Large defence acquisitions in
India
like the HDW, Bofors, Denel, the Baraks from
Israel
and recently the $4b six Scorpene submarine deal with Armaris/Thales,
have been mired in controversies, and this phenomenon is not
peculiar to India alone. Mark Thatcher, son of Baroness Margaret
Thatcher, and BAE in UK have both been subjected to inquires in
large arms sales to Saudi Arabia and Chile, and have witnessed
extensive media coverage for their purported involvements. So far
nothing has come of them. The connivance of Roland Dumas Foreign
Minister of France with oil giant Total, in the French Frigate sale
to Taiwan stands proved, and Dumas lost his job but his jail
sentence is in abeyance.
As of writing a controversy is still breathing in South Africa
involving former Vice President Zuma, who was sacked by President
Mbeike. In S Africa’s case Germany mysteriously bagged the four MEKO
frigate deal, which was diverted from Spain, at the last moment. In
South Africa an independent investigative agency called Scorpion,
akin to India’s CBI has tabled its findings, and unsubstantiated
snippets keep finding their way into the media, like the Scorpene
deal in India, which is being investigated by CBI and is being
linked to the now famous ‘Navy’s war room leak’. The list of cases
of money taking in defence deals world over is large, and only in
Japan in an unusual case, Prime Minister Tanaka spent time in jail
for his involvement in the Lockheed bribery case.
It is well acknowledged that a percentage between 5 to 15% of the
contract money is set aside towards clinching large defence deals in
developing countries, as the acquisition process varies, and
political parties expect cuts as it is they who decide out of
multiple choices tabled by the Armed Forces. Normally, legally
appointed agents facilitate the deal, but in 1986 Rajiv Gandhi had
banned Defence Agents. Hence arms dealers, openly came into play and
most of the big ones operated as NRIs with contacts in India. It
needs noting, proving a case against NRIs whose world income is not
subject to India’s Income tax laws is difficult, and also political
parties invariably influence the investigations. In the case of
Bofors the smaller amount of moneys that were paid abroad to late
Win Chaddha were legitimate winding up Agency charges, and the
Hindujas received their dues as retainers from Bofors, which the CBI
tried in vain, to prove were commissions. It was AE Services of UK
which negotiated the Bofors contract, and Quatrocchi who was earlier
involved in commission taking in fertilizer and pipeline deals as
per details revealed by a former CBI Jt Director B R Lall in his
book, “Who Owns CBI”, got away with the large Bofors commissions. In
early 2006 by the deputation of a law officer to London who released
his moneys, the case has died a death, after millions were spent in
investigating the case for over 20 years. In the Bofors or other
cases not a single uniformed officer was found to be involved in
money taking, and in the Tehelkha case the moneys that a few black
sheep were tempted to take, were minor sums. They have been punished
by courts martial, and matters closed and the Army deserves to be
congratulated.
Long delays in disposing off the investigations in defence affects
the morale of the services, as many innocent officers are called in
to give evidence. It also invariably delays procurement due to black
listing of supplier companies. This impinges on National Security.
Luckily for the Governments that have guided India’s defence since
the 90s, threats of war had receded, and yet it was the Bofors 155mm
Howitzer that saved the day for
India
in the Kargil war. Both Israel and S Africa supplied much needed
ammunition to ensure the Army could shell the Kargil heights, and S
Africa’s Denel was readying to supply G5/6 155mm guns on lease if
the Kargil war was prolonged. Today the nuclear, and more recently
the missile equation with
Pakistan
makes all out war a remote possibility.
India
with its four times the defence budget of
Pakistan
has also out weaponised its neighbours, though the arms race
breathes. This brings one to the current situation.
The $4b six Scorpene deal with the Armaris/Thales combine, has been
put under CBI’s scanner, which could take ages. Emails, accusations
and innuendoes of money taking with names have been brought out by
the media especially by successive editions of Outlook including
statements on TV, linking it with the War Room Leak of 2005. Three
senior officers serving in the war room and one IAF officer were
arbitrarily removed from service by the Defence Minister Pranab
Mukherjee under the same draconian Art 310 of the Indian
Constitution, which was employed by George Fernandes to remove
Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat in 1998, under President’s powers, without
inquiry. Late Justice Shah who contributed a lot to the writing of
India’s constitution had warned Pandit Nehru not to include this
hung over clause borrowed from the British into the Constitution,
but Nehru fearing coups then rampant in our neighborhood, in Iraq
and Egypt insisted. Justice Shah then requested Panditji to include
the words that the President should be asked apply his mind before
the article is enacted and Panditji retorted, that he did not wish
to have a Presidential system of governance. The article stayed and
at times has been used as a threat to make officers resign. The
decision cannot be challenged in law except on technicalities and
despite the Vishnu Bhagwat case, the procedure has not been defined,
and so the Defence Minister has the sole power as enshrined in the
11th Schedule of powers of business. Public interest and
individual litigations cases have been filed, and this has created a
pall of gloom on the Navy’s morale. In fact Capt Kayshap Kumar
dismissed under President’s Pleasure has been absolved by CBI, and
this creates a piquant situation for the MOD and the Navy. It is
hoped the procedure for use of this Article will now be redefined as
the officer’s case is now in court.
In the case of the Navy, it is true that smoke emitted from the war
room and therefore there had to be a fire, but the media has reveled
in its many analysis, and targeted individuals on hearsay, as no one
knows how big the fire is. The ‘hanky panky’, by a few serving Navy
and Air Force officer needs to be looked at in perspective, as it
affects morale of the service in the eyes of the public. It now
seems retired Lt Cdr Shankaran and his associate also a retired Lt
Cdr Prashar have been the beneficiaries of some payments in foreign
exchange, which only Shankaran can clarify, and with all the powers
with the Government who have impounded his passport, Shankaran
cannot be traced. This speaks poorly of our intelligence agencies
and our rapport with Interpol which has a red corner alert. Indian
Navy’s former CNS Admiral Arun Prakash whose wife is the aunt of
Shakaran before demitting office, when asked a specific question on
the war room leak case in a leading magazine, had this to say.
Q.
Of late, there have been some news stories in certain sections of
the press on issues which involve you. Does it affect you?
Answer. (laughs)
“Once you have been given the responsibility of being the Chief of
the Indian Navy and given the challenge of defending the maritime
interests of the country, there is little time to think about other
matters. However, let me state that whatever might come out in the
press, the Indian Navy has always acted entirely in accordance with
the letter and spirit of the law as laid down in our regulations,
and in consultation with all concerned authorities. As far as I am
concerned, my conscience is absolutely clear, or I would not be here
today. My primary concern is the image of my Service and the morale
of the men and women who work tirelessly day in and day out in the
service of the nation. I would like to re-assure them through your
magazine that a false and motivated campaign of disinformation by
certain sections of the media cannot divert the Indian Navy’s focus
on its primary task, which is to defend the maritime interests of
our great country. Every individual in the Indian Navy is a part of
this bigger picture and we need to get on with our task of making
India a great maritime power. I am proud and happy doing my bit for
the country and Indian Naval Forces”.
The Government needs to heed the words used by a former chief
who was also the Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee. The Government
needs to take the case out of the CBI’s dilatory hands, like has
happened in UK and Australia, appoint a Commission of Inquiry to
quickly investigate the matter with CBI’s assistance and ensure that
the War Room leak does not keep reappearing like Banquo’s ghost to
haunt the fine Indian Navy.
In defence of the millions of dedicated officers of the armed
forces and their morale, the investigation needs speedy disposal and
the modality of employing Article 310 in the future needs to be
approved by the Cabinet under Article 75 of the Constitution, or the
Prime Minister the de facto C-in-C of the Armed Forces. This will
ensure that the morale of the fine services does not suffer any
further.