India-Russia Divorce and its impact on Indian defence

[Hellfire]

@dadeechi

I gave you my answer very explicitly. Can not give you anything more clearer than that.

Even before the Uri Strike, I had mentioned very clearly that there is an intense rivalry between US and Russia and all the rest are merely pawns in a wider game that has policy affectations from outside the region too. This was a reference for my initially linking Kashmir issue with India potentially raising it with Baluchistan, something many had scoffed at and dismissed out of incredulity. That Baluchistan is a part of Pakistan, is something that India has never questioned nor any right minded person would be questioning as it is, but the result, of a nefarious design. However, the same is the equation between India and Pakistan, irrational and devoid of the pragmatism as opposed to that of the Chinese (policies).

While majority have concentrated on the narrow prism of the Indo-Pak confrontation, you have simply failed to analyse the Indian actions recently as being opportunistic in an overall picture rather than of any well thought out deliberate plan.

Contrary to your predilection to draw lines in sand, a futile exercise if I may say as sand is not stationary, the international relations and politics are very transient and dynamic in nature. Elucidating on my earlier contention that the Russians are positioning themselves as facilitators of a dialogue between the two nations: you will just need to re-visit the past history too, wherein in 1965 the Soviets played a role in forging a peace between the two nations. This exercise, is more of establishment of contact with the PA by Russia, a domain exclusive to Chinese and US so far, as Russia and indeed the whole world realises and is aware of the fact that it is PA that wields the power and weight in Pakistani political scenario with the government being a nominal figurehead.

Having said that, the mistake of US in elimination of OBL, as earlier touched upon by me elsewhere, deprived US of the single biggest leverage that they had on Pakistan, thereby allowing China to effectively fill the vacuum as created by US policy of scaling down military and financial support to PA to 'correct' it's actions to suit US interests (a policy followed in the aftermath of removal of the existing leverage).

You have to very clearly understand the fact that PA will NOT allow establishment of peace with India. It can not. It is akin to PA committing a suicide if it allows that to happen. The sole reason for existence of PA and its supremacy in the domestic and international political scenario, has been on the sole premise of immediate annihilation by India, a bogey that has allowed it to whip up sentiments and at the same time enjoy pre-eminence as can be made out from the fact of the severance package that the top PA brass gets in Pakistan.

Coming back specifically to Russian aims: Russia is least bothered by Indian actions with US. The mere fact that Indian Armed Forces are using equipment of Soviet/Russian origin and will continue to do so over the next 4-5 decades even if we make a deliberate and constant attempt to shift to western sources, is the reason. I will not even get into what is not in public domain. But please understand that India Defence needs to the tune of 40 Billion USD is to be met by Russia over a very short period of time. US is not sharing critical technology with India which Russia will willingly give to India as India is the only country with which Russia is confident it does not face the threat of IPR violations and sharing of critical data with its potential enemies.

What you further fail to appreciate is the status quo between the two - that is US and Russia in various regions - from Middle East, to Ukraine. Why is there a status quo? You also need to analyse why Turkey is being allowed to carve out a safe zone for itself in Northern Syria.

If one says all these are isolated incidents, one is seriously mistaken.

I re-iterate, for US to be able to play any role in Indo-Pak issue today, is a non-starter. China, for obvious reasons, can not do much. That leaves ONLY Russia as a viable power of some standing ( a role it has adopted earlier too) which can facilitate a de-escalation of tensions between the two.

The power is with PA, until and unless a relationship is established with PA, not much can be achieved even by Russia in the long run.

Also always remember that Islamist insurgency is also a threat for the Russians, who are Orthodox Russians and have a historic baggage of 90s too with them (hint: the Yugoslav conflict) in addition to the Chechen-Dagestan region.

I will not be elaborating beyond this. Rest is upto you to read.

 

[Raul_AD]

@dadeechi @hellfire

India will always be in trouble and will be arm twisted by US, Russia, China, Europe. Until and unless it develops serious and formidable Military Industrial Complex. What I mean by MIC is "Made in India" not "Make in India".

You cannot assert your much deserved rightful position in the world by rented equipments. Because whenever the situation arrives you are looking around the world and are always assessing what will the worlds reaction. Who will be helping us or who will block our supplies, whom we can buy by throwing money but knowing we would be paying exorbitant costs.

Glaring example of that is current crisis of Uri. We are haplessly looking for support around the world. What we got? No body clearly supported our stand, other then countries like Afghanistan & Bangladesh.

All know they can arm twist India because they have leverage over India, and can comfortably circumvent India, because India is not a serious military threat and is dependent for supplies on them or others.

We are not like what Russia is in Ukraine or in Syria. Every country in the world thinks thousand times before seriously objecting Russian designs. They know ultimately they will have to engage with MIC of Russia.

Same is also true about Israel. Arab countries know the strength of Israeli MIC and always refrains from directly engaging with Israel. Though KSA and all Arab nations are investing heavily in most modern weapons in the world, but they cannot take on Israel because they are just BORROWED & RENTED.

What China is doing to create its MIC, it is just heavily investing for it. It was also grabbing whatever it can and copying everything it can without giving a thought about Intellectual Property Rights. Now spying around the world for technologies. Just within a decade China will be a serious competitor to USA and USA will not be able to do anything about it.

We have lost 7 decades still we go gaga for foreign weapons which comes attached with serious penalties, constraint and at exorbitant costs. We are even now not serious about developing indigenous weapons and despise whatever been developed indigenously be it Ajun & Tejas.

Yes we are a gullible country and are been treated so in the world. It is our own doing by not investing in Indigenous MIC. The world knows that they can bully India into LEOMA, CISMOA & BECA. Because India has no spine.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

@dadeechi @hellfire

India will always be in trouble and will be arm twisted by US, Russia, China, Europe. Until and unless it develops serious and formidable Military Industrial Complex. What I mean by MIC is "Made in India" not "Make in India".

You cannot assert your much deserved rightful position in the world by rented equipments. Because whenever the situation arrives you are looking around the world and are always assessing what will the worlds reaction. Who will be helping us or who will block our supplies, whom we can buy by throwing money but knowing we would be paying exorbitant costs.

Glaring example of that is current crisis of Uri. We are haplessly looking for support around the world. What we got? No body clearly supported our stand, other then countries like Afghanistan & Bangladesh.

All know they can arm twist India because they have leverage over India, and can comfortably circumvent India, because India is not a serious military threat and is dependent for supplies on them or others.

We are not like what Russia is in Ukraine or in Syria. Every country in the world thinks thousand times before seriously objecting Russian designs. They know ultimately they will have to engage with MIC of Russia.

Same is also true about Israel. Arab countries know the strength of Israeli MIC and always refrains from directly engaging with Israel. Though KSA and all Arab nations are investing heavily in most modern weapons in the world, but they cannot take on Israel because they are just BORROWED & RENTED.

What China is doing to create its MIC, it is just heavily investing for it. It was also grabbing whatever it can and copying everything it can without giving a thought about Intellectual Property Rights. Now spying around the world for technologies. Just within a decade China will be a serious competitor to USA and USA will not be able to do anything about it.

We have lost 7 decades still we go gaga for foreign weapons which comes attached with serious penalties, constraint and at exorbitant costs. We are even now not serious about developing indigenous weapons and despise whatever been developed indigenously be it Ajun & Tejas.

Yes we are a gullible country and are been treated so in the world. It is our own doing by not investing in Indigenous MIC. The world knows that they can bully India into LEOMA, CISMOA & BECA. Because India has no spine.

Nothing can improve without improving your economy. Bypassing heavy and manufacturing industries and heading straight for services is a huge nation strategic mistake. Those who have played the game Cities XXL will know what im talking about

http://citiesxxl.wikia.com/wiki/Industry

Industry is one of the two main business categories. It is divided into Food Industry, Heavy Industry, Manufacturing, and High Tech, with the latter three divided into Low, Medium, High density, and Exceptional. Exceptional includes special buildings that work to increase the efficiency and profitability of it's corresponding lot.

Contents
[show]
Food Industry
Food Industries work differently to most other lots. It must be built in designated agricultural areas on certain maps, and works by defining an area where the farm will go. All types of farm function exactly the same, only differing in aesthetics. Silos can be built after every ten farms, which creates a circle of influence, increase the profit of each farm. Fertilizers further the increase even more, and can be built after every five silos, meaning fifty farms.

Heavy Industry
Heavy Industry are the starting industries the player can work with. They are the easiest to build requiring only unskilled workers in low densities. However, they are also the greatest polluters, which must be kept away from the wealthy Executives and Elites, and also other lots that depend on an environmental rating such as offices and High-Tech.

Manufacturing
Manufacturing is the next step in industry development. They begin hiring skilled workers in their labor-force, produces slightly more in profit than Heavy Industry, and less pollution. However, unless you import Heavy industry, it is not meant to be a replacement for heavy industry, as it depends on it as a bought resource.

High Tech
High Tech is the last step in industry development, hiring executives and elites to run their company. It produces the most profit and has a zero pollution ratio. It is also very intolerant of pollution, meaning it should be built in either a specialized "clean" city or kept some distance away from pollution sources. It uses a large amount of resources and buys in manufacturing as a resource.

Offices are a type of industry (which makes sense in Cities XL game-play, despite not making sense in real world). The difference with other industries is, of course, that Offices don't produce goods, but instead produce services (the resource known as 'Office services'), which are mainly used by Industries.

Office buildings include a wide variety of companies that you can find in those tall, modern-looking buildings: banks, recording studios, financial companies, trade unions and so on. The offices are the source of your city's largest and most impressive skyscrapers, and by using them together with the executive's skyscrapers, you can achieve a very modern, Manhattan-like skyline.

Offices are a 'clean' industry, meaning that they have no negative effects. Like High-tech Industry, they benefit from Quality of Life (that is, Environment), so build them away from pollution (bothair and noise). Also, they benefit from Passenger services, so they need to be close to a big inter-city connection source.

Offices also need the services of Business Hotels, which provide lodgings for the many business travelers that the companies receive.

• Planet, you'll start needing more and more office services. Keep in mind that this is not a very good source of income - the biggest skyscrapers pay not more than 600 - 700c in taxes, so you'll need to combine them with other businesses in the city to achieve growth. Still, they're easy to build and maintain in every 'clean' city, and although they employ high residential classes; all the Megastructures require them, so you could always find use for excess production (besides selling toOmnicorp).

This game's mechanics describes exactly the steps China took to become who she is today.

1)you need Natural resources(and india has tons of untapped resources. Chromium is 1 of them):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium#Production


Approximately 28.8 million metric tons (Mt) of marketable chromite ore were produced in 2013, and converted into 7.5 Mt of ferrochromium.[31] According to John F. Papp, writing for the USGS, "Ferrochromium is the leading end use of chromite ore, [and] stainless steel is the leading end use of ferrochromium."[31]

The largest producers of chromium ore in 2013 have been South Africa (48%), Kazakhstan (13%), Turkey (11%), India (10%) with several other countries producing the rest of about 18% of the world production.[31]

The two main products of chromium ore refining are ferrochromium and metallic chromium. For those products the ore smelter process differs considerably. For the production of ferrochromium, the chromite ore (FeCr2O4) is reduced in large scale in electric arc furnace or in smaller smelters with either aluminium or silicon in an aluminothermic reaction.[32]


Chromium ore output in 2002[33]
For the production of pure chromium, the iron must be separated from the chromium in a two step roasting and leaching process. The chromite ore is heated with a mixture of calcium carbonate and sodium carbonate in the presence of air. The chromium is oxidized to the hexavalent form, while the iron forms the stable Fe2O3. The subsequent leaching at higher elevated temperatures dissolves the chromates and leaves the insoluble iron oxide. The chromate is converted by sulfuric acid into the dichromate.[32]

India is a top Chromium producer- but yet it's not a stainless producer. this is where the problem lies. India have tons of raw materials, but insufficient heavy or manufacturing industries to produce intermediate/finished products to export to the world.


Raw materials(e.g iron ore, chromium ore) etc for your Heavy industries(e.g iron smelting, steel production, composite alloys, aluminium production). build up a strong base utilizing unskilled workers(while at the same time, relieving poverty by providing jobs for them)

Only with a sound Heavy industry, then comes Manufacturing industries- because manufacturing end products will require the intermediate products provided for by the Heavy industries. Manufacuring provides jobs for both unskilled, medium-skilled workers and some highly-skilled workers. Poverty and is further reduced and the masses are pushed up into the middle class on a massive scale.

Penultimately, with a sound Manufacturing base- High end(aka High-tech industries) R&D sectors may then come into the scene. Smartphones, robots, whatsoever u could think of- because they would be utilising the finished products provided for by the Manufacturing industries.(semiconductors, nanotechnology, etc) Jobs would be provided for the middle classes are propelled into the upper classes and millionaires are often created at this stage.

Lastly, then comes the Services Sector to provide support for all the industries.(etc, Banking, Offices) as these industries would need some1 to count their stock and money for them.

Thus, fix the economy first, then talk about 'MIC'. Otherwise, India will always be at the mercy of other nations(like what u' ve described. e.g spare parts, supply, etc.)

By underfocusing on the fundamental triple industries and concentrating almost everything on Services sector only, India has already taken the wrong big step. There's practically nothing for offices to provide services to. Hence, the direction taken to export call centre services.
It used to be sad that india is the Office of the World while China is the Factory of the world.

Well, China is both now.

 

[Raul_AD]

Nothing can improve without improving your economy. Bypass heavy and manufacturing industries and heading straight for services is a huge nation strategic mistake. Those who have played the game Cities XXL will know what im talking about

What is important is vision and strategic plan. It was always missing. Despite having developed HAL Marut in 1960s we let go whatever we learnt in Aircraft technologies.

There were never serious efforts to develop MIC and to develop indigenous systems and invest in R&D.

ISRO is the product when we were denied technologies. Had we invested with same veracity in weapon technologies the things wold have been different.

 

[dadeechi]

What I mean by MIC is "Made in India" not "Make in India".

Excellent post.

I too hope that "Make in India" would some day be reverted back to "Made in India".

 

[Raul_AD]

Nothing can improve without improving your economy. Bypassing heavy and manufacturing industries and heading straight for services is a huge nation strategic mistake. Those who have played the game Cities XXL will know what im talking about

http://citiesxxl.wikia.com/wiki/Industry

Industry is one of the two main business categories. It is divided into Food Industry, Heavy Industry, Manufacturing, and High Tech, with the latter three divided into Low, Medium, High density, and Exceptional. Exceptional includes special buildings that work to increase the efficiency and profitability of it's corresponding lot.

Contents
[show]
Food Industry
Food Industries work differently to most other lots. It must be built in designated agricultural areas on certain maps, and works by defining an area where the farm will go. All types of farm function exactly the same, only differing in aesthetics. Silos can be built after every ten farms, which creates a circle of influence, increase the profit of each farm. Fertilizers further the increase even more, and can be built after every five silos, meaning fifty farms.

Heavy Industry
Heavy Industry are the starting industries the player can work with. They are the easiest to build requiring only unskilled workers in low densities. However, they are also the greatest polluters, which must be kept away from the wealthy Executives and Elites, and also other lots that depend on an environmental rating such as offices and High-Tech.

Manufacturing
Manufacturing is the next step in industry development. They begin hiring skilled workers in their labor-force, produces slightly more in profit than Heavy Industry, and less pollution. However, unless you import Heavy industry, it is not meant to be a replacement for heavy industry, as it depends on it as a bought resource.

High Tech
High Tech is the last step in industry development, hiring executives and elites to run their company. It produces the most profit and has a zero pollution ratio. It is also very intolerant of pollution, meaning it should be built in either a specialized "clean" city or kept some distance away from pollution sources. It uses a large amount of resources and buys in manufacturing as a resource.

Offices are a type of industry (which makes sense in Cities XL game-play, despite not making sense in real world). The difference with other industries is, of course, that Offices don't produce goods, but instead produce services (the resource known as 'Office services'), which are mainly used by Industries.

Office buildings include a wide variety of companies that you can find in those tall, modern-looking buildings: banks, recording studios, financial companies, trade unions and so on. The offices are the source of your city's largest and most impressive skyscrapers, and by using them together with the executive's skyscrapers, you can achieve a very modern, Manhattan-like skyline.

Offices are a 'clean' industry, meaning that they have no negative effects. Like High-tech Industry, they benefit from Quality of Life (that is, Environment), so build them away from pollution (bothair and noise). Also, they benefit from Passenger services, so they need to be close to a big inter-city connection source.

Offices also need the services of Business Hotels, which provide lodgings for the many business travelers that the companies receive.

• Planet, you'll start needing more and more office services. Keep in mind that this is not a very good source of income - the biggest skyscrapers pay not more than 600 - 700c in taxes, so you'll need to combine them with other businesses in the city to achieve growth. Still, they're easy to build and maintain in every 'clean' city, and although they employ high residential classes; all the Megastructures require them, so you could always find use for excess production (besides selling toOmnicorp).

This game's mechanics describes exactly the steps China took to become who she is today.

Heavy Industries were there but bogged down by Socialist Quota Regime. Despite liberalising in 1990s we never had vision to develop Industries let alone the industries in critical engineering technologies.

Excellent post.

I too hope that "Make in India" would some day be reverted back to "Made in India".

@hellfire

"NOW" is the call of the hour. Or else it will be too late. World is changing fast nobody want a country as huge as India to be economically prosper. They just want India to be rich enough to be just market for their products. No a force to recon with.

That's why USA is slapping LEOMA, CISMOA & BECA. Russia just want to sell all the junk it produces. France sells Augustas, Rafales at exorbitant costs. China opposes India's entry into NSG.

Things are not as great as they looks. We are a second rated country and just a market nothing else.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Heavy Industries were there but bogged down by Socialist Quota Regime. Despite liberalising in 1990s we never had vision to develop Industries let alone the industries in critical engineering technologies.



@hellfire

"NOW" is the call of the hour. Or else it will be too late. World is changing fast nobody want a country as huge as India to be economically prosper. They just want India to be rich enough to be just market for their products. No a force to recon with.

That's why USA is slapping LEOMA, CISMOA & BECA. Russia just want to sell all the junk it produces. France sells Augustas, Rafales at exorbitant costs. China opposes India's entry into NSG.

Things are not as great as they looks. We are a second rated country and just a market nothing else.

sorry was adding on to my posts and correcting grammar.

pertaining to your psots:

Chromium:
Metallurgy[edit]

Decorative chrome plating on a motorcycle.
Main article: Chrome plating
The strengthening effect of forming stable metal carbides at the grain boundaries and the strong increase in corrosion resistance made chromium an important alloying material for steel. The high-speed tool steels contain between 3 and 5% chromium. Stainless steel, the main corrosion-proof metal alloy, is formed when chromium is added toiron in sufficient concentrations, usually above 11%. For its formation, ferrochromium is added to the molten iron. Also nickel-based alloys increase in strength due to the formation of discrete, stable metal carbide particles at the grain boundaries. For example, Inconel 718 contains 18.6% chromium. Because of the excellent high-temperature properties of these nickel superalloys, they are used in jet engines and gas turbines in lieu of common structural materials.[34]

The relative high hardness and corrosion resistance of unalloyed chromium makes it a good surface coating, being still the most "popular" metal coating with unparalleled combined durability. A thin layer of chromium is deposited on pretreated metallic surfaces by electroplating techniques. There are two deposition methods: Thin, below 1 µm thickness, layers are deposited by chrome plating, and are used for decorative surfaces. If wear-resistant surfaces are needed then thicker chromium layers are deposited. Both methods normally use acidic chromate or dichromate solutions. To prevent the energy-consuming change in oxidation state, the use of chromium(III) sulfate is under development, but for most applications, the established process is used.[30]

In the chromate conversion coating process, the strong oxidative properties of chromates are used to deposit a protective oxide layer on metals like aluminium, zinc and cadmium. This passivation and the self-healing properties by the chromate stored in the chromate conversion coating, which is able to migrate to local defects, are the benefits of this coating method.[35] Because of environmental and health regulations on chromates, alternative coating methods are under development.[36]

Chromic acid anodizing (or Type I anodizing) of aluminium is another electrochemical process, which does not lead to the deposition of chromium, but uses chromic acid as electrolyte in the solution. During anodization, an oxide layer is formed on the aluminium. The use of chromic acid, instead of the normally used sulfuric acid, leads to a slight difference of these oxide layers.[37] The high toxicity of Cr(VI) compounds, used in the established chromium electroplating process, and the strengthening of safety and environmental regulations demand a search for substitutes for chromium or at least a change to less toxic chromium(III) compounds.[30]



Guess what? Chromium is used for jet engines too.

Aluminium:

General use
Aluminium is the most widely used non-ferrous metal.[49] Global production of aluminium in 2005 was 31.9 million tonnes. It exceeded that of any other metal except iron(837.5 million tonnes).[50] Forecast for 2012 was 42–45 million tonnes, driven by rising Chinese output.[51]

Aluminium is almost always alloyed, which markedly improves its mechanical properties, especially when tempered. For example, the common aluminium foils and beverage cans are alloys of 92% to 99% aluminium.[52] The main alloying agents are copper, zinc, magnesium, manganese, and silicon (e.g., duralumin) with the levels of other metals in a few percent by weight.[53]


Household aluminium foil

Aluminium-bodied Austin "A40 Sports" (c. 1951)

Aluminium slabs being transported from a smelter
Some of the many uses for aluminium metal are in:

• Transportation (automobiles, aircraft, trucks, railway cars, marine vessels, bicycles, spacecraft, etc.) as sheet, tube, and castings.
• Packaging (cans, foil, frame of etc.).
• Food and beverage containers, because of its resistance to corrosion.
• Construction (windows, doors, siding, building wire, sheathing, roofing, etc.).[54]
• A wide range of household items, from cooking utensils to baseball bats and watches.[55]
• Street lighting poles, sailing ship masts, walking poles.
• Outer shells and cases for consumer electronics and photographic equipment.
• Electrical transmission lines for power distribution ("creep" and oxidation are not issues in this application as the terminations are usually multi-sided "crimps" which enclose all sides of the conductor with a gas-tight seal).
• MKM steel and Alnico magnets.
• Super purity aluminium (SPA, 99.980% to 99.999% Al), used in electronics and CDs, and also in wires/cabling.
• Heat sinks for transistors, CPUs, and other components in electronic appliances.
• Substrate material of metal-core copper clad laminates used in high brightness LED lighting.
• Light reflective surfaces and paint.
• Pyrotechnics, solid rocket fuels, and thermite.
• Production of hydrogen gas by reaction with hydrochloric acid or sodium hydroxide.
• In alloy with magnesium to make aircraft bodies and other transportation components.
• Cooking utensils, because of its resistant to corrosion and light-weight.
• Coins in such countries as France, Italy, Poland, Finland, Romania, Israel, and the former Yugoslavia struck from aluminium or an aluminium-copper alloy.[56][57]
• Musical instruments. Some guitar models sport aluminium diamond plates on the surface of the instruments, usually either chrome or black. Kramer Guitars and Travis Bean are both known for having produced guitars with necks made of aluminium, which gives the instrument a very distinctive sound. Aluminium is used to make someguitar resonators and some electric guitar speakers.[58]

Aluminium is usually alloyed – it is used as pure metal only when corrosion resistance and/or workability is more important than strength or hardness. The strength of aluminium alloys is abruptly increased with small additions of scandium, zirconium, or hafnium.[59] A thin layer of aluminium can be deposited onto a flat surface by physical vapor deposition or (very infrequently) chemical vapor deposition or other chemical means[which?] to form optical coatings and mirrors.

Guess what? alumnium is used for creating plane bodys

Steel:

Alloy steels[edit]
Stainless steels contain a minimum of 11% chromium, often combined with nickel, to resist corrosion. Some stainless steels, such as the ferritic stainless steels are magnetic, while others, such as the austenitic, are nonmagnetic.[64] Corrosion-resistant steels are abbreviated as CRES.

Some more modern steels include tool steels, which are alloyed with large amounts of tungsten and cobalt or other elements to maximize solution hardening. This also allows the use of precipitation hardening and improves the alloy's temperature resistance.[2] Tool steel is generally used in axes, drills, and other devices that need a sharp, long-lasting cutting edge. Other special-purpose alloys include weathering steels such as Cor-ten, which weather by acquiring a stable, rusted surface, and so can be used un-painted.[65] Maraging steel is alloyed with nickel and other elements, but unlike most steel contains little carbon (0.01%). This creates a very strong but still malleable steel.[66]

Eglin steel uses a combination of over a dozen different elements in varying amounts to create a relatively low-cost steel for use in bunker buster weapons. Hadfield steel (after Sir Robert Hadfield) or manganese steel contains 12–14% manganese which when abraded strain-hardens to form an incredibly hard skin which resists wearing. Examples include tank tracks, bulldozer blade edges and cutting blades on the jaws of life.[67]

In 2016 a breakthrough in creating a strong light aluminium steel alloy which might be suitable in applications such as aircraft was announced by researchers at Pohang University of Science and Technology. Adding small amounts of nickel was found to result in precipitation as nano particles of brittle B2 intermetallic compounds which had previously resulted in weakness. The result was a cheap strong light steel alloy—nearly as strong as titanium at ten percent the cost[68]—which is slated for trial production[when?] at industrial scale by POSCO, a Korean steelmaker.[69][70]



Not to mention alloy steels are used to make ship and tank hulls.



Ultimately, my point is India needs to have her own abundant supply of materials that she could obtain freely at will in order to build up a basic 'Military Industrial Capacity'. Only then can then come the supply of the higher-end parts needed with R & D input to create her own truly indigenous defense equipment.

 

[Raul_AD]

Guess what? Chromium is used for jet engines too.

Even China till date is struggling with Jet Engine Technology. It is not that simple. The metallurgy used in Jet engines are not easy to produce. Along with successful design of Jet Engine. This technology is mastered by few selected in the world and remains with them. That why, Transfer of technology for Jet Engines never happened.

For others it is only dream. It needs decades of research and billions poured without a second thought.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Even China till date is struggling with Jet Engine Technology. It is not that simple. The metallurgy used in Jet engines are not easy to produce. Along with successful design of Jet Engine. This technology is mastered by few selected in the world and remains with them. That why, Transfer of technology for Jet Engines never happened.

For others it is only dream. It needs decades of research and billions poured without a second thought.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/china-makes-90-engines-its-major-warplanes-air-force-insider-chan

China Makes 90% Engines for Its Major Warplanes: Air Force Insider
Sep 11, 2016

• 14 views
• 0 Comments

• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter

On September 4, super pilot Senior Colonel Wu Guohui, a professor on air force equipment at National Defense University, told Beijing Times in an exclusive interview that China has made great progress in developing aircraft engines. At present, China-made aircraft engines are used in more than 90% of China’s major warplanes including J-11, J-15 and J-16 fighters, H-5 and H-6 bombers, JH-7 fighter/bomber, Y-7 and Y-8 transports and Z-8, Z-9 and Z-10 helicopters.

Prof. Wu believes that the establishment of China’s aircraft engine group corporation will make engine research and development independent from aircraft design and concentrate the management and resources for research, development and production. That will greatly speed up China’s aircraft engine development to enable China to catch up with world advanced level within 5 to 10 years.

Source: Beijing Times “Super pilot’s insider story on air force major fighters: 90% engines China-made” (summary by Chan Kai Yee based on the report in Chinese)

WS10A for the J-10B, J-11B, J-16:

WS10B for the J-10C, J-11D, J-15, J-16:

WS13E for the JF-17:

WS20 for the Y-20:

the world and western propaganda wants to believe(and stay believing) that China still struggles to create jet engines

whatsoever, my point is not jsut about Jet engines.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

WS-15 for the J-20:

 

[wiseone2]

@dadeechi @hellfire

India will always be in trouble and will be arm twisted by US, Russia, China, Europe. Until and unless it develops serious and formidable Military Industrial Complex. What I mean by MIC is "Made in India" not "Make in India".

You cannot assert your much deserved rightful position in the world by rented equipments. Because whenever the situation arrives you are looking around the world and are always assessing what will the worlds reaction. Who will be helping us or who will block our supplies, whom we can buy by throwing money but knowing we would be paying exorbitant costs.

Glaring example of that is current crisis of Uri. We are haplessly looking for support around the world. What we got? No body clearly supported our stand, other then countries like Afghanistan & Bangladesh.

All know they can arm twist India because they have leverage over India, and can comfortably circumvent India, because India is not a serious military threat and is dependent for supplies on them or others.

We are not like what Russia is in Ukraine or in Syria. Every country in the world thinks thousand times before seriously objecting Russian designs. They know ultimately they will have to engage with MIC of Russia.

Same is also true about Israel. Arab countries know the strength of Israeli MIC and always refrains from directly engaging with Israel. Though KSA and all Arab nations are investing heavily in most modern weapons in the world, but they cannot take on Israel because they are just BORROWED & RENTED.

What China is doing to create its MIC, it is just heavily investing for it. It was also grabbing whatever it can and copying everything it can without giving a thought about Intellectual Property Rights. Now spying around the world for technologies. Just within a decade China will be a serious competitor to USA and USA will not be able to do anything about it.

We have lost 7 decades still we go gaga for foreign weapons which comes attached with serious penalties, constraint and at exorbitant costs. We are even now not serious about developing indigenous weapons and despise whatever been developed indigenously be it Ajun & Tejas.

Yes we are a gullible country and are been treated so in the world. It is our own doing by not investing in Indigenous MIC. The world knows that they can bully India into LEOMA, CISMOA & BECA. Because India has no spine.

India would have to build a MIC to achieve true autonomy in security matters.

Economic strength is required to sustain military power. Russia is a relative light weight in international relations. They have nukes, MIC, energy supplies. But they lack true economic clout to be a game changer. Other than building civillian nuclear power plants Russians have nothing to offer India on economic development.

 

[Dash]

@dadeechi

I gave you my answer very explicitly. Can not give you anything more clearer than that.

Even before the Uri Strike, I had mentioned very clearly that there is an intense rivalry between US and Russia and all the rest are merely pawns in a wider game that has policy affectations from outside the region too. This was a reference for my initially linking Kashmir issue with India potentially raising it with Baluchistan, something many had scoffed at and dismissed out of incredulity. That Baluchistan is a part of Pakistan, is something that India has never questioned nor any right minded person would be questioning as it is, but the result, of a nefarious design. However, the same is the equation between India and Pakistan, irrational and devoid of the pragmatism as opposed to that of the Chinese (policies).

While majority have concentrated on the narrow prism of the Indo-Pak confrontation, you have simply failed to analyse the Indian actions recently as being opportunistic in an overall picture rather than of any well thought out deliberate plan.

Contrary to your predilection to draw lines in sand, a futile exercise if I may say as sand is not stationary, the international relations and politics are very transient and dynamic in nature. Elucidating on my earlier contention that the Russians are positioning themselves as facilitators of a dialogue between the two nations: you will just need to re-visit the past history too, wherein in 1965 the Soviets played a role in forging a peace between the two nations. This exercise, is more of establishment of contact with the PA by Russia, a domain exclusive to Chinese and US so far, as Russia and indeed the whole world realises and is aware of the fact that it is PA that wields the power and weight in Pakistani political scenario with the government being a nominal figurehead.

Having said that, the mistake of US in elimination of OBL, as earlier touched upon by me elsewhere, deprived US of the single biggest leverage that they had on Pakistan, thereby allowing China to effectively fill the vacuum as created by US policy of scaling down military and financial support to PA to 'correct' it's actions to suit US interests (a policy followed in the aftermath of removal of the existing leverage).

You have to very clearly understand the fact that PA will NOT allow establishment of peace with India. It can not. It is akin to PA committing a suicide if it allows that to happen. The sole reason for existence of PA and its supremacy in the domestic and international political scenario, has been on the sole premise of immediate annihilation by India, a bogey that has allowed it to whip up sentiments and at the same time enjoy pre-eminence as can be made out from the fact of the severance package that the top PA brass gets in Pakistan.

Coming back specifically to Russian aims: Russia is least bothered by Indian actions with US. The mere fact that Indian Armed Forces are using equipment of Soviet/Russian origin and will continue to do so over the next 4-5 decades even if we make a deliberate and constant attempt to shift to western sources, is the reason. I will not even get into what is not in public domain. But please understand that India Defence needs to the tune of 40 Billion USD is to be met by Russia over a very short period of time. US is not sharing critical technology with India which Russia will willingly give to India as India is the only country with which Russia is confident it does not face the threat of IPR violations and sharing of critical data with its potential enemies.

What you further fail to appreciate is the status quo between the two - that is US and Russia in various regions - from Middle East, to Ukraine. Why is there a status quo? You also need to analyse why Turkey is being allowed to carve out a safe zone for itself in Northern Syria.

If one says all these are isolated incidents, one is seriously mistaken.

I re-iterate, for US to be able to play any role in Indo-Pak issue today, is a non-starter. China, for obvious reasons, can not do much. That leaves ONLY Russia as a viable power of some standing ( a role it has adopted earlier too) which can facilitate a de-escalation of tensions between the two.

The power is with PA, until and unless a relationship is established with PA, not much can be achieved even by Russia in the long run.

Also always remember that Islamist insurgency is also a threat for the Russians, who are Orthodox Russians and have a historic baggage of 90s too with them (hint: the Yugoslav conflict) in addition to the Chechen-Dagestan region.

I will not be elaborating beyond this. Rest is upto you to read.

Two very important points raised by you.
1. US killing Osama.
2. China opening office after that.

You know,
You are being sovereign is not a theory. It's exercised in practicality. You can't just remain sovereign by compromising on national security and being living on the illusion of being self sufficient inside our idyllic walls.

When America says she is sovereign she can go the limits to establish her right without any body's permission. Take an example of Israel or even Turkey.

They just see what's best of them and rest dust.

When you start taking actions, you become less dependent on stupid narratives.

Time has come we take actions. And not just debates and debates and debates.

 

[spectribution]

You were "formed" on the same day in the same month in the same year. And before your head starts shaking "India was there". No it was not. British India was. The only thing you have up on Pakistan is you got the the same name - that means nothing. One hour prior to Indian Republic and Pakistan becoming independant thee was British India. That was dissolved and the successor states took over the assets and land. One of them was you.

And just to clarify have a look at map of British India and then what became of it.

By this logic you are going against your country's own line on 'Akhand Bharat'.

 

[dadeechi]

On the below thread, When I asked to people to introspect as Mr BHADRAKUMAR is a very accomplished Diplomat of India, people said that he leans towards communists

https://defence.pk/threads/india-russia-opt-for-velvet-divorce.397266/page-12#ixzz4KyjIDkYp

On the below thread, when I said that Modi is moving India towards US away from Russia, people said that I was unnecessarily pressing the panic button.

https://defence.pk/threads/modis-russia-visit.414836/page-2#post-8023417

On this very thread people are still behaving as if there is nothing to worry and there is no change in policy.

Now you have other strategic policy thinkers weighing into what I have been saying all along.

==============================================================================

Russia’s Unfriendly Political Signalling to India on Pakistan
Submitted by asiaadmin2 on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 05:40
Paper No. 6173 Dated 26-Sept-2016

By Dr. Subhash Kapila

Russia’s promiscuous relationship with Pakistan while at the same time professing enduring commitment to its long-standing ‘Special Strategic Partnership’ with India should no longer fool India. Contextually, Russian troops landing in Pakistan for joint exercises with Pakistan Army is an unfriendly act against India.

With India-Pakistan relations at an all-time high inflexion point due to the provocative attacks by Pakistan Army affiliated Jihadi terrorist groups on the Indian Army Base Camp at Uri and with Indian public opinion incensed to a point demanding strong reprisals against Pakistan Army, in the interests of its ‘Special Strategic Partnership’ the least that Russia could have done was to postpone the joint exercises till things cooled down, even if it did not want to cancel this exercise with the Pakistan Army.

That Russia decided to go ahead with this joint exercise with the Pakistan Army displays an utter Russian disregard for Indian political sensitivities. Ironically, the joint Russian-Pakistan military exercise is focused on ‘counter-terrorism operations’ with a country that is involved in de cades long proxy terrorist war against India. Pakistan is also widely recognised as the incubator of global terrorism. It is doubly ironical that this joint Russian-Pakistan military exercise is being held on Pakistani soil, the defiled soil from which Pakistan Army affiliated Jihadi terrorists groups have inflicted wanton death and destruction on hundreds of Indian lives and property.

Still more ironical and adding insult to injury is the reality that initial reports after the Uri attacks indicated that Russia had called off the Russia-Pakistan joint military exercise in Pakistan, seemingly out of respect for Indian political sensitivities. That Russia did a U-TURN on its earlier declared intentions logically indicates that Russia has succumbed to Chinese pressures as China is Pakistan’s much vaunted strategic patron. Chinese pressure would have been intense on Russia so as to bail out Pakistan from a virtual global isolation.

So where does the above changing trends in Russia’s foreign policy of a strategic and political pivot to the China-Pakistan Axis leave India and the future course of Russia-India ‘Special Strategic Partnership? Especially so, when Indian public opinion does not take kindly to countries which align with Pakistan. In Indian public opinion perceptions simple linear equations exist and that is ‘Either you are with India or you are against India when you cavort with India’s implacable enemies.’

That the Russian strategic and political pivot to the China-Pakistan Axis is a strategic pivot to India’s two implacable enemies, namely China and Pakistan, ‘doubly reinforces’ Indian public perceptions that Russia has indulged in a well-calibrated unfriendly act against India and the Indian people.

When equated in terms of human relations, Russia’s promiscuity in getting attracted to Pakistan, for whatever reasons, amounts to Russia being an unfaithful partner in the Russia-India Special Partnership. And therefore, India needs to go in for a divorce from this Special Strategic Partnership which now exists only in name.

Recently, one Indian defence journal devoted a Special Issue advocating as to the imperatives of sustaining the Russia-India Special Strategic Partnership with a lot of extolling by former Indian Ambassadors and Former Indian Armed Forces Senior Officers recalling all that Russia had done for India in the past.

Rebutting this advocacy of Indian Russia-well-wishers I have two simple questions to pose (1) What has Russia done for India lately and whether the Russian pivot to the China-Pakistan Axis is an India-friendly act? (2) Is Russia committed to assist India in attaining the status and role of a Major Global Power?

In strategic and political dimensions Russia has not done anything substantial for India which could be quoted in favour of Russia that it still attaches value to its Special Strategic Relationship with India. Russian strategic and political moves and actions in the recent past have all been China-centric and promotive of China’s strategic interests. Most of such moves have been at cross-purposes with Indian national security interest.

Russia’s strategic pivot to the China-Pakistan Axis is decidedly unfriendly to Indian security interests. In strategic terms it amounts to Russia tilting towards India’s confirmed enemies, singly and jointly, aiming at the ‘containment of India’. In global perceptions it is likely to be viewed as the first sign of the emergence of a China-Pakistan-Russia Axis.

Moving to the next and most crucial question for India at his critical juncture in its ascendant trajectory is whether Russia is committed to facilitating the emergence of India as a Major Global Power, two big negatives hover on the horizon. In the immediate perspective, had it been so, the Russia would not have made a strategic and political pivot to Pakistan. This itself also negates any long-term perspectives. Further, the tenor of the Russia-China strategic nexus strongly indicates that Russia is highly unlikely to tilt towards India and build it to major global power status as China world not stand for it, and Russia cannot afford to jettison China.

How intensely Russia is subservient to China stands reflected in one of my SAAG Paper written after the presentation of my Paper on South China Sea disputes in Moscow organised by the Russian Academy of Social Sciences, the noted Russian strategic academics who presented Papers at this Seminar were all highly tilted towards China’s stand on its sovereignty over the whole of the South China Sea maritime expanse. It was a glaring betrayal of Russia’s yet another strategic partnership, this time with Vietnam. When I questioned the Russian hosts why the change, one was met with a sardonic smile. This only reinforces my contentions in the preceding paragraph.

Before I am accused of being cynically inclined against Russia and Russian foreign policies, the regular readers of my SAAG Papers of the first half of the last decade would recall how strongly I advocated Russia’ strategic resurgence to balance China’s military rise and for global strategic equilibrium.

It also needs to be pointed out that Russia is doing no favours to India presently whether in the field of construction of nuclear reactors or in the field of military hardware. Russia-India engagement in these two fields is ‘purely economic in content’ with no strategic underpinnings. One could sardonically dismiss these moves as retaining some components of a hedging strategy.

The last major question that needs to be addressed is as to whether India needs to be politically and strategically perturbed by Russia’s strategic and political pivot to Pakistan and the China-Pakistan Axis? The answer is that India should not be perturbed at all. The prevailing balance of power in Indo Pacific Asia and at the global level is heavily weighted against the Russia-China Strategic nexus and Russia’s moves towards Pakistan in South Asia amount to no consequence.

At best, Russia’s moves towards Pakistan amount to poor strategic and political signalling to India to impede or slow its growing strategic proximity to the United States and the West. Russia may like to learn from the United States on the strategic and political costs of molly-coddling a dysfunctional and terrorist state like Pakistan.

In terms of concluding observations, one would like to emphasise that while one has argued that Russia’s tilt towards Pakistan is inconsequential, strategic and political prudence would demand that the Indian policy establishment keeps Russia’s moves in Pakistan under close scrutiny. India must also make serious attempts to sensitise the Russian policy establishment on Indian public perceptions on the gross insensitivity that Russia has displayed in not cancelling the joint military exercise with Pakistan against the backdrop of heightened India-Pakistan tensions in the wake of the Uri attacks. Thereafter, it is Russia’s call on what trajectory it wishes to adopt in relation to relations with India.


http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/node/2058



Raja Mandala: Get real on Russia
As it draws closer to Pakistan and China, India must stop taking it for granted.
Written by C. Raja Mohan
Published:Sep 27, 2016, 0:04
About Author

• 
  C. Raja MohanThe writer is director, Carnegie India, and the consulting editor on foreign affairs for 'The Indian read more...
• Raja Mandala: Get real on Russia

C. Raja Mohan | Published:September 27, 2016 12:04 am

Narendra Modi (L), with Russian President Vladimir Putin
“Every school child in India knows Russia is India’s best friend.” That was the essence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s remarks when he first met the Russian President Vladimir Putin at the margins of the BRICS summit two years ago in Brazil. Although Modi was on his very first diplomatic assignment outside the Subcontinent, he had got the popular Indian sense of Russia just right.

As Russia conducts its first ever military exercise with the Pakistan Army this week, Delhi has to reckon with the prospect that Russia might not necessarily remain India’s “best friend forever”. Rethinking Russia’s position in India’s strategic calculus will be heart-wrenching for many in Delhi. Moscow’s new warmth towards Pakistan may have, wittingly or unwittingly, begun to nudge India towards a relationship with Russia that is founded in realism rather than inertia.

Until now India’s Russian relationship seemed immune to change — internal and external. Governments — centrist, leftist and rightist — have come and gone in Delhi. The Soviet Union, which had such strong influence on the formation of modern India’s worldview during the inter-war period, simply disappeared from the map in 1991. But Delhi and Moscow seemed to carry on after the end of the Cod War. But by letting the sensitive Jammu and Kashmir question into its current play with Pakistan, Moscow might have dealt a big blow to the popular enthusiasm in India for the Russian relationship. At the heart of the Indian perception of Russia as the most reliable international partner was Moscow’s attitude towards the dispute between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir. The Soviet tilt towards India on the issue in the 1950s amidst the Anglo-American maneuvers in favour of Pakistan helped put a halo around Russian heads in India. During their 1955 visit to India that laid the foundations for an extended partnership between the two countries, the Soviet leaders Khrushchev and Bulganin, travelled to Srinagar. In a public reception there, Khrushchev proclaimed that Moscow was just across the border and if there is any trouble in Kashmir, Delhi should just give a shout. Moscow kept its word and exercised its veto in the UN Security Council to block Anglo-American moves on Kashmir in the 1950s.

Anyone familiar in Moscow with the special role of Kashmir in the evolution of India-Russia relations would have balked at the Pakistani proposal to conduct military exercises in Gilgit-Baltistan, that is part of the Kashmir claimed by India. It is entirely possible that the Russians did not see through the Pakistani ruse to lure them into Kashmir. Others suggest the decision may have simply been a bureaucratic mix-up. The Russian embassy in Delhi stepped in to clarify that the exercises will not take place in Gilgit-Baltistan. But the damage had been done. The timing of the exercise was bad enough. It comes at a moment when India was trying to isolate Pakistan after the Uri attacks, coping with fresh political violence inside Kashmir, and drawing international attention to India’s claims over Gilgit-Baltistan. That Russia was unwilling to postpone these exercises in deference to Indian sensitivities at this critical juncture suggests something fundamental is at work in Moscow’s approach to the Subcontinent.

That Russia has sought a normal relationship with Pakistan since the end of Cold War has not been a secret. So is the fact that Indian diplomacy often prevailed over its old friends in Moscow to limit Russian ties with Pakistan. Moscow’s reluctance to defer to Indian sensitivities this time suggests that a new phase in India-Russia relations is finally with us. Only the sentimentalists in Delhi will be surprised at Russia’s decision to redo its South Asian sums.

That a sovereign has no permanent friends is part of traditional wisdom around the world. Nothing illustrates this more than the evolution of Russia’s ties with China and Pakistan. Few countries in the non-Western world have done more damage to Russian interests. The Chinese alignment with the West from the 1970s and the Pakistani jihad against Moscow in the 1980s were central to the defeat of the Soviet Union in the Cold War. That was then; Moscow now believes it can play the China card in enhancing its leverage with the US. Some in Moscow may also bet that cosying up to Pakistan would help caution India against drawing too close to America. Others in Russia might point to the unintended consequence of pushing India into the arms of the US.

But India has no reason to be drawn into that argument within Moscow. Russia has the sovereign right to choose its friends. Nor should Delhi assume that Russia’s current orientation — warmth to China and hostility to the West — is a permanent one. At a moment of great turbulence in great power relations, Russia is rightly jockeying for position. This demands that Delhi must stop taking Moscow for granted. It must focus instead on reconstituting the partnership with a country that will remain a powerful force in Eurasia, on its own merits.

http://indianexpress.com/article/op...inister-narendra-modi-vladimir-putin-3051614/

WW3 Scenario: Russia, China Joining Pakistan In War Against India; America Missing In Action

India-Pakistan Flags Global Panorama / Flickr cc
BY Pritha Paul Email Published: Sep 26, 2016 Updated: 16 hours ago


India and Pakistan, two arch rival countries have started their preparations for war. While India depends on the U.S. for backup, Russia and China have already shown their support towards Pakistan. Can this be the grounds for World War III?

Video: India and Pakistan’s Verbal Battle Over the Kashmir Attack Goes to the U.N.



Pakistan has been secretly attacking military bases set up in Kashmir, which serves as a border of India and Pakistan, resulting in several Indian soldiers dying for months now.

Indo-Pak Dispute
After the consecutive wars that raged back in the 20th century between India and Pakistan, both the nations had come to some sort of peace agreement that brought new hope and understanding between the two.

For decades non-violent relations followed between these two, which almost seemed to verge on cordial until Pakistan elected a new Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, who is hell bent on bringing their neighboring country to their knees.

While India has been holding back from engaging in direct violence against Pakistan, the last straw was 18 soldiers being killed in a terrorist attack at the Army camp in Uri, India on September 18.

Even though the Govt. of India has not formally declared it yet, they have started preparing for war which seems inevitable, what with Pakistan not listening to reason, warnings or threats anymore.

Secretary General Ram Madhav took to the social media and wrote “For one tooth, the complete jaw”, reports CNN. Even the Home Minister of India tweeted “Pakistan is a terrorist state and it should be identified and isolated as such.”


China And Russia Side With Pakistan
It is no secret that India has always enjoyed full support from the U.S. This has made the entire affair a global one because China, who has been unabashedly anti-America for years now, has publicly pledged allegiance with Pakistan.

“In case of any (foreign) aggression our country will extend its full support to Pakistan. We are and will be siding with Pakistan on the Kashmir issue,” Consul General of China in Lahore Yu Boren has said in a press release, reports NDTV.

Russia has also begun dipping its toe into the fight. Even though it has not verbally extended its support towards Pakistan, its antics point to a Russia-Pak pact happening soon enough.

Russian troops are currently practicing anti-terrorist drills in Pakistan, which are causes for worry for India reports The Times Of India.

The only opportunity to convince Russia to side with India is the upcoming annual summit which is due in a few weeks when India will host Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Where Is The U.S.?
On the other hand, the United States seem to be in a bit of a disarray, what with its presidential elections going on and the country being torn apart by the sudden influx of anti-racism movements.

Under such circumstances, can India bank on the U.S. anymore? And is siding with Pakistan a well-planned strategy of China and Russia to establish a new world order where U.S. is not at the top anymore?

http://www.morningnewsusa.com/ww3-s...india-america-missing-in-action-23107921.html

 

[dadeechi]

The Russian bull in South Asia shop
Russia’s recent diplomatic mess in India happened because the bilateral relationship has hardly gone beyond defence

Kunal Singh

Photo: AFP Photo/Inter Services Public Relations/HO
It is no exaggeration to state that Russia—previously, the Soviet Union—has been India’s most reliable partner post-Independence. But a gradual shift has been underway for the past few years. Russia’s decision to send a mechanized infantry unit of its southern military command for joint military exercises with Pakistani troops is part of the shift. The Russians were clever to time it with the India-Russia joint military exercises in Ussuriysk district.

But then the Uri attack happened and reports started trickling in that Russia had cancelled its joint military exercise with Pakistan. Given the weight of history, this development was not surprising. Except that it was untrue. Not only did Russia go ahead with the exercises but the state-run news agency TASS even reported that the opening ceremony would be held at an army school in Rattu in Gilgit-Baltistan. Given the disputed status of that territory and the recent war of words between India and Pakistan on the same, this was a red line crossed as far as New Delhi was concerned.

Quickly realizing the diplomatic quicksand they had entered, the Russians took corrective measures. TASS removed the details of Gilgit-Baltistan locations from its website and the Russian embassy in New Delhi issued a clarification that the sole venue of military exercises in Pakistan is Cherat. All other reports, the embassy said, were “erroneous and mischievous”.

What explains the Russian desire to strengthen ties with Pakistan but without infuriating New Delhi? A part of the answer lies in the growing strategic and defence partnership between New Delhi and Washington. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), the share of the US in Indian arms imports has climbed from 0.18% in 1995-2000 to 13.78% in 2011-15. The surge in arms imports from Israel started even earlier but that too with the US in the loop. The decline in the share of Russian imports is not too great: It decreased from 76.52% during 2006-10 to 70.44% during 2011-15 but it remains roughly similar to the share of 71% during 1995-2000. However, with India being called a “major defence partner” of the US, the Russians see the writing on the wall.

With low commodity prices and Western sanctions following Moscow’s annexation of Crimea, the Russian economy is under tremendous pressure. The desire to diversify its arms market is natural. In June 2014, it lifted an arms embargo on Pakistan and the two countries signed a military cooperation agreement a few months later. Earlier this year, Russia agreed to sell four Mi-35 attack helicopters to Pakistan. Su-35 fighter jets may be next in line.

But the diversification is easier said than done. Moscow fears that overplaying the Pakistan card may accelerate the Americanization of Indian defence supplies. With a sharp contraction in Chinese purchases, the Russian defence industry is today over-reliant on India. The Indian share in Russian arms exports has increased, according to Sipri data, from 23.36% in 1995-2000 to 39.09% during 2011-15.

To round off the complicated picture of Russian arms deals in South Asia, India has recently sold, with Moscow’s nod, four Russian origin Mi-25 attack helicopters to Afghanistan to fight the Pakistan-backed Taliban. India also has an arrangement with Russia to pay for the arms and equipment the latter sells to Afghanistan.

It is not just Russia which is attempting a tightrope walk. India too has taken positions on Crimea and Syria which are more in line with Moscow’s thinking than Washington’s. New Delhi believes the West’s rigid stance vis-à-vis Russia has only achieved a closer Moscow-Beijing embrace. It has also increased the probability of a Moscow-Beijing-Rawalpindi axis evolving.

The India-Russia relationship has had its hiccups. The high point was clearly the bilateral treaty of 1971 which helped India’s offensive in East Pakistan. But in 1962, Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev delayed the transfer of MiG-21 aircraft till the border war between India and China had ended. In an attempt to repair Sino-Soviet mistrust, Khrushchev told Chinese ambassador Liu Xiao that the Chinese were USSR’s “brothers” while Indians merely “friends”. Khrushchev assured Liu that there was no question of Soviet neutrality between India and China.

The other major disappointment came when the Soviet Union decided to broker peace between India and Pakistan in the 1965 war. India had to cede all its wartime gains under Soviet pressure at Tashkent. As K. Shankar Bajpai wrote in The Indian Express last September, the threat of withdrawal of the Soviet veto in the UN security council (UNSC) did the trick.

In more recent years, Russia has indeed supported New Delhi’s entry into the UNSC. But its attitude towards the expansion of the council—and hence towards Indian entry—has been found wanting. It obviously helps Russia if its largest arms purchaser remains dependent on it for support inside the security council.

The Cherat and Ussuriysk exercises and the mess that came with them should be seen in the historical perspective of the India-Russia bilateral relationship and the current flux in the arms market. This mess happened because India-Russia cooperation has hardly gone beyond defence. The bilateral trade in 2015 was a measly $7.83 billion. The India-US relationship encompasses a far greater number of areas and bilateral trade in 2015 was more than $132 billion. Clearly, a different world is evolving and so is the new normal of India-Russia ties.

Kunal Singh is staff writer (views) at Mint.

Comments are welcome at kunal.s@livemint.com

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/yto02BCIHvApwsFKwDkLMO/The-Russian-bull-in-South-Asia-shop.html