MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2422
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ArjunPandit » 31 Jan 2019 05:21

ajai shukla G interviewed Baba kalyani. One line in his responses has caught the attention of few folks on twitter

https://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/01 ... ccess.html

In global procurements, it will now be mandatory for Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) to offer an Indian company half the order at the L-1 price, as long as its bid is within 20 per cent of the winning bid. This is policy in many countries, including the US, but was so far missing in India.


Should India introduce mandatory “Make in India” for defence kit, like France and the US?

It is already there in various forms. DPP-2016 mandates that, for procuring any equipment, if an IDDM (Indian designed, developed and manufactured) option is available, it has to be taken.

Separately, the Defence Production Policy has specified that, in seven years, all major platforms like aircraft, helicopters, warships and tanks must be built in India. After 2025, we can’t import these platforms.

Is that at all realistic?

Of course, seven years is more than enough. Over the last five years, most private defence firms have created capability by forming joint ventures with foreign partners. Now the government needs to signal seriousness by placing orders.


Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10691
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Aditya_V » 31 Jan 2019 10:21

All this can be reversed in a blink of eye, there is definately a lobby which does not want it- lets see how this plays out.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2398
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby abhik » 31 Jan 2019 19:16

Should India introduce mandatory “Make in India” for defence kit, like France and the US?

It is already there in various forms. DPP-2016 mandates that, for procuring any equipment, if an IDDM (Indian designed, developed and manufactured) option is available, it has to be taken.

How is this working out for Arjun, OFB rifle etc?

Separately, the Defence Production Policy has specified that, in seven years, all major platforms like aircraft, helicopters, warships and tanks must be built in India. After 2025, we can’t import these platforms.

Why wait for 7 years, when it can be most of these can be today (rather years ago).

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4072
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby JayS » 31 Jan 2019 20:53

Aditya_V wrote:All this can be reversed in a blink of eye, there is definately a lobby which does not want it- lets see how this plays out.


There was time to do that, it was immediately after 2014. But now its not possible. The most important sector of GOI is barely touched in terms of reforms. I frankly feel Modi govt finds itself out of depth here completely. They have all good intentions but lack the competency and conviction to take strong action on this highly complex area of Aerospace and Defense and even other crème de la crème high tech areas. We have barely seen any improvement in these areas, compared to the paradigm shift in sectors like Transport. They kept relying on the same babudom which has kept the MoD crippled. There was one good RM who could have really transformed MoD, who understood things and who had mind of his own to go beyond what his advisors are telling him and had guts to take decisions. He was sent back for govt formation in a tiny state of no consequence.

We can only expect slow improvement in this area.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4072
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby JayS » 31 Jan 2019 20:54

BTW, Second project under the Strategic Partnership Program is cleared by DAC. Project 75I to build 6 Diesel Subs. L&T should be the obvious choice.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21033
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Prem » 31 Jan 2019 23:09

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 7706330113
Ministry of Defence Note on Defence Acquisition Council Approval for Indigenous Construction of Six Project 75 I Submarines for the @IndianNavy under Strategic Partnership Model.The DAC also cleared acquisition of Milan ATGM for Indian Army @adgpi

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby VKumar » 01 Feb 2019 00:12

Somewhere I read 2 AWACS also cleared with Israeli collaboration

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2398
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby abhik » 01 Feb 2019 17:52

JayS wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:All this can be reversed in a blink of eye, there is definately a lobby which does not want it- lets see how this plays out.


There was time to do that, it was immediately after 2014. But now its not possible. The most important sector of GOI is barely touched in terms of reforms. I frankly feel Modi govt finds itself out of depth here completely. They have all good intentions but lack the competency and conviction to take strong action on this highly complex area of Aerospace and Defense and even other crème de la crème high tech areas. We have barely seen any improvement in these areas, compared to the paradigm shift in sectors like Transport. They kept relying on the same babudom which has kept the MoD crippled. There was one good RM who could have really transformed MoD, who understood things and who had mind of his own to go beyond what his advisors are telling him and had guts to take decisions. He was sent back for govt formation in a tiny state of no consequence.

We can only expect slow improvement in this area.

I don't think appointing political light weights to the RM position or simply keeping it empty was a coincidence. Defense along with home, external and finance ministry is considered to be the big 4, second only to PM position - all are occupied by light weights or spent forces. Someone like Gatkari may not have been appointed to not create an alternate power center.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4072
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby JayS » 01 Feb 2019 19:11

Not a correct thread to discuss on those lines.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3217
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Kakkaji » 02 Feb 2019 04:35

DAC approval means nothing. It is the aaproval by the CCS that we should track.

These days, even after CCS approval, actual contracts take months to sign.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3217
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Kakkaji » 02 Feb 2019 04:37

IMHO Gen. VK Singh should have been made the MoD to start with. He has the domain knowledge, and is a go-getter.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 933
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby jaysimha » 02 Feb 2019 11:50

Kakkaji wrote:DAC approval means nothing. It is the aaproval by the CCS that we should track.

These days, even after CCS approval, actual contracts take months to sign.

It is like,,,,,,, say when you are hungry,, I give you bubble gum.
You start chewing it continuously, it will not fill your stomach,,,,,,,
but gives an impression to others as you if I have given a lot to eat......... :)

thats why, I personally feel, we should monitor only Indian companies who get order from Mod/army/navy/AF/Isro etc.
usually they are big public companies, and they report such huge/prestigious orders to stock exchanges..

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Kashi » 02 Feb 2019 12:17

Kakkaji wrote:IMHO Gen. VK Singh should have been made the MoD to start with. He has the domain knowledge, and is a go-getter.


That would have gone well with IAF and IN.

Parrikar should have stayed on longer.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby nam » 02 Feb 2019 17:24

Since there is the annual cry about not even defence budget.. I have made a list of big ticket items which the service need and may require large allocation on the budget line.

Code: Select all

Indian Army:
Dhanush: OFB does not need signing amount. Anyways GOI entity.
ATAGS: Still in trails.
 FICV: Still stuck in process and requirement. Note, it is development, not procurement.

Code: Select all

Airforce:   
more jets: LCA/Su30 can be ordered through HAL and number fudging.
MMRCA 2: No AON issued, what is the chance of contract signing in 2019?
AWACS: News on Phalcon signing. Can order DRDO's program. What is the signing amount ffor A330?
 Tanker: The quote is expensive. As simple as that.
Jag engine: Quote is nonsense.

Code: Select all

Navy:   
SSN: still in design phase
LHD: What is the amount required even if contract is signed?
Diesel Subs: If really required will go for more Scorpene with Maz docks. Nothing will start for a year, even if contract signed.
Minesweeper: Failed the Korean deal. Stuck in process and need negotiation with new partner.

Keeping this mind, can anyone tell me how will allocating say an additional 10% or say 2-3 billion help? Which contract signing are going to use it?

hemant_sai
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 42
Joined: 13 Dec 2018 12:13

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby hemant_sai » 02 Feb 2019 21:38

abhik wrote:
JayS wrote:
There was time to do that, it was immediately after 2014. But now its not possible. The most important sector of GOI is barely touched in terms of reforms. I frankly feel Modi govt finds itself out of depth here completely. They have all good intentions but lack the competency and conviction to take strong action on this highly complex area of Aerospace and Defense and even other crème de la crème high tech areas. We have barely seen any improvement in these areas, compared to the paradigm shift in sectors like Transport. They kept relying on the same babudom which has kept the MoD crippled. There was one good RM who could have really transformed MoD, who understood things and who had mind of his own to go beyond what his advisors are telling him and had guts to take decisions. He was sent back for govt formation in a tiny state of no consequence.

We can only expect slow improvement in this area.

I don't think appointing political light weights to the RM position or simply keeping it empty was a coincidence. Defense along with home, external and finance ministry is considered to be the big 4, second only to PM position - all are occupied by light weights or spent forces. Someone like Gatkari may not have been appointed to not create an alternate power center.


Well Gadkari himself confessed in many interviews that he asked for road & transport ministry. I agree with Jay about the one good RM who could have changed this scenario. But still I don't understand why RM cannot seek his opinion/suggestion. He publicly stated that he doesn't like Delhi's atmosphere (he might have other meanings to it), but if there was vision, things could have been arranged where he could have given his services from Goa in different capacity to help RM.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 23 Feb 2019 12:34

Very good summary of action taken since 2014 to address deficits in Mod.

viewtopic.php?p=2323820#p2323820

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 24 Feb 2019 09:26


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Mar 2019 07:15

Karan M wrote:MOD Annual report for 2017-18 is finally out. Enjoy.

https://mod.gov.in/sites/default/files/ ... rt1718.pdf


Very good description of MoD and Defence Procurment.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19116
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby chetak » 08 Mar 2019 07:34

Kakkaji wrote:IMHO Gen. VK Singh should have been made the MoD to start with. He has the domain knowledge, and is a go-getter.


Agree with you about all his good qualities and ability.

I am a big fan and the system has willfully conspired against him and done him dirty, both the executive and the judiciary.

But he carries a load of baggage that can be disruptive and is often perceived as needlessly combative.


sarathy
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 26
Joined: 13 Mar 2019 22:33

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby sarathy » 25 Mar 2019 20:22

ramana wrote:https://www.firstpost.com/india/government-misspend-on-defence-will-widen-gap-between-intent-and-capability-6321261.html/amp?__twitter_impression=true


True! The defense budget itself (as a % of GDP is at all time low) and as highlighted in "Analysis-Indias-Ability-Fight-2-front" by Ravi Rikhye, it is far from enough for the circumstances we face. Coupled with bureaucratic delays, corruption etc. it is virtually flexing national security interests to dangerous limits. And what do we get? More announcements on populist schemes and giveaways! :oops: :((

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 26 Mar 2019 00:19

No. The actual allocation is higher in terms of Rupees as GDP is higher.
Second Make in India purchases give better value.

Ravi Rikhye and experts think of Dash to Indus and WWII Battle of Krusk type scenarios.
Did you know Allies had 450K troops to invade 150K Nazi Germany at Normandy.
It was the follow-on forces were needed to defeat Germany in about a year.

Populist schemes are also needed.

If you allocate more % all it gives ifs reasons to reject local and buy foreign.
Next term will see MoD reform in all aspects.
Wait three months.
Hence all these BS articles.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6808
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 26 Mar 2019 02:55

The "defense budget as a % of GDP" is a line of thinking we need to move away from. It would be better to look at total government revenue and overall budget allocation. If you look at what percentage our total budget is taken up by defense, that number is already quite high (over 15% of total program spending in 2018). There is little scope for increasing it further.

Inefficient procurement processes cost us a lot more in real world loss or shortfall in capability compared to a lack of money. The multi-decade artillery procurement saga is the biggest example of this. Money was the least of our problems with that, yet the IA got no new guns for 20+ years.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7218
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Prasad » 26 Mar 2019 11:25

The only metric that makes any sense is What programs are we doing, need to fund & how much do they need? Vs How much is actually funded. Any other metric says a lot but doesn't mean very much.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 26 Mar 2019 22:14

Can we gather data for the past 20 years of budget allocated and actual spent for the MoD/
I think its very much needed.
Please help.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 17 May 2019 03:04


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD:Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 21 May 2019 01:17

Prasad wrote:The only metric that makes any sense is What programs are we doing, need to fund & how much do they need? Vs How much is actually funded. Any other metric says a lot but doesn't mean very much.

Can you put together a blog on this aspect?
List top ten programs for all services.
List how much it costs.
List whats allocated
List whats spent.

KaranM can you help with the top 10 programs to kick this off?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 21 May 2019 18:14

From Sudhir Pillai


‘’Army raises alarm: rising accidents due faulty ammunition” says ⁦@rajatpTOI⁩. Malady lies beyond OFB in MOD orgn/institutions tasked w/quality? #DGQA #DGAQA under MoD as ag indep bodies overseeing arms like OFB/def PSUs ⁦@TakshashilaInst⁩ https://t.co/BjnEArJzEt

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby ramana » 21 May 2019 21:16

I think there is a need to reform the DGQA. I am posting link to US DCMA which was a result of procurement reform started in 1960s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_C ... ent_Agency

Contract administration within DoD has been studied and modified for many years. In the early 1960s, a study was commissioned by the Secretary of Defense to examine the entire DoD contracting process. Known as "Project 60," the findings pointed to numerous benefits of consolidating contract administration and audit. At that time, each defense agency and military service was administering and auditing its own contracts, which resulted in a great amount of duplicate effort. Many of the contract administration responsibilities were eventually moved to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). However, the military services continued to retain oversight of the major weapon systems acquisition programs.

Defense Contract Management Command (DCMC)

The contract administration process was again reviewed in 1989. Citing continued problems with the manner in which the services were administering contracts, a Defense Management Review Decision (DMRD) 916 recommended the establishment of a joint command to administer defense contracts, to ensure that consistent policies and standards were applied to the defense acquisition process. DCMC was established as a command within the Defense Logistics Agency in February 1990 to satisfy the findings of DMRD 916.
DCMA

On September 27, 2000, DCMC was renamed as the Defense Contract Management Agency and established independently from DLA. In DoD Directive 5105.64, the Deputy Secretary of Defense formally established the mission, responsibilities and functions of DCMA; save for 18 specific exceptions detailed in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, DoD activities normally delegate a wide variety of contract administration functions to DCMA.

The DCMA headquarters moved from northern Virginia to Fort Lee, Virginia, as part of the federal 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process. The new headquarters was dedicated as Herbert Homer Hall on September 15, 2011. Homer was a DCMA employee killed in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.[1]

According to the DoD's Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Estimate, DCMA has 10,637 civilian and 472 military personnel, located in over 740 locations, managing over 19,000 contractors and nearly 350,000 active contracts. The operations and maintenance budget estimate for fiscal year 2015 was roughly $1.3 billion. [2]

The current director is Vice Adm. David H. Lewis , U.S. Navy.[3]

In essence DCMA is similar to India's DG/QA and is run by DOD.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1039
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Nikhil T » 05 Jun 2019 13:19

Veteran Air Chief PV Naik’s Open Letter to Raksha Mantri

Hon Raksha Mantri,

Please accept my heartiest congratulations on winning so convincingly from your constituency Lucknow. I also congratulate you on taking over the prestigious appointment of Raksha Mantri. I am well aware of your vast and varied experience in the political field. Lok Sabha MP, Union Cabinet Minister for Surface Transport, CM of UP, Union Agriculture Minister, BJP National President and in 2014 the Union Home Minister. A most impressive CV. But what impressed me even more was your MSC Physics and the efforts to improve awareness of our traditional sciences like Vedic mathematics.

2. I am happy that you will bring the full weight of your multi-faceted experience to bear on your job as Raksha Mantri. It also warms the cockles of my heart that, finally, someone with political clout has taken over this Ministry. The country needs it. When I reflect on my innings with the IAF I find that a couple of times when I was appointed to a post similar to the one I held earlier, I felt I knew everything about the job. Invariably, an unpleasant surprise or two before I was back on line. Far be it from me to presume even a modicum of complacency on your part, I genuinely feel that I need to acquaint you, sir, with some differences you might notice in the Raksha Mantralaya.

3. One major difference is that the Defence Ministry is unlike any other. All other ministries have a singularity of purpose. All members of the ministry work towards the same aim. In your Ministry it is ‘us’ versus ‘them’. Through the Seventies, Eighties and the Nineties, the bureaucracy continued to acquire disproportionate powers vis-à-vis the Service Chiefs. The bureaucracy conveniently points to the “Government of India Transaction ofBusiness Rules” framed in 1961 under the constitutional powers of the President of India. These documents continue to guide the conduct of business by the Government of India. It is instructive to read the document. Under these rules, the three Service headquarters were designated as “Attached Offices of the Department of Defence”, and are, therefore, placed in a position subordinate to the DoD. The Service Chiefs, as professional heads of the three Armed Forces and with experience garnered over a period of at least four decades, found no mention in these rules. The Secretary Department of Defence on the other hand, according to these rules, is responsible for Defence of India and every part thereof including preparation for defence and all such acts as may be conducive in times of war to its prosecution and after its termination to effective Demobilisation. It is, in fact, a crying need that the Armed Forces be integrated with MOD and become a part of the decision making apparatus. We should start small, say at Director level, and make it work before taking it further. This, sir, is the first step. Without this, the rest is cosmetic.

4. If you permit me I would like to highlight some issues for your kind consideration in subsequent paras. I do not presume to render advice to such a seasoned and experienced person as you, but I feel these issues are important and, if addressed expeditiously and correctly, will pay you good dividends. Over the last five years we have seen the care & concern you have bestowed over the Para Military Forces(PMF).On their advice, I am sure, you would not have hesitated in asking for the Armed Forces(AF) help in difficult situations. Now, sir, you will have to switch loyalties in a hurry. Excessive use of the AF in aid to civil authority is detrimental to morale and training suffers. The same care you lavished over the PMF now has to go to the AF also.

5. The next step is to see the lie of the land. By the time you read this, you would already have started your visits starting with the glamorous Siachen. Visit Tawang and Arunachal. Visit Nagaland. Visit forward areas in Rajasthan. Go to the forward units. Mingle with soldiers. Share a cup of tea in an enamel mug. Eat fresh pakodas in a cracked plate. Do not give them speeches but talk to them & listen to them. You will get an idea of their life spent in the service of the nation. Appreciate the hardships. Please visit the forward Air Force and Naval bases too. The aim is to gain the trust of the soldier. Promise them only what you can deliver. But deliver on your promises.

6. Centuries ago the worldly wise Chanakya told the king of Magadh: “The Mauryan soldier does not himself the Royal treasuries enrich nor does he the Royal granaries fill… The soldier only and merely ensures that… He is thus the very basis and silent, barely visible cornerstone of our fame, culture, physical well-being and prosperity; in short, of the entire nation building activity. While the Magadha citizenry endeavours to make the State prosper and flourish, the Mauryan soldier guarantees that the State continues to exist!” may I suggest, sir, that this be the cornerstone of your policy during your tenure as RM. There is a growing perception among the AF that they have been hard done by successive govts. A sense of denigration is slowly pervading the field. When the need for National security arises, they are made much of, and studiously ignored thereafter. Not to mention discriminatory deals like Warrant of Precedence, MFU or Pay grade anomalies, a soldier’s prime mover is ‘Izzat’. One of your prime asks is going to be to restore the pride of the soldier.

7. Learn to trust your Chiefs of the Army, Navy and the Air Force. By the end of the year you will have three new Chiefs. These are officers who have been through the mill for almost fourdecades. They carry a wealth of knowledge and experience in matters pertaining to military security. Harness this wealth. Give them easy access to your office. Their loyalty is already absolute. As a corollary, you, too, must gain their trust. I am sure you have already started having briefings every morning. May I suggest you avoid this temptation. Do not concern yourself with routine. Nothing would please the bureaucracy more than to tie you up with routine and the mundane. I think a weekly meeting with the Def sec & the Chiefs would suffice, but do minute these meetings for follow up. For military grievances, ask military advice. For a solution, involve both the military and the babus. Please, for heavens’ sake, do not take military decisions based solely on the shadow files created by Babus. Do consult the Chiefs. Sir, I have a small suggestion regarding the selection of Chiefs. Nobody denies that merit based selection, with due deference to seniority, is the best method. The question is who determines merit? Is it the RM under Def Secy’s advice? Is it the PMO? Is it Intel or the NSA? All the above have only peripheral knowledge of the officer concerned. Besides political leanings, we need to factor in professionalism too. So whose advice counts in the Appointments Committee? May I suggest a panel involving all the above plus an ex Chief of the same Service?

8. The premier need of all three Services today is equipment. Tanks, guns, aircraft, ships, weapons, ammo. Please give it top priority. May I sincerely urge you not to fiddle around with DPP initially. Instead, remove the blockages. Find out who is responsible for delay and let the heads roll. Today’s procurement cycle is about six to eight years. The PM’s policy of ‘Make in India’ is vital for us. Try to clear the way for Private sector to participate in Defence production. Try to create a level playing field. They are ever so willing to contribute. I would urge you to view HAL and DRDO with more than a modicum of concern. They are monolithic and need critical surgery. Ideally, they need to be sub divided into manageable entities under professional management. Presently, just make them more accountable. The serious business can follow.

9. I believe implicitly in civilian control over the military. My understanding of civilian control is what was iterated in the Anglo-French war. The orders to English generals were” To demolish France but not to such an extent that she is unable to rise again”. This is the desirable scale of civilian control over the military. It should deal with higher directions of war and grand strategy. Over the years, a series of leaders have let this control degenerate into Bureaucratic Control, nay, Bureaucratic Interference. It has permeated into fields like promotions, postings, liaison visits to friendly countries, even such routine necessities like canteens and messes. This unnecessary interference is leading to wastage of man hours and inefficiency. I am sure you are the right man to reverse the trend.

10. I strongly feel that we need to improve ‘jointness’ among the three Services. It has been working well all these years. However, Technology has vastly increased the lethality and speed of battle demanding faster decision making. India’s aspirations and her zone of influence are on the rise. We need to think ‘Joint’. Plan and execute jointly. In fact, occupying a ‘joint’ billet should be a prerequisite to higher promotions. I think now is the right time to initiate preliminary discussions on the appointment of a Chief of Defence Staff(CDS). There are many questions to be answered. What type of CDS do we want. He should not be a mere figurehead. He should be the single point of advice to the RM. What should his powers be? Will the powers- that- be comfortable with this much power concentrated in one military person? Do we need Theatre Commands? Who controls the nukes? These are very difficult questions to answer. You have a long tenure ahead of you, sir, to find the answers, provided we start early.

11. I would like to close this letter by paraphrasing from Chanakya’s advice to his king “….If ever things come to a sordid pass, O King, when, on a given day, the Mauryan soldier has to LOOK BACK over his shoulder (‘Simhawalokana’) prompted by even a single nagging worry about his and his family’s material, physical and social well being, it should cause you and your Council the greatest concern and distress! It is my bounden duty to caution you, My Lord, that the day when the Mauryan soldier has to demand his dues or, worse, plead for them, will neither have arrived suddenly, overnight nor in vain. It will also bode ill for Magadha. For then, on that day, you, My Lord, will have lost all moral sanction to be Raja Dhiraja! It will also mark the beginning of the end of the Mauryan Empire!!” I think Chanakya brings out very clearly what the society owes a soldier. His self-respect must never be trifled with. Do not be lulled by the term ’equivalence’. A soldier’s task is a thousand times more onerous. The rest, sir, I leave to your decency and judgment.

12. You, sir, have a vast span of control and a large responsibility. I hope you find the time to go through my open letter. I have put down, in good faith, issues and suggestions which are relevant to the defence of the country and the Armed forces. All that remains for me is to wish you a very successful and rewarding tenure as RM.

With warm regards,
Yours sincerely,
(PV Naik)
Air Chief Mshl
Veteran

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1039
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: MoD: Defence Procurement Policies Issues and Discussions

Postby Nikhil T » 05 Jun 2019 13:23

I feel AM Naik has been too kind on his own people, while blaming much of the malaise on the bureaucracy. Still a great idea for a recently retired officer to pen down their thoughts as the MoD undergoes a change in guard. I hope this becomes a practice going forward, so that the citizens can advocate for change as well.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests