COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

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.
Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Manish_P » 07 Sep 2018 11:26

Lalmohan wrote:real time data networking of US hardware with Indian command and control systems is probably what it is geared towards
we will clearly need a parallel interoperability protocol on our military networks for Russian systems
it is unlikely that we will be able to easily match (in real time) data from sensors on one protocol with weapons on another (e.g. SU30 lights up target for an Apache, or P8 for a Su30) but we could eventually develop some fast mapping technology that might make it possible


and

Karan M wrote:This has huge security implications for us. If we go for widespread 2 way datalinking, we will have to create two sets of networks - one for our tactical assets, i.e. delineate between our datalinks and the ones tapped into COMCASA, and the data from COMCASA enabled networks, e.g. Link-16 type has to be sanitized before it gets into our frontline assets. Perhaps we can create secure nodes on larger assets like AWACS, IFR platforms. What you don't want to have is malware sent across unsanitized nodes to your tactical assets.

On the ground, we will have to firewall and create entirely parallel - "core Indian" networks for many of our critical C4I, Strategic and Services establishments. A) Not easy. B ) Very expensive.


+1

Thank you, both.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3002
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Kashi » 07 Sep 2018 13:22

The more I read about it, the more it seems like a very bad idea for the reasons pointed out by the members above.

I wonder what compelled GoI to go for this inscrutable agreement.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12883
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Lalmohan » 07 Sep 2018 13:32

if we look at it from a naval aspect it has merit. surveillance and control of assets across an ocean region in collaboration with allied navies (japan, Australia, usa)

doklam was probably an area where JSTARs capabilities would have helped, I am guessing that the P8's have some version of JSTAR's but not the dedicated USAF assets for land surveillance type capabilities - which if unkil did provide us, raises some questions as to where they were flying those aircraft from to generate that kind of data...?

I can't see it working effectively in a air-land-battle scenario against TSP where we have many platforms that are not US compatible - maybe that's part of the RnD about S-400 as well?

nvishal
BRFite
Posts: 736
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:03

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby nvishal » 07 Sep 2018 13:38

arshyam wrote:BTW, some CISMOA equipment require US personnel to be present, inspect, etc. Are we okay with that?

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 698_1.html

Depends on which platforms are going to incorporate those systems.

At present, I only see the drones using them.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 07 Sep 2018 13:54

Lalmohan wrote:if we look at it from a naval aspect it has merit. surveillance and control of assets across an ocean region in collaboration with allied navies (japan, Australia, usa)

doklam was probably an area where JSTARs capabilities would have helped, I am guessing that the P8's have some version of JSTAR's but not the dedicated USAF assets for land surveillance type capabilities - which if unkil did provide us, raises some questions as to where they were flying those aircraft from to generate that kind of data...? {Satellite power TechInt capability is far far beyond what India possess at the moment both in terms of coverage and resolution. Take the case of a area revisit. What is the Indian capacity at a location like Doklam plateau? Perhaps we will enough sats to focus them all on a single area to create a 24 x x7 picture but definitely not enough to keep the whole hinterland of Tibet, from where Doklam will be supplied, under 24x7 surveillance.}

I can't see it working effectively in a air-land-battle scenario against TSP where we have many platforms that are not US compatible - maybe that's part of the RnD about S-400 as well? {I don't know what the actual configuration and linking will look like but one can speculate. Think of this Indo-US "military communications hub" as a command center of an AWACS that will be manned 24x7 where both the Indian network and the US network will terminate. At this junction data extracted from the US system can manually be fed into the Indian network. Our Ground/Air assets will only need to plug into the Indian network to get the complete tactical picture.}
Last edited by pankajs on 07 Sep 2018 14:11, edited 1 time in total.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Manish_P » 07 Sep 2018 14:01

arshyam wrote:BTW, some CISMOA equipment require US personnel to be present, inspect, etc. Are we okay with that?l


All, not some. Unless it is the one-to-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment.

Check para 9 of the CISMOA memorandum of agreement between the US and South Korea

Link - here

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19619
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Philip » 07 Sep 2018 17:28

I am amused at those who portray Russia as a failing state.Take Syria for example, who has failed and in full retreat despite all its great tech.prowess, intel, etc.while Russia with mostly Sov. era weaponry and some deadly 2500km rage Kalibir missiles, have sent ISIS and the US backed anti- Assad mercenary forces packing?!

I whole-heartedly agree about our intel and Doklam.We should improve and expand our intel capability to get results. using both traditional and tech. methods.Tech methods like what the US depend upon do not win wars! In '65 it was superb " humint" by one our JB types , with JB style intel gathering,that tipped off the GOI ( just in time) about Pak's secret plans to go to war.

More importantly is the compromising of our own command and control systems by interlinking US systems into ours.The bit about knowing exact location of friendly forces too allows the US to obtain a picture of our tactical ops. There should be multiple firewalls and a complete disconnect between our commns. and any intel sharing with the US.Do we also know whether significant bits of such intel is being withheld, for example locations of Paki assets, Uncle Sam's favourite bumchum in the region?
Such intel could be rationed out to India while they get a full monty from us.Who's to know?

There is another aspect too.The Chins are brilliant at hacking , with a galaxy of US secrets right from nuclear warhead design, JSF stealth tech, missile tech, etc. purloined through its cyberwarfare army.If it hacks US commns. it would through this interoperability obtain all our intel and secure commns. too.Any flaw in US NCW woulx be disastrous for us if we're joined at the hip with Uncle Sam.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 07 Sep 2018 21:34

Thanks to Neshant-ji for bringing this thread up, this old post seems very relevant to this thread. Remember, we are supposed to pay for "upgrading" our communications equipment.

shiv wrote:Here is a great article brought to my attention by Rohit Vats, ex BRFite. I suspect this must be the right thread for this but I apologise because I am unable to understand this thread and have too much other reading to do to read the "recommended reading" for this thread

Meet France’s War Philosophers :)
The third concern is the Americanization of the French military. Anyone familiar with NATO militaries can testify to the spread of the U.S. military’s profound influence. Take, for example, the wide use of American military definitions, terms (buzzwords), tactics, and doctrines. Any force operating in a coalition with Americans must follow American norms, and even without Americans present, NATO militaries often fall back on those norms as a common reference.

Desportes disapproves for a number of reasons, among them his distaste for the American way of war and American strategic culture, which, he argues, fetishizes technology and prevents strategists from grasping the fundamentally political nature of most conflicts. Americans, he says, confuse war with a technological duel. They build weapons for weapons’ sake. A case in point he offers is the so-called “transformation” or the “revolution in military affairs,” the American idea that digital networking technology matched with precision munitions was revolutionizing warfare and offered the United States a major advantage over its opponents. He cites the U.S. military publication Joint Vision 2010, which is shot through with enthusiasm for high technology, as a prime example of the U.S. military’s religious “credo.”

Desportes regards the American way of war as intrinsically flawed and, in any case, too expensive for France to follow. It necessitates equipment so costly that those without America’s deep pockets are forced to slash their forces to pay for new, up-to-date items, creating something of a death spiral for militaries that already are cutting their size because of budget cuts. French and other allied forces are becoming exquisite — meaning, in this case, highly capable and very expensive — but rare. This is a problem because, Desportes insists, numbers matter and most conflicts require controlling space rather than simply locating and attacking the enemy. Controlling space requires “volume.” The result is a French military that can prevail in a battle but cannot win a war.

Cutting budgets to finance “American-style” fighting is also problematic because it results in gaps in French capabilities, which oblige France to rely even more on American help. Indeed, France’s reliance on the United States to conduct its military operations (the United States routinely provides aerial refueling, heavy airlift, and intelligence) gives Washington a de facto veto power over many French military activities. There is plenty of precedent: The United States used its ability to throttle back support to the French military to limit French action in Indochina, Sinai, and Algeria as well as on a number of occasions in Africa. Diminished capabilities also translate into diminished resiliency and overall operational coherence. Desportes compares “transformation” with the Maginot Line, the cost of which, he says, forced France to cut back on a number of capabilities that reduced the force’s “operational coherence” and gravely weakened the whole. For Desportes it is clear that the American way of war does not work for Americans, either: They lose their wars.


This is the state "independent" France. Hmm..

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 07 Sep 2018 21:45

pankajs wrote:
arshyam wrote:BTW, some CISMOA equipment require US personnel to be present, inspect, etc. Are we okay with that?

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 698_1.html

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Which part is troublesome in your opinion?

Everything. So an MH-60 embarking from a Kolkata class destroyer in the future will have one or more US crew aboard to man the comms? I don't see how you find it "perfectly reasonable", especially when we would have paid for the MH-60 in full, as well as the COMCASA eqiupment on-board - with our own hard earned money. And we get to spend more money accommodating foreign personnel for this requirement. Not to mention the mere presence of such foreign personnel who are not present as guests in a controlled environment like goodwill visits or exercises, but in real-time ops due to this so-called agreement is a huge problem for our op-sec.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 07 Sep 2018 21:47

Manish_P wrote:
arshyam wrote:BTW, some CISMOA equipment require US personnel to be present, inspect, etc. Are we okay with that?l


All, not some. Unless it is the one-to-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment.

Check para 9 of the CISMOA memorandum of agreement between the US and South Korea

Link - here

You are right!

This agreement is a gift that keeps on giving; the more one reads about it, the more it stinks.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12883
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Lalmohan » 07 Sep 2018 22:07

the desportes article reminds me of how the great mongol war machine would induct the cannon fodder from vassal states into their orbat, whilst maintaining overall C3I with the great khan's staff officers

strategic dominance baby

but as desportes says - not able to hold ground after the victory... which the mongols avoided by slaughtering the ruling and military elites of conquered nations, though even they struggled to hold ground over time due to their intrinsically smaller numbers

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby jpremnath » 07 Sep 2018 22:13

Signing this shitty agreement wouldn't have come without consent or feedback from the forces. Which is what is most perplexing. Why would they agree to a strategical suicide?..

And for all those fawning over how we will get china data real time, do you think we will get it during an even of war?...Just imagine when the Chinese steps on our foot in a wrong way on any of those border areas...And we decide enough is enough...Well, surprise, the US thinks it's a bad time for war as it might affect their stock markets in an US election year or something..The Americans ask us to stand down or their comm equipment just stops...Now what do we do..?..I am sure by then all our surveillance drones, radios and all will be shiny new american toys which were bought off the shelf after shafting desi r&d...So tails behind our legs, the third biggest 'power' in the world goes back meekly to the barracks...And a new poodle is born..

there is nothing wrong in developing our own comm systems regardLess of how long it takes or how much it costs..we are not in the middle of a war and neither is china going to attack us anytime soon...

I understand many of the forumers would have reacted differently if it was any other govt which signed this...Can't believe it is this ' nationalist ' govt which laid down our interests in both COMCASA & RECP in one week..they surely seems to be in a hurry..god knows for what....I have never felt so deflated thinking about our future like now..

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 07 Sep 2018 22:16

arshyam wrote:
pankajs wrote:Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Which part is troublesome in your opinion?

Everything. So an MH-60 embarking from a Kolkata class destroyer in the future will have one or more US crew aboard to man the comms? I don't see how you find it "perfectly reasonable", especially when we would have paid for the MH-60 in full, as well as the COMCASA eqiupment on-board - with our own hard earned money. And we get to spend more money accommodating foreign personnel for this requirement. Not to mention the mere presence of such foreign personnel who are not present as guests in a controlled environment like goodwill visits or exercises, but in real-time ops due to this so-called agreement is a huge problem for our op-sec.

Where in the agreement does it specify that a US crew member will accompany the equipment "all the time". Someone one posted the US-SoKo agreement as a pointer. Assuming that to be the template, perhaps you or anyone could point out the offending clause.

Past that point, what else? Everything has no data for me to start digging. I can only proceed when you are explicit in your assumption. You where in the above case for me to advance a counter.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 07 Sep 2018 22:24

^^ We can't do much beyond go by what's in the public domain. Unless GoI chooses to reveal what they have signed for, we can only do so much, media spin doctors notwithstanding.

As to your question about the offending portion, Manish_P-ji has posted the relevant details above.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Picklu » 07 Sep 2018 22:27

don't think this is for afg.

More likely, f-teens are coming.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 07 Sep 2018 22:32

arshyam wrote:^^ We can't do much beyond go by what's in the public domain. Unless GoI chooses to reveal what they have signed for, we can only do so much, media spin doctors notwithstanding.

As to your question about the offending portion, Manish_P-ji has posted the relevant details above.
Manish_P wrote:
arshyam wrote:BTW, some CISMOA equipment require US personnel to be present, inspect, etc. Are we okay with that?l


All, not some. Unless it is the one-to-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment.

Check para 9 of the CISMOA memorandum of agreement between the US and South Korea

Link - here

Relevant extract
PARAGRAPH IX
DoD-provided COMSEC equipment and materials, including keying materials, will be installed and maintained only by authorized US personnel. This does not preclude, during periods of operational necessity, the one-for-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment by MND personnel. When authorized by the US, qualified ROK personnel may remove and/or replace US COMSEC equipment previously installed by US personnel. For purposes of performing required maintenance and periodic inspections, authorized and duly identified US personnel will be permitted timely access to DoD-provided COMSEC equipment and material.
DoD will, in cases when time and circumstances permit, notify MND in advance in those instances when access by authorized US personnel is considered necessary. During periods of such access, US personnel will be accompanied by appropriately cleared MND personnel. This does not preclude inspections by MND, which may be performed at any time.

No mention of, to quote you "one or more US crew aboard to man the comms" or even a hint of, to quote me accompany the equipment 'all the time'".

It only talks of installation, maintenance and periodic inspection.

To clarify further ... note the following language
1. .. notify MND in advance in those instances when access by authorized US personnel is considered necessary. {Clearly the US crew does not man the equipment but is brought in for periodic inspection with prior notice}
Last edited by pankajs on 07 Sep 2018 22:40, edited 1 time in total.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby V_Raman » 07 Sep 2018 22:39

my money is on F18 - GE414 tech - carrier capable aircraft - still in use for USN and enhanced. only sticking point - make in India.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Karthik S » 07 Sep 2018 22:44

Still not worth this thing. Didn't expect from present government.

GopiD
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Jul 2011 14:57

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby GopiD » 07 Sep 2018 22:47

Cain Marko wrote:While I understand all the rnd, I feel that this was bound to happen, a part of the natural alliance that ABV spoke of. The pieces on the board are moving and we can expect some very dramatic shifts in the near future.


My guess is, the strategic shift had already happened vis-à-vis China and these are the steps that we are taking to balance out the shift. There’s been some major rethinking that’s happened in our deep state for Comcasa to happen and unfortunately, we at BRF have missed the train on this. this is a grand gamble by GOI and I sure hope that it pays as much as the risk it entails.
Last edited by GopiD on 07 Sep 2018 23:11, edited 1 time in total.

GopiD
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Jul 2011 14:57

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby GopiD » 07 Sep 2018 23:08

jpremnath wrote:Signing this shitty agreement wouldn't have come without consent or feedback from the forces. Which is what is most perplexing. Why would they agree to a strategical suicide?..

I understand many of the forumers would have reacted differently if it was any other govt which signed this...Can't believe it is this ' nationalist ' govt which laid down our interests in both COMCASA & RECP in one week..they surely seems to be in a hurry..god knows for what.


+100 to these points. Reading the COMCASA document is depressing. The question is, why did GOI sign it after knowing all this quite well? What part of the picture are we missing?

I just hope the have some damn good reason to sign this document.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 07 Sep 2018 23:20

Folks taking of shitty agreement but no one is pointing out the shitty part.

One response was about US crew manning the equipment. A document and a section was pointed out but there is no language to support the assumption. Infact, the language that is part of the para is indicative of the exact opposite!

Funny!

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby jpremnath » 07 Sep 2018 23:34

This agreement pretty much means we will be stocking up on american equipments, drones and surveillance...All these are gonna cost big bucks...Which will mean we will cut down on any domestic development or purchases in those fields...This is not how a world power behaves..Ar atleast some one who wants to be a power ...If we need to depend on others to save our ass, why don't we just join the US as a treaty ally?...Let's be like SoKo or Japan..

For those who thinks we can get out after 10 years, it's just not gonna happen...getting out will mean all expensive purchases will be useless, and it will be even treated as diplomatic slap..no Indian govt will have the backbones to cancel it....because 10 years down the line, our head will be nicely in Unkil's armpit and it's gonna smell pretty nice...That's Funny!

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Karthik S » 07 Sep 2018 23:38

pankajs wrote:Folks taking of shitty agreement but no one is pointing out the shitty part.

One response was about US crew manning the equipment. A document and a section was pointed out but there is no language to support the assumption. Infact, the language that is part of the para is indicative of the exact opposite!

Funny!


You seem to support this agreement, can you let others know practical benefits that we will derive from this thing?

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby jpremnath » 07 Sep 2018 23:49

Karthik S wrote:
pankajs wrote:Folks taking of shitty agreement but no one is pointing out the shitty part.

One response was about US crew manning the equipment. A document and a section was pointed out but there is no language to support the assumption. Infact, the language that is part of the para is indicative of the exact opposite!

Funny!


You seem to support this agreement, can you let others know practical benefits that we will derive from this thing?


He is talking tactics..Others are worried about the Logistics and Strategies

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 07 Sep 2018 23:54

https://www.firstpost.com/india/2-plus- ... 33461.html
2-plus-2 dialogue: India, US sign key defence pact, vow to work for open Indo-Pacific; full text of joint statement
They welcomed the inclusion of India by the United States among the top tier of countries entitled to license-free exports, re-exports, and transfers under License Exception Strategic Trade Authorization (STA-1) and also committed to explore other means to support further expansion in two-way trade in defense items and defense manufacturing supply chain linkages. They welcomed the signing of a Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) that will facilitate access to advanced defense systems and enable India to optimally utilize its existing U.S.-origin platforms. The Ministers also announced their readiness to begin negotiations on an Industrial Security Annex (ISA) that would support closer defense industry cooperation and collaboration.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 08 Sep 2018 00:13

jpremnath wrote:This agreement pretty much means we will be stocking up on american equipments, drones and surveillance...All these are gonna cost big bucks...Which will mean we will cut down on any domestic development or purchases in those fields...This is not how a world power behaves..Ar atleast some one who wants to be a power ...If we need to depend on others to save our ass, why don't we just join the US as a treaty ally?...Let's be like SoKo or Japan..

For those who thinks we can get out after 10 years, it's just not gonna happen...getting out will mean all expensive purchases will be useless, and it will be even treated as diplomatic slap..no Indian govt will have the backbones to cancel it....because 10 years down the line, our head will be nicely in Unkil's armpit and it's gonna smell pretty nice...That's Funny!

Quite right!

Just take the case of a 5th Gen Stealth fighter. If India needs to procure one in the next 20 years I will bet that it is going to be imported and the only choice on offer will be a Ruskie jet or an Amru one. My bet is on the Amru after today's agreement.

Now this will not be at the cost of a domestic 5th Gen jet because there won't be one on offer! Just check the developmental timelines of the 5th gen from around the world. One likes it or not this is the how it will play out no matter what one desires.

Whether it will cut into homegrown development is another matter. I think we will continue our local effort just as we are going ahead with Tejas and its next versions even while we have just floated a new RFP/Tender/<whatever it is called> for new "foreign" procurement.

Same or worse with Drones. Beating ones chest that we are a world power will not make up for our deficiencies. Comparison with SoKo and Japan is too funny but I will let it pass.

In 20 years, whether it will be India smelling Unkills armpit or Unkill smelling Indian armpit will still be a toss up but the world as we know it will change in about 40-50 years. Funny folks talk strategy but can not think further than 10 years.

https://www.amazon.in/Hundred-Year-Mara ... 1250081343
The Hundred-Year Marathon: China's Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower

Now that's called strategy ... 100 freaking years! Just a note, I haven't read the book and this is not a recommendation to buy or read.

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby jpremnath » 08 Sep 2018 00:38

Wonderful...None of the concerns were addressed and all we could see is someone who is confident that we can't develop 5th gen fighter and drones on our own..So the solution is to buy American....Yeah!!!..an American Philip in BRF..That is new!!...

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5843
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Rakesh » 08 Sep 2018 00:42

Okay, let us get a few facts straight;

1) COMCASA will *NOT* divulge all our communications. As Karan Saar pointed out ---> we will have two sets of networks (one for Indian/Existing platforms and the other for COMCASA-equipped platforms).

2) Again as Karan Saar mentioned, It is going to be expensive and not easy. But the Indian Govt believes it can afford the cost and is worth the pain. And I do not believe this is a gamble by the GOI. The very fact that we did not sign the standard CISMOA agreement, clearly indicates that.

3) Not all existing US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board. So the existing C-17s, C-130s, P-8Is, etc are not necessarily required to have the equipment. If the Indian Armed Forces do not feel the need for the equipment, they simply will not put it on there. There is no compulsion to install or NOT to install COMCASA equipment. Signing the agreement - which has gone into immediate effect - means little, if the communication equipment is not installed.

4) Not all future US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board either. So the upcoming CH-47s, AH-64s, second batch of C-130s, four additional P-8Is, the lone white tail C-17 may or may not have the equipment. Again, it is based on operational needs and not a fleet-wide installation of American platforms that serve (or will serve) in the Indian Armed Forces.

The main takeaway is COMCASA is a platform-specific agreement and not a blanket agreement. That is an important point to understand. So what equipment will be among the first to feature COMCASA-equipped communications? That platform has yet to be inducted and that platform will be armed Predator drones. The Predator drone will serve as a game changer for the Indian Armed Forces, especially for the Army (i.e. striking terrorist camps) and the Navy. In addition, keeping track of Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean (something the Navy already does with elan), becomes much easier with CENTRIXS.

Now let us dispel the myth that a COMCASA-equipped platform cannot communicate with other platforms. Let me use a few examples.

Example 1 - Let us say CENTRIXS tracks a PLA boat in the Indian Ocean. Are the Indian Naval personnel who are monitoring the boat, using CENTRIXS, suddenly have a bout of Aphasia (the sudden loss of language or the inability to communicate)? They can very easily pass that info - via a secure Indian network which already exists in the form of INS Kattabomman in Tamil Nadu - to a P-8I ASW aircraft, a Kolkata Class or Delhi Class destroyer or one of our own subs (Kalvari Class, Sindhugosh Class, Shishumar Class or even INS Chakra) in the area to track her or even sink her (if required). The Indian Navy is already tracking Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean and INS Kattabomman plays a role in that.

Example 2 - Predator drones pick up terrorist camps near the border and need to be taken out. Can the Indian Army drone operator not pass on that info - over a secured Army network which already exists - to another unit in the Army, to carry out the task? So instead of using the missiles on the armed drone itself, perhaps the Army wants to send in special forces to complete the task? Or light up the camps using Pinaka rockets or ATAGS artillery?

So the Americans will certainly be able to see what we are doing (in tracking targets) with COMCASA-sourced equipment. But how we choose to engage that target, will still remain behind a black curtain and of our choosing.

The point is this ---> there is no inability on the part of Indian Armed Forces personnel (who are operating COMCASA-sourced equipment) to pass on location info to other units that do *NOT* operate COMCASA-sourced equipment. Where the bone of contention lies is can that info (of tracking targets using COMCASA-sourced equipment) be shared with a third party? Now the GOI has asked for an assurance from the US Govt that they will not do such a thing and the US Govt in turn has given the Pinocchio answer. And despite the expected Pinocchio response, the GOI has taken that scenario into consideration and feel that the reward outweighs the risk.

The second (and equally important) US platform that will come is the F-35. That sounds far fetched now, but COMCASA has opened the door for the Fancy Cornish Hen. There is no F-16 or F-18 coming for the IAF and for that matter no 110 birds (from any other OEM) are coming either. The GOI will go through the motions of MMRCA 3.0 and then they will scrap the contest and go in for a G2G deal for the F-35 and do it via a FACO line. Expect to hear the same things again from the IAF during the process of MMRCA 3.0 ---> 1) There is NO Plan B; 2) 110 birds are required; 3) Squadron Shortage is Alarming; etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The other myth that needs to be dispelled is that US personnel will be present 24-7, wherever COMCASA-sourced equipment is used. The whole point of COMCASA (from the US side) is designed to circumvent that very requirement. They can easily snoop in - despite their assurances that they will not - sitting behind a desk in the United States, if they wanted to. They do not have to be anywhere in India for that. And we would not be the wiser. But, there will be no US personnel aboard a MH-60R or a P-8I to see what we are doing. What is required however, will be scheduled inspections to ensure that the COMCASA equipment has not been tampered with. Again, we only need to abide by that rule. So let them do their scheduled inspections and keep them happy.

Also, folks please think about this carefully ----> Why did the US agree to COMCASA and not arm twist India to sign the standard CISMOA agreement? What makes it so eager for the Americans to agree to an Indian specific agreement? Between India and the US, who is equally (if not greater) wary of the Chinese? Why give us a waiver for CAATSA at all? Why did South Korea (who also face the Chinese threat and the North Korean threat) sign the standard CISMOA agreement and not insist on a South Korea specific agreement? Why are the Americans not stopping supplies of the AH-64, CH-47, C-130, C-17, MH-60R, etc to India, like how they stopped the F-35 for Turkey who also bought the S-400?

Do not be fooled by the standard line from a few on BRF ---> that in America, lies India's salvation. The reality is otherwise.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4880
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby SBajwa » 08 Sep 2018 00:56

Good post Rakesh!! too many people are wearing brown pants here!

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby souravB » 08 Sep 2018 01:07

Folks why's this dhoti shivering. There is a clause of 6 months notice to get out of the agreement, if our defense forces feel like that they can easily pressure the government to get out of it.
And I'd be skeptical about reading US-SoKo CISMOA agreement and form a conclusion about US-India COMCASA agreement which we do not know the details about yet. There must be some significant changes between the two which prompted to change the name of the agreement altogether.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby souravB » 08 Sep 2018 01:20

Rakesh wrote:
The second (and equally important) US platform that will come is the F-35. That sounds far fetched now, but COMCASA has opened the door for the Fancy Cornish Hen. There is no F-16 or F-18 coming for the IAF and for that matter no 110 birds (from any other OEM) are coming either. The GOI will go through the motions of MMRCA 3.0 and then they will scrap the contest and go in for a G2G deal for the F-35 and do it via a FACO line. Expect to hear the same things again from the IAF during the process of MMRCA 3.0 ---> 1) There is NO Plan B; 2) 110 birds are required; 3) Squadron Shortage is Alarming; etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Sir ji, US administration might be looking hell and heaven for a F-35 buyer after Turkey is kicked out to reduce the cost for it's own acquisition. But would that be possible cuz we're doing the exact same thing they supposedly denied f-35 to Turkey for. btw I also made this point a few days back in a different thread.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7634&p=2292600

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 08 Sep 2018 01:31

jpremnath wrote:Wonderful...None of the concerns were addressed and all we could see is someone who is confident that we can't develop 5th gen fighter and drones on our own..So the solution is to buy American....Yeah!!!..an American Philip in BRF..That is new!!...

High praise indeed! Your are welcome and thank you!

The first highlight is like when asked for the "exact" issue another gent replied everything. Each to his own.

Now back to the meat of the subject. When "estimating" and it is an estimate after-all, there is two key principles I try to keep in mind. I am a realist after-all or at least that is how I think of myself.
1. Past Track record. Not hidden from people but one can choose to ignore it.
2. Trends. It has been stated by many wise folks in another context "The trend is your friend, until the end when it bends"

It always makes me smile when folks forget to account for past track record and trends. But I do admire confidence in other people.
Last edited by pankajs on 08 Sep 2018 01:33, edited 1 time in total.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6703
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby brar_w » 08 Sep 2018 01:32

Turkish aircraft are being produced i.e. The number of aircraft they currently have on order will likely be produced as scheduled. Their future orders were not put in because partners have placed orders annually (for now) rather than one large amount as an FMS customer would. This means, that the annual impact of the future Turkish orders will be at most 6-10 aircraft a year for a program that will be producing well north of 120 aircraft a year. Plenty of future prospects to offset any single digit/yr loss of production. As far as US cost (URF) is concerned, Turkish aircraft or lack of will have a negligible impact (on the net). It would obviously impact Lockheed's bottom line but that is different from what the US Government pays for its F-35s which are purchased under a fixed price contract.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5843
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Rakesh » 08 Sep 2018 01:38

souravB wrote:
Rakesh wrote:The second (and equally important) US platform that will come is the F-35. That sounds far fetched now, but COMCASA has opened the door for the Fancy Cornish Hen. There is no F-16 or F-18 coming for the IAF and for that matter no 110 birds (from any other OEM) are coming either. The GOI will go through the motions of MMRCA 3.0 and then they will scrap the contest and go in for a G2G deal for the F-35 and do it via a FACO line. Expect to hear the same things again from the IAF during the process of MMRCA 3.0 ---> 1) There is NO Plan B; 2) 110 birds are required; 3) Squadron Shortage is Alarming; etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Sir ji, US administration might be looking hell and heaven for a F-35 buyer after Turkey is kicked out to reduce the cost for it's own acquisition. But would that be possible cuz we're doing the exact same thing they supposedly denied f-35 to Turkey for. btw I also made this point a few days back in a different thread.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7634&p=2292600

Look at a world map and see if Turkey and China share a border. Now do the same with India.

Why is Turkey not getting a CAATSA waiver for the S-400 purchase? Why is India getting a waiver for the exact system?

The Chinese are a threat or they are not a threat. The US cannot have it both ways :)

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby pankajs » 08 Sep 2018 01:56

Rakesh wrote:Okay, let us get a few facts straight;

Well covered!

I have a few differences on some of the details but not on the overall scenario.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Manish_P » 08 Sep 2018 08:24

Rakesh wrote:Okay, let us get a few facts straight;


+1

Excellent points, Rakesh sir

Really wish there was a way to favourite/bookmark posts

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 08 Sep 2018 08:40

pankajs wrote:
arshyam wrote:^^ We can't do much beyond go by what's in the public domain. Unless GoI chooses to reveal what they have signed for, we can only do so much, media spin doctors notwithstanding.

As to your question about the offending portion, Manish_P-ji has posted the relevant details above.
Manish_P wrote:
All, not some. Unless it is the one-to-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment.

Check para 9 of the CISMOA memorandum of agreement between the US and South Korea

Link - here

Relevant extract
PARAGRAPH IX
DoD-provided COMSEC equipment and materials, including keying materials, will be installed and maintained only by authorized US personnel. This does not preclude, during periods of operational necessity, the one-for-one replacement of malfunctioning equipment by MND personnel. When authorized by the US, qualified ROK personnel may remove and/or replace US COMSEC equipment previously installed by US personnel. For purposes of performing required maintenance and periodic inspections, authorized and duly identified US personnel will be permitted timely access to DoD-provided COMSEC equipment and material.
DoD will, in cases when time and circumstances permit, notify MND in advance in those instances when access by authorized US personnel is considered necessary. During periods of such access, US personnel will be accompanied by appropriately cleared MND personnel. This does not preclude inspections by MND, which may be performed at any time.

No mention of, to quote you "one or more US crew aboard to man the comms" or even a hint of, to quote me accompany the equipment 'all the time'".

It only talks of installation, maintenance and periodic inspection.

To clarify further ... note the following language
1. .. notify MND in advance in those instances when access by authorized US personnel is considered necessary. {Clearly the US crew does not man the equipment but is brought in for periodic inspection with prior notice}

Fair enough. I should have read it more thoroughly.

Now let's elaborate this a bit. Some P8Is will be equipped with COMCASA equipment, and that will require US access to the plane to install, inspect, etc. (the inspect part also sticks in my craw, but that's not only because of this agreement so I'll let that slide for now). Now, the P8I will share it's picture to other COMCASA gear via the secure links between such gear. A nearby warship has been tasked to deal with it, but it either needs this COMCASA gear, or there needs to be a near-real-time data transfer mechanism so it can have a tactical picture. Needless to say, the latter does not exist as of now, and it's up to us to spend our resources and build such a data transfer system. For it to really work without manual intervention, we need access to some APIs on the COMCASA equipment to read data off it, and somehow I doubt that the Americans will expose their APIs to non-COMCASA equipment. So the best scenario will be to install the same COMCASA equipment on the ship. Who will perform this installation? Where will such equipment be integrated on board the ship? And since we won't always have a COMCASA equipped ship around when we need it, eventually, more and more of our ships will start carrying such equipment, facilitating easy access for foreign personnel on-board sensitive areas of many ships.

Now consider a ship-borne heli, like the MH-60. We are going to embark this on pretty much all our frontline assets. One of the advantages of this heli is that it can now carry COMCASA equipment aboard, but it won't be of much use unless the host ship also has compliant equipment. Once again, who has to come and install, maintain, inspect? Which parts of the said ship will they get access to? I am pretty sure this compliant equipment won't be installed in the galley. I hope you can see where I am going - we are voluntarily signing up to opening the most sensitive parts of our frontline assets for foreign personnel to routinely access, and also display our thinking and priorities to this foreign govt. as they can see what we are seeing.

This will be at the cost of investing in growing our own systems and equipment of greater sophistication, which will happen only with sustained investment. Such investment happens only when we don't have alternatives (the engine dev saga shows we aren't really good in growing our capabilities when alternatives exist), so I don't see us investing much in our own tech going forward, as better tech is easily available.

For all this, what are we getting in return? What is the compelling reason for us to give up so much?
Last edited by arshyam on 08 Sep 2018 08:52, edited 1 time in total.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 08 Sep 2018 08:42

Karthik S wrote:
pankajs wrote:Folks taking of shitty agreement but no one is pointing out the shitty part.

One response was about US crew manning the equipment. A document and a section was pointed out but there is no language to support the assumption. Infact, the language that is part of the para is indicative of the exact opposite!

Funny!


You seem to support this agreement, can you let others know practical benefits that we will derive from this thing?

+1.

I am astonished to see BRF so easily swallowing up this agreement. Stark contrast to the nuke-deal and 123 agreement days. Is Modi so much above national interest that we don't even want to enumerate some of the adv and disadv and try to get a better picture?

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2964
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby arshyam » 08 Sep 2018 08:50

Rakesh saar, good summary. At least you took the trouble to articulate your points. Some of mine:

Rakesh wrote:1) COMCASA will *NOT* divulge all our communications. As Karan Saar pointed out ---> we will have two sets of networks (one for Indian/Existing platforms and the other for COMCASA-equipped platforms).
While this is true, I don't know how practical it is to have two sets of communications equipment everywhere we have COMCASA equipment. Someone from the forces side is bound to write about this, let's see what their take is. One of my objections to this agreement is that I don't see a compelling for us to go to this trouble.

Rakesh wrote:2) Again as Karan Saar mentioned, It is going to be expensive and not easy. But the Indian Govt believes it can afford the cost and is worth the pain. And I do not believe this is a gamble by the GOI. The very fact that we did not sign the standard CISMOA agreement, clearly indicates that.
Fair enough. But I'd like to see the fine print before concluding anything. Let's also keep in mind that building a system that can bridge both is going to be almost impossible (I mentioned it in my post above). Even if we do, the reliability of such a system will be at the mercy of the Americans.

Rakesh wrote:3) Not all existing US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board. So the existing C-17s, C-130s, P-8Is, etc are not necessarily required to have the equipment. If the Indian Armed Forces do not feel the need for the equipment, they simply will not put it on there. There is no compulsion to install or NOT to install COMCASA equipment. Signing the agreement - which has gone into immediate effect - means little, if the communication equipment is not installed.

4) Not all future US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board either. So the upcoming CH-47s, AH-64s, second batch of C-130s, four additional P-8Is, the lone white tail C-17 may or may not have the equipment. Again, it is based on operational needs and not a fleet-wide installation of American platforms that serve (or will serve) in the Indian Armed Forces.
Somehow, I think it won't pan out like this. American gear is generally good (which is not the reason I oppose this agreement), so I expect we'll put it on all US sourced platforms.

Rakesh wrote:The main takeaway is COMCASA is a platform-specific agreement and not a blanket agreement. That is an important point to understand. So what equipment will be among the first to feature COMCASA-equipped communications? That platform has yet to be inducted and that platform will be armed Predator drones. That platform will serve as a game changer for the Indian Armed Forces, especially for the Army (i.e. striking terrorist camps) and the Navy. In addition, keeping track of Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean (something the Navy already does with elan), becomes much easier with CENTRIXS.
Let's try to understand what happens when the terrorist camp we want to strike (from our PoV, all of our western neighbour is a terrorist camp, isn't it) conflicts with American perception? The fact is, there are still a lot of people in the US establishment who have Pakistan's back for whatever reason, and we cannot assume that the Americans will be okay with whatever we do to secure our interests. More importantly, in such a scenario, what recourse do we have if the CENTRIXS access is suddenly cut off? There is some mumbling about legally-binding agreements, but you and I both know that it means jack-shite in the real world real-time use cases. If the Americans deem it fit, we will get access, else we won't. This agreement ensures that they hold all the cards.

Rakesh wrote:Now let us dispel the myth that a COMCASA-equipped platform cannot communicate with other platforms. Let me use a few examples.

Example 1 - Let us say CENTRIXS tracks a PLA boat in the Indian Ocean. Are the Indian Naval personnel who are monitoring the boat, using CENTRIXS, suddenly have a bout of Aphasia (the sudden loss of language or the inability to communicate)? They can very easily pass that info - via a secure Indian network which already exists in the form of INS Kattabomman in Tamil Nadu - to a P-8I, a destroyer or one of our own subs in the area to track her or even sink her (if required). The Indian Navy is already tracking Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean and INS Kattabomman plays a role in that.
This is more work, but doable. Agreed. My point is, what is the killer requirement on our horizon for us to do this extra work? As you say, we are already tracking Chinese boats with our own assets, and if they are not good enough, we should invest in them. This agreement to me seems like an easy way to suck our money and starve funds for investments into improving our own capabilities.

Rakesh wrote:Example 2 - Predator drones pick up terrorist camps near the border and need to be taken out. Can the Indian Army drone operator not pass on that info - over a secured Army network which already exists - to another unit in the Army, to carry out the task? So instead of using the missiles on the armed drone itself, perhaps the Army wants to send in special forces to complete the task? Or light up the camps using Pinaka rockets or ATAGS artillery?
Same point as the above: India and the US deep state have differing perceptions on who is a terrorist, so this will only limit our options. Worse, now we are at risk of divulging who we are tracking, as the gear could be sourced from the Americans.

Rakesh wrote:So the Americans will certainly be able to see what we are doing (in tracking targets) with COMCASA-sourced equipment. But how we choose to engage that target, will still remain behind a black curtain and of our choosing.
Do you not see the problem with this?

Rakesh wrote:The point is this ---> there is no inability on the part of Indian Armed Forces personnel (who are operating COMCASA-sourced equipment) to pass on location info to other units that do *NOT* operate COMCASA-sourced equipment. Where the bone of contention lies is can that info (of tracking targets using COMCASA-sourced equipment) be shared with a third party? Now the GOI has asked for an assurance from the US Govt that they will not do such a thing and the US Govt in turn has given the Pinocchio answer. And despite the expected Pinocchio response, the GOI has taken that scenario into consideration and feels the rewards outweigh the risks.
Just for my understanding, can you elaborate what this Pinocchio answer means?

Rakesh wrote:The other myth that needs to be dispelled is that US personnel will be present 24-7, wherever COMCASA-sourced equipment is used. The whole point of COMCASA (from the US side) is designed to circumvent that very requirement. They can easily snoop in (despite their assurances that they will not) sitting behind a desk - in the United States - if they wanted to. They do not have to be anywhere in India for that. So there will be no US personnel aboard a MH-60R or a P-8I to see what we are doing.
True. Pankajs-ji pointed out the language, and he is right. I will need to re-read the Korean agreement.

Rakesh wrote: What is required however, will be scheduled inspections to ensure that the COMCASA equipment has not been tampered with. Again, we only need to abide by that rule. So let them do their scheduled inspections and keep them happy.
How we have fallen, saar? Sure, the EUMA started it and not this agreement, but the fact that we are so casually talking about foreign inspections of our frontline assets shows the direction we are going towards. So much for our ambitions of being an independent pole in a multi-polar world.

Rakesh wrote:Also, folks please think about this carefully ----> Why did the US agree to COMCASA and not arm twist India to sign the standard CISMOA agreement? What makes it so eager for the Americans to agree to an Indian specific agreement? Between India and the US, who is equally (if not greater) wary of the Chinese? Why give us a waiver for CAATSA at all? Why did South Korea (who also face the Chinese threat and the North Korean threat) sign the standard CISMOA agreement and not a South Korea specific agreement? Why are the Americans not stopping supplies of the AH-64, CH-47, C-130, C-17, MH-60R, etc to India, like how they stopped the F-35 for Turkey who also bought the S-400? Do not be fooled by the standard line from a few on BRF ---> that in America lies India's salvation. The reality is otherwise.
What CAATSA waiver are you talking about? That so-called waiver requires the USG to certify that we are demonstrably moving away from sourcing Russian equipment, and it not a blanket waiver. So our foreign policy is sought to being influenced in the American direction. Same goes for Iranian oil. Also, there is no guarantee that some day in the future some senator with an itch in the wrong place will propose an amendment to withdraw this as well (or say we have to buy from Timbuktoo), and the US prez will simply posture about Congress doing something and his hands being tied. Net net, this CAATSA waiver is not set in stone. If this sounds far-fetched, please see the past actions of the US: they have a history of saying one thing and doing something else.

We have a tactical convergence at best with US interests w.r.t. China. But installing their gear on even some of our frontline assets which enable them to track our activities in real time will give away enough hints about our strategic posture. We can try to hide this as much as possible, but it is impossible to be 100% certain that nothing important is divulged.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: COMCASA Signing By India: A Trap or Unshackling?

Postby Karthik S » 08 Sep 2018 08:50

Rakesh wrote:Okay, let us get a few facts straight;

1) COMCASA will *NOT* divulge all our communications. As Karan Saar pointed out ---> we will have two sets of networks (one for Indian/Existing platforms and the other for COMCASA-equipped platforms).

2) Again as Karan Saar mentioned, It is going to be expensive and not easy. But the Indian Govt believes it can afford the cost and is worth the pain. And I do not believe this is a gamble by the GOI. The very fact that we did not sign the standard CISMOA agreement, clearly indicates that.

3) Not all existing US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board. So the existing C-17s, C-130s, P-8Is, etc are not necessarily required to have the equipment. If the Indian Armed Forces do not feel the need for the equipment, they simply will not put it on there. There is no compulsion to install or NOT to install COMCASA equipment. Signing the agreement - which has gone into immediate effect - means little, if the communication equipment is not installed.

4) Not all future US-sourced platforms will necessarily have COMCASA equipment on board either. So the upcoming CH-47s, AH-64s, second batch of C-130s, four additional P-8Is, the lone white tail C-17 may or may not have the equipment. Again, it is based on operational needs and not a fleet-wide installation of American platforms that serve (or will serve) in the Indian Armed Forces.

The main takeaway is COMCASA is a platform-specific agreement and not a blanket agreement. That is an important point to understand. So what equipment will be among the first to feature COMCASA-equipped communications? That platform has yet to be inducted and that platform will be armed Predator drones. That platform will serve as a game changer for the Indian Armed Forces, especially for the Army (i.e. striking terrorist camps) and the Navy. In addition, keeping track of Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean (something the Navy already does with elan), becomes much easier with CENTRIXS.


So this agreement just for the predator drones and for the hypothetical scenario where we'll buy F 35?

Now let us dispel the myth that a COMCASA-equipped platform cannot communicate with other platforms. Let me use a few examples.

Example 1 - Let us say CENTRIXS tracks a PLA boat in the Indian Ocean. Are the Indian Naval personnel who are monitoring the boat, using CENTRIXS, suddenly have a bout of Aphasia (the sudden loss of language or the inability to communicate)? They can very easily pass that info - via a secure Indian network which already exists in the form of INS Kattabomman in Tamil Nadu - to a P-8I, a destroyer or one of our own subs in the area to track her or even sink her (if required). The Indian Navy is already tracking Chinese boats in the Indian Ocean and INS Kattabomman plays a role in that.

Example 2 - Predator drones pick up terrorist camps near the border and need to be taken out. Can the Indian Army drone operator not pass on that info - over a secured Army network which already exists - to another unit in the Army, to carry out the task? So instead of using the missiles on the armed drone itself, perhaps the Army wants to send in special forces to complete the task? Or light up the camps using Pinaka rockets or ATAGS artillery?

So the Americans will certainly be able to see what we are doing (in tracking targets) with COMCASA-sourced equipment. But how we choose to engage that target, will still remain behind a black curtain and of our choosing.


In your second example, the khans will most likely inform pakis that we are snooping over them :lol: looking at our history. Both your scenarios doesn't require any coordination or any such agreement with US.

The point is this ---> there is no inability on the part of Indian Armed Forces personnel (who are operating COMCASA-sourced equipment) to pass on location info to other units that do *NOT* operate COMCASA-sourced equipment. Where the bone of contention lies is can that info (of tracking targets using COMCASA-sourced equipment) be shared with a third party? Now the GOI has asked for an assurance from the US Govt that they will not do such a thing and the US Govt in turn has given the Pinocchio answer. And despite the expected Pinocchio response, the GOI has taken that scenario into consideration and feel that the reward outweighs the risk.

The second (and equally important) US platform that will come is the F-35. That sounds far fetched now, but COMCASA has opened the door for the Fancy Cornish Hen. There is no F-16 or F-18 coming for the IAF and for that matter no 110 birds (from any other OEM) are coming either. The GOI will go through the motions of MMRCA 3.0 and then they will scrap the contest and go in for a G2G deal for the F-35 and do it via a FACO line. Expect to hear the same things again from the IAF during the process of MMRCA 3.0 ---> 1) There is NO Plan B; 2) 110 birds are required; 3) Squadron Shortage is Alarming; etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The other myth that needs to be dispelled is that US personnel will be present 24-7, wherever COMCASA-sourced equipment is used. The whole point of COMCASA (from the US side) is designed to circumvent that very requirement. They can easily snoop in - despite their assurances that they will not -sitting behind a desk in the United States, if they wanted to. They do not have to be anywhere in India for that. So there will be no US personnel aboard a MH-60R or a P-8I to see what we are doing. What is required however, will be scheduled inspections to ensure that the COMCASA equipment has not been tampered with. Again, we only need to abide by that rule. So let them do their scheduled inspections and keep them happy.


Doesn't look like words of a self respecting nation. Again all this for predator drones and hypothetical case where we'll buy F 35s? Haven't we learnt anything from the past? How much time it will take for them to take polar opposite position and start cozying up to the pakis (their first love in the sub continent) if govt there changes? what if next khan govt is more inclined towards China? For now our military will become like sentinels into which Khans can warg into sitting in the US as you say and keep an eye on cheen.

Guys, am not going into "No it's not blanket deal", "we can move out buy giving months notice (as if we are some house tenant) etc.It's one thing to buy innocuous equipment such as C 17, C 130 from them, but this kind of sovereignty compromising agreement with someone who is known to be the most unreliable 'partner' and supported India's destruction many times in the past is beyond condemnation.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JayS, Kartik, Kengsley, milindc and 53 guests