angeldemon_007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 5,298
- Reaction score
- 0
The headline of the front-page news item of The Financial Times for February 18, 2011, screamed, US doubts over India jet fighter partner. Reportedly, Timothy Roemer, the ambassador of the United States of America to India, expressed his profound doubts in the following words as revealed by WikiLeaks The potential for HAL to successfully partner with US firms as a truly advanced aircraft remains untested and suspect. The implications are clear. The US needs to avoid being the partner of Indian aviation manufacturers. It would be preferable for the US to have India as a steady customer of aircraft manufactured by it. A buyer-seller relationship would keep the monopoly of technology in the hands of the US while India would spend the dollars.
Understandably, the US doubt, per se, is not misplaced. As observed by Roemer Indias aviation industry is two to three decades behind that of the United States and other Western nations. Very true, indeed. But the US seems to have misread an essential ingredient of its capitalist economic policy. In a depressed market with limited buyers when a large ticket-buyer is in a stronger position to dictate a seller, it has to show respect for the latter. Else, chances are that the high-technology producer, which is also the seller, may face a mega financial loss at a time of unprecedented economic downturn, thereby creating a crisis in its domestic employment market.
Apparently, Roemer is partially guided by the British defence company, BAE Systems, which recently supplied the advanced jet trainer, Hawk, to the Indian Air Force. It has emerged that the British have given adverse report pertaining to the usage and maintenance of their aircraft by Indian personnel. BAE technicians supervising work at HAL became aware that parts were being taken from the kits intended to assemble new aircraft and used instead as replacement parts for the aircraft already delivered. The scathing indictment showed Indians in a poor light: Lack of controls left BAE unsure of what parts were now missing from the kits.
Two sides
Roemer, however, seems to have forgotten that the coin has two sides. How could he not have taken into account an equally damaging counter-charge made by the defence minister of India on the floor of Parliament that the United Kingdoms BAE Systems has supplied sub-standard materials to the IAF?
Paradoxically, however, Roemers apprehension and doubts are unlikely to be shared and supported by US aviation companies bidding for the multi-billion-dollar fighter order from India. Thus whereas Boeing is enjoying a productive partnership with the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Lockheed Martin expressed optimism as it could ensure HAL will be successful. It is a tale of two opinions. Roemers suspicion and observations are sweetly countered by those of the manufacturers from his own country.
What then is the prospect of an Indo-US industrial co-operation in case Washington DC wins the US $11 billion fighter order? Will the US fulfil the contractual obligations? Or will it inject fresh conditions as stumbling blocks to the modernization of the IAF? To be fair to Roemer, one cannot brush aside his queries and apprehensions. If he is struck by the lack of automation and safety precautions at the HAL plant, they need to be addressed and corrected.
At the same time, Indias aircraft industry would do better to produce, upgrade and use indigenous fighters (as done by China). It must lessen its dependence on imported goods. No country can become a superpower without adequate progress in the field of technology and without its own defence industry.
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | Points to Ponder
Understandably, the US doubt, per se, is not misplaced. As observed by Roemer Indias aviation industry is two to three decades behind that of the United States and other Western nations. Very true, indeed. But the US seems to have misread an essential ingredient of its capitalist economic policy. In a depressed market with limited buyers when a large ticket-buyer is in a stronger position to dictate a seller, it has to show respect for the latter. Else, chances are that the high-technology producer, which is also the seller, may face a mega financial loss at a time of unprecedented economic downturn, thereby creating a crisis in its domestic employment market.
Apparently, Roemer is partially guided by the British defence company, BAE Systems, which recently supplied the advanced jet trainer, Hawk, to the Indian Air Force. It has emerged that the British have given adverse report pertaining to the usage and maintenance of their aircraft by Indian personnel. BAE technicians supervising work at HAL became aware that parts were being taken from the kits intended to assemble new aircraft and used instead as replacement parts for the aircraft already delivered. The scathing indictment showed Indians in a poor light: Lack of controls left BAE unsure of what parts were now missing from the kits.
Two sides
Roemer, however, seems to have forgotten that the coin has two sides. How could he not have taken into account an equally damaging counter-charge made by the defence minister of India on the floor of Parliament that the United Kingdoms BAE Systems has supplied sub-standard materials to the IAF?
Paradoxically, however, Roemers apprehension and doubts are unlikely to be shared and supported by US aviation companies bidding for the multi-billion-dollar fighter order from India. Thus whereas Boeing is enjoying a productive partnership with the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Lockheed Martin expressed optimism as it could ensure HAL will be successful. It is a tale of two opinions. Roemers suspicion and observations are sweetly countered by those of the manufacturers from his own country.
What then is the prospect of an Indo-US industrial co-operation in case Washington DC wins the US $11 billion fighter order? Will the US fulfil the contractual obligations? Or will it inject fresh conditions as stumbling blocks to the modernization of the IAF? To be fair to Roemer, one cannot brush aside his queries and apprehensions. If he is struck by the lack of automation and safety precautions at the HAL plant, they need to be addressed and corrected.
At the same time, Indias aircraft industry would do better to produce, upgrade and use indigenous fighters (as done by China). It must lessen its dependence on imported goods. No country can become a superpower without adequate progress in the field of technology and without its own defence industry.
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | Points to Ponder
