By Prof Satya Narayan Misra
New Delhi. Where you stand depends on where you sit is an aphorism used in terms of politics, is equally applicable to geopolitics.
Where India sits is the single most determinant of its options on the world stage, where the unipolar dominance of the US in the last two decades has given way to a bipolar challenge of China and Russia, counterbalancing the Western hegemony. The dehyphenated foreign policy which the Indian Government has been pursuing over the last decade has been subject of swirling debate and muted approbation.
There is, however, little doubt that the current BJP Government has been successful in embedding a perception of a powerful India as the fastest growing country globally, outpacing China, not just among people inside India and the diaspora at large. How much of this perception is based on fact and how much is smoke and mirrors needs to be parsed?
Given the US – Russia covert understanding on Ukraine and softening of stance in trade between US and China, lately with China agreeing to buy soybean from the US,and alsoallowing export of rare earth magnets to it.
India’s foreign policy options look unenviable, if not intractable.
Trump’s World View
Henry Kissinger had observed during Trump’s first tenure (2017-20020) :“ I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appear from time to time to mark the end of an era and force it give up its old pretences.” He kick started the process by dismantling Obama’s vision of a United States of Europe through the Trans-PacificPartnership (TPP). He also evinced a deep aversion for global institutional arrangements and the liberal order that was spawned by USA as the prima donna.
The familiar anchors of the old order are being uprooted, and this is dramatically beingdemonstrated with its insanely abnormal high tariff on India (bracketing with Brazil. The US does not see India as a major power in the same league as China and Russia, and it may also no longer value India as key to countervail China’s expanding power in Indo–Pacific.
For Trump, land is a key marker of power.
The outlandish claim to Greenland, the demand for restoration of US-built Panama canal , Canada as the 51st state of the US of A reflect the hemispheric frame in his thinking, in which the US rules over the Americas, the Russians dominate Europe and China is conceded hegemony over Asia.
Making up with Russia would rekindle China-Russian rivalry. But China and Russia have built a more comprehensive partnership that extends beyond defence and security to economic development. Strategic depth of Russia is in its long frontier to the North. It is also a source of energy and critical minerals.
China and Russia will join together to contain the USA , should such an eventuality arise. It was demonstrated when the US imposed sanctions on Russia after its invasion of Ukraine.
Defence Deals with Russia
India signed the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with Russia in 1971, spurring a large number of technology transfers followed by production in India of T 90 Tanks, Armoured Vehicles, Artillery Guns, Mig 21, Mig 29 fighters and, also the Su 30 Multirole jets.
Deals with Israel
From a predominantly hyphenated defence acquisition, India also bought a number of UAVs from Israel starting with 2002, and followed with a megadeal in 2004 for Falcon Airborne Warning & Control System (AWACS) at $1.1 billion. India has been buying Heron and Searcher drones, Radars and Missiles
Honeymoon with USA
The honeymoon with USA started in 2005, with a new framework for US-India Defence Relations. India’s procurement looked at competitive tendering.
India went in for mega defence buys from USA like C130 J Hercules transport aircraft in 2008 for $1 billion, P 81 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft for $2.1 billion, AH-64E from Boeing, C-17 Globe master heavy transport aircrafts for $5 billion. The Services showed a clear predilection for American surveillance and transport aircraft over their earlier acquisitions from Russia. This understandably upset our Russian partners, who sensed New Delhi’s tilt towards Washington.
Nonetheless, the government’s procurement of S400 air defence systems in 2018 for $5.4 billion from Russia was clearly a watershed moment in India’s defence procurement from Russia, giving credence to our strategic autonomy in the choice we make about the platforms we choose and the country we want we buy from.
Transfer of Technology (ToT)
Over the years, the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has also introduced norms for ToT for indigenous production. Manufacturing countries do not part easy with key technologies but the agreements being worked out now do have a clause to negotiate during acquisitions.
The first instance of ToT was the acquisition of 400 Bofors FH 77 155 mm artillery Field Guns from Sweden, with the then Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, insisting on ToT as a policy. Unfortunately, one of his ministers, VP Singh, alleged that there was corruption in the deal and that the “Bofors fired backwards and killed own troops.” VP Singh successfully replaced Rajiv Gandhi as PM.
In the 1999 Kargil War, Bofors actually decimated the high altitude Pakistani positions, and the Indian victory was credited 80 percent to the precision hits inflicted by this gun.
The ToT India obtained under the 1986 deal has been wasted over the years, but recently it has been shared with private Indian companies assigned to build indigenous artillery weapons.
Contending with Russia and USA
President Vladimir Putin’s recent visit to India is predicated on three themes, increasing bilateral trade from the existing $69 billion to $100 billion by 2030, increasing export of energy and most importantly selling more S400 Triumf Long Range Air Defence Systems which proved most potent against Pakistani drone attacks in OP Sindoor.
While India wants an indigenous production base for the S 400, it is also considering acquisition of its newer variant, the S500 Prometheus SAM, which has a longer range and operationally higher altitude to hit targets.
Fifth Gen Fighter Jets
But the deal in which both USA and Russia are keenly competingwith each other is about stealth aircraft.
While Russia is peddling the SU 57, President Donald Trump is up with the F35.
For the first time, Trump is also willing to share some technology for critical subsystems with India.
Russia though has been the most durable and reliable technology transferring country. India has licence produced Mig 21, Mig 29 and SU 30 aircraft as well as T72 and T 90 tanks, frigates, submarines and cruise missiles. The Russian M 46 130mm artillery guns and Mig 21 aircraft played a key role as far back as 1971 when the Indian Army decimated Pakistani positions, leading to the liberation of East Pakistan as Bangladesh.
Comparative Costings
It would be interesting to compare SU 57 with F35 stealth aircraft:
| Feature | SU-57 | F-35 |
|---|---|---|
| Stealth Capability | Good | Excellent |
| Speed | Mach 2 | Mach 1.8 |
| Manoeuvrability | High | High |
| Avionics | Advanced | Advanced |
| Unit Cost | USD 35–50 million | USD 80–100 million |
| Numbers Produced | 20 | 600 |
The Hobson Choice
India signed a Preliminary design contract with Russia for a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft in 2010,with both India and Russia investing $6 billion each for a twin engine version of SU57.The project was shelved in 2018 due to concerns over SU57 stealth capability compared to that ofthe F35.
Russia has though made a new offer to revive the project , including technology transfer and joint production.
The writer was Joint Secretary (HAL ) in the Ministry of Defence with close involvement in defence cooperation with Russia.
