Armed forces should not be obliged to ensure success of Make In India

[T90TankGuy]

It has been reported in the media that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force are unlikely to accept the new Arjun main battle tank and the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft. Many experts have criticised the decision saying it will prove to be the "death nail" in the process of defence indigenisation.

Naturally, agencies such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and various defence public sector undertakings are upset. It is obvious that years of their efforts and hard work are being rendered futile. Various conjectures are being drawn about who could benefit from the decision.

Globally, the business of defence acquisitions has been found marred by various controversies and almost every defence purchase gets criticised for one reason or the other.

Is the case for Arjun and Tejas any different? Probably, everything would depend on which side of the debate you are on.

There are some commentators who are trying to argue their case in favour of these systems based on some (convenient) technical facts while some argue that substandard systems should not be accepted. This piece does not make an argument either in favour of Arjun and Tejas or against them. However, there is a need to raise a very basic question - what is the responsibility of Indian armed forces towards ensuring Indian defence industry advances?

Basically, why do defence forces acquire military platforms and weaponry? What is the role of the armed forces in the acquisition? Common sense indicates that the central role of the armed forces is to safeguard the security interests of the nation. Countries like India have no expansionist ambitions so the forces are expected only to secure the borders and ensure India's geostrategic interests are safeguarded.

In addition, Indian armed forces are expected to come to the "aid of civil authorities" if called for. Over the years, Indian armed forces have played a major role in disaster management. The forces are also known for contribution towards the United Nations Peace Keeping missions. In short, there is no rule/regulation which makes it mandatory for the forces (and holds them responsible) to run both public and private defence industries.

Indian armed forces are expected to know their adversaries, their fighting potential, strategies, and tactics among others. They should have a larger understanding of what threats India is likely to face and they also need to factor in futuristic threats.

India's strategic areas of interest cover a wider geographical area from regions of Africa to South China Sea. Over the years the concept of "Indo-Pacific" is finding increasing traction globally indicating the need for larger Indian presence in Indian and Pacific Ocean region. India has a large diaspora working in different parts of the world with the major chunk being in West Asia. Hence, Indian armed forces are expected to meet various tactical and strategic challenges in these areas.

In order to remain fully prepared to address any eventuality, the forces equip themselves with appropriate equipment. To assist the forces, India - like many other countries - has developed a system for research development and manufacturing of defence equipment. Over the years, organisations such as DRDO, HAL and few others have played a significant role in enhancing India's security framework.

It is important to mention that owing to India's nuclear policies, the country's defence technology agencies suffered significantly from the technological apartheid. Over the years, all these agencies have delivered various useful products to the armed forces and would continue to do so in future. These agencies also drew their share of criticism too. However, by and large these agencies have served their purpose and a lot is expected from them in the future too. It is also important to ensure that the target of these organisations should not be single client (Indian armed forces) based. For the growth of these agencies, there is a need to establish a holistic policy on defence exports.

However, the larger question is, are defence forces responsible for ensuring that the defence industry flourishes? The forces are the end-users of any equipment. It is their life and reputation which is at stake. Armed forces decide on the type and quality of flying platforms or tanks based not on what is best available in the global market, but based on their own threat perceptions. They study their adversaries in detail from their doctrines, their war fighting capabilities, the military equipment held by them, nature of international assistance and possibilities of other militaries coming to their help during crises, the type of training they undergo, and their overall military industrial complex. This process would always remain dynamic.

Once the nature of a likely threat and the war-waging capabilities of the adversaries are clearly identified, the armed forces would fine-tune their strategies and tactics and try to equip themselves accordingly. So, if DRDO, HAL and ordinance factories are able to provide what is envisaged, then naturally there is no requirement of any imports.

It is the responsibility of Indian armed forces to project the correct requirements based on threat perceptions. Their assessment should be professional. Their job is to safeguard the security interest of the country, period. It is very naïve to say that the armed forces are failing India's defence industrial complex. Programmes such as Make In India have a meaning provided India is secure. This does not mean the development of indigenous military industrial complex should be stalled. For any armed force import dependence is not healthy. However, the question is whether armed forces should compromise on operational military readiness just to safeguard the process of indigenisation?

It is the job of the civilian administration to ensure that India's defence industry (both in public and private sector) develops and India's import dependence gets reduced. It is they who have to find a balance between defence forces' legitimate requirements and developing India's defence industry.

Indian Army's former general, VP Malik, had said, "we will fight with whatever we have". In democratic India, armed forces can have an opinion and a view. The final decision has to be taken by the government. So, if the government decides that in the larger interest of the growth of the Indian defence industry, armed forces should use only indigenous products, so be it. But it is incorrect to argue that armed forces are keen to have only imported equipment, they have been using various Made in India platforms which match their requirements. Armed forces are only giving a professional opinion and they should not be tried for being professional.
https://www.dailyo.in/politics/make...dian-army-indian-air-force/story/1/20630.html

 

[BHarwana]

Foreign companies has links to Indian Generals and they are making sure India never get it own defense Industry up and running. They have made such large investments on the Indian potential to purchase weapons.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

You're right, safeguard the nation, but when you rushed the procurement of the T90s without proper summer trials, when one of main theaters is a scorching hot desert(I think we all know what happened to the T90s in thar after), when CAG found out trials were skipped or even omitted for the tank - Or when you change requirement midway every couple of years, several times, having soldiers run around with sterling guns, or no bullet proof jackets for an unreasonably long time. Or when you expect summer, winter, high altitude, or even yoga, gymnastic trials for homemade systems, but outside OEMs get a pass on occasion, it doesn't sound like elements in the IA care about the soldiers, whatsoever. It's not one or the other, several people are to blame.

However, if you want a model for a success, go the PPP way, like with the recent DRDO ATAGs, with DRDO, IA arty, and the private sector all in link to put out a proper product.

 

[Sugarcane]

Modi ji will discipline the armed forces, they should learn the Make in India era and should look for the ways to secure their commissions from local companies.

You're right, safeguard the nation, but when you rushed the procurement of the T90s without proper summer trials, when one of main theaters is a scorching hot desert, when CAG found out trials were skipped or even omitted for the tank - Or when you change requirement midway every couple of years, several times, having soldiers run around with sterling guns, or no bullet proof jackets for an unreasonably long time. Or when you expect summer, winter, high altitude, or even yoga, gymnastic trials for homemade systems, but outside OEMs get a pass on occasion, it doesn't sound like elements in the IA care about the soldiers, whatsoever. It's not one or the other, several people are to blame.

However, if you want a model for a success, go the PPP way, like with the recent DRDO ATAGs, with DRDO, IA arty, and the private sector all in link to put out a proper product.

How you will call it Indian if it doesn't pass Yoga trials ?

 

[MilSpec]

It has been reported in the media that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force are unlikely to accept the new Arjun main battle tank and the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft. Many experts have criticised the decision saying it will prove to be the "death nail" in the process of defence indigenisation.

Naturally, agencies such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and various defence public sector undertakings are upset. It is obvious that years of their efforts and hard work are being rendered futile. Various conjectures are being drawn about who could benefit from the decision.

Globally, the business of defence acquisitions has been found marred by various controversies and almost every defence purchase gets criticised for one reason or the other.

Is the case for Arjun and Tejas any different? Probably, everything would depend on which side of the debate you are on.

There are some commentators who are trying to argue their case in favour of these systems based on some (convenient) technical facts while some argue that substandard systems should not be accepted. This piece does not make an argument either in favour of Arjun and Tejas or against them. However, there is a need to raise a very basic question - what is the responsibility of Indian armed forces towards ensuring Indian defence industry advances?

Basically, why do defence forces acquire military platforms and weaponry? What is the role of the armed forces in the acquisition? Common sense indicates that the central role of the armed forces is to safeguard the security interests of the nation. Countries like India have no expansionist ambitions so the forces are expected only to secure the borders and ensure India's geostrategic interests are safeguarded.

In addition, Indian armed forces are expected to come to the "aid of civil authorities" if called for. Over the years, Indian armed forces have played a major role in disaster management. The forces are also known for contribution towards the United Nations Peace Keeping missions. In short, there is no rule/regulation which makes it mandatory for the forces (and holds them responsible) to run both public and private defence industries.

Indian armed forces are expected to know their adversaries, their fighting potential, strategies, and tactics among others. They should have a larger understanding of what threats India is likely to face and they also need to factor in futuristic threats.

India's strategic areas of interest cover a wider geographical area from regions of Africa to South China Sea. Over the years the concept of "Indo-Pacific" is finding increasing traction globally indicating the need for larger Indian presence in Indian and Pacific Ocean region. India has a large diaspora working in different parts of the world with the major chunk being in West Asia. Hence, Indian armed forces are expected to meet various tactical and strategic challenges in these areas.

In order to remain fully prepared to address any eventuality, the forces equip themselves with appropriate equipment. To assist the forces, India - like many other countries - has developed a system for research development and manufacturing of defence equipment. Over the years, organisations such as DRDO, HAL and few others have played a significant role in enhancing India's security framework.

It is important to mention that owing to India's nuclear policies, the country's defence technology agencies suffered significantly from the technological apartheid. Over the years, all these agencies have delivered various useful products to the armed forces and would continue to do so in future. These agencies also drew their share of criticism too. However, by and large these agencies have served their purpose and a lot is expected from them in the future too. It is also important to ensure that the target of these organisations should not be single client (Indian armed forces) based. For the growth of these agencies, there is a need to establish a holistic policy on defence exports.

However, the larger question is, are defence forces responsible for ensuring that the defence industry flourishes? The forces are the end-users of any equipment. It is their life and reputation which is at stake. Armed forces decide on the type and quality of flying platforms or tanks based not on what is best available in the global market, but based on their own threat perceptions. They study their adversaries in detail from their doctrines, their war fighting capabilities, the military equipment held by them, nature of international assistance and possibilities of other militaries coming to their help during crises, the type of training they undergo, and their overall military industrial complex. This process would always remain dynamic.

Once the nature of a likely threat and the war-waging capabilities of the adversaries are clearly identified, the armed forces would fine-tune their strategies and tactics and try to equip themselves accordingly. So, if DRDO, HAL and ordinance factories are able to provide what is envisaged, then naturally there is no requirement of any imports.

It is the responsibility of Indian armed forces to project the correct requirements based on threat perceptions. Their assessment should be professional. Their job is to safeguard the security interest of the country, period. It is very naïve to say that the armed forces are failing India's defence industrial complex. Programmes such as Make In India have a meaning provided India is secure. This does not mean the development of indigenous military industrial complex should be stalled. For any armed force import dependence is not healthy. However, the question is whether armed forces should compromise on operational military readiness just to safeguard the process of indigenisation?

It is the job of the civilian administration to ensure that India's defence industry (both in public and private sector) develops and India's import dependence gets reduced. It is they who have to find a balance between defence forces' legitimate requirements and developing India's defence industry.

Indian Army's former general, VP Malik, had said, "we will fight with whatever we have". In democratic India, armed forces can have an opinion and a view. The final decision has to be taken by the government. So, if the government decides that in the larger interest of the growth of the Indian defence industry, armed forces should use only indigenous products, so be it. But it is incorrect to argue that armed forces are keen to have only imported equipment, they have been using various Made in India platforms which match their requirements. Armed forces are only giving a professional opinion and they should not be tried for being professional.
https://www.dailyo.in/politics/make...dian-army-indian-air-force/story/1/20630.html

Wow, Hopefully you did not write this.

DRDO/HAL/GRSE/MDL/BHEL/BEML/BDL none of these are trying to shove weapon systems that they have dream't up down the armed forces throats. Every cent of their products have been sanctioned by the MoD. Three references to HAL in the article, to slam the LCA without realizing that HAL had nothing to do with development of LCA. LCA was developed by ADA, a complete brainchild of the IAF and DRDO. If the author wants to bash HAL on behalf of IAF, by all means shutdown HAL and see how capable IAF BRD's are of maintaining their fleet or for that case getting support from russia. The organization that author is trying to bash here has built pretty much everything that IAF has flying today in it's fleet.

True , it's not Armys job to prop up domestic defense industry, but then again their job is also not to buy garbage from poland, or tatra trucks. The same armed forces that are now planning to induct S400 triumf without a single test fire just like it had inducted KH31, KH35, and Moskit without a single test fire.

As far as Army's requirements are concerned, wonder how does the arjun beat the t90Bhisma i head to head trials, or even how the Arjun gets sabotaged in the trial runs after the reports surface, Arjun MRO's are not maintained and fleet gets grounded, the same t90 then breaks down in the biathlon this year.

 

[T90TankGuy]

Wow, Hopefully you did not write this.

DRDO/HAL/GRSE/MDL/BHEL/BEML/BDL none of these are trying to shove weapon systems that they have dream't up down the armed forces throats. Every cent of their products have been sanctioned by the MoD. Three references to HAL in the article, to slam the LCA without realizing that HAL had nothing to do with development of LCA. LCA was developed by ADA, a complete brainchild of the IAF and DRDO. If the author wants to bash HAL on behalf of IAF, by all means shutdown HAL and see how capable IAF BRD's are of maintaining their fleet or for that case getting support from russia. The organization that author is trying to bash here has built pretty much everything that IAF has flying today in it's fleet.

True , it's not Armys job to prop up domestic defense industry, but then again their job is also not to buy garbage from poland, or tatra trucks. The same armed forces that are now planning to induct S400 triumf without a single test fire just like it had inducted KH31, KH35, and Moskit without a single test fire.

As far as Army's requirements are concerned, wonder how does the arjun beat the t90Bhisma i head to head trials, or even how the Arjun gets sabotaged in the trial runs after the reports surface, Arjun MRO's are not maintained and fleet gets grounded, the same t90 then breaks down in the biathlon this year.

No !!! did not write this , and yes while i do agree with some points i disagree with most. @Joe Shearer and i were having an argument on this very topic so i posted this article.
just wanted to post another point of view.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It has been reported in the media that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force are unlikely to accept the new Arjun main battle tank and the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft. Many experts have criticised the decision saying it will prove to be the "death nail" in the process of defence indigenisation.

Naturally, agencies such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and various defence public sector undertakings are upset. It is obvious that years of their efforts and hard work are being rendered futile. Various conjectures are being drawn about who could benefit from the decision.

Globally, the business of defence acquisitions has been found marred by various controversies and almost every defence purchase gets criticised for one reason or the other.

Is the case for Arjun and Tejas any different? Probably, everything would depend on which side of the debate you are on.

There are some commentators who are trying to argue their case in favour of these systems based on some (convenient) technical facts while some argue that substandard systems should not be accepted. This piece does not make an argument either in favour of Arjun and Tejas or against them. However, there is a need to raise a very basic question - what is the responsibility of Indian armed forces towards ensuring Indian defence industry advances?

Basically, why do defence forces acquire military platforms and weaponry? What is the role of the armed forces in the acquisition? Common sense indicates that the central role of the armed forces is to safeguard the security interests of the nation. Countries like India have no expansionist ambitions so the forces are expected only to secure the borders and ensure India's geostrategic interests are safeguarded.

In addition, Indian armed forces are expected to come to the "aid of civil authorities" if called for. Over the years, Indian armed forces have played a major role in disaster management. The forces are also known for contribution towards the United Nations Peace Keeping missions. In short, there is no rule/regulation which makes it mandatory for the forces (and holds them responsible) to run both public and private defence industries.

Indian armed forces are expected to know their adversaries, their fighting potential, strategies, and tactics among others. They should have a larger understanding of what threats India is likely to face and they also need to factor in futuristic threats.

India's strategic areas of interest cover a wider geographical area from regions of Africa to South China Sea. Over the years the concept of "Indo-Pacific" is finding increasing traction globally indicating the need for larger Indian presence in Indian and Pacific Ocean region. India has a large diaspora working in different parts of the world with the major chunk being in West Asia. Hence, Indian armed forces are expected to meet various tactical and strategic challenges in these areas.

In order to remain fully prepared to address any eventuality, the forces equip themselves with appropriate equipment. To assist the forces, India - like many other countries - has developed a system for research development and manufacturing of defence equipment. Over the years, organisations such as DRDO, HAL and few others have played a significant role in enhancing India's security framework.

It is important to mention that owing to India's nuclear policies, the country's defence technology agencies suffered significantly from the technological apartheid. Over the years, all these agencies have delivered various useful products to the armed forces and would continue to do so in future. These agencies also drew their share of criticism too. However, by and large these agencies have served their purpose and a lot is expected from them in the future too. It is also important to ensure that the target of these organisations should not be single client (Indian armed forces) based. For the growth of these agencies, there is a need to establish a holistic policy on defence exports.

However, the larger question is, are defence forces responsible for ensuring that the defence industry flourishes? The forces are the end-users of any equipment. It is their life and reputation which is at stake. Armed forces decide on the type and quality of flying platforms or tanks based not on what is best available in the global market, but based on their own threat perceptions. They study their adversaries in detail from their doctrines, their war fighting capabilities, the military equipment held by them, nature of international assistance and possibilities of other militaries coming to their help during crises, the type of training they undergo, and their overall military industrial complex. This process would always remain dynamic.

Once the nature of a likely threat and the war-waging capabilities of the adversaries are clearly identified, the armed forces would fine-tune their strategies and tactics and try to equip themselves accordingly. So, if DRDO, HAL and ordinance factories are able to provide what is envisaged, then naturally there is no requirement of any imports.

It is the responsibility of Indian armed forces to project the correct requirements based on threat perceptions. Their assessment should be professional. Their job is to safeguard the security interest of the country, period. It is very naïve to say that the armed forces are failing India's defence industrial complex. Programmes such as Make In India have a meaning provided India is secure. This does not mean the development of indigenous military industrial complex should be stalled. For any armed force import dependence is not healthy. However, the question is whether armed forces should compromise on operational military readiness just to safeguard the process of indigenisation?

It is the job of the civilian administration to ensure that India's defence industry (both in public and private sector) develops and India's import dependence gets reduced. It is they who have to find a balance between defence forces' legitimate requirements and developing India's defence industry.

Indian Army's former general, VP Malik, had said, "we will fight with whatever we have". In democratic India, armed forces can have an opinion and a view. The final decision has to be taken by the government. So, if the government decides that in the larger interest of the growth of the Indian defence industry, armed forces should use only indigenous products, so be it. But it is incorrect to argue that armed forces are keen to have only imported equipment, they have been using various Made in India platforms which match their requirements. Armed forces are only giving a professional opinion and they should not be tried for being professional.
https://www.dailyo.in/politics/make...dian-army-indian-air-force/story/1/20630.html

We should have talked, champ, before you reproduced this here. Please note

1. In principle, I agree with your point of view (the point of view of the article): the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need. That SHOULD, however, be subordinate to any other economic or industrial policy with a medium-term time horizon.
2. In specifics, I have a problem with the resistance to the T-90 (yes, yes, I know your nick). From EVERY point of view, the Arjun is a better machine.
3. "......the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need." That should come with an attached time-line. On the expiry of the time-line, the specifications should be changed, if needed. One solution to this Heracles and the tortoise problem is to ask for the original QSR to stipulate present requirements and projected future requirements as extensions of every factor involved. That will encourage the designers to go as far forward of the present requirements, as far as possible close to the future requirement, as can be done in the current design cycle.

 

[Counterpunch]

I might not be qualified militarily to comment on this but generally speaking this mindset will be beneficial in the longer run. I don't think US Air force is supposed to induct anything that the industry produces

For the defense forces foremost should be their duty to the motherland to defend and not the duty to the defense industries to make them flourish. Until the fine balance could be struck the forces should continue to focus on their prime duty. This way, incompetencies will not get shrouded and transfer to the front line where there is no room for them

 

[ziaulislam]

We should have talked, champ, before you reproduced this here. Please note

1. In principle, I agree with your point of view (the point of view of the article): the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need. That SHOULD, however, be subordinate to any other economic or industrial policy with a medium-term time horizon.
2. In specifics, I have a problem with the resistance to the T-90 (yes, yes, I know your nick). From EVERY point of view, the Arjun is a better machine.
3. "......the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need." That should come with an attached time-line. On the expiry of the time-line, the specifications should be changed, if needed. One solution to this Heracles and the tortoise problem is to ask for the original QSR to stipulate present requirements and projected future requirements as extensions of every factor involved. That will encourage the designers to go as far forward of the present requirements, as far as possible close to the future requirement, as can be done in the current design cycle.

no, arjun and tejas doesnt meet Indian army requirements..period..
not a good idea to force these upon them

 

[Joe Shearer]

Wow, Hopefully you did not write this.

DRDO/HAL/GRSE/MDL/BHEL/BEML/BDL none of these are trying to shove weapon systems that they have dream't up down the armed forces throats. Every cent of their products have been sanctioned by the MoD. Three references to HAL in the article, to slam the LCA without realizing that HAL had nothing to do with development of LCA. LCA was developed by ADA, a complete brainchild of the IAF and DRDO. If the author wants to bash HAL on behalf of IAF, by all means shutdown HAL and see how capable IAF BRD's are of maintaining their fleet or for that case getting support from russia. The organization that author is trying to bash here has built pretty much everything that IAF has flying today in it's fleet.

True , it's not Armys job to prop up domestic defense industry, but then again their job is also not to buy garbage from poland, or tatra trucks. The same armed forces that are now planning to induct S400 triumf without a single test fire just like it had inducted KH31, KH35, and Moskit without a single test fire.

As far as Army's requirements are concerned, wonder how does the arjun beat the t90Bhisma i head to head trials, or even how the Arjun gets sabotaged in the trial runs after the reports surface, Arjun MRO's are not maintained and fleet gets grounded, the same t90 then breaks down in the biathlon this year.

I'd like to describe JBG's reproduction as his tactical nuke used during the course of a discussion that we were having, but that is unfair to him: he had already composed his arguments based on the discussions that take place from time to time.

Coming to your own remarks,

1. it's true that HAL had nothing to do with the LCA; it was, finally, the production shop after everything had been accepted by the air force.
2. The Air Force has nil capacity to build, to assemble or to maintain, forget about specifying or designing new aircraft, or re-designing older aircraft. For all those, it has to have a production shop; that shop is nothing but HAL.
3. The Air Force is panicky now only because the production rate is so slow. The problem is precisely with the production rate; 4 a year is the speed of a glacier.
4. The Air Force has only itself to blame. A larger requirement will help HAL (and whoever it gets from private sector to finance setting up additional lines) to continue to manufacture for a longer period. It is not frightfully difficult to set up lines for 20 to 24 a year.

The most obvious requirements have not been met. The Tejas is today a good, short range interceptor most amenable to GCI missions; it can play an expanded role if ADA takes another couple of years to build in data links (compatible to the SU 30 in the first instance) enables them as AWACS or SU 30 controlled aircraft. Both AWACS and SU 30 have very long legs; both can loiter and call up swarms of Tejas carrying BVR missiles at short notice, without coming under attack themselves. Neither the F16 nor their magic weapon the JF-17 can do Jack Squat about it; the Swedish AWACS they have, and the Chinese AWACS they are planning to buy are far greater threats.

The Arjun deal is a straight walk-over for the Arjun, and I have carefully listed the reasons on another thread. There is really nothing to be done but either shove it down the throat of the DG in question, and his next three successors. At the moment, it will cream the very questionable junk that it will face, but that is in the western theatre; it cannot be deployed in Ladakh and in Arunachal; there is no way to deploy it in Ladakh and that has nothing to do with terrain. It has everything to do with the long maintenance trail. Arunachal has everything to do with terrain, unless the Army plans to fight in the Brahmaputra Valley. Those who think that being able to transport bulldozers shows that armour can play a role there need to be tied hand and foot and put in front of those same bulldozers; armour needs space to move about.

no, arjun and tejas doesnt meet Indian army requirements..period..
not a good idea to force these upon them

There is no point in discussing these outside Indian interlocutors.

I might not be qualified militarily to comment on this but generally speaking this mindset will be beneficial in the longer run. I don't think US Air force is supposed to induct anything that the industry produces

For the defense forces foremost should be their duty to the motherland to defend and not the duty to the defense industries to make them flourish. Until the fine balance could be struck the forces should continue to focus on their prime duty. This way, incompetencies will not get shrouded and transfer to the front line where there is no room for them

IN PRINCIPLE, yes; I have serious problems with the specific examples quoted.

You're right, safeguard the nation, but when you rushed the procurement of the T90s without proper summer trials, when one of main theaters is a scorching hot desert(I think we all know what happened to the T90s in thar after), when CAG found out trials were skipped or even omitted for the tank - Or when you change requirement midway every couple of years, several times, having soldiers run around with sterling guns, or no bullet proof jackets for an unreasonably long time. Or when you expect summer, winter, high altitude, or even yoga, gymnastic trials for homemade systems, but outside OEMs get a pass on occasion, it doesn't sound like elements in the IA care about the soldiers, whatsoever. It's not one or the other, several people are to blame.

However, if you want a model for a success, go the PPP way, like with the recent DRDO ATAGs, with DRDO, IA arty, and the private sector all in link to put out a proper product.

The ATAGS is a brilliant example of the way to go.

 

[Dungeness]

We should have talked, champ, before you reproduced this here. Please note

1. In principle, I agree with your point of view (the point of view of the article): the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need. That SHOULD, however, be subordinate to any other economic or industrial policy with a medium-term time horizon.
2. In specifics, I have a problem with the resistance to the T-90 (yes, yes, I know your nick). From EVERY point of view, the Arjun is a better machine.
3. "......the Indian Armed Forces must be given full freedom to specify what they need." That should come with an attached time-line. On the expiry of the time-line, the specifications should be changed, if needed. One solution to this Heracles and the tortoise problem is to ask for the original QSR to stipulate present requirements and projected future requirements as extensions of every factor involved. That will encourage the designers to go as far forward of the present requirements, as far as possible close to the future requirement, as can be done in the current design cycle.

It seems to be a vicious cycle with no end in sight. Specs from military-----Delays by DROD/HAL-----Original Specs obsolete-----New Specs issued by military-----more delays by military industrial complex-----Foreign arms purchase------start over again.

Indian members often take a great pleasure mocking China's effort of reverse engineering, but they failed to realize or were not willing to admit that it is the effort of figuring out whats, hows, whys in the process that laid the foundation of modern industries. eg, the success of both FC-1 and J-10 were based on the throughout understanding of Mig-21, which both China and India obtained through ToT from Soviet in 1960's.

Of course, PLA did not have the luxury to pick and choose, that in turn helped Chinese military complex in the end.

 

[Maarkhoor]

It has been reported in the media that the Indian Army and Indian Air Force are unlikely to accept the new Arjun main battle tank and the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft. Many experts have criticised the decision saying it will prove to be the "death nail" in the process of defence indigenisation.

Naturally, agencies such as Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and various defence public sector undertakings are upset. It is obvious that years of their efforts and hard work are being rendered futile. Various conjectures are being drawn about who could benefit from the decision.

Globally, the business of defence acquisitions has been found marred by various controversies and almost every defence purchase gets criticised for one reason or the other.

Is the case for Arjun and Tejas any different? Probably, everything would depend on which side of the debate you are on.

There are some commentators who are trying to argue their case in favour of these systems based on some (convenient) technical facts while some argue that substandard systems should not be accepted. This piece does not make an argument either in favour of Arjun and Tejas or against them. However, there is a need to raise a very basic question - what is the responsibility of Indian armed forces towards ensuring Indian defence industry advances?

Basically, why do defence forces acquire military platforms and weaponry? What is the role of the armed forces in the acquisition? Common sense indicates that the central role of the armed forces is to safeguard the security interests of the nation. Countries like India have no expansionist ambitions so the forces are expected only to secure the borders and ensure India's geostrategic interests are safeguarded.

In addition, Indian armed forces are expected to come to the "aid of civil authorities" if called for. Over the years, Indian armed forces have played a major role in disaster management. The forces are also known for contribution towards the United Nations Peace Keeping missions. In short, there is no rule/regulation which makes it mandatory for the forces (and holds them responsible) to run both public and private defence industries.

Indian armed forces are expected to know their adversaries, their fighting potential, strategies, and tactics among others. They should have a larger understanding of what threats India is likely to face and they also need to factor in futuristic threats.

India's strategic areas of interest cover a wider geographical area from regions of Africa to South China Sea. Over the years the concept of "Indo-Pacific" is finding increasing traction globally indicating the need for larger Indian presence in Indian and Pacific Ocean region. India has a large diaspora working in different parts of the world with the major chunk being in West Asia. Hence, Indian armed forces are expected to meet various tactical and strategic challenges in these areas.

In order to remain fully prepared to address any eventuality, the forces equip themselves with appropriate equipment. To assist the forces, India - like many other countries - has developed a system for research development and manufacturing of defence equipment. Over the years, organisations such as DRDO, HAL and few others have played a significant role in enhancing India's security framework.

It is important to mention that owing to India's nuclear policies, the country's defence technology agencies suffered significantly from the technological apartheid. Over the years, all these agencies have delivered various useful products to the armed forces and would continue to do so in future. These agencies also drew their share of criticism too. However, by and large these agencies have served their purpose and a lot is expected from them in the future too. It is also important to ensure that the target of these organisations should not be single client (Indian armed forces) based. For the growth of these agencies, there is a need to establish a holistic policy on defence exports.

However, the larger question is, are defence forces responsible for ensuring that the defence industry flourishes? The forces are the end-users of any equipment. It is their life and reputation which is at stake. Armed forces decide on the type and quality of flying platforms or tanks based not on what is best available in the global market, but based on their own threat perceptions. They study their adversaries in detail from their doctrines, their war fighting capabilities, the military equipment held by them, nature of international assistance and possibilities of other militaries coming to their help during crises, the type of training they undergo, and their overall military industrial complex. This process would always remain dynamic.

Once the nature of a likely threat and the war-waging capabilities of the adversaries are clearly identified, the armed forces would fine-tune their strategies and tactics and try to equip themselves accordingly. So, if DRDO, HAL and ordinance factories are able to provide what is envisaged, then naturally there is no requirement of any imports.

It is the responsibility of Indian armed forces to project the correct requirements based on threat perceptions. Their assessment should be professional. Their job is to safeguard the security interest of the country, period. It is very naïve to say that the armed forces are failing India's defence industrial complex. Programmes such as Make In India have a meaning provided India is secure. This does not mean the development of indigenous military industrial complex should be stalled. For any armed force import dependence is not healthy. However, the question is whether armed forces should compromise on operational military readiness just to safeguard the process of indigenisation?

It is the job of the civilian administration to ensure that India's defence industry (both in public and private sector) develops and India's import dependence gets reduced. It is they who have to find a balance between defence forces' legitimate requirements and developing India's defence industry.

Indian Army's former general, VP Malik, had said, "we will fight with whatever we have". In democratic India, armed forces can have an opinion and a view. The final decision has to be taken by the government. So, if the government decides that in the larger interest of the growth of the Indian defence industry, armed forces should use only indigenous products, so be it. But it is incorrect to argue that armed forces are keen to have only imported equipment, they have been using various Made in India platforms which match their requirements. Armed forces are only giving a professional opinion and they should not be tried for being professional.
https://www.dailyo.in/politics/make...dian-army-indian-air-force/story/1/20630.html

Simply they don't want substandard / failed things since they now they are facing Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It seems to be a vicious cycle with no end in sight. Specs from military-----Delays by DROD/HAL-----Original Specs obsolete-----New Specs issued by military-----more delays by military industrial complex-----Foreign arms purchase------start over again.

Indian members often take a great pleasure mocking China's effort of reverse engineering, but they failed to realize or were not willing to admit that it is the effort of figuring out whats, hows, whys in the process that laid the foundation of modern industries. eg, the success of both FC-1 and J-10 were based on the throughout understanding of Mig-21, which both China and India obtained through ToT from Soviet in 1960's.

Of course, PLA did not have the luxury to pick and choose, that in turn helped Chinese military complex in the end.

Your last line is the most important one, the one that matters most.

It is also one that does not apply to us directly; China has never had to face an aggressor after 1950; every campaign thereafter has been to assert her supremacy over a remote border area in dispute with another state. She had the luxury of experimenting, even with using sub-standard equipment and upgrading such equipment in incremental fashion, and that has worked reasonably well for her. India had no such luxury; try to put yourself into a situation where Myanmar or Korea or Japan is a constant threat and that the threat takes the form of an all-out attack.

That is not to deny the validity of the rest of your argument - if you had not experimented, as India never did, in spite of having identical opportunities, and faced identical handicaps, you would not have developed beyond the J7 to the J8, for instance. I am sure that the same incremental improvement and aggressive indigenisation were important factors in your subsequent technological breakthroughs.

 

[Dungeness]

Your last line is the most important one, the one that matters most.

It is also one that does not apply to us directly; China has never had to face an aggressor after 1950; every campaign thereafter has been to assert her supremacy over a remote border area in dispute with another state. She had the luxury of experimenting, even with using sub-standard equipment and upgrading such equipment in incremental fashion, and that has worked reasonably well for her. India had no such luxury; try to put yourself into a situation where Myanmar or Korea or Japan is a constant threat and that the threat takes the form of an all-out attack.

That is not to deny the validity of the rest of your argument - if you had not experimented, as India never did, in spite of having identical opportunities, and faced identical handicaps, you would not have developed beyond the J7 to the J8, for instance. I am sure that the same incremental improvement and aggressive indigenisation were important factors in your subsequent technological breakthroughs.

Well, China was on the blink of all out nuclear war with then Soviet Union in 1969. It is all about the calculated risks and strategic vision and planning. India should have the confidence that there is no clear and present danger to its security as it is much stronger than any of its foes in its region, so it can forgo the absolute military supremacy instead focuses on indigenous R&D and economics, much like what China did in 80's and 90's. Sometimes, people walk into a tight spot themselves.

PLA has made it almost a "religion" not to rely on foreign weaponry, I guess they developed this mentality because of years of international embargoes and suctions. Too many choices may not be a good thing after all.

 

[noksss]

Simply they don't want substandard / failed things since they now they are facing Pakistan.

Since all the wars with Pakistan is fought with obsolete weapons I don't see any issues handling you guys these potent weapons is for our dragon friends