Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV
Posted: 03 Apr 2022 13:40
Pratyush, agreed.
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
Ministers must be capable, empowered and focussed on a clear goal to do such things. That can only happen if there is no personality cult above them. Good leaders surround themselves with people better than them and let them take credit.Pratyush wrote:In the ultimate analysis, what he accomplished or how Indian public responded to him is meaningless.Cyrano wrote:Diploat or not his mission was to get India to do something its unwilling to do. Thats called diplomacy and he failed miserably at that and riled Indian people against his country.
What matters is what is India going to do about it. Because, if the western led economic order is allowed to continue as is. Then it has an absolute capacity to crush our strategic options.
I am disappointed that the finance minister has not taken this opportunity to come up with a plan to replace the western owned payment gateways in India in a time-bound manner.
I am disappointed that the petroleum minister has not taken any opportunity to open negotiations with OPEC to try and buy oil in Indian rupees. Start with 25 %, but make the start.
Unless India decides to stand for itself, it can kiss it's political and strategic independence goodbye. This is the bottom line.
one never said escalate, one only said that the required deterrence is already in place and those who need to take note have already done so.Rudradev wrote:In other words, your answer is escalation. India should escalate against a Chinese attack on LAC by retaliating in the Indian Ocean and as a last resort, nuclear posturing with Agni.chetak wrote:
AGNI
it's what scares the piss out of xi and the CCP.
When dealing with a nuclear armed rival, ukraine has shown the reality of what all these sabre rattlers fear the most and that fear has been cruelly exposed by the tucked tail response of NATO and the US.
The battle hardened IA of today is not going to be a pushover as the cheeni well know, no matter what the global times military experts' think. The inevitable Indian blockade of the malacca straits by the IN will be a humiliating slap to the cheeni "face". The IAF dimension which was, inexplicably and also spinelessly, not brought into play in 1962 will now be a major fulcrum and an integral part of the response. The CDS structures now in place have added to the cheeni list of major headaches
The entire stalemate situation on the LAC that is now staring the PLA in the face has split the cheeni establishment vertically with one side of the cheeni fearing the AGNI response if red lines are crossed.
The repeat of the 1962 option was never again open to the cheeni. At the time, India was led by a cabal of traitorous scum and commie degenerates, both in and out of uniform.
where the cheeni still hold the decisive upper hand is in the vital media and cyber warfare space
But how well would such an escalation go when we are under sanctions from the US bloc and the Kremlin isn't returning SJS's calls, let alone sending us spares or ammunition, because Xi has a gun to their head. (That is the scenario outlined in my post).
Not even the best trained and motivated armed forces can fight for long when equipment is stripped away by attrition, ammunition is exhausted, fuel is hard to secure, and nothing is being replaced by our suppliers. Add in the fact that in this scenario, our broader economy will also be reeling from multilateral sanctions by the West (unlike Putin, we won't have Xi to bail us out).
So yes, perhaps India's nuclear arsenal will be the first AND last deterrent against China if US sanctions India. But how effective a deterrent have India's nukes been against China's border actions since 2020? The Chinese seem to have calculated that we will never allow any response against border incursions to rise past the nuclear threshold.
His nomination is at risk because as mayor of Poop Angeles he deliberately looked the other way when his direct aid engaged in gay sexual harassment. If there is a lawsuit coming from the victim, then I would say it is unlikely. Right now it looks like there will be senators from both parties who will vote against him. I would say 40% probability of him being confirmed, and Dem senators are asking the administration to select someone else.Pratyush wrote:Has Eric Garceti actually been confirmed as an ambassador to India?
Thank you for your post and keep posting. Thankfully you're a moderator and anyone else would have been promptly banned.Karan M wrote: Sir if you are basing your assessment in part off of what's been posted on that twitter thread postulating an Indo Pak matchup all I will say is it was very optimistic and things, would likely not work out that way in a, real conflict. I have the deepest respect for the author and his professional assessment but things have moved pretty rapidly in the past few years.
Plus please do a neutral assessment of where China is today and the trend and you will quickly see we are already way behind and falling further behind every day.
Let me just bring the IAF to the table. We are at around 30 squadrons today. Assuming even a 70% sustained serviceability, a very high number, we can barely bring 21 squadrons to the fight against Pak or China. Let alone both. Add attrition thanks to our relative paucity of high end munitions unlike the Western AF and that means low level attacks will occur as will dumb bomb ones, and our vulnerability to high end SAM systems will rise by a huge amount. The sheer disinterest in arming the IAF is also evident from the fact we have a, mere 5 AEW&CS to face a two front threat. Around double that number are present with Pak alone, more than that with China. We lack IFR beyond 6 over stressed assets. In short the number of either us not enough to run sustained ops over two sectors let alone entire borders. For instance it takes three AEW&CS to maintain constant coverage over one sector without even considering mechanical failure or attrition. Now consider what a joke a five strong fleet is for our requirements and the follow on DRDO program for 6 platforms is also limited and further away given the program was launched so late. We don't show any seriousness in either imports or domestic replacement either. Our 6 IFR fleet is barely enough to run a few sector level ops. Now add serviceability to the mix.
The sheer nonchalance with which the budget shortfall has been taken is visible by the fact that years after induction, the DRDO EW suite for the MiG-29s was just ordered. We couldn't afford it despite the fact it was ready a couple of years back itself and the manufacturer was awaiting orders. No country would send its premier AD fighters up without EW. We did so, for years on end because we couldn't ge bothered to find 1400 Cr for saving assets and lives far more valuable.
Even now the Su-30 upgrade hasn't been progressed. The bulk of our fleet is at best parity with PRC gear and in the conservative case, has fallen behind their newer inductions (easily a hundred plus). Neither the GOI nor the IAF saw it fit to progress the indigenous radar upgrade with any seriousness. Uttam, an AESA radar developed on a shoestring budget by DRDO, which is then mocked for delays, is yet to be developed further for the Su30, IAF says they may think of it. In any other country such a shambolic treatment of its own R&D capability would be grounds for a thorough overhaul. Here, we are still talky talk with no firm road map or orders placed.
Plus, sadly, this Govt doesn't seem to want to spend a dime extra on hitech of any sort beyond re-juggling already scarce budgets between public and pvt sectors. Where is the jet engine program to reaplace the GE engines on the Tejas? Till they aren't reached, the IAF will remain wary of dependence on a fighter that can be grounded at Washingtons diktat.
The mere 36 Rafales are literally a drop in the bucket vs the PLAAF and PAF fighter fleet and highly vulnerable to decapitation strikes given only 2 AFB can handle them. If we miraculously save the airframes, precision CM/BM attacks will devastate the support infra. We neither funded the DRDO BMD system in time to accelerate it, nor did we purchase enough S400s. A mere 5 cannot protect us against both air and missile attacks.
Add to this the delay in placing Tejas orders, again budgetary indicating GOI disinterest. The line will be idle, IAF will receive trickle feed inductions till ramp up. No clear orders for Mk2 either.
And we are relying on five squadrons of Jaguars for which we are already running behind countries to get already hard to find spares.
This is the state of affairs after electing a nationalist Govt.
Limited interest in hard power beyond doing the basics like filling ammo reserves and streamlining processes. Our top talent has been put in the social justice programs whereas the programs that accelerate national growth like technology development are ignored. Without the latter, there will be no former. One can't run on services, taxing the middle class or the PLI type schemes alone. We are critically dependent on tech from abroad and wont even back the winners like DRDO's missile, sensor complex or fix the gaps (propulsion, metallurgy) or semiconductors (IISCs mere Rs 2.5K GaN proposal has been kicked down the road to the new ISEM plan). We seem to think the Govt only exists for facilitating trade/business/dhandho and running social service. More pragmatic Govts like France/Israel fund their MIC and derive industry/society wide benefits from exporting denied items like thermal imaging detectors (state funded R&D available to domestic suppliers alone).
Since we are already in plain speaking mode, let me bring in the Army - most Indian tanks lack the ammunition to face off against higher end PRC gear. Its to our limited advantage the terrain prevents them from bringing their armor superiority to bear vs the bulk of our fleet, the obsolete T-72s. Their armor is weak, their guns obsolete.
Even against Pakistan they'd struggle against the T-80U, Al Khalid and the new MBT they just imported. Yes Chinese gear is usually of lower reliability etc but to count on that to always be the case is unwise (from our perspective).
We've fallen behind in loitering ammunition and advanced ATGMs too while the IA wasted everyone's time forcing the Nag through hoop after hoop ignoring its potential in the NE sector where ambient temperatures wouldn't stress its advanced seeker.
When it comes to AD, we've been desperate to even import VSHORADS and thanks to our broken processes were only willing to import the obsolete Igla S which the Russians are dropping. Merely because otherwise we'd have to retender.
Our procurement process mitigating against single vendor deals is totally broken. Nor are the services able to stipulate truly functional or modern requirements. The Ukrainians fighting the Russians today have better anti tank, anti aircraft gear in several cases, than we do. What's hilarious is domestic gear is stuck in endless trials whole we spend all our budget on emergency imports and GOI moves those amounts to the next fiscal, limiting Capex even more.
In artillery, the Pakistanis actually outmatch us in SPHs after picking up hand me down Italian units. We as usual penny pinched and bought a, mere 100 K9s and have acted as if we've arrived. The less said about the rest the better. In tube artillery, the ATAGS saga needs no elaboration.
The services have become adept at setting PSQRs which set off DRDO and its partners on a wild goose chase then to set GSQRs which were different enough to add years to the program and then ask for imports as stop gap measure. Now it's supposedly being changed but even so the legacy programs continue to be moneyed around with. No pvt firm would put up with the abuse DRDO has suffered and the DPSUs bar BEL, HAL don't even have significant R&D budgets or leeway to spend on it, focused as they are on returning dividends to the GOI.
I'll put just one last number here because its food for thought. In 2019, PLAAF had 600 4th gen fighters (IAF today has around 420). By 2021, US Intel estimated the number was 800-1100. Let's just think on that a minute. These are advanced fighters alone. Not IFR, nor sensors, nor EW. If we don't want to bankrupt ourselves and merely wish to deter, we have to wake up and fix our gaps. Now please consider how ridiculous our tom tomming about 36 Rafales appeared to such an adversary. And the only saving grace is China's focus on SCS. But they are now creating the infra to reposition their assets double quick. Here, thanks to budget shortfalls, IAF was struggling to build HAS.
Either ways we've fallen significantly behind the combined firepower of our adversaries and sooner or later, they may well choose to risk a conflict despite the damage they'd take from us in the process.
We have a long list there which I spent considerable time figuring out. The answers are also there but GOI seems to have no interest in pursuing straightforward answers.
We need to accelerate our domestic programs (would cost relative peanuts) and order existing gear on a priority basis. But it seems tokenism is the order of the day especially at the forces procurement level itself (buy a few hundred fancy items and consider it enough). Whereas it isn't.
I could go into more detail about our vulnerabilities but would prefer not to, on an open forum. I could mail you the details offline if you prefer. Either ways, IMHO, the situation has long become one of the gravest urgency.
Thanks Mort but nobody would be banned for a fact based post. It's where people postulate opinions as fact and get into name-calling "XYZ are traitors, shoot them" that's where moderator action comes into play.Mort Walker wrote: Thank you for your post and keep posting. Thankfully you're a moderator and anyone else would have been promptly banned.
Pratyush wrote:Chetak, you seem to be missing the argument entirely that there is considerable space between a limited conventional war and a nuclear exchange.
I would draw your attention to the Kargil war. Both India and TSP were nuke power's. Yet in a limited war India kicked TSP ass.
There's a reason for that. People on this thread are thinking how to avoid Indian getting it's ass kicked in the absence of external support.
In a way, India is where TSP was in 99. But we have self awareness that tells us what capability is required to prevent PRC doing to us. What India did to TSP during that war.
Nukes are meaningless to that equation.
Agreed. I am also concerned after the Uki-Rus tussle, brought about by the US Deep State (Ruthless, heartless, scheming bunch) using NATO as a disguise, have exposed how vulnerable the rest of the world really is. Payments, import/export, tools that we take for granted in IT (e.g. internet connection, search Google, facebook's whatsapp, Google play for Android, operating system, database systems, enterprise solutions), settlement of Forex, imports of Videshi maal are all built on shaky foundations. If GOI does not address these issues I am afraid we are in for subjugation of the colonial kind once again. We need a national program that can come up with alternates, we have all the talent in place to make it happen, just some vision, some funding and national laws to make them mandatory for India. Thambis Pitchai, Nadella, Krishna and other US Desi leaders when they retire can help in this endeavor. Phone communication is simply too important. No more appeasement nor just enough development we need to leapfrog ourselves with a total lack of faith in global systems (since they are subject to Sanctions). Complete Desi systems that we can use and have the rest of the world induct on a mutual basis. We see some movement in UPI in other nations like Nepal. But we need to tie up with Russia and other countries and declare independence from US based solutions. Going back to gold back securities for Banking is very important.Pratyush wrote: What matters is what is India going to do about it. Because, if the western led economic order is allowed to continue as is. Then it has an absolute capacity to crush our strategic options.
I am disappointed that the finance minister has not taken this opportunity to come up with a plan to replace the western owned payment gateways in India in a time-bound manner.
I am disappointed that the petroleum minister has not taken any opportunity to open negotiations with OPEC to try and buy oil in Indian rupees. Start with 25 %, but make the start.
Unless India decides to stand for itself, it can kiss it's political and strategic independence goodbye. This is the bottom line.
Have you or anyone tried contacting the Raksha Mantri’s office even the PMO and Fin Min (who was Def Min prior) to bring attention to this? I’m not saying they don’t know of the problem, but developments in China, Pak, Russia and US are very concerning. Atmanirbhar needs to get pushed harder with more funding with a separate CAPEX item in the budget.Karan M wrote:Thanks Mort but nobody would be banned for a fact based post. It's where people postulate opinions as fact and get into name-calling "XYZ are traitors, shoot them" that's where moderator action comes into play.Mort Walker wrote: Thank you for your post and keep posting. Thankfully you're a moderator and anyone else would have been promptly banned.
Exactly ... Even if the Govt. has plans, they don't want to reveal anything ...Pratyush wrote:This thread has become truly derailed. Thanks to the efforts of a few posters. Including this one.
However, the issues that Karan and Vidur are discussing are extremely relevant.
I understand that the government of India cannot make public the discussion about what it plans to do about the strangle hold of western systems over developing world.
I am afraid we are left to stew in our anxieties about the future course of action of the nation. Which is what we are seeing on this thread.
The secondary issue is the development of sufficient domestic industrial capacity to generate growth and employment for the youth of the nation. India has 30 states with chief ministers who have to pull together in the direction which increases industrial activities. We are not really seeing chief ministers pushing for industrial development in state's. This is the biggest problem in our current state of development.
The no import lists published by MOD is a step in the right direction. But unless the defense minister takes a public stand about no more imports of complete weapon systems. With an immediate effect, I am afraid not much will be accomplished.
Again this is OT to the thread.
Most likely that's what will happen looking at the demented executive ... He is being guided by State Dept on everything ... He does not know who is VP or First lady or whether Michelle Obama was VP or he was VP ...Mort Walker wrote:Cryin’ Chucky has declared defeat in the senate! Garcetti is NOT going to India and must remain in Poop Angeles. Hopefully he isn’t replaced with Dick Verma or Daleep Singh type.
OT true and i will stop here.Pratyush wrote:This thread has become truly derailed. Thanks to the efforts of a few posters. Including this one.
However, the issues that Karan and Vidur are discussing are extremely relevant.
I understand that the government of India cannot make public the discussion about what it plans to do about the strangle hold of western systems over developing world.
I am afraid we are left to stew in our anxieties about the future course of action of the nation. Which is what we are seeing on this thread.
The secondary issue is the development of sufficient domestic industrial capacity to generate growth and employment for the youth of the nation. India has 30 states with chief ministers who have to pull together in the direction which increases industrial activities. We are not really seeing chief ministers pushing for industrial development in state's. This is the biggest problem in our current state of development.
The no import lists published by MOD is a step in the right direction. But unless the defense minister takes a public stand about no more imports of complete weapon systems. With an immediate effect, I am afraid not much will be accomplished.
Again this is OT to the thread.
What makes it a lot worse is that the negligence of R&D is often excused by urgent procurement needs, which btw are never done in a timely fashion - and are subject to huge price increases when they are finally signed for! All in all, a totally effed situation. End result - na ghar ke, na ghat ke (piecemeal acquisitions with poorly developed MIC).Karan M wrote:
If we are unwilling to spend more than the bare minimum on R&D and import substitution, as we are doing now, we wont have what we want.
https://twitter.com/AbhishBanerj/status ... A1Ygw&s=19Israel is close to both Russia & US
US allies with Saudi & Israel
Saudi broke ties with Qatar in 2017, but largest US military base in Middle East is in Qatar
Make no mistake
Anyone who says India cannot be close allies with both Russia & USA is lobbyist with vested interest
Hans Nichols
Sun, April 3, 2022, 4:51 PM
Chuck Schumer’s team is privately acknowledging to Senate Democrats that Eric Garcetti doesn’t currently have 50 votes within their caucus to be confirmed as ambassador to India, congressional aides tell Axios.
Why it matters: The comments by the Senate majority leader’s office, delivered Wednesday through his legislative director during a call with other LDs, mean the Los Angeles mayor is unlikely to receive a floor vote any time soon. Garcetti was formally nominated eight months ago.
Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free
The comments also indicate the growing concern — and confusion — within the Democratic Party about the fate of President Biden’s nominee to serve as ambassador to a crucial country resisting the administration’s efforts to get tougher on Russia.
The cold math of a 50-50 Senate may force Biden to pull Garcetti’s nomination and find another candidate who can be seated as his envoy to the world’s largest democracy.
The delay has also created leadership uncertainty for the nation's second-largest city and its 4 million residents.
Driving the news: Schumer’s team was asked about the timing of a possible Garcetti vote during a weekly call designed to provide a big-picture issues overview to Senate offices.
The staffer's comments were based on the public indications from some Democratic senators — a number of whom have said they want more information about allegations of workplace sexual harassment before supporting Garcetti.
At this time, Schumer’s office is not formally “whipping” the vote — asking senators how they plan to vote.
The comments were made before Axios reported Thursday that Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) had “concerns” about the allegations.
That brought the public number of wavering Democratic senators to five.
A spokesperson for Schumer declined to comment to Axios about the call contents.
The big picture: Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has placed a “hold” on Garcetti’s nomination, pending his own independent investigations into the allegations. Sen. Joni Ernest (R-Iowa) has placed a second hold on the nomination.
Grassley told the Los Angeles Times he doesn’t expect to be finished with his investigation when the Senate returns from Easter recess on April 25, giving an outside group, Whistleblower Aid, more time to meet with senators from both parties.
The core of the allegations stems from a lawsuit filed by Los Angeles Police Department officer Matthew Garza, who claimed that Rick Jacobs, while the mayor’s deputy chief of staff, sexually harassed him.
Jacobs has denied the allegations and Garcetti has denied being aware of them.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee looked into the allegations and concluded Garcetti had been truthful in a legal deposition during which he denied any knowledge.
Garcetti’s nomination was voted out of committee in January without Republican opposition.
On March 25, a State Department official briefed Senate chiefs of staff, explaining the allegations had been investigated by the department and the committee and they determined Garcetti didn’t know about the alleged behavior.
Between the lines: A former Garcetti communications director, Naomi Seligman, continues to arrange meetings with Democratic offices, alleging she also was a victim of harassment from Jacobs.
Meanwhile, a different Garcetti aide wrote to senators last Monday, questioning Seligman’s account, Politico reported.
It does seem like sanctions on Russia and their ability to deliver will force domestic acquisitions as there are no other viable economic alternatives.ramana wrote:Karan,
There is no point in increasing allocation for IAF. They will rush to buy the most expensive planes even if they are very few. And don't care for weapons only platforms. Example Hammer acquisition was an afterthought. Despite the dance in the sky after Balakot has no interest in integrating Astra on Tejas.
Another Chief's term wasted.*
So we are at this impasse.
* A chief should make his decision based on service needs and inputs.
All chiefs seem to be beholden to inputs from outside and don't care for service needs.
Not until Unkil, NATO, Israel, South Africa and others slap complete arms embargo on India.Mort Walker wrote: It does seem like sanctions on Russia and their ability to deliver will force domestic acquisitions as there are no other viable economic alternatives.
ukraine has landed in a messMort Walker wrote:It does seem like sanctions on Russia and their ability to deliver will force domestic acquisitions as there are no other viable economic alternatives.ramana wrote:Karan,
There is no point in increasing allocation for IAF. They will rush to buy the most expensive planes even if they are very few. And don't care for weapons only platforms. Example Hammer acquisition was an afterthought. Despite the dance in the sky after Balakot has no interest in integrating Astra on Tejas.
Another Chief's term wasted.*
So we are at this impasse.
* A chief should make his decision based on service needs and inputs.
All chiefs seem to be beholden to inputs from outside and don't care for service needs.
Karan, agreed.Karan M wrote:Sir then the MOD has to assign where the money has to be spent. Time for soft measures is over and we can't let their mistakes or errors dog their own and the nations strategic needs. I mean we were procuring R-27s in this day and age from Ukraine as versus Astra procurement and expediting Mk2. Also the funds have to be made available to expedite the Astra Mk2 and the Mk3, ie the SFDR program.
I am afraid that this is not correct.rsingh wrote:Buying weapon or at least pretending to look for weapon gives india a big leverage in world. Actual we are buying influence and modernizing armed forces at the same time.
Well Logic is as follows. Russia knows we can buy weapons and we pay in hard currency. Russia knows Chinese reverse engineer the goods and then reproduce.We do not. We are more valuable than China. You have no Idea how Chinese are seen in Siberia. Lovingly known as Takans (cockroaches).In all despite all fear mongering, Russia will never be against India.Pratyush wrote:I am afraid that this is not correct.rsingh wrote:Buying weapon or at least pretending to look for weapon gives india a big leverage in world. Actual we are buying influence and modernizing armed forces at the same time.
If that is the case, then US should not have any leverage. Because it meets most of its weapons needs domestically.
A long hard look at which Nations have leverage and which ones don't will reveal the following;
1) an economically independent nation has some leverage.
2) an economically and militarily independent nation has greater leverage than a nation that is just economically independent.
3) militarily dependent nation has little leverage.
4) an economically and militarily dependent nation has zero leverage.
What we are seeing in case of India is a combination of 1 and 3. We need to be both economically and militarily independent.
Imagine is scenario where our testimonials are in side our langoti.
As compared to our testimonials exposed to half dozen sets of hands with different interests.
One scenario is preferable to other.
Which is it?
the reaction of the britshits after India opted for the rafale was outstandingly satisfying.rsingh wrote:Well Logic is as follows. Russia knows we can buy weapons and we pay in hard currency. Russia knows Chinese reverse engineer the goods and then reproduce.We do not. We are more valuable than China. You have no Idea how Chinese are seen in Siberia. Lovingly known as Takans (cockroaches).In all despite all fear mongering, Russia will never be against India.Pratyush wrote:
I am afraid that this is not correct.
If that is the case, then US should not have any leverage. Because it meets most of its weapons needs domestically.
A long hard look at which Nations have leverage and which ones don't will reveal the following;
1) an economically independent nation has some leverage.
2) an economically and militarily independent nation has greater leverage than a nation that is just economically independent.
3) militarily dependent nation has little leverage.
4) an economically and militarily dependent nation has zero leverage.
What we are seeing in case of India is a combination of 1 and 3. We need to be both economically and militarily independent.
Imagine is scenario where our testimonials are in side our langoti.
As compared to our testimonials exposed to half dozen sets of hands with different interests.
One scenario is preferable to other.
Which is it?
US knows there is only one country in Asia (apart from Japan and S. Korea who can buy (potential) big ticket items in quantity and pay for It. Again despite all these low level jackal cries US will Not annoy India.You have foot in mouth comments here are there but nothing dangerous.
European countries. Have you seen how we milked Europe when we bought Raffale ? they were almost at each others collars. France has taken pro India stand after that. As Simple as that.
Canyou please post the original tweet?chetak wrote:
https://twitter.com/rohan_mukh/status/1 ... 4672512008ramana wrote:chetak wrote:/quote]
Canyou please post the original tweet?