CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

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.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52569
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby ramana » 30 Oct 2018 00:12

CM, I don't think such subtlety exists in US now. Lets discuss political aspects in the Strat Forum.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3027
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby kit » 30 Oct 2018 01:28

Austin wrote:India will pay for the S-400 systems in rubles or rupees.

https://www.interfax.ru/world/634587?utm_source=top


Should be great for us , No need to spend forex ....with rouble rupee arrangement here to stay India buy from Russia will only increase



now if only India produced all those civilian electronic stuff and machinery Russia imports from China

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 01 Nov 2018 04:12

Countering CAATSA: How India can avoid American arm twisting
https://www.businesstoday.in/opinion/co ... 86653.html

By Rakesh Krishnan Simha, October 26, 2018

In its endless obsession with bringing the Russian economy to its knees, the United States has deployed its latest weapon. CAATSA - or the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act - allows the US to punish Moscow's military partners on the basis that their business dealings violate American law. As the largest user and buyer of Russian weapons, India is vulnerable to Section 231 of the new law, which imposes sanctions on individuals and countries that deal with Russia's intelligence and defence sectors. Days after India inked a $5.4 billion deal with Russia to buy the S-400 missile defence system, US President Donald Trump said India would "soon find out" whether the US was going to slap punitive sanctions. Asked when, he replied: "You will see. Sooner than you think." However, Trump's threats lacked the sting that was once typical of American presidents who looked at India through Cold War tinted lenses. Being a businessman, he's always looking for a deal. Soon enough, US officials are believed to have approached Defence Minister N. Sitharaman with an offer - New Delhi could avoid sanctions if it agrees to buy the F-16 fighter as a quid pro quo.

Catch-22 for India

Because CAATSA is an American law that prevents global free trade, it is patently illegal and can be challenged. Nevertheless, if enforced it could choke the supply of weapons from Russia and blow a gaping hole in India's war fighting capability. It will also earn India considerable hostility in Moscow and drive the Russians closer to Pakistan and China, creating a different set of complications. Secondly, any American interference in India's fiercely independent defence procurement policies will create a backlash in India and torpedo the growing strategic and defence partnership between New Delhi and Washington. India could thus end up in a Catch-22 situation in which it loses either way - whether the country abides by CAATSA or not. Sanctions under CAATSA would be triggered once Delhi makes a payment for the Russian equipment. The sanctions include blocking of licences and permissions for a US entity to export a significantly large number of items to India. The restrictions on this front would include any arms sale or the transfer of nuclear equipment or technology.

What's At Stake?

Not even the most optimistic American hawks are expecting India to walk away from Russia immediately. As one of the biggest customers of the Russian armaments industry, India will have tremendous difficulty scaling down its ties with Moscow. More than 70 per cent of the weapons fielded by India's armed forces and 60 per cent of the country's defence imports are of Russian origin. Significant weapons deals such as the $6 billion Sukhoi Super 30 upgrade, the $5.4 billion S-400 deal, highly successful projects such as the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, and secret collaboration in the area of nuclear powered submarines, miniature nuclear reactors and aircraft carriers, all point to the deep defence ties between Moscow and New Delhi dating back over 50 years. In this backdrop, nobody expects India to abandon its defence ties with Russia, even if economic and people to people ties have cooled considerably.

The assessment is also shared by the Americans. The strain CAATSA could place on the resurgent India-US relationship was in focus at a hearing of the US Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2018. Admiral Harry Harris, the former commander of the US Pacific Command (now IndoPaCom), said: "Seventy per cent of their military hardware is Russian in origin. You can't expect India to go cold turkey on that. I think we ought to look at ways to have a glide path, so that we can continue to trade in arms within India." His comments were made in the context of US Secretary of Defence James Mattis seeking exemptions from Section 231 for a number of US partners and allies. India is believed to be part of this list.

The general consensus in the US is that both houses of Congress would have to consider ways to give a waiver to India. The main reason why the US is going easy on India - at least for the moment - is that Washington and New Delhi are in the process of working out multiple nuclear power plant and arms sale projects. As Admiral Harris remarked, India is "a key partner and a great strategic opportunity". Translation: India has deep pockets and the US need the money to keep its factories running. Pissing off India isn't good politics. Simply put, applying CAATSA against India could put the US foreign policy and defence establishments in a bind and slow down their expanding cooperation with India.

How can India respond?

India isn't Saudi Arabia or Britain that the US can push around; it is poised to be the world's third largest economy. Due to India's large market and manpower, it is the US that needs India more than the other way round. Instead of getting into a heated diplomatic scrap, India should explore ways to sidestep CAATSA's punitive measures in a number of ways.

1. In the immediate term, one way to avoid secondary sanctions would be if the US determines that India is reducing its dependence on Russian arms. On paper at least it appears so - according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, "Russian hardware represented 62 per cent of the country's total weapons imports during the past five years, compared with 79 per cent in 2008-2012."

2. India may seek an official declaration from the US, specifying that anti-Russian measures would not be used against Indian companies.

3. India should enact its own legislation which declares that decisions based on extraterritorial foreign laws that prevent free trade are unlawful and therefore not applicable to it.

4. New Delhi can complain at the World Trade Organization and threaten counter sanctions to protect its legitimate interests.

5. India's leverage as the world's second largest weapons importer needs to be communicated clearly to the Americans because clearly they keep forgetting this fact. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has an ambitious $250 billion plan to modernise India's military and a hefty chunk of that amount will go to buy advanced weapons. The US - which has been the biggest beneficiary of India's arms diversification programme in the past two decades - will end up as the biggest loser if it slaps sanctions.

Sanctions: Silver Lining

In 1992 when India was facing difficulties in procuring Russian spares for its defence forces, Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao dispatched Foreign Secretary Mani Dixit on a fact-finding mission to Moscow. However, the new Russian Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev refused to meet Dixit. The atmosphere was further aggravated by Kozyrev's statement that henceforth Moscow would have an "equidistant" policy in relations with India and Pakistan and that Russia would "stop looking at Pakistan through Indian goggles". This new stance was known as the Kozyrev Doctrine.

It was this diplomatic snub that forced Rao to steer India towards the West and kickstart diversification - a process that has continued to this day. The moral of the story is that the Kozyrev Doctrine may have been a stab in the back by a trusted friend but it opened India's eyes to the dangers of dependence on one country for critical defence supplies. India has since stepped up the pace of both diversification and Make in India, resulting in impressive gains on both fronts. However, the pace of indigenisation hasn't been enough as the defence forces continue to depend on imports of advanced weapons.

Similarly, CAATSA could be the much needed wakeup call India needs to fast-track Make in India. For, diversification has its limits. Even if India decides to spread its imports evenly between Russia, the US, Israel and Europe, the reality is that all four are interlinked. For instance, Israel is touted as a reliable arms supplier and also a country with shared strategic interests. However, a number of Israeli weapons systems such as the Green Pine radar incorporate American technology at some level. This gives the US leverage against Israel, which may be arm twisted to apply sanctions on India. Although Tel Aviv has always stood by India during wars, its future stance cannot be predicted with certainty. By fast tracking indigenisation, India can ensure self-sufficiency in defence and become immune from sanctions conjured out of thin air by policy wonks in the US State Department.

Changing Winds

New geopolitical developments are also in India's favour. With the US creating a new Indian Ocean-Pacific Ocean command (the aforementioned IndoPaCom) to take on China's growing naval power, Washington needs India as a strategic partner. The new command replaces the Pacific Command, indicating the importance of having a larger US naval presence in the Indian Ocean. While Japan and Australia are the lynchpins of the American plan to contain China in the Pacific, in the Indian Ocean it is India that is the key to cornering the dragon. New Delhi should use this leverage to squeeze all the waivers it can to nullify CAATSA. If India plays its cards right, America's brand new weapon could simply fizzle out.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 01 Nov 2018 04:16

How India's Modi Chose Moscow's S-400 Missiles, Defied Trump and Spurned Israel
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/.pre ... -1.6577325

Dated - October 24, 2018

By Shrenik Rao - A fellow at the University of Oxford's Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and a graduate of the London School of Economics, Shrenik Rao is a digital entrepreneur and filmmaker. Rao revived the Madras Courier, a 232-year-old newspaper, as a digital publication of which he is the editor-in-chief.

To counter China's growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region, the U.S. needs India as much as India needs the U.S.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 01 Nov 2018 04:19

US likely to give waiver to India's S-400 missile deal after some bilateral turbulence: Experts
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 404902.cms

By Rajat Pandit, Dated - October 28, 2018

But the jury is still out. The presidential waiver for the S-400 deal, if and when it's granted, will come with caveats, say experts. One, the Trump administration will need a transactional quid pro quo in terms of a major Indian defence deal for the US. Two, India will have to visibly demonstrate a strategic decision to progressively reduce its dependence on Russian weapon systems. Three, if India goes in for another big arms deal with Russia, like the impending lease of a second Akula-class nuclear-powered submarine for over $2 billion, it will further muddy the waters. "Repeated waivers will be tough," said an expert.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52569
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby ramana » 01 Nov 2018 05:15

All these massa poodles are make soothing noises after the threats made before the deal was inked.


In TOI the threat is still there in red! And the pro quid quo demand

There is something sinister in that which makes them sell unwanted planes to India.

Akula is on its way.


Rakesh,
Put a google map from east of Africa to japan and post it here.
Will point out whats happening.

And home work read up Mahan.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7252
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Prasad » 01 Nov 2018 11:30

del.
Thanks Trikaal
Last edited by Prasad on 01 Nov 2018 19:40, edited 1 time in total.

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 544
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Trikaal » 01 Nov 2018 15:23

Prasad wrote:Wow that Rakesh Simha article. Not an ounce of shame! "Please don't sanction ud because we are going to buy more stuff from you" with some bluster thrown in. Not one word about making things on our own and instead advocating lurching from one side to another learning nothing from the very Russian example he quotes. Talk about a lack of independent thought.

Umm, did u not read the article? More specifically under the sub-heading 'Sanctions:Silver lining'? He talks about exactly that!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36299
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby SaiK » 02 Nov 2018 01:07

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201811 ... lications/

How Ruble purchase goes orthogonal to CAATSA? any pointers here?

---
x-posting in "understanding maasa" dhaaga

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 03 Nov 2018 11:53

Rupee-Ruble trade is a very positive thing not just limited to Defence purchase but even for general trade. We used to have Rupee-Ruble trade back then with SU and our two way trade was very high.

Using USD or for that matter any intermediate currency is a big bottle neck considering India and Russia can have a high trade volume with fully closed cycle trade and Indian Economy growing at 7 % YOY this trend will get better for both parties.

Removing the constrains of USD would also mean both parties can trade more and trade freely

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Viv S » 03 Nov 2018 22:42

SaiK wrote:https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201811011069424164-s400s-for-india-in-rubles-implications/

How Ruble purchase goes orthogonal to CAATSA? any pointers here?

The Rupee-Ruble system is a means of bypassing US sanctions (and the SWIFT system) on Rosoboronexport, and enabling payments for the S-400 to be made.

Its workable for limited amounts but as a permanent trading system it has serious limitations for the simply reason that the rupee, being an inflationary currency (which is actually a good thing for a developing country like India), cannot serve as a long term repository of value.

Simply put, Russia is a net exporter of goods to India to the tune of $6-7 billion annually (primarily minerals & weapons) and whatever proportion of that is held in rupees, will shrink in real terms by maybe 3-4% annually (depending on currency movements).

One way around that is for Russia to invest that sum back in India, either through financial instruments (like gilt-edged/sovereign bonds), or FDI. Another is to boost imports from India. The potential for FDI is limited by the lack of commercial interaction between the two countries while boosting imports is difficult for similar reasons. Bonds are fine but there's a limit to how much debt the GoI is willing to issue and how much is available on the open market.

Valuations in trade in any case will continue to be benchmarked against the USD.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3027
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby kit » 06 Nov 2018 22:18

Rakesh wrote:US likely to give waiver to India's S-400 missile deal after some bilateral turbulence: Experts
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 404902.cms

By Rajat Pandit, Dated - October 28, 2018

But the jury is still out. The presidential waiver for the S-400 deal, if and when it's granted, will come with caveats, say experts. One, the Trump administration will need a transactional quid pro quo in terms of a major Indian defence deal for the US. Two, India will have to visibly demonstrate a strategic decision to progressively reduce its dependence on Russian weapon systems. Three, if India goes in for another big arms deal with Russia, like the impending lease of a second Akula-class nuclear-powered submarine for over $2 billion, it will further muddy the waters. "Repeated waivers will be tough," said an expert.


dont think Trump will be around by that time :mrgreen:

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 544
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Trikaal » 07 Nov 2018 00:53

Statements like "Repeated waivers will be tough to obtain" are self-defeating imo. The onus of providing a waiver is on US. This is a US law and the US better find ways of circumventing their own law if they want access to the second biggest market in the world. These statements are part of US propaganda and psychological warfare where they force us to make concessions for something which is our right.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 07 Nov 2018 12:11

Yes rightly said , this is US internal law they have to worry about how to give us concession and not us , They are going to loose Indian Arms market if they dont and not us , India holds the High Card in this game which forces US to give concession with verbal threats but they dont have much choice...Suck it or Leave it !

As far as Rupee-Ruble trade , the Central Bank of both countries will work on factors like Inflation , how Rupee/Ruble pegs against basket of Reserve Currency ( not just USD ) and will adjust the payment either quarterly,half yearly or yearly. There are other options too like using other reserve currency in Trade Euro , Yuan , Yen etc

But Rupee-Ruble Bilateral Trade is good for both the countries as India is a fast growing market and Russia is the largest natural exporter , Works out best for both , Something we used to do with SU and India trade.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 08 Nov 2018 11:11

....
Last edited by Rakesh on 08 Nov 2018 19:17, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: This article has already been posted above.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7308
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Russian Weapons & Military Technology

Postby Peregrine » 05 Dec 2018 02:46

We will work everything out: Mattis on India's purchase of S-400 defence systems – PTI

WASHINGTON: Defence secretary James Mattis has expressed confidence that India and the US would be able to resolve all issues related to India's purchase of the S-400 air defence systems + from Russia that could draw possible US sanctions.

India risked the threat of US sanctions when it agreed in October to a $5 billion deal to buy Russian missile systems.

India's purchase is subject to potential US sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), which deals primarily with countries having "significant transactions" with Russia, North Korea or Iran.

"We will work everything out. Trust me," Mattis told reporters on Monday as a journalist asked the visiting defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman about the missile deal and the possibility of US sanctions.

India needs a presidential waiver to get around the punitive CAATSA sanctions.

"We'll work all this forward. This is the normal collaboration and consultation that we have with each other," Mattis said in response to a similar question.

"India has been spent many, many years in its non-aligned status, and it has drawn a lot of weapons from Russia," Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon ahead of Sitharaman's arrival on Monday.

Russia's S-400 system, a mobile long-range surface-to-air missile system, made its debut on the world stage in 2007. The platform rivals Lockheed Martin's THAAD, or terminal high altitude area defense, system and Raytheon's Patriot system.

S-400 is known as Russia's most advanced long-range surface-to-air missile defence system.

China was the first foreign buyer to seal a government-to-government deal with Russia in 2014 to procure the lethal missile system. Moscow has already started delivery of an undisclosed number of the S-400 missile systems to Beijing.

Cheers Image

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7503
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Mort Walker » 05 Dec 2018 09:20

^^^Unkil is licking its chops to see under the hood of the S-400 when India and Turkey gets it. It is not a question of if, but a question of when and that will be when unkil, who's vast MIC resources, shall develop effective countermeasures.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Karan M » 05 Dec 2018 09:27

There is no evidence that India will expose anything regarding the S-4XX to Unkil or any other nation.

The US has in fact gone to significant lengths to prevent its export to Turkey or to India.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7503
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Mort Walker » 05 Dec 2018 09:56

Karan M wrote:There is no evidence that India will expose anything regarding the S-4XX to Unkil or any other nation.

The US has in fact gone to significant lengths to prevent its export to Turkey or to India.


The GoI will not, but individuals are a different story. Unkil has to protect its MIC, but if that doesn't work....

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Karan M » 05 Dec 2018 11:19

It would be ludicrous to to imply that Indian service members or otherwise will compromise the S-400 or any other asset.

If Indian service members and civilians can maintain the sanctity of Su-30 and Indian strategic assets for so long, they will equally ringfence the S-400. Rest assured on that front.

Which is exactly why Unkil is so eager to prevent these systems for entering into service. They know how hard and expensive it is to put expansive countermeasures in place and espionage is anything but guaranteed.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 21 Dec 2018 08:29

Our new found relationship with Amreeka is not going smoothly. Honeymoon is over, reality has set in. This is like marriage onlee :lol: And with Defense Secretary Mattis resigning today, their is a lot of political turmoil in Washington. This folks, is India's strategic partner vis-a-viv China.

Watch how few will spin this and blame India for this downward spiral. We purchased S-400, so it is India's fault. We are humming-hawing on American fighter aircraft production, so it is India's fault. We are too narrow minded to see the value of the strategic partnership with Amreeka! Shame, Shame! Tauba, Tauba!

Pentagon Moves India Office Out, Reduces Manpower
https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN ... mode=text#

If India is an important part of the new Indo-Pacific strategy of the United States, why has the Pentagon moved the India office out of the iconic building to a secondary address? Not only has the India Rapid Reaction Cell, which was launched with much fanfare in 2015, been shunted out of the Pentagon, its strength has reportedly been reduced from six officers to just two. It doesn’t make sense if the idea is to strengthen the defence partnership and make it a crucial to the future of a “free and open Indo-Pacific”. The downgrade is significant – from being right next door to the US defence secretary, the India office is now housed in a largely administrative building six miles away. The move was made on Nov. 1, according to insiders. No one seems to have protested or questioned the decision. Is that because there isn’t a high-level official willing to push the cause and fight the necessary bureaucratic battles? Or did no one of consequence notice as office managers juggled the desks around? Or is it because the dissatisfaction with the larger relationship – trade issues, India’s over compensation for other partners — beginning to infect the defence relationship?

The India cell had momentum when it was born, even a certain cache, I was told, with officers lining up to join. Just as in the State Department in the mid-2000s when the India desk became a coveted place to work. Above all, in the vast bureaucracy that is the Pentagon, the India cell signalled New Delhi’s importance as a defence partner and a major buyer of US equipment. Keith Webster, director of Pentagon’s office of international cooperation, led the team as it worked on all ongoing initiatives, especially those under the Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI). The idea was to ramp up the “operational tempo,” he had said then. Webster was deeply knowledgeable about India’s complexities. He was also patient but most importantly, he enjoyed the complete support of Ash Carter, the former defence secretary and Frank Kendall, the under secretary of defence. The Carter-Kendall-Webster trio worked seamlessly and was effective in pushing the India relationship forward. It was Carter’s idea to create the first ever country specific cell to focus the mind and overcome the usual bureaucratic paralysis that can stymie the best of intentions.

Carter helped change Pentagon’s mindset on technology transfer to India, shortened the interminable review process and removed India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation from the “entities list” to allow cooperation. Carter, Kendall and Webster are all gone and it seems the India cell become an orphan no senior official wanted to embrace. To be sure, defence secretary Jim Mattis has been extremely vocal and positive on India but it seems after him there is no senior management person to push the whole panoply of initiatives. Mattis has tried hard to shield India from the dreaded sanctions law called CAATSA by lobbying for a waiver from the US Congress. He was warm and effusive as he welcomed defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman last week, and all but suggested India won’t come under sanctions for signing the S-400 deal with Russia.

So dedicated was he to ensuring the success of Sitharaman’s first visit, he reportedly arrived a full half hour early at the Smithsonian’s Freer and Sackler Gallery where he was hosting a dinner for her complete with a military band. Mattis, widely respected in India, has a lot on his plate and who knows how long he will stay given the constant churn in this administration. He is believed to have a contentious relationship with John Bolton, the national security adviser. What about the successors of Kendall and Webster? They are — Ellen Lord is under secretary for acquisitions, and Tina Kaidanow, director for international cooperation.

Kaidanow retired from the State Department as the head the political-military bureau and was key on arms transfer issues. Lord’s background may hold some clues on the bureaucratic disinterest in the India cell. Before joining the Pentagon, she was president and CEO of Textron Systems, a major defence contractor and maker of Bell helicopters. Textron was fined $300,000 by the Indian defence ministry earlier this year for failing to meet the tough offset commitments on a $257-million deal to supply precision guided cluster bombs to the Indian Air Force. Textron decided to wind down its operations in India. With such “direct” India experience and the mandate to sell more and more weapons, Lord must be working hard to gin up enthusiasm.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 22 Dec 2018 10:20

Defence Secretary James Mattis’ exit leaves India exposed in Washington
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2018/12/ ... -exit.html

Over the preceding decade, the US has become India’s biggest defence supplier, logging $15 billion in sales of C-17 Globemaster III and C-130J Super Hercules transporters, P-8I Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft, CH-47F Chinook heavy lift choppers and AH-64E Apache attack helicopters. Now Washington is pushing for another $10 billion worth of sales of 114 F-16 Block 70 fighters, 57 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighters and 22 Sea Guardian drones.

So now Ajai Shukla has already made up his mind on which OEM should win the IAF contest for 110 fighters and then sheepishly puts the onus on Washington. Why deny Boeing a chance at 110 fighters for the IAF? :) And in the same vein who should win the naval fighter contest as well.

For a person who criticized the Prime Minister in unilaterally changing the Rafale deal from 126 fighters to 36 fighters, this is an amazing about face! What ever happened to the DPP process that he so eagerly quotes from? Can the IAF decide please?

He has already decided on the cost also - only $10 billion for 110 F-16 Block 70s, 57 F-18E/F Block IIIs and 22 Sea Guardian drones. In which fairly tale world does he live in? I would love to know how he came to this hilariously low ball figure.

With Mattis lobbying vigorously for India, the US Congress legislated a waiver from CAATSA. Mattis strongly supported New Delhi’s argument that India’s large arsenal of Russian weaponry did not allow it to make a clean break.

Relying on a stable American foreign policy is not a cheque India can cash at the bank. That cheque’s bounces from time to time and it’s intrinsic value changes from one Adminstration to the next.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3304
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby arshyam » 22 Dec 2018 12:11

This thread amply demonstrates why any talk of stretegeric paartnersheep is all hawa onlee. And hopefully serves as a cautionary tale for future pappi-jhappi with some other US admin.

I'd once again repeat Kissinger's maxim: "to be America's enemy is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal". We have so far just avoided the latter eventuality, and hopefully stay that way.

Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Chinmay » 22 Dec 2018 12:34

Rakesh saar, if we are getting 110 F-16s, 57 F18s and 22 Sea Guardians for 10 billion, I would sign the cheque tomorrow :lol: :lol: :lol:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 01 Feb 2019 09:39

S-400 deal a proof of India-Russia ties: Russian Ambassador to India

Full Interview here https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 131647.ece

Let’s talk about bilateral ties. India recently said that it will go ahead with the S-400 missile defence system deal with Russia despite American pressure. What is the current status of the deal? When Russia is expected to deliver the systems?


The deal was done, and the first delivery, as far as we understand, will start by 2020 — may be earlier, but not later, definitely — and it will continue for three to four years. This is a very large deal, it’s about $6 billion. This would be valuable contribution to the security of the Indian air space and number two, this will be a proof of the special nature of the ties between India and Russia. Russia is not very much concerned about the influence of U.S. sanctions. As far as Russia is concerned, our relationship with India is independent, irrespective what a third party might say, Americans or anybody.

But will India and Russia face problems of payment because of American sanctions?


There were some problems over working nature, to be frankly. Due to the enormous size of the deal, it’s not easy to make the payment of an amount as big as $6-7 billion. But recently, both parties, Russia and India, came together to develop a practical solution involving banks of two sides and national currencies. This is what I could say about it. So a practical solution is there and it started working. So as far as the problem is concerned, it’s no more. Rather, it is about building the experience, the habit of payments in national currencies.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7348
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Rakesh » 24 Feb 2019 05:59

CAATSA 2.0 appears to take shape in the form of DASKA (Defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression) :roll:

The bill has not been passed yet....

Proposed ‘sanctions from hell’ against Russia may curb Trump, but won’t help US rule the world
https://www.rt.com/news/451505-new-us-r ... explained/

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 06 Mar 2019 10:05

Surprisingly now SD has warned Turkey a NATO Allay of Sanctions and re-assesment of F-35 if it goes ahead with S-400 purchase which the Turkey PResident says he would do so

Turkey’s Purchase of S-400 to Result in Reassessing F-35 Program - US State Dept


https://sputniknews.com/military/201903 ... a-program/
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - The United States has warned Turkey that its planned purchase of the Russian S-400 air defence system would put at risk Ankara’s participation in the F-35 jet program and could lead to Washington imposing sanctions on Ankara, US Department of State spokesperson Robert Palladino said in a press briefing.

"We've clearly warned Turkey that its potential acquisition of the S-400 will result in a reassessment of Turkey's participation in the F-35 program and risk other potential future arms transfers to Turkey, as well as lead to potential sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act," Palladino said on Tuesday.

Palladino noted that the US position regarding Turkey potentially obtaining S-400 systems has not changed and Washington would like to work collaboratively on the issue of air defence systems with Turkey.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 06 Mar 2019 11:10

Looks like Arm Twisting of Turkey continues from from SD and now by US Military

Top US general in Europe: Don’t give Turkey F-35 if they buy Russian system

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 08 Mar 2019 22:39

Pentagon acting spokesman Charlie Summers pledged "grave consequences" for Turkey, a NATO ally, should it buy the S-400. Specifically called out that Turkey will not be allowed to have either F-35 or Patriot as a result.

https://twitter.com/AaronMehta/status/1 ... 6199133185

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 08 Mar 2019 22:42

The extend to which US can arm twist its oldest NATO allay is amazing , A single Sale of S-400 as a sovereign nation not even integrated with NATO system is considered so great a threat that they will not get F-35 and Patriot

If they treat their oldest NATO allay in such a way how will they treat others ........Time for US policy maker to think that threatening any sovereign nation would only make the nation determination stronger.


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 08 Mar 2019 22:45

Amid fear of US sanctions, India continues military purchases from Russia

Notwithstanding fear of sanctions by the United States, India is going ahead with a series of defence deals with Russia. In the recent months, New Delhi has expressed confidence in its old and trusted ally by concluding an over half a dozen military procurement agreements. Latest in the series is a $3 billion deal to lease a third nuclear-powered submarine. The agreement was signed in New Delhi on Thursday and the submarine would be delivered to the Indian Navy by 2025.

In the last few years, it was observed that the US is selling huge defence platforms to India. In the last ten years, Washington has sold weapons worth $18 billion to India that includes Apache and Chinook helicopters, C-17 and C-130 transport aircraft, and M 777 ultra-light Howitzers among others. However, the United States and India are also working closely to continue the strategic partnership, as for the first time, both countries conducted its 2+2 dialogue between the foreign affairs and defence ministers of both sides in New Delhi.

According to the US law—Countering America's Adversaries through Sanctions Act (CAATSA)—the country can impose sanctions on any country that has "significant transactions" with Iran, North Korea or Russia.

But in last one year, New Delhi has reimposed its confidence in Moscow. It is notable that 70 per cent of Indian military equipment are of Russian-origin.

In October last year, India had gone ahead with signing the $5.43 billion deal with Russia for five S-400 Triumf missile shield systems. The game changer S-400 ‘Triumf’ long-range air defence missile system has the capability to destroy incoming hostile aircrafts, missiles and even drones at ranges of up to 400 km. Only Russia and the US have such long range modern air defence system. Each system of S-400 includes a command and control centre, a 3D phased array acquisition radar, optional tracking radar and firing units with associated multi-mode engagement radar. Experts claim that the acquisition radar can not only detect and track up to 300 targets within a distance of 600km but also can engage 36 targets at one point.

Soon after S-400, India also went ahead signing a $950 million deal to supply two frigates directly from Russia and a contract to build two more at Indian shipyard.

Moreover, India and Russia have recently concluded an inter-governmental agreement (IGA) for 200 helicopters estimated to cost over $1 billion. As per the deal, 60 helicopters will be imported from Russia and at least another 140 will be built in India by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) with technology transfer.

Only last month, India and Russia signed an intergovernmental agreement to jointly manufacture Russian origin AK-203 7.62 mm rifles at the state-owned Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) facility in Uttar Pradesh. Explaining the details of the agreement, 40,000 AK-203 rifles will be directly imported for the Indian Army over the next few months, following which the joint venture is expected to manufacture 70,000 units per year until the entire contract is completed under New Delhi's 'Make in India' initiative.

Besides concluding multiple deals, procurement of a new squadron of Sukhoi 30MKI jets is under process alongwith advanced talks on an additional squadron for MiG 29 UPG fighters. In order to close the gap in its combat squadron strength, IAF will be procuring at least 18 Su-30MKI and 21 additional MiG 29K in coming months.

Procurement of Russian origin Igla-S system of very short range air defence missiles system worth $ 1.5 billion for the Indian Army is also at an advanced stage and Russia became the lowest bidder in the global tender. The deal is presently at contract negotiations stage.

The issue of payments and money transfer between the two nations came as a major roadblock, but authorities claim that the problem has been addressed. Both sides have agreed to use the national currencies for payments (rupee-rouble exchange).

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7479
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby brar_w » 08 Mar 2019 23:14

Austin wrote:
If they treat their oldest NATO allay in such a way how will they treat others ........Time for US policy maker to think that threatening any sovereign nation would only make the nation determination stronger.


I don't think that the US is threatening anyone. The Turks were accepted into the F-35 developmental program as one of the partner nations. It is in US sovereign interest to evaluate the relationship and determine whether the elevated status of the relationship is still justified. At the end of the day bi-lateral ties are determined by each nation based on its assessments of where their national interests lie.. The Turkish industry has benefited to the tune of billions with their involvement in US programs both in the JSF and earlier in the F-16 and numerous others. If they are going to risk that then some of the onus is on them as well, not just the US. For this reason the US-Turkey relationship as it exists now cannot be used as a template to evaluate other bi-lateral relationships.

With respect to the US-India relationship, the expectation of this sort of relationship does not exist. India as a soverign nation has always exercised its options to make strategic decisions across the geopolitical spectrum whether that is buying from the US or Russia. With the Turks this has not been the recent case so there is a change in behavior that will naturally impact how close the Mil-Mil and MIC-MIC ties are. Not evaluating those in light of new developments would be dereliction on the part of the US government. If the US government determines that the exclusive strategic proximity enjoyed by Turkey no longer exists and as such they should not be extended those same Mil-Mil or MIC to MIC partnerships then its well within their rights. Turkey can buy S-400, S-500 or S-600 and Su-57 if they want, it is their right as a sovereign, but then it also the US right in a bi-lateral partnership to re-evaluate to what extent it allows turkey into its sensitive weapon system developmental programs especially since when entry into those programs were allowed no such dynamics existed (a sharp contrast to the US-India relationship where it is well established that a strong India-Russia relationship both exists and is in India's interests so there are little illusions of strategic partnership exclusivity as existed with Turkey).

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 28 Mar 2019 10:22

US working with India to provide alternative to Russian missiles: Pentagon

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 027_1.html

The US is working with India to provide potential alternatives to S-400 air defence systems that New Delhi has decided to purchase from Russians, a top Pentagon official said on Wednesday.

India inked an agreement with Russia in October last year to procure a batch of the missile systems at a cost of Rs 40,000 crore. India went ahead to seal the deal notwithstanding the US' warnings against it.

There were apprehensions about the payment mechanism for the deal in the wake of the US sanctions against Russia.

"We are very keen to see them (India) make an alternative choice. We're working with them to provide potential alternatives (to S-400)," Randall Schriver, Assistant Defence Secretary for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs told lawmakers during a Congressional hearing.

Responding to questions on the potential sanctions on India for making such a purchase from the Russians, Schriver said, "it would be an unfortunate decision" if New Delhi chose to pursue S-400 from Russia.

"Of course, we have the (CAATSA) legislation hanging over all of that," he said referring to the punitive CAATSA legislation that imposes sanctions on countries that purchase substantial military equipment from Russia.


Schriver said CAATSA legislation is not designed to be in impediment in the growing strategic partnership that the US has with India.

"It's designed to impose cost on Russia, consequence to Russia. One way or the other, we want to work through it because India is an emerging partnership for us," the top Pentagon official said.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 28 Mar 2019 10:39

“The S-400 is a computer. The F-35 is a computer. You don’t hook your computer to your adversary’s computer and that’s basically what we would be doing,” said Katie Wheelbarger, acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1R20AY

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 28 Mar 2019 10:41

Seems now the dots are connecting , US anticipates F-35 future sale to India but does not want India or any country that operates S-400 to buy F-35.

They they want any interoperability of systems with S-400 , Hence insisting on US providing Alternative system to India ( compliant to F-35 )

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby Austin » 29 Mar 2019 10:45

US Senators table bill to stop transfer of F-35 jets to Turkey unless it ditches S-400 deal

US senators have proposed a bipartisan bill to make good on Washington's blackmail of Turkey – by halting the transfer of 100 agreed-upon F-35 jets until Ankara tears up the deal with Moscow to buy S-400 air defense complexes.
The bill on limiting the transfer of F-35 stealth fighter jets to Turkey was introduced by Republican Senator James Lankford, and co-sponsored by Republican Thom Tillis and Democratic Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Chris Van Hollen on Thursday.

The draft of the bill states that "no funds may be obligated or expended" to transfer the batch of the F-35 aircraft to Turkey or intellectual property and technical data related to its operation and maintenance until a written certification is provided to Congress that Turkey "does not plan or intend" to go ahead with the delivery of the cutting-edge Russian S-400 surface-to-air missiles.

The lawmakers claim the purchase of the Russian-made weapons by Turkey would "endanger the integrity" of NATO and "result in a significant impact to defense cooperation" between Washington and Ankara. The military cooperation between Turkey and Russia deals a blow to the US own security, Shaheen argued.

"The prospect of Russia having access to US aircraft and technology in a NATO country, Turkey, is a serious national and global security risk," she said.

Pentagon has been piling pressure on Ankara in an attempt to dissuade it from buying Russia's famed S-400 Triumpf air defense systems, threatening it with sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). The newly-introduced bill demands that Trump "faithfully execute" the provisions of the act.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3304
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby arshyam » 29 Mar 2019 19:03

Austin wrote:US Senators table bill to stop transfer of F-35 jets to Turkey unless it ditches S-400 deal

"The prospect of Russia having access to US aircraft and technology in a NATO country, Turkey, is a serious national and global security risk," she said.

The sheer arrogance has to be seen to be believed. Best part is that this person would not realize how she sounds, as in the amriki mind, it's an article of faith that what's good for them is good for the world, and vice versa.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7479
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: CAATSA...An Oxymoron?

Postby brar_w » 29 Mar 2019 19:20

arshyam wrote:

The sheer arrogance has to be seen to be believed. Best part is that this person would not realize how she sounds, as in the amriki mind, it's an article of faith that what's good for them is good for the world, and vice versa.


I don't think it is at all. Just as Turkey has its sovereign right to choose where to source its defense systems from, the US too has its right to decide whether it should treat a former very close ally with the same degree of technology and business (F-35 is a lot about shared business opportunities for Turkish OEM's for the next decades) partnerships if it sees the ally move closer to one of the US's main competitors. The US can definitely keep on pretending that nothing has changed and treat Erdogan's Turkey just the same as it would have treated Turkish-US relations a decade or more ago when Turkey was made a partner on the program but that would be quite stupid imho just as continuing to sell F-35As to Turkey would be a bad idea had they purchased Chinese Command and Control or network systems. The US Military and national security community views Russia and China as their main competitors so it is natural that uniformed officials and many politicans and retired officials would be against pretending to treat Turkey as if nothing has happened and it has not moved closer into the orbit of one of them.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/euro ... an-system/

As I have written in my earlier posts, the US-Turkish relationship resulted in the F-16 agreements with massive Turkish involvement in sustainment and modernization of that program, and the same arrangement was continued on the F-35 but with additional partnerships between US defense OEM's when it came to aircraft component production for the global F-35 fleet. When these deals were struck, Turkey was a solid US NATO ally. Have those things changed since then? Yes, Turkey is now buying strategic air-defense systems from Russia which the US considers one of its 2 great power competitors. Why the hell should US politicians continue to treat the US-Turkish relationship the same way given those dynamics? Better to cancel Turkey's partnership, take those F-35As and give them to other partners and spread the industrial work around Europe IMHO.

As I said earlier, this is different with relationships with other Non-NATO allies where ties with Russia are priced in to the bi-lateral relationships so you cannot take the current US Turkey relationship and apply that to India-US or US-Egypt relationship for example.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests