded oil travelling through the region.
Wells is also scheduled to testify before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on "Maintaining US Influence in South Asia: The FY 2018 Budget".
She said in her submission that the Indo-Asia Pacific region is also home to nearly half of the planet's population and some of the fastest growing economies on earth.
"Working with like-minded partners, India has the strategic and economic potential to uphold the international order that has served so much of humanity over the past seven decades. The investments we make in our security partnership now will pay dividends for decades to come," she said.
As fellow democracies, countering terrorism is the critical priority for both India and the United States, she asserted.
"India is situated in a dangerous neighbourhood, where terrorist attacks have killed both Indians and Americans alike. Joint training and capacity building are essential to expanding our counter terrorism cooperation," she said, citing the State Department Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) programme in which more than 1,100 Indian security personnel have received training from the US since 2009.
Wells said India is among America's most important strategic partners in the Indo-Pacific region.
"In the words of President Trump, the relationship between India and the United States has never been stronger, has never been better," she said in the testimony.
"The President's first meeting with Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi in June set a positive tone and ambitious agenda for strengthening bilateral ties, particularly in the areas of defence, energy and trade," she added.
Talking about the trade between the US and India in her written submission, Wells said the economic relationship has largely been on a positive trajectory and America needs to do more to balance the trade deficit between the two countries, which totalled nearly USD 30 billion last year.
"We are working closely with USTR and the Commerce Department to address the concerns of the US business community regarding India, including tariff and non-tariff barriers, subsidies, localisation policies, restrictions on investment, and intellectual property concerns that limit market access and impede US exporters and businesses from entering the Indian market," Wells said.
"Our bilateral trade has more than doubled in the last decade from USD 45 billion in 2006 to more than USD 114 billion in 2016. US exports to India support more than 260,000 American jobs across all 50 states," she said.
Last year alone, investment from Indian companies supported more than 52,000 jobs in the US, she added.
She said the Trump administration is committed to ensure that the trade relationship with India is fair and reciprocal, and continue to press India to further open its markets and create a level-playing field for US companies.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/T...ports-sale-of-F-16,-F-18-jets-to-India-303778
Thursday, September 07, 2017 By: ET Source Link: CLICK HERE
The Trump administration has told Congress that it "strongly supports" the sale of F-18 and F-16 fighter jets to India and asserted that the proposals have the potential to take Indo-US defence ties to the next level.
Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for the South and Central Asian Affairs, told a Congressional Subcommittee in a written submission that defence cooperation with India would be an important pillar in the bilateral relationship as it needs the country to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific region.
In this context, the Trump administration has informed the Congress that it "strongly supports" the sale of F-18 and F-16 fighter proposals put forward by Boeing and Lockheed Martin respectively.
These proposals have the potential to take India US defence relationship to the next level, the official said.
"The reason why defence cooperation with India is so vital to US interests is because we need India to be a net security provider in the Indo-Pacific," Wells said
She highlighted that the region serves as the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world's 90,000 commercial vessels, many sailing under the US flag, and two-thirds of traded oil travelling through the region.
Wells is also scheduled to testify before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific on "Maintaining US Influence in South Asia: The FY 2018 Budget".
She said in her submission that the Indo-Asia Pacific region is also home to nearly half of the planet's population and some of the fastest growing economies on earth.
"Working with like-minded partners, India has the strategic and economic potential to uphold the international order that has served so much of humanity over the past seven decades. The investments we make in our security partnership now will pay dividends for decades to come," she said.
As fellow democracies, countering terrorism is the critical priority for both India and the United States, she asserted.
"India is situated in a dangerous neighbourhood, where terrorist attacks have killed both Indians and Americans alike. Joint training and capacity building are essential to expanding our counter terrorism cooperation," she said, citing the State Department Anti-Terrorism Assistance (ATA) programme in which more than 1,100 Indian security personnel have received training from the US since 2009.
Wells said India is among America's most important strategic partners in the Indo-Pacific region.
"In the words of President Trump, the relationship between India and the United States has never been stronger, has never been better," she said in the testimony.
"The President's first meeting with Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi in June set a positive tone and ambitious agenda for strengthening bilateral ties, particularly in the areas of defence, energy and trade," she added.
Talking about the trade between the US and India in her written submission, Wells said the economic relationship has largely been on a positive trajectory and America needs to do more to balance the trade deficit between the two countries, which totalled nearly USD 30 billion last year.
"We are working closely with USTR and the Commerce Department to address the concerns of the US business community regarding India, including tariff and non-tariff barriers, subsidies, localisation policies, restrictions on investment, and intellectual property concerns that limit market access and impede US exporters and businesses from entering the Indian market," Wells said.
"Our bilateral trade has more than doubled in the last decade from USD 45 billion in 2006 to more than USD 114 billion in 2016. US exports to India support more than 260,000 American jobs across all 50 states," she said.
Last year alone, investment from Indian companies supported more than 52,000 jobs in the US, she added.
She said the Trump administration is committed to ensure that the trade relationship with India is fair and reciprocal, and continue to press India to further open its markets and create a level-playing field for US companies.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/T...ports-sale-of-F-16,-F-18-jets-to-India-303778
Are they giving F-16 or F-18 for free? Or are they offering substantial discounts? Are they giving critical engine technology?
Trump buttery talks are gimmicks to get Indians buy their expensive junk. If we have to pay market price for them wherein US makes profits, why would we buy junk? We will get whatever IAF decides.
If trump considers India as a defence partner, consider giving engine technology. We can build rest of the jet ourselves.
Trump buttery talks are gimmicks to get Indians buy their expensive junk. If we have to pay market price for them wherein US makes profits, why would we buy junk? We will get whatever IAF decides.
If trump considers India as a defence partner, consider giving engine technology. We can build rest of the jet ourselves.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 7,701
- Likes
- 9,099
We shouldn't then care for American interests. We should not fight their wars. Let them deal with their problems themselves. We should do what is good for India. We make our own calculated moves. In a war we can't trust anyone. They will not back us with ammunition. They will make business out of selling ammunition.You think they will give their golden egg laying goose away?
Khagesh
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2015
- Messages
- 1,274
- Likes
- 870
While your sentiments are praiseworthy, hope you can assure us that really is the case and it is not already too late for staking a claim on independence.
Anyhow you are not going to be the last one to say that. Life will go on.
US Defence Firms Want Control Over Tech In Make-In-India Plan
Lockheed has offered to shift its F-16 production line to India from Fort Worth, Texas, and make it the sole factory worldwide if India orders at least 100 single-engine fighters.
Reuters | Updated: Sep 19, 2017 17:23 IST
US naval F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft takes off from USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier.
NEW DELHI: US defence firms offering to set up production lines in India to win deals worth billions of dollars want stronger assurances they won't have to part with proprietary technology, according to a business lobby group's letter to India's Defence Minister.
These companies are also saying they shouldn't be held liable for defects in products manufactured in collaboration with local partners under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Make-in-India's drive to build a military industrial base.
Lockheed Martin and Boeing are both bidding to supply combat jets to India's military, which is running short of hundreds of aircraft as it retires Soviet-era MiG planes, and its own three-decade long effort to produce a domestic jet is hobbled by delays.
Lockheed has offered to shift its F-16 production line to India from Fort Worth, Texas, and make it the sole factory worldwide if India orders at least 100 single-engine fighters.
Proposals to sell F-18 and F-16 jets have been put forward by Boeing and Lockheed Martin respectively.
The US firm has picked Tata Advanced Systems as its local partner under the defence ministry's new Strategic Partnership model under which foreign original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) can hold up to a 49 percent stake in a joint venture with an Indian private firm which will hold the majority of shares.
The US-India Business Council (USIBC) wrote to India's Defence Minister last month seeking a guarantee that US firms would retain control over sensitive technology - even as joint venture junior partners.
"Control of proprietary technologies is a major consideration for all companies exploring public and private defence partnerships," the business lobby, which represents 400 firms, said in the August 3 letter, reviewed by Reuters and previously unreported.
"To allow foreign OEMs to provide the most advanced technologies, the partnership arrangement between an Indian owned 'strategic partner' company and a foreign OEM needs to provide an opportunity for the foreign OEM to retain control over its proprietary technology," it said, noting this wasn't explicit in the policy document.
Technology Transfer
Technology transfer is at the heart of PM Modi's drive to build a domestic industrial base and cut a reliance on imports that has made India the world's biggest arms importer in recent years.
Without full tech transfer in previous arms deals, India's mainly state-run defence factories have largely been left to assemble knock-down kits even for tanks and aircraft produced under license from the foreign maker.
PM Modi's advisers have vowed to change that, insisting on transfer of technology so that critical military equipment are designed and manufactured in India.
Benjamin Schwartz, USIBC's director for defense and aerospace, said the new Indian policy offered a roadmap for establishing partnerships between US and Indian companies, but it raised some questions for the firms.
He said he was not in a position to name those companies concerned by the Indian policy, but there was a "general desire to see increased clarity" on several aspects, including the control of proprietary technologies.
Quality Issues
The USIBC also opposed a clause in the new rules that held foreign firms jointly responsible for the quality of the platforms provided to the military, saying legal liability is a significant factor in business decisions.
"We recommend the MoD (Ministry of Defence) affirm that foreign OEMs will not be liable for defects outside their company's control," the USIBC said.
Lockheed did not respond to a request for comment. Boeing, which is bidding for a separate contract to sell its F/A-18 Super Hornets for India's aircraft carrier fleet, declined to comment on the USIBC letter, but the company's India president, Pratyush Kumar, said there were concerns about Indian private firms' lack of experience in the aerospace sector.
Only state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd had made planes under license, while some private players were starting from scratch, having never built even an aircraft component. Mr Kumar said he could not find a single example worldwide of a private enterprise with limited experience building out a plane under transfer of technology.
"Look at Turkey, look at Japan, look at Brazil - look at multiple countries. In all cases there is a fine balancing act of co-opting the capabilities of both public and private enterprise," he said.
India's Defence Ministry offered no response to the concerns expressed by the trade lobbying group on the strategic partnership model, which will also apply to building submarines and helicopters as part of a $150 billion modernisation drive.
But an official, referring to sensitive technology, said the government has made clear in the past that foreign firms can be allowed to increase their stake beyond 49 percent if the technology they bring in is state-of-the art.
"It can be done on a case-to-case basis," the official said.
Mukesh Aghi, president of the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum, said that despite the starting problems, defence manufacturing looked set to be a breakthrough area in ties between India and the United States.
"It's the next big thing. There is strong support from the (US President Donald) Trump administration to take this forward."
Lockheed has offered to shift its F-16 production line to India from Fort Worth, Texas, and make it the sole factory worldwide if India orders at least 100 single-engine fighters.
Reuters | Updated: Sep 19, 2017 17:23 IST
US naval F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft takes off from USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier.
NEW DELHI: US defence firms offering to set up production lines in India to win deals worth billions of dollars want stronger assurances they won't have to part with proprietary technology, according to a business lobby group's letter to India's Defence Minister.
These companies are also saying they shouldn't be held liable for defects in products manufactured in collaboration with local partners under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Make-in-India's drive to build a military industrial base.
Lockheed Martin and Boeing are both bidding to supply combat jets to India's military, which is running short of hundreds of aircraft as it retires Soviet-era MiG planes, and its own three-decade long effort to produce a domestic jet is hobbled by delays.
Lockheed has offered to shift its F-16 production line to India from Fort Worth, Texas, and make it the sole factory worldwide if India orders at least 100 single-engine fighters.
Proposals to sell F-18 and F-16 jets have been put forward by Boeing and Lockheed Martin respectively.
The US firm has picked Tata Advanced Systems as its local partner under the defence ministry's new Strategic Partnership model under which foreign original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) can hold up to a 49 percent stake in a joint venture with an Indian private firm which will hold the majority of shares.
The US-India Business Council (USIBC) wrote to India's Defence Minister last month seeking a guarantee that US firms would retain control over sensitive technology - even as joint venture junior partners.
"Control of proprietary technologies is a major consideration for all companies exploring public and private defence partnerships," the business lobby, which represents 400 firms, said in the August 3 letter, reviewed by Reuters and previously unreported.
"To allow foreign OEMs to provide the most advanced technologies, the partnership arrangement between an Indian owned 'strategic partner' company and a foreign OEM needs to provide an opportunity for the foreign OEM to retain control over its proprietary technology," it said, noting this wasn't explicit in the policy document.
Technology Transfer
Technology transfer is at the heart of PM Modi's drive to build a domestic industrial base and cut a reliance on imports that has made India the world's biggest arms importer in recent years.
Without full tech transfer in previous arms deals, India's mainly state-run defence factories have largely been left to assemble knock-down kits even for tanks and aircraft produced under license from the foreign maker.
PM Modi's advisers have vowed to change that, insisting on transfer of technology so that critical military equipment are designed and manufactured in India.
Benjamin Schwartz, USIBC's director for defense and aerospace, said the new Indian policy offered a roadmap for establishing partnerships between US and Indian companies, but it raised some questions for the firms.
He said he was not in a position to name those companies concerned by the Indian policy, but there was a "general desire to see increased clarity" on several aspects, including the control of proprietary technologies.
Quality Issues
The USIBC also opposed a clause in the new rules that held foreign firms jointly responsible for the quality of the platforms provided to the military, saying legal liability is a significant factor in business decisions.
"We recommend the MoD (Ministry of Defence) affirm that foreign OEMs will not be liable for defects outside their company's control," the USIBC said.
Lockheed did not respond to a request for comment. Boeing, which is bidding for a separate contract to sell its F/A-18 Super Hornets for India's aircraft carrier fleet, declined to comment on the USIBC letter, but the company's India president, Pratyush Kumar, said there were concerns about Indian private firms' lack of experience in the aerospace sector.
Only state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd had made planes under license, while some private players were starting from scratch, having never built even an aircraft component. Mr Kumar said he could not find a single example worldwide of a private enterprise with limited experience building out a plane under transfer of technology.
"Look at Turkey, look at Japan, look at Brazil - look at multiple countries. In all cases there is a fine balancing act of co-opting the capabilities of both public and private enterprise," he said.
India's Defence Ministry offered no response to the concerns expressed by the trade lobbying group on the strategic partnership model, which will also apply to building submarines and helicopters as part of a $150 billion modernisation drive.
But an official, referring to sensitive technology, said the government has made clear in the past that foreign firms can be allowed to increase their stake beyond 49 percent if the technology they bring in is state-of-the art.
"It can be done on a case-to-case basis," the official said.
Mukesh Aghi, president of the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum, said that despite the starting problems, defence manufacturing looked set to be a breakthrough area in ties between India and the United States.
"It's the next big thing. There is strong support from the (US President Donald) Trump administration to take this forward."
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2012
- Messages
- 5,405
- Likes
- 5,530
How a US arms lobby group played both India and Pakistan on the F-16 aircraft
In response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Octopus has created an army of top-secret intelligence agencies, analysts, specialists, and building complexes—phalanxes, really—devoted to identifying, spying on and rooting out terrorists both domestically and around the world.
…
A large majority of this homeland security and intelligence apparatus actually comprises individuals who do not work for the US government directly. They are employees of private sector companies who are hired by the government to do these jobs, and are known as “contractors.”
…
Many of these individuals and organisations claim that they are not officially lobbying, like think tanks, public relations agencies and political action committees (PACs). Or they claim they are not really lobbyists because they avoid direct contact with the lawmakers. Instead, they send their subordinates to Capitol Hill to do the heavy lifting— the cajoling of members of Congress and their staffs. Or they claim that they spend less than 20 per cent of their time lobbying. This legal threshold is what allowed former South Dakota Democratic senator Tom Daschle to lobby for more than a decade without registering as a lobbyist…This evasion tactic is actually nicknamed and widely referred to as the “Daschle loophole”…In some cases, the organisations these lobbyists work for are lobbying for both sides of an issue—thereby, making money off adversaries.
Let us take the case of the issue of the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan in 2016.
…
Islamabad had been pushing to resume its purchases of the United States’ advanced F-16 fighter jets ever since 1990. This was the year the Pressler Amendment was enforced, preventing Pakistan from getting 28 of the F-16s they had agreed to buy in the early 1980s. Forced to pay for storage fees as the unused F-16s collected dust in a boneyard in the Arizona desert, the Pakistanis were incensed.
…
However, after 9/11, Pakistan upped its advocacy campaign and convinced the George W Bush administration to sell them the fighter jets—to “exorcise the bitter pill of the Pressler Amendment” and to forge new relations with Islamabad. The United States determined it was critical to placate Islamabad in order to get its cooperation in the war against the terrorists. Consequently, the Bush administration announced in 2005 its intent to once again sell F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan—as many as Pakistan wanted to buy.
How did Pakistan convince the Bush administration and, later the Obama administration, to continue to give it more and more military aid?
…
The manufacturer of the F-16—the massive defence corporation Lockheed Martin—with $47 billion in annual revenue in 2016, also has a labyrinthine lobbying operation. According to the Center for Responsive Politics’ Open Secrets database, the company has been spending more than $10 million on it annually since 2006. In addition to their in-house lobbyists, they have amassed an army of outside companies to assist them with their lobbying efforts: law firms, public relations agencies, consultants.
By far the largest amount of Lockheed Martin’s lobbying budget is paid out to the Podesta Group, the powerful firm headed by the super-lobbyist, Tony Podesta. Lockheed Martin paid the group $550,000 in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016. Most of the issues the Podesta Group advocated for on behalf of Lockheed Martin were defence and aerospace issues. It is highly likely that they assisted in the overall effort to push through the sale of F-16s to Pakistan!
In February 2016, the state department and the department of defense announced that they were approving a sale of eight more F-16s to Pakistan, clearly a victory for Lockheed Martin. Under the terms of this new deal, however, the sale of these additional F-16s was to be subsidised by the US government. In a move to make these deals even sweeter, the government sometimes uses what is called Foreign Military Funds (FMFs). FMF is a bucket of taxpayer money that is used to subsidise sales of military equipment to foreign countries.
…
The Indian government immediately and publicly protested both the sale and the subsidy, causing quite a hiccup for the US government. India’s leaders recognised the jets for what they were: a nuclear-capable force projection that could be used against them. The Indian foreign secretary, S Jaishankar, immediately summoned Richard Verma, the US ambassador to New Delhi, to express his displeasure. And then the Pakistani government publicly feigned surprise over the Indians’ complaints.
The Indian embassy in Washington summarily deployed their army of lobbyists to block the deal. So, who has been lobbying on their behalf since 2010? Once again, the Podesta Group.
According to their FARA filings, the Podesta Group was paid $700,000 by the government of India for work they performed in 2016. Conventional wisdom says that a firm that is representing India cannot very well represent Pakistan at the same time. But in the world of the Octopus, the same firm represents competing interests and it is all legal.
…
The power and pressure of the Indian embassy’s lobbying firm produced results. A week after the state department’s announcement of the planned subsidised F-16 sale to Pakistan, Kentucky Republican senator Rand Paul introduced a joint resolution to halt the sale.
…
Senator Paul’s resolution was debated on the floor of the senate and a vote was called, but the resolution was scuttled in what is called a “tabling motion.” In a 71 to 24 vote, the Senate voted to “table” the resolution, which effectively killed the effort. Senator Paul received some bipartisan support for this resolution, but not enough.
…
The sale was approved but without the FMF subsidies, and now Pakistan says it cannot afford to pay full freight for the eight fighter jets. Lockheed Martin also complained about the news, saying that it would not be able to afford to keep its F-16 production line in operation without the sale. It also said, incredulously and ironically, that it planned to move the entire F-16 production line from Texas to India.
Indeed, the vice-president of Lockheed’s F-16 programme, Susan Ouzts, said in an interview with reporters from the Pakistani English-language daily, the Nation, that prime minister Narendra Modi had expressed interest in the planes. The Nation article even alleged that India may have lobbied to place on hold an India F-16 deal to disrupt the Pakistan F-16 one.
…
As cosy a relationship as Pakistan has with the Pentagon, apparently it forgot that the Octopus has many, many tentacles that would need to be choreographed. This case study is just one example of the corruptive—but thoroughly legal—behaviour of the Octopus. It will sink its suctioned feet into any client that will pay it. Everyone and everything is sullied with money. No transaction or representation is completely transparent. Nowhere is that more evident than in the case of the US–India nuclear agreement, inked in 2005 and approved in 2008. Almost a decade later, the only beneficiaries of this deal are arms traders. No nuclear power plant has even broken ground. I blame the Octopus for this.
Excerpted from Larry Pressler’s book Neighbours in Arms with permission from Penguin Random House India.
https://qz.com/1092790/how-a-us-lobby-group-played-both-india-and-pakistan-on-the-f-16-aircraft/
In response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Octopus has created an army of top-secret intelligence agencies, analysts, specialists, and building complexes—phalanxes, really—devoted to identifying, spying on and rooting out terrorists both domestically and around the world.
…
A large majority of this homeland security and intelligence apparatus actually comprises individuals who do not work for the US government directly. They are employees of private sector companies who are hired by the government to do these jobs, and are known as “contractors.”
…
Many of these individuals and organisations claim that they are not officially lobbying, like think tanks, public relations agencies and political action committees (PACs). Or they claim they are not really lobbyists because they avoid direct contact with the lawmakers. Instead, they send their subordinates to Capitol Hill to do the heavy lifting— the cajoling of members of Congress and their staffs. Or they claim that they spend less than 20 per cent of their time lobbying. This legal threshold is what allowed former South Dakota Democratic senator Tom Daschle to lobby for more than a decade without registering as a lobbyist…This evasion tactic is actually nicknamed and widely referred to as the “Daschle loophole”…In some cases, the organisations these lobbyists work for are lobbying for both sides of an issue—thereby, making money off adversaries.
Let us take the case of the issue of the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan in 2016.
…
Islamabad had been pushing to resume its purchases of the United States’ advanced F-16 fighter jets ever since 1990. This was the year the Pressler Amendment was enforced, preventing Pakistan from getting 28 of the F-16s they had agreed to buy in the early 1980s. Forced to pay for storage fees as the unused F-16s collected dust in a boneyard in the Arizona desert, the Pakistanis were incensed.
…
However, after 9/11, Pakistan upped its advocacy campaign and convinced the George W Bush administration to sell them the fighter jets—to “exorcise the bitter pill of the Pressler Amendment” and to forge new relations with Islamabad. The United States determined it was critical to placate Islamabad in order to get its cooperation in the war against the terrorists. Consequently, the Bush administration announced in 2005 its intent to once again sell F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan—as many as Pakistan wanted to buy.
How did Pakistan convince the Bush administration and, later the Obama administration, to continue to give it more and more military aid?
…
The manufacturer of the F-16—the massive defence corporation Lockheed Martin—with $47 billion in annual revenue in 2016, also has a labyrinthine lobbying operation. According to the Center for Responsive Politics’ Open Secrets database, the company has been spending more than $10 million on it annually since 2006. In addition to their in-house lobbyists, they have amassed an army of outside companies to assist them with their lobbying efforts: law firms, public relations agencies, consultants.
By far the largest amount of Lockheed Martin’s lobbying budget is paid out to the Podesta Group, the powerful firm headed by the super-lobbyist, Tony Podesta. Lockheed Martin paid the group $550,000 in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016. Most of the issues the Podesta Group advocated for on behalf of Lockheed Martin were defence and aerospace issues. It is highly likely that they assisted in the overall effort to push through the sale of F-16s to Pakistan!
In February 2016, the state department and the department of defense announced that they were approving a sale of eight more F-16s to Pakistan, clearly a victory for Lockheed Martin. Under the terms of this new deal, however, the sale of these additional F-16s was to be subsidised by the US government. In a move to make these deals even sweeter, the government sometimes uses what is called Foreign Military Funds (FMFs). FMF is a bucket of taxpayer money that is used to subsidise sales of military equipment to foreign countries.
…
The Indian government immediately and publicly protested both the sale and the subsidy, causing quite a hiccup for the US government. India’s leaders recognised the jets for what they were: a nuclear-capable force projection that could be used against them. The Indian foreign secretary, S Jaishankar, immediately summoned Richard Verma, the US ambassador to New Delhi, to express his displeasure. And then the Pakistani government publicly feigned surprise over the Indians’ complaints.
The Indian embassy in Washington summarily deployed their army of lobbyists to block the deal. So, who has been lobbying on their behalf since 2010? Once again, the Podesta Group.
According to their FARA filings, the Podesta Group was paid $700,000 by the government of India for work they performed in 2016. Conventional wisdom says that a firm that is representing India cannot very well represent Pakistan at the same time. But in the world of the Octopus, the same firm represents competing interests and it is all legal.
…
The power and pressure of the Indian embassy’s lobbying firm produced results. A week after the state department’s announcement of the planned subsidised F-16 sale to Pakistan, Kentucky Republican senator Rand Paul introduced a joint resolution to halt the sale.
…
Senator Paul’s resolution was debated on the floor of the senate and a vote was called, but the resolution was scuttled in what is called a “tabling motion.” In a 71 to 24 vote, the Senate voted to “table” the resolution, which effectively killed the effort. Senator Paul received some bipartisan support for this resolution, but not enough.
…
The sale was approved but without the FMF subsidies, and now Pakistan says it cannot afford to pay full freight for the eight fighter jets. Lockheed Martin also complained about the news, saying that it would not be able to afford to keep its F-16 production line in operation without the sale. It also said, incredulously and ironically, that it planned to move the entire F-16 production line from Texas to India.
Indeed, the vice-president of Lockheed’s F-16 programme, Susan Ouzts, said in an interview with reporters from the Pakistani English-language daily, the Nation, that prime minister Narendra Modi had expressed interest in the planes. The Nation article even alleged that India may have lobbied to place on hold an India F-16 deal to disrupt the Pakistan F-16 one.
…
As cosy a relationship as Pakistan has with the Pentagon, apparently it forgot that the Octopus has many, many tentacles that would need to be choreographed. This case study is just one example of the corruptive—but thoroughly legal—behaviour of the Octopus. It will sink its suctioned feet into any client that will pay it. Everyone and everything is sullied with money. No transaction or representation is completely transparent. Nowhere is that more evident than in the case of the US–India nuclear agreement, inked in 2005 and approved in 2008. Almost a decade later, the only beneficiaries of this deal are arms traders. No nuclear power plant has even broken ground. I blame the Octopus for this.
Excerpted from Larry Pressler’s book Neighbours in Arms with permission from Penguin Random House India.
https://qz.com/1092790/how-a-us-lobby-group-played-both-india-and-pakistan-on-the-f-16-aircraft/
Kalki_2018
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2017
- Messages
- 720
- Likes
- 1,253
No F-16 or 18 will ever serve in IAF or IN. Its LCA or nothing.
Innocent
Regular Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2017
- Messages
- 486
- Likes
- 840
If you buy US-made planes, they will stay grounded - Peru
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201710151058252414-peru-russia-mig-29/
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201710151058252414-peru-russia-mig-29/
