India continues on the war-path

Patron Lt Gen (Retd) SARDAR F.S. LODI does not detect any change in India’s hostile attitude.

During Russian President Vladimir Putin’s four-day state visit to India from 2-5 October both countries signed a series of major multi-million dollars arms contracts. Under the agreements signed, Russia will supply India 310 of the latest missile-firing T-90 tanks. 150 tanks being bought outright and the rest assembled in India under licence. This deal is worth more than $800-900 million and the first batch of tanks, are expected to arrive in India in the next few months.

Another arms contract, which is worth more than two billion dollars is for the licenced production of 140 Sukhoi SU-30M multi-role fighters. India had ordered 50 SU-30 in a separate deal signed in 1996 worth $ 1.8 billion. 16 aircraft from this earlier deal are already in the country. SU-30 aircraft are long-range fighters capable of carrying a considerable load of bombs and rockets. These aircraft can be refuelled in the air and have the capability of covering three-forth of China.

Another major arms contract is for the purchase of the 30,000-tonne aircraft carrier, ‘Admiral Gorchkov’. The carrier is being offered free, but would cost around $ 750 million to refurbish. Its fleet air arm aircraft MiG-29K jets would cost another $ 1.2 billion.

India has already run up a huge debt through its heavy arms purchases from the former Soviet Union and still owes Russia an estimated Rs. 200 billion or about $ 4.5 billion. This is being paid in instalments in Indian rupees. To settle the debt India transfers Rs. 30 billion ($ 651 million) a year to a Russian account held with the Central Reserve Bank of India.

The new contracts for the purchase of arms from Russia would in all probability be on the same easy terms of payment in Indian rupees spread over many years. India is prepared to purchase large quantities of modern arms and equipment on credit and keep a large standing army, navy and airforce when there is no apparent threat to her security from her small neighbours. This feverish arms acquisition by India is certainly a source of serious concern in South Asia, as it will tend to destabilize the region.

Over and above the large arms deal with Russia, India has been purchasing arms and equipment from western sources as well. An order for the purchase of 66 Hawk advance jet training aircraft is expected to be placed with British Aerospace in the United Kingdom, this is worth around $ 1 billion. 10 French made Mirage fighters have been ordered to supplement 40 Mirage 2000s acquired in 1986. In a separate deal India has entered into a contract for a mid-life upgrade of 125 MiG-21 fighter planes. The first batch of these planes is expected back from Russia early next year. Another 125 MiG-21Bs will be upgraded in India at Hindustan Aeronautics.

India has also been purchasing Russian ship and submarine launched anti-ship cruise missiles, the 3M-54E. These have been fitted to the latest Kilo-class submarine supplied to India. The submarine was contracted at St. Petersburg and sailed for India in late August this year.

Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes said on October 18, 2000, that there would be no let up in the modernisation of India’s Armed Forces and purchase of defence hardware as the country had to cope with a deteriorating regional security environment. Mr Fernandes made these remarks while delivering the defence minister’s traditional address, to an annual conference of the seniormost commanders of the Armed Forces in New Delhi.

The Indian Defence Minister’s remarks were somewhat baffling. Which deteriorating regional security was he referring to that has prompted India to rearm so feverishly and at a tremendous cost to the tax payer and the poor masses of India. The Indian Defence Minister seems to ignore the fact that India and its massive arms purchases from all available sources are the main threat to the security and future stability of the entire region. The Russian President may have overlooked this fact as well during his recent visit to India.

Mr. Fernandes went on to say that there was a growing recognition of the role India could play in ensuring regional and global peace. This is a role that India may well be assigning to itself, as it would fit in with her hegemonic designs in South Asia, but would certainly not be acceptable to her small neighbours. “A militarily strong and confident India backed by a vibrant economy is the need of the hour,” he said.

Mr Fernandes said the security environment in “India’s immediate and extended neighbourhood had continued to deteriorate over the years.” He noted the increase in international and cross-border terrorism and called for continuous efforts to monitor developments in this area in a focused manner. The use of the word terrorism in any form with reference to the freedom struggle in Kashmir is the official Indian policy now as it evokes the picture of dread and horror in the West and helps to mask the grave human rights violations by security forces in Indian-held Kashmir. Use of the word terrorism also helps to malign Pakistan and keep her on the defensive.

Pakistan government has understandably shown considerable concern at India’s large-scale induction of additional arms into a region where eyeball to eyeball confrontation of forces still continues. Foreign ministry spokesman Riaz Mohammad Khan told a news conference on October 9, that in contrast to Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf’s call to India for mutual reduction in arms and Armed Forces. The Indo-Russian massive arms deal during Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent visit to New Delhi had caused natural concern in Pakistan, as it would destabilize the region.

Mr George Fernandes assured his senior Armed Forces commanders that India had emerged as the “clear victor,” both in military and diplomatic terms, from last year’s Kargil border conflict with Pakistan. India’s forceful propaganda and the Defence Minister’s sense of self-delusion overlooked the fact that without urgent American intervention on the side of India, the fate of Indian forces in Kargil and the Siachin glacier would have been completely different. The future of the subjugated people of Indian-held Kashmir would have changed for the better. If Kargil was a victory for India as declared by the Defence Minister, why is India purchasing sophistic and modern arms in such large quantities.

India has been raising her defence budget for many years now. This year’s increase has been the largest, a whooping 28 per cent over the previous year. About 60 per cent of the increase has gone towards acquisition of new weapons. Lieut. General Vinay Shankar, Director General Artillery in India has just announced that India is purchasing more Bofors 155 mm Howitzers from Sweden. He gave two reasons for this addition, the guns have a long range of 30 km and can fire a heavier shell causing more damage. In the rarefied atmosphere at Kargil heights the guns fired up to 40 km, he said.

A Washington based weekly the ‘Defence News,’ reported recently that India is planning to purchase military arms and equipment to the tune of US$ 25 billion over the next 15 to 20 years. This is a lot of unnecessary investment in military hardware when there is no apparent threat to India’s security from her small neighbours. This large military acquisition will certainly destabilize the region. Any hope of reinitiating the peace process through a meaningful dialogue will also be prematurely abandoned. Is India on the war-path, is the moot question being discussed by military thinkers and analysts who are working towards peace in South Asia.

Commenting on India’s large purchases of modern weapons and equipment, the prestigious Institute of Strategic Studies in its annual assessment mentions that this (Indian purchase of arms) is occurring at a time when military tensions still dominate Pak-India relations. THE NATION newspaper in its editorial on October 21, writes: “Pakistan has to face a future where its largest and most hostile neighbour is arming itself in both conventional forces and weapons of mass destruction.” It is certainly a sobering thought and one cannot but doubt India’s actual intentions in South Asia and the region around it.

A senior Indian Army officer Major General V. K. Madhok (Retd) explained it rather well in his article titled ‘Entrapped in the Lethal Game of Arms Deal,’ published in ‘The Sentinel’ on 20 September, 2000. He writes that the Russians have a proliferating arms market in India. In spite of Indian defence industries with a turnover of over Rs 6,000 crore a year “yet, huge defence imports are being made.” He says Rs1,000 crore a year are spent on the import of spares needed for the maintenance of imported defence equipment used at present by the three Services in India.

General Madhok goes on to say that in the last three years, Indian defence delegations visited Israel and Italy in February 1997, the Army and Naval Chiefs have visited South Africa and Russia respectively in July 1998 to scout for armoured vehicles, missiles and ammunition for Bofors 155 mm Howitzers. He said: “During and post-Kargil is another story, where our delegations have been rushing to UK, Sweden, Italy, South Africa, France and Germany to buy a variety of defence hardware.”

The Indians are now becoming conscious of the large amounts being spent on defence, primarily to combat internal ‘insurgencies’ in Indian-held Kashmir and the Eastern provinces of India. This is particularly so after the former Indian Army Chief General V.P. Malik while still in service had expressed his strong views, that the problem of Kashmir could not be solved by the application of force and, therefore, a political solution had to be found. At present India’s defence budget according to General Madhok is more than Rs 50,000 crore for 2000-2001 and there is every reason to believe, he says, that it will not be less than Rs 65,000 crore for 2001-2002. An increase of 30 per cent next year.

Aside from the imports, India is also increasing her stockpiles of home made missiles. ‘The Economic Times’ of New Delhi reported this in its issue of 8 September 2000, quoting the Washington based ‘Defence News.’ The report said that India was to go ahead with full production of about 300 short-range surface-to-surface Prithvi missiles for all three branches of the defence forces. The ‘Defence News’ quoted Indian Government sources. Prithvi is a Pakistan-specific short range missile capable of reaching most of the commercial and military targets in Pakistan. Its serial production is a direct threat to the security of Pakistan.

The report said that the decision to produce the missiles was taken by defence minister George Fernandes on 25 August, 2000. The serial production of 300 Prithvis is estimated to cost around $ 200 million. These will be built at Bharat Dynamics in Hyderabad, India. The Indian Army required over 150 Prithvis with a range of 150 km while the Navy needed about 50 missiles of equal range. About 150 Prithvi missiles with a longer range of 250 kms have to be produced to meet the requirement of the Air Force. The Naval version of Prithvi will move to serial production in April 2001.

Similarly Seema Mustafa writing in ‘The Asian Age’ of New Delhi on 2 September, 2000, in an article titled ‘Holes in the Armour’ says: “Unfortunately Kargil has been used only for further stockpiling of weapons. “She says that the only lesson learnt by the generals in command and the politicians in charge, is to open the doors for the arms manufacturers, the arms dealers, the conmen and the thugs who have been milking this country dry in the name of defence and security.

India has been on a weapons-buying spree since the conflict on the Kargil heights in the Summer of 1999. This has been done on the pretext of providing a balance in her forces and to overcome the shortcomings pointed out by the experts for their tactical and strategic failures in the short border conflict within Indian-held Kashmir. The causes of failure surely lie elsewhere and are not relevant to the present holding of weapons and equipment by the Army or the Air Force. India now finds it convenient to use the Kargil debacle to import a disproportionate amount of modern arms for her overall national aims in the region.

India’s recent military arms and equipment import contracts with Russia include M-90 tanks, SU-30 long range fighters, submarine launched cruise missiles and an aircraft carrier. These major weapon systems can by no stretch of the imagination ‘correct’ the imbalance of India’s forces on the  Kashmir heights. Kargil is certainly being used to hoodwink world opinion, while India imports weapons to serve her future plans and national goals in the region, which would certainly be to the detriment of her small neighbours particularly Pakistan.

While India continues to arm in a big way, tension will not decrease in South Asia as some had hoped, but may in fact increase. These new weapons are likely to give India a false sense of military superiority which when combined with the notion that India also has western support due to ‘terrorism’ and other factors, may harden India’s stand on solving bilateral issues in a peaceful manner without recourse to arms. The long visits undertaken by the Presidents of the USA and Russia, have bolstered India’s belief in the rightness of her aim of dominating the region and beyond, by force arms if necessary.

Any defence analyst can see that the constant imports of sophisticated arms by India are well beyond her legitimate defence requirements and are meant for other purposes. The items being imported from Russia are certainly designed to project India’s power and economic interests beyond her frontiers in South Asia and later to the area on the outer fringes of the region. This is now becoming a source of concern to the countries lying in the path of future Indian expansion.

Although Pakistan has decided not to enter into an arms race with India, but in view of the large scale acquisition of arms by the large and aggressive neighbour some military adjustments will have to be made by Pakistan and some imbalances corrected at an early date. This would be required despite the financial handicaps the country has been placed in over the years. The public would demand adequate defence of the country’s borders.

When all is said and done India must realize that her desire and intention to dominate the region and be an arbiter of its destiny would not be acceptable to her small neighbours under any circumstances. These Indian expansionist intentions will also be looked at with suspicion by the countries lying on the outer periphery of the region. India should also keep in mind that she will not succeed in becoming a regional power as long as there is tension and conflict on her frontier, which is certainly of her making. There must be peace with her neighbours and the national desire to maintain it.

India should show moral courage and the political will to seek and foster peace in South Asia. As a large country with separatist tendencies within her, it is in the interest of the Indian Union to have peace with her neighbours and to avoid a temptation to pose as a dominating power in the area. Flexing of muscles and the use of force has never brought peace. The new millennium is an era of peace and progress for mankind. The people of South Asia demand and deserve their full share of progress and prosperity unhindered by the threat or use of force.