WASHINGTON, Nov 15: The US and Pakistan have been quietly rebuilding their military-to-military relationship disrupted in 1990 when Washington slapped restrictions on Islamabad for its efforts to develop nuclear weapons, says a congressional report.

The report by the Congressional Research Service notes that in June 2004, President Bush designated Pakistan as a major non-Nato ally of the United States.

The report says the close US-Pakistan security ties of the cold war era — which came to a near halt after the 1990 aid cut-off — have been in the process of restoration as a result of Pakistan’s role in US-led anti-terrorism campaign.

The Pentagon reported Foreign Military sales agreements with Pakistan worth $344 million between 2003 and 2004, growing to $492 million in 2005.

In June 2006, the Pentagon notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military sale to Pakistan worth up to $5.1 billion. The deal involves up to 36 F-16 combat aircraft, along with related refurbishments, munitions, and equipment, and would represent the largest-ever weapons sale to Pakistan.

Congressional concerns about the sale and displeasure at the Bush Administration’s apparently improper notification procedures spurred a July 20 hearing of the House International Relations Committee. During that hearing, many members worried that F-16s were better suited to fighting India than to combating terrorists; some warned that US military technology could be passed from Pakistan to China.

The State Department’s lead official on political military relations sought to assure the committee that the sale would serve US interests by strengthening the defence capabilities of a key ally without disturbing the regional balance of power and that all possible measures would be taken to prevent the onward transfer of US technologies.

A resolution disapproving the proposed sale, was introduced in the House of Representatives, but was not voted upon.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice later sent a letter to Congress indicating that no F-16 combat aircraft or related equipment would be delivered to Pakistan until Islamabad provided written security assurances that no US technology will be accessible by third parties.

Islamabad has, however, denied that any “extraordinary” security requirements were requested.

After further negotiations on specifics, including a payment process that will require a major outlay from the Pakistani treasury, the United States and Pakistan in September signed a letter of acceptance for the multibillion dollar F-16 deal.

The United States has undertaken to train and equip new Pakistan Army Air Assault units that can move quickly to find and target terrorist elements.

There has also been a direct US role in training the security detail of the Pakistani president, help to fund a 650-officer Diplomatic Security Unit, and assistance with numerous programs designed to improve the quality of Pakistan’s internal police forces through the provision of equipment and training.

A revived high-level US-Pakistan Defence Consultative Group — moribund since 1997 — sits for high-level discussions on military cooperation, security assistance, and anti-terrorism; its most recent session came in May 2006.

Opinion

Editorial

Impending slaughter
Updated 07 May, 2024

Impending slaughter

Seven months into the slaughter, there are no signs of hope.
Wheat investigation
07 May, 2024

Wheat investigation

THE Shehbaz Sharif government is in a sort of Catch-22 situation regarding the alleged wheat import scandal. It is...
Naila’s feat
07 May, 2024

Naila’s feat

IN an inspirational message from the base camp of Nepal’s Mount Makalu, Pakistani mountaineer Naila Kiani stressed...
Plugging the gap
06 May, 2024

Plugging the gap

IN Pakistan, bias begins at birth for the girl child as discriminatory norms, orthodox attitudes and poverty impede...
Terrains of dread
Updated 06 May, 2024

Terrains of dread

Restored faith in the police is unachievable without political commitment and interprovincial support.
Appointment rules
Updated 06 May, 2024

Appointment rules

If the judiciary had the power to self-regulate, it ought to have exercised it instead of involving the legislature.