India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[ramana]

You mean like they told Saddam to go for it leading to Desert storm?

They kind of made similar noises after 26/11 and then backed off.

GOI will do what they will do when they are ready.

[shiv]

@Shiv^^^: I was wondering the same (if I have understood you correctly): What if Hillary says; "Go for it"..? we don't have an excuse then not to act.

No Cosmoji no. Hilary is welcome ot say "Go" or "Cum". In the final analysis we have to think for ourselves no matter what Hilary says or does not say. Ant reference to Hilary or the US in a matter that requires OUR decision is a digression. The US and Hilary's permission or lack of permission can have no role in our decision making. That is all I am trying to say. Imagining that Hilary saying "Go" and India having no excuse is exactly what you said earlier - that is a belief that we are waiting for US permission. There may well be other considerations other than cowardice also. I merely mentioned cowardice as a good example that people will swallow easily on BRF.

BTW, FWIW, I am coming around to believing (incoming emails) that it's not the rejection of the planes that is causing heartburn in DC but the postponement of the strategic dialogue talks scheduled for April. The reason then given was "regional elections". However, it is now seen as GoI knowing about the down select but saying it did not to preempt pressure and essentially blindsiding Hillary and the WH.

This is what I think. the US used Indian snake oil sellers and other lobbying efforts to win the deal. The lobbyists will now be struck off the lists in the US for having failed and they are really angry and have their chaddis in a huuuuuuge knot and they are the people (not the US administration) that are producing all this media noise. They are sore losers. But its tough.Their asses are on fire and they will scream and will only be satisfied if they cause dhoti soiling among Indians by the noise they are making. We just have to inhale their stink and fart it out without dhoti shivering. Like a fart, this will pass.

[ramana]

Also imagine the fallout on India if US planes made the shortlist and Roemer quits anyway!

[Cosmo_R]

@Shiv^^^: Actually, I did not phrase that well. I was simply wondering if this "US pressure not to act" is a facade. IOW, GoI is actually grateful that US supposedly restrains us because otherwise there would be no excuse but to act. The US goes along with charade because it suits their objectives.

Anyway, I do not mean to derail this another whine against MMS.

@Marten^^ I believe Roemer is not the first US Amb to meet with APHC. When Mush came to India in 2001(?) at the paki embassy in ND, the APHC were invited and GoI reps were there too.

[shiv]

We may never know the truth about Roemer. Maybe he was tasked to do all that is possible to make the deal go through. maybe he ended up depending on a snake oil middlemen for information that gave him a more rosy picture than the truth. Note that all the media articles are by "experts" and "commentators". Clearly they are whining and kicking about. balls to them.

If the US kills relations with India because we do not buy from them - then we are looking at a country that could hold our balls and squeeze after we buy from them because they want to force us to buy something else. The US is not so stupid as to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Can no one understand that? Clearly the negative articles have nothing to do with Indo-US relations but are prompted by failed sour grapes analysts and snake oil sellers who know they belong in the bathwater that is now being thrown out. If thei analysis and predictions had worked they would stand to make millions in the future the greedy bums. Balls to them. Why confuse idiotic article writers with diplomacy?

[shiv]

@Shiv^^^: Actually, I did not phrase that well. I was simply wondering if this "US pressure not to act" is a facade. IOW, GoI is actually grateful that US supposedly restrains us because otherwise there would be no excuse but to act. The US goes along with charade because it suits their objectives.

Cosmo could you point me to one single GoI source that says the government is bending to US pressure? You are quoting BRF theory as fact.

[Anantha]

Idiot's guide to winning contracts in India (for Unkil and others)

Step1: Indian defence establishment shortlists the best arms/planes as per their specs
Step2:Any nation issuing statements supporting TSP -10 pts
if you sell B grade weapons to TSP -10pts
if you sell A grade weapons to TSP -50 pts
if you sell fighter planes to TSP -100 pts
if you politically support TSP -200 pts
Conversely,
If you take out 10 low level LeT operatives +10 pts
If you take out an ISI operative mid level (Iqbal class) +50 points (order worth 50 mi $)
If you take out 1 high level LeT guy (Hafeez sayyed class) +75 pts (small weapon systems order)
If you take out an ISI operative high level (Gul Class) +100 points (order for 200 mi $)
If you take out any of the top 5 Army guys +200 pts (order for 5 billion $ and above)
For everything else there is Mastercard and the debt will be paid by the Chinese only

You will soon see the big 5 fighting amongst themselves as to who will take out which level operative in TSP. You may also see Boeing, Eurofighters etc pressuring their respective govt to take out the key figures in TSP.

[Manny]

IF you support China and are itching to sell you aircrafts to China then -300 points (France). The US that is restraining France gets that +300 points.

If you support Kashmiri separatists in your country and are an apoligists for Porkies then -400 points (UK)

IF you are conspirator against Indian losers who think the UNSC is the hot ticket and desires to be part of the UNSC then + 50 points (Italy)

Let's not do Talibani math here. ?

[Anantha]

In short what I am trying to say is with the western economy in pits right now, arm sales are an important way to sustain some of their jobs and economy. Therefore, India has much more leverage than what traditionally was there in the arms market and we still have not used/learnt to use it. The arms deals are golden opportunities to make the west behave and dance to our tunes.

[VinodTK]

Premvir Das: Indo-US engagement at the crossroads

[Manny]

Premvir Das: Indo-US engagement at the crossroads

There are too many Indians who are too dumb and convinced that they can do without the US and in fact they believe they can do it while giving the US the bird.

On the other hand maybe they know they cannot.. but that is exactly what they want for India. India is just too dangerous and an untrustworthy Hindutva country for them and it needs to be powerless and impotent. There are quite a few Indians who think exactly like that.

[svinayak]

This is what I think. the US used Indian snake oil sellers and other lobbying efforts to win the deal. The lobbyists will now be struck off the lists in the US for having failed and they are really angry and have their chaddis in a huuuuuuge knot and they are the people (not the US administration) that are producing all this media noise. They are sore losers. But its tough.Their asses are on fire and they will scream and will only be satisfied if they cause dhoti soiling among Indians by the noise they are making. We just have to inhale their stink and fart it out without dhoti shivering. Like a fart, this will pass.

The snake oil sellers are afraid and worried when their American contacts will ask them what happened. They will ask questions like
"why did Indians reject the planes when we have done so much"
"You have personally promised that we will be given fair chance in this deal"
"You said that you have so much contacts deep inside the Indian govt and political circle. Is it true or false"

Other Indians who are friends with more regular americans will get questions like
"Why did India reject US planes"
"Why does India not accept US India deal"

I want to find out what these Indians will answer

I was personally asked in a meeting with other fellow desis - after the nuclear test in 1998

"Why did India do this" - I replied "Why not?"
"Why are Indians celebrating the nuclear tests" - I replied "Why not?"
"Will Indians be given visas to US after this test". She was more worried about the contractors in the project.
I replied " After the Iraq sanctions US allowed visas and there should be no problem with visa"

[Muppalla]

We may never know the truth about Roemer. Maybe he was tasked to do all that is possible to make the deal go through. maybe he ended up depending on a snake oil middlemen for information that gave him a more rosy picture than the truth. Note that all the media articles are by "experts" and "commentators". Clearly they are whining and kicking about. balls to them.

If the US kills relations with India because we do not buy from them - then we are looking at a country that could hold our balls and squeeze after we buy from them because they want to force us to buy something else. The US is not so stupid as to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Can no one understand that? Clearly the negative articles have nothing to do with Indo-US relations but are prompted by failed sour grapes analysts and snake oil sellers who know they belong in the bathwater that is now being thrown out. If thei analysis and predictions had worked they would stand to make millions in the future the greedy bums. Balls to them. Why confuse idiotic article writers with diplomacy?

Perfecto. I could not write better though I worte similar.

As compared to pre-2000 era, there are too many snake oil sellers who played as though they can clinch anything for GOTUS. The folks inside GOTUS surprisingly fell for such folks. Now there will be a lot of heads that will roll off that includes the officials of GOTUS and offcource the snakeoil dealers.

Commercially US DoD is still doing impressive business with India and all they lost is just one deal. There will be several other stull that India is buying from US.

[Cosmo_R]

@Shiv^^^: Actually, I did not phrase that well. I was simply wondering if this "US pressure not to act" is a facade. IOW, GoI is actually grateful that US supposedly restrains us because otherwise there would be no excuse but to act. The US goes along with charade because it suits their objectives.

Cosmo could you point me to one single GoI source that says the government is bending to US pressure? You are quoting BRF theory as fact.

@Shiv ^^^ It must be age but what I am really trying to get across is that GoI is NOT bending to US pressure but using it as an excuse to NOT do anything to pakiland. IOW, this whole 'restraint' biz is a carefully concocted exercise to avoid taking ball$y action.

I am not proselytizing this I'm just speculating.

[Cosmo_R]

Premvir Das: Indo-US engagement at the crossroads

"For more substance to be given to the relationship, a larger overview of national interest is needed. If a multipolar Asia is what India wants and a unipolar continent is what China seeks, then the US becomes a very important factor in our calculus. Its interests in Asia are enormous and it cannot let China assume a hegemonic role. Without ‘using’ the US, it is not possible for India to secure the Asia that it wants."

My personal worry is that we are all fixated on Pakistan, the USS Enterprise, F-16 Block 52s and even David Headley. They are all wounds and redolent of the hypocrisy that underpins realpolitik. We are still talking 'Love Story' when this is office politics.

IMVVVVHO, the Amerikhans are manageable—the levers are transparent and there is a clear causality. The Kublaik(H)ans are not. The Han devour everything their path; "All your *.* belong to us".

The trouble in parliament (LC) over approval of the nuclear agreement (that India asked for in 2005), the nuclear liability legislation, the Boeing brouhaha over the price of the C-17s, the effortless signing of the PAK-FA $25 billion agreement for an unproven plane, have all contributed to a growing narrative in the US that India is still trapped in a NAM mode.

Kanwal Sibal
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... el=defense

makes the point. KS is not like his bro Kapil.

[ramana]

From what i hear the US officials are in shock and awe. They feel they covered all the bases :PM, officials, chatterati, lifafa opinion makers. They had dummy playing sessions to game the responses. However they never thought dumbing the technology under export controls would cause the rejection on primary grounds of not meeting requirements. The performance at Leh was poor. Another was a particular maneuver at an airfield in the plains. More whining will cause more revelations. Its better to reflect on lessons learned.

* One big problem is what use to be called the Indian moralistic streak. Folks couldn't fudge the ground truth that the planes that didn't make it were inferior.

[sanjaykumar]

They are in shock and awe because this decision confirms India's determined independence and possibly America's relative decline. But India should forge defense relationship with the US via other deals and perhaps gasp pulling its own weight wrt Pakistan.

I bet the Pakis are in shock and awe as well. Tinged with an envious admiration, not that it matters a pile of steaming product of high a fiber diet.

[Manny]

Other Indians who are friends with more regular americans will get questions like
"Why did India reject US planes"
"Why does India not accept US India deal"

I want to find out what these Indians will answer

Let me give it a shot...If I may,

Cause...Cause

1) The Sonia Gandhi feudal family is surrounded by sycophants who have not woken up from the NAM days and want to assert themselves for they lost the battle on economics for the most part.

2) They always suffered from the envy of success and felt more comfortable with losers and want to make China (their heart of heart BFFs) happy.

3) They just can't let this opportunity to give the bird to the big bad USA! This was just too good an opportunity to do just that...so all the other lefty losers of India can feel better too on their way to the US embassy to get a Visa which if they don't get would be totally devastated. The hypocrite losers they are.



Honest to God. that would be my answer!

[Prem]

Answer should be unlike Poodles and Boondles of Uncle , Indians go and fight real wars. Who will want to jump into the thick of mortal combat with inferior blade as well restriction to not to unsheath without manufacturer's permission and then again not be allowed to use the sharpest edge in retaliation. Especially galling when the attacker will be armed with the weapons gifted by same seller while defender have to pay even to carry the sword. The policy just dont make sense and violate every rule of politic, realpolitic, ethic and above all business sense.
Imagine Starbuck sellinbg coffee with the condition that they be informed with ever sip and permission must be taken before the cup moved from left hand to right hand.

[Sushupti]

U.S. long feared India arms-sale snags, cable shows

Fri, Apr 29 22:31 PM EDT
By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has fretted for years that its ties to Pakistan and past sanctions against India would harm its efforts to win arms deals such as the $11 billion fighter order that slipped away from two U.S. suppliers this week, a U.S. diplomatic cable showed.

"Our ability to seize the opportunities presented by this newly improved environment is limited by the commonly held view that the U.S. will not prove to be a reliable supplier of defense equipment," Timothy Roemer, the U.S. ambassador to India, said in an October 29, 2009, cable to Michele Flournoy, a top Pentagon official then about to visit India.

U.S. officials from President Barack Obama down subsequently pushed hard to sell U.S. fighter jets to India to crown expanding security ties. The United States also is eyeing tens of billions of dollars in other potential arms deals with India, the cable showed.

In the end, India shortlisted two European aircraft over Boeing Co's (BA.N) F/A-18 SuperHornet and Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) F-16, company officials said on Thursday.

Lockheed and Boeing are the Pentagon's No. 1 and No. 2 supplier, respectively. Each is pressing to boost sales in India, which plans to spend about $50 billion in the next five years to modernize old Soviet-era weapons and technology.

Roemer announced Thursday he was leaving his post for professional and family reasons. "The new environment" reference in his 2009 cable concerned the emergence of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government with "a clear mandate not beholden to coalition partners" for the first time since post-Cold War U.S.-Indian strategic ties took shape.

U.S. competitors use the economic sanctions imposed by Washington after Indian nuclear tests in 1998 to try to harm U.S. sales prospects, the cable said.

They also point to "our close defense relationship with Pakistan as rationale that the U.S. should not be trusted," Roemer wrote in the message obtained by the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks and made available to Reuters by a third party.

The cable cited one unnamed source as saying the Indian army will never put U.S. equipment in divisions facing Pakistan, India's historic foe, "because they expect the U.S. will stop military supplies in the event of Indo-Pak hostilities."

"DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED"

The U.S. Defense Department said on Friday it was "deeply disappointed" by rejection of the U.S. bid to supply 126 new fighter aircraft. Instead, India set up a contest between France's Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon made by Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain.

"We look forward to continuing to grow and develop our defense partnership with India," said Navy Commander Leslie Hull-Ryde, a Pentagon spokeswoman, "and remain convinced that the United States offers our defense partners around the globe the world's most advanced and reliable technology."

She said U.S. officials were closely studying Indian-provided documentation on the short-listing decision, and looked forward to a full "debrief" from the Indian Air Force.

A State Department spokeswoman, Heide Fulton, declined to comment on Roemer's 2009 cable as a matter of policy.

A senior State Department official said the United States was not aware of any allegations of impropriety "so far" in the fighter matter. The full field included the two American planes, three Europeans and a Russian model.

Asked about the possible impact of any Indian concerns over U.S. reliability as a supplier, the official said the elimination of Boeing and Lockheed seemed to be based on technical considerations.

"I think, if anything, the concerns are that it was only made on that basis and without looking at the wider strategic implications of this," the official said.

In the past three years, India has agreed to buy some $10 billion in U.S. military hardware including six Lockheed C-130J military transport planes and eight long-range Boeing P-8 maritime reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft.


http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUST ... 0?irpc=932

[shiv]

@Shiv ^^^ It must be age but what I am really trying to get across is that GoI is NOT bending to US pressure but using it as an excuse to NOT do anything to pakiland. IOW, this whole 'restraint' biz is a carefully concocted exercise to avoid taking ball$y action.

I am not proselytizing this I'm just speculating.

Cosmo this has nothing to do with age. Where has the GoI used US pressure" as an excuse?

The only place where US pressure has been openly quoted in one bookk as an excuse was postponement of nuclear tests by the Narasimha Rao government. Everything else - including "Not attacking Pakistan because of US pressure" is BRF theory. US pressure did not stop Indian action in 1971. US pressure did not stop Indira Gandhi from testing in 1974. Worry about US pressure did not stop Vajpayee in 1998.

I believe you are imagining things and now bringing in age as an additional factor to support an untenable theory. I do not for one minute accept the theory that India is not acting against Pakistan because of real US pressure or even pretending that US pressure is stopping India. There is on the other hand plenty of other reasons why India might not want to attack Pakistan - and the reasons can be quoted clearly - there is no need to hide behind US pressure hijab. Have you forgotten how this same BRF used to quote the Muslim vote bank factor as the reason for not attacking Pakistan just a few years ago - or is that what you mean by "age" - you were not around to remember that? Please.

[devesh]

Asked about the possible impact of any Indian concerns over U.S. reliability as a supplier, the official said the elimination of Boeing and Lockheed seemed to be based on technical considerations.

"I think, if anything, the concerns are that it was only made on that basis and without looking at the wider strategic implications of this," the official said.

very interesting...so, India should accept inferior fighters for her defense b/c that helps her long term strategic objectives!!!!!!! even a billion exclamation marks won't be enough for that one...this same argument was peddled by Indians who've been working for Uncle. basically, accept an inferior fighting force when neighbors are arming up, b/c guess what....that only increases our long-term "strategic deth."

[shiv]

Asked about the possible impact of any Indian concerns over U.S. reliability as a supplier, the official said the elimination of Boeing and Lockheed seemed to be based on technical considerations.

"I think, if anything, the concerns are that it was only made on that basis and without looking at the wider strategic implications of this," the official said.

very interesting...so, India should accept inferior fighters for her defense b/c that helps her long term strategic objectives!!!!!!! even a billion exclamation marks won't be enough for that one...this same argument was peddled by Indians who've been working for Uncle. basically, accept an inferior fighting force when neighbors are arming up, b/c guess what....that only increases our long-term "strategic deth."

The excuse is so short sighted and US centric that it does not even deserve a hack thoo. From an Indian viewpoint - the Indian Air Force is definitely going to be forced to accept unproven tech as LCA and MCA appear. But when we have the chance let the IAF get what they want, and they will have to accommodate Indian tech in due course.

[Pratyush]

Well what can be said, the Indian MUTU live in a world of their own. It is Indian money, we are within our rights to select the design that meets the needs of the IAF.

The Euro canards meet that requirement, when it comes to the IAF. That is what the IAF has indicated. Nothing stopped the US from bringing the F35 in the fight. They chose not to bring them in whtere under development of otherwise is a different issue. On top of that the 4 or 5 letter treaties. For a strike platform, it is as good as not having the platform. So I say good riddance.

Their loss, live with it.

[Manny]

Answer should be unlike Poodles and Boondles of Uncle , Indians go and fight real wars. Who will want to jump into the thick of mortal combat with inferior blade as well restriction to not to unsheath without manufacturer's permission and then again not be allowed to use the sharpest edge in retaliation. Especially galling when the attacker will be armed with the weapons gifted by same seller while defender have to pay even to carry the sword. The policy just dont make sense and violate every rule of politic, realpolitic, ethic and above all business sense.
Imagine Starbuck sellinbg coffee with the condition that they be informed with ever sip and permission must be taken before the cup moved from left hand to right hand.

If that was the case, then the rejection should have been made on that condition. Clearly spelled out to the Americans that this was an unacceptable contract. That I can totally accept.

[Prem]

Manny sir,
This is just a part of the story . {Please note the reference to inferior blade beside the restriction to use in mortal combat}

[Cosmo_R]

@Shiv ^^^ It must be age but what I am really trying to get across is that GoI is NOT bending to US pressure but using it as an excuse to NOT do anything to pakiland. IOW, this whole 'restraint' biz is a carefully concocted exercise to avoid taking ball$y action.

I am not proselytizing this I'm just speculating.

Cosmo this has nothing to do with age. Where has the GoI used US pressure" as an excuse?

The only place where US pressure has been openly quoted in one bookk as an excuse was postponement of nuclear tests by the Narasimha Rao government. Everything else - including "Not attacking Pakistan because of US pressure" is BRF theory. US pressure did not stop Indian action in 1971. US pressure did not stop Indira Gandhi from testing in 1974. Worry about US pressure did not stop Vajpayee in 1998.

I believe you are imagining things and now bringing in age as an additional factor to support an untenable theory. I do not for one minute accept the theory that India is not acting against Pakistan because of real US pressure or even pretending that US pressure is stopping India. There is on the other hand plenty of other reasons why India might not want to attack Pakistan - and the reasons can be quoted clearly - there is no need to hide behind US pressure hijab. Have you forgotten how this same BRF used to quote the Muslim vote bank factor as the reason for not attacking Pakistan just a few years ago - or is that what you mean by "age" - you were not around to remember that? Please.

Shivji, no imagining, no untenable theories. I am trying figure WTF you are saying. I am asking a question. By age I mean I'm getting old trying to understand your meaning between all the window dressing around flatulence and such.

So: What are these reasons that India won't retaliate against Pakistan? A simple answer to a simple question. Please.

[Pranav]

So: What are these reasons that India won't retaliate against Pakistan? A simple answer to a simple question. Please.

Because India would want any conflict to be limited, while the Paks and their backers would favour escalation and brinksmanship.

[shiv]

So: What are these reasons that India won't retaliate against Pakistan? A simple answer to a simple question. Please.

My reply is linked below. It is OT for this thread
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 7#p1080337

[ramana]

On a wing and a prayer Sanjay Baru

Sanjaya Baru: On a wing and a prayer
The decision to make India’s choice of fighter jet a purely technical one was, in fact, political.
Sanjaya Baru / New Delhi May 02, 2011, 0:28 IST

Major and strategically important defence purchases have rarely, if ever, been purely technical decisions. In the 1950s, Jawaharlal Nehru made political choices in opting to seal deals with the British, the Americans and the French. Nehru’s and Indira Gandhi’s switch to the Soviet Union in the early 1960s was a political and strategic decision. In her second stint in the 1980s, she turned westwards to Europe and Rajiv Gandhi followed suit. Narasimha Rao allowed Israel to open shop and Atal Bihari Vajpayee took the first step towards a strategic partnership with the United States. In each case, geo-political considerations took precedence over techno-economic evaluations.

No government decision to spend upwards of $11 billion on defence equipment could have been devoid of political and strategic calculations. Few will, therefore, readily accept the explanation that the decision to disqualify bids from the US, Russia and Sweden for a medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), and shortlist European jets, was purely technical. Even if that was the case, the decision to allow only technical considerations to dictate the choice was a political one.


Technical considerations must get priority. Also, one should not jump to the conclusion that it will mark an irreversible turning point in India’s relations with the US, which is visibly upset, more “angry” than “disappointed”. The least important part of the disappointment for the US would be the money lost because not only has the US done well in the past couple of years selling defence equipment to India, but it is also likely to get other big orders, like the $4-billion purchase order for Boeing’s C-17 transport aircraft, which according to US Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer would benefit “30,000 American workers and 650 American suppliers located in 44 states”.

However, international relations experts and strategic analysts have already commented that the very “de-politicisation” of this decision could well be a manifestation of a downslide in the India-US bilateral political relationship, compared to the heyday of the second Bush administration and the first Manmohan Singh government. Such a perception will have its own political and geo-political consequences.

What exactly is the deal about? The best analysis of the MMRCA tender has been offered by an Indian-American scholar of defence studies, Ashley Tellis, who also served as a policy advisor to the US State Department and the White House. In his lucid and, obviously, partisan analysis, Dogfight: India’s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft Decision (available at: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/dogfight.pdf), Dr Tellis sums up: “The MMRCA bid has been one of the hottest recent aviation procurements not just in India, but internationally, too. Eight countries and six companies eagerly await the outcome of this contest. This has turned into such a sizzling affair not only because of the size of the contract. Indeed, there are bigger procurement battles raging internationally. Rather, this procurement bid has been incandescent because it involves geopolitics, the economic fortunes of major aerospace companies, complex transitions in combat aviation technology, and the evolving character of the IAF itself.”

Over several months in 2009-10, the Indian Air Force (IAF) conducted trials along India-Pakistan and India-China borders to test six different aircraft: Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Lockheed Martin F-16IN Super Viper (US), Dassault Aviation’s Rafale (France), MiG-35 (Russia), the Eurofighter Consortium’s Typhoon (Germany, Italy, Spain and UK) and Saab’s Gripen (Sweden). By all accounts, the tests were extensive and exhausting. (This newspaper’s defence analyst Ajai Shukla has written extensively on the subject.)

Of the five jets which were rated on around 450 specs, Rafale and Typhoon were shortlisted based on technical parameters. Interestingly, neither the weightage or evaluation methodologies of the vital technical specifications nor the costs of aircraft have so far been considered a variable. Another “technical” consideration that seems to have been ignored so far is the extent to which the indigenisation of production, technology transfer and financial support would be offered by different suppliers. After all, the deal is not just to procure 126 or more jets, but to help modernise India’s aerospace industry.

Were the technical factors favouring the two European jets so overwhelming that they prevailed over any political considerations weighing in favour of either the US or Russia? Or, put differently, were political considerations so weak that they could not override technical factors? Was the MMRCA verdict an assertion of an “independent foreign policy”, as some gratuitous commentators suggest, or a manifestation of either political weakness or changing strategic preferences?

The decision to favour Europe in this deal could also have been prompted by concerns about European economies falling like ninepins and being bailed out by cash-rich China. Building partnerships in Europe is important, even if less so than building one with the US. Moreover, while promoting Europe as a partner of the IAF, the US can still emerge as the key partner for India’s increasingly important Navy.

Few will believe that politics played no role in the MMRCA decision. Instead, most will assume that the political factor in India’s strategic relations with the US has weakened since the days of the historic civil nuclear energy cooperation agreement. Has President Barack Obama’s “successful visit” to India not helped repair the damage done to the bilateral relationship in his first year in office? Are issues of strategic importance to India getting short shrift from US? Equally, and importantly, is the drift in India beginning to take its toll in terms of our long-term strategic planning?


The domestic political preoccupation of the leaders of the world’s largest democracies seems to have weakened the political foundation of an as yet evolving strategic partnership. That alone would explain the politics of a technical decision.

Wonder the purpose of the article?

[krithivas]

The US must have recognized its stupidity to tax Indian business to fund "Supplemental Border Security Bill" and the "9/11 Health Responders Bill"; and the other monumental announcement of $2B aid to Paki-land just before Obama's India visit which netted US ~$3B business. It was not prudent for the US to have gone out of the way to target Indian business, and karma is karma.

[Prem]

Big O, the POTUS is about to give unscheduled statement about something big related to National security. Its not Libya . My hunch is it is for OBL or Poaks.

[rgsrini]

^^^ In CNN they are clearly indicating that it is not about Libya. It is about another part of the world. They are saying that it is hugely significant to national security. It is something that US is looking forward to for a while apparently. Looks like it is about OBL...

Quite possibly Poakroaches are playing one of the major cards to be back as the most favored munna....

Announcement coming out in 9 minutes from now.

Let us see how good our speculations are...

[negi]

Ha ha Obama justifying his Nopel pijj prije by laying to rest a pawn which his country had spawned in the name of fighting the ebil SU. What farce !

[Hari Seldon]

^^OK, so what was that grand announcement, eh?

[rgsrini]

Confirmed.... OBL is dead/killed. Need to wait for additional info on how it happened.

[amdavadi]

Bin ladin is dead

[Muppalla]

Finally Kiyani has delivered.Probably dead in Pindi.

[ArmenT]

^^^^
CNN is reporting he was killed in a mansion outside Islamabad. Could be in Pindi .

[Airavat]

US diplomats wanted more “payback” for a deal that legitimised India’s nuclear industry

Mr Bush’s successor Barack Obama put top of the list big business deals that create much-needed jobs in the US across multiple sectors and states. Mr Obama walked away with deals worth $10bn, representing 50,000 American jobs. But Washington wanted more. A contract to deliver 126 multi-role combat aircraft, worth $11bn, was one suitable prize. But, last week, France’s Dassault and the multinational Eurofighter Typhoon consortium made the shortlist. The US, alongside Sweden and Russia, did not.

India, the world’s fastest growing economy after China, is buying American. It has ordered C-130 transport aircraft and P-8 maritime surveillance planes. It stands to buy C-17 aircraft for $4bn.

So what are the lessons of the defeat? One is that India resists, openly at least, transactional relationships. Many US partners do. Neighbouring Pakistan similarly bridles, but with a broken economy can less easily resist.

Despite pointing out that India has bought billions of dollars worth of military hardware from the US, the author, James Lamont, has got several things wrong.

1. Payback for the nuclear deal, if any, will be in the nuclear energy sector. In fact the nuclear deal itself was payback for India's exemplary record in nuclear non-proliferation.

2. US military hardware is NOT bought by Pakistan. It is paid for by the US taxpayer. And such hardware (or the shield it provides to terrorists) is used in killing Indians, Afghans, Americans, Baloch, and Pashtuns.