Abhishek's CC and _P; And Arun_S saar.
If I may be so bold: While you guys have interesting geo-political analysis of the impact of a ABM system, isnt the analysis you are painting premature? You are painting a picture which assumes India has ABM deployed. However as Arun_S himself cautioned me, lets walk and then run. Lets not get carried away.
The matter of interest at the moment is getting the ABM system up. Till then the geo political game will be painted by
1) When/if/how did India get ABM, when will it be fully deployed.
2) How to stop India in getting the ABM system operational (for Pak, Chin)
3) Should I help India get a ABM or should I block it? Which way is my benifit more? (Ru/US/Israel etc.)
Lets game the above scenario for now, because the resolution of the the current game will determine what the setting of the pieces for the next one is, and the current assumptions you are basing your analysis on may not even be valid.
saty, look at my fresh post after all te pasting jobs.
To Abhishek's point,
last year I was discussing the unique geopolitical situation that India is in with a Brigadier (now Maj General) of the Indian Army. He pretty much reiterated the same points that Abhishek made about India's position. India is currently being wooed by all sides, Russians want India to be on their side in order to contain US interests in the region, US wants India to be on their side to contain Chinese interests in the region. Until India chooses a side, India will be at an advantage.
hello everyone, I am going to follow Kalam Sahab's line of thinking a few steps further. I am saying what I think Kalam Sahab is saying and feel free to attack me if you think I am wrong.
I am all for globalisation of economies and I will be very happy when all trade blocks, tariffs and direct or indirect subsidies are lifted, but I want to make something clear. There are things we should import and things we should absolutely NOT.
When it comes to conventional weapons systems we can buy some things from outside the country, but when it comes to matters of nuclear security we cannot buy from outside. That in my opinion is a rule that cannot be broken.
To buy a weapon meant for strategic use from outside the country would negate what gains could be had from it. A foreign power would have the ability to dictate the nature of its use and that kind of power in someone elses hands would eradicate our decisional autonomy.
Surface to Air Missiles to protect against conventional airstrikes are not a strategic weapon and they can be imported.
But ABM systems which provide protection against airborne nuclear threats are too vital to be left to imports.
I see two natural consequences of this.
Firstly, the ability to protect our airspace against intrusions is a very vital part of securing fortress India. After Gulf War I in 1990, western strategists have becoming increasingly reliant on gaining air superiority as a prerequisite to military control over a nation. A strong and robust indigenous ABM program lays the groundwork for a stronger Air Defence System which cannot be easily penetrated by a foreign power. In essence it ensures that what was done to Iraq by the French cannot be repeated in India. I repeat Fortress India will not be betrayed with such ease.
Secondly, from a technology perspective, we maintain our decisional autonomy by reducing our dependence on imports when it comes to security against nuclear strikes. This means that our ABM test has just done what Shakti tests did for nuclear weapons. It showed that we are not dependent on anyone. This is unlike other third world countries with nuclear weapons which are completely reliant on being sock puppets of China. By pursuing the most advanced technologies known to man, we are aiming for the big league.
In sum, a stronger regime of self-reliance in air defence technology has strategic implications that outweigh any immediate costs. A strong indigenous representation in the arena of air defence systems is a non negotiable item in the India's national security calculations.
I) India every so often wakes up the world to show its latent talent and potential.
Example. Arjun, LCA, Missile development, Kaveri, Cryo engines etc.
Evreyone in the world knows we can do it, except our own home grown critics and GMs with chalta hai attitude.
2) India is wooed by one and all because of its unique position as a very viable multi ethnic functional democracy with immense land mass, natural resources and above all smart human capital. Economies and technologies are consumption driven, Hence India and China by virtue of large population will have to be next leaders of the pack of nations. India even when compared to PRC has institutions that have stood for centuries with far more transparency than PRC can ever imagine in the short run, and thanks to a society which values democracy inspite of PRC inspired , CIA aided PWG, Naxals and leftwing nuts.
The correct posture in the current Geo Political environment is to be equally aligned ( rather than outdated Non aligned, just like our defination of secular means 'all religions on equal footing', not religion free as the dictionary defines it)based on selective issues evaluated on the basis of first and foremost national interests, not ideology. If the world greatest democracy can be in bed with Mushy like tinpot dictators, PRC like democratic dictatorships and equally cozy to western democracies, we too can do that be it with Burma or Iran or USA..
Now coming to Vijay J 's doctrine of self relaince in strategic weapons and reliance on outside powers for non strategic wepons suits us fine as long as we have the money to pay. ( Tejori house full)
Non strategic weapons will be used and have to be effective, we will have wars with Pakistan that is for sure and even Bangladesh.
So we better have things that fire, work and give results. We cant go to war with Proof of concept equipment.
Strategic weapons by nature are not sold even to closest allies or Munnas, at best a shield is offered (like for chief Vitalstatistic of Asterix)
Strategic weapons are for brandishing only, if they are used both brandisher and brandishee will reap the consequences ( New english word are not monopoly of yankees or ebonics, desi wallahs also contribute to queens Hinglish)
So DRDO is ideally suited for strategic weapons development, because for those purposess even a Proof of Concept (like the recent clash of Prithvis in Aakash) is good enough to make some idiots accross the border wipe their eyes and see reality.
DRDO meanwhile can extend the fine tuning for quite sometime without much damage to war fhiting quality of our forces.
Even if some MOD wallah wants to import Strategic weapons system for his own tactical reasons ( of financing his kids education in US or UK, or buy a condo in Tampa FL or Jackson heights NY), they will never be used, or not sure they will perform. So why not local made DRDO stuff we can atleast have some spinoffs no?
SO I endorse Vijay J 'sargument and his doctrine.
Philip, While I do understand the technical complexity that US faces for tis NMD program which leads to apparent delays, one should not lose sight of the fact that the DRDO program is for much shorter range TBMs and is emmienetly doable. It is based on available assets within India.
So incorrect comaprisons to US efforts should not be thrown up as attempts to deny credibility to the Indian EAIS. This EAIS is part of CMD for only a credible EAIS allows lower numbers that are needed for global arms control and strategic balance. So lifafa DDM are undermining their own paymasters.
This could be a spin off from Talbott-Jaswant talks? ABM against TSP and China may limit the Indian arsenal to K. Subramaniam advocated numbers than the Bharat karnad numbers-thereby still consistent with DND and CMD? Pure speculation on my part-but could be true.
Yes, That is why Uncle encourages ABM. The ability of China and Pakistan to increase missiles and warheads has limitation which Uncle controls.
This is a balance of power strategy