| OPINION | |
|
India’s rising military expenditure |
|
![]() |
Patron Lt Gen (Retd) SARDAR F.S. LODI analyses our neighbour increasing defence budget. |
|
India
continues to arm and expand her Armed Forces at an unprecedented scale and
yet talk of peace and stability in South Asia. India already has the third
largest Army in the world and is the biggest military power in the South
Asian region, with no external threat whatsoever to her security. This
feverish expansion in her military’s aggressive potential is most likely
to upset the regional balance of power in South Asia, thereby,
destabilizing the region and may be edging it closer to an armed conflict. In
the present budget presented to parliament for the financial year
2001-2002 defence has been allocated Rs 620,000.00 million. This amount
shows an increase of Rs 75,000 million over last year’s revised
estimates of Rs 544,610 million, or an increase of about 14 percent in
defence spending this year. Last year India increased its defence budget
by a whopping 28.2 percent or Rs 130,000.00 million. (by $ 3 billion to a
total defence spending of $ 13.5 billion) Three years earlier in 1997
India’s defence budget was increased by 24.4 percent and in 1994 by 20
percent. In between these major escalations there have been yearly
increases ranging from 10 to 12 percent. These
large-scale increases in India’s defence spending are certainly well
beyond her legitimate defence and security requirements and consequently a
source of great concern for her small neighbours particularly Pakistan
which is now the only truly independent country on the periphery of India.
This increase in India’s defence spending has also surprised the foreign
donors particularly those from the west who are helping India to cope with
the financial and other losses after the disastrous earthquake in the
province of Gujarat. It amounts to India diverting her own financial
resources for unnecessarily expanding her Armed Forces and leaving the
rehabilitation of the poor people of Gujarat to foreign sympathy donors. Pakistan’s
Foreign Office voiced the governments deep concern and said India had
launched itself on a massive programme of expansion of its conventional
military capabilities without regard to regional stability. It strongly
felt that the increase would upset the military balance in South Asia. The
Foreign Office spokesman went on to say that “the massive acquisition of
armaments by India is a cause for concern for Pakistan because the bulk of
India’s army is deployed on the Pakistani border. Therefore, we cannot
but be deeply concerned.” He also referred to India’s huge 28.2
percent defence spending hike last year and the recent multi-billion
dollar arms purchase from Russia. In
Pakistan on the other hand defence expenditure has not been increased for
many years now. In 1994 when India raised its defence expenditure by 20
percent, the Prime Minister of Pakistan had remarked at the time that even
in view of India’s 20 percent increase in its defence budget, Pakistan
cannot watch it, because if it did it would not be able to meet the 5.4
percent budget deficit target agreed with the IMF by the Moeen Qureshi
government. The same principle guided the Pakistan government thinking in
1997 when India raised her defence spending by 24.4 percent, from Rs 364.9
billion in 1996 to Rs 454.2 billion in 1997. Last year while India raised
her defence spending by 28.2 percent, Pakistan did not react but in fact
reduced her defence spending by 8 percent. The amount thus saved was
diverted to the government’s poverty alleviation programme. This
year the federal cabinet under the chairmanship of the Chief Executive
General Pervez Musharraf has decided in principle not to increase the
defence budget, as proposed by the debt Reduction and Management
Committee. A few days later while addressing the Young Presidents
Organization (YPO) at Lahore the federal finance minister Shaukat Aziz
said that the defence budget was being reduced. He said it had already
been brought down to 4.70 percent of the GDP from over 8 percent during
the past several years. At present to country’s defence budget
constituted 20 percent of its annual budget. He went on to say that 50
percent of the budget went to debt servicing. Pakistan is keeping her
defence spending within her financial constraints imposed on the nation by
the self-destruct financial policies adopted by the elected and unelected
caretaker governments during the past decade. Increase
in India’s defence expenditure is mainly utilized for the purchase of
modern weapons, and equipment from abroad. Some amount is also used for
updating her large indigenous weapons manufacturing base at home. Some
additional induction of manpower for new weapons including guns and
missiles of raising units and formation HQ in the Army, new aircraft in
the Air Force and new surface ships, submarines, and an aircraft carrier
for the Navy are also required. India’s defence allocation in any case
is not a true reflection of her defence spending as large amounts are
shown under different heads in other ministries for security reasons, and
often to bypass export regulations of other countries from where banned
items may be imported. India’s
recent negotiations and firm orders include 400 Bofor guns (used in Kargil)
from Sweden, 310 modern T-90 tanks from Russia, mine-blast protection
vehicles from Israel and ground and air surveillance devices for the army.
The Indian Air Force was allocated a large amount for the purchase of 140
SU-30-MKI multirole fighter aircraft from Russia. 60 of the same aircraft
were ordered earlier, 30 in 1966 and 30 in 1998, of these 18 aircraft have
already reached India, in addition to these India’s Chief of Air Staff,
Air Chief Marshal A.Y. Tipnis indicated at the 68th anniversary of the
Indian Air Force that India was purchasing some more Mirage 2000 fighters
from France, Jaguars from UK and M-17 helicopters from Russia.
Negotiations are in progress for the purchase of a large number about
60-70 of advanced jet trainers (AJT) from UK. For
the Navy, India is purchasing a Russian aircraft carrier, the “Admiral
Gorshkov”. The carrier is a free gift but India has agreed to pay $ 650
million for a full refit of the ship. The Navy is also purchasing 40
Russian MIG-29K aircraft which would be the air arm of the new carrier.
Another 26 could be added later. India has ordered three Krivak class
frigates from Russia at a cost of about $ 1 billion. India is also
negotiating with Russia for the lease of a nuclear submarine. The previous
one INS “Chakra” was returned to Russia (the USSR) in the late 1980s
after a three year’s lease. The Navy has also purchased five KA-31
marine AEW helicopters. These could be used from the Russian aircraft
carrier. The
‘Hindustan Times’ reported from New Delhi on February 2nd 2001 that
Russia was preparing to sign the lease of four TU-22M3 (backfire)
long-range bombers armed with deadly KH-22 cruise missiles having a range
of 500 km. The supersonic TU-22M3 bomber has a maximum range of 2410 km
when flying at subsonic speed, and carrying a 12-tonne payload of bombs
and missiles. The
allocation for the ordinance factories and other defence production and
research facilities has been increased four times for Rs 2,620 million to
Rs 10,320 million this year. India’s nuclear and missile programme are
also being pursued with great vigour and a lavish allocation of financial
resources. New Delhi is building a “Credible nuclear deterrent”, which
according to defence analysts could cost upto $ 500 million a year. I
asked the Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Pakistan, HE Eduard S.
Shevchenko during his trip to Karachi recently that India’s purchase of
large scale modern armaments from Russia was a source of great concern to
Pakistan. Particularly so when a clause in the present Indo-Russian
contracts stipulates that the same items would not be sold to Pakistan. I
reminded the ambassador that during the 1965 Indo-Pak war we outgunned the
Indian artillery by only one regiment of 12 guns. After the war India
purchased 400,130 mm long range guns from the USSR. But the USSR sold a
100 of the same guns to Pakistan as well. Thus keeping a ratio of 4 to 1
between the two armies. A four to one superiority by India is acceptable
and can be handled by Pakistan. A balance was, therefore, maintained. The
Russian ambassador to Pakistan Mr Eduard Shevchenko is a charming career
diplomat and said with the greatest of candour that if Russia did not sell
arms to India, it could purchase the same from other countries. This is
certainly true as other western countries are only too willing to oblige
India. Russia is the fourth largest arms exporter of the world, way down
after USA, UK and France. The ambassador went on to say that he was not
aware if Pakistan had in fact shown a desire to purchase arms from Russia.
He seemed to imply that Russia would certainly consider the offer. The
former Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes was adamant in maintaining
that the increase in defence spending “will help us keep up the pace of
weapons upgrading and modernization drives in the Armed Forces”. He went
to the extent of saying after the massive damage of over Rs 14,000 crore
in the Gujarat earthquake that: “No matter what problems, economic or
otherwise, the country may face, the national defence cannot be held
hostage to it”. He did not care to clarify that he wanted a strong
defence against whom, when India had only small neighbours to contend
with. In any case most of the defence items being imported by India had
strong offensive overtures. It was the offensive capability of the Armed
forces that was being enhanced. The
Indian Prime Minister Mr Vajpayee was, however, worried about the fiscal
deficit. While defending the budget outlay he said that strong steps were
needed to tackle India’s fiscal deficit which is targeted for next year
at 4.7 percent of the GDP against its present 5.1 percent. “The
increasing fiscal deficit was becoming a cause for concern, which is why
we have had to take some hard steps to control it”. Vajpayee told
reporters after Finance Minister Sinha’s presentation. Mr Vajpayee who
is a moderate and the future hope of peace in South Asia was certainly
pressurized by the hawks, to raise the defence budget. Certainly a step in
the wrong directions. It
must be appreciated by all that for peace in South Asia there must be
peace and amity between India and Pakistan. By the induction of more
lethal and destructive arms into the region the objective of peace cannot
be achieved. Greater the quantum of arms, greater would be the mistrust
between India and Pakistan and greater the tension between the two. When
tension increases violent actions are bound to follow, shattering the
desired political will for peace. Instead
of purchasing more arms and destabilizing the region, what is required
urgently is to initiate some confidence building measures. The prospect of
an armed conflict should be reduced to the minimum particularly in the
present nuclear environment that exists in South Asia. Resort to arms has
failed to solve Indo-Pak problems in the past and are not likely to do so
in the future as well. Measures adopted so far by India and Pakistan with
regard to Kashmir have certainly borne fruit. There is less tension along
the line of control in Kashmir as the guns are silent and should continue
to be so. The
next logical step should be a dialogue between India and Pakistan to solve
the long outstanding dispute on the status of Jammu and Kashmir. Solving
the dispute in a spirit of some compromise on either side should bring
peace to the region which seems to be the desire of the people. |
|