Tag: F-16

US Approves $450-Million F-16 Fleet Sustainment Plan to Pakistan for Counter-Terrorism

This is Washington’s first major security assistance to Islamabad in four years.

Washington: The Biden administration has approved a US $ 450 million F-16 fighter jet fleet sustainment programme to Pakistan to help it meet current and future counterterrorism threats, in Washington’s first major security assistance to Islamabad in four years.

In 2018, Biden’s predecessor Donald Trump had suspended about USD 2 billion in security aid to Islamabad for failing to clamp down on the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani Network terror groups and dismantle their safe havens in the country.

In a notification to the US Congress on Wednesday, the State Department said it has approved a possible foreign military sale of F-16 case for sustainment and related equipment for an estimated cost of USD 450 million, arguing that this will sustain Islamabad’s capability to meet current and future counterterrorism threats by maintaining its F-16 fleet.

The Defence Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying the Congress of this possible sale on Wednesday.

The United States Government has notified Congress of a proposed Foreign Military Sales case to sustain the Pakistan Air Force’s F-16 programme. Pakistan is an important counterterrorism partner, and as part of longstanding policy, the United States provides life cycle maintenance and sustainment packages for US-origin platforms, a State Department spokesperson said.

Pakistan’s F-16 programme is an important part of the broader United States-Pakistan bilateral relationship. The proposed sale will sustain Pakistan’s capability to meet current and future counterterrorism threats by maintaining its F-16 fleet. The F-16 fleet allows Pakistan to support counterterrorism operations and we expect Pakistan to take sustained action against all terrorist groups, the spokesperson said.

According to the Congressional notification, the proposed sale does not include any new capabilities, weapons, or munitions.

It said that Pakistan has requested to consolidate prior F-16 sustainment and support cases to support the Pakistan Air Force F-16 fleet by reducing duplicate case activities and adding additional continued support elements.

The USD 450 million foreign military sale to Pakistan participation in F-16 Aircraft Structural Integrity Programme, electronic combat international security assistance programme, international engine management programme, engine component improvement programme, and other technical coordination groups; aircraft and engine hardware and software modifications and support and aircraft and engine spare repair/return parts.

The Pentagon said this proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by allowing Pakistan to retain interoperability with US and partner forces in ongoing counterterrorism efforts and in preparation for future contingency operations.

The proposed sale will continue the sustainment of Pakistan’s F-16 fleet, which greatly improves Pakistan’s ability to support counterterrorism operations through its robust air-to-ground capability. Pakistan will have no difficulty absorbing these articles and services into its armed forces, it said.

According to the Congressional notification, the proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

(Lalit K. Jha)

IAF Shows Radar Images, Claims ‘Irrefutable’ Evidence of Downing Pak F-16

The IAF has more credible information and evidence that is clearly indicative of the fact that PAF has lost one F-16, says Air Vice Marshal R.G.K. Kapoor.

New Delhi: The Indian Air Force reiterated that it shot down an F-16 jet of the Pakistan Air Force on February 27, during the aerial combat that followed the Balakot strikes. At a media briefing on Monday, it showed radar images of the engagement to assert “irrefutable evidence” of downing the enemy jet.

Air Vice Marshal R.G.K. Kapoor showed several slides of graphic captures from airborne warning and control systems (AWACS).

The IAF has more credible information and evidence that is clearly indicative of the fact that PAF has lost one F-16 in the air action on February 27, he said.

The aerial dogfight came a day after India conducted a ‘pre-emptive non-military action’ on alleged terror training camps of the Jaish-e-Mohammed in Balakot, Pakistan. An Indian aircraft, MiG-21 Bison was shot down in the dogfight.

“The IAF has irrefutable evidence of not only the fact that F-16 was used by Pakistan Air Force on February 27, but also that an IAF MiG 21 Bison shot down a Pakistan Air Force F-16,” Kapoor said in a statement.

He did not take any questions on the issue.

On Friday, the IAF had asserted that it shot down an F-16 fighter jet of Pakistan during the dogfight, following a report in a leading US news magazine which contradicted India’s contention.

“There is no doubt that two aircraft went down in the aerial engagement on February 27, one of which was a Bison of IAF while the other was an F-16 of PAF conclusively identified by its electronic signature and radio transcripts,” the IAF official said.

He said the IAF has more credible information and evidence that is clearly indicative of the fact that the PAF has lost one F-16 in the air action on February 27. “However, due to security and confidentiality concerns, we are restricting the information being shared in public domain.”

The IAF also said official statements made by the director general of ISPR, Major General Asif Ghafoor, corroborate its stand. The IAF statement said the DG ISPR had categorically stated that Pakistan had identified two pilots, one in custody and the other admitted to hospital. This was reiterated by the Pakistani PM, the IAF said.

Last week, leading American magazine Foreign Policy reported that a US count of the F-16s with Pakistan has found that none of them are missing, contradicting India’s claim that one of its fighter jets shot down a Pakistani F-16 during the aerial dogfight on February 27.

In the report, the magazine said two senior US defense officials with direct knowledge of the situation told it that American personnel recently counted Islamabad’s F-16s and found none of the planes missing.

The Government has maintained that Indian Air Force pilot Abhinandan Varthaman engaged with one of the Pakistani F-16s and shot it down before his Mig-21 Bison was downed.

Varthaman was captured by Pakistan and was released after nearly 60 hours in Pakistani custody.

The IAF on February 28 displayed pieces of an AMRAAM missile, fired by a Pakistani F-16, as evidence to “conclusively” prove that Pakistan deployed the US-manufactured jets during an aerial raid on Indian military installations in Kashmir.

Pakistan denied that it lost any F-16 jets during the aerial combat.

IAF Refutes US Report on Pakistan’s F-16 Jets, Says Radio Signature Confirms Downed Aircraft

A report in Foreign Policy asserted that all Pakistani F-16 jets were accounted for.

New Delhi: After high-resolution imagery last week poked holes in the Modi government’s assertion that it destroyed a Jaish-e-Mohammad camp in Balakot, a US count of its fleet has now countered the country’s claim of downing one Pakistani F-16 fighter jet in a February 27 aerial battle.

According to Foreign Policy, though India has repeatedly said that Wing Commander Abhinandan Vardhaman’s Mig-21 shot down an F-16 in a dogfight before his own plane went down, US personnel recently counted Islamabad’s F-16s – and found none missing.

The Indian Air Force has stuck to its guns, claiming that there were radio signatures and communication which showed that one of the two ejections sighted on February 27 was a Lockheed Martin F-16 aircraft of the Pakistan Air Force.

Following the air battle, which led to the capture of Vardhaman by Pakistani forces, the external affairs ministry had said that “one Pakistan Air Force fighter aircraft was shot down by a MiG 21 Bison of the Indian Air Force. The Pakistani aircraft was seen by ground forces falling from the sky on the Pakistan side.”

Pakistan’s military spokesman Major General Asif Ghafoor, however, denied that any F-16 had been shot and added that in the Pakistan Air Force operations that day, no F-16 had been deployed. The Pakistani claim that no F-16s had been deployed was refuted by India, which presented fragments of an AMRAAM air-to-air missile that had been recovered on the Indian side of the Line of Control. The AMRAAM can only be used by F-16s. However, India was unable to present any physical evidence to back up its claim of having downed an F-16.

Also read: New High Res Satellite Imagery Suggests Balakot Airstrike a ‘Very Precise Miss’

In the evening, news agency ANI quoted Indian Air Force sources as dismissing the central claim of the Foreign Policy article that a PAF F-16 aircraft was shot down.

Reiterating that Flight Lieutentant Varthaman had shot down the aircraft, IAF sources volunteered new information that the F-16 was hit about 7-8 kilometres inside Pakistan occupied area in Sabzkot area.

Further, they claimed that radio communication of Pakistan Air Force had been intercepted in which the speakers apparently stated that one of their F-16 aircraft had not yet returned to base.

In his debriefing upon his return to India, Vardhaman – who let off an R37 missile from his Mig-21 – said he saw a PAF F-16 going down on the other side of the border. As per a PTI report, the MEA also said in March there were eyewitness accounts and electronic evidence of this as well.

One possibility, Lara Seligman wrote, is that Vardhaman may have gotten a lock on the Pakistani F-16 and fired before his own plane was shot down. In the heat of the combat, he may have believed that he downed the Pakistani jet. However, a US inventory on the ground in Pakistan has not found any such planes missing, indicating that India may have misled the international community about the events of that day.

The Foreign Policy report further stated that a senior US defence official, who is in the know about the count, said that Pakistan had asked the US to take a physical inventory of the F-16 fighter jets. This was as per an end-user agreement signed when the foreign military sale was finalised. On why the count had taken several weeks to conduct, the official said that several jets were not immediately available for inspection due to the conflict.

However, now that the US personnel have completed the count, “all aircraft were present and accounted for,” the official told the magazine.

Later in the day, Seligman updated her story to answer a question many people were asking – whether the US count would include the F-16s Pakistan bought from Jordan.

Following the publication of the Foreign Policy report, Pakistan army spokesperson Asif Ghafoor issued a celebratory tweet on Friday afternoon.

In the evening, news agency ANI quoted Indian Air Force sources as dismissing the central claim of the Foreign Policy article that a PAF F-16 aircraft was shot down.

Reiterating that Wing Commander Vadthaman had shot down the aircraft, IAF sources volunteered new information that the F-16 was hit about 7-8 km inside the Pakistan-occupied area in Sabzkot.

As per the IAF, only F-16s were present where Vardhaman was engaged in a dogfight. They claimed that AWACS signatures showed that there was a F-16 aircraft which disappeared from the radar about 8-10 seconds during the dogfight.

Further, they claimed that radio communication of Pakistan Air Force had been intercepted in which the speakers apparently stated that one of their F-16 aircraft had not yet returned to base.

After the Indian response, Pakistan too stuck to its guns and said it had “more truth on this to share”.

On the day of the Pakistani airstrikes, India stated that a “Pakistani aircraft was seen by ground forces falling from the sky on the Pakistan side”. A day later, pieces of AMRAAM missile which can only be deployed from an F-16 plane, were displayed to the media.

It was on March 9 that the Ministry of External Affairs issued a press release that for the first time publicly claimed that Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman had made the kill of a F-16 aircraft. As per the press note, there were “eyewitness accounts and electronic evidence” for Pakistan’s deployment of F-16 aircraft and the downing of the aircraft.

The same press release also stated that India has asked the “United States to also examine whether the use of F-16 against India is in accordance with the terms and conditions of sale”. Indian foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale also had apparently raised this issue during his sojourn to Washington.

The US had also noted Indian concerns over Pakistan’s usage of F-16, but had refused to make any statements. “As a matter of policy, we do not publicly comment on the contents of bilateral agreements involving US defense technologies nor the communications we have about them,” said US state department deputy spokesperson, Robert Palladino.

Pakistan had slightly modified its position on the use of F-16 aircraft against India. While still maintaining that only JF-17s were used in the airstrikes, Pakistani military indicated that deployment of F-16 aircraft in the February 27 airstrikes would have been justified, as it was in “self-defence”.

In response, MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said on Wednesday, “whether and under what circumstances F16 is or is not allowed will have to come from the US”. He added that it was it was a “fact” that F-16s were used. “…and we understand as per the understanding of the use of F-16 between Us and Pak, it should have not been done and we are why had flagged with the US,” he added.

On its part, Pakistan has also maintained that it had shot down two IAF planes during the aerial combat – a claim India has vociferously denied and asked for Islamabad to furnish proof. The country has, however, not provided any visual evidence of a second plane being downed.

Following the publication of Foreign Policy report, Pakistan army spokesperson Asif Ghafoor issued a celebratory tweet on Friday afternoon.

However, neither India nor the US have issued a statement on the claims in the article so far.

This story was updated to include the IAF’s response to the Foreign Policy article.

Pak Indicates F-16s Might Have Been Used to Hit Indian Aircraft in February

Pakistan’s military spokesman Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor issued a statement with reference to what he said were “repeated Indian claims” about shooting down a Pakistani F-16 on February 27.

Pakistan on Monday for the first time indicated that F-16s might have been used to hit Indian fighter jets during the aerial combat on February 27 and said Islamabad retains the right to use “anything and everything” in its self defence.

Pakistan’s military spokesman Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor issued a statement with reference to what he said “repeated Indian claims” about shooting down of Pakistani F-16 by India and use of F-16 in the air battle on February 27.

“As regard Pakistan Air Force (PAF) action for strikes across Line of Control, it was done by JF-17 from within Pakistan airspace,” he said.

Later, when two Indian jets crossed the Line of Control, they were shot down by the PAF, he claimed.

“Whether it was F-16 or JF-17 which shot down 2 Indian aircraft is immaterial,” he said.

He further said: “Even if F-16 have been used as at that point in time complete PAF was airborne including F16s, the fact remains that Pakistan Airforce shot down two Indian jets in self defence.”

Ghafoor said that Pakistan had right to use anything for its defence.

“India can assume any type of their choice even F-16. Pakistan retains the right to use anything and everything in its legitimate self defence,” he said.

He also rejected that any F-16 was destroyed by Indian Air Force in the dogfight.

“The event of February 27 is part of history now. No Pakistani F-16 was hit by Indian Airforce,” he said.

Last month, Ghafoor said that only JF-17 was used against India on February 27.

Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated after the February 14 attack by Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed in Pulwama that killed 40 CRPF soldiers.

Amid mounting outrage, the Indian Air Force carried out a counter-terror operation, hitting what it said was a JeM training camp in Balakot, deep inside Pakistan on February 26. The next day, Pakistan Air Force retaliated and downed a MiG-21 in an aerial combat and captured an Indian pilot, who was handed over to India later.

India-Pakistan Crisis: F-16s and the Missile Mystery

A simple inventory of the F-16 fleet by US officials posted on the ground would end the controversy of whether an F-16 was downed during the recent escalation between the two countries.

Washington: One of the mysteries of the recent India-Pakistan crisis is whether an Indian Mig-21 shot down a Pakistani F-16 in a dogfight. India says it definitely scored a kill but Pakistan denies even using the F-16s during the aerial confrontation.

The United States would have the definitive answer because of its oversight on Pakistan’s F-16 fleet but thus far Washington has stonewalled all questions with the standard, “we-are-looking-into-the-reports” response.  

Electronic signals and heat signatures of F-16s detected by the Indian Air Force aside, debris of a US-made air-to-air missile (AMRAAM) that can only be fired from an F-16 was found in the Rajouri sector in Jammu and Kashmir. 

The numbers on the recovered missile parts match the numbers in the contract announced by the US Department of Defense for Raytheon Co. on November 17, 2006. Therefore the fact that Pakistan used F-16s against India is not in doubt.

Also read: Did Balakot Airstrikes Hit Their Target? Satellite Imagery Raises Doubts

What’s in doubt and will remain a matter of considerable speculation for sometime to come is whether an F-16 was downed. Several western experts have questioned the “kill” and demanded more proof than the Indian government is ready to share or able to – the remains of the F-16 fell over PoK as did the Mig-21 Bison, which apparently downed it. 

Pakistani villagers on the ground initially reported three parachutes – one obviously that of Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman who was captured by the Pakistan army and later released – and the other two supposedly from the twin-seater F-16. 

People hold a portrait of IAF wing pilot commanded Abhinandan Varthaman as they wait for his arrival near the Attari-Wagah border on March 1, 2019. Credit: PTI

Rather than let the matter drift as a case of “he said, she said”, the US government can easily establish the facts – a simple inventory of the F-16 fleet by US officials posted on the ground would solve the mystery and end the controversy. 

After all, the F-16s sold to Pakistan in 2006 and delivered from 2010 onwards are said to be under “a very enhanced end-use monitoring program,” as stated by a senior State Department official at the time. 

Also in question are the terms of the end-user agreement the US signed with Pakistan when it approved the F-16 sale worth $5 billion – its prohibitions and allowances are not publicly known. 

Robert Palladino, State Department’s deputy spokesman, said on March 5, “As a matter of policy we don’t publicly comment on contents of bilateral agreements, involving US defence technologies nor the communications that we have with other countries about that.” 

According to those who have dealt with end-user agreements, a typical one with Pakistan would prohibit the use of US military equipment against US-allied militaries or forces friendly to the US. In other words, the use of F-16s against India would seem to be a violation, especially if the aircraft were used in an offensive manner, which India says they were. 

Also read: Reading Between the Lines, from Pulwama to the Balakot Airstrike

India is pushing the case that by deploying the F-16s and using them to fire air-to-air missiles at Indian targets, Pakistan has violated the terms and conditions of the F-16 sale. New Delhi has cited Congressional hearings and the promises made by US officials to strictly monitor the use of the fleet. 

The US sold the F-16s to Pakistan in 2006 mainly as a big “thank you” for its cooperation in the war on terror. It added AMRAAMS for good measure – why air-to-air missiles were needed against terrorists who don’t run an air force was never explained. Fiction about and around arms sales to Pakistan is an art perfected by US diplomats over the years. 

India had objected to the sale at the time on grounds that advanced, offensive platforms sold to Pakistan always end up being used against India. But US officials were busy rewarding Pakistan for helping “catch” Al-Qaeda terrorists it was sheltering in the first place. 

The US Congress too was unhappy with the way the State Department pushed the F-16 sale – without consultation and adequate notice to members. Henry Hyde, the then chairman of the House International Relations Committee, gave a tongue lashing to John Hillen, assistant secretary of political-military affairs, accusing the State Department of a “deliberate” and “wholly inappropriate maneuver” to “diminish the Congress’ lawful oversight of arms sales.” 

Hillen stoutly defended the sale, stressing the “new and unprecedented elements of the security plan for Pakistan,” including the presence of a US official to “monitor compliance.” According to the terms of the end-use monitoring programme, the US would conduct semi-annual inventories of all F-16 aircraft equipment and munitions, including related technical data. No mixing with aircraft or equipment from other countries was allowed. 

Access to the F-16s and bases had to be pre-approved and maintenance had to be done by the Pakistan Air Force, Hillen said. Even storage of parts was to be in dedicated facilities with no contractors or third-country nationals allowed access. The US would not deliver the F-16s until Pakistan was fully compliant, he had promised.

The restrictions certainly sounded tough and the US Congress seemed satisfied despite its initial hesitation. 

Also read: India’s Airstrike on Pakistan May Not Have Hit its Target

The question today is whether Pakistan complied with the agreement it signed. The big hole, which Pakistan will likely exploit is the right to self-defence apparently allowed under the agreement – unnamed US officials already have hinted at the right to western correspondents, thereby preparing the ground. 

Ashley Tellis, a South Asia expert at the Carnegie Endowment, said one would have to be a lawyer to determine whether the end-user agreement was violated. “The agreement doesn’t prohibit self-defence. But what constitutes self-defence? Pakistan can say India attacked first and India can say it was retaliating for the (Pulwama) terrorist attack. It is not a slam dunk.”

Some have speculated the US won’t reveal any information about Pakistan’s use or misuse because it might be embarrassed to concede that an old Mig-21 shot down a relatively advanced F-16 and give Russia a propaganda victory. There is also the delicate matter of Lockheed Martin trying to sell the F-16 assembly line to India. 

Tellis strongly disagreed with the idea that the issue of prestige was preventing US officials from confirming a possible F-16 kill. “An old Mig-21 is entirely capable of shooting down an F-16. An old airframe doesn’t mean it can’t conduct effective combat missions.”

Mig-21 Bison used by IAF is the upgraded version of the 30-year-old plane and equipped with modern avionics and a new radar. 

 “Success doesn’t always go to the best aircraft. There are all kinds of variables. The outcome can be completely random which is why you avoid visual range combat when multiple aircraft are involved. It’s difficult to keep track,” Tellis explained. 

That leaves only politics as a possible reason the US government is being coy about revealing the facts – it doesn’t want to put Pakistan on the mat at this time.  

Washington would like to avoid difficult questions for a variety of reasons – Pakistan’s “cooperation” in the Afghanistan peace process, a general tendency in the State Department to not take clear positions on South Asia if possible and finally the fact that it would reveal yet another failure of US policy vis-à-vis Pakistan. 

Seema Sirohi is a Washington DC-based commentator.

Washington Wants to Know if Pakistan Used US-Built Jets to Down IAF Plane

“We are aware of these reports and are seeking more information,” a US Embassy spokesperson said. “We take all allegations of misuse of defence articles very seriously.”

Islamabad/Srinagar: The United States said on Sunday it was trying to find out if Pakistan used US-built F-16 jets to down an Indian warplane, potentially in violation of US agreements, as the stand-off between the nuclear-armed Asian neighbours appeared to be easing.

Pakistan and India both carried out aerial bombing missions last week, including a clash on Wednesday that saw an Indian pilot shot down over the disputed region of Kashmir in an incident that alarmed global powers and sparked fears of a war.

A Pakistan military spokesman on Wednesday denied Indian claims that Pakistan used F-16 jets.

Pakistan returned the captured Indian pilot on Friday in a high-profile handover Islamabad touted as a “peace gesture”, which appeared to significantly dial down tensions, but both sides remain on high alert.

Also read: Five Days After Airstrike, Questions Still Remain About the Indian, Pakistani Versions

At the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border between the two countries in the disputed Kashmir region, there was relative calm in the past 24 hours, both armies said on Sunday. But Indian security forces said they were carrying out major anti-militancy operations on their side on Kashmir and had shot dead two militants.

The US Embassy in Islamabad said on Sunday it was looking into reports that Pakistan used F-16 jets to shoot down the Indian pilot, a potential violation of Washington’s military sale agreements that limit how Pakistan can use the planes.

“We are aware of these reports and are seeking more information,” a US Embassy spokesperson said. “We take all allegations of misuse of defence articles very seriously.”

While Pakistan has denied using F-16 jets during a dogfight that downed an Indian MiG-21 warplane over Kashmir on Wednesday, it has not specified which planes it used, though it assembles Chinese-designed JF-17 fighter jets on its soil.

Pakistan has a long history of buying US military hardware, especially in the years after 2001 when Islamabad was seen as a key partner in the US-led ‘War on Terror’.

Pakistan bought several batches of F-16 planes, built by Lockheed Martin Corp, from Washington before relations soured and the United States cut off subsidised sales in 2016.

It is not clear what exactly these so-called “end-user agreements” restrict Pakistan from doing. “The US Government does not comment on or confirm pending investigations of this nature,” the US Embassy added.

On Thursday Indian officials displayed to reporters parts of what they called an air-to-air missile that can only be fired from F-16 jets, alleging they were used to bomb its side of the disputed Kashmir border on Wednesday.

Also read: India’s Airstrike on Pakistan May Not Have Hit its Target

A Pakistan military spokesman told reporters on Wednesday that Pakistani jets “locked” on Indian targets to demonstrate Pakistan’s capacity to strike back at India, but then chose to fire in an empty field where there would be no casualties.

Pakistan said its mission on Wednesday was in retaliation for India violating its airspace and sovereignty a day earlier, when Indian jets bombed a forest area near the northern city of Balakot.

India said it struck at militant training camps, but Islamabad denied any such camps existed, as did some villagers in the area when Reuters visited.

Militancy operations

Cross-border shelling in the past few days has killed seven people on the Pakistani side and four on the Indian side of Kashmir. But on Sunday it was relatively quiet near the de facto border of Kashmir, the source of two of the three wars India and Pakistan have fought since independence from Britain in 1947.

“By and large the LoC was calm last night but you never know when it will become active again,” said Chaudhry Tariq Farooq, a minister in Pakistani Kashmir. “Tension still prevails.”

In Jammu and Kashmir, troops on Sunday shot dead two militants after a three-day gun battle that also killed five security force personnel, taking the total death toll to 25 in the past two weeks.

The fresh anti-militancy drive was launched after a Kashmiri suicide bomber, a member of a Pakistan-based militant group, killed 40 Indian paramilitary police on Feb. 14.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has also come down hard on separatist groups operating in Kashmir, including by banning the Jamaat-e-Islami party, two of whose clerics were detained in raids on Saturday night.

(Reuters)

Lockheed says US May Take ‘Fresh Look’ at its Plan to Set Up F-16 Plant in India

The US company is keen to switch F-16 production to India, as long as the Indian government agrees to order hundreds of the planes, but concedes it needs to get the Trump administration on board first.

The US company is keen to switch F-16 production to India, as long as the Indian government agrees to order hundreds of the planes, but concedes it needs to get the Trump administration on board first.

A U.S. Lockheed Martin F-16 flies during an air display at the Farnborough International Air Show, Hampshire, July 19, 2004. REUTERS/Toby Melville

A U.S. Lockheed Martin F-16 flies during an air display at the Farnborough International Air Show, Hampshire, July 19, 2004. REUTERS/Toby Melville

New Delhi/Washington: U.S. defence firm Lockheed Martin wants to push ahead with plans to move production of its F-16 combat jets to India, but understands President Donald Trump’s administration may want to take a “fresh look” at the proposal.

With no more orders for the F-16 from the Pentagon, Lockheed plans to use its Fort Worth, Texas plant instead to produce the fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter that the United States Air Force is transitioning to.

Lockheed would switch F-16 production to India, as long as the Indian government agrees to order hundreds of the planes that its air force desperately needs.

Trump has criticized U.S. companies that have moved manufacturing overseas and which then sell their products back to the U.S. In his first few weeks in office, he has pushed companies, from automakers to pharmaceutical firms, to produce more in the United States.

In Lockheed’s case, however, the plan is to build the F-16 to equip the Indian Air Force, and not sell them back into the United States.

Lockheed said it has been talking to Trump’s transition and governance teams as well as the U.S. Congress for several months on its plans, including the proposed sale of F-16 planes to India, a spokesman told Reuters in Washington.

“We’ve briefed the Administration on the current proposal, which was supported by the Obama Administration as part of a broader cooperative dialogue with the Government of India,” the spokesman said.

“We understand that the Trump Administration will want to take a fresh look at some of these programs, and we stand prepared to support that effort to ensure that any deal of this importance is properly aligned with U.S. policy priorities.”

India is expected to spend $250 billion on defence modernisation over the next decade, analysts say, and there is concern that a veto on making the F-16 in India would not only hit Lockheed, but also threaten other military contracts to come up in India for Boeing, Northrop and Raytheon.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the plan to build the plane in India.

A person close to Lockheed said company officials did not know what the Trump administration planned to do about the proposal to shift F-16 production to India.

“They’re following it closely and talking with the White House. But if they don’t move production to India, there’s no way they’ll get the India contract,” the person said.

One argument to be made was that moving to India would preserve some component production in the United States. “Twenty-five percent of something is better than zero percent of nothing,” the person said.

‘No threat to US jobs’

Lockheed has said that moving F-16 assembly to India would create 200 engineering jobs in the United States to help support the production line in India.

It has also said that about 800 workers in the United States making the non-Lockheed parts for the F-16 would keep their jobs if construction shifts to India.

“We are offering to make the F-16 Block-70 aircraft with a local partner in India. This is an offer exclusive to India,” Randall L. Howard, head of F-16 business development, told Reuters ahead of India‘s biggest air show beginning in Bengaluru next week.

In India, the F-16 is up against SAAB’s  Gripen combat aircraft, which the Swedish firm has also offered to make locally, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi drives a Make-in-India campaign to build a domestic aerospace industry and reduce costly imports.

The Indian government is expected to decide this year on which company will build a single-engine fighter plane, in collaboration with a local partner. A defence official said the process was at a very early stage.

The Indian air force alone needs 200-250 fighters over the next 10 years, its former chief Arup Raha said before he left office in December.

Negotiating arms contracts with India can take years, and industry officials said there was no guarantee Lockheed would win the contract even if it moves production to India.

Defence ties between India and the United States have grown rapidly, with U.S. arms sales of more than $4 billion in 2012-15, mostly under government-to-government foreign military sales, upstaging long-term supplier Russia and even Israel.

Lockheed’s executive director for international business development, Abhay Paranjape, said his team has met with representatives from 40 defense and aviation firms in India to help build the ancillary network for the aircraft assembly program.

“We want to be prepared, that’s why we started the ground work,” he said, adding Lockheed has also scouted possible factory sites in India.

Lockheed has a joint venture with India‘s Tata Advanced Systems Ltd to make airframe components for the C-130J Super Hercules transport plane and the S-92 helicopter.

“The capability for building components exists here, it’s been proven with the C-130s. The challenge now is to pick the right partners,” Paranjape said.

(Reuters)

(Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal in BERLIN; Editing by Ian Geoghegan)