Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

[member_22733]

I would like to understand the economics and the long term technological impact of 100% FDI in defence, time for a new thread?

[johneeG]

There seem to be many uncanny similarities between the Bolsheviks and Fordri's tactics.

a) Bolsheviks of Russia were supported by Germany. Germany was fighting Russia and was the major beneficiary of the revolution within Russia. Karl Marx himself is a german. Fordriwal is supported by the See Eye A.
b) The Tsar of Russia was leading the war on the battlefront and the administration rested with a Tsarina(wife of Tsar) who was a German. Dhesh is led by Anotonio. Subbu Swamy claims that Antonio was also born in German areas.
c) Women's day marked the protests by women workers which paved the way for Feb revolution in Russia. Anti-Rape protests waved the way for Fordriwal. (This makes the 'empowerment of women' remark by pappu highly suspicious in this context).

Link to post

Western elites pushing to destroy India with feminism
Aug 23rd, 2013
by Brett Stevens.

western_media_alarmism
How do you backdoor Social Marxism into a country? The same way you’d do it here to a small community: invent a pressing problem with a protect victim — gays, women, minorities, children — and demand investigations, public dialogues and other tools designed to make the people there hate themselves.

Then they’ll be grateful when you come in to saveTM them “from themselves.”

Right now, the Western liberal elite media is hive-minding about rape in India. See here, here, here, here, and here (CNN reporting on its own crowd-sourced report).

This fits into the modern narrative of “putting out fires”: overworked, we soldier on, but then we notice a problem so urgent that we must even break out of the normal drudgery of modern life. Rape! That’s as bad as racism… wait, nothing is as bad as racism… it might be racist, but at least one of these victims is white, so… almost as bad as racism. But still very bad.

Finding a problem like this justifies our intervention. It justifies summoning up ten thousand Slutwalks, several Public Dialogues, many collaborative art projects, thousands of investigative journalism pieces, at least a dozen public speeches, and perhaps the sale of 1.2m self-help books about rape, how to avoid it, and how feminism will save us.

And that last point is worth noting: how feminism will save us. The point is to use this justification for action as a backdoor to bring in Western liberal elite-style feminism, which requires a backdrop of Social Marxism, which in turn requires the liberal concept of progress and with a few quick steps, we can dominate this society with our neurosis too.

Cynics like myself think that the point of this expansion is power, with a side dose of “misery loves company.” Or in other words, we’re not going down alone. Everyone must join us in our maniacal quest for Ideological purity and if it destroys us, it will destroy them, and we’ll all be equal in destruction.

But how real are these claims? A helpful BBC article provides some statistics:

It says that the city of Delhi, home to 7.5 million women, recorded 585 cases of rape in 2012, compared with a total of 484 cases from the cities of Mumbai (232 cases), Calcutta (68), Chennai (94) and Bangalore (90 cases). Delhi, Mumbai and Calcutta are megacities with populations of more than 10 million people.

Let’s compare that to statistics from major American cities. New York had 1,092 rapes in 2011. Los Angeles had 828 rapes in 2011. Chicago had 1,439 rapes in 2009 (the most recent year they reported statistics). Houston had 771 rapes in 2011.

In other words, Delhi probably has fewer rapes than most big American cities. Where’s the outrage? Oh, we already have feminism. Time for another Slutwalk.

Western elites spread their cancerous liberalism through jihads such as the manufactured “India rape crisis.” By ignoring statistical evidence, and instead picking a few of the inevitable crimes of a big city, the media can make it appear as if a crisis appears where none exists.

The audience for this media, naive in the belief that the news somehow reports on factual reality, will see the increasing frequency of stories and assume that there is an increasing frequency of crime, when in fact the rate of crime is lower than where they live.

However, this gives the left their true source of power, which is socialization. In every chattering circle, people can talk about rape in India as if they knew something. This embarrasses Indians, and motivates them to atone for that by importing Western-style liberalism and with it, cultural Marxism and other forms of social control.

It’s time to hold our press accountable for the vast amount of damage they do in the name of their own holy jihad of spreading the religion of liberalism to every corner of the globe.

Link

Link to post

----
KaranM saar,
thanks for explaining the drawbacks of FDI in defence. So far, I haven't seen any major pluses in favor of FDI. At best, it seems to be similar to present situation with added benefit of local jobs. At worse, it will hamper the local Military-Industrial Complex.

I think it is not advisable to go for this FDI business and it is better to concentrate on private and public partnership within Dhesh. Some FDI will slip in and there will also be TOTs. But, for long term, indigenous private and public military industrial complex has to be encouraged instead of bringing in foreign players.

First, allow the Bhaarathiya private players and let them compete with DPSUs. Then, later, if there is still need, then one can talk about FDI. At the present, it seems like a needless and potentially dangerous route.

[Karan M]

@karanM,

Your posts are too long and rambling like Rahul Mehta's. If you can keep it to the point it will be helpful.

Boss, your comparison itself shows that you don't appreciate details and yet you want a debate?

Akin to saying "hey make it zimbler"? Do you think bullet points in summary slides compensate for an entire post? If that's what you want, aint happening.

You want to make it simple, take a printout. What I have said is straightforward.

[Karan M]

@karanM,

Your posts are too long and rambling like Rahul Mehta's. If you can keep it to the point it will be helpful.

Should not have told him that. He probably still does not realize that all this 100% FDI SHAFDI is only to use his time to take this thread to the thousand mark.

Or probably there are more than one people behind that ID. I suspect its the old suspect johneeG ji who has join hands with the real KaranM. My god what if KaranM has been kidnapped and this is an identity theft in broad BRF. O Teri!

Actually Johnee G is a different gent. I don't post much on BRF anymore because its not good for me to do so - have enough stuff on my plate anyhow.

What I do care about though is defence - and all policies related to it. Been tracking the sector for ages.

This 100% FDI stuff was something I had flagged in UPA tenure itself as a Grade A trojan horse only to see it reappear in BJP era and have it pushed along by a brainless commerce ministry which is not even bothered about the long term ramifications.

Rest of the topics - even in the Mil forum - I am gradually disassociating from them. There is only so much of the same circular discussion we can have on the same old topics, with the same old claims regurgitated. Rafale good, Sukhoi bad, LCA bad etc etc.

Actually, Supratik's statement brings the same old thing forth. Somehow the onus is on those who track these issues to provide "zimble, easy to digest" platitudes for the other person to agree/disagree with, leaving out the amount of nuance & detail that is necessary to get the picture across.

For instance, pointing out the manner in which the offsets laws were misused without mentioning how the offsets policy by itself was necessary, would be a mistake.

[johneeG]

KaranM saar,
Have you considered the possibility of 'ravi_g' being my other ID?

[Supratik]

@karanM,

Modi wants all-India projects to be explained in 10 slides. Anything longer is a rant or rambling. You shouldn't take it personally. Anyway, unless you are working inside DRDO or other orgs and unless there are concrete examples I will still call it CT. However, your argument about protecting Indian innovation, technology and companies is correct and I am in agreement with it. If I am not mistaken most countries with MIC don't allow their companies to be bought. As regarding corruption in India you wouldn't be able to do even your morning Pakistan if you worry about corruption because even the best policies are corruptible. Having said that there are two things a) I don't think the 100% FDI is automatic so India will have control over what comes in, b) we haven't seen the fine print yet so we don't know what the terms and conditions are. If a foreign company wants to set-up an Indian subsidiary and sell stuff I don't see any problem in that. The picture will be clearer as we go along.

[member_20317]

KaranM saar,
thanks for explaining the drawbacks of FDI in defence. So far, I haven't seen any major pluses in favor of FDI. At best, it seems to be similar to present situation with added benefit of local jobs. At worse, it will hamper the local Military-Industrial Complex.

I think it is not advisable to go for this FDI business and it is better to concentrate on private and public partnership within Dhesh. Some FDI will slip in and there will also be TOTs. But, for long term, indigenous private and public military industrial complex has to be encouraged instead of bringing in foreign players.

First, allow the Bhaarathiya private players and let them compete with DPSUs. Then, later, if there is still need, then one can talk about FDI. At the present, it seems like a needless and potentially dangerous route.

Not that easy actually. At a certain level this is about business management too where logistics, capital allocation, resource building and risk taking is also involved.

FDI route is not actually used even though the CCS is willing to go to any lengths to support the foreigners so long as it is found in national interest. So you could argue that it implies that we avoid that route. But the ideation in weapons systems is immense and all across the world people are doing exciting stuff that is for reasons similar to India not actually used by the country of origin. There was an exciting project in a uropain country - a dumbed down version of folliage penetrating SAR on a drone. Usual happened. Amerikhans displayed interest and that project was never heard of again. Your guess is as good as mine. No doubt the Indians need this tech and can develop it further for the himalayas. No doubt DRDO will be able do have it done. But what price in terms of resources. It is obvious an engineer spending his time making a solid IRJ is not going to be focusing on a liquid IRJ.

We have to think like a Nato sized country with a NoKo type budget. Nimble footedness is a must. And beating the single horse we have DRDO/HAL/OFB, all the time is not going to help.

Think of this not as losing our own. Instead think of this as enabling our engineers to focus on a few things we absolutely will not get in a reasonable cost/time.

................

KaranM saar,
Have you considered the possibility of 'ravi_g' being my other ID?

But can't be.

Because ravi_g otherwise carries the moniker mongrel. Yuck.

You OTOH are a real Garu.

[Cosmo_R]

@Shonu ^^^:

"The govt should be funding indian SMEs to create things. Similar to the grant scheme the US runs. Ofcourse there is a good chance people will try to abuse this, but every receipt needs to be audited and the final product needs to be provided. This will lead to innovation and an indigenous MIC. Instead of this silly 100% FDI which will do nothing for our country."

The problem is that until these SMEs get started and deliver products on a commercial scale, we'll be importing. It is THAT import stream that would be very useful to target. Example, allow Dassault to invest 100% in the supply chain in India on the condition their India employees are 95% Indian. There will a spinoff of know how at the individual level and after a few years a significant number will start their own parts and sub assembly businesses which can then benefit from grants and so on.

What good is 100% local ownership of OFBs that import everything and screw it together (with OEM screwdrivers)? Its neither fish nor fowl. My take is that with 100% FDI: the investors take the risks without any guaranteed contract from the GoI. Right now, many of our OFBs are an employment scheme based on an import stream.

[Karan M]

@karanM,

Modi wants all-India projects to be explained in 10 slides. Anything longer is a rant or rambling.

So, are you Modi? Have a reality check please. Modi is a PM. Do you think he has the time to understand or even contemplate the pros and cons of each issue beyond a point? That is why he has ministers or even advisers. The debate here tends to be more detailed...last I remembered, nobody here talks in bullet points either. Your comment was pompous.

You shouldn't take it personally.

If you are unable to communicate politely, it will be taken personally. Simply put, the issue is at your end. You seem to think I owe you detailed explanations and with nice soundbytes wherein you sit & decide what to accept and what not to, and you are entitled to it. This for a topic that is so detailed that it takes hours to even move past the first look. Sure!

Anyway, unless you are working inside DRDO or other orgs and unless there are concrete examples I will still call it CT.

Concrete examples?

Why are you even debating this issue when by your own admission you don't particularly understand or even follow the military forum?

There are threads there which have tracked specific examples of glaring malfeasance and you want to be spoonfed information when told explicitly that it is not in Indian interests to debate specific manners in which specific Indian programs can be harmed by these actions and also, that by naming the organizations responsible for having committed dodgy stuff in the past (some of which are active), there are wider repercussions.

Boss, go do some reading, talk to people, step out of your own cocoon, in whatever field you are, but are completely unaware of the dirt, or the elbow grease that percolates or makes the Indian defence sector, where there are hard won successes as well. One doesn't even have to be in the field directly to be aware of the details of many of the things being discussed.

I am not going to spend any more time making nice "Ten minute presentations" for you either..

However, your argument about protecting Indian innovation, technology and companies is correct and I am in agreement with it. If I am not mistaken most countries with MIC don't allow their companies to be bought. As regarding corruption in India you wouldn't be able to do even your morning Pakistan if you worry about corruption because even the best policies are corruptible. Having said that there are two things a) I don't think the 100% FDI is automatic so India will have control over what comes in, b) we haven't seen the fine print yet so we don't know what the terms and conditions are. If a foreign company wants to set-up an Indian subsidiary and sell stuff I don't see any problem in that. The picture will be clearer as we go along.

Ah, so now you get the point in bold. That is all, zimble. Nothing more.

Regarding corruption, the amount of corruption in India dwarfs that in other countries which is what makes laws and relying on them infeasible. That is the point. You were saying laws will do the trick, when coupled with policy relaxation, as they will hedge the risks - but practise tells us they wont.

You need to retain current policy of not allowing foreign acquisitions instead and stick to it.

Instead of making complex laws which you can't enforce anyhow. Try arm twisting the French when your privates are in their hands thanks to the Mirage/Rafale/Milan etc. A few months delay in spares and our serviceability will go from 80% to 40%, and so does our warmaking potential, and India can't replace $130 Mn aircraft either.. such is the way of the arms trade.

[Karan M]

The problem is that until these SMEs get started and deliver products on a commercial scale, we'll be importing. It is THAT import stream that would be very useful to target. Example, allow Dassault to invest 100% in the supply chain in India on the condition their India employees are 95% Indian. There will a spinoff of know how at the individual level and after a few years a significant number will start their own parts and sub assembly businesses which can then benefit from grants and so on.

Sorry but those SMEs are delivering products on a commercial scale. We are talking of preventing these commercially viable SMEs from being transferred lock, stock and barrel to the benevolent folks at Dassault, who charge an arm and a leg for their patented technology & will then claim ownership of long term support as well.

What good is 100% local ownership of OFBs that import everything and screw it together (with OEM screwdrivers)? Its neither fish nor fowl. My take is that with 100% FDI: the investors take the risks without any guaranteed contract from the GoI. Right now, many of our OFBs are an employment scheme based on an import stream.

Irrelevant, because we are speaking of SMEs and those pvt firms which do make items inhouse and supply it to the OFBs, and not the OFBs themselves. As matter of fact, the DPSUs have outsourced a lot of the work they should be doing to the SMEs.

[Karan M]

BTW, offsets are intended to allow the defence industry to scale up. There was a lot of hue and cry from the same quarters (think tanks, rtd blimps etc) that offsets would benefit only the DPSUs. Reality - largest chunk of the offset contracts went to pvt SMEs.
Thankfully, even the MMRCA Offsets contract clause was not relaxed.

That was the first "battle" won.

Next of course is this second round, wherein the SMEs themselves are being targeted, and notes being prepared to state that 100% FDI will do the trick and nothing else.

Its blatant really. Nobody wants to transfer TOT or provide technology for offsets to India, but are being forced to via the strict DPP - so this latest "wild card entry" to somehow let 100% subsidiaries in India do the trick.

Sure..

As matter of fact, if the offsets contracts are strictly enforced, that itself will lead to boomtime in Indian industry - private especially.

The onus is on the winning contractor to get the job done, identify an Indian partner and have things sorted out within a fixed deadline. Some leakage is inevitable, but even if half the contracts fructify, we will be seeing a rapid change for the better.

What is holding up the entire movement, simply put, is the lack of decision making at both the MOD level & the shambolic movement at the Defence Offsets Mgmt agency - even so contracts have been put in place and orders are in delivery.

But if we had better movement, such trojan horses of 100% FDI would have been dismissed with contempt earlier on itself.

The biggest farce is the Arty Upgrade program. Thousands of guns required, Indian companies willing to invest, yet no movement.

[member_20317]

When we talk of Rafale supply chain risks or DRDO IPR we forget that even 26% is approval route and the Def Min will always control the OFB and through the vendor management at OFBs also the constitution of the defence sector MSME.

Please note this route of internal control is in addition to the fact that outsiders are not coming in, actually.

But this does not mean that the foreigner MIC owners (not the goddamned MNC owners) are [added later - not] playing games of subverting the MIC of others and buying up good ideas.

I am trying to bat for Wernher von Braun kind of acquisition (figuratively off course). Remember - our germans are better than their germans. Why cannot the FDI route be treated as a way of picking up good ideas, inviting technicians and have them cooperate with carefully managed/controlled Indian teams. Both the Indians and Chinese have poached the Russian talent for their respective strategic programs.

We all cry corruption all the time when the reality is that what is labeled as corruption is actually jugaad or non-investment in enforcement aka free for all. And the situation is not going to change by introducing audits and book keeping. You really are against corruption you have got to support the idea of giving ownership to people with ideas. Where they get their money to invest should be controlled. But is it not obvious that at least some of these smart foreigners will be trying to convert the IPR into shareholding. Also the entry policy should be regulated properly by a clear spelling out and enforcement of controls but at least poach on others to make up for the loss of talented Indians that they have poached from you or from other countries like India.

[nachiket]

What good is 100% local ownership of OFBs that import everything and screw it together (with OEM screwdrivers)? Its neither fish nor fowl. My take is that with 100% FDI: the investors take the risks without any guaranteed contract from the GoI. Right now, many of our OFBs are an employment scheme based on an import stream.

The problems in the OFBs (mainly shoddy quality and workmanship) is not going to be solved by allowing in FDI. We have had Indian firms capable of building manufacturing facilities to provide an alternative to the OFBs for some time now. The problem is that the government doesn't want that option, because if a contract for the manufacture of an OFB or HVF bread and butter product like rifles or armored vehicles is given to a private manufacturer, the government will have a rebellion on their hands from the OFB unions who think all such contracts are their entitlement. The OFB knows it has a captive market, just like HM and PAL once knew they had a captive market for their cars and continued to sell decades old models to people who had no other choice.

Its not just OFB either. Pipavav shipyard faced the same problem when the MoD continued to hand out deals only to government shipyards.

Unless this policy changes, defence manufacturing is never going to improve, FDI or no FDI. The DPSU monopoly in manufacturing/assembling whole products has to be broken. The DRDO has found a way around it by cultivating the SME's to manufacture components that Karan is talking about. But we desperately need companies like Tata, AL, etc. to start manufacturing and delivering entire products like howitzers and APC's to the armed forces. I'm pretty sure their QC will be miles ahead of OFB, simply because they have a lot to lose in terms of future deals if the users don't like the product. OFBs never had to worry about that, so there was no incentive to do better.

We don't necessarily need 100% FDI for this. MoD's policies have to change first.

[Manish_Sharma]

India will definitely be a net gainer from increased FDI in defense and the only ones who will definitely lose are those who thrive on sycophancy, corruption and government subsidies with zero culpability and answerability. The same folks who have done nothing in the way of defense development and are entirely responsible for the outrageous situation where a nation of over 1 billion still imports infantry guns, bullets and trainer aircraft after 75 years of independence.

I thinks same people want 100% FDI who'd let deshwaseez to assemble foreign made systems and platforms like Tatra was being mfrd.

[Karan M]

But this does not mean that the foreigner MIC owners (not the goddamned MNC owners) are playing games of subverting the MIC of others and buying up good ideas.

Problem is they are..

There has been a huge lobbying effort underway now for several years on the following tacks:

1. DRDO/DPSU complex/entire Indian MIC - drop it entirely. Constant attempt and expect it to continue. DRDO in particular is considered a big pain by many folks because they run India's strat programs, and folks are worried about tech transfer between programs. Also because they are the originators of many of the critical ideas such as offsets, stringent TOT restrictions (as versus screwdriver giri etc).

2. Kill current high profile programs and buy foreign equivalents. G vs LCA. Luckily, IAF went for all out capability, and that was skipped. Has succeeded for T-90 vs Arjun, as much as we may crib.

3. Kill the offsets program and TOT programs both. Offsets are being targeted via the argument it raises costs of the program (nevermind + impact on industry itself) and TOT via citing the inefficiently run earlier TOT programs which were shoddily drafted and poorly executed.

There is a famous saying - when a lot of folks turn up in opposition, you are doing something right.. much the same here.

The usual suspects - arms traders and their media pimps - have been baying a lot on 1-3. It'll continue. This FDI stuff is another in a long line of such attempts.

The acqiuisition of foreign tech is no big thing BTW. The offsets proposals mean the foreign firm will have to grow its Indian partner to get its work done.

They did it for the Chinese, now its our turn.

Ditto if TOT is open to pvt and public both, see the results.

[chaanakya]

That is quite an interesting discussion on 100% FDI in defence sector. I am not sure how Govt of the day came out with such a proposition when long held wisdom had been to exclude critical sectors like defence from FDI investment. Looks like a trial balloon.
Indian companies are willing to invest but where is the ownership of the product by Users. Is there any commitment from them . Not yet. Unless Army/Airforce float EOI for that purpose and go for competition to select the best concept and prototype to be awarded orders in large numbers later on, no forward movement will take place.

See the example of Tejas and Arjun. Two big ticket item largely developed with indigenous efforts yet acceptance is painfully slow. On the other hand we have Navy which is having one of the largest indigenous development program and we now have Nuclear Submarine.

I would normally be suspicious of FDI in defence sector. Most of the time their sole aim is to open up a closed sector where India has made substantial progress or is likely to make one or to protect their captive market. I still remember Cray XMP super computer which was restricted dual use item not allowed to India. Later when Param etc was developed Unkil relaxed the restriction to allow import of Low end Super computers so that development of Indian super computer could be stymied.

If at all FDI is to be allowed , let it be minority stake where product and its IPR is jointly owned. Brahmos could be one such template. Though Karan could shed more light on it and I ca see merit , ample merit in his argument. Well I am on the other side of the divide, i.e. on the Side of Bharat ( indigenous development) and not India (FDI route). Though I have not tracked the sector as extensively as Karan has done.

JMTC.

[member_20317]

But this does not mean that the foreigner MIC owners (not the goddamned MNC owners) are playing games of subverting the MIC of others and buying up good ideas.

Problem is they are..

Sorry Karan M ji, I actually forgot to put a 'not' in haste. If you read it with the not as introduced above in the original post it would still make sense. I do agree they are doing us in.

The case I was trying to build up was to play the game of counter subversion.

Sorry ji, made you write so much for something I already agree on.

[Karan M]

Chaanakya saar - finally somebody who remembers the "good old days" and also the hard lessons learnt eg with the Cray and many other issues.

If at all FDI is to be allowed , let it be minority stake where product and its IPR is jointly owned.

Precisely!

Well I am on the other side of the divide, i.e. on the Side of Bharat ( indigenous development) and not India (FDI route).

We are on the same side here.. I completely support indigenous development as the long term strategy and bulking up of our own industry to make our own items in defence. JVs etc should be allowed for short term only and in areas where we need rapid development in short timeframes (for which we dont have the ready tech) and Indian partner should do some good value addition or get TOT to allow proper support.

[Karan M]

Brahmos BTW is an interesting discussion - almost entirely Indian funded using up the funds we "owed" Russia as their part of the financing..
Uses Indian tech for all the ground eqpt - FCS, carriers/TELs, command and control. "Core" - ie the missile - dominated by Russian expertise on the Yakhont program - only few key avionics items like navigation system, onboard comp derived from Prithvi.
Now - as a program - 100% success in meeting service requirements etc.
However, success bred complacency and the folks did not move on indigenizing the seeker/propulsion until a salvo from Unkil's Harpoon program almost sunk the programs Army procurement on cost grounds. Now they are doing it.
Russia of course, showed us the finger in a sense and exported its own variant, the Yakhont since all the stuff in it was from Russia (and why should they subsidize the Indian MIC).

IMHO - Brahmos shows the pros (rapid development/deployment) and cons (limited indigenization/control/cost) of JVs. They have to be constantly monitored and program objectives changed over time, as conditions change.

Other great hope was (is?) Barak-NG aka LRSAM for the IAF/IN. Seems to be finally moving. Time will tell if we got a good deal.

[member_20317]

My point additionally also was that the Touts survive only because we are defensive and do not have a research base in a lot of things. As a result the Touts enable imports for keeping their foreign principles in business and then use the market presence and deep networking of their foreign principles to also cut smaller deals for those same masters. Only this time the smaller deals are a mechanism of generating profits to pay off the Touts.

Indians end up propping up both the foreign principle and the touts.

For this situation to be rectified we will need to source the smaller ideas from the other countries. In any case no big ideas are going to come from other countries and hence our internal resources, should be working on the big ideas, only.

There has to be some MBA jargon for what i am trying to say. But we can do onto others that they have been doing onto us.

[Karan M]

Speaking of touts - i wonder what will happen to the gent with the Romanian wife, currently in some jail?

[Raja Bose]

Speaking of touts - i wonder what will happen to the gent with the Romanian wife, currently in some jail?

You mean Abhishek Verma? He is small fry.

[Karan M]

Yeah, but I bet he has info on many programs and who else was in the business with what contacts. IIRC he was a fixer and information provider more than a big player himself.

[sunilUpa]

Can FDI help in developing manufacturing practices and developing skilled man power where they are lacking?

[Karan M]

Technically yes, but it all depends on intent and the nature of the program itself. I mean, if we look at MRO - financially viable, useful employment generator - but not as complex as actual aircraft assembly, which in turn is not as complex as being vertically integrated..

[SBajwa]

FDI in 100% for things like

1. Night vision goggles for all forces (police + defense) for both export (to approved countries) and in house.
2. All type of small guns and military guns and their ammunition for both export and in house.
3. Tents, water bottles, uniforms, boots, running shoes, hats, hand held GPS, GPS for vehicles, etc.
4. Small boats, etc.

lot of this stuff is used by sportsmen, hikers, etc.. so it is used with both Defense and civilians.

and off course! Indian companies should be given some tax breaks for defense items, while levying a tariff on foreign companies.

[member_22733]

I am a little torn about the subject. I have worked in hard engineering companies (not SW/ITvity types) and I have some ideas on what makes a successful product. I have also worked in Indian ITVity type companies and I know the difference. From that perspective I am somewhat neutral to 100% FDI.


Assorted list of conditions that the govt. should put forward for allowing > 50% FDI in defense:
1) A bunch of post-grad/PhD students are to be trained in the field that the Foreign entity enters into, by the foreign entity free of charge. They should not be bound in any form to the foreign entity.
2) A few extension projects be done by the PhD students/post grads wherein they try to solve an open problem in the field that would further develop the capability of the weapon/system being sold.
3) Money invested be locked in for the long term (> 10+ year blocks)
4) Production of the weapon system right from its nuts and bolts sourced entirely from India
5) Production license be locked in for the long term (> 10+ year blocks)
6) Allow for periodic inspection to ascertain that none of the norms are violated.
7) Permanent govt liaison be present in high level technical and non technical meetings.


Note that the above points are aimed at increasing the knowledge base and also expanding the production base present in India. This in general would be useful in the long term.

[JohnTitor]

Technically yes, but it all depends on intent and the nature of the program itself. I mean, if we look at MRO - financially viable, useful employment generator - but not as complex as actual aircraft assembly, which in turn is not as complex as being vertically integrated..

Most people here are not factoring in some basic rules in defence production:

A- Companies that invest want profit, they will take 100% of this profit home. This is the case with every company all over the world. They are not in your country to make you developed or help you grow or give your countrymen jobs. They are here to make money and make money they will.

B- Defence is a "national security" issue the world over. No company will develop/manufacture/enhance the latest tech in another country. Period. Do you think the US govt will let LM manufacture tech that will be used in the F35? Or perhaps you think the anti-radar coating will be made in india? The US won't even let the F22 take part in a war-game with india, what to speak of building it elsewhere? The only bits and pieces that will get build/developed in india would be cheap and dirty stuff which (if lost) will not put the host country's security in jeopardy.

Lilo posted this in another thread - it is for Boeing:

What do you notice? Outside the US, they don't make anything that can be termed as "high tech" or "critical" in the real sense. Where are the engines made? Where are the computers that run the plane made? And this isn't even a military plane. Also notice the job distribution - jobs outside the US don't even make up a fraction of those in the US. Further, they are just importing this stuff with no investment outside the US.

You expect them to invest in india AND make critical stuff????

Lets be honest here, given the incentive, I am sure indian companies can make every single thing in that image that is sourced from outside the US - or learn to make it within 1-2 years. This is not rocket science. What indian companies will struggle with is real high tech stuff like engines, fan blades, ECUs, software that runs the system etc.. This can only be developed in india with proper investment and R&D and incentive from the govt. DRDO can't do it on its own and neither should it.

What these companies will build in india are stuff that anyone can do, but these companies will gain from cheap labour, lax environmental laws, corrupt bureaucracy etc.. If an indian company develops something and starts to grow, these companies will buy it out and take the IP back to the host nation. Indians will have nothing but more paper money that has been printed at a US mint.

Speaking of which, india cannot even make the paper it uses for its currency, why isn't de la rue opening shop india with 100% FDI to make that paper in india? I guess even paper used for currency is "high tech" which has national security repercussions!

FDI in 100% for things like

1. Night vision goggles for all forces (police + defense) for both export (to approved countries) and in house.
2. All type of small guns and military guns and their ammunition for both export and in house.
3. Tents, water bottles, uniforms, boots, running shoes, hats, hand held GPS, GPS for vehicles, etc.
4. Small boats, etc.

lot of this stuff is used by sportsmen, hikers, etc.. so it is used with both Defense and civilians.

and off course! Indian companies should be given some tax breaks for defense items, while levying a tariff on foreign companies.

Let me help you there:
1- UK has europes only company that makes CCDs. Again, this is fab/clean room based stuff which india torpedoed back in 2008 (when intel wanted to open up a plant in AP, but weren't provided tax benefits so they built it in israel instead). India has little or no knowledge about running huge cleanrooms which make this sort of thing. NV requires CCDs for converting light into images (the kind used in NV/TV etc). I can assure you, that this company that makes CCDs in the UK will NEVER, let me say that again NEVER, transfer this tech over to india or any other country. It has been built over 60years of R&D and billions of $$s so they ain't gonna set up shop in india.
2- Instead of learning and developing from INSAS you want FDI to build a plant to make parts and assemble them for the army? Guess where the R&D team for this company will be? I'll give you a clue, not india!
3- Sure, you want even the simple stuff to be over run by non-desi companies. nice!
4- really?

[panduranghari]

Why not use spies and steal technology? What is wrong in this approach? Why should we not play dirty?

[Raja Bose]

Yeah, but I bet he has info on many programs and who else was in the business with what contacts. IIRC he was a fixer and information provider more than a big player himself.

From accounts, he sang quite well onlee. For getting info on who's who's, all they have to do is pick up a bunch of his South Dilli neighbours including the eye-ranian dude who used to own the very first Ferrari in Dilli not to mention the sardar who delayed the Sukhoi deal for years

[Vayutuvan]

panduranghari: Two points -

1. Why do you think we are not playing dirty?

2. There are other issues which I will detail in another post, but in short, would you believe "data" (say "yield") and "initial conditions and material propeties" under which the "yield data" has been produced? What about machining tolerances? Response times?

[Rahul Mehta]

@karanM,

Your posts are too long and rambling like Rahul Mehta's. If you can keep it to the point it will be helpful.

When anti-RM elements run out of arguments, they resort to RM-bashing even when RM is nowhere near.

===

Suddenly UN and US SD are making statements on women safety in India. Goras trying to find reasons for doing color revolution in India again. NM will be attacked soon may be from Anna team, Khejri or some other wako. Already terrible attacks on freedom of expression are the talk. Arnob, Thaper, UndiTV and all are going gaga on that.

Rambling of UN\USA will have NO effect in India. But what paid-media writes will surely have effect. And paidmedia becomes worse, when it is owned by MNC-owners (aka foreigners). And who allowed foreigners to own paidmedia in India? ABV, Sushma and company. And who is batting for 100% FDI in newspapers? NaMo , Prakash Javedkar and company. And AAP\Congress will support all this opening of media. So yes, paidmedia can create a mess. But then BJP = NaMo are non-solutions. Solutions I propose are in the SMS thread.

====

Dear anti-FDI folks,

Please decide what POLITICAL stand you wish to take. In most posts I see that you are pro-NaMo. And then I also see you anti-FDI. And NaMo seems to be hardcore pro-FDI. Your political stand is contradicting your views on economic policies.

=====

RM ji, can you touch your ideas on Education in India, the current state of affairs, what has gone wrong (if in fact something has gone wrong), and how to fix it. This would be for across the board primary, secondary, high school and higher education including professional/technical education. Where does vocational training fit in and how to move people from unskilled agri and construction sectors to semi-skilled or skilled manufacturing jobs and how to create those jobs - not just IT and service sector (banking, insurance, travel, entertainment) jobs?

Tomorrow or some other day in the near future would be fine along with pointers to your FB (provided mods do not have a problem with the same).

Here is the BRF thread which has links to most of the solutions I have proposed -- http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=6646 . The links to my FB sites are also in that thread

[KJo]

I wonder if Shashi Tharoor is trying to kiss up to Modi to get a mantri job in his Govt.

[ramana]

He criticised Modi move to talk to secretaries without the Ministers!
OTH Modi is commint a mistake in making Congress LOP.
They dont meet the minimum standard set by Lok Sabha rules of 10% strength.

[RamaY]

Droppings from Eenadu news paper:

1/ Modi warned his ministers to be aware of sting ops, secret cams etc, and advised them to limit their interactions with unknown/suspecious people

2/ Venkaiah Naidu (parliamentary affairs minister) indicated that the die-nasty will not be given LOP position.

[Vayutuvan]

RM, thanks. Will let you know if I have feedback (I usually do ).

[abhishek_sharma]

No more English, Modi chooses Hindi for talks with foreign leaders

[Yagnasri]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 26136.aspx

If true, this is a major disappoint by NM. There is nothing from US to show that there do not continue with "get NM work". Then why do things like this? May be NM knows things we do not know, may be he is being "pragmatic' may be in a forget and forgive mood. We may never know his true reasons.
But in long term it will give great confidence for US SD to organize color revolutions in India. It already started with madia making sounds of rapes, publishing of books, freedom of expression, killing of some muslim youth (in a congress ncp ruled state and blamed on BJP). Soon there will be jhola color revolution in Delhi or some other place.

[KJo]

No more English, Modi chooses Hindi for talks with foreign leaders

I disagree with this. Language chauvinism is silly, Mulayam Singh Yadav used to do this and then he coolly sent his son Akhilesh to Mysore for Engineering in English language. Actor Rajkumar used to organize strikes in Karnataka to demand impositionof Kannada medium and his kids went to an English boarding school in Chennai or Ooty.

If a foreign leader can speak English, Modi should speak the same. His English is not bad, he can express himself pretty well.

[KJo]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 26136.aspx

If true, this is a major disappoint by NM. There is nothing from US to show that there do not continue with "get NM work". Then why do things like this? May be NM knows things we do not know, may be he is being "pragmatic' may be in a forget and forgive mood. We may never know his true reasons.
But in long term it will give great confidence for US SD to organize color revolutions in India. It already started with madia making sounds of rapes, publishing of books, freedom of expression, killing of some muslim youth (in a congress ncp ruled state and blamed on BJP). Soon there will be jhola color revolution in Delhi or some other place.

Yes, if this is true, I am disappointed. Modi should have played hard to get, and made the US wait for years. Visited many countries and then deigned to visit the US.