End User Agreement : India's capitulation to US interests ?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 16:02

pgbhat wrote:Until we don't have indigenous technology we will have to put up with crap from sellers. We have a choice NOT to buy from US.

Its one thing to put up with crap when you are needy, in todays world its a buyers market out and out in Mil Space.

And then there's putting up with crap and jumping into a tubful of it on our own free will and calling it vanilla ice cream

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 21 Jul 2009 16:32

This will happen if US inspection team decides to visit. I dont think India needs it. US is aiming something very high in horizon which will happen sooner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojhri_Camp

There was speculation that the explosion was done by Pakistani agents to cover up a pilferage of the weapons stocks, including Stinger missiles.[4] The true cause of the explosion remains a mystery.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 21 Jul 2009 16:40

Many here must be familiar with how the West does deals. All this morally high sounding laws passed by the windbags of the US congress are for domestic political compulsions. Any american or western corporation will drop onerous terms and obnoxious conditions if the competition can provide the same stuff and it means a lot of money.

As explained by many here, the US does make some neat stuff that we would love to have. The only real solution to non-dependence on these modern day robbers that are arms exporting countries is to make the stuff ourselves. At least all the really really important stuff.

If the GOI has a plan to do that, these things can be handled. The US has these conditions, the Russians resort to blackmail like they have done in the case of Gorshkov. So no one is a saint out there. If we want something really badly, we will take it from the US with these conditions.

We must have faith that India will know how to drive a hard bargain on such matters. If the US insists on this condition for the MRCA deal, and the others dont, who is going to loose out? On the other hand India can use this apparent "willingness" to drive a hard bargain with others. Money talks.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 16:48

Raja Ram wrote:The US has these conditions, the Russians resort to blackmail like they have done in the case of Gorshkov. So no one is a saint out there. .

Raja Ram jee, there is no comparison between the EUM and the Groshkov deal whatso ever. The G deal is a cover to slip in 2 Akulas as well as most possibly 4-6 backfires. As such these are such high ticket items (and with out any EUM what so ever) that we cant even think of engaing anyone else for in forseeable future.

Even the G delay as a stand alone has caused the Rusi admin to come down heavily on their own, even when they know that the head of India now is probably more interested in what are their fierce competitors anyway to an extent on fawning over them.

Contrast this with US EUM (please see prior incidents) where US would probably want to use Indian ships and ports in exchange for a bunch of 1980s tech.

While I am completely for indigneisation, the pain we have to suffer for the most trivial of US equipment and then the resulting loss of operating space is unbelievable -- but for Arian space and the French, US would have made sure ISRO closed down with the amount of pressure they had and the lack of cooperation they still give.

Heck the rust bucket trenton which was tossed across the wall came with so many issues and has killed two Indian naval sailors already.

And now to top it all we have EUM.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 21 Jul 2009 16:53

Sanku,

My point is that even the enlightened, brilliant economist, statesman PM of ours signs up this EUVMA thingy, this will matter only if we buy stuff. With this condition hanging like a democles sword, the real users, namely, the RayC Sir variety will use this to effectively scuttle any purchase of US maal. It will also give the indegenous industry a lift by giving them a non-technical advantage of buying desi maal.

Going by several examples like Arjun, Akash, Tejas et.al, sometime our friends in OG and Light Blue/Gray need more such encouragement to consider desi maal rather than sexy US maal. These friends may like these US toys but they sure as hell dont want pokey US goras inspecting them.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 16:59

Raja Ram jee, I dont think the opinion of our friends in OG and other colors will matter a whit, just as Kakodakar was forced into taking a position much against it initial position (although he did try to limit the damage) and as MoDs current ranting were given a short shrift be arranging that MK Antony not be around when the declaration was made.

At SeS the enlightened soul pretty much over rode all the exsiting establishment views single handedly.

I see your hopes as misplaced.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 18:01

So it hasn't been signed.

One explanation could be that the CCS, MOD and the various services need to be consulted before a final signature.

The GOI has been very cautious with the nuclear deal. As of today, not one of those reactors has been placed under safeguards. India has not signed the agreed Additional Protocol and submitted its facilities list to the IAEA. It appears that the negotiations with the US regarding reprocessing have delayed this.

Similar caution wrt the EUMA?

All the talk about willingness to sign NPT yet the AP hasn't been signed and it seems, neither has the EUMA.

It is a buyer's market? Tell that to every country in the world that buys US equipment. They all have to sign an EUMA. Problem with forward bases? It seems that the inspections can be done at a time and place of India's choosing. Singapore perhaps, or the Maldives.

The EUMA has nothing to do with the civilian nuclear plants. And BTW, what is the problem with the US inspecting the equipment in a power plant? These will be nowhere near any BARC military facilities. It will be US technology they are looking at, in a US built facility. There is nothing they can learn. They designed the stuff and would have been on site for years during construction. They can live on site as far as India cares. As long as that electricity flows.

India has already signed individual EUMAs for the VVIP jets etc. Are these periodic checks burdensome? Who wanted the Air Force 1 type gadgets? Is there a buyer's market for these?

All this

For what?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 18:19

Gerard wrote:It is a buyer's market? Tell that to every country in the world that buys US equipment. They all have to sign an EUMA.

Every country in the world? Surely there are countries which do not buy US equipment? Also many the countries which buy US equipment do so because that's the only equipment they can buy, for example a NATO country does NOT have the luxury of choosing a Russian system? Many other countries which buy US systems do so because that comes with other sweeteners for THEM

It is a buyers market only in context of India.

Problem with forward bases? It seems that the inspections can be done at a time and place of India's choosing. Singapore perhaps, or the Maldives.

Geradji you have not been following the thread. Surely flying a set of guns to Maldives every year is going to be such fun? Not to mention practical? And is the the intrusivens only with location and not with the unit?

India has already signed individual EUMAs for the VVIP jets etc. Are these periodic checks burdensome? Who wanted the Air Force 1 type gadgets? Is there a buyer's market for these?

An itemized EUMA is very different from total EUMA, also a VVIP civilian jet is different from a mil equipment. You could use Trenton as a example but this point has already been debated that this should be a case specific EUMA and we should beat down Americans to have it minimalistic under the love of lucre.

And coming to it do we really really need a Air force 1 from US of A and no one else?

As to it has not been signed yet -- well GoI has announced that in principle it agrees to sign. Why will it not sign? Some folks had that hope, at the time of Nuke deal, that Hyde act has the poison pills so GoI will not sign 123.

We all know how much of J18 got signed in the end.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 18:27

Every country in the world? Surely there are countries which do not buy US equipment? Also many the countries which buy US equipment do so because that's the only equipment they can buy, for example a NATO country does NOT have the luxury of choosing a Russian system?

Notice that I said "every country in the world that buys US equipment"

AFAIK, Greece is a NATO member. They have bought Russian equipment.

Russia and Greece are finalizing a contract on the delivery of 1,000 BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles to the Greek army...
Russian TOR-M1 air defense systems, Kornet and Fagot antitank weapons, as well as air cushion landing craft Zubr are in service with the Greek Armed Forces

And coming to it do we really really need a Air force 1 from US of A and no one else?

Do other nations make these gadgets?

a VVIP civilian jet is different from a mil equipment.

I would be more worried about the security of the PM's jet than a crate of ATGMs

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 18:38

Gentlemen, I have a request, let us not try it has not happened yet logic for EUM. GoI has made it clear that it will sign. We have EUMs in the past to see what EUM looks like.

Hoping that GoI will not sign a EUM or it will be somewhat different from India than it has always been is somewhat temporary.

We had the very same debate before Hyde act and before 123. Hyde act was exactly what US always has maintained and 123 was explicitly under the Hyde act.

Instead of being short termed about these let us discuss their impact etc. and future course.

And note considering possible future moves is !=

, even if the prediction is gloomy it does not mean one is whining. If one was to take this approach then nothing negative could ever be said and all would be great in future!!

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 18:44

There was much

then and accusations that Kakodar had sold out.

Yet he negotiated an Additional Protocol that, from reports, protected Indian interests.

Before the nuke agreement, India could buy not one gram of Uranium, not one bolt or screw for a nuke power plant. The NSG embargoed all.

Today fuel is being supplied. Reactor deals with Russia and France are being signed. Where is Hyde in all this?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2009 18:49

The so-called sell out in terms of an EUVA is very similar to the alleged sellout in the nuke deal...The EUVA enables the US to participate in every Indian "contest" vigorously..Which means that other suppliers, France or Russia, are given a level of competition that drives down prices to India's benefit...It is then upto India to choose whether the US equipment is best suite to our needs..imilarly, the Hyde Act and the concomitant deal made the US act as our sherpa in the NSG, getting us the keys to a hitherto closed door..It is upto us now to choose our partners..And we have done it - nuke contrcts have been signed with Russia, France, Kazakhstan..But not yet with the US!!!!

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 18:49

And I ask again, what exactly is the problem with the EUMA?

Does it in fact state that US origin weapons are to be used only in parades down Rajpath?
Has any EUMA stopped a US customer from using their weapons as they see fit?

Does the EUMA give India the right to select the place and time of the periodic inspections?
How then does this compromise security?

Is India not free to purchase equipment from any supplier willing to sell?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 18:53

Gerard wrote:AFAIK, Greece is a NATO member. They have bought Russian equipment.

Thanks for the correction, I do hope that you will not grudge that NATO members must largely buy equipment which is of NATO origin for reasons of interoperability and the fact that buying Soviet Union equipment till recently was not even an option.

Also all countries which currently buy US equipment were indeed part of US umbrella till recently, they were not independent entity in the manner India has always wanted to be.

I don't see, how a certain number of countries depending on US removes the fact that it is a buyers market overall.

In fact, that Greece could buy Ru equipment despite being a NATO member just goes to show that it indeed is becoming more of a buyers market as the old alliances and their restrictions become out of date.

And we were never allied in the first place.

And coming to it do we really really need a Air force 1 from US of A and no one else?
Do other nations make these gadgets?

What are these gadgets? Mostly electronics (both comms and warfare types) right? I dont see why not? After all, all the mil aircrafts have these now, right. Only a matter of integrating them with a passenger A/C. (Of course much easier to have a off the shelf product)

I would be more worried about the security of the PM's jet than a crate of ATGMs

Its not about a crate of ATGMs its about whats the intrusion into the IA for that crate and what is the attendant pain.

The H&D issue is of course always there.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 18:54

Gerard wrote:And I ask again, what exactly is the problem with the EUMA?

Gerard each of the point has been addressed before and yet awaits a counter argument and this is still a short thread.

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 21 Jul 2009 18:58

Gerard wrote:There was much then and accusations that Kakodar had sold out.

Yet he negotiated an Additional Protocol that, from reports, protected Indian interests.

Before the nuke agreement, India could buy not one gram of Uranium, not one bolt or screw for a nuke power plant. The NSG embargoed all.

Today fuel is being supplied. Reactor deals with Russia and France are being signed. Where is Hyde in all this?

The 'Hyde' may not be overt but be assured that US/PRC or some other benighted P-5/NSG member will bring up the inspections issue sooner or later, then we shall have a problem on hand. Things will have to be fine initially to lull all into believing that the deal was a good one, but be assured we are yet to see the sting that lies in the proverbial tail.
Why, things are already underway, as seen by the reprocessing issue raised at G-8; that specifically meant for India.
Also, IIRC, there were provisions to restrict nuke testing in the bill. Besides, this is MMS's deal, so be assured, just like his other actions, Indian position will be utterly compromised.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 19:00

whats the intrusion into the IA for that crate and what is the attendant pain.

If the inspection is burdensome, then India should just buy equipment from a non-US supplier.

If only the Americans make the desired equipment, then the attendant pain is necessary. Or the option of doing without the American stuff.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 19:04

IIRC, there were provisions to restrict nuke testing in the bill.

Yes there were. These do not bind India.

If India wishes to test, she shall test.

It is the IAEA that does inspections, not the US/Chinese. These inspections are not something new. India has had nuclear facilities under safeguards and IAEA inspectors running around for decades. The DAE is quite experienced at all this.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2009 19:12

EUVA and the nuke deal are similar casesin point...

EUVA enables US companies to compete vigorously in all Indian arms "contests"..By common sense, that would give by sheer competition a better terms of reference to the custoimer, ie, India...Then it is upto us to decide whether to buy US equipment or not..But the sheer presence of an American manufacturer will reate better terms for India in a market which is still extremely oligopolistic in nature...

Ditto for the nuke deal - the Hyde Act made the US act as our sherpa in the NSG and get us the exemption, opening hitherto locked doors...Thereafter we have signed up deals with France, Russia and Kazakhstan..Note not yet with the US!!!So it opened up an option for us, it is not incumbent on us to deal with the US...If we do, we do so if it suits us!

This is the way great powers interact, not with defensive "sarfaroshi ki tamanna' rhetoric, which we indulged in the '60s and '70s and '80s - which no one had any real time for..

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Jul 2009 19:14

Does anybody have any information on how often there were physical on-site inspections by the US on INS Jalashwa?

If there were any, were they of such nature, that they would constitute as intrusive, intelligence-gathering, and a cause of disturbance in the normal operations?

The main question is -
i) Is USA demanding the EUMA simply to conform with the US Laws and still to have a level playing field with its other competitors, or

ii) Does the USA intend to use these agreements in the future to subdue India's military options and doctrine?

If it is case ii) then either they would want to use it to gather valuable intelligence, or to prevent us from going to war with any of its allies, namely Pakistan.

One would have to look more closely at the actual agreement to see if that is possible? If it gives them too much leeway to meddle, then it is not good. On the other hand, if India can choose the place and time for such an inspection, then it does not conflict with our tactical interests.

One has to keep in mind, that it would not be in USA's interests to use these inspections just for the nuisance value, so these would be kept to as few as necessary. They wouldn't want to rub their client the wrong way!

Having the USA in any bidding for tenders for defense equipment would go a long way in bringing down the prices of the purchases. More competition is good. Secondly having a EUMA is good to improve acquisition speed.

I don't think, India would necessarily be buying mostly American from now on. The old strategic bonds also need to be tended to.

Our forces should get the best for the lowest price, as quickly and with as few strings attached as possible. If this EUMA improves on that, then it is good. The EUMA contributes to the first three goals. The question is does it contribute to the fourth goal as well. For that one would have to study the document.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 19:32

End-user pact with US is straight, in national interest: Govt

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 21 Jul 2009 19:44

OK ... now that we have had a pretty vigorous discussion about the EUM agreement, I would like the guru-log here to explain how the following scenario will work out:

India has bought tons of US equipment (F-18s, C-130s etc.)
India and Pak tensions suddenly shoot up due to another kargil like scenario.
This time India decides to teach Pakistan a lesson irrespective of world pressure.
Unkil decides to throw a spanner in the works by suddenly stating that they want to inspect their equipment under the EUM agreement.
India declines/stalls and goes ahead and uses the equipment against Pakistan anyway.

Now, what options will Unkil have? Will they impose sanctions against India de-barring us from any future weapons purchases? Will they be able to stop us from using these weapons against Pak during the above mentioned scenario? Will India's hands be tied due to this EUM?

Keeping aside the H&D issue (which as a jingo does rankle me as well

), I think if we can answer these sort of questions, we will be able to make a better judgement regarding the merits/de-merits of this agreement.

edited: Changed scenario from terrorist attack to kargil like keeping Abhi_G's point in view.

Abhi_G · Post by **Abhi_G** » 21 Jul 2009 19:58

^^^ Added to g.kacha's questions: where is China in the calculations?

Added later: g.kacha, sometime after the Mumbai attacks, Pranab Mukherjee said "no chances of war". Most likely some arm-twisting was going on in the background and as N^3 rightly said GoI does not have any interest in taking punitive actions anyway. Seems to me that compromise has already been made much much before. Will this new thing change the scenario, irrespective of whether the weapons are of US or non-US origin? Would not like this pessimistic approach but would like to be enlightened about any future very serious scenario, where we are severely crippled to act. So once again where is China in the calculations?

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 21 Jul 2009 20:05

If India buys any of the teens, will it be free to take part in joint exercises with Russian Air Force if India does that?

any objections from Amrika on that in EUMA?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Jul 2009 20:16

If US defence technology is so badly needed by India, then India cannot complain about the "costs" imposed by the "seller". The question from the Indian side, is "who" decides what is "needed" by "India"?

If US arms are the best and top-notch, then why is the "best" needed? Only if India is expecting either an aggressive attack in the foreseeable future from a power which can almost match US technology, but falls that crucial bit short to make actual US weapons the only superior ones needed to overcome such aggressive attacks.

How can technology of a third power almost match the US one but always falls that crucial bit short? Only if such a power is dependent, or has managed to reverse engineer, US technology which is either directly sold time-lagged (already obsolete or a "generation" back in US terms), or has been obtained through a fourth party and therefore necessarily out of phase with current US tech. Which such power is also likely to be the aggressor form Indian viewpoint? Two obvious popular candidates - TSP and TSC (Terrorist State of China - terrorist for all practical purposes as far as India is concerned). But then does GOI serisuly believes these two are capable of mounting such attacks in the near future? Is it guaranteed that the supposed superior US weapons will neutralize any, all or part of the advantages that these two might have/

However, how do we make sure that this time-lagged delivery is maintained by USA, for TSP and TSC into the future? Shouldn't there have been an "arrangement" "binding on all future govs" of the USA not to deliver components to named third parties that can neutralize the performance of systems sold to India, and banning all third parties excluding these two to sell such components to these two when sourced from USA?

I, for one, believe, that we allow the GOI to get away with a chain of arguments that is a vicious cycle. We don't have sufficient progress and indigenous capability therefore we need to get the best from others. Because we get them from others we do not need to invest, and incur costs in indigenous capacity building. Because we have not invested in the costs of indigenous capcity development, we have to get what we need from others.

The question really then reduces to who in India thinks and decides for India, as to what India "needs"? If in the perception of such a group, GOI has done what the group thinks, India needs, or India should think "it needs", then it is not a capitulation of India's interests. Because from this group's viewpoint, they are "India" themselves.

AnimeshP · Post by **AnimeshP** » 21 Jul 2009 20:21

Abhi_G wrote:^^^ Added to g.kacha's questions: where is China in the calculations?

Added later: g.kacha, sometime after the Mumbai attacks, Pranab Mukherjee said "no chances of war". Most likely some arm-twisting was going on in the background and as N^3 rightly said GoI does not have any interest in taking punitive actions anyway. Seems to me that compromise has already been made much much before. Will this new thing change the scenario, irrespective of whether the weapons are of US or non-US origin? Would not like this pessimistic approach but would like to be enlightened about any future very serious scenario, where we are severely crippled to act. So once again where is China in the calculations?

Abhi_G ... my scenario is a hypothetical one. Terrorist attack may not be the correct one (as you pointed out). It could be a Kargil like situation. The point I am trying to understand is, whether this agreement will stop India from taking punitive action against our "friendly neighbours" should GoI decide to do so? Will the arms of our forces be tied because of this agreement? Will GoI's hands be tied by this agreement when it is taking a decision to take action ?

Whether GoI develops the resolve to take punitive actions is a different question altogether.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Jul 2009 20:22

If India were a true "SuperPower"

India would do what the Soviet Union used to, what China does today, and what Pakistan has and always will do:

Sign anything and everything, nod head vigorously, bow a lot and say:

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

for every License Statement and Technology Proliferation Control Regime and Glowing Pu Cut-Off Treaty and Eye-Pee Treaty and Open Markets Treaty and Carbon Emission Control Treaty.

It will take the round-eyes/kufr etc. Snake_Oil Salesppl a while to put together all the "Ha!"s and come up with what they mean. The way things are going, let's see: F-18 production will be shipped to India? Boeing final assembly may be done in India. Or in China. The software for all the stuff will be written in India, and the electronics built in China (using Pakistani PhDs of course).

"Sanctions" take on a whole new meaning.

negi · Post by **negi** » 21 Jul 2009 20:39

Let us wait for the EUA text to come out ; until then lets hold our horses a bit (yeah... we have gone a bit overboard with this...) .Having said that a bit of anxiety in such matters is obvious and desirable.

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Jul 2009 20:45

narayanan wrote:The way things are going, let's see: F-18 production will be shipped to India? Boeing final assembly may be done in India. Or in China. The software for all the stuff will be written in India, and the electronics built in China (using Pakistani PhDs of course).

"Sanctions" take on a whole new meaning.

Too good jee too good!! I remember when Much Maligned Singh saab launched his reforms in 1990-91 then also he was alleged of selling out Indian economy (or whatever there was left of it in 1990-91) to IMF/World Bank.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Jul 2009 20:46

Probably as the EUMA Text has only been agreed upon and not yet signed, it will take some time, before it becomes public. That would be then on November the 24th when MMS visits BHO.

Perhaps one was not willing to sign the EUMA with a much weakened Clinton. BHO's signature on it would have some relevance. Until then the draft agreement would be whetted within the internal babucracy.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 21 Jul 2009 20:51

I for one dont understand what are we trying to protect here ? location of our airbases or deployment patterns ? Unkil can easily slip in an innocuous looking GPS chip in each of the aircrafts and they would have all the information that they need. The only thing that we can do to prevent this is to not buy equipment from unkil at all. But now that we have decided to buy it why all this hue and cry about EUA, did someone forget "dene waala ka haath har vakt upar hota hai"? Given this, IMO unkil wants to make sure that none of its electronics are reverse engineered or something, they definitely have better ways to keep tabs on our deployment/training and tactics and do not need a EUA for that.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 21:02

Gerard wrote:
whats the intrusion into the IA for that crate and what is the attendant pain.
If the inspection is burdensome, then India should just buy equipment from a non-US supplier.

If only the Americans make the desired equipment, then the attendant pain is necessary. Or the option of doing without the American stuff.

I have never understood this line of logic, if the only silver lining in the accursed document is that "we don have to buy from US if we sign"

Why sign? Since we are not going to buy from them anyway?

At least for the Nuke deal we needed their clout in NSG to get even partial waver which could be used for full transactions with others. (At which point I must add that I think India is kidding itself if they think that they can use NSG to be independent -- it is an extension of US)

Whats the big deal here? Let each deal have a EUM deliberation on its own merits?

And whats the mythical chimera that we are chasing now? In the Nuke deal it is clear that despite all the hoo haa all we will get is some nuclear fuel and an excuse (to give a lot of money to others to buy their reactors.)

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 21:07

suryag wrote:I for one dont understand what are we trying to protect here ? location of our airbases or deployment patterns ?

Oh there is no end to information which a set of physical inspector can collect as compared to just some sensors (even if more that GPS)

For example a physical inspection can reveal what ways as the aircraft (say) been used in, what are the possible ordinances that have been stocked for it.

A humar can guage war fighting doctrine, level of preparedness etc etc...

Tons...

Of course it can be carefully hidden and only a little attempted to be shown, just like Padmini was shown just a bit to Allaudin Khilji.

did someone forget "dene waala ka haath har vakt upar hota hai"?

Thats the whole point, people like me think we are the "dene wala" -- we are the ones paying from the hard labour of Indians and the expolation of its natural resources.

And still our "haath is neeche", the congress hand for all its flaws was never like this before?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 21:10

munna wrote:
"Sanctions" take on a whole new meaning.
Too good jee too good!! I remember when Much Maligned Singh saab launched his reforms in 1990-91 then also he was alleged of selling out Indian economy (or whatever there was left of it in 1990-91) to IMF/World Bank.

This one puny horse has been beaten to death more than what it is worth.

For one -- Shri Singh was not even the decision maker of any reform (tons of documented proof including interviews) and secondly there have always been allegations that there was A Mole helping US get the inside gen.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 21 Jul 2009 21:16

^^^ Well Sanku ji in that case let us treat ourselves as arrogant rich buyers and reduce the people who offer to sell us something to mere hawkers. What i was hinting at is the apologetic tone that our govt is coming up with, which makes us feel that they are showing reham on us and distributing khairat. Unlike the cold-war era we now have the financial muscle to throw in a couple of billion dollars extra for what we want, but the govt is determined to act penny wise ound foolish.

As for the information that an inspector can gather we should remember that we are dealing with aircrafts that house multiple computers and these can store practically anything and eveyrthing and also transmit it out if desired without our knowledge. I am pretty sure we are not going to put these aircrafts in rf shielded enmeshed rooms to block rf wavelenghts. If we really want to conceal things then go for a vetrivel type arrangement for the mission computers so that the brains are Indian while the muscle is american.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 21:20

suryag wrote:^^^ Well Sanku ji in that case let us treat ourselves as arrogant rich buyers and reduce the people who offer to sell us something to mere hawkers.

Yes, absolutely. We dont have to be rich buyers. We are buyers and thats rich enough for those who want to sell.

As for the information that an inspector can gather we should remember that we are dealing with aircrafts that house multiple computers and these can store practically anything and eveyrthing and also transmit it out if desired without our knowledge

No Sir, in many areas the human powers of intuition and experience based knowledge gathering far supersede anything that any computer may have, and then the computer has to some how pass back information.

No Sir I will not take that forward, I just dont think its remotely possible and let us at least disengage on that point.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 21 Jul 2009 21:27

I have never understood this line of logic, if the only silver lining in the accursed document is that "we don have to buy from US if we sign"

Why sign? Since we are not going to buy from them anyway?

Simple, just the entry of a US vendor is a game changing one in the equations of a contest...Its the presence of F18 with AESA that has made all the other vendors scramble to meet India's base requiremetn of an AESA..Imagine a sitation where the only competitors were Eurofighter, Rafale and Mig35 -would any of them be really interested in bending backwards to offer the AESA? TXN specific EUMs are cumbersome and very soon will take the seriousness out of US competition, therefore defeating the purpose..

And whats the mythical chimera that we are chasing now? In the Nuke deal it is clear that despite all the hoo haa all we will get is some nuclear fuel and an excuse (to give a lot of money to others to buy their reactors.)

Well, "some nuclear fuel" is what is keeping capacity utilisation of exising plants down..And buying "their" reactors - our standard model is the 220 MW - the Russians made it clear that the Kudunkulum would be the last project they would do outside the "system"..Now every manufacturer is bending over backwards to make reactorsfor India...Biggest gain of all is psychological from a geostrategic point of view..We gto the nukes, we tested, we asked the rest of the world to change their rules only for us, and we got most of what we wanted...That is a demonstration of playing high politics....Cribbing "sovereignty lost" for every piece of paper signed is a reflection of the India of the '60s and '70s - all talk and nothing else..

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 21 Jul 2009 21:31

Why sign? Since we are not going to buy from them anyway?

But by signing, you have the option to buy, especially if it is equipment that cannot be obtained anywhere else.

If there is comparable equipment available elsewhere, then the EUMA should be considered when the choice is being made. It may be better to buy from the French or others since the EUMA inconvenience will not be there.

But it is clear that there is a lot of equipment the Indian military wishes to buy from the US.
Well, there is a requirement for all that gee-wiz stuff in the glossy catalog - a signed EUMA.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 22:20

Gerard wrote:
Why sign? Since we are not going to buy from them anyway?
But by signing, you have the option to buy, especially if it is equipment that cannot be obtained anywhere else.

Well that option is always there, even when we dont sign, since one time deal can be made.

In fact sigining up front removes the pain and hence hides the cost, if it has to be done each time it will be a real and painful reminder for the Babu, otherwise something that can be forgotten.

I am sorry, the stated reason does not justify a I do not think a one time blanket signature IMVHO -- in fact I would say its the other way around.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jul 2009 22:23

somnath wrote:
I have never understood this line of logic, if the only silver lining in the accursed document is that "we don have to buy from US if we sign"

Why sign? Since we are not going to buy from them anyway?
Simple, just the entry of a US vendor is a game changing one in the equations of a contest...

Somnath refer to above reply to Gerard, one time blanket signature is not required for what you propose. On the contrary it seeks to strengthen the US bargaining position vis a vis others including India.

And whats the mythical chimera that we are chasing now? In the Nuke deal it is clear that despite all the hoo haa all we will get is some nuclear fuel and an excuse (to give a lot of money to others to buy their reactors.)

Well, "some nuclear fuel" is what is keeping capacity utilisation of exising plants down..[/quote]

Well we discussed this to death. The U shortage in India is artifically created. There is enough discussion around that. There is no real shortage.

Yes there is a point that we wont be able to buy external reactors. I am not sure if that is good thing still though. Enough of being a market for overpriced products.