|Reply to Thread New Thread|
|01-03-2012, 01:48 AM||#1|
India, Sri Lanka hold Inaugural Defence Dialogue
The inaugural defence dialogue between the Defence Secretaries of India and Sri Lanka was held here yesterday. Defence Secretary Shri Shashikant Sharma and the Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Shri Gotabhaya Rajapaksa co-chaired the meeting alongwith their delegations, comprising the officers of the Defence Ministries and the Armed Forces of the respective countries. Regional security situation including issues of maritime security in the Indian Ocean region dominated the inaugural Annual Defence Dialogue.
The Defence Secretary Shri Shashikant Sharma and his Sri Lankan counterpart Mr. Gotabhaya also called on the Defence Minsiter Shri AK Antony in South Block. Various issues relating to bilateral defence interactions came up for discussion at the meeting.
|01-16-2012, 03:56 AM||#2|
Cash crunch hits defence shopping
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi: Faced with a deteriorating fiscal situation, the Centre is believed to be going slow in clearing big-ticket defence purchases in the final quarter of the financial year.
Sources said a slew of large orders scheduled for clearance between January and March may not be given clearance.
North Block has returned the file for the second phase of military modernization along the Chinese border with several queries. The second phase involves a total commitment of Rs 65,000 crore over the next five years, including 90,000 new recruits as soldiers.
On the Navy front, the ministry has returned the proposal on the second phase of Karwar port development estimated at about Rs 13,000 crore.
The Air Force‚??s proposal for acquiring Basic Trainer Aircraft has been red-flagged by the finance ministry.
According to a Cabinet member, these were because of the tenuous fiscal situation.
|01-17-2012, 05:51 PM||#3|
Link INDO-ISRAELI DEFENSE COOPERATION IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
By Efraim Inbar and Alvite Singh Ningthoujam December 22, 2011
This paper focuses on the current Indo-Israeli defense cooperation and its constraints. The article begins with a brief historical account of this relationship, followed by a discussion of its progression into the defense arena in the late 1990s under the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government. Subsequently, it examines the magnitude of the more recent defense cooperation under a new Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. Finally, this paper attempts to examine the importance of factors constraining defense cooperation.
Since India and Israel first established diplomatic relations in 1992, defense cooperation has played a major role in bilateral ties, with India emerging as one of Israel‚??s largest arms clients. Furthermore, this relationship has strengthened since the Hindu-oriented Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of India came into power in 1998. , The BJP emphasized the threat of Islamist terrorism, thus making Israel a natural ally. Just as Israel faces tremendous security threats from Iran, due to its nuclear program and support for terrorist groups like Hamas and Hizballah, India remains concerned with the Pakistani nuclear arsenal and Pakistan-based terrorist activities. The U.S. decision to relax sanctions against India‚??which were imposed after the 1998 Pokhran nuclear test‚??also eased the way for closer ties between India and Israel. In addition, its subsequent international war on terror after September 11 created a political environment suitable for further bilateral cooperation.
This paper focuses on the current Indo-Israeli defense cooperation and its constraints. The article begins with a brief historical account of this relationship, followed by a discussion of its progression into the defense arena in the late 1990s under the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government. Subsequently, it examines the magnitude of the more recent defense cooperation under a new Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. Finally, this paper attempts to examine the importance of factors constraining defense cooperation.
A BRIEF REVIEW OF INDO-ISRAELI RELATIONS
After cool relations for almost four decades, India and Israel established full ambassadorial level diplomatic relations in 1992. It was a late coming together of two ancient peoples who had both emerged from colonial rule in the same era. Several historical factors hindered early normalization of the relationship, the most prominent of which were the policies adopted by Indian leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and the first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Their traditional support for the Arabs in the conflict in Palestine and Nehru‚??s Non-Alignment foreign policy hardly favored close relations with the Jewish state. This was partly due to the fact that India had the largest Muslim minority population in the world.
The animosity toward Israel was reflected in India‚??s vote in the UN General Assembly on November 29, 1947, against the partition resolution that led to the establishment of Israel. Only in September 1950 did India grant de jure recognition to Israel, followed by the opening of a consulate in Bombay in 1953. Yet these steps did not lead to any improvement in relations. India‚??s closeness with the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser and its commitment to the Non-Alignment movement, as well as the significant influence of its sizeable Muslim population on India‚??s domestic politics, reinforced the coolness toward Israel.
Moreover, India‚??s stance toward Israel throughout the Cold War was based upon an anti-Western and anti-imperialist worldview, which was shared by the Arabs and the Muslim world. In addition, Israel‚??s intimacy with the United States in the 1960s was loathed by the Indian government, which was at the time suspicious of American foreign policy.
So strong was India‚??s opposition that even Israel‚??s covert military assistance to supply arms and ammunition to India during the 1962 and 1965 wars with China and Pakistan bore no fruit. Other instances, such as Israel‚??s supply of 160 mm mortar and ammunition to India during the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War, as well as the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, did little to change India‚??s standpoint. Relations between the two states remained unsurprisingly icy into the 1980s.
However, the end of the Cold War in 1991 brought a wind of change. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, India‚??s main diplomatic and strategic ally during the Cold War, India was ‚??forced to reorient its foreign policy to accommodate the changing international milieu.‚?Ě At this time, the crisis of the Soviet military industry forced India to look elsewhere for arms supply, and Israel was an appealing source. Threats emanating from across the border favored India‚??s reassessment of its relationship with Israel. In addition, the shifting tide in Middle East politics, vis-√*-vis the Arab-Israeli conflict, made India rethink its policies toward Israel as it became clear that it would have to upgrade diplomatic relations with Israel in order to participate in the Middle East peace process. Another event that had a major impact on Indian decisionmakers was the normalization of Sino-Israeli relations in January 1992. Simultaneously, Israel began to forge diplomatic ties with other Asian countries like Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
At the end of the Cold War, many nations wanted to upgrade and normalize their relations with Israel, a country known for its advanced technologies and excellent relations with the United States. India, at this time, also found an ally in Israel who could partly fill the void in military needs left by the demise of the Soviet Union.
INDO-ISRAELI DEFENSE COOPERATION IN THE 1990s
Indian Prime Minister P.V. Narashimha Rao‚??s decision in January 1992 to establish full diplomatic relations with Israel was driven by the potential for security cooperation. Similar goals and rationales behind arms modernization, buildup, and export brought the two nations closer. Moreover, Israel could potentially assist India in remedying problems with its program for developing indigenous weapons systems.
In March 1994, Israel‚??s Air force commander visited India. His Indian counterpart‚??then Chief of the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) A.P.J Abdul Kalam‚??visited Israel two years later. The warmth of the newly formed ties was evidenced by high level official visits starting with Israeli President Ezer Weizman‚??s trip to India in December 1996, accompanied by a 24-member business delegation. Subsequently, Israel offered India both investment and technical cooperation in matters related to military aircraft, reverse engineering, and the upgrading of weapons systems. In addition, India began to obtain a large number of small arms and weapons systems from Israel, eventually including airborne early warning systems. New Delhi sent its first military attach√© to Israel in 1997, indicating a growing military dimension in bilateral relations.
In 1996, India purchased a sophisticated Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation from Israel, which was installed at the Jamnagar air base. The same year, a $10 million deal was made to provide two Dvora MK-2 patrol boats for the Indian Navy. In the electronics and communication arena, Israeli firms like Tadiran played an important role in providing pertinent systems to India. Soltam, another Israeli defense firm, agreed to supply the Indian Army with 155 mm self-propelled guns. During the 1990s, the Israeli firm Elta also won a multi-million dollar contract to upgrade the avionics on India‚??s MiG-21 fighters. The negotiations for the purchase of Barak-1 vertically-launched surface-to-air missiles from Israel in the late-1990s were a significant technological and financial breakthrough in defense cooperation, which provided India with cutting edge technologies and eventually led to co-production.
However, the definitive motivation for greater Indo-Israeli military cooperation emerged from the BJP‚??s 1998 success in forming a ruling coalition. While Israel‚??s weapon production capabilities and combat successes had caught the attention of the Indian defense establishment, it was not until the BJP rose to power that the advantages of bilateral cooperation began to outweigh the objections of India‚??s large, yet decreasingly relevant, Muslim minority. Thus, despite India‚??s support for the Palestinians in various international forums, including the UN, New Delhi gradually began strengthening relations with Israel. Increasing Islamist terrorism in the divided states of Jammu and Kashmir and elsewhere in the country further strengthened this relationship. Meanwhile, Pakistan‚??s expanding nuclear arsenal and alleged funding of militant groups has presented India with additional justification for cooperative ties with Israel.
Growing defense relations were further solidified by Israel‚??s willingness to supply arms‚??including ordnance, laser-guided bombs, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)‚??during the 1999 Kargil War between India and Pakistan. The quick response to India‚??s request for military assistance increased Israel‚??s credibility as a reliable arms supplier even during a crisis and helped to bolster the relationship. Thereafter, the defense cooperation grew considerably as Israel stepped up its arms sales to India while most major countries restricted their technological exports to India following the 1998 Pokhran nuclear test. Shortly thereafter in 2000, Indian Home Minister Lal Krishna Advani‚??s visit to Israel further reinforced the bilateral bond.
New Delhi also appreciated Israel‚??s proficiency in upgrading outdated Soviet weapons systems, which constituted most of India‚??s defense stockpile. Israel had an advantage, as many of its immigrants had already worked as engineers and technicians in the Soviet military industry. Unsurprisingly, India turned to Israeli companies for retrofitting these aging Soviet weapons. For example, Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) signed large contracts with the Indian Air Force (IAF), including the upgrading of Russian-made MiG-21 aircraft. In addition, Israel provided state of the art fire control systems and thermal imagery for the Indian Army‚??s Russian-made T-72 tank fleet.
Counterterrorism measures comprise another important factor in Indo-Israeli defense cooperation. The relationship between the states‚?? security agencies actually predates the establishment of official diplomatic relations. However, engagement between the two countries in this field remained limited during the early period of normalization of relations. Moreover, this relationship was never a military alliance, as both the countries adhered to their own set of national priorities and made no commitment to fight for each other. This remains true today.
THE MAGNITUDE OF INDO-ISRAELI DEFENSE COOPERATION IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
Despite opposition from various Indian political parties and civilian organizations, defense cooperation with Israel continues to strengthen, particularly after the historic visit of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in September 2003. Since 2000, India has acquired several high-tech systems from Israel, ranging from Barak-I anti-missile defense systems and early-warning radars to Searcher and Heron UAVs. Following the 2004 election of the pro-Palestinian Congress-led UPA government, observers questioned whether relations forged during the BJP-led NDA government would continue.
Certainly the presence of leftist parties in the coalition government, particularly the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has complicated defense cooperation. Nevertheless, some of the most important military deals between Israel and India have been signed by this government. Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee made it very clear that there would be no shift in policy toward Israel, including the existing defense ties. Signifying an intention to continue the relationship, albeit under a lower publicity profile, he said:
We have developed defense cooperation with several countries and we are not making any distinction between country A and country B. We have defense cooperation with Israel like with many other countries and if any deals for import of high-tech have been finalized, those will carry on ‚?¶ But in general terms, I can say that [it is] a country with which we have defense cooperation that will continue.
Indeed, then Indian Army Chief of Staff Gen. J.J. Singh made an unpublicized visit to Israel in March 2007. In June of the same year, India accepted a visit by then Israeli Deputy Chief of General Staff Maj. Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky.
Today, defense cooperation between Israel and India remains solid, with the arms trade soaring. The approximate total value of the weapons trade over the past decade is estimated at around $10 billion. With the delivery of the Phalcon Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS), equipped on Russian-built Ilyushin II-76s, in May 2009 and March 2010, Israel has emerged as one of the largest arms exporters to India. An agreement for these weapons systems was signed in March 2004 at an impressive cost of $1.1 billion.
Interestingly, a similar deal with China was cancelled by Israel in 2000 under the intense pressure from the United States, due to American fears the Chinese would use these weapons in the event of a military confrontation in the Taiwan Straits. The deal with India was nearly terminated due to similar American fears of Indo-Pakistani tensions. The eventual U.S. approval of the Israeli Phalcon sale bore great significance, as it happened just before a visit by Prime Minister Sharon in September 2003 that truly marked the height of strong Indo-Israeli ties.
By the end of 2006, Israel rose to become the second largest arms supplier to India, after Russia, with annual arms sales totaling approximately $1.5 billion. This figure is all the more significant considering that worldwide in 2006, Israel was reported to have sold a total of $4.2 billion worth of arms. In addition, from 2002-2007, India‚??s defense procurement from Israel was estimated at $5 billion. During a visit to Israel in 2007, Singh reviewed several of the ongoing projects, including the mounting of Israeli TISAS (Thermal Imaging Stand Alone Systems) on 500 BMP-2 infantry combat vehicles, the large scale upgrading of 300 T-72M1 tanks, as well as the production of hand-held thermal imagers and LORROS (Long-Range Reconnaissance and Observation Systems).
In order to encourage greater domestic involvement in arms supply, India insisted on forming offset arrangements with the foreign original equipment manufacturer (OEM), which would require the OEM to spend 30 percent of the contract on Indian parts, equipment, and services. India‚??s current offset guidelines are structured to meet national objectives for sustaining and creating jobs in the defense sector so as to accelerate the maturity of its defense technology base and boost its capability to build indigenous weapons systems. Under a 2008 arrangement, Rafael was awarded a $325 million contract to supply the Indian Air Force with Spyder Low-Level Quick Reaction Missile systems (LLQRM) armed with Python and Derby missiles; this in turn would provide offsets of more than $90 million to Indian industry.
Other arrangements included India‚??s purchase of EL/M-2083 radars, manufactured by IAI at a cost of $600 million, for identifying low-altitude aerial penetration. In September 2009, Israel signed a $1.1 billion contract to supply an upgraded tactical air defense system to India, with delivery expected by 2017.
Israeli defense firms showed a strong presence at the 2009 Aero India Exhibition. Several Israeli-manufactured weapons systems were on display, with many catching the attention of Indian defense planners. At the show, Lova Drori, Rafael‚??s executive VP for marketing, attributed the strong cooperation between the two nations to the shared challenges of domestic and border terrorism, coalesced with Israel‚??s efforts to provide India with state-of-the-art weapons systems. He added that most Israeli-developed systems tended to fit India‚??s requirements as well.
In March 2010, the two countries signed a huge $1.4 billion contract for the development and procurement of Barak 8 medium-range surface-to-air missiles. The acquisition of such sophisticated weaponry will give India a significant edge over its adversaries. In 2011, the Indian Army finalized a deal with Rafael worth $1 billion that will provide 8,356 Spike anti-tank guided missiles, 321 launchers, and 15 training simulators.
In mid-2010, India showed particular interest in Israel‚??s state-of-the-art anti-missile defense systems‚??David‚??s Sling and Iron Dome. The acquisition of sophisticated defensive equipment would give India a significant advantage in the case of any missile attacks from neighboring countries like Pakistan or China. Israel has deployed Iron Dome in order to defend against the rockets fired by Gaza terrorists and has successfully intercepted over 90 percent of rockets fired at its southern cities, such as Be‚??er Sheba and Ashkelon. India‚??s desire to acquire David‚??s Sling is most likely due to its own difficulties in developing the indigenous Prithivi Air Defense system. While Israeli authorities showed a willingness to discuss sales, any deal would be complicated due to the need for U.S. permission.
Israel Military Industries (IMI) and Rafael displayed new air defense and missile systems at the 2011 Aero India Exhibition as well. Weapons systems such as the Delilah-GL (ground launched), a loitering guided missile, the MPR500 ‚?? Multi-Purpose Rigid Bomb, the IFB500 ‚?? Improved Fragmentation Bomb, and the new spectral IR flares were believed to have been displayed by IMI. As mentioned earlier, a joint partnership between India‚??s Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) and Israel‚??s Elbit was established to manufacture simulators and avionics for the latter‚??s Skylark mini UAVs. This will also help HAL in developing its own UAVs.
In light of the ongoing military modernization drive by its neighbors and the rising threat of terrorism, New Delhi has increased its annual defense budget to $32 billion. India‚??s military expenditure totaled $36.3 billion in 2009, an increase of 13 percent from 2008, and a 67 percent increase since 2000. Israeli defense firms are therefore very hopeful for multi-million dollar contracts in India. IAI also hopes to win contracts to supply the Indian Air Force with another three Phalcon AWACS. According to media reports, the IAF is likely to introduce Israeli Harop killer UAVs from 2011 onwards. With this growth in the defense budget, Rafael is said to be competing for major defense bids including a multi-million dollar contract to supply the Indian Army with anti-tank missiles and protection systems.
That the Israeli pavilion occupied the largest exhibit space during the 2010 biennial Defense Expo held in New Delhi is itself an indication of the strength of this defense cooperation. With India becoming a large weapons importer‚??an estimated 70 percent of arms and defense equipment arrive from overseas‚??large defense firms from major countries sought to make their presence known at the expo.
Technology Transfer and Co-Production
Defense cooperation between India and Israel has also involved technology transfers to the Indian military industries alongside the sale of Israeli components. An early step in this direction involved the September 2002 agreement between IAI and India‚??s HAL for joint production of an attack helicopter (Dhruv). As part of the agreement, HAL would manufacture the fuselage, while IAI would develop the avionics. However, no significant breakthrough has been witnessed in this field.
In 2006, India sought Israeli expertise in the production of key surveillance systems. India‚??s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) faced technical difficulties with the Divya Drishti surveillance project. Israeli firm Elbit Systems, in collaboration with the DRDO‚??s Hyderabad-based Defense Electronics Research Laboratory (DLRL), the Electronic Corporation of India, and Tata Power Company Limited managed to resolve these issues. In the same year, IAI and India‚??s Defense and Research Development Laboratory (DRDL) signed a deal worth $350 million for the joint development and production of the long-range Barak missile system, followed by a similar agreement to build anti-aircraft missiles together for the Indian Navy and the IAF.
An important breakthrough in the Indo-Israeli co-production of weapons occurred in 2007, when India‚??s Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, cleared a joint venture of $2.5 billion for the co-production of medium-range surface-to-air missiles (MRSAM), capable of hitting targets up to 70 kilometers away. In August 2009, India signed a $2.5 billion deal with IAI and Rafael for the joint development of a new, advanced version of the Spyder surface-to-air missile. The cooperation has also focused on joint R&D projects in the fields of high-endurance and rotary UAVs, submarine-launched cruise missiles, anti-ballistic missile systems, network-centric operation, micro-satellite surveillance systems, advanced precision-guided munitions (PGMs), and third-generation night-vision devices.
In November 2010, India‚??s giant private sector Tata Group acquired a 74 percent stake in HBL Elta Avionics Systems Ltd. (HELA), a Hyderabad-based company partially owned by Israel‚??s Elta Group, an IAI subsidiary. This joint venture intends to manufacture aerial vehicles, electronic warfare systems, missiles, radars, and homeland security systems. Elevating their joint venture program to new heights, India‚??s Tata Group and TAMAM, a division of IAI, announced a pact to explore favorable opportunities for the manufacturing, integration, and maintenance of the MiniPOP electro-optic system. A joint venture between Rafael and India‚??s Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) is also expected in the near future.
These developments signal a clear transition away from supplier-recipient cooperation and toward a joint venture relationship. Indeed, Indian defense minister A. K. Antony promised to encourage the development of homegrown products, with major participation from private companies working with state-owned Indian defense companies.
It now remains to be seen how much India can absorb the opportunities provided by Israeli defense firms. Considering the developments and successes over the last few years, future defense cooperation between India and Israel looks promising. Moreover, the increase in the Indian defense budget for the fiscal year 2011-2012 to $36 billion promises a rapid modernization of the army, navy, and air force.
Considering Israel‚??s reliance on the Indian Ocean as a major transit route to Far East ports, due to hostilities along neighboring Arab land routes, naval cooperation represents another important arena for convergent Indo-Israeli interests. Israel has been increasingly concerned by Iran along the shores of the Indian Ocean and has sought to enhance its strategic reach in this area. In 2002, Israel was reported to have developed a second strike naval capability far from its territorial borders, owing to its strengthening cooperation with India. The same source also said that Israel had carried out a long-range cruise missile test from one of three Israeli submarines in the India Ocean, a claim which Israeli defense officials denied.
In 2003, the capabilities of the Indian Navy‚??s coastal defense were likewise strengthened by the commissioning of the Indian Naval Fast Attack Craft (INFACT T-82), a ship built by IAI. Indian Navy warships, including the INS Viraat and three Delhi-class destroyers, have already been equipped with Barak-I systems that were purchased in 2003. In July 2004, despite concerns from the newly elected left-leaning UPA government over India‚??s close relations with Israel, India‚??s Navy Chief Admiral Arun Prakash visited the Jewish state. As an additional mark of growing naval relations, the INS Godavari and Mysore visited the port of Haifa in May 2004.
In a 2007 visit to India by Israeli Navy Chief Vice Admiral Maj. Gen. David Ben Bashat, a decision was made to increase naval cooperation. Both countries agreed to boost the development of Indian Sea Harrier Jump Jets as well as to the joint development of anti-missile defense systems. Furthermore, collaboration with Israel to develop unmanned combat helicopters for the countries‚?? navies was proposed by India‚??s Naval Chief Vice Admiral Suresh Mehta who visited Israel in early 2008. It should be noted that while the Indian political leadership often declines to visit Israel due to domestic and other sensitivities, frequent discreet visits by top Indian military leaders continues.
The year 2010 marked a significant growth in India-Israel naval cooperation, as naval chiefs from both countries made reciprocal visits. In January, Israeli Navy Chief Vice-Admiral Eliezer Marom paid a three day visit to India. The main emphasis of this visit was on the $2.5 billion project signed by DRDO and IAI for the development of a supersonic 70-km range Barak-NG (next generation) missile defense system for the Indian Navy. In a goodwill gesture, Indian Navy Chief Admiral Neermal Virmal visited Israel on a four-day trip in October 2010 and discussed ways to expand defense ties. In 2011, the Indian Navy‚??s marine commandoes finally began to use the Israeli made TAR-21 (Tavor Assault Rifle 21st Century) assault rifles and Galil sniper rifles (ordered in 2008).
Counterterrorism Cooperation and Military Training
The intelligence and counterterrorism fields represent another significant area of India-Israel military cooperation. On September 11, 2001, when the United States awoke to one of the most horrifying attacks in its history, Israeli defense and intelligence officials under the leadership of then National Security Advisor Uzi Dayan were meeting with their Indian counterparts to discuss the countries‚?? common threats. For example, repetitive cross-border attacks on Indian territorial sovereignty encouraged New Delhi to seek defense assistance from Israel, which had long suffered similar threats. In a June 2004 visit to Israel, India‚??s Vice Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Shantano Choudhary, was shown the counter-infiltration devices used along the borders in the Golan Heights and Negev desert. During Maj. Gen. Kaplinsky‚??s 2007 visit, the Israeli delegation, along with its Indian hosts, reviewed the performance of the Israeli equipment used along the Line of Control (LOC) in Jammu and Kashmir.
The 2008 Mumbai terror attack stirred a growing interest in Israeli counterterrorism techniques and led to the formation of a joint working group. In September 2008, Defense News reported that India and Israel were planning joint counterterrorism exercises between Israeli commando forces and Indian troops. Plans were expected to be finalized during the visit of Israeli Army Ground Forces Chief Maj. Gen. Avi Mizrahi to India. As part of the agreement, Israeli commandos would provide training to Indian troops at various locations in India, including jungles, mountains, and highly populated urban zones, as well as close-quarter operational training for defeating terror targets with reduced civilian casualties.
Following the Mumbai attack and other attacks since, India‚??s security forces were criticized for their slow response to such brazen hostilities. Consequently, a consensus emerged calling for a more organized national security framework. To this end, Israel‚??s shared expertise in fighting cross-border terrorism has been highly appreciated by the Indian defense establishment. When Israel offered India homeland security assistance and counter-terror know-how in 2009, the Maharashtra government responded by sending an Indian delegation to Israel for hands-on experience. Subsequently, an Israeli government proposal for hosting common training programs along with the supply of an array of arms, ammunition, and technology, including equipment for bomb disposal squads, was recommended to the Home Ministry of India. In the past, Israeli counterterrorism training was limited to technology and equipment transfer.
As part of this information-sharing process, India‚??s Chief of Staff, Gen. Deepak Kapoor visited Israel in November 2009. His Israeli counterpart, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, reciprocated with a visit to India in December of the same year. A joint working group (JWC) meeting in December 2009, co-chaired by Indian Defense Secretary Pradeep Kumar and Israeli Defense Ministry Director General Brig. Gen. (ret) Pinchas Buchris, was held to discuss concerns and agreements on various defense issues. Then, in January 2010, Indian National Security Advisor M. K. Narayan held a meeting with his Israeli counterpart Uzi Arad, which focused on counterterrorism cooperation and intelligence sharing.
Beyond standard weapon transfers, equipment upgrades, and co-production, Indo-Israeli defense cooperation also extends to space. India started its space program in the early 1960s and has since designed, built, and launched its own satellites into space. As a result of India‚??s rising excellence in science and technology, Israeli President Ezer Weizman traveled to India in 1996 to discuss forging ties between the nations‚?? space programs. This endeavor was delayed due to Israeli internal political considerations, particularly the determination of who would be the one to sign these agreements. In January 2002, Shimon Peres, then Israeli Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, visited the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO). Following this visit, Israeli Space Research Program Head Col. (res.) Aby Har-Even and Head of ISRO Dr. K. Kasturirangan signed the agreement on space cooperation in early November 2002. Then, in 2003, the ISRO agreed to launch a Tel Aviv University satellite.
In January 2008, India launched TechSAR, an Israeli surveillance satellite also known as Polaris, believed to be capable of providing information on strategic installations in Iran. Various players in the Indian political arena criticized such strategic cooperation, especially at a time when Indo-Iranian relations were deteriorating due to New Delhi‚??s vote in the IAEA against the Islamic Republic and the resulting energy stalemate. For India and Israel, however, this launch marked a new stage in their ties and showcased India‚??s growing advancement in the field of space technology.
The successful launch of Polaris testified to the growing international confidence in ISRO‚??S ability to place satellites into orbit. This was followed by India‚??s launch of the Israeli-made imaging satellite, RISAT 2, on board its domestically built Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), which was dispatched from the Satish Dhawan Space Center in Sriharikota. Indian defense experts are now interested in developing satellites with Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) platforms, which are capable of tracking large ground targets and ballistic missiles during day or night and through vegetation and cloud cover. Significantly, Israel already possesses this technology.
Constraints on Defense Cooperation
Despite the robustness of the Indo-Israeli defense cooperation, some constraints on closer relations do exist, including domestic political sensitivities, entry of foreign arms suppliers, Iran, and also the United States. Finally, the allegations of corruption in Indo-Israeli arms trade and the complex Indian bureaucratic system are also highlighted below.
Indian Domestic Political Sensitivities
Since the normalization of relations with Israel in 1992, a large segment of India‚??s political establishment has voiced resentment, primarily due to India‚??s prominent population of 160 million Muslims. As a result, India has displayed a deeply entrenched ideological commitment to the Palestinian cause. An overt expression of closeness with Israel would lose the votes of these Muslim citizens, whose support parties like Congress still bank on. There are fears that close ties with the Jewish state could also lead to the radicalization of Islam in India. Even though a large part of the Muslim population is well integrated into Indian society, instances exist of Muslim youths conducting terror activities within the country. These sensitivities toward the Muslim minority have constrained India in openly furthering ties with Israel, especially on security related matters.
Political parties like the Communist Party of India (Marxist) are openly hostile toward Israel. Leftist parties have demanded that the government refuse any deals with IAI, which is currently under investigation for the alleged Barak missile corruption scandal. They also claim that Israeli missiles would undermine DRDO‚??s indigenous missile system developed and that Indian-developed missiles are superior to those co-produced with IAI.
Tellingly, after the 2008 Indian launch of the Israeli TechSAR satellite, media coverage greatly differed between the two countries. While Indian media portrayed TechSAR as a commercial satellite, the Israeli press claimed it was for anti-Iranian surveillance. Israel‚??s critics picked up the Israeli reports and questioned Delhi‚??s wisdom in having such close relations with Jerusalem. In the words of one critic, ‚??The political implications of India‚??s increased strategic ties and dealings with Israel are, however, doubtless serious and undesirable, notwithstanding the fatal attraction of mutually advantageous geo-strategic locations of the two countries from a space-based surveillance perspective.‚?Ě Thus far, however, the effects of such internal Indian pressure have been limited and have not had a major impact on the defense cooperation between India and Israel. On the contrary, India‚??s rising security needs have bolstered the ties between the two states.
The American Factor
U.S. interests have sometimes constrained Indo-Israeli defense cooperation with regard to weapons and technology transfer. In 2003, the United States blocked negotiations between India and Israel on the sale of Israel‚??s Arrow anti-missile defense system. Such actions not only strain bilateral ties but also undermine Israel‚??s credibility as a reliable arms supplier. Apart from the fear of destabilizing the South Asian military balance, the United States was mainly concerned that the procurement of such technologies would accelerate India‚??s efforts toward developing an indigenous ballistic missile defense system. This might interfere with the U.S.-Pakistan alliance, which Washington has a considerable interest in maintaining in the context of its war on terror.
More recently, in January 2011, Israel barred the export sale of its EL/M-2052 radar to several countries, including India. This restriction was the result of U.S. pressure under the assumption that the export of such an advanced radar would likely undermine the sale of U.S.-made systems. India had planned to equip its Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) with this radar. Taking advantage of its own burgeoning relationship with India in the last few years, the United States hopes to offer India similar technology.
While the United States has in some ways hampered technology cooperation between India and Israel, it has made an effort in recent years to enhance its own high-tech trade with India and to forge closer strategic ties. For instance, the United States removed from its Entity List in 2011 all Indian government defense-related companies, including subsidiaries of DRDO and ISRO. This move, meant to facilitate U.S.-India trade and cooperation, may prove detrimental to Indo-Israeli military cooperation as India can now import from the United States some of the latest technologies, like advanced warning capability, radar, reconnaissance, electronics equipments, and warfare intelligence. In India were to do so, Israel would lose out on these deals.
Defense cooperation between India and the United States is expected to continue moving forward, as indicated by the November 2010 visit of President Obama to India. However, while the United States has agreed to provide high-tech weaponry and equipment to India, the issue of technology transfer remains contentious. For instance, India has thus far refused to agree to several American pacts, namely CISMOA (Communications, Interoperability, and Security Memorandum of Agreement) and BECA (Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geospatial Cooperation), as India considers them ‚??restrictive and intrusive.‚?Ě Furthermore, Indian defense planners are wary of U.S. political reliability and willingness to transfer technology, particularly when it comes to future technological upgrades and the supply of spares. Hence, dependence on American arms remains uncertain.
With these tensions between India and the United States hanging in the air, Israel should not be concerned over its own defense relations with India. Furthermore, there is actually a lack of competition between the United States and Israel in selling large platforms. For example, unlike the United States, Israel does not sell tanks and aircraft to India, which limits competition between the two. Thus, even though American involvement in India‚??s arms supply could come at the cost of Israeli products and technology, there remains a wide enough spectrum of common interest to sustain the cooperation.
Additional Arms Suppliers
The entry of foreign companies into the Indian arms market has, without doubt, increased competition for Israel. Currently the main competitors are the United States and European nations like France and Russia‚??all bidding to supply a variety of items on the Indian defense shopping list. In recent years, these countries have displayed increasing flexibility concerning technological transfer.
One particular example of an ongoing rivalry is that between Israel‚??s Rafael and the European MBDA over two major guided weapons systems for the IAF. Both companies have seemingly offered their Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ARSAAM) and Python 5 designs for the HAL-built SEPECAT Jaguar. Despite the European firm‚??s confidence in winning the tender, Rafael boasts significant experience in the integration of Python-series missiles and is bolstered by its recent success in adding the Derby missile onto Indian Navy fighters.
It is worth noting that the entrance into the Indian market of U.S. and European aircraft military producers does not pose a challenge to Israel, as it is not competing in this field. Rather, it is a greater problem for Russia, the traditional supplier of India‚??s fighter jets. Indeed, Israel sells a number of sub-components for the equipment and has been competing successfully in the modernization and upgrade market for India‚??s inventory of Russian helicopters and fighter aircraft.
Overall then, the Jewish State‚??s cutting-edge excellence in the field of missiles, avionics, air defense systems, UAVs, reengineering of outdated Soviet weapons systems, electronic warfare systems, and so forth will likely continue to drive forward Israel‚??s defense cooperation with India. Nevertheless, Israel must still work hard to protect its market share.
Last, the growth of the Indian defense industry is another potential challenge to Indo-Israeli defense ties. Initiatives like ‚??Make-India,‚?Ě which seek to reduce defense imports, have led the Indian government to shortlist four domestic companies for the development and manufacturing of next-generation infantry combat vehicles for the Indian Armed Forces. Furthermore, through technological transfers, Indian research organizations are developing their own defense technologies. With such rapid development, the burgeoning demands of India‚??s armed forces are likely to be met partially through domestic production. That said, as Israel‚??s technological edge remains a significant attraction, its military assistance to India is not going to dwindle anytime soon. Also, considering the several long-term joint projects that the countries have recently signed on to, it is clear that India still maintains a desire to procure more Israeli-made defense equipment.
|01-17-2012, 05:52 PM||#4|
Iran: A Diminishing Constraint
While Israel perceives Iran as a major threat, due to its ongoing nuclear program and aid to Hizballah and Hamas, India endeavors to maintain good relations with Iran, a major oil supplier. The Indo-Iranian Joint Commission, established in 1983, was instrumental in forging India‚??s close defense and military ties with Iran. Also, after the end of the Cold War, India‚??s desire to counter the Pakistani influence, along with the burgeoning geopolitical importance of Central Asia and the need to strengthen economic and commercial ties, further bolstered ties between India and Iran.
The defense cooperation that existed between India and Iran in the early part of the first decade of the twenty-first century was viewed as a constraint upon Indo-Israeli ties. India‚??s alleged discussions over arms sales to Iran during a meeting between Indian Defense Secretary Yogendra Narain and his Iranian counterpart Ali Shamkani in 2001 raised eyebrows in Israel. India-Iran defense cooperation was strengthened with the signing of a strategic partnership accord in January 2003, during then-Iranian President Mohammad Khatami‚??s visit to New Delhi. This agreement promoted mutual defense ties, granting New Delhi access to Iranian bases in exchange for various Indian defense products, training, and technologies. Subsequently, hundreds of Indian naval and logistics specialists visited Iran, offering assistance on submarine maintenance and overhaul and tanks upgrades, and proposing the sale of Indian air defense equipment and airborne platforms.
Iran sought Indian technicians to refit and maintain its T-72 tanks as well as its BMP infantry fighting vehicles. In addition, India was reportedly planning to sell Iran Konkur anti-tank missiles. While these plans were clearly disconcerting for Israel, no such activities actually took place, and they seem unlikely in the near future. In another potential deal in 2004, Iran negotiated the purchase of advanced Indian radar systems designed for fire control and surveillance of anti-aircraft batteries. The contract for the Upgraded Support Fledermaus radar system, to be supplied by the Indian state-owned firm BHEL, was estimated at around $70 million. However, this deal remains suspended due to intense U.S. pressure, as the Americans fear these systems would enhance Iranian protection of its nuclear facilities.
One of Israel‚??s major concerns was the possible Indian transfer of Israeli-based technology or training to Iran. Israel, for obvious reasons, feared that its own technologies could be passed on to various terrorist organizations in the region, particularly Iranian-supported Hamas and Hizballah. These concerns were voiced by Israeli PM Ariel Sharon during his 2003 trip to India.
Israel also objects to Indo-Iranian joint military and naval maneuvers and reciprocal military visits. One such exercise took place in June 2006, when Iranian naval vessels visited the port of Kochi; another was held in March 2003, in the Arabian Sea. Naval cooperation dates back to the mid-1990s, when the Indian Navy assisted the Iranian Navy in adapting four Russian-built Kilo-class submarines for the Persian Gulf‚??s warm water. Iran even joined the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), an agreement which allows Indian Ocean navies to collaborate with one another, with greater maritime cooperation planned for the future. During the peak of their relationship, India also developed intelligence outposts in Iran along with a consulate in the port city of Bandar Abbas in 2001, to monitor ship movements in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.
However, following the 2005 nuclear deal between New Delhi and Washington, Israeli concerns over the relationship between India and Iran began to dissipate. U.S. pressure on India to end all military relations with Iran appeared to have been a condition for the nuclear deal. Indeed, since this time, defense cooperation between India and Iran has been minimal or dormant. Except for five Iranian sailors who reportedly participated in a training course with the Indian Navy in 2007, there has been no visible military exchange between the two nations. Moreover, though India and Iran established a joint working group on defense in 2003, no meetings have occurred for many years.
Furthermore, India‚??s rejection of an Iranian request for a satellite launch in November 2009 shattered Tehran‚??s hopes of cooperation in space technology. An Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) official explained, ‚??India does not want to get entangled in Iran‚??s problems over its nuclear and missile programs; hence its reluctance to launch satellites that could assist its missile capability.‚?Ě Iran‚??s proposal for a joint patrolling exercise in the Gulf was also rejected by India.
Moreover, diplomatic relations between New Delhi and Tehran were downgraded substantially following India‚??s vote in September 2005, as well as in February 2006 and November 2009, against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for its noncompliance to disclose intentions of its nuclear program. In November 2010, India abstained from voting on a UN resolution charging Iran with human rights violations‚??India had thus far always voted against the resolution, taking a pro-Tehran stance. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene‚??i responded by referring to Kashmir as a ‚??nation,‚?Ě a remark which further brewed mistrust between the two countries.
In general, Iran has become a diminished constraint on all Indo-Israeli bilateral relationships, specifically in the area of defense cooperation. Furthermore, a revival of Indian-Iranian defense ties is very unlikely in the near future considering the risk the relationship poses to India‚??s blossoming ties with the United States and Israel.
Bureaucracy and Corruption Charges
Further difficulties that plague Indo-Israeli defense cooperation are bureaucracy and various corruption allegations involving major Israeli defense firms and Indian officials. First, the prevalence of a complex bureaucratic system in India remains a considerable hurdle to its arms procurement policies. Negotiations with Israel, the signing of bilateral agreements, and defense cooperation between the countries have often been hindered due to such bureaucratic sluggishness.
Furthermore, stringent regulations placed on foreign companies investing in Indian industry greatly limit domestic production due to the resulting delays in financial and technological transfer. In addition, the slow pace of weapons procurement by the government limits the arms production industry since it causes market stagnation. Due to the traditionally slow pace of the Indian Defense Ministry, observers doubt its arms purchase program will be capable of meeting the 2022 goal of acquiring $100 billion worth of equipment to replace India‚??s increasingly obsolete weaponry, a necessary move in the face of rising threats.
In order to meet its growing demands, India‚??s Defense Acquisition Council (DAC) announced in December 2010 the much-awaited new Defense Procurement Policy (DPP). Defense Minister A. K. Antony hoped that such a drastic step would help India achieve its goal of defense industry indigenization and also offer greater transparency. The intention of this updated policy is to ensure an effective synergy between the public and private sectors in defense production programs. At the same time, it dictates that the government will continue relying on foreign arms suppliers should the indigenous industries have any difficulty supplying critical technologies or delivering products according to set timelines. In addition to this new DPP, as India today still imports 70 percent of its defense items, defense planners are currently determining the feasibility of government-to-government foreign military sales (FMS)‚??a route that could be both quicker and cheaper.
Indo-Israeli cooperation has also been occasionally undermined by allegations of bribery and corruption in certain arms deals. Such issues surfaced when India‚??s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) conducted an investigation of IAI and Rafael regarding the supply of Barak-1 missiles, a deal conducted by the BJP-led NDA government in 2000. India‚??s Defense Minister at the time, George Fernandes, and retired Naval Chief Admiral Sushil Kumar were involved in this alleged bribery scandal. It was discovered that the deal was signed by Fernandes despite objections from the government‚??s scientific advisor and former President of India A.P.J Abdul Kalam as well as from the DRDO. Several questions were also raised over the need for purchasing Israeli missile systems when India‚??s indigenously-built Trishul was nearly functional. In 2009, a similar bribery allegation surfaced regarding an agreement signed between India‚??s UPA government and IAI for the supply of MRSAM. The Indian government went ahead with this controversial deal while the investigation remains underway.
In the past, India usually blacklisted any defense firms involved in such scams. For example, due to corruption charges, India has in the past cancelled contracts for guns with the Swedish firm Bofors and the South African Denel, and submarine deals have been quashed with the German company Howaldstswerke. Consequently, the Indian military acquisition program was badly affected. Similarly, the cancellation of a $250 million deal India‚??s Ministry of Defense (MOD) signed with IMI for the establishment of an ammunition factory in Nalanda also hindered ‚??India‚??s quest for self-reliance in the critical area of artillery ammunition.‚?Ě However, despite many more corruption charges against Israel, Israeli duplicity has been treated somewhat differently than that of other countries, as breaking ties with Israeli firms would have much more serious repercussions on India‚??s military modernization and defense and security interests.
An important dimension of the aforementioned bribery allegations was the involvement of private entrepreneurs or middlemen in such arms transactions. Their influence in India derives from their ability to ease the decisionmaking process and from their connections with elite political leaders and bureaucrats. Apart from this, their willingness to pay heavy commissions to various politicians, military officials, and bureaucrats involved in the arms procurement process makes them ubiquitous in such dealings. This has not only raised question marks over the credibility and transparency of Israel as a reliable arms supplier but also tarnished the image of the Indian political and bureaucratic systems. In both alleged scams, middlemen played a role. Names such as Suresh Nanda (son of India‚??s retired Admiral S. M. Nanda), Sudhir Choudhary, and Vipin Khanna were the main focus of the investigative raids. New Delhi has since attempted to regulate the role of the middlemen in defense deals, yet has achieved little success.
While the bribery issue is a little-discussed topic in Israel, in India it is recalled by various political parties to help promote their particular agendas. Generally such allegations garner criticism from left-leaning politicians who are not supportive of Indo-Israeli defense ties. Nonetheless, allegations of bribery in Israel-India arms deals and the related probes have had no visible effect on the arms trade so far. In fact, IAI and Rafael, while both under CBI investigation, continue to play pivotal roles in the Indian arms market.
Indo-Israeli defense cooperation is unlikely to decline in the near future. Israel‚??s credibility as a reliable arms supplier with limited political implications furthers these ties. In today‚??s complex international political arena, India desires the trust and confidence of a consistent partner who can deliver at any time. In addition, India‚??s quest for its own technological advancement in the defense industry provides incentive to expand ties with the Jewish state. The bilateral relationship between the two will continue to be driven by these close defense ties and shared national security challenges.
At a time when India‚??s neighbors, Pakistan and China, are enhancing their defense ties, India seeks greater engagement with Israel. The Jewish state has previously proven its credentials in times of crisis faced by India. For Israel too, further expansion of defense trades with this South Asian country is an economic and political imperative. Both countries should also aim to step up their cooperation on counterterrorism measures and on the joint development of defense systems.
Israel and India must enhance their political engagement as well, as defense ties alone cannot bind a bilateral relationship. Even though domestic political sensitivities in India still constitute a constraint on its policies toward Israel, there are considerable indications that New Delhi is trying to overcome these factors. This has been marked by the ongoing successful arms trade between the present Congress-led UPA government and Israel. Not only does this show the intensity of Indo-Israeli ties per se but the increasing flexibility of India in carving its own independent foreign policy objectives. It also represents the diminishing legacy of Cold War thinking and its limits upon an Indian-Israeli relationship.
Though arms sales have been the primary focus of the bilateral relationship, the expansion of activities in the commercial sector would be advantageous for both countries. Frequent cultural exchange could also improve the bilateral relationship. If Israel‚??s current attempt to open a consulate in the high-tech city of Bangalore is successful, cooperation in science and technology will be greatly enhanced too.
The entry of additional players in the Indian arms market should not be viewed as a hindrance either, as it is a matter of diversification of New Delhi‚??s priorities according to the defense needs and capabilities of any respective supplier. There are still a wide range of mutual benefits both countries gain especially with India‚??s gradual disengagement from its staunch traditional and ideological foreign policy approach in the Middle East. Finally, India‚??s interest in the Gulf is ever increasing. Preserving the current momentum should be the focus of all the actors involved in this complex game of international relations.
* Efraim Inbar is Professor of Political Studies at Bar-Ilan University and Director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.
*Alvite Singh Ningthoujam is an Indian researcher who served as a Fellow at the BESA Center. This research was partly funded by the Israel Government Scholarship, 2010-2011.
 Efraim Inbar, ‚??Israel‚??s Strategic Relations with Turkey and India,‚?Ě in Robert O. Freedman (ed.), Contemporary Israel: Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy and Security Challenges (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2009), p. 239.
 P. R. Kumaraswamy, India‚??s Israel Policy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010), pp. 25-127.
 P. R. Kumaraswamy, ‚??Israel-India Relations: Seeking Balance and Realism,‚?Ě Israel Affairs, Vol. 10, No. 1-2 (2004), p. 255.
Arielle Kandel, ‚??The Significant Warning of Indo-Israeli Relations in the Post-Cold War Period,‚?Ě Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA), Vol. 13, No. 4) (December 2009), http://www.gloria-center.org/2009/12/kandel-2009-12-07/, p. 1.
 Efraim Inbar, ‚??The Indian-Israeli Entente,‚?Ě Orbis (Winter 2004), p. 90.
 Harsh V. Pant, ‚??India-Israel Partnership: Convergence and Constraints,‚?Ě MERIA, Vol. 8, No. 4 (2004), http://www.gloria-center.org/2004/12/pant-2004-12-06/, p. 2.
 Inbar, ‚??The Indian-Israeli Entente,‚?Ě p. 91.
 For a detailed and an earlier account of defense-related cooperation between India and Israel in the 1990s, see P. R. Kumaraswamy, ‚??India and Israel: Evolving Strategic Partnership,‚?Ě Mideast Security and Policy Studies, No. 40 (September 1998).
 Raja Swamy, ‚??The Case against Collaboration Between India and Israel,‚?Ě MR Zine, August 2006, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2006/swamy300806.html.
 P. R. Kumaraswamy, ‚??Strategic Partnership Between India and Israel,‚?Ě MERIA, Vol. 2, No. 3 (1998), http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1998/issue2/jv2n2a6.html, pp. 4-6.
 Inbar, ‚??The Indian-Israeli Entente,‚?Ě p. 95.
 Wendell Minnick, ‚??Israeli Exhibit Among Largest at Show,‚?Ě Defense News, February 12, 2009, http://www.defensenews.com/osd_story.php?i=3944502.
 Rahul Bedi, ‚??Moving Closer to Israel,‚?Ě Frontline, Vol. 20, No. 4 (February 2003), http://www.frontline.in/fl2004/stories/ ... 005500.htm. For example, Israel supplied the Indian Army with around 40,000 rounds of 155 mm ammunitions and 30,000 rounds of 160 mm mortars at the cost of $400 each during this war.
 Yiftah S. Shapir, ‚??Israel‚??s Arms Sales to India,‚?Ě Strategic Assessment, Vol. 12, No. 3 (2009), http://www.inss.org.il/upload/(FILE)1259664485.pdf, p. 29.
 Inbar, ‚??Israel‚??s Strategic Relations with Turkey and India,‚?Ě p. 237.
 ‚??India, Israel Military Ties Continue to Grow,‚?Ě The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), April 8, 2003.
 Rajat Pandit, ‚??Israel Sneaks to No. 2 Spot as Arms Supplier,‚?Ě Times of India, February 9, 2007, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... green-pine.
 Shishir Gupta, ‚??Next Navy Chief Goes to Israel to Signal Smooth Bilateral Sailing,‚?Ě Indian Express, July 11, 2004, http://www.indianexpress.com/storyOld.php?storyId=50798.
 ‚??India Must Review Ties with Israel: Karat,‚?Ě The Times of India, March 14, 2007.
 ‚??Israeli Phalcon Reaching India on Monday,‚?Ě NDTV, May 24, 2009; ‚??India to Get Phalcon AWACS on Thursday,‚?Ě Times of India, March 24, 2010.
 Doug Tsuruoka, ‚??India‚??s Major Tech Needs Are Often Met by Israel,‚?Ě Investor‚??s Business Daily, January 26, 2007.
 ‚??Quietly, India-Israel Ties Growing,‚?Ě Times of India, March 9, 2007.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??Indian AF Buys Spyder Air-Defense Missiles,‚?Ě Defense News, September 2, 2008, http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3702399.
 Shapir, ‚??Israel‚??s Arms Sales to India,‚?Ě p. 30.
 ‚??IDF Chief Set to Visit India to Strengthen Military Ties,‚?Ě Haaretz, December 6, 2009.
 Minnick, ‚??Israeli Exhibit Among Largest at Show.‚?Ě Israeli exhibits at Aero India 2009 included: Rafael‚??s mobile Iron Dome short-range artillery rocket; the Spike MR (range 2.5 kilometers) and Spike ER (8 kilometers), third generation man-portable (MANPAD) missile system also manufactured by Rafael; Elbit Systems‚?? various UAV platforms (Hermes 450, the new Hermes 900, and the Skylark I and II); IAI‚??s variety of products, including, namely, NIMROD 3, the Netcentric Laser-Guided Warfare System, the Naval Rotary UAV (NRUAV) system for naval vessels, and the Medium Range Ground-to-Air Missile (MRSAM) system; and the Israel Military Industries‚?? (IMI) offer to export Delilah‚??s stand-off air-to-surface missile systems, for ground and sea-based targets. Exhibits from smaller firms included: RADA Electronic Industries‚?? Inertial Navigation Systems, among them its R-100F FOG-based Embedded GPS/INS system and the Modular Avionics MEMS-based INS (MAVINS) system.
 Interview with Lova Drori, Executive VP-Marketing, Rafael, conducted by Defense News during Aero India 2009, November 20, 2009.
 Yaakov Katz, ‚??Israel Eyeing Big Defense Contracts in India,‚?Ě Jerusalem Post, March 10, 2010.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??India to Buy Israeli Spike Missiles,‚?Ě Defense News, March 21, 2011.
 ‚??Israel‚??s Iron Domes Intercepts First Gaza Rocket,‚?Ě Defense News, April 7, 2011. See also Uzi Rubin, ‚??The Missile Threat from Gaza: From Nuisance to Strategic Threat,‚?Ě Mideast Policy and Security Studies, No. 87 (October 2011).
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??India Eyes Israeli Missile Systems,‚?Ě Defense News, July 12, 2010.
 ‚??IMI at Aero India 2011,‚?Ě Defenseworld.net, February 4, 2011.
 Sam Perlo-Freeman, Olawale Ismail, & Carina Solmirano, ‚??Military Expenditure,‚?Ě SIPRI Yearbook 2010: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 189.
 Siddharth Srivastava, ‚??India Sets Sights on Killer Drones,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, April 9, 2010, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LD09Df01.html.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??India‚??s Defexpo 2010 to Attract 650 Companies,‚?Ě Defense News, February 12, 2010; Jyoti Malhotra, ‚??Largest Exhibitor Israel Is the Star at Defexpo,‚?Ě Business Standard, February 18, 2010, http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... po/386055/.
 Dror Marom, ‚??Israel and India to Develop Joint Attack Helicopter,‚?Ě Globes, September 26, 2002.
 A.K. Dhar, ‚??DRDO Seeks Israeli Expertise in Key Surveillance System,‚?Ě Outlook India, November 26, 2006.
 ‚??India, Israel to Craft Joint Anti-Aircraft Missile,‚?Ě Defense News, February 27, 2007; Ran Dagoni, ‚??Israel and India in New Missile Deal,‚?Ě Globes, July 10, 2007.
 Siddharth Srivastava, ‚??India Embraces US, Israeli Arms,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, July 27, 2007.
 ‚??India, Israel to Ramp Up Military Ties,‚?Ě Times of India, December 10, 2009.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??Tata Buys Majority Stake in HBL Elta Avionics,‚?Ě Defense News, November 26, 2010.
 ‚??Tata Group Acquires Stake in HBL Elta Avionics,‚?Ě Indian Military, November 25, 2010.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??A Call for India to Buy Indian More Often,‚?Ě Defense News, February 22, 2010. MINIPOP is an electro-optic system that provides image processing and automatic video tracker capabilities.
 Inbar, ‚??The Indian-Israeli Entente,‚?Ě p. 100.
 ‚??India Assisting Israeli Navy,‚?Ě Times of India, June 17, 2002.
 ‚??Israeli-Built Ship Commissioned in Indian Navy,‚?Ě Indian Express, October 9, 2003.
 ‚??India, Israel to Step Up Naval Ties,‚?Ě Times of India, August 8, 2007.
 ‚??India, Israel Mull Development of Unmanned Combat Helicopters,‚?Ě Times of India, August 14, 2007.
 ‚??India to Hold Wide-Ranging Strategic Talks with US, Israel,‚?Ě Times of India, January 19, 2010.
 ‚??Naval Chief Visits Haifa; Pays Homage to Fallen Indian Soldiers,‚?Ě Times of India, October 13, 2010.
 ‚??Indian Navy Marines Ready for Tavor Rifles,‚?Ě UPI Asia Online, January 20, 2011.
 Ilan Berman, ‚??Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente?‚?Ě Middle East Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 4 (Fall 2002), pp. 33-40.
 ‚??India, Israel Army Brass Hold Talks,‚?Ě Times of India, June 14, 2007.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??Israeli Troops to Train Indian‚??s in Counterterrorism,‚?Ě Defense News, September 9, 2008.
 Ritu Sarin, ‚??From Israel, Lessons on fighting terror,‚?Ě Indian Express, July 21, 2009.
 Kevin Peraino, ‚??Why Israel Isn‚??t Angry,‚?Ě Newsweek, December 3, 2008.
 ‚??India, Israel Discuss Terrorism, Intelligence, Defence Trade,‚?Ě Outlook India, December 22, 2009.
 A Joint Working Group (JWG) was initially established in 2001, when then Director General of the Israeli Defense Ministry Maj. Gen. (ret.) Amos Yaron made an unscheduled stopover in New Delhi and met then Indian Defense Secretary Yogendra Narain.
 ‚??India, Israel Discuss Cooperation on Counter-Terrorism,‚?Ě Press Trust of India, January 5, 2010.
 Interview with Aby Har-Even, former head of the Israel Space Agency, February 7, 2011.
 Amnon Barzilai, ‚??Israel, India Sign Space Program Cooperation Agreement,‚?Ě Haaretz, November 11, 2002.
 R. Ramachandran, ‚??Tango with Israel,‚?Ě Frontline, March 2009. Specifically, ISRO Chief Kasturirangan signed an agreement during a 2003 visit to Israel for the launch of an Israeli astronomy satellite known as TAUVEX (Tel Aviv University Ultra Violet Experiment).
 P. R. Kumaraswamy, ‚??With Israel, Is Sky the Limit?‚?Ě New Indian Express (Chennai), January 39, 2008.
 Neeta Lal, ‚??India‚??s Eye in the Sky Takes Aim,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, April 21, 2009. This 300-kilogram satellite will orbit about 500 kilometers above Earth. It is designed by IAI and is equipped with Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) technology.
 M. Rama Rao, ‚??India‚??s Missile Deal with Israel in Controversy, Marxists Demand Probe, Congress Rejects,‚?Ě Asian Tribune, April 1, 2009.
 Ramachandran, ‚??Tango with Israel.‚?Ě
 Atul Aneja, ‚??US Objects to Sale of Arrow Missiles to India,‚?Ě The Hindu, September 8, 2003.
 Ramtanu Maitra, ‚??An Arrow to Washington‚??s Heart,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, August 20, 2002.
 Arie Egozi, ‚??Israel Bars AESA Radar Export to India,‚?Ě Flightglobal, January 11, 2011.
 ‚??U.S. Wants to Offer Best Defense Technology to India: Pentagon,‚?Ě Indian Express (New Delhi), September 24, 2010.
 Shaun Tandon, ‚??U.S. Puts End to India Export Restrictions,‚?Ě Defense News, January 25, 2011.
 ‚??Will Barack Obama Foster in a New Era of Indo-US military Cooperation,‚?Ě The Economic Times, November 22, 2010.
 Gurmeet Kanwal, ‚??Indo-US Defence Cooperation: Set to Chart a New Trajectory,‚?Ě IDSA Comment, November 23, 2010. The Entity List specifies the license requirements that the U.S. Department of Commerce imposes on each listed person or company. Those license requirements are independent of, and in addition to, license requirements imposed elsewhere by the Department of Commerce.
 Craig Hoyle, ‚??AERO India: MBDA, Rafael Go Head-to-Head for Air Force Weapon Deals,‚?Ě Flightglobal, February 9, 2011.
 Wendell Minnick, ‚??Russia Fights Increased Competition in India,‚?Ě Defense News, February 2009.
 Excerpted from an interview with Indian Secretary for Defense Production Raj Kumar Singh, Defense News, February 7, 2011, p. 22.
 Monika Chansoria, ‚??India-Iran Defense Cooperation,‚?Ě The Indian Defence Review, Vol. 25, No. 1 (January-March 2010), http://www.indiandefencereview.com/2010 ... ation.html.
 Pant, ‚??India-Israel Partnership,‚?Ě p. 11.
 Christine C. Fair, ‚??India and Iran: New Delhi‚??s Balancing Act,‚?Ě Washington Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Summer 2007), p. 150; Christine C. Fair, ‚??Indo-Iranian Ties: Thicker than Oil,‚?Ě MERIA, Vol. 11, No. 1 (March 2007), http://www.gloria-center.org/2007/03/fair-2007-03-09/.
 Barbara Opall-Rome & Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??India‚??s Balancing Act: Avowed Foes Israel and Iran Key to New Delhi‚??s Security,‚?Ě Defense News, September 15, 2003.
 Fair, ‚??Indo-Iranian Ties‚?Ě
 ‚??Iran Seeks Indian Radar to Protect Nuke Facilities,‚?Ě Daily Times (Lahore), September 27, 2004.
 Vijay Sakhuja, ‚??Iran Stirs India-US Waters,‚?Ě IPCS Articles, April 10, 2006.
 Harsh V. Pant, ‚??India‚??s Relations with Iran: Much Ado About Nothing,‚?Ě Washington Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Winter 2011), http://www.twq.com/11winter/docs/11winter_Pant.pdf, pp. 64-65. Other nations involved in IONS include Australia, Bangladesh, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Indonesia, Kuwait, Malaysia, Madagascar, Myanmar, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, South Africa, Singapore, UAE, Yemen, etc.
 Fair, ‚??India and Iran,‚?Ě p. 151.
 J. Dutta, ‚??Israel or Iran? Antony Chooses Oman,‚?Ě The Telegraph (Kolkata), May 8, 2010.
 Sudha Ramachandran, ‚??The Elephant in India and Iran‚??s Room,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, November 21, 2009.
 A. Ranja, ‚??Delhi Reaches Out to Lonely Tehran, May Offer ISRO Launch for Satellite,‚?Ě Indian Express (New Delhi), November 16, 2009.
 A. Moha, ‚??Delhi Ticks Off Tehran over Kashmir ‚??Nation,‚??‚?Ě The Telegraph (Kolkata), November 20, 2010.
 Siddharth Srivastava, ‚??India‚??s Crippled Arms Purchase Spree,‚?Ě Asia Sentinel, March 25, 2010, http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... Itemid=376.
 Ritu Sharma, ‚??New Production, Procurement Policy Cleared,‚?Ě Tehelka, December 15, 2010, htt p://www.tehelka.com/story_main48.asp ... EFENCE.asp.
 Vivek Raghuvanshi, ‚??Bureaucracy Remains Hurdle to Rapid Arms Procurement,‚?Ě Defense News, March 1, 2010.
 Sudha Ramachandran, ‚??Indian Weapons Imports under the Gun,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, October 19, 2009.
 Radhakrishna Rao, ‚??Indian Defence Deals: Cleaning the Augean Sky,‚?Ě Army Articles, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, July 17, 2009, http://www.ipcs.org/article/army/indian ... -2910.html.
 Sudha Ramachandran, ‚??India Fails to Kick Out Arms Kickbacks,‚?Ě Asia Times Online, November 4, 2006.
|01-18-2012, 11:40 PM||#5|
Link US says it is open to work with India on missile shield
Weeks after offering to sell its F-35 fifth generation fighter jets, the US today said it was open to work with India on joint development of a ballistic missile shield.
The offer was made by deputy assistant secretary of defence Robert Scher who said that the Indo-US defence ties were valuable and critical not only for the security and stability of the region, but globally.
"We are really open to it. And this is something we ask to and ask them if they are interested in it," Scher said on collaboration on the missile shield project in an interview to PTI, emphasising that US "is and will be a dependable weapons supplier to India."
The top Pentagon official disclosed that Washington and New Delhi had been involved in crucial discussion on the ballistic missile shield, adding that the US was looking forward to "restart" the dialogue.
Reiterating that US was ready for India to join in the multi-nation collaboration on F-35 fighters, Scher said that Washington was still awaiting India's response.
Referring to President Barack Obama's latest defence strategy in which the US commits itself to a long-term defence relationship with India, the Pentagon official said the US would certainly welcome discussion with New Delhi on F-35 and anti-missile system.
He cited the sale of C-130J transport aircraft to India ahead of the schedule as an example of readiness of the US armament industry to respond to India's need.
|01-19-2012, 10:25 PM||#6|
Link Development plans in BrahMos affected
The promised land, a prerequisite for further development, continues to elude missile firm BrahMos Aerospace Thiruvananthapuram Ltd (BATL), whose fourth birthday passed unsung on December 31.
Phase II development plans of Chakkai-based BATL has come unstuck with the State Government yet to compensate the Indian Air Force (IAF) with the land at the Muttathara Sewage farm in lieu of the IAF land promised to BATL. Last heard, the government was grappling with a vexatious labour row in Muttathara, the settlement of which is key to the hand-over.
Nearly 100 employees of the Dairy Development Department engaged in fodder grass cultivation in Muttathara, who fear job loss are on the warpath demanding rehabilitation, which the government has failed to provide.
‚??As asked, the department submitted a proposal to the government sometime back in which it had sought retention of part of the land for grass cultivation, but no decision has been taken on this yet,‚?Ě sources said. When contacted, Dairy Development director K T Sarojini said the department hoped to retain part of the land for cultivation so that some of the men could stay on.
‚??The remaining employees, we hope to redeploy in our various offices,‚?Ě she said. Under an agreement, the IAF would transfer a 7.25-acre plot housing the Air Force Signals Unit adjacent to BATL once the State Government provided it with land elsewhere. The government identified 20 acres at the Sewage Farm in Muttathara - seven acres as compensation and 13 which the IAF is purchasing.
‚??The district administration had submitted its report to the government,‚?Ě ADM Mohammed Mustafa said, when contacted.
But this report too is understood to be pending with the government.
All this time, a foundation-stone for Phase II unveiled by Defence Minister A K Antony continues to gather dust at the BATL administrative block.
‚??What can we do? Only if we get the land, we can establish a missile integration complex as planned. Without it, there is no development,‚?Ě BATL executive director N R Vishnu Kartha said.
Even though the IAF had not formally transferred its land in Chakkai to BATL, about five acres, excluding the front portion, had been set aside based on a purely verbal agreement.
‚??We hope to start construction here soon,‚?Ě Kartha said.
The erstwhile Kerala Hi-tech Industries Ltd (KELTEC) was gifted to Indo-Russian cruise missile venture BrahMos Aerospace Ltd in December, 2007. But a missile is yet to roll out of here, thanks to the administrative issues including labour disputes and uncertainty over the IAF land.
Incidentally, the coming February marks the third ‚??birthday‚?? of the foundation-stone unveiled by Antony for the Phase II works.
|01-20-2012, 05:27 PM||#7|
|01-28-2012, 05:53 PM||#8|
Link NDA commandant awarded Bar to AVSM
Lt Gen Jatinder Singh, Commandant of National Defence Academy, has been awarded Bar to AVSM (Ati Vishisht Seva Medal) in recognition of his devotion to duty and distinguished service. The award was declared on the eve of the Republic Day.
The General is a specialist in mechanised operations and counter insurgency and took over as the Commandant of NDA on January 1, 2011. He is an alumnus of the Sainik School Kazhakootam, National Defence Academy 42nd Course, Juliet‚?? Squadron, and was commissioned into the prestigious 1 Guards (2 Punjab) regiment of the Indian Army on June 13, 1973. He is a also a graduate of the Defence Services Staff College, Wellington and Higher Command Course (Air) at College of Air Warfare, Secunderabad. The General was also awarded the Chief of Army Staff Commendation in 2002, the Sena Medal in 2003 and the AVSM in 2008 a press release issued by the NDA said.
|01-31-2012, 02:39 AM||#9|
Link Audi looks to enter Indian armoured car mkt with A8 L Security
German auto major Audi is eyeing to enter the high-end armoured car market in India with its A8 L Security model that could cost around Rs 5 crore, and the first vehicle is likely to be delivered this year.
The company, which had showcased the car that can withstand attacks from AK-47s and hand grenades to select guests during the recently concluded Auto Expo here, is understood to have already received about 20 enquiries from the government and top corporate honchos of the country.
According to sources close to the development, Audi is likely to deliver the first A8 L Security in India within next 4-6 months and it is tagged around Rs 5 crore.
"This is a very niche product and is for only a few select persons like top government officials and heads of business groups. Any possible deal is directly handled by the security division of Audi from Germany," a source said.
During the Auto Expo earlier this month, the company has received about "20 active enquiries" from some government departments and top businessmen of the country, the source said, adding Audi is in the process of evaluating the requests at present.
When contacted, Audi India officials declined to comment on any such development.
The sources, however, said Audi has ruled out making the vehicle available to normal customers.
"It will always be very selective sale. Audi is also eyeing defence, para-military and police forces in India," the source said.
The car is completely customised with security gadgets and the price will vary according to specifications that are put in place on requests of individuals.
"The car will be handed over to owners as a fully imported model. Although nobody can say the price for sure at this moment, but it is guessed at around Rs 4 crore to Rs 5 crore," another source said.
The Audi A8 L Security is manufactured at a dedicated high-security production facility in Germany in order to maintain comprehensive secrecy of the entire process.
Audi AG uses many premium and strong materials such as high-strength steel, aramid fibre, ceramic, multi-layer glass and a special aluminium alloy. The car carries an armoured box for the vehicle and communication electronics.
"The underbody has blast protection and anti-magnetic armour plating. Just to give an example of how solid and secure the vehicle is, only one door of the car weighs about 160 kg," the source said.
The car also has the capacity to protect the passengers from chemical attacks such as poisonous gas, he added.
|02-19-2012, 04:45 PM||#10|
Ground wars would be rare in future: Retd IAF vice marshal Kapil Kak
RAJKOT: Retired Air Vice Marshall Kapil Kak today said here that Indian Air Force (IAF) played a significant role in recapturing the Indian territory in the 1999 Kargil war, and such "ground wars" may not be seen in the future, as air forces and navies would play significant roles.
"Indian army and air force were not prepared because they did not believe that geographically tough mountain terrain could be infiltrated (at the time of Kargil)," said Kak, currently an additional director, Centre for Air Power Studies, talking to reporters at `Youth Fiesta' organised by Jay, Genius and Gardi school.
"In 1971, Indian army had proved its supremacy over Pakistan, and to take revenge, its army and militants occupied some areas in Kargil," he said.
Kargil could be one of the last "ground" wars, as both the countries possess nuclear weapons, and in future the Air Force and Navy would be playing a vital role if war-like situation breaks out, Kak said.
Reacting to a question on Kashmir, Kak said, "The situation in Kashmir is improving."
G S Uban, a retired Major General, said: "The situation in Kashmir is now under control...in the past it was uncontrollable." State government and civil society should work together to bring normalcy back in Kashmir, he said.
|02-20-2012, 08:45 PM||#11|
Link Story of the 1988 Maldives coup attempt Economic Times
Operation Cactus, Indiaís military intervention at the request of then President Gayoom of the Maldives in 1988, was a spontaneous response, swiftly executed, writes Sushil Kumar, for the Economic Times.
But who would have ever imagined that a mission to thwart a coup in the island capital of Male, would finally be accomplished more than a thousand kilometers away and turn out to be a historic mid-ocean rescue operation.
After the rapid induction of an Indian Army para brigade at the airport on Hulule island, adjacent to Male, the rebel group who were Sri Lankan mercenaries of the PLOTE cadre, ran for cover and grabbing hostages from ashore, hijacked a merchant vessel , Progress Light, which was anchored in Male harbour.
With its motley group of seven hostages that included a Maldivian cabinet minister and his Swiss mother-in-law , the hijacked ship raced out of Male harbour under the cover of darkness. But unknown to rebel leader Abdullah Luthufi on board Progress Light, an Indian Navy Task Force led by INS Godavari with Captain Gopalachari in command, was fast closing in.
As the drama unfolded at sea, the Indian Navy operations room in Delhi was palpably tense yet privileged by the distinguished presence of then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who was keenly following the action. The Maldivian president had personally requested that the rebels be captured and brought back to Male to face trial, so ensuring the safety of the hostages and also rounding up the rebels was certainly going to be a daunting task. This was evident from the incalculable difficulty of the mission flashed to Captain Gopalachari, the task force commander Ė ďrescue the hostages and capture the rebels .Ē
When dawn broke on the following day, the rebels on Progress Light were startled by the presence of menacing-looking warships of the Indian Navy task force that had stealthily encircled the hijacked ship during the night. Agitated and confused, the rebels initially refused to talk and pressed on doggedly in a north-easterly direction. Their intentions were clearly to seek refuge in Sri Lanka; radio transmissions monitored by the IN warships had confirmed this.
After hours of inaction at sea, a terse message from the Sri Lankan Navy came like a bombshell to the Indian Navy operations room: ďThe SLN had been directed by its government to destroy the rebel ship, if it approached within 100 miles of the Sri Lankan coast.Ē Our sources also confirmed that Sri Lankan Navy gunboats were manoeuvring out of Colombo harbour.
The Sri Lankan ultimatum posed an operational dilemma for the Indian Navy, since the rebels were hell-bent on taking the ship to Sri Lanka. Moreover, the mandate given to the Sri Lankan Navy also had the possibility of a naval confrontation which would have ruined everything. Fortunately, camaraderie at sea remains a praiseworthy concept and with the hotline as a handy device, a tense situation was promptly defused.
But time was surely running out, so the task force commander on board INS Godavari was given an immediate aim -- "Stop Progress Light."
Captain Gopalachari rose to the occasion and improvised on the art of coercive diplomacy. Using his linguistic skills in South Indian languages, he personally engaged the rebel group leader Abdullah Luthufi in a bout of friendly negotiations while the IN task force of Godavari, Betwa and Tir provided a convincing firepower demonstration through a well-timed action sequence.
A four-inch shell shattered the foremast, ack-ack fire raked the foxle deck which knocked out the anchors and a massive undersea explosion from a helicopter-dropped depth charge sent a spine -chilling shudder through the rebel ship. Progress Light came to a deadhalt and lay motionless in the water. Before the dazed rebels realised what was happening, navy commandoes stormed on board and it was all over.
"Hostages rescued safely and rebels captured" was the final message from INS Godavari that brought down the curtain on Operation Cactus. It may perhaps remain just a footnote in our maritime history but Maldives 1988 certainly was an operation with a difference.
Sushil Kumar, The writer was director of Navy Ops in 1988 and later the Navy chief
|02-21-2012, 03:00 AM||#12|
Eurocopter writes to army chief over delays in chopper deal
Expressing "concern" over delays in finalising the deal for procuring 197 light helicopters for the defence forces, European defence major Eurocopter has written a letter to Army chief Gen VK Singh in that regard.
The European Eurocopter AS 350 Fennec is competing with Russian Kamov 226 'Sergei' for supplying these choppers to the Indian Army and Air Force in a project expected to be worth over $1.5 billion.
The choppers will be used by the army and the IAF to replace their ageing fleet of vintage Cheetah and Chetak helicopters, which are critical for providing supplies to troops deployed in Siachen Glacier and other high altitude areas.
"We take this opportunity to express our concern regarding the time frame for the very important programme, for which the RFP was issued in July 2008.
"The technical evaluation process has now taken over 38 months and has not yet been concluded due to reasons which are unknown to us," Eurocopter told the army chief in the letter, a copy of which is with PTI. The previous attempt of the armed forces to find a replacement of these choppers could not be successful in 2007 after the Defence Ministry withdrew the tender which Eurocopter had won.
"We hope that this program after so many years will soon be successfully concluded and we would be proud to contribute to the self-reliance of Indian armed forces," it added.
The trials of two helicopters in the race were completed in December 2010 and the Army Aviation Corps (AAC) submitted the trial reports to the Defence Ministry after that.
The report was accepted by the ministry in October last year and was approved by the Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) for the project only last month.
|02-28-2012, 05:02 PM||#13|
No irregularities in copter deal, says Finmeccanica
Italian defence major Finmeccanica has said its subsidiary Agusta Westland, which has been selected to supply 12 helicopters for VVIP travel in India, is not involved in any irregularity in the deal.
The clarification comes after Defence Minister A.K. Antony asked the Defence Secretary on Friday to look into the issue following reports of alleged corruption in the Rs.3,500-crore deal signed in February 2010.
ďNo notice related to the purported investigations has been served to companies and officers of the Finmeccanica Group, neither in Italy, nor in India. Finmeccanica furthermore declares that the companies of the Group have adopted organisations and ethical codes in line with regulations and best practices, aimed at preventing and banning any conduct not responding to proper management standards,Ē a company statement said on Monday.
It said AgustaWestland excluded any behaviour non-compliant with its Code of Ethics. ďAgustaWestland is not involved in any irregularity concerning the supply of helicopters in India.Ē
The statement said contract negotiations started in September 2008 and concluded in February 2010, with a reduction in the value, compared with the original offer, and ďwithout any additional price escalation to take into account after two years of delay from the originally forecasted contract effective date.Ē
The contract was awarded to AgustaWestland after a comprehensive technical and flight evaluation of the competing helicopters done by the Indian Air Force as per the Defence Procurement Procedures, the statement said.
|03-04-2012, 05:42 PM||#14|
VSHORAD Ė Indiaís Next Big Air Defense Program (Link)
India has to therefore seriously augment its Air Defense capabilities. Several ongoing programs include the replacement of SA-18 Very Short Range Air Defense Systems (VSHORAD), with modern weapons. The cost of the replacement, as anything in India Ė is huge: over replacement of about 800 launchers and initial delivery of 5,000 missiles, at a cost of 27,000 Crore (US$5.2 billion). Evaluations of some of the candidates are expected to commence in MayĖJune this year. The ongoing DefExpo 2012 provides India with a unique opportunity to take a look at some of the most cutting edge Air Defense Systems that are on display.
RBS-70 Man Portable Air Defense Missile launched on a test. Photo: Saab
In contrast to the passive (UV/IR) guided weapons currently in operation, two VSHORAD systems employing laser-beam riding semi-active command to line of sight (SACLOS) guidance technique stood out in this yearís DefExpo. While such systems are presumably heavier and more complex, the more affordable cost of their seekerless missiles is bound to come to effect in the evaluating the total cost of ownership (including missiles, test and practice rounds).
RBS 70/NG Ė SAABís RBS 70 comprises the missile in a launch container, a tripod firing stand and an optical sight. It is operable by one, and portable by three persons. The missile is outfitted with a solid propellant booster motor. When the operator fires the missile, the booster motor is ignited inside the launch tube and the missile is accelerated out of the tube. The control surfaces and the four fins open into position as the missile leaves the tube. The sustainer motor ignites after the missile has travelled a safe distance from the launch position.
The booster is subsequently jettisoned. The RBS 70 has laser beam riding guidance, riding a laser signal being beamed from its own launch station, rather than being guided from the front towards the reflected signal from a laser designated target. The missile operator can locate a hostile target visually or the target can be detected by a search radar. When the target is acquired, the operator tracks the target and the Raytheon Cossor IFF880 friend or foe system interrogates the target. If the target is identified as friendly, a warning light in the sight is illuminated and the firing sequence is halted. The operator aims the missile towards the target, fires and tracks the target, thus aiming the laser guidance beam continuously at the target until the moment of impact. Speaking to Defense Update Saabís spokesperson stated that as the laser beam riding guidance of the RBS 70 is located in the tail of the missile, it is extremely difficult to jam it, since the missile has no seeker head at the front.
In 2011 Saab has introduced an improved version of the system, designated RBS 70NG (new generation), which is comprised of a new sight module, integrating a high resolution thermal imager allowing 24/7 operational capability.
The new module enables advanced cueing and an auto tracker, to improve reaction times and target acquisition, and engagement, thus increasing the hit probability throughout the missile range. Improved guidance has also been introduced, to further increase performance both for manual and auto-tracker engagements. The system has a built-in video recorder for after-action review. With these improvements RBS 70NG offers a flexible and scalable evolution to meet evolving Ground Based Air Defense requirements with Man-Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) as well as with remote-controlled or vehicular applications.
StarStreak Ė Starstreak developed by the Thales group is a close-range anti-aircraft guided-weapon system designed for use against enemy helicopters and ground attack aircraft. Starstreak contains a two-stage solid propellant rocket motor, a separation system and three high-density darts. A pulse of power from the missile-firing unit sets off the first-stage motor that ignites and therefore increases the speed of the missile. The missile enters into a spin due the Canted nozzles. The efferent force of the roll causes the fins to unfold for aerodynamic stability in flight. Once clear of the canister, the motor is thrown out. The second-stage motor ignites and accelerates the missile to a velocity of Mach 4.
A severance system at the front end of the motor holds three darts. When the second stage motor is burnt out, the propulsion triggers the three darts to automatically break up. The darts sustain a high kinetic energy as they are steered to the same target. Each dart includes guidance and control circuitry, a thermal battery and a high-density penetrating warhead with fuse. The severance of the darts kicks off the arming of the specific warheads. Each dart is steered independently using a double laser beam riding system. As the dart collides with the target, the inertial forces trigger the delay fuse, allowing the warhead to penetrate before detonation.
MISTRAL-2 Ė Another competitor seeking the future Indian VSHORAD contract is the European company MBDA, offering the Mistral. This missile has already been selected to equip the Indian Dhruv Helicopter; therefore MBDA does have an advantage in terms of logistics and ordinance management. Moreover, the company has a production line for MILAN missiles established in India by Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL), where Mistral missiles could be produced, if the company wins this program. Other contenders include Rosoboronexport, offering a modern version of the IGLA-S (SA-24) and South Korean LIG Nex1, offering the Chiron.
IGLA-S (SA-24) Ė Similar to the Mistral, a major advantage of IGLA-S is its capability to use existing infrastructure, including DJIGHIT launchers and STERLETS command and control modules, or mobile carriers such as the SA-9 and SA-13 mobile air defense systems. IGLA-S offers superior performance over the IGLA / STRELA missiles, particularly in its immunity to countermeasures (conventional heat flares are useless against its IR seeker flares). According to Russian sources, it is also effective against fast, low flying cruise missiles or high flying but slow unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). With a warhead 1.5 times larger than its predecessors, IGLA-S also offers 20 percent range increase, able to hit targets at a distance of six kilometers.
CHIRON Ė The Korean LIG Nex1 Company has also entered the Indian VSHORAD, yet its product, the Chiron stands the lowest chance to win the technical or commercial phases. Although it uses elements of the Mistral missile to offer increased range over the Russian missile, its seeker, implementing Russian technology is considered less advanced than that of the SA-24. Reportedly, the Koreans are asking $175,000 per unit, which is more than double the cost of an IGLA-S.
Indiaís Air Defense guns like the L-70 and ZU-23 are 40 years old and missile systems like the SA-2 have also become obsolete. This coupled with the fact that there are huge loopholes in the radar network means that the skyís above India are completely insecure. Corrective measures need to be taken immediately and this yearís Defense Expo has certainly provided the answer to Indiaís quest for a modern air defense system.
|03-15-2012, 02:40 AM||#15|
Delay in Defence Purchases
Acquisition of weapons and equipment for defence forces is a complex activity and is carried out in accordance with the provisions of Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP). As per broad timeframe given in DPP, it takes about 80-137 weeks to complete the various stages of procurement and conclude the contract. However, delays sometimes occur in procurement cases due to several reasons, such as insufficient and limited vendor base, non¨conformity of the offers to the Request of Proposal (RFP) conditions, field trials, complexities in contract negotiations and long lead time for indigenization etc. Defence acquisitions are normally based on fixed price contracts. There are contractual provisions for penalties including imposition of liquidated damages for delay in execution of contracts.
To counter systemic and institutional delays, procedures are continuously reviewed and refined on the basis of experience gained during the procurement process.
This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri PiyushGoyal in Rajya Sabha today.
|03-15-2012, 02:42 AM||#16|
Probe in Procurement of 12 VVIP Helicopters
There was a media report stating that the scope of a probe by Italian prosecutors into allegations against unethical dealings by M/s Finmeccanica, Italy has widened to include the Indian contract signed with M/s Agusta Westland for purchase of 12 helicopters. Ministry of Defence asked for a report in the matter from the Indian Embassy in Rome. The report received indicates that Italian magistrate/prosecutors are conducting preliminary investigation about allegations of financial mal-practices occurring within M/s Finmeccanica, Italy and its subsidiaries in general and there is no specific probe being conducted about India related transactions
This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Moinul Hassan in Rajya Sabha today.
|03-18-2012, 06:54 PM||#17|
The defence budget for 2012-13, presented in Parliament on Friday, confirms the Indian Armyís degeneration into a low technology, manpower-intensive force that spends most of its money on day-to-day running. While the Navy and Air Force are built up into modern, space-age forces.
Also evident from the figures is that inflation and the slide in the value of the rupee has caused the militaryís modernisation budget to be effectively reduced for the first time in decades. More worryingly, Indiaís dependence on foreign weaponry could continue with R&D (research and development) expenditure slashed in real terms.
This gloomy conclusion was not immediately evident when Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee announced in Parliament yesterday the government had allocated Rs 1,93,407 crore for the military in 2012-13, a rise of 13.15 per cent over the current yearís revised allocation of Rs 1,70,937 crore. The capital budget, which is the main source for the procurement of new weaponry, was raised by a seemingly healthy 15 per cent from Rs 69,198 crore last year, to Rs 79,578 crore for 2012-13.
But a different picture emerges when one translates the capital budget into US dollars, import-dependent Indiaís primary currency for arms purchases. Last yearís capital budget (at Rs 44.45 per dollar on Apr 1, 2011) was $15.56 billion. This yearís capital budget (conservatively assuming an exchange rate of Rs 50 per dollar) translates into $15.91 billion.
ďFactor in cost inflation, which is roughly 10-15 per cent per annum for weapons systems, and this yearís capital budget will buy significantly less than last yearís,Ē said G Balachander of the Delhi-based Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis.
The Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO), Indiaís main source of indigenous defence systems, must also make do with less. In rupee terms, the R&D allocation of Rs 4,640 crore for 2012-13 just about matches last yearís R&D spend of Rs 4,628 crore. But, given inflation and the falling rupee, and the high percentage of foreign parts in DRDO-built weaponry, the DRDOís spending power will be significantly eroded in the coming year.
Another worrying issue is the Armyís slowdown in modernisation. The Navy will spend almost twice as much in the coming year on force modernisation as it will on manpower and running expenses (capital spend of Rs 23,882 crore, vis-ŗ-vis revenue spend of Rs 12,548 crore).
The IAF will be only slightly lower (capital spend: Rs 28,503 crore, vis-ŗ-vis revenue spend of Rs 17,705 crore). In contrast, the Army will spend only Rs 13,803 crore (half the capital expenditure of the much smaller Navy and IAF); while spending Rs 78,114 crore on running expenditure (roughly four times as much as the IAF and six times more than the Navy).
ďThe Army has always been a manpower-intensive force, given our mountain borders. But its fighting capability will be seriously eroded if modernisation is choked. The Army badly needs new artillery, the helicopter fleet is obsolescent, there are hardly any serviceable attack helicopters, and night fighting capability remains a gaping hole. Most importantly, the infantry, which is operationally committed around the year, must be modernised urgently,Ē said Lt Gen Pradeep Khanna, who retired last year as the chief of the Armyís southern command.
A key reason for the IAF emerging as the biggest beneficiary of the capital budget is the expected signing of a contract this year for 126 Rafale medium multi-role fighters. Normally, 15 per cent of the overall price is paid at the time of signing; with the Rafale contract expected to be for Rs 70,000 crore, the IAF will pay some Rs 10,000 crore this year, with the balance distributed over the coming decade. The IAF is also making annual payments for the earlier contracts for the American C-130J Super Hercules and C-17 Globemaster III transport aircraft. A contract could also be signed this year for 197 light utility helicopters, and for urgently needed trainer aircraft for rookie IAF pilots.
Similarly, the Navy is budgeting for the impending contract for Project 17A frigates that will be built in Mazagon Dock Ltd, Mumbai (MDL) and Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Kolkata (GRSE). It is also making annual payments for several ongoing warship programmes: Project 28 anti-submarine corvettes being built by GRSE; and Project 75 Scorpene submarines, and Project 15A and 15B destroyers being built at MDL. In addition, it is paying Boeing for the P8I Poseidon multi-mission maritime aircraft (MMA) that are being built in the US.
On an average, more than two-thirds of any yearís capital budget is pre-committed towards annual installments for defence contracts concluded earlier. Weapons platforms are often paid for over a decade or so. Just about 30% of any yearís capital budget goes towards new contracts.
Earlier this month, China had announced that it would spend $106 billion (670 billion Yuan) on its military in 2013. Defence experts estimate that Beijing actually spends 50-100% more than the declared figure. Like India, China too has steadily increased defence spending in line with its economic growth.
|03-20-2012, 01:29 AM||#18|
Military Base in Lakshadweep
Establishment and/or augmentation of military base in Union Territory of Lakshadweep is based on analysis and assessment of the threat perception to coastal security and merchant shipping, as well as requirement from strategic perspective. This is an ongoing and continuous process. Presently a naval detachment is operational at Kavarathi Island.
This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri HamdullahSayeed in Lok Sabha today.
Military Assistance to Vietnam
Government is pursuing defence cooperation activities with a number of foreign countries, including Vietnam, based on mutual interests of both sides and keeping in view all relevant aspects.
Defence cooperation activities with foreign countries include high level visits, training exchanges and other interactions between the armed forces of both sides. This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Kirti Azadin Lok Sabha today.
Irregularities in Purchase of Tatra Trucks
No irregularities in purchase of components of the Tatra Trucks for army have been reported.
This information was given by Minister of State for Defence Shri MM PallamRajuin a written reply to Shri Bhoopendra Singh in Lok Sabha today.
|03-21-2012, 07:26 PM||#19|
The Hinduja brothers have cautioned British Prime Minister David Cameron that his efforts to forge closer ties with booming India were failing owing to rising taxes and lengthy visa delays for Indians.
"Rising taxes and lengthy visa delays for Indians were deterring investment in Britain," Gopichand and Srichand Hinduja, chairman and co-chairman of Hinduja group, told the Times.
"Something is wrong with the model," Gopichand Hinduja said.
"His (Cameron's) visits, his signals are good but they don't percolate down the line," he said.
"Britain can play an important role as a vehicle for Indian investment in Europe... but with his heavy taxes and the difficulties which are being put for anybody coming from overseas to buy property ... (they are) harming progress."
"Do you see how much difficulty they are creating for visas?"
The remarks, from one of the world's most powerful Indian businessmen, come just days before George Osborne is due in Delhi for talks with Pranab Mukherjee, the Finance Minister, on the trade relationship which has failed to grow despite being a focus of Cameron's Government, the report said.
Nearly two years after Cameron and Osborne led what No 10 called "the biggest trade mission in history" to India, Britain has slipped to 16th place in a league table of the nation's trade partners, behind Belgium.
In recent months, British companies have also faced a string of problems in India. In a snub to BAE Systems, a $ 12 billion contract to sell fighter jets to the Indian air force went to Rafale of France.
The Hinduja brothers control one of India's biggest industrial conglomerates that includes Gulf Oil, Ashok Leyland - the lorrymaker that they bought from British Leyland in 1987 - and one of India's top private banks, IndusInd.
Criticising UK Government's current approach, Gopichand Hinduja questioned the quality of advice being offered to Cameron on India trade matters.
"The Prime Minister has to take some advice from the overseas Indians who understand and see what is lacking. There couldn't be any better tips and suggestions."
|03-27-2012, 04:28 PM||#20|
Agents were banned in 2006 procedure
Agents and brokers were banned under the Indian Defence Procurement Procedure in 2006 whereas the contract negotiations for helicopters had been going on since 2001.
In the backdrop of these negotiations was the Army Aviation Corps ambitious plan to buy 197 helicopters to replace the ageing fleet of Cheetahs and Chetaks. The Augusta of Italy, Bell, Eurocopter, and the Russian Kamov and Kazan were initially in the race but the list later got narrowed down to Eurocopter and Bell. In December 2007, the MOD pointed to discrepancies in the evaluation process and scrapped the Indian Army tender for 197 Eurocopter helicopters.
Further on the Vectra-Defence link, the Vectra Group says that Tatra a.s. is based in Czech Republic and has no relation with the MoD. On this count, the factual position is that Vectra Group is the largest shareholder of the consortium Tatra Holding s.r.o. that owns Tatra a.s.
The Bharat Earth Movers Limited has been making trucks for defence and other purposes under licence from Tatra. It is these trucks that would emerge at the core of the present controversy, government of India, source pointed out.
|Reply to Thread New Thread|
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|