Large defence acquisitions in India have invariably been mired
in scandals, which disrupt the acquisition process impinging
on long term national security. Luckily for India its external
threats have receded. Nuclear parity with Pakistan’s and the
revelation of Hatf VII (Babur), a superior sub sonic cruise
missile with a 500 kg nuclear war head and 300km range, makes
all out war suicidal for both nations. The PM’s offer to work
towards a treaty of Peace, Security and Friendship should be
viewed in that light. It is a harkback to Pakistan’s earlier
offer of a ‘No War Pact’, which India had rubbished. It was
because America had turned a blind eye to Pakistan’s nuclear
capability, and India was wary, but now the tide has turned in
India’s favour. India is USA’s ally and President Bush
recently cold shouldered Pakistan. The change in the balance
of power equation is apparent.
With a defence
budget four times larger than Pakistan’s, India can out weapon
all its neighbours combined. Pakistan presently, is beset with
huge internal problems of governance, while its Army is
heavily deployed to quell uprisings in Baluchistan, Waziristan
and by Taliban, which they claim have the hand of Indian
intelligence agencies behind them –– like RAW had done for the
Mukti Bahini in 1971. India’s aims in the Afghanistan and Iran
border regions are unclear to most analysts. Therefore
Pakistan relies on its first use nuclear arsenal kept in
readiness, as an insurance against any of India’s moves that
would threaten the integrity of
Pakistan. India
should welcome the revival of a no war pact.
In
India
today, unfortunately the antennae of defence and economic
planners’ are tuned to catching up with China, and the Indian
Maritime Doctrine looks at the Indian Ocean, as the Navy’s
lake of responsibility, which raises the hackles of China. The
Indian Navy’s expansion plan is the largest undertaken by any
developing nation, and India’s priorities are now set to
acquire strategic assets. For this submarines are a most vital
component, more than aircraft carriers. All of
South East Asia is acquiring submarines.
The HDW
submarine scandal of the early 90s erupted when India’s
Ambassador in Germany reported commission taking. This led to
a drawn out CBI inquiry which came to naught. The Navy’s order
for two more home built boats died along with the expertise of
submarine building. Today the Navy’s operational submarine
fleet of 15 with one third in refit is destined to deplete and
age, unless new submarines are acquired. Media reports say
that 100 Indians with families are receiving training at
Sosnovy Bar a small village near St Petersburg, and Russian
inputs suggest it is for two nuclear Akula submarines
completing construction at Kosomolsk-on Amur. India needs to
possess nuclear submarines. Admiral Zumwalt had said, “The
Ocean is the area with the greatest potential to produce major
shifts in the global power balance”. Submarines are ideal for
stealth patrols, and nuclear boats can speedily cover vast
spaces and also provide
India
its nuclear deterrent, so essential for
India’s
no first use policy.
In January INS
Sindhukriti entered the cash strapped Hindustan Shipyard Ltd
under the Ministry of Shipping at Vishakapatnam, for a Rs 580
crore refit, the first ever Kilo class submarine in India,
replicating the refits the Navy had got done in Russia, for
Klub missile conversion. Analysts say Kilo refits in India
could take longer than the nearly two years it takes in
Russia, because of the learning curve in Indian conditions.
This needs to be factored.
The Navy’s $4b
six Scorpene deal with the Armaris-Thales combine, has
recently been put under CBI’s scanner as Emails, accusations
and innuendoes of money taking with names have appeared in the
media. Far reaching statements have been made on TV. More
details keep cropping up and the issue has now got linked to
the War Room Leak of 2005. Three responsible officers serving
in Navy’s nerve center in South Block, were dismissed from
service without pensions, by the Defence Minister Pranab
Mukherjee under the same draconian Art 310 linked with 311 of
the Indian Constitution, which was employed by George
Fernandes to summarily remove CNS Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat in
1998, without rank or pension (later restored) under
President’s powers.
Late Justice
Shah who contributed a lot to the writing of India’s
Constitution had warned Pandit Nehru not to include this
colonial clause, as it was a legacy from the British, who have
no written Constitution. The article was meant for the British
Armed Forces who operated at great distances from Whitehall.
The designated authorities were delegated powers to dismiss
officers abroad and have them transported back to UK for
trial. But Nehru, fearful of coups, insisted on its inclusion.
Justice Shah then pleaded that since officers serve at the
Pleasure of the President as the doctrine is termed, the
President should be allowed to ‘apply his mind’ before
enforcing the article. Panditji closed the matter saying he
did not wish to have a Presidential system of governance.
The article
has stayed, and has been used and misused, as a threat to make
officers resign. A Navy Captain’s services were so terminated
a few years ago with no publicity when he was compromised by a
hostile intelligence agency. Yet despite the ramifications of
the Vishnu Bhagwat case, when in 1999 the Government fell in
its wake, the procedure of how this draconian power is to be
exercised has not been defined. By default, as there is no
reference to this Article in the lengthy Rules of Transaction
of Business issued by the Government, the Defence Minister
exercises the absolute power to use this powerful tool to
dismiss an officer. Many feel it contradicts the tenets of
article 14 of the Constitution, that of equality before law.
The Scorpene deal is witnessing a CBI
inquiry, Public Interest Litigation and individual litigations
in the war room leak case, and if not resolved soon, the
Navy’s submarine acquisition plans could be set back once
again. Competitors like HDW and the cheaper Amur offered by
Russia,
even when the Scorpene deal was being considered, may try to
make come backs.
What has led to the machinations are now
being discussed in hushed tones, and innuendoes of money
taking keep appearing in the media, but the bottom line is
that the Navy’s submarine acquisition plans should be safe
guarded. For the future the procedure to use Article 311 must
be spelt out
by the Governmentin the list of Transactions of
Business. The President, Prime Minister or Cabinet should be
made the referral authority, so that it is seen to be above
board, as is the case in so many cases including one of a
member of the Election Commission running a trust, which is
presently doing the stipulated rounds.
As per the Government’s business rules the
President has referred it to the Prime Minister who can close
the matter, or refer it to the Election Commissioner for final
disposition. The PM has chosen to seek legal advice. Officers
in uniform deserve similar justice. |