A New India?

[muse]

Bharatiya Sthalsena



Sunday, March 01, 2009
Dr Farrukh Saleem

One out of every 200 Indians is already employed by the Indian Armed Forces. Three out of every four Indians already live at or less than $2 a day. Bharat Sarkar (the Government of India) has, however, now jacked up the defence budget by a massive 55 percent. Who is India going to fight with?

India has 3,773,300 troops, plus 1,089,700 paramilitary forces (NationMaster - World Statistics, Country Comparisons). India's army is second only to China in size. The Indian Air Force, with a total aircraft strength of 1,700, is the world's 4th largest. The Indian Navy already operates some 13 dozen vessels with INS Viraat as its flagship, the only "full-deck aircraft carrier operated by a country in Asia or the Western Pacific, along with operational jet fighters." Who is India going to fight with?

India has six neighbours; Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma, Nepal and China. India now spends a colossal $32.35 billion on defence, Pakistan $4.8 billion, Bangladesh $830 million, Nepal $100 million and Burma $30 million (according to Business Standard, India's second-largest financial daily, "There is no apparent reason for India to understate its defence budget. No IMF conditions constrain defence spending…. But India continues to camouflage what other comparable liberal democracies transparently show as defence spending). Collectively, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Nepal spend $5.7 billion a year on defence. Who is India going to fight with?

Yes, there's China and the People's Republic spends $80 billion a year on defence. According to a report by Stratfor, the Texas-based private intelligence agency, "China has been seen as a threat to India, and simplistic models show them to be potential rivals. In fact, however, China and India might as well be on different planets. Their entire frontier runs through the highest elevations of the Himalayas. It would be impossible for a substantial army to fight its way through the few passes that exist, and it would be utterly impossible for either country to sustain an army there in the long term. The two countries are irrevocably walled off from each otherl.... Ideally, New Delhi wants to see a Pakistan that is fragmented, or at least able to be controlled. Towards this end, it will work with any power that has a common interest and has no interest in invading India."

To be certain, India and China are not military rivals. Who is India then going to fight with? Bharatiya Sthalsena (the Indian Army) has a total of 13 corps, of which six are strike corps. Of the 13 corps at least seven have their guns pointed towards Pakistan. The 3rd Armoured Division, 2nd Armoured Brigade, 4 RAPID (Reorganised Army Plains Infantry Divisions), Jaisalmer AFS, Utarlai AFS and Bhuj AFS are all aiming at splitting Pakistan into two (by capturing the Kashmore/Guddu Barrage-Reti-Rahimyar Khan triangle).

On Jan 21, 2009, India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) tested BrahMos, the supersonic cruise missile (from Brahmaputra and the Moskva of Russia). According to India Today, the "test failure was due to a software error (unit cost $2.73 million)."

On July 9, 2006, DRDO test fired Agni III (unit cost $8 million). The missile remained airborne for a mere five minutes and then fell into the sea off the coast of Orissa. The following day, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) failed to launch a satellite when its rocket veered off course (destroying an Insat-4C satellite). The combined value of the satellite and the rocket was Rs2.5 billion. Agni III was test fired again on April 12, 2007, and then once again on May 7, 2008.

In 1974, DRDO began developing Arjun tank. It took DRDO 30 years--with billions wasted--to deliver the first five units. In July 2008, the Indian Army said it was "capping Arjun's induction at 124 units." DRDO now plans to deliver the remaining units sometime in 2009.

In November 2008, Lt Col Shrikant Purohit was arrested by the Mumbai Anti-Terrorism squad for his involvement in the Samjhauta Express bombings. Sudha Ramachandran, writing for Asia Time Online, said, "The arrests have triggered a heated debate…. The probes point to the possibility of the hitherto secular and apolitical Indian Army being infected by the communal virus."

Some nine years ago, India committed to achieve goals established at the Millennium Summit 2000. With so much money going into defence India is staring into a whole matrix of failures: failure in eradicating "extreme poverty and hunger"; failure in reducing the number of underweight children; failure in reducing child mortality; failure in reducing maternal mortality and failure in combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.

Why a country 75 percent of whose population is at or below $2 a day is bent upon spending $32.35 billion for the acquisition of more killing machines? Who is India then going to fight with?



The writer is the executive director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS). Email: farrukh15@hotmail.com

 

[Torpedo]

Why not to ask the same question to China? From the article, China spends 8 times the total defense budget of ALL the remaining nations in Asia. Or you don't wanna ask just because China throws some pieces of that huge amount to Pakistan?

Author always talks in terms of numbers. They will look huge because India is huge. Speak in terms of GDP and you will get the truth.

This article is nothing more than "a reply of a 15 year old when asked to write a page cursing India". I advise him not to write until he grows up!!

 

[Bull]

Bharatiya Sthalsena

Sunday, March 01, 2009
Dr Farrukh Saleem

One out of every 200 Indians is already employed by the Indian Armed Forces. Three out of every four Indians already live at or less than $2 a day. Bharat Sarkar (the Government of India) has, however, now jacked up the defence budget by a massive 55 percent. Who is India going to fight with?

The author hasnt done his homework to see why the hike was made necessary.

• The armed forces just got a new pay package with a 35% rise. That needs to be factored in and also the arrears need to be paid.
  
• The massive ruppee depreciation making imports cosltier aint taken into consideration.

India has 3,773,300 troops, plus 1,089,700 paramilitary forces (NationMaster - World Statistics, Country Comparisons). India's army is second only to China in size. The Indian Air Force, with a total aircraft strength of 1,700, is the world's 4th largest. The Indian Navy already operates some 13 dozen vessels with INS Viraat as its flagship, the only "full-deck aircraft carrier operated by a country in Asia or the Western Pacific, along with operational jet fighters." Who is India going to fight with?

INS Viraat is almost dead, with more time on repair than in the sea. 1700 jet strong IAF still has '00s of Mig 21 that needs replacement. IA needs artillery which was last bought when i was in primary school.

India has six neighbours; Pakistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma, Nepal and China. India now spends a colossal $32.35 billion on defence, Pakistan $4.8 billion, Bangladesh $830 million, Nepal $100 million and Burma $30 million (according to Business Standard, India's second-largest financial daily, "There is no apparent reason for India to understate its defence budget. No IMF conditions constrain defence spending…. But India continues to camouflage what other comparable liberal democracies transparently show as defence spending). Collectively, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Nepal spend $5.7 billion a year on defence. Who is India going to fight with?

India's defence allocation includes capex as well as overheads, while as Pakistan has another provision for capex, so comparing $4.8 Bn to $ 32.25 isnt correct. And also Pakistan is spending so less out of constraint of the economy.

Yes, there's China and the People's Republic spends $80 billion a year on defence. According to a report by Stratfor, the Texas-based private intelligence agency, "China has been seen as a threat to India, and simplistic models show them to be potential rivals. In fact, however, China and India might as well be on different planets. Their entire frontier runs through the highest elevations of the Himalayas. It would be impossible for a substantial army to fight its way through the few passes that exist, and it would be utterly impossible for either country to sustain an army there in the long term. The two countries are irrevocably walled off from each otherl....

Well with technology Himalayas wont be that much a deterrant. Its much easier now than in '61 to cross himalayas and inflict damage.

Ideally, New Delhi wants to see a Pakistan that is fragmented, or at least able to be controlled. Towards this end, it will work with any power that has a common interest and has no interest in invading India."

Now from where did that come front. He just pulled this out if the hat, from comparing military budget to fragmenting Pakistan.

To be certain, India and China are not military rivals. Who is India then going to fight with? Bharatiya Sthalsena (the Indian Army) has a total of 13 corps, of which six are strike corps. Of the 13 corps at least seven have their guns pointed towards Pakistan. The 3rd Armoured Division, 2nd Armoured Brigade, 4 RAPID (Reorganised Army Plains Infantry Divisions), Jaisalmer AFS, Utarlai AFS and Bhuj AFS are all aiming at splitting Pakistan into two (by capturing the Kashmore/Guddu Barrage-Reti-Rahimyar Khan triangle).

What would you call two parties who have fought a war had lot of skirmishes and still has disputed borders.

On Jan 21, 2009, India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) tested BrahMos, the supersonic cruise missile (from Brahmaputra and the Moskva of Russia). According to India Today, the "test failure was due to a software error (unit cost $2.73 million)."

On July 9, 2006, DRDO test fired Agni III (unit cost $8 million). The missile remained airborne for a mere five minutes and then fell into the sea off the coast of Orissa. The following day, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) failed to launch a satellite when its rocket veered off course (destroying an Insat-4C satellite). The combined value of the satellite and the rocket was Rs2.5 billion. Agni III was test fired again on April 12, 2007, and then once again on May 7, 2008.

In 1974, DRDO began developing Arjun tank. It took DRDO 30 years--with billions wasted--to deliver the first five units. In July 2008, the Indian Army said it was "capping Arjun's induction at 124 units." DRDO now plans to deliver the remaining units sometime in 2009.

From China and India suddenly farouk moved onto DRDO's failure.

In November 2008, Lt Col Shrikant Purohit was arrested by the Mumbai Anti-Terrorism squad for his involvement in the Samjhauta Express bombings. Sudha Ramachandran, writing for Asia Time Online, said, "The arrests have triggered a heated debate…. The probes point to the possibility of the hitherto secular and apolitical Indian Army being infected by the communal virus."

And from DRDO's failure to Col. Purohit and that too with the twisted assertion that he was arrested for samjauta blast, while evryu kid knows he was arrested for Malegaon blasts.

Some nine years ago, India committed to achieve goals established at the Millennium Summit 2000. With so much money going into defence India is staring into a whole matrix of failures: failure in eradicating "extreme poverty and hunger"; failure in reducing the number of underweight children; failure in reducing child mortality; failure in reducing maternal mortality and failure in combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

.

And now from Col. Purohit to goals of Millenium summit.

[

B]Why a country 75 percent of whose population is at or below $2 a day is bent upon spending $32.35 billion for the acquisition of more killing machines? Who is India then going to fight with?[/B]

And now from millenium goals to another distorted fact of 75% poor in India.

The writer is the executive director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS). Email: farrukh15@hotmail.com

ED in CRSS, wow and has an email id @ hotmail.


Muse you are a damn THINKTANK, is this the best article you can get?

 

[linkinpark]

Well, Bull summed it up about the articles flaws. Firstly, there is no coherence in his article. Secondly, it is not clear what point he want's to make?- Indian Military or DRDO failures or Col. Purohit or Poverty in India?. I think he should take some lessons in writing the articles.

 

[muse]

The article seems to have struck a exposed nerve with Indian friends - which by itself is no biggie, however; Indina friends are entirely too defensive about the poverty in India - it's just a fact.

India is a big and developing country, it has a huge population and a majority of them are very poor - this does not negate that significant numbers of Indians are now leading lives of dignity and that number is increasing as well.

The point the article is making, in my opinion, is to open the floor to a debate about high levels of defence expeditures at a time when poverty has not challeneged as most would like to see it challeneged and equally importantly, that such defence spending and the capablity it generates is cause for concern and indeed alarm. Now, it may be emotionally satisfying that adversaries are alarmed, but lets all be cautious about what we want, because we may just get it.

Lets reflect and discuss soberly and none of this defensive responses, it will only debase us.

 

[NSG_BlackCats]

Sir Muse..India has a lot of Poverty agreed.
1.So why India never goes on a begging spree like Pakistan to IMF,China,US to help her from getting bankrupt.
2. Interm of GDP india's defence spending is less 2.5% of GDP where as Pakistan spends 3% of it's GDP.
3. Some 5 years ago Pakistan's GPD was 1/5 of that of India's GDP, now it is 1/10 th..so in terms of growth we are doing well.

The following day, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) failed to launch a satellite when its rocket veered off course (destroying an Insat-4C satellite).

Sir, Have you head about Chandrayan1?It is also done by ISRO. Recently the Orbiting Carbon Observatory satelite of NASA has failed..does that make NASA a failed institution?

 

[Contrarian]

The point Muse is not the amount of money in absolute terms that India spends on defence, but what it spends as a percentage of its GDP.

India spends a lower percentage of its GDP on its defence needs as compared to say Pakistan. We naturally have a much larger country, a much larger economy and thus a much larger defence budget.

The question you need to ask is why does Pakistan spend as much on its defence needs.
Again, it all depends on the size of the GDP and the percentage of that spent on defence. You would find Pakistan outstrips India by a considerable margin there!

 

[foofighter]

Lol, who ever wrote this sounds a little scared.
Its totally dumb to suggest that India shouldn't increase its defence capacity.

60% of India is below the age of 40. So 60% has aspirations. And the rest 40% has aspirations for the 60%.

There are some, who "wish" for success, and do nothing. There are others who "want" succes, and do everything. That is precisely the motto why India is expanding so rapidly. We dont wish, we work to be a part of the greater world.

Why a country 75 percent of whose population is at or below $2 a day is bent upon spending $32.35 billion for the acquisition of more killing machines? Who is India then going to fight with?

Dude, go dig you economic books. And come up with facts, not bullshit.
India has less that 25% living under $2 a day, and less than 1% living in slums. These are the latest 2005-2006 figures.

You know this flimsy talk of poverty.Those who keep making these stupid comments on doing nothing behest of poverty and the ones who dont understand poverty. I dont know what these chaps got running in their about poverty, but of all I know, poverty cannot be removed by giving money to the poor directly but indirectly by expanding job oppurtunities within India. Thats precisely what we are doing.

Ironically, the only country who seems reluctant of seeing India grow is Pakistan.

 

[BATMAN]

So why India never goes on a begging spree like Pakistan to IMF,China,US to help her from getting bankrupt.

they help you without begging!
Recently, indian auto industry had been bailed out by UK without even asking!

BTW, beggers do not return what they earn but we pay markup on loans.
Technically, it is called banking operations. Do you know?

 

[foofighter]

they help you without begging!
Recently, indian auto industry had been bailed out by UK without even asking!

You are talking about Jaguar/ Land Rover owned by Tata. They got bailed out cuz the deal got finalised very late and has 95% European workers, out of which most are British. Rest of India's auto industry doesnt seek bailout from anybody at the moment.

BTW, beggers do not return what they earn but we pay markup on loans.
Technically, it is called banking operations. Do you know?

Well we may surely not know about "banking operations" when money is begged frm other countries, in order to save ourselves from getting run over by terrorists.

But we we know hell lot about "banking operations" when it comes to running the worlds 2nd fastest growing economy and being the only country in the world who's "banks" didnot seek "bailout" from their government.

 

[BATMAN]

You are talking about Jaguar/ Land Rover owned by Tata. They got bailed out cuz the deal got finalised very late and has 95% European workers, out of which most are British. Rest of India's auto industry doesnt seek bailout from anybody at the moment.

Jaguar is a private company pumping employing indians on preferential order as compare to british workers.
Why would Britain care for the job market of EU?
Indian govt. organised finances to take over european companies when their shares are down but than it is only UK who have to bail out companies which has stopped hiring locals!

Well we may surely not know about "banking operations" when money is begged frm other countries, in order to save ourselves from getting run over by terrorists.

But we we know hell lot about "banking operations" when it comes to running the worlds 2nd fastest growing economy and being the only country in the world who's "banks" didnot seek "bailout" from their government

Still you see no difference between a loan negotiated from IMF and begging?

 

[muse]

Black cats


Several excellent points: Indian economy is doing well, and as a percentage of it's GDP, it does spend less on defence - however; these are not points of contention.

What the author is pointing to, in so far as I understand it, is that given it's neighbors defence spending, the author questions the intentions of India with regard to it's defence spending.

Indian interlocutors simply get over being defensive, these are just conversations and the need does not arise for obfuscation or evasion. certainly Indian interlocutors here did not hike the defense budget and on one here expects a explanation or defensive for that - the purpose the thread is to elict discussion so that we may at least ask interesting questions which may further our understanding of the motivations behind the steady increases - in other words, what kind of a security futire are policy makers in India foreseeing? what assumptions are they basing policy decisions on -

All this "tu tu. mai mai" is not the way to go about engaging.

As this is Pakdef, obviously most Pakistanis and all other than Indians may not have a through understanding of how the indian policy makers are viewing the near future with regard to security and it doe snot help anybody understand if our Indian interlocutors choose to lose themselves in a defensive posture.

The questions with regard to the defense spending of the neighbors of India and the the fact that the Indian defense spending seems to bear little relation with rgard to the spending of it's neighbors are obvious - now lets focus on the why and the underlying assumtions that are the foundation of that policy.

 

[linkinpark]

Black cats


Several excellent points: Indian economy is doing well, and as a percentage of it's GDP, it does spend less on defence - however; these are not points of contention.

What the author is pointing to, in so far as I understand it, is that given it's neighbors defence spending, the author questions the intentions of India with regard to it's defence spending.

Indian interlocutors simply get over being defensive, these are just conversations and the need does not arise for obfuscation or evasion. certainly Indian interlocutors here did not hike the defense budget and on one here expects a explanation or defensive for that - the purpose the thread is to elict discussion so that we may at least ask interesting questions which may further our understanding of the motivations behind the steady increases - in other words, what kind of a security futire are policy makers in India foreseeing? what assumptions are they basing policy decisions on -

All this "tu tu. mai mai" is not the way to go about engaging.

As this is Pakdef, obviously most Pakistanis and all other than Indians may not have a through understanding of how the indian policy makers are viewing the near future with regard to security and it doe snot help anybody understand if our Indian interlocutors choose to lose themselves in a defensive posture.

The questions with regard to the defense spending of the neighbors of India and the the fact that the Indian defense spending seems to bear little relation with rgard to the spending of it's neighbors are obvious - now lets focus on the why and the underlying assumtions that are the foundation of that policy.

The answer to this is clear, its not neighbors but China. If anyone goes through a lot of articles on geo-strategic politics in South Asia it is clear that China is following the policy of encirclement, the famous ' String of Pearls' theory wherein the aim of China is to preoccupy India with hostile neighbors so as to keep India busy without disturbing the Chinese juggernaut and doesn't compete with on World stage.

China being a very opaque country in the matters of Defence, it is better being safe than sorry and that is the reason you see the increase in spending on Defence which has been neglected a lot previously.

One argument is why spend so much when you have so much poverty. Poverty is there and a lot of the budget is already being spent on Social welfare which is much higher that what we spend on Defence, so one cannot say India is not doing anything on Poverty. Poverty cannot be made to go just like that, it takes time.

One has to remember that it is not possible to spend all of the money only on one aspect (for ex Poverty) of the country with neglecting other aspects (for ex Defence, Education). I give two examples here, recently Indian government has strike off all the loans taken by Farmers which amounted to $20 billion and has increased expenditure on education by 250%. As you can see, India is growing economically and it is increasing allocations to different sectors accordingly.

 

[theonlyone]

I think the article pretty biased.
If u r comparing countries i think its best to compare just india and pakistan.
All the remaining countries that are mentioned like nepal or bhutan or bangladesh are landlocked countries and have defense pacts with india.That is why their defence spending is less.

Now if u compare our defence spending of pakistan with india as explained earlier india is spending relatively less.

If it is aquestion of need for defence budget then it is because we have a hostile neighbour with whom 3 wars have been fought and another not so friendly largest country.

 

[afriend]

The article seems to have struck a exposed nerve with Indian friends - which by itself is no biggie, however; Indina friends are entirely too defensive about the poverty in India - it's just a fact.

India is a big and developing country, it has a huge population and a majority of them are very poor - this does not negate that significant numbers of Indians are now leading lives of dignity and that number is increasing as well.

The point the article is making, in my opinion, is to open the floor to a debate about high levels of defence expeditures at a time when poverty has not challeneged as most would like to see it challeneged and equally importantly, that such defence spending and the capablity it generates is cause for concern and indeed alarm. Now, it may be emotionally satisfying that adversaries are alarmed, but lets all be cautious about what we want, because we may just get it.

Lets reflect and discuss soberly and none of this defensive responses, it will only debase us.

However accute the situation of poverty may be, one may also note that india is having hostile and unstable neigbhours around it. India have the largest costal lines, and have a neighbour who openly have supported terrorsm in india in the name of freedom struggle, we have seen wars in 1962,65,71 kargil.. etc. India is having border issues with bangladesh and china too.

Given such conditions i would say it would be a joke on somone to question the logics between indias defence spending. Comparing the defence spending to its much smaller neigbhours both econmically and geographically is also another joke.

The spending is justfied because only if we can provide a sense of security to its people an economy can grow.