Uhh.. India buys so many tanks, aircrafts, etc. because politicians here take a healthy cut on those deals. There's no strategy involved, it's pure business. Also, pointing at Pakistan as the enemy works because of long term cultural issues. The one time that the navy chief mentioned China's a worry - everyone scoffed at him and he was almost fired.
Source: My father was a senior air force pilot and was being coerced into buying obsolete airplanes from a dealer since the home minister's son was involved in making the deal.
sorry no offence, but that story sounds like less believable to me for some reasons.
1. airplane deals are not cleared by anyone but the senior most of general rank airforce officials, so can you please mention your father's exact rank level again?
2. Home minister's son you say? which home minister if you can mention?
3. If my father was a such a senior air force pilot, I would rather not be even mentioning this, because this is a accusation, and it really means a great deal to do so without proof. A family member of a senior airforce official, sounds a lot unbelievable to me. Sorry, but I can't believe your 'sources'
I'd rather not share any details even though my father passed away earlier this month. Rest assured, when I say senior pilot, I mean at the highest echelons of the forces. Yes, General Rank level indeed.
Maybe you don't know how deals work but they often require a recommendation from the people who are going to actually USE the equipment.
I don't see why you seem to be so upset about this. It's hardly a secret in India. I didn't say that my father agreed to be party to this, and neither do many other senior military officials, but this is a dirty game and no one denies that.
As for you not believing my sources, frankly, I don't really care.
I up-voted your parent and would down vote you if I could, here is why
(a) Defense deals are not the domain of the home minster, their oversight is the responsibility of the defense ministry.
(b) There have been 2 home minsters in the last 10 years
Shivraj Patil
P Chidambaram
Shivraj Patil and his children, Shailesh Patil and Archana Patil have faced regular accusations of corruption. The reports of their corruption are in the domain of land acquisition and obtaining permits for business that they would not otherwise have likely received. This was largely done using their fathers name and listing their home address as the home ministers residence in New Delhi. But neither of them are involved in the business of arms.
Chidambaram has 1 son Karti Chidambaram, who likewise has benefited from his fathers association. Chief among which was accusations that he received 5% stake in Aircel as kickbacks for other approvals from his father. Quote from wikipedia "according to The Pioneer and India Today reports, documents show that approval to the foreign direct investment (FDI) proposal was indeed delayed by about 7 months by P Chidambaram.". This was during the time that Chidambaram held the position of Finance minister. It would be likely that Karti benefited later from his father holding the home portfolio in the same manner as Shivraj Patil's children.
(c) From your own admission in this response, your father was to only make recommendations for purchase of equipment which is vastly different from have the authority to make purchase, which is what you claim in the first. I take it from the 2 comments that he recommended their purchase. Your comments show poor form for claiming something that is clearly not true.
(d) Last but not the least, your father spoke about matters that he had no reason to be addressing outside of his work place. The exceptions could be his role as a whistle blower which is definitely not the case here.
As someone whose father worked as director of DRDO organization and had purchasing authority for research equipment for a lab that employed 100000+ employees and 1000+ scientists, I can assure you my father never even in passing mentioned any work related information outside of work for obvious security implications.
The entire border security force falls under the home ministry. They buy large amounts of defense equipment. Get your facts straight before making a mountain out of a molehill. Recommendations at that level are the same as endorsements - and are also necessary for deals to go through FYI the particular deal I spoke of did not go through.
There's no point arguing this as I'm not really trying to prove anything here. India's defense deals suffer from large amounts of corruption and there is no question about that.
To say that certain people are only attracted to certain kinds of corruption as your post says is almost laughable.
It's also strange that you just registered to say all of this on a hacking related forum. Makes me think of you as the same person as rikacomet. You certainly don't have any credibility.
point (D) mentioned by you is the exact reason, I first doubted him. This is not something someone of that senior level usually does, nor does any of his family members do the same.
In his defense his father was in the Air force, he retired at the rank of Air Vice marshal and I would guess at the time when he claims to have heard from his father of the incident his father was the rank of Air commodore.
On "Air commodore" from wikipedia "Air commodore (Air Cdre in the RAF and IAF, AIRCDRE in the RNZAF and RAAF, formerly A/C in the RCAF) is a one-star rank and the most junior of the air-officer ranks". Note air-officer ranks are fairly high and take a number of years of service to achieve. However these ranks are fairly low when it comes to procuring equipment.
"Air Vice marshal" is one rank higher.
I do think he believes what he claims in his comments, I am just pointing out that his beliefs are vastly exaggerated. His father was likely asked about his recommendations of the aircraft but is unlikely to have any knowledge beyond that about the reason that a particular aircraft was procured. Everything else that he has heard is hear say.
Far more relevant is that the defense ministry has been headed by A.K. Antony since 2006. Antony is known for his incorruptible record and simple personal life, wikipedia has about 10+ references on where this claim originates from. Antony like wise has a very low profile and is rarely in the news. For anyone following Indian politics it is fairly well know that there are a handful of non-corruptible politicians across all affiliations in India. Antony has always been included amongst those.
Well, I would have rather not shared all this information but at the time my father was an AVM (i.e. a two star general) and was also the head of the air wing of the border security force. As head of an entire fleet, he pretty much had the authority to decide and recommend what he pleased. Also, his recommendations were of paramount importance, especially concerning new purchases. Obviously he wasn't happy when he was asked to recommend something in particular - and he didn't, that's probably why the deal failed.
So no, my beliefs are not highly exaggerated. They are just based on whatever was going on at the time. Take it as hearsay, take it as whatever you want.
I do however request that you remove/edit your post as it is personally identifiable and I will delete this post as well. I'd rather not have an online archive of all these things directly related to my father.
>I do however request that you remove/edit your post as it is personally identifiable and I will delete this post as well. I'd rather not have an online archive of all these things directly related to my father.
It would have been smarter to not post any information that could be linked to your identity in the first place.
Yes, but I wasn't being specific for that very reason. It's one thing to say "My dad was a senior official and had so and so experience" and it's another to have other people post personally identifiable information.
But in retrospect, it's probably not worth it because I'm not as invested in the argument as the other side. It was just to share an interesting story and nothing more.
I will apologize right now, of my free accord, if I doubted you wrongly. I'm going to be less of a skeptical person, and accept that yes he is what you said.
But I do want to make a note, that the opinion stating, that corruption is like bonfire in India, is wrong, it is not that rampant, it appears large, because of recent wave of it getting much media and public attention. Its like mud, it shouldn't be tossed in the air so it can fall on those who are not corrupt. Its too easy to say everyone is corrupt, hard to recognize who is corrupt and who is not. Plus point (D) above was something, I was not able to put in more clear words myself. It is not a good behavior, something, a lot of people in armed forces and alike avoid.
Are you joking? I travel to India frequently for business. I can assure you corruption is rampant at all levels I've had the misfortune of being in contact with (which is not very high level at all). You need to bribe everyone in Indian govt. to get them to do their jobs, for which they already get a salary.
>because this is a accusation, and it really means a great deal to do so without proof.
This is part of the attitude that gets on my nerves really. Public media is not a court of law. And that was by design that goes along with democracy. I won't deny the design has its problems, but i am more interested in seeing how the design can be improved. If you don't want to examine, just ignore the accusation.
So the exact details of the OPs story doesn't add up. Maybe it's because they're lying, maybe they're being deliberately vague as pr. your third point.
What I mean is that, I do not deny corruption prevalent in India, but, what I do question is his 'sources'. This is an opinion, not a question. I found it doubtful, thus I said. I felt it was worth mentioning, because my family is related to the armed forces as well, so anyone wrongfully hiding behind a fake persona putting a bad light on armed forces is also hurting me.
Fake persona ? I'm a regular at HN and use my real name here. Hardly a fake persona. You seem to be taking a rather emotional standpoint here for no valid reason.
I know you are a real person (duh!), but somehow I'm having doubts about the rest of it. Maybe I'm just being extra sceptical, but it would really help if you can prove your dad is really what you say he is.
If you know anything about how things work in India, you won't ask him to give concrete proof about dad. For the safety of his dad and other family members, he is right to keep details secret.
"less believable"?? Clearly, you are not familiar with India. In fact, if there is a huge arms deal for defense forces (or huge deal for anything), you can bet there is involvement of at least one politician to take his cut.
1. It has to be cleared by pilots, senior pilots in that list even clerical level staff come at places. If some one with expertise objects then that objection is either bought, or objector is coerced or sometimes eliminated (esp.) if the deal runs quite long into millions. This 'clearing by expertise/experts' thing was explained by a friend of mine currently posted at Yelahanka AFS.
2. I would like to know this too. Chidambaram has a son who is a crook and I am sure the father is one too. Not sure he was the one mentioned.
3. Well, this sounds credible(your counter-point I mean) and worrying :-)
The article uses "great power" as a synonym for 'buys lots of weapons' or more charitably "has a strong army". By these definitions, North Korea is a "great power".
India is decades away from being a 'great power'. Lots of internal problems to solve first (said as an Indian living in India)
I have never been to India but my girlfriend spent six months there. She would laugh at the title of this article. In her eyes, India has to radically change culturally before the country may blossom. For example, one cultural problem is that too many people just acquiesce in the face of difficulty.
The article uses "great power" as a synonym for 'buys lots of weapons' or more charitably "has a strong army". By these definitions, North Korea is a "great power".
Not true. You've mistaken "huge army" for "strong army". The DPRK military is huge (in terms of manpower). It is, nonetheless, not remotely capable enough to qualify as "great power".
yes, I would agree with you a lot on what you said above. The war with china (if any) is not on the military level, but is and should be on the socio-economic development issues.
we should ought to say, that we both have 1 billion+ people, lets see who can do things for them better, who can eradicate cancer/malaria/dengue/H1N1/etc, who can provide better education and opportunities, and much more.
The fights of today and tomorrow should not be fought with guns and explosives, it should be with budgets and plan implementations.
"Great power" ROFL. We are a nation where most of the country lives in poverty and have a truckload of economic and social problems that we like to sweep under the carpet. Importing weapons does not make us a "great power".
India is trying to be a "great power" in the 50s Soviet-era style.
Today's world is about soft power. India is woefully lacking there. It is beset by internal strife (the entire Northeast has been under some form of "martial law" (AFSPA) for 50 years). The central-western region has the Naxalite problem, which keeps on simmering and growing. And then there's Kashmir.
Aside from Bhutan, none of India's neighbors take it seriously. If India can't even project its power on its own borders, how will it do anything beyond?
The reality is: India's defence budget is basically a piggybank for political parties to fund the elections (and pad the bank accounts of senior politicians). The first thing a party does when it comes to power is sign some major defence deals (or "modify" deals in the pipeline, so they can get their cut also).
I think it even subsumes and helps explain the lack of a coherent military strategy - there's a lack of any direction at the highest levels of governance.
"If it doesn't get its act together, 10 years from now people might still be praising the BRICs, except that the "I" in BRIC might stand for Indonesia, not India."
Having personally experienced the massive dysfunction at all levels in India, this article makes almost no sense.
India's is ruled by corrupt and incompetent bunch of sycophants & dynasties that are incapable of thinking strategically at any level. The massive and entrenched corruption means that rather than tanks and planes, all an adversary needs is a chunk of cash - they could paralyze any decision making and ensure a Military dominance.
It's a pity that India and Pakistan both prefer spending insane amounts of money and effort in upgrading their military toys, rather than improving quality of education, health, and life in general for their citizens. In both countries, poverty rates, education standards and quality of life are among the worst in the world.
Pakistan and India need to invest more money and effort in being partners rather than enemies, they share almost the same grass root problems, so an increased cooperation will only improve the situation. I say this as a patriotic Pakistani who has spent his entire life (except for the last three years) in Pakistan.
eh this is useless postering getting reported for no reason.
why does importing tech ever matter? especially tanks? they need to have independent defense contractors within india fighting for contracts fairly; until then this is useless reporting because it won't even mention the incentives for politicians for importing this tech.
What happens when your importer cuts off supply? For a small country, you really have no option, but India is a huge country that is more than capable of domestic supply.
What if India was dependent on US arms, and war erupted with China? And what if the US, wanting to keep China and Pakistan onside for their own affairs, bottlenecks the supply of arms to keep them happy?
Or currently, with 50% of India's arms coming from Russia - overland they've either got to go through hostile Pakistan or China itself. By sea it's vulnerable to a strong navy, and you'd see a lot of Chinese naval activity east of Africa. With satellites and other modern tech, you can't play the hide-and-seek naval supply of yesteryear - surface shipping is incredibly vulnerable.
For a short notice (such an) event India might be in trouble unless some other nation/supplier comes forward with a better cost or commitment to some sort of alliance/favour or support and solidarity.
If it happens not in a war like situation then the contract was broken by the supplier and India is fully capable of using those manufacturer's patents and manual as recipe book just like China has been doing for decades. Now, that country can't go their government or Indian government and say - "hey, look we screwed India and now it's screwing us back".
If you wanted a short an final answer - then yes, India will be in trouble.
They were rhetorical questions in response to 'why should it be an issue'.
India is fully capable of using those manufacturer's patents and manual as recipe book
The article gives some examples of India failing to do exactly that. "It'll be alright on the night" is okay in theatre productions, because the worst that can happen is an evening's spoiled entertainment and you get a do-over the next night. Doesn't really work that way with national security if you're expecting it'll all come together once a war sparks.
>>The article gives some examples of India failing to do exactly that.
No, it doesn't. It mentions DRDO being not very efficient but that's because politicians are more interested in buying than start manufacturing. Engineers are made to sit duck, do bullshit PPTs and just sign the papers, oversee tenders and purchases. And I don't know about tank story.
DRDO cannot start making copies of Ak47 and GE engines on a whim. State decides that.
>>Tejas
It's a pretty good fighter plane. You can see it in action on tube :-)
>>It'll be alright on the night
Atleast I never said that. Fine if you are making a general benevolent observation.
That article talks about a lot of things that stands good and there other (majority) which pure speculative bull.
India, or rather its military expansion/presence is in my view as an Indian citizen, is in the right direction. Firstly this is in line with the fact, that we are a founder of Non Alignment Movement (1961), a movement, that in the shadows, kept the rest of the world powers out of the Cold War, as many might not know or think, NAM is one of the actual reason, that a war between the West Bloc and East Bloc never really happened. So yes, today, if we are not positioned as a anti-matter to any country, it is because of our roots. In fact, the whole conflict against Pakistan is passive, if we were US, we might have made permanent bases in Pakistan to keep them in check, like US did in Japan, but we didn't. With China, growing, we do not share the same sense of hostility as some do in the west. Anything India does is just actually a strategic action to balance its interest between this hostility. No offence, meant.
Anyways, the spending over the last few years in India, has rather been of modernizing nature than expansive nature. An example of that is 1.5 billion spent on a SECOND HAND aircraft carrier by India, of which we have near zero.
India as a great power? yes, India is becoming a great power military, politically, economically , socially, etc, but we would rather like the world to see our opinion on handling our military. This is actually a good article about India to make frontpage, since it allows the opportunity for us to showcase, that this is the land of Gandhi, we could have done a lot of things to Pakistan, but we knew, that our differences are deeper than any military discord.
As a muslim, I have also realized, that over the years, the problems of muslims of pakistan is NOT the problems of muslims of India, and they really need to work a lot of things up in Socio-Economic factors. A stable democratic govt, free from military control is one. We never had any coup, but pakistan did quite a few. This I'm saying not to offend anyone, but to highlight, how in India, Military and Civil establishments are parallel close lines, but in Pakistan, they are intersecting lines.
with proper education, the next generation of Indians and Pakistanis, will see and solve our basic problem of discord, that is to say, if other countries (none named) do not intervene for their own interest, which are quite a few, for example, a amalgamation of India-Pakistan would almost instantly increase our cotton production capacities, which are fundamentally supplementary to each other, and today are actually struggling because of our relations. Besides, we have near about same economic standards, and it would be like a catapulting India ahead of China almost instantly. But this is something, a lot of people don't see.
"NAM is one of the actual reason, that a war between the West Bloc and East Bloc never really happened."
This seems to be a view not widely held outside of NAM countries. Do you have any facts, events e.g. to support that claim? e.g. how NAM countries worked during the Cuban crisis? Or how NAM countries helped during the Able Archer crisis? Or how they were involved in the Berlin crisis of 61 with the T-54 and M-48 tank standoffs? (three events that come to mind where the cold war was nearly going hot)
yes, Please read the NAM wiki. The design of the NAM was actually for as per the official definition, was to break the cold war. And ever since, it so happened, it has been struck with a lack of direction.
Well, isn't it obvious? During cold war, countries were being pressed to join either of the blocs, but NAM provided a barrier against this pressing, when countries unanimously agreed to stay neutral and share the opinion.
Due to its nature, that whatever was happening, was on a diplomatic behind closed doors basis, where discussions were being held about stances hiding it from both US and USSR bloc, it is very hard to trace, what they really did, and how they did it. But, with a attendance of 55% or 115 countries, you cannot rule it out as just another organization.
please check out this official foreign policy extract from 1983, it was a big event in world politics. reading only the Introduction will let you know.
I have a plush toy on my desk here that keeps my town from being hit by asteroids. It works fantastic, no asteroids have hit this town since I put it there.
My claim that a plush toy has been keeping this town from being hit by asteroids is roughly equivalent to your claim that NAM countries were "the actual reason that a war between the West Bloc and the East Bloc never really happened".
A plush toy, is only a non-living thing, that sits and do nothing, NAM is a 115 country strong organization, most of which are countries that joined it to not align based on military issues, but on development issues, with someone like India, who have also been under colonial rule like them
"Due to its nature, that whatever was happening, was on a diplomatic behind closed doors basis, where discussions were being held about stances hiding it from both US and USSR bloc, it is very hard to trace, what they really did, and how they did it. "
does not contain any facts and sounds more like something from the X-Files.
I'm not sure what you mean with "NAM Wiki", if you mean the Wikipedia page, I've read that one and couldn't find anything on how they worked to prevent a war.
This is how it worked somewhat:
Bloc A and B are pressing Country C and D and more to join one of them. Alone, the pressure is a huge deal for these countries, who are fresh out of colonial rules. Country E, which was also under colonial rule until recently and shares a lot of things with these other countries decides to collaborate with them in dealing with the pressure, Bloc A and B are exerting. So together, all the countries were able to stand firm against this pressure, just like the story of 5 brothers and 5 sticks. On the other side, as a third front, they also pushed the Bloc A and B to hold bilateral talks.
I'm finding it difficult to reconcile the lack of prestige or power of Indian diplomacy (compare to China, France, UK, US, Russia) against the idea that they were significant behind closed doors in averting Cold War crises. Where did all this diplomatic skill go after the Cold War? Where was it before the Cold War crises really took off? Skilled diplomatic corps aren't things that can be conjured out of thin air.
Certainly India would have been a powerful addition to either side of the Cold War, and declaring a third path was a powerful statement to make in itself, but it doesn't follow that the Cold War would have gone live if it weren't for Indian diplomats.
Now, I don't really believe that India or NAM actually played a key/direct/active role in preventing a war on one those provocative and volatile occasions, triggered by either side but I do believe that NAM provided a platform for a large number of countries to stay out of the 'big-game'.
For one, it prevented the world from being totally polarized into two opposites which was, (no dear I do not have a mathematical proof for this statement), a good reason for shelling not happening across every border on this planet - well, simply because the idea of if you are not a friend you are an enemy was absent and NAM was the reason.
AFAIK NAM or India was not at all involved in any direct intervention of any war or war like situation (esp. b/w the big two). India was not capable of doing this either with military power or diplomacy. Hell, it just wanted to stay out of the cross-fire having recently been freed and trying to be on its own feet with a plethora or problems at hand related to caste, religion, education and poverty etc.
>>three events that come to mind where the cold war was nearly going hot
Yeah, that is what happens when sensational journalism and films take over. All we see and remember of a decades long conflict are cannons being fired and spies shooting with silencered pistols :-)
This. It didn't stop the USA and USSR from directly confronting each other, but the pledge of neutrality and a 'third bloc' formed by many significant countries from disparate parts of the world (particularly key were Yugoslavia, United-Arab-Republic/Egypt, Indonesia, India, etc.) undoubtedly had a big effect to ensure that the rest of the world wasn't about to be 'carved up' into spheres of influence or be drawn into proxy wars.
You are giving yourselves too much credit. A nuclear war between USA and USSR would be the war to end all wars. It matters not what other countries did or did not do. The only reason it did not happen is because thankfully both of them were not that crazy. It would have been MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). So my point is, what exactly are you giving yourself credit for?
I don't claim much knowledge of the far east, so this is just a gut reaction: to me (in the USA) I have always looked at India as being a very good partner for the USA. I think both countries share a lot of common values and have aligned interests.
I hope for an as good as possible relationships with China, but it seems like China's interests are not so well aligned with ours. (I am still waiting for China to join with possibly Russia, South America, and other regions to jump off of the US$ as their reserve currency.)
I have spent 13 years in the area and am currently/mostly in China's south-western area bordering Myanmar (very close to the disputed region in far north-eastern India). I am very lazily writing a history on the area, purely out of personal interest.
It's probaly worth pointing out that all of the borders in this area are essentially modern / historically largely irrelevant, dating basically from colonial times, and falling arbitrarily across significant ethnographic and cultural boundaries. In addition, the proxy economic/diplomatic conflict in Myanmar (nicely summarized at http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/03/china-didnt...) is a serious concern for all parties at present, and entirely excluded from the article.
The US is deeply involved there, and not for the first time, having operated a dangerous, famous and still well remembered and locally celebrated air route over the Himalayan foothills from eastern India known as 'The Hump' in support of Chinese resistance against the Japanese. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hump
Still earlier, the Americans were also to be chief suppliers of the ultimately failed English Myanmar-China train project much discussed in early 20th century English parliament (they were pretty jiffed the French beat them to it from Northern Vietnam). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yunnan-Burma_Railway (I snapped the pic there!)
I don't see India projecting any influence in this part of China, really. There are few Indian businesses, commercial envoys or students (unlike Bangladeshi, Burmese, Korean, Thai, etc.). Of late the eastern Indian area (Brahmaputra valley) at which the northern section exists the greater disputed area has been mostly opened to tourists for the first time. Most of the 'Burmese' present here are actually Bangladeshi Muslim traders who have acquired Burmese documentation. Buddhists are few and far between.
My understanding is that local governors of that part of India are keen to trade with China and re-open the (American-army-corps engineered, but largely local labourer-built) Stillwell Road ("Burma Road"), and there have been India/China discussions to that effect for many years now. No action though, and the proxy political conflict in Burma is probably going to result in further delays. Though plans have been announced for railways to Myanmar from China (and early political posturing for onward links to Bangladesh), nothing seems to have moved and recent politicking probably means long delays on any concrete development.
This is all further complicated by Chinese relations with the Kachin, Wa and Shan armies along Myanmar's northern periphery, their not insignificant presence on the Chinese side of the border (especially the Wa and Shan/Dai/Tai), the presence of opium, the China government's widely assumed and somewhat evidenced involvement in its large-scale trans-shipment, the historical presence of nationalist (Taiwanese) anti-communist warlords in the region.
NB. Earlier in my career I had some experience dealing with the Indian Military. Lots of posturing culminated in untold swathes of military officials listening to technical presentations for which they obviously had no competency (asking irrelevant questions, etc.)
Source: My father was a senior air force pilot and was being coerced into buying obsolete airplanes from a dealer since the home minister's son was involved in making the deal.