PARALYSIS IN DEFENCE PLANNING AND PROCUREMENT

 

 

Contributing Editor AIR MARSHAL (Retd) AYAZ AHMED KHAN talks about the faulty procedures in our defence planning and procurement sector and recommends reforms that need to take place urgently

One of the major lessons of the 1965 and 1971 wars was that defence planning and procurement policies should be re-tailored to achieve self-reliance in defence production. The low priority given to indigenize major weapon systems by Islamabad was made clear to the senior officers during the 1972 foreign tour of the first regular National Defence College course to Tehran. General Tofanian, Shah’s defence minister and former commander of the Iranian Air Force, answering a question from a NDC student (late Lt General Fazle Haq, then a Brigadier) said, "Iran -Pakistan defence cooperation has been the victim of "PARALYSIS OF ANALYSIS".

Referring to Shah’s offer to President Ayub Khan for co-assembly, joint-manufacture of main battle tanks (MBT’s) Pakistan’s hesitation and GHQ’s astonishing reply that "tank had no future", left the Iranian General Staff speechless, and the Shah angry. This unwise reply infuriated the Iranian ruler, and stalled the possibilities of self-reliance in the vital field of armour manufacture.

Pakistan Army wiz-kids had gone in circles to prove to the Field Marshal that armour i.e. the tank would be a useless weapon platform in a future war. This reply based on the study carried out by the General Staff or armour specialists reflected a state of mental paralysis which has afflicted our defence planners for a long time. Was such a conclusion based on the fact that during the 1965 war, Pakistani tanks from No1 Armoured Division had got stuck in the paddy fields of Khemkaran, and became easy targets for Indian gunners hiding in sugarcane fields? But then No. 6 Armoured Division did well in the Chawinda area to destroy Indian armour advancing towards Gujranwala. Was such a recommendation made due to the Khemkaran experience, or due to the new weapon systems i.e. ATGM’s and guided missile firing fighters and helicopters being inducted into modern armies, which could destroy exposed tanks. Frankly Field Marshal’s advisors were proven right during the 1967 Arab - Israel war. Nasser’s tanks in the Sinai desert became sitting ducks for the Israeli Air Power. Over eight hundred Egyptian tanks caught in the open were destroyed by Israeli Air force fighters. But it must not be forgotten that before going for the Egyptian armour, Israeli Air Force had caught the Egyption Air Force on the ground and destroyed it. Israeli air force had complete air superiority during the 1967 war.

Pakistan armour was not used to any great effect in the ‘71 war. And Pakistani generals were again right when in the 1973 October war, Egyptian and Syrian armies turned the tables on the Israeli Air Force and Armour by destroying it with shoulder fired SAM;s and ATGM’s. But in spite of the Arab and Israeli armour debacles in the 1967 and 1973 wars, and Pak debacle in the ‘71 war, armies every where stepped up their efforts for more and better quality tanks. India started tank manufacture in earnest, and Arjun MBT after completion of intensive test trials is ready for delivery to Indian Army armoured corps. Pakistan lost a golden opportunity for self-reliance in armour manufacture, primarily because of the inability of our decision makers to take bold and timely decisions viz armour manufacture in Pakistan with Iranian cooperation, which certainly was in our long term national interest.

Al-Kalid MBT is a victim of indecisions, time and cost over- runs, and its series production is nowhere in sight. It is worth mentioning that the first Al-Khalid was demonstrated to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in early 1992, when General Mirza Aslam Beg was the COAS. Had there been consistency in procurement planning, this vital project surely would have taken concrete shape during the last six years, and we would have seen squadrons of Al-Khalid tanks rolling the 23 March Pakistan Day parades.

General Tofanian also referred to Shah’s offer the 1965 war to fund co-assembly and progressive manufacture of French Mirage fighters in Iran and Pakistan. Pakistan again rebuffed Iranian offer. Pakistan Air Force at the time was engaged in urgent plans to procure Mirage Ill’s and V’s from France, and the Air Staff perhaps felt that the Iranian offer would hinder the pace of procurement of the urgently required fighters. But the Iranian offer merited very serious consideration, because it was being funded by Tehran, and would have been a major step towards self - reliance in the vital field of combat aircraft manufacture. The STORY OF PAKISTAN AIR FORCE does not throw any light on this offer from Iran. Senior PAF officer, and PSO’s at the time may wish to throw some light on this matter.

Unfortunately paralysis of analysis in defence procurement has been exacerbated by the notorious Pressler Amendment. This devious American law targeted against Pakistan has paralysed decision making for procurement of major weapons for the Army, Navy and Pakistan Air Force. Since October 1989, when the Pressler Amendment was enforced against Pakistan, procurement of combat aircraft to replace or reinforce the afflicted F-16 fleet has become a nightmare for the PAF. US Department of State and US moles in Islamabad, have been blackmailing Pakistan over the supply of duly paid for F-16 fighters to erode PAF’s defensive capability, and to create confusion and chaos in PAF planning and procurement for a replacement fighter aircraft. With 658 million dollars stuck in the American pocket, the US officials have felt at liberty to evade solemn commitments, sabotage written agreements, and violate international law. US evasive tactics over the F-16 deal have confounded and baffled the government and the Air Staff so completely that nine years have passed, but decision for the procurement or indigenous manufacture of an alternate combat aircraft is yet to be taken. On Monday August 1 1994 former President Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari told the press at Kamra that options are being studied to offset the F-16’s denial by the US. "Pakistan is studying various options for acquiring high tech aircraft in case supply of F- 16 is denied. During my visit to the United States I told them to supply us the F-16 aircraft or return the money." US officials took no notice of Mr. Leghari’s demand, and four years have gone by, but the Government of Pakistan has yet to provide funds for the co-manufacture of Super-7 fighter with Chinese help. The options for the co-manufacture of Super- 7 and FC-1 fighter were submitted to the ministry of Defence by Air Headquarters five years back, but there is hardly any progress.

US officials continued their evasive, intimidatory and blackmailing tactics even after the visits to Washington of prime ministers Benazir Bhutto, Mian Nawaz Sharif, and President Leghari. Foreign Minister Gohar Ayub during his US visit also tried to persuade US authorities to settle the F-16 issue. But in spite of positive signals for the return of funds if not the aircraft US officials have continued to blackmail, discredit and intimidate Pakistan. Astonishingly successive US ambassadors to Pakistan and to India have stated that, " Pakistan will not get F-16s despite the fact that US considers that country a friend." In fact Mr. Weisner former US ambassador to India ruled out the possibility of US delivering F-16s to Pakistan , " even if Islamabad capped and scrapped its nuclear weapons programme." His astonishing clarification that ," At some point there was some consideration in the White House that to slow the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems there was a need to strengthen the conventional strength of Pakistan. This is the context in which the delivery of F-16s to Pakistan was considered,. But as a matter of practicality the transfer of F-16s to Pakistan is now not going to take place". Earlier in April 1994 US officials had assured General Abdul Waheed the fomer COAS, in Washington that the US may delink the F-16’s from the nuclear issue. But nothing came off this assurance. The Air Staff could have neutralized this political arm-twisting by suggesting alternate weapon systems for the PAF. There was talk of buying 40 Mirage 2000-5’s at an exorbitant coast during 1991-92, and later during 1995-96. But the deal became controversial being overpriced, and scandalous due to rumours of possible kick-backs. It was given up.

On August 10 1994 former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto asked the United States to refund the F-16 money i.e. US Dollars 658 million. "F-16 deal with the United States was a business affair, and Pakistan would not accept any political condition in this regard. We have time and again made it clear to the United States, that we have paid for the F-16’s, and if it cannot deliver the aircraft, it should return the money". Mr McCurry of the US Department of State giving a detailed background of the F-16 deal responded by stating that, "the dialogue between the two countries on the nuclear issue and delivery of the F-16’s remains fruitless. Pakistan will either receive the F-16 warplanes, or be refunded the money it has so far paid". Air Headquarters accepted the challenge of American trickery, and suggested as French Mirage 2000-5’s as alternates. French weaponry is extremely expensive. During the second PPP regime it was clear that within the billions involved there were huge commission for the agents and kick-backs for influentials. Faced with multifarious problems, especially the economic crunch, the Muslim League government during its first year in office has not paid the required attention to the vital requirement of the PAF for technologically advanced aircraft, or indigenous co-manufacture of fighters. The PAF Air Staff led by the Chief of the Air Staff are better judges of what combat aircraft the PAF should have. Reportedly PAF requirements have been submitted to the Government for approval.

The country cannot afford an endless wait to replace the much maligned American F-16s. PAF is left with only 32 F-16’s, while the Indian Air Force has 232 aircraft of equivalent or better performance. The numerical gap of two to one has become three to one because of massive Indian investments in air power. Pakistan’s security is already seriously jeopardized because of the qualitative gap between the PAF and the IAF is in the order of 1 to 7 now. If nothing is done to bridge this yawning gap, in four years time it will become unbridgeable. The Defence Ministry and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs must realize their responsibility, and advise the Government to immediately refer the case of F-16 payment to the concerned court of law in the United States of America, and to allocate funds for the purchase of modern fighters as well as for the co-manufacture of fighters in Pakistan. Defence and security is the over-riding concern of the Pakistani nation, and the Government cannot run-away from its duty of equipping the armed forces properly.