Quote:Friday, Feb. 19, 2010By JYOTI THOTTAM AND NILANJANA BHOWMICK / NEW DELHI



The Indian Defense Minister, A.K. Antony, called this week's massive defense industry trade show, Defexpo 2010, "an endeavor to showcase India's capabilities in land and naval systems, as well as its emergence as an attractive destination for investment in the defense sector." His junior minister, M.M. Pallam Raju, was a little more blunt. He called the event, which attracted more than 600 companies from 35 countries, "a one-stop shop." India is emerging as one of the most important defense markets in the world, with billions to spend, and the global defense industry is only too happy to help it do so.



The country's marquee bid is an order for 126 fighter planes, worth $10 billion — the single biggest tender in the world in the last 15 years. Six companies' jets are in the running: Boeing's F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Aviation's Rafale, Lockheed Martin's F-16, Russia's MiG-35 Saab's JAS 39 Gripen, and the Eurofighter Typhoon from EADS, a six-nation European consortium. All of them sent teams of delegates to Defexpo. They hovered around their booths, giving impromptu presentations over free capuccino to bureaucrats, Army officers and local journalists. The bid is already in its final stages, as Indian Air Force pilots test the planes in the field, so it is unlikely that PowerPoint slides at Defexpo will sway the decision. Still, says Marco Bonelli, spokesman for the Eurofighter Typhoon, "You have to be here."



So it was with no small pride that Eurofighter representatives pointed out that the Defense Minister himself had come to their booth this week and tried out the Typhoon flight simulator. He sat in a replica of the cockpit, watching a head-up display projected onto a screen in front of him as a simulated landscape — in this case, the west of England, near Manchester — passed underneath. Wing Commander Anthony "Foxy" Gregory of the Royal Air Force was there to answer technical questions, and will head next to Bangalore to work with Indian test pilots. "We see the Indian Air Force becoming a strategic partner in the region," Gregory says.



What has really drawn defense companies to India, however, is the smaller-ticket market for internal security, especially after the Nov. 26, 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai. "We had to rethink our strategy after 26/11," says Woolf Gross, corporate director of international programs for Northrop Grumman. "After our review we decided to cater to India's homeland security." The company adapted one of its surveillance systems, for example, to identify suspicious vehicles at sea, the route that the Mumbai attackers are believed to have used. For the first time since the inaugural Defexpo in Delhi in 1999, Northrop Grumman has flown in representatives from all its five units. "We are hoping for that one big sale in India," he says.



The Indian government, too, has signaled the new importance of what it calls "low-intensity conflict," like the multi-agency security offensive aimed at defeating India's armed Maoist insurgency, a movement that controls a wide stretch of territory in central India. The Defense Ministry's research and development arm, which traditionally caters to the needs of the armed forces, this year for the first time displayed unmanned aerial vehicles and other weapons developed for counter-insurgency. "Technology is being dovetailed to suit low-intensity conflicts," a top defense research official told TIME.



U.S. companies are following their lead. Taser, for example, is selling its controversial stun-guns, used by law-enforcement authorities to subdue people, to Indian state police forces as well as central security forces, which are conducting joint anti-Maoist operations. It has already signed contracts for Taser weapons with the police forces of two states — Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir — and expects India to become one of its "top 10, if not top 5," export markets, says spokesman Yogesh Saini. "They're not allowed for private security guards [in India], but we have had people asking about it."



One question left unanswered at Defexpo 2010 was whether a country in which one-third of the adults are illiterate and 43% of children are malnourished should spend so much on weapons. India's central government spent $4.5 billion on education in 2008 — about the same amount that it plans to spend on 197 new helicopters. A handful of protesters picketed outside the gates of the exhibition hall on opening day, but they drew little notice. India's attention is firmly focused on what one defense company representative called the "quality gap" between its weapons and those of its neighbors, Pakistan and China. The gaps at home will have to wait.

Quote:One question left unanswered at Defexpo 2010 was whether a country in which one-third of the adults are illiterate and 43% of children are malnourished should spend so much on weapons. India's central government spent $4.5 billion on education in 2008 — about the same amount that it plans to spend on 197 new helicopters. A handful of protesters picketed outside the gates of the exhibition hall on opening day, but they drew little notice. India's attention is firmly focused on what one defense company representative called the "quality gap" between its weapons and those of its neighbors, Pakistan and China. The gaps at home will have to wait.

Quote:NEW DELHI, February 21, 2010 Special Correspondent



The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) dispelled apprehensions that there was a question mark over the capability of the indigenously manufactured Arjun tank.



Speaking at a press conference here on Saturday, DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat dismissed reports that the tank was undergoing yet another series of revaluations vis-À-vis the Russian T-90 main battle tanks.



Dr. Saraswat said that half of the 124 tanks ordered by the Army had already rolled out, and there was no rethink about their induction. The comparative evaluation referred to in media reports was nothing but a trial of the tank’s role in the overall arsenal of the Army. “It is a normal process of identifying the role the tank will play in the plans,” he said.



“Let me make it clear, that these are not evaluation trials of the Arjun tank, as those trials, including in summer and winter months, are over and more than 50 per cent of the tanks have now rolled out of the factory for induction.”



Dr. Saraswat also refuted criticism about the performance of made-in-India INSAS (Indian Small Arms System) rifles. He said there were no niggles in the INSAS rifle, a standard issue to the infantry and the paramilitary forces, and felt the complaints, if any, must be local in nature. The feedback from the Army indicated that the troops were satisfied with the rifle.



He said the integration of avionics and sensors on a Brazilian plane to produce an indigenous “eye-in-the-sky” was proceeding apace. The modifications of the Embraer aircraft to fit the surveillance systems were “in fairly good shape” and the AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) could be ready for tests in two years, he said.

Quote:Is the government under pressure from the United States to cancel fat defence orders to the European companies and go for purchases from the American firms?



The question is being raised after Union Defence Minister A K Antony recently struck down a $1.6 billion order bagged by the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company for supply of the Airbus transport planes to the Indian Air Force.



This was yet another order legitimately won by an European defence company last year with IAF selecting the multi-role tanker transporter Airbus A330 after four years of labour to pick up the best suiting its needs, but arbitrarily cancelled by Antony without giving any reason.



Last year, a concluded deal for 197 helicopters from Eurocopter, a French-German conglomeration, was similarly cancelled by the defence ministry, which gave a very dodgy financial argument to explain why Boeing's P81 Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft was preferred over Airbus in another deal.



Another decision to award a large tender for the secured defence communication to Motorola, an American firm, over EADS, is also mired in red tape and secrecy, with no explanation coming forward from the defence ministry for dumping the winner to oblige an American firm.

...



Post-nuclear deal, the United States appear sitting pretty on actual and potential defence orders worth US $10 billion from India, and these include F-16 and F-18 multi-rope combat Falcons that may dominate India's front line air defence umbrella by next year.



Other deals that appear to be falling in the American kitty include military transport aircraft like C130J and C-17, reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft, helicopters, naval vessels, Patriot or other missiles and armoured vehicles.



Analysts say buys from the United States have implications of strategic deterrence and cost to the taxpayer, particularly because the American firms never transfer critical technology, have intrusive clauses inbuilt in every contract and the US government always holds the threat of sanctions for use of the American weapons and technology that do not suit the American interests.

Quote:Dr. Saraswat said that half of the 124 tanks ordered by the Army had already rolled out, and there was no rethink about their induction. The comparative evaluation referred to in media reports was nothing but a trial of the tank’s role in the overall arsenal of the Army. “It is a normal process of identifying the role the tank will play in the plans,” he said.

Quote:By John Elliott



Published: February 23 2010 12:08





From [url="http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/"]Riding the Elephant blog [/url]



“It’s time to understand that the gun is innocent”. That has to be the prize quotation to come out of Delhi’s Defexpo defence show last week. It was made by Anand Mahindra who runs Mahindra & Mahindra, a Mumbai-based tractors to software group that is diversifying into defence equipment and is now tendering in India to sell the latest version of a Bofors gun that triggered a major mid-1980s corruption scandal here.



That scandal has hampered the development and equipping of the country’s armed forces for over 20 years. So Mahindra was presumably trying to joke his way out of the political embarrassment of M&M having a joint venture with UK-based BAE Systems, which now makes Bofors guns following a series of takeovers.



In 1986, the Indian government headed by prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, placed a $1.4bn contract with Bofors of Sweden that led to allegations of about $50m in bribes. That’s a pitifully small amount compared with today’s massive corruption levels, but the case has reverberated ever since through Indian’s political system and the courts, embarrassing the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty.



Defence ministers and bureaucrats have been scared to place large sensitive orders, fearing similar bribe scandals. That fear has reached crisis proportions under the current defence minister, A.K.Antony, a Congress politician who is so scared of losing his clean reputation (and damaging his Leftist image in his home state of Kerala) that he proverbially tilts at windmills every time there is a whiff of corruption, cancelling more big contracts than he has placed in the past six years.



Mahindra’s remark is specially relevant now because India urgently needs to shake off the Bofors legacy and modernise its armed forces, which are probably the worst equipped of any large country in the world.



Pallam Raju, the minister of state for defence, said at an army seminar last week that history shows there are hardly any examples internationally “wherein a higher technology military power has been overwhelmed by lower technology power in the long run.”



“Defences are obsolete”



Yet a background paper prepared by the Delhi-based PHD chamber of commerce for the army seminar said that “most of India’s ground based air defences are obsolete” and that upgrades of basic artillery equipment were “ten years behind schedule”. The generals attending the seminar didn’t metaphorically blink at such unpatriotic statements – they knew only too well they are true.



[url="http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2010/feb/06/slide-show-1-india-will-have-to-depend-on-us-for-military-hardware.htm"]The chief of army staff said [/url]recently that 80 per cent of India’s armoured tanks are night blind. “That means like the medieval times you fight morning to evening and take rest at night - Pakistan has 80 per cent of tanks capable to fight at night,” says Rahul Bedi, a defence journalist. “Planning and strategic thinking of the Indian Army’s procurement program is in complete shambles. Bureaucrats and politicians are throttling the procurement process.”



A more academic critique headlined “Arming without Aiming” will be coming soon from the America’s Brookings Institution. Co-authored by Stephen Cohen, a south Asia expert, it argues that India’s arms purchasing has “lacked political direction and has suffered from weak prospective planning, individual service-centred doctrines, and a disconnect between strategic objectives and the pursuit of new technology”.



And Ajai Shukla, a former army officer and now a defence journalist,[url="http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/ajai-shuklacostantony/s-halo/386534/"] writing in the Business Standard daily newspaper[/url], estimates that “Antony’s halo” is costing India 125 per cent more than is necessary for half the equipment it buys because of price rises and because tenders are sometimes being abandoned in favour of more expensive negotiated deals.



India is the world’s largest buyer of defence equipment, with expenditure budgeted at least at $40bn over the next four years. Half of that is on capital expenditure and is likely to rise around 15 per cent in the finance minister’s annual Budget speech this Friday, even though not all of it is ever spent.



70 per cent bought abroad



At least 70 per cent of purchases have been made abroad for decades, mainly because the generally inefficient and moribund public sector-dominated defence establishment cannot deliver even high technology night vision goggles and modern helmets, let alone fighter aircraft or guns. Until recently, the capable private sector was mostly kept out of doing more than supplying minor components because the defence establishment enjoyed the [color="#800080"]combined benefits of protected jobs, patronage, prestige, and foreign kickbacks[/color] – and because Mr Antony instinctively supports public sector trade unions that do not want private sector competition.



[url="http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/india%E2%80%99s-lethargy-drift-and-corruption-escalate-into-crises/"]As I wrote last October[/url], the armed forces have been warning the Defence Ministry for years to accelerate orders for urgently needed new equipment that are mired in bureaucratic inertia, corruption, and the manipulations of competing suppliers who trip up each other’s potential orders. (The same applies to equipment needed for the Home Ministry’s internal security).



How Pakistan and China must enjoy watching the self-inflicted damage that India does to its own war readiness, relishing the thought that they themselves could not do more in a border war.



Some progress has been made in recent years on improving defence manufacturing, but it has been dismally slow since it was nominally opened up to the Indian private sector in 2002. With a few exceptions such as Tata and Larsen & Toubro obtaining rocket launcher contracts, and L&T building the hull of a nuclear submarine, there have been few major private sector orders.



This will gradually change following the introduction in the past year of a technology transfer-oriented “Buy and Make (Indian)” policy, and the (long drawn out and muddled) introduction of an offset programme, where foreign arms companies have to spend half the value of an order in India. This is pulling foreign defence companies into tie-ups with Indian business such as M&M’s with BAE, but offset contracts worth only Rs82,000 crore ($1.8m) have so far been signed.



Less progress has been made on speeding up urgently needed defence orders, often because potential losers lobby or bribe the government to change tack. Following intense US diplomatic pressure, a $550m pending order with Europe’s Eurocopter for 197 modern light helicopters - that are urgently needed - was cancelled two years ago after America realised its Bell company was losing. Inexplicably, Bell failed to tender when the contract was offered again.



Europe complains



Last month, Germany’s ambassador to India, Thomas Matussek, complained publicly after a $1.5bn contract for Airbus A-330 multi-role refueling tanker aircraft made by Europe’s EADS consortium was rejected after the finance ministry said they were too expensive. Mr Matussek alleged “political reasons”, and one does not have to be too much of a conspiracy theorist to sense America’s hand at work again.



Mr Matussek’s complaint had a wider significance at a time when the US, using clout provided by its nuclear supplies deal with India, is trying to supplant Russia as the country’s biggest arm’s supplier. India has begun negotiating some contracts through the US government instead of using tenders, partly to enable it to select specific equipment such as Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster heavy-lift aircraft where a $1.7bn order is being negotiated, and partly to avoid the risk of corruption scandals on competitive tendering. This sort of negotiated contract has happened for decades with Russia, but the use of America’s FMS (foreign military sales) procedure is new and is worrying European countries as Germany, France, and the UK because they look like being squeezed out of key contracts.



So what does India need to begin to turn itself into a state of at least semi-war readiness to cope with potential border wars with China and Pakistan?



First, it needs a defence minister who can shake off the Bofors legacy and cope with kick-backs, whether or not he lines his own and his political party’s pockets. He also needs the political skills, standing and determination to push through quick decisions and play diplomatic games constructively with the US, Russia and Europe so that orders are placed, not cancelled.



Also needed are a prime minister and political leadership who can shake off some of the froth surrounding India’s peace-loving mantra and who are genuinely interested in building up the technological capability, and supporting the manpower, of the country’s fighting forces. Sadly the current dispensation, as it is called in India, does not meet that criteria.



The writer is a former FT south Asia correspondent

Quote:[size="2"] Ajay Banerjee, Tribune News Service [/size][center] [size="2"] [/size][/center]

[size="2"]New Delhi, February 27

Unlike the epic Mahabharata, the Indian Army’s lead tanks named after legendary warriors ‘Arjun’ and ‘Bhishma’ will coexist and will be deployed in different battle arenas in the future. At present, a “deployment” trials are being conducted in the deserts of Rajasthan, where 14 of the home-grown Arjun tanks face the Russian origin T-90 - christened Bhishma - by the Indian Army. [/size]



[size="2"]The Indian Army is likely to order more Arjun tanks rather than depend entirely on the Russian tanks, sources said. The chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Dr VK Saraswat, says: “We are expecting a repeat order of the Arjun tanks in the near future”. [/size]



[size="2"]Separately, sources said two more regiments - some 124 tanks - of the Arjun series are likely to be inducted. An announcement is likely after the “deployment” trials are over. Saraswat clarified the comparative evaluation referred to in media reports was nothing but a trial of the tank’s role. “It is a process to identify the role the tank will play and will not be comparative between the two tanks,” he added. [/size]



[size="2"]The Indian Army had ordered two regiments of the Arjun but had then showed reluctance to accept more. The trials will show the true picture. Commanders of the Indian Army, who in the past have been critical of the Arjun, have slowly come around and now say that the two tanks are of different classes and cannot be compared with each other. [/size]



[size="2"]The Arjun at 58.5-tonne is much heavier than the 46.5 tonne T-90. [color="#800080"]But with more powerful engines the Arjun moves faster than the T-90. It is ideal for deployment in the arid Rajasthan-Gujarat sector facing Pakistan. [/color][/size]



[size="2"][color="#800080"]The Arjun has better and latest systems on board. It has better transmission system than the T-90, accurate firepower while on the move. The Arjun has better thermal imaging capability, enabling it night vision. [/color][/size]



[size="2"][color="#800080"]The night vision capability of T-90 is of lower category. It malfunctions in the heat of Rajasthan,[/color] says an in-house input of the Indian Army. The Army plans to have 1,650 T-90s in the next few years. The production has been localised and the first tanks built in India rolled out a few months ago.[/size]

Quote:NEW DELHI - India plans to buy weapons and equipment worth $100 billion by 2022 as nearly 50 percent of its military gear is obsolete. But defense officers and analysts here are divided on how fast purchases can be made given the traditional slow pace of the Defence Ministry bureaucracy.



"Unless the Indian Defence Ministry devises a quicker method of weapon procurement," it is unlikely the military will be able to buy modern equipment and also replace obsolete weapons in the next 15 years, said Mahindra Singh, a retired Indian Army major general.



India, the second-largest weapon importer after China, fills 70 percent of its requirements from overseas. Indian defense planners want to flip that percentage and meet 70 percent of its weapon and equipment needs from domestic supplies, but despite the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and 39 state-owned military equipment factories, India remains dependent on imports.



DEFENSE SECTOR OPENS UP

The Indian defense sector was opened up to private-sector investments in 2001, but nearly a decade later private companies account for less than $800 million in defense sales, compared with $4.5 billion for state-owned companies.



In 2002, Indian planners introduced the Defence Procurement Procedures (DPP), which are reviewed annually.



However, no major joint venture has emerged between domestic and foreign defense companies. The law limiting investment by foreign companies in the defense sector to 26 percent is largely blamed for the lukewarm response of overseas companies to tie up with Indian entities, said a country manager of a European defense company.



The new DPP are aimed at giving room to private-sector companies, said another senior Defence Ministry official, adding that the defense offset market itself will be worth about $10 billion in the next five to seven years, offering another venue for private-sector companies.



However, some private-sector players say most of the talk is lip service.



"Government is only talking. The new DPP does not aim at any technology transfer. This will only add value in pure manufacturing domain with no long-term capability being built in the country. Government has not looked at the fundamental issue of in-house capability building," said the CEO of a private Indian defense company.



PRIVATE-SECTOR PARTICIPATION

Overseas companies have have remained the military's largest source of equipment.



After the opening of the defense sector in 2001, major industrial houses like the Tata Group, Mahindra Group, the Kirloskar brothers, Larsen & Toubro and Ashok Leyland diversified into defense. Nearly half a dozen more medium-sized industrial firms have joined them.



However, the private-sector companies still are not able to compete with the large state-owned companies, which have been established for more than five decades.



The only major contract that has been won by a private company is the $260 million order for the modernization of Indian Air Force air fields by Tata Power SED. However, even that contract has still to be awarded because Selex of Italy has challenged the selection.



MARKET

In the decade since the 1999 Kargil conflict with Pakistan, India has inked deals worth more than $50 billion. These include eight Boeing P-8I planes for $2.1 billion, six C-130J Super Hercules aircraft for $962 million, the amphibious warship the USS Trenton, worth $460 million, and weapon-locating radars worth more than $150 million from the United States.



Other major deals include acquisition of six Scorpene submarines from France worth $3.9 billion, the purchase and license production of 230 Sukhoi aircraft worth $8.5 billion, a $2.2 billion deal with Israel to jointly develop a medium-range surface-to-air missile system, the purchase from Israel of three Phalcon AWACS for $1.1 billion and a $1.7 billion deal with France to upgrade Mirage aircraft that is still pending.



ROAD AHEAD

Future big-ticket projects include purchase of 126 medium multirole combat aircraft worth $10 billion, purchase of a variety of 155mm/52-caliber guns for another $10 billion, new-generation submarines worth $5 billion, purchase of a variety of helicopters worth $4 billion and acquisition of network-centric warfare platforms worth another $5 billion.



The acquisition list gets lengthier with purchases for homeland security worth $10 billion.



But given the slow pace of procurement, planners are now considering the government-to-government Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route as a quicker and cheaper option.



The FMS route will become more dependable for quick acquisitions in the future, Singh said. â– 

Quote:Pokhran, March 1: Fighter jets of the Indian Air Force participating in war game Vayu Shakti pounded mock enemy bunkers in Pokhran, close to the Pakistan border, yesterday.



The event, being organised a few days after foreign secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan, is being held at the Chandan range in Pokhran, just 70km from the Pakistan border.



The whole range was lined with 18 targets — enemy bunkers, unfriendly radars, mock terror camps and under-siege buildings to create the ambience of a 26/11-style attack.

..........