The Hindu Business Line : Pragmatic about US defence technology

THE recent offer of American fighters and technology to India should not be spurned out of pique or by following the familiar and hackneyed decision-making process dictated by one political party or the other. It is laughable to believe that there is a new arms race on between India and Pakistan since both, in the eyes of the world, are sitting pretty atop atomic arsenals.

Therefore, each acquisition for replacement of old, worn-out and obsolete equipment by either country cannot be said to be fuelling the arms race now, even incrementally.

India is avowedly following a policy of arming itself purely for the defence of the nation. . In that case, it should not worry too much about a few squadrons of F-16s with Pakistan, against its own formidable Sukhoi-30s and Mirages and the new planes and technology on offer from the US.

In India, even during the years when generous allotments are made in the Budget, arms acquisitions have never matched expectations. Whatever the armed forces may say for public consumption, their procedures for determining specifications, interminable trials and moving goals for modernisation will not impress any dispassionate efficiency expert.

On top of it, the inertia often exhibited by higher echelons in the Ministries of Defence and Finance adds to the delay. This is compounded by the ever-promising and rarely-fulfilling DRDO, and the abysmally low productivity of government-owned production units.

The cognoscenti know that all along there was another factor which impeded modernisation in comparable terms — the bear-hug from Russia. Every time the military puts out its RFP, the Russians or nowadays even the Czechs or the Poles are able to offer a product of their own in their inimitable manner, with their political clout.

This clout factor has been so strong that India has not hesitated to bail out ailing armament industries in the Urals by continuing with the Russian armour for, perhaps, no other reason than familiarity. In this context it may be good to know that the US has laws under which it punishes US companies if found guilty of using graft to push their wares, even in foreign countries. Reportedly, Russia has no such law and its legal framework is known for its opacity.

When the Russian armament industry was tottering after the advent of `perestroika', India was caught napping and missed a rare opportunity to invite some of its brilliant scientists and technologists, particularly in the fields of aviation and space. India's loss was Israel's, if not America's, gain. Also, since then, the Russians appear to be less ready to impart technical knowledge than before. Transferring technology from Russia is painful from the word go. Legions of translators have to be employed before the Indian counterparts can make sense out of their drawings and specifications.

It is needless to remind ourselves that we have now established a track record of making cooperative and collaborative ventures with the US a great success. This has happened ever since the Indian youngsters discovered that studying in US graduate schools and working in their corporations gave them a sense of freedom rarely found in the stifling atmosphere of hierarchical controls at home. In our case, the offer of fighter aircraft is less important than the offer of technology and setting up facilities here. For all the fanfare made about having successfully flown the LCA, further progress depends on critical imports or help in Avionics hardware (incidentally, we have proved ourselves in developing embedded software) and even crucial mechanical controls.

All those interested in the early introduction of our own fighters should not be averse to some nudge and help from the US, even if we have, sadly, more or less abandoned the `designed in India' main battle-tank.

India needs the US for support in space and civilian nuclear technology, nuclear fuel for Tarapur and, politically, for a seat on the UN Security Council. The US needs India's cooperation — India being the `incredible democracy' according to Mr George Bush — in its efforts to alter the colour of the political map of the world by erasing dictatorships.

(The author is a former member, Ordnance Board, Kolkata.)

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Icons in distress

Twelfth Finance Commission: The endless search for solutions

China's extraordinary export boom

Creditable initiatives from RBI

WTO may slip on banana peels, again

Pragmatic about US defence technology

Foreign operations of Bank of India