Arms trade is one of the world’s most lucrative corporate businesses which thrives mostly on economic rationale, rather than geopolitical concerns.
If we talk about #US, arms sales have been a fixture in its economy and foreign policy because it provides a profitable & flexible tool for reinforcing alliances and containing adversaries while benefiting the economy. Despite the #Sino-US global power contestation, China buys and uses NI and Silicon Valley components in most of its technology products, and interestingly US Arms and Technology Companies lobby hard to make these sales easier and sanction free. Similarly, multiple Western states sell arms to Israel, Egypt, and KSA concurrently while Russia simultaneously to India, and China; which have otherwise contentious border. Chinese arms sales are similarly mostly making economic sense, rather hardline geopolitical concerns. Hence primary factors dictating global arm sales are quality, price, availability, life cycle support, technology transfer etc. It’s most of the time a competition or combination of these factors that turns any buyer towards one product or the other. BBC’s poorly researched article is based on too many assumptions and reflects a narrow-minded myopic viewpoint for creating a certain narrative. It would have been better if BBC first looked inwards and tried to explain multi-billion dollar sales of British govt to multiple partner countries. We however do understand the pain of increased defense exports of Pakistan purely on merits of fair competition in global arms markets; may it be ammunition or #JF-17. The pain is accentuated due to Indian cronies in British media industry. Rest assured, the increased exports of #Pakistan’s defense industry are more on the cards with SIFC and a structured approach.
will have to come out with more misinformation and deceit
https://twitter.com/politicalprism_/status/1724016949678731471?s=46