‘Private sector key to developing air defence’

What is the status of the fighter jet fleet of the Indian Air Force (IAF)?

IAF has a sanctioned strength of 42 fighter aircraft squadrons. According to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, IAF is now down to 25 active squadrons. Fourteen squadrons are equipped with MiG-21s and MiG-27s, which may be retired between 2015 and 2024. This seriously undermines our capability to wage a two-front war. We need to expedite the proposed induction of Su-30 MKIs, Tejas, Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) & the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA).

How does our fleet compare with that of China and Pakistan?

China’s People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) has approximately 2,000 operational fighter aircrafts. Their fleet of indigenous J-10/11/16 fighter jets and Russian Su-27/30 is technologically superior to India’s. It is developing its fifth generation J-20 and plans to purchase Russian Su-35s. Our capability gap with China is widening by the day. The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has close to 400 . Given the defence ties between PAF and PLAAF, India cannot afford to be in a ‘ chalta hai ’ mode.

In terms of planning and procurement of modern fighter jets, where does the Ministry of Defence (MoD) stand?

The MoD lacks a clear vision and an efficient defence procurement procedure (DPP). This is worsened by lack of coordination between agencies; a bureaucracy with limited tenures and low defence knowledge; and an overall environment of fear due to various procurement scandals in the past.

Most leading defence powers use professional consulting firms to design, monitor and implement long-term procurement programs under the Government’s overall control. While other ministries in India do this regularly, it’s a concept alien to MoD.

In 2012, MoD selected Dassault for the $20 billion-order forMedium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft(MMRCA). Why is the deal in trouble?

Like most contracts, it has grey areas. Media reports suggest that Dassault needs to take full responsibility for the 108 aircraft to be manufactured by HAL. Dassault does not accept this as a pre-condition and feels that its liability is limited to just transfer of technology to HAL. An untoward incident with a HAL-built aircraft may create severe financial liabilities for Dassault.

Other issues could the massive escalation of cost due to inflation, technical upgrades and exchange rate variation. The non-flexibility in changing Indian offset partners selected eight years back could be another challenge.

The defence minister has been talking of Sukhois as an alternative. Which is better suited for India'?

The MMRCA is expected to fit in between Su-30MKI and Tejas. The Russians MiG-35 did bid for the MMRCA deal but lost. To open the Sukhoi versus Dassault debate could be a smart negotiating tactic, or very unfortunate, if it’s not. India is ranked 142nd out of 189 countries in World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business ranking. To drag the MMRCA selection process for eight long years and then question the very need for the product may not reflect very well on India. A flexible approach, without compromising India’s interests, is needed here.

After 32 years of development, the LCA was finally handed over to the Air Force. Is the delay justified? How does Tejas fare?

New aircraft design, development and certification do take decades. Specifications also change as technology advancements happen constantly. It is premature to comment on how Tejas may fare. A better approach could have been to use off-the-shelf components and then replace them, over time, with made-in India ones. The systematic sidelining of the Indian private sector – where India’s best engineers go every year – has been a big mistake. No aerospace power in the world is 100 per cent self-sufficient. The US military uses products from UK, French, German, Swedish and Israeli companies. The Eurofighter Typhoon is produced by four European countries that, incidentally, fought two World Wars among them. Focus and global collaboration is key.

What are the reasons behind India being the world’s largest defence importer?

Over-dependence on government monopolies like DRDO and Defence Public Sector Units (DPSU) has brought us this dubious distinction. The biggest military power – USA – doesn’t depend on DPSUs. Its defence research is handled by DARPA, with less than 200 scientists and no labs. DARPA relies on US industry, universities, government laboratories and individuals. In sharp contrast, DRDO has 52 laboratories, over 30,000 technical staff and not much to show in return. DARPA is headed by Delhi-born US scientist Dr Arati Prabhakar. It’s interesting to see that while US can entrust sensitive military research to a person of Indian origin, our antiquated defence establishment would not trust fellow Indians if they are from the private sector. It’s perhaps driven by individual insecurities, than sound logic.

COMMENT NOW