ISLAMABAD - Abi-Habib, the *NYT's* South Asia correspondent has said US officials still do not have sufficient reason to believe that an F-16 was shot down by India, as claimed by IAF .
New Delhi had insisted that Pakistan's use of F-16 against India meant that Islamabad stood in violation of a sales agreement with the US, which reportedly restricts the fighter jets to be used for anti-terrorism activities alone.
She explained how Pakistan may not have committed a violation of its sales agreement with the US even if it did use F-16s to shoot down Indian jets (which the PAF nonetheless says never happened).
"The US says if Pakistan used an F-16 to shoot down an Indian MiG, it may not have violated sale agreement," she tweeted.
"They say if India entered Pakistani airspace for a second day, and Pakistan used the jet defensively, the contract wasn't violated. But, if Pakistan used an F-16 to attack India first, then deal was violated.
"Citing weapons experts and officials, Abi-Habib also put a question mark on Indian Air Force's claim that the AIM-120 missile's remnant that was displayed by New Delhi was 'proof' of Pakistan's use of an F-16 in the counter-strike to the Balakot incident.