Showing posts with label AFS ARMs PROCUREMENT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFS ARMs PROCUREMENT. Show all posts

Saturday, April 11, 2015

Indian PM Modi Requests Urgent Delivery of 36 Rafale Jets From France

Source:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/india/2015/india-150410-sputnik01.htm?_m=3n%2e002a%2e1390%2eka0ao00b2h%2e19xs
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/mrf.htm







Indian PM Modi Requests Urgent Delivery of 36 Rafale Jets From France

Sputnik News 

 
 
10 Apr 2015


Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked France to urgently deliver 36 Rafale jets as quickly as possible.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi called on France Friday to urgently deliver 36 Rafale jets.

The official spokesperson for India's foreign ministry Syed Akbaruddin quoted Modi's words on Twitter:

"Have requested 36 Rafale jets in fly-away condition as quickly as possible."


Earlier, Le Monde reported that India agreed to purchase 63 Rafale jets for $7.7 billion, citing a source in the Indian Ministry of External Affairs.

In 2012, India chose France's Dassault Aviation to supply it with 126 Rafale multirole fighter aircraft.
The multibillion dollar project has long been surrounded by uncertainty due to its high costs and Dassault's unwillingness to guarantee the performance of Rafale aircraft produced in India under transfer of technology agreements.


Previously, media reports suggested that India might cancel the deal with France altogether and consider buying Russian or British fighter jets instead.

 


Further Reading




    Medium Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft   (MMRCA/MCRA)Multi-Role Fighter



On 10 April 2015, Indian Prime Minister Nradendra Modi announced, while on a state visit to France, that India would purchase 36 Rafale fighter jet aircraft. All 36 aircraft would be built in France; an increase from the original agreement's 18. Overall, the announcement still marked a decrease from the initial 126 Rafale that were to be sold and left unresolved the fate of the initial deal's remaining 90 aircraft.

It was reported on 31 January 2012, that India had selected the Dassault Rafale fighter jet as the winner of its MMRCA competition. The Dassault entrant had been selected over the Eurofighter Typhoon. It was reported that Dassault had been the lower of the 2 bidders, with the deal being estimated to be worth $11 billion. Under the deal, 18 Rafales were to be delivered ready-made, while 108 more would be built in India. Further negotiations were expected to take place before India finalized the agreement.


India has not yet awarded this contract. Rather, they had determined who was assessed as making the lowest bid and therefore asked to enter into further negotiations. But both BAE Systems and government body UK Trade and Investment [UKTI] have publicly stated that the Eurofighter Typhoon has not yet been ruled out for India. On 07 February 2012 it was reported that Eurofighter partners in the UK, Spain, Italy and Germany were to consider 'all options', including a potential price cut, in order to win India's multi-role fighter contract (MRCA). Price cuts were being considered, and BAE argued that Typhoon would be newer, more versatile and easier to modernise than the French aircraft.


The Medium Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MMRCA) / Multi-Role Fighter purchase will replace India's ageing Russian built MiG-21s, which date back to the 1960s. Russian aircraft make up most of India's fleet, which had no US-built hardware in it.

The Mirage-2000-5 and the SU-30K were the two aircraft that were considered to be feasible alternatives to replace obsolescent aircraft that the Air Force planned to phase out. While both aircraft were still under development, the Mirage-2000-5 was designed ab initio as a multi-role aircraft with identified avionics systems and weaponry. The SU-30K on the other hand was designed only for an air defence role. In order to improve the declining combat capability of the Air Force owing to fleet obsolescence, the Ministry contracted in November 1996 for supply of 40 SU-30 aircraft and associated equipment with its manufacturer at a total cost of US $1462 million.


The United States imposed military sanctions on Delhi following India's May 1998 nuclear tests. But the sanctions were phased out starting in late 2001, following September 11th, and bilateral ties have since flourished.


As of 2000 the French were negotiating the sale of 10 Mirage 2000, which the IAF needed to make up for attrition. The deal had been stalled since 1990 over price. The Mirage 2000 with IAF in 1985 technology, while the version under discussion was 1996 technology, but is not the latest Mirage 2000-5. In November 2002 Hindustan Aeronautics Limited along with the Indian Air Force participated in joint technical discussions with M/s Dassault Aviation, M/s Thales and M/s Snecma, France to assess the feasibility of production and transfer of technology for manufacture of Mirage 2000-5 MK II aircraft. The discussions are at a preliminary stage.


As of March 2002 the IAF reportedly had plans to acquire as many as 126 Mirage 2000-5s to equip seven squadrons. The IAF reportedly wanted 36 Mirage 2000-5s to be delivered in completed form, with the remainder to be assembled by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) at Bangalore.


India's program to acquire 126 new multirole fighters may be worth more than $9 billion within the next two years. According to Moscow Defense Brief the number of the planes may increase up to 180-190 and the price of the contract will increase up to eight billion dollars.


What began as a lightweight fighter competition to replace India's shrinking MiG-21 interceptor fleet bifurcated into two categories and two expense tiers. In January 2005 it was reported that the program appeared to have shifted its preference toward a twin-engined aircraft. This would rule against platforms such as Dassault's Mirage 2000H, Lockheed Martin's F-16 and the Saab/BAE Systems Gripen, and put into play Dassault's Rafale, RSKMiG's MiG-29 and the Eurofighter Typhoon. India will not consider a further derivative of Sukhoi's Su-30.


In February 2005 Indian Air chief Air Marshal SP Tyagi said the air force would acquire 126 fighter aircraft from different countries. The first jet worth Rs 2.5 billion would arrive in India by 2007. Air Marshal SP Tyagi stated that the Indian government was negotiating acquisition of aircraft with the US, France and Russia. A Request for Information (RFI) had been sent to four firms - Lockheed Martin (F-16), MiG RAC of Russia (MiG 29 M2), Dassault Aviation of France (Mirage 2000-5) and Gripen of Sweden. "F-16 is one of the aircrafts we are looking at along with three other aircrafts of similar capabilities. We are not only considering their multi-role combat capabilities but also air superiority," Tyagi said on the sidelines of an international aerospace seminar being held as part of the Aero India event. The Indian air force got the chance in October 2004 to go head-to-head with Singapore [RSAF] F-16s during a joint exercise at Gwalior.


The Bush administration said 25 March 2005 it was notifying Congress of plans to sell F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan. President Bush telephoned Indian Prime Minister Monmohan Singh to tell him of the move, drawing what an Indian government spokesman said was an expression of great disappointment. In his conversation with Indian Prime Minister Singh, President Bush said the United States will respond positively to India's request for bids for new planes, though he noted this does not constitute a sale.


There has been some speculation that the Bush administration may be ready to sell high-end F-16 planes to India. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. told NDTV's Rajdeep Sardesai in a 16 March 2005 interview: "We will talk about defense requirements, and I look very much forward to doing that. We want very much for there to be a military balance in the region that preserves peace. We take note of the warming relations between India and Pakistan, very good for South Asia, very good for the entire region, very good for the world. But we are developing a very good defense relationship with India. We've had exercises. We were very much part of an effort with the tsunami, where I understand that India was able to deploy ships within 48 hours. That's extraordinary. So we have a lot of work to do together, and I want this defense relationship to work."


On 16 March 2005 Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh noted: "The Next Steps in the Strategic Partnership, or NSSP, Phase II should be concluded fairly soon. ... It is known, India and the United States have an ongoing dialogue on defense, on various aspects of it, on defense supplies, on defense equipment, and every issue was brought up, including F-16, and as the Secretary has said, no announcement is going to be made. We discussed every aspect of our defense relationship with the Secretary of State, and if anything else happens between now and lunch, I'll let you know. ... we did express certain concerns about certain matters on the defense issue as to how it might pave some complications I think there are no serious differences of opinion. There are one or two items on which we don't agree. Our relations will now reach a maturity but we can discuss these things freely and frankly and place our views firmly on record, and our views with regard to F-16 (inaudible)."


As of July 2005, Boeing had also offered its F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet" for the Indian Air Force's consideration. Boeing said that it was in talks with the IAF and the Navy and was also offering the co-production of the Super Hornet in India, subject to US government approval. In August 2005, Russia offered its MiG-35 for the IAF's consideration as well.


In March 2006 came a surprise pullout by France's Dassault on the eve of the Request For Proposals (RFP). As a result, the Mirage 2000 v5 is no longer in the fray, despite the fact that India already flies 40 Mirage 2000Ds and its senior officials had touted standardisation as a plus factor.


Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal F.H. Major said in July 2007 that the air force wanted to reduce the inventory in its combat jet arsenal to three aircraft systems only, and over the next few years, it would use the home-made Tejas as the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the new MRCAs as the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) and the 35-ton SU30-MKIs as the Heavy Combat Aircraft (HCA).


The Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) RFP capped a process that began in 2001, when the IAF sent out its request for information (RFI) for 126 jets. After delays lasting almost 2 years beyond the planned December 2005 issue date, India's Ministry of Defence finally announced a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) on 28 August 2007. Under the terms of purchase, the first 18 aircraft will come in a 'fly away' condition, while the remaining 108 will be manufactured under Transfer of Technology. Some reports add an option for an additional 64 aircraft on the same terms, bringing the total to 190 aircraft. The selection process was likely to take at least 2 1/2 years, with source selection at the end of 2009, followed by lengthy price negotiations, and probably including delays along the way.


Indian Air Force's (IAF) 126 multi-role combat aircraft were planned to be procured around 2012. Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major said October 30, 2007 that "All going well I am looking at the first induction of MMRCA by 2012-13. The delivery begins 48 months after the contract is signed. Evaluation of the aircraft will take at least two-three years." As of 2007 the Indian Air Force (IAF) had around 30-32 squadrons worth of serviceable aircraft. This was well below the target of 39 1/2. About 21 squadrons flew MiG-21s of one vintage or another, and overall squadron strength was projected to plunge to 27 during the 2012-2017 period.
By the time the evaluation process is complete, the size of the order is likely to rise to around 200 jets, as the IAF, which was down to 32 squadrons from a high of 39 1/2, expected to see a further depletion of its fleet due to the retirement of some its ageing Soviet-era MiG-21 aircraft.


In January 2009 the Swedish manufacturer of Gripen, SAAB International, proposed to India transfer of technology to become 'an independent manufacturer' of its own fighter jets. Looking forward to the trials for the medium multi-role combat aircraft, SAAB favored 'extensive transfer of technology' well in excess of 60 percent requirement to boost India's indigenous capabilities in this regard.


India's long-running Multi-Role Fighter competition narrowed on 27 April 2011 as the field was narrowed from six to two contestants. The American bids for Lockheed Martin's F-16 and Boeing's F/A-18 Super Hornet were rejected, as was the Swedish Gripen and Russian MiG-35. Dassault Rafale fighter of France and the joint Eurofighter Typhoon project were still in the running. The US countered with an offer to sell the F-35 to the Indians, including possibly the short-takeoff version to operate off Indian aircraft carriers. If successful, it would perhaps be the death blow to European fighter sales to Asia.


By early 2012 State-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) was preparing to progressively manufacture the Dassault Rafale combat jet that has apparently been chosen by the Indian Air Force (IAF) for its $10.4 billion order for 126 planes. The first 18 aircraft would come in fly-away condition, within three years of signing of the contract and meanwhile, HAL would get the production tooling, expertise and technical know-how under transfer of technology from the French. The remaining 108 aircraft would initially be progressively manufactured from SKD (semi-knocked-down) and CKD (completely knocked-down) kits. Gradually, HAL would start producing the fuselage and other parts from the raw materials. Dassault engineers would assist in technology transfer and production plants.


India insisted that Dassault take full responsibility for the aircraft produced at Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. plant in Bengaluru. Negotiations had been deadlocked for over a year on this point. France said it cannot give guarantees for production of the aircraft made at a facility over which it has no administrative or expert control. The Indian government would decide on the Rafale deal only after the ministry's contract negotiations committee submitted its report in early March 2015.


Under a new proposal in March 2015, Dassault would not be liable for penalties if Hindustan Aeronautics failed to deliver the planes on time. The deal was initially worth $12 billion but was widely estimated to have jumped to $20 billion, primarily because of the implications of building some of the jets in India. Under terms of the contract, 18 of the planes will be sold ready-to-fly while the rest will be assembled at an Indian state-run facility.


The four-nation European Aeronautic Defense and Space consortium (EADS) reaffirmed its proposal to offer Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft to India if its long-disputed deal to acquire French Rafale jets falls through, German Ambassador to India Michael Steiner said 08 April 2015. "The consortium stands ready with their proposal. The governments of the four nations are supporting this proposal because they are convinced it is a good one both in terms of quality of the product and price," the diplomat was quoted as saying by the Indian news outlet Odisha Sun Times.


India had yet to make a final decision on whether it will acquire French Rafale fighter aircraft and some saw the Russian-designed SU-30 multirole fighter as an alternative if the deal with France’s Dassault Aviation falls through, a source in the Indian Ministry of Defense told Sputnik on 12 January 2015. “No doubt there are complications regarding the Rafale deal as the deal is lingering but at present no final decision has been taken by the Ministry of Defense in this regard and status quo remain the same. But in case the deal fails SU-30 may be the option,” the source said.


Acquiring Russian-designed Sukhoi Su-30MKI instead of France's Rafale fighter aircraft would be the most beneficial option for India in terms of price and performance characteristics, a spokesman for the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade (CAWAT) said 12 January 2015. “If India chooses not to buy French Rafale fighter aircraft in favor of Russian Su-30MKI, it would be beneficial for the Indian side in every aspect. The tactical and technical characteristics of the Russian plane are much better than those of the French fighter jet,” the spokesman said.



































 

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

पक्का खबर Ukraine Just Lose 5 Indian Air Force Planes?

SOURCE:
http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/did-ukraine-just-lose-5-indian-air-force-planes/





                         पक्का   खबर 


Ukraine Just Lose 5 Indian Air Force Planes?




Thursday, March 19, 2015

INDIAN DEFENCE AND ( Mr babu) THE ABOMINABLE NO MAN









MORE THAN PAKISTAN & CHINA BABUs ARE THE BIGGEST THREAT TO THE INDIAN DEFENCE & SECURITY.  FOR EVERY ILLEGITIMATE  CHILD BIRTH OF MILITARY RULE IN PAKISTAN THE  INDIAN BABU FEELS THE PANGS OF LABOUR PAIN & INDUCES THE SAME IN THE INDIAN   POLITICIAN & HARBINGERING THE INDUCED HOSTILITIES TOWARDS THE INDIAN ARMED FORCES.--- VASUNDHRA







                     INDIAN DEFENCE
                                   AND 
                               [MR Babu]
              THE ABOMINABLE NO MAN

                                  Claude Arpi                    





Claude Arpi is an expert on the history of Tibet, China and the subcontinent. He was born in Angoulême, France. After graduating from Bordeaux University in 1974, he decided to live in India and settled in the South where he is still staying with his Indian wife and young daughter. He is the author of numerous English and French books including ‘The Fate of Tibet,’ ‘La Politique Française de Nehru: 1947-1954,’ ‘Born in Sin: the Panchsheel Agreement’ and ‘India and Her Neighbourhood.’ He writes regularly on Tibet, China, India and Indo-French relations. In the present article, he analyses the pathetic state of the country's defence sector. 


                                        
India’s defence sector is today facing one of the grimmest times since the debacle of 1962. Many will infer that it is because India is a democracy governed by the rule of law and not a totalitarian regime. It could be, let us first have a look at the facts. 
 On July 10, A K Antony, the Defence Minister, announced that the 155-mm artillery guns fielded by Bofors and Israel’s Soltam had not met the Army’s parameters during field trials. The government had decided to refloat a global tender.


  He explained that the Army was not satisfied with the field trials over four years. “We will issue fresh tenders at the earliest and ensure that these guns are inducted into the Army within the shortest possible time”. Euphemism! Four rounds of trials had been conducted between 2002 and 2006.The then Chief of Army Staff, General J JSingh confirmed that the guns from Bofors and Soltam had not met qualitative requirements. The deal estimated at Rs 4,000 crore was for 400 155-mm 52-calibre guns with India showing her interest to manufacture more than a thousand guns under the transfer of technology. The Pakistani newspaper Daily Times commented: “The real reason for issuing the fresh global tender is to avoid buying the guns from the company that supplied the Bofors guns in 1979, resulting in a political turmoil with allegations of kickbacks to the then Prime Minister, late Rajiv Gandhi. Fears that the Opposition would link the two deals, re-ignite the Bofors scandal, and use it against the Congress in upcoming elections, led to the move.” They might be right.



Next episode. The website, DefenseNews.com on September 3, announced: “The Indian Air Force’s planned purchase of 18 Spyder Low Level Quick Reaction Missiles (LLQRMs) from Israel’s Rafael Armament Development Authority may be in jeopardy. Defence Ministry officials have asked that the estimated $325 million procurement plan be reviewed by the Central Vigilance Commission.”




 Rumors spread that the ministry would cancel the contract with Israel following allegations of illegally influencing the purchase process. The site commented: “The decision of the government has come out at the time when India has just started the process of major upgradation of its air defence systems.” Analysts thought that the Ministry was keen to diversify its procurement and that Israel would emerge as one of the major Indian partners, bringing a balance in the over reliance on Russia. 




 Two months later, the news broke that the order from the European consortium Eurocopter for 197 helicopters for the Indian Army had been cancelled in an abrupt communiqué. The Defence Ministry spokesman Sitanshu Kar gave no reason for the decision. Here again this comes after several long years of tenders and trials, during which the Eurocopter emerged as the front-runner for the deal. Kar just stated: "A fresh RFP will be issued shortly." Strange! Some press agencies quoting sources in the defence establishment said that the negotiations were terminated because of “major deviations in the approved parameters of the helicopter and procedures.” It was later denied by the representatives of the European company in a press conference in Delhi. The Franco-German-Spanish Eurocopter Group is a Division of European Aerospace and Defence Systems (EADS), a world leader in aerospace (of Airbus fame) and defence. The only competitor in the race for the deal was Bell of the US.




  It was murmured that the Bush Administration had more clout in the corridors of South Block than its French or German counterparts. It is possibly true, but the next question is, what will happen to the selection process for 126 fighter planes? Will it follow the same fate?



An interesting article appeared in the Business Standard written by Ajai Shukla, a journalist with an army background. He asked a very pertinent question: Did the babus, who cancelled the deal, have a thought about those who valiantly fight to defend India’s borders? He particularly mentioned the troops on the Siachen glacier: “For those jawans, and for tens of thousands of others like them who have already been cut off by the snows, this decision means a clear reduction in chances of survival.” George Fernandes had set up the good tradition of sending senior officers of the Ministry to the glacier to get direct knowledge of the consequences of their decision; this has probably been abandoned. 



 We all know the unfortunate way of planning in the land of Bharat. It is only after a soldier dies that someone starts thinking that coffins are urgently needed. Coffins are then quickly purchased, but soon after the CAG enters into the picture and objects: “Illegal! The three statutory quotations were not obtained and field trials not conducted”. It becomes a major scam and the Ministry decides to draft new rules and regulations, more rigorous to avoid future scams. The new rules are so stringent, that hardly any deal can pass through the net.




  In the chopper case, Shukla rightly points out: “The cancelled purchase from Eurocopter had taken six years to fructify. Whether another selection procedure will end in a perfectly objective decision is already well known: it will not”.


As a result of “some pending decision in acquisitions”, last year the Ministry had to return almost 3,000 crore in the capital outlay section itself. Under the fiscal responsibility law, the ministries, which are unable to spend the money allocated to them in the prescribed timeframe, have to return the unspent funds. Every year, money has thus been returned to the Consolidated Fund of India. 




 You will tell me: what can India do? True, the babus are ruling India. An IAS officer that I encountered in the past was nicknamed ‘The Abominable No Man’. This person would write ‘no’ to any proposal and find rules to justify his decision; during his long career he had discovered that it was the safest way to never be caught one day by the CAG, CVC or the dreaded RTI.



 Even if politicians had the will to change this state of affairs, they probably won’t able be able to. Babudom is too engrained in India’s working pattern and even the CAG is said to have admitted: “The emphasis seems to be on technical compliance through a multitude of detailed rules and regulations rather than on creating a new organisational culture, which focuses on results.” The only solution would be to leave such decisions to the Army, but you will be told that it is extremely dangerous; we could end up the Pakistan way. “Better to rein in the Generals! And the Army is not what it used to be!”




Shukla also reveals that India is the only major country that plans its defence one year at a time. India is supposed to have a 15-year Long-Term Integrated Procurement Plan (LTIPP), now the CAG has reported that the LTIPP 2002-2017 was finalised in 2006 only. What about the years between 2002 and 2006? Lost! In any case, with only a year left for the 10th defence plan, a revised LTIPP has now been ordered. It should be ready in 2009. But similar fate will probably await the new avatar. True, it is not in the Indian psyche to think so much in advance. The gods are supposed provide on a daily basis for our basic requirements (including defence?), so why to bother?




 The problem is not faced by the Army alone. The Navy has its share of misfortunes. Will the diplomats able to salvage the sinking deal for the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov. Purchased for one dollar (or rouble, I don’t remember), the ship was to be refurbished in the Sevmach dockyards in Russia for $650 million. It was supposed to be ready in 2008, but Russia has now announced that it would cost $1.2 billion and the transformation work will be completed in 2111 only. The Naval Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta had to speak bluntly: India might have to look elsewhere for hardware if contractual obligations are not respected. Whether India cancels the deal or not, the Navy is in a difficult situation today. 




 This sorry state of affairs of India’s preparedness became even more apparent when Antony visited the Sino-Indian border in Sikkim: “It is an eye-opener for me. There is no comparison between the two sides. Infrastructure on the Chinese side is far superior. They have gone far in developing their infrastructure".


  The minister honestly admitted that China was far ahead. After visiting Nathu La, he however promised that he would take vigorous steps to develop the frontier areas to match China.


Indeed, India can be proud to be the largest democracy in the world and the armed services can be proud to have an honest Minister, but it is today clearly not enough. India should be ready for any eventuality and for this, drastic changes in the bureaucracy are required. Will the Government will bold enough to take the necessary step is another question.







  By the same author:

 As Dalai Lama gains, Tibetans lose |

  Burma's freedom cry |  

 India-China: Imperfect harmony

Thursday, November 27, 2014

Action at Defence Ministry at last Bigger challenges need to be faced

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20141127/edit.htm




    MR PARIKAR ON HINDSIGHT IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR PERFORMANCE TILL DATE IS NO BETTER THAN SAINT ANTONY. ST ANTONY NEVER PROMISED ANY THING BECAUSE HIS MOUTH WAS ALWAYS SHUT. ALAS MR PARIKAR YOUR MOUTH IS NOT SHUT BUT EVERY TIME YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH IT IS ONLY TO ANNOUNANCE THAT YOU HAVE SHIFTED THE GOAL POST OR  YOU  HAVE EVEN CHANGED THE SCORE BOARD ( DATED   27 NOV  2015 )





Action at Defence Ministry at last Bigger challenges need to be faced
                          By                        Inder Malhotra





           
          

               



The Indian armed forces should be liberated from the stranglehold of the generalist BABUs  of the MoD

                  FOR over a quarter of a century the Indian Army has desperately needed artillery guns. But no matter how hard it tried it couldn't get them. One reason for this, of course, was the aftermath of the Bofors scandal, which became the standard excuse of all concerned not to take any decision at all. There was an element of disingenuousness in this posturing. For, despite the commissions worth Rs 64 crore distributed to the still unnamed beneficiaries, the Swedish gun served this country superbly during the Kargil war. Ironically, it was at the peak of this fight that the Army discovered to its dismay that it was running out of ammunition because of the obsession of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to blacklist all suppliers it suspected or disliked.  Ultimately, we had to buy the ammunition from South Africa at thrice the normal price.  Even this made no difference to the civilian bureaucracy in the MoD and its political bosses.   Indecision remained the ruling doctrine of both.  Sadly, A. K. Antony, a very fine man with an enviable reputation for personal probity, who has been the longest-serving Defence Minister so far, became the biggest hurdle to decision-making.  By doing nothing he was sure of retaining his image as "St. Antony".   BUT how  "St. Antony".   WAS HE BETTER THAN  HAV NATHHA SINGH who like his Defence Minister had decided to do nothing and in his village people   today  address  him as "SANT NATHHA JI "   ( http://bcvasundhra.blogspot.in/2014/11/my-name-is-sep-sipahi-bhoop-singh.html )  Against this bleak backdrop it is greatly to be welcomed that within a few days after his appointment as Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar has ended the paralysis over the procurement of artillery guns by clearing the decks for acquiring 814 long-range mounted artillery guns to fill a serious gap in its equipment and, therefore, in its overall capability.   The cost will be Rs 15,570 crore. The deal was approved after a serious consideration at a Defence Acquisition Council meeting that Mr Parrikar presided over for the first time.   He also said that the DAC should meet oftener than it has done so far even if its agenda is rather short. My first thought on hearing this was that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should have handed over the Defence Ministry to the former Goa Chief Minister while forming his Cabinet on May 26.    Mr Parrikar has laid down that that the acquisition of artillery guns — like all future procurements — will take place within the framework of the Prime Minister’s “Make-in-India” concept.     While the Army will buy 100 guns off the shelf of the foreign vendor, the remaining 714 will be manufactured here. Global tenders will be floated soon, and the Indian manufacturer will have to "tie up" with the selected foreign vendor for building the gun.   Several Indian companies such as the Tatas, Larsen & Toubro and Kalyani, as well as the public sector Ordnance Factory Board have already produced prototypes of 155mm, 52 calibre guns. They are all likely to take part in the bid.     So far, so good. But the real point is that the defenders of the country's freedom and frontiers will be greatly handicapped in discharging their duty until the makers of policy on national security attend to the fundamental task of reforming the higher management of the defence system.    Civilian control over the military is, of course, the basic principle in every democracy. Indeed, even in China the doctrine of the  “Party controlling the Gun”  has prevailed since the time of Mao Zedong. The present Chinese President, Xi Jinping, has reinforced it.   





Bu But in a democracy like India

         the civilian supremacy does not,



           and  must not,mean the






      supremacy of civil servants




 It is long overdue that the Indian armed forcesabsolutely apolitical, unlike the armies of some of our neighbours
— should be liberated from the stranglehold of the generalist babus of the MoD.



In recent years when a service chief informally and politely told the then Prime Minister that he and his two opposite numbers regretted that they were not asked to be present at a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), the reply he got was:

: “Well, you were represented by the Defence secretary”!


This pattern has to end.


One thing that the Modi government does not need to do is to appoint a commission or committee to suggest what to do. There is a heap of sensible reports on the subject that are gathering dust.



The report of the Kargil Committee — headed by this country's strategic guru K. Subrhamanyam — had, among other things, made a strong case of having a Chief of Defence Staff.



The Atal Behari Vajpayee government took it seriously. A Group of Ministers, chaired by L. K. Advani, endorsed the suggestion. At the last minute, while accepting all the GoM's recommendations, Atalji held over the one on the CDS.


He made no secret of the fact that he had consulted former President R. Venkataraman and former Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao, both of whom had been defence ministers in Congress governments.



 Seven years later, the Manmohan Singh government appointed the Naresh Chandra Task Force on revamping the entire external and internal security setup. Realising that there still was much resistance to having a CDS, it suggested a step in the right direction: the appointment of a permanent Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee with a fixed tenure of two years.



This was a vast improvement over the existing arrangement under which the most senior of the three chiefs acts as chairman of the CSC also until his retirement. He neither has enough time for inter-Services matters because he has to run his own service too, nor a long enough tenure. In one case it lasted precisely 30 days.



The permanent chief, according to the Task Force, would not interfere with the operational matters but handle all inter-Service issues, including determination of priority in the matter of acquisition of weapons and equipment. Most importantly, the permanent chairman would be able to supervise the Strategic Command more effectively than has been happening since 1998. Over to Mr. Parrikar.       



     MR PARIKAR ON HINDSIGHT IT LOOKS LIKE YOUR PERFORMANCE TILL DATE IS NO BETTER THAN SAINT ANTONY. ST ANTONY NEVER PROMISED ANY THING BECAUSE HIS MOUTH WAS ALWAYS SHUT. ALAS MR PARIKAR YOUR MOUTH IS NOT SHUT BUT EVERY TIME YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH IT IS ONLY TO ANNOUNANCE THAT YOU HAVE SHIFTED THE GOAL POST OR  YOU  HAVE EVEN CHANGED THE SCORE BOARD ( DATED   27 NOV  2015 )