India working to fix army modernisation glitches for edge over neighbours: Pentagon

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

WASHINGTON: Aimed at addressing the problems of ageing equipment and to better posture itself in defence against Pakistan and China, the new Indian government is making efforts to overcome impediments to its major military modernisation drive, the Pentagon has said.

"India is in the midst of a major military modernisation effort - undertaken by all three military services - to address problems with its ageing equipment and to better posture itself to defend against both Pakistan and China," Lt Gen Vincent R Stewart, Director of Defense Intelligence Agency, told members of the House Armed Services Committee during a hearing on global threat assessment on Tuesday.

India, he said, is working to address impediments to modernisation, such as its cumbersome procurement process, budget constraints, and a domestic defense industry that has struggled to provide military equipment that meets service requirements.

Noting that relations with Pakistan remain strained, he said India and Pakistan engaged in periodic skirmishes on or near the Line of Control that separates Kashmir, resulting in the highest number of civilian casualties since 2003.

Track-II dialogue between the two sides continued throughout the year, but resulted in little progress in resolving bilateral disputes, he observed.


Commenting on Sino-India ties, Stewart said they maintain limited military-to-military engagement and continue to discuss their longstanding border dispute, despite occasional altercations between troops patrolling the border.

"India is concerned over Chinese logistical improvements along the border and is raising additional ground forces, improving logistical capacity, and is basing advanced fighter aircraft opposite the China border. India also is concerned over China's increased activity in South Asia and the Indian Ocean," he said.

"India continues to conduct periodic tests of its nuclear-capable missiles to enhance and verify missile reliability and capabilities. In early December 2014, India successfully tested the Agni-IV intermediate-range ballistic missile, which New Delhi claims has a range of 4,000 kilometers," he said.

The top Pentagon intelligence official said India will continue developing an ICBM, the Agni-VI, which will reportedly carry multiple warheads, and is working on the development of several variants of a submarine-launched ballistic missile.

India working to fix army modernisation glitches for edge over neighbours: Pentagon - The Economic Times

 

[PARIKRAMA]

The top Pentagon intelligence official said India will continue developing an ICBM, the Agni-VI, which will reportedly carry multiple warheads, and is working on the development of several variants of a submarine-launched ballistic missile.

Good that USA clearly knows we are working on a ICBM with 8-10k in mind. In case USA does pressurise us not to go ahead with fast development of A6, our government should bargain hard and get TOT goodies in jet engine or EMALs or any other technology which we feel would enhance our domestic defence market. Anyways A5 nearly takes care of our own immediate requirements.

But we must keep striving for matching the feats of agni series in SLBM arena. We do require beyond k4 and possibly K5/K6 which are counterpart of A5/A6 but configured as SLBM with MIRV.

Strangely, i may add that we can openly say we should not feel the pressure and go on with the development pace but we live in a world where maintaining good relations for geo political and economical reasons are also important. Thus, we should do whatever serves in the best interest of our country.

 

[Screambowl]

Good that USA clearly knows we are working on a ICBM with 8-10k in mind. In case USA does pressurise us not to go ahead with fast development of A6, our government should bargain hard and get TOT goodies in jet engine or EMALs or any other technology which we feel would enhance our domestic defence market. Anyways A5 nearly takes care of our own immediate requirements.

But we must keep striving for matching the feats of agni series in SLBM arena. We do require beyond k4 and possibly K5/K6 which are counterpart of A5/A6 but configured as SLBM with MIRV.

Strangely, i may add that we can openly say we should not feel the pressure and go on with the development pace but we live in a world where maintaining good relations for geo political and economical reasons are also important. Thus, we should do whatever serves in the best interest of our country.

If they had to object, they would have done it on AagniV. Objection might come from few countries in regards of Common wealth revenue. But I believe India has stopped taking it.

 

[halfilhal]

Good that USA clearly knows we are working on a ICBM with 8-10k in mind. In case USA does pressurise us not to go ahead with fast development of A6, our government should bargain hard and get TOT goodies in jet engine or EMALs or any other technology which we feel would enhance our domestic defence market. Anyways A5 nearly takes care of our own immediate requirements.

But we must keep striving for matching the feats of agni series in SLBM arena. We do require beyond k4 and possibly K5/K6 which are counterpart of A5/A6 but configured as SLBM with MIRV.

Strangely, i may add that we can openly say we should not feel the pressure and go on with the development pace but we live in a world where maintaining good relations for geo political and economical reasons are also important. Thus, we should do whatever serves in the best interest of our country.

Condition of Russia is for every one to see when it picked a tussle with US? If US pressurizes, then India would have no option but to bow down. Agni development obviously got the go ahead from US.

 

[Tshering22]

If they had to object, they would have done it on AagniV. Objection might come from few countries in regards of Common wealth revenue. But I believe India has stopped taking it.

You cannot rule them out still though.

Remember, US doesn't care what we do in our neighbourhood.

But if DRDO goes to build the Surya ICBM (20,000 km) with MIRV, then they will definitely object.

You see, all of the 8 nuclear powers of the world have missiles pointed towards each other; some less, some more. But they have it pointed at each other. If you think UK and France have not pointed missiles towards USA or vice versa, or Russia and China haven't pointed at each other, Europe, USA and us, etc you'd be wrong. Even we do the same.

Having missiles that can strike US mainland by any country is a problem for the Americans. Even though India has never been hostile as a country.

 

[SwAggeR]

Pentagon needs to forego it's control freak habits . Deals like end user tracking or restrictions on use of Jalswa won't help the cause either.

If they are really interested in engaging something substantive with India then they must understand that they can not use us as a leverage against China and India must be free to use her assets bought from hard cash the way she deems fit.

Sooner or later we will short out our border difference with China , till then they have time to tone down attitude because if they wait too long then it might be end of their presence in our backyards.

I am all for strong RIC. Let's together make century a Asian century.

You cannot rule them out still though.

Remember, US doesn't care what we do in our neighbourhood.

But if DRDO goes to build the Surya ICBM (20,000 km) with MIRV, then they will definitely object.

You see, all of the 8 nuclear powers of the world have missiles pointed towards each other; some less, some more. But they have it pointed at each other. If you think UK and France have not pointed missiles towards USA or vice versa, or Russia and China haven't pointed at each other, Europe, USA and us, etc you'd be wrong. Even we do the same.

Having missiles that can strike US mainland by any country is a problem for the Americans. Even though India has never been hostile as a country.

We just need couple of boomers loaded with 8000 km. range missiles.I guess that is quite possible by 2020.It will give great strategic depth to our diplomats in hammering out just deals.

 

[Screambowl]

You cannot rule them out still though.

Remember, US doesn't care what we do in our neighbourhood.

But if DRDO goes to build the Surya ICBM (20,000 km) with MIRV, then they will definitely object.

You see, all of the 8 nuclear powers of the world have missiles pointed towards each other; some less, some more. But they have it pointed at each other. If you think UK and France have not pointed missiles towards USA or vice versa, or Russia and China haven't pointed at each other, Europe, USA and us, etc you'd be wrong. Even we do the same.

Having missiles that can strike US mainland by any country is a problem for the Americans. Even though India has never been hostile as a country.

We can settle it via diplomacy only. Give them some business take some business and make surya.

 

[SwAggeR]

Nowadays , US media seems too concerned about military rise of Eastern countries.

https://twitter.com/x/status/562999047104241664

 

[SwAggeR]

Too eager to track ?? huh ??

https://twitter.com/x/status/563010217173327873

 

[Tshering22]

Pentagon needs to forego it's control freak habits . Deals like end user tracking or restrictions on use of Jalswa won't help the cause either.

Well the problem is, they are very specific about the technologies they share. It is therefore our responsibility to come up with a domestic, effective solution to such restrictions. I mean, come on! Look at the political stand of the countries with whom USA deals. The nature of relationship with different countries ranges from Level 1 being considered as partners but as subservient, to Level 3, which is downright being a slave. There is no EQUAL category for any country they deal with.

Anyone expecting equality has been classified as an enemy: namely Russia and China.

Level 1 Partners
1- UK:-- Agreed to become a lackey in NATO and now doesn't even get to share the JSF technology, despite being the most loyal partner to USA in NATO.

2- Germany:-- A superbly tech powerhouse on its own, but on leashes, where it is still bound by post-WW2 imposition by the Allied governments; mainly USA, while France and UK keep a close watch on the Germans for the Americans.

3- Japan:-- Another superpower on its own, but despite numerous attempts by Mr. Abe, is finding it difficult to completely throw off the political yoke of USA. While Japan has benefited from being defence partner of USA, it still has most of its political policies in approval of Washington. Even if Abe tries to change it completely, his opposition won't let it happen. Not essentially anti-American, but what I would call, independent.

4- France:-- A well-respected neutral country until a few years ago, when it joined NATO and threw off its policies in favour of agreeing to everything Americans say. The Russian LPD deal speaks volumes of their changing thought process.

Level 2

The entire Oil producing part of the Middle East:-- With monarchs having a strong alliance with the US, their position of power is strong as long as they keep the value of US dollars high.

Philippines: Again, a major recipient of American aid and assistance, the country is a mini-USA in southeast Asia. They are peaceful and gentle people but largely rely on US for major defence concerns due to a small economy size.

Argentina before Kirchner, Colombia and Chile are in the same boat. Only Brazil has enough muscle to keep afloat without any leanings.

Level 3

Former Libya, Shah's Iran, Iraq post Saddam and Pakistan and a handful countries in Africa.

Despite some of them trying to free themselves, these countries have largely been used brutally, thrown out, reused again and then thrown out. No matter what they do, they are unable to come up on their own.

Some are innocent while others just don't want to leave their comfort zones.

If they are really interested in engaging something substantive with India then they must understand that they can not use us as a leverage against China and India must be free to use her assets bought from hard cash the way she deems fit.Sooner or later we will short out our border difference with China , till then they have time to tone down attitude because if they wait too long then it might be end of their presence in our backyards.

Unlikely. Sorting out border issues that is mutually acceptable will take quite a long time. And as long as China keeps the same equation with USA as they do today, it is only going to get in favour of China. Which means Americans will soon have bigger disadvantage against them.

It is even possible that they might have a sort of quasi-alliance to establish 'sectors of influence' in Asia in mutual agreement.

That will press us to be prepared by increasing our economic might followed by indigenous defence capabilities.

I am all for strong RIC. Let's together make century a Asian century.

A true RIC or BRICS will take some time as we are economically not that strong to match as an equal as China or militarily not even remotely anywhere near Russia. Brazilians have a different set of problems and the South Africans are not very keen on projecting their influence.

Therefore, this RIC setup will take some time.

We just need couple of boomers loaded with 8000 km. range missiles.I guess that is quite possible by 2020.It will give great strategic depth to our diplomats in hammering out just deals.

Anything less than 12,000 Km doesn't serve purpose.

Too eager to track ?? huh ??

https://twitter.com/x/status/563010217173327873

More like supplying weapons for ISIS.

 

[SwAggeR]

Well the problem is, they are very specific about the technologies they share. It is therefore our responsibility to come up with a domestic, effective solution to such restrictions. I mean, come on! Look at the political stand of the countries with whom USA deals. The nature of relationship with different countries ranges from Level 1 being considered as partners but as subservient, to Level 3, which is downright being a slave. There is no EQUAL category for any country they deal with.

Anyone expecting equality has been classified as an enemy: namely Russia and China.

Level 1 Partners
1- UK:-- Agreed to become a lackey in NATO and now doesn't even get to share the JSF technology, despite being the most loyal partner to USA in NATO.

2- Germany:-- A superbly tech powerhouse on its own, but on leashes, where it is still bound by post-WW2 imposition by the Allied governments; mainly USA, while France and UK keep a close watch on the Germans for the Americans.

3- Japan:-- Another superpower on its own, but despite numerous attempts by Mr. Abe, is finding it difficult to completely throw off the political yoke of USA. While Japan has benefited from being defence partner of USA, it still has most of its political policies in approval of Washington. Even if Abe tries to change it completely, his opposition won't let it happen. Not essentially anti-American, but what I would call, independent.

4- France:-- A well-respected neutral country until a few years ago, when it joined NATO and threw off its policies in favour of agreeing to everything Americans say. The Russian LPD deal speaks volumes of their changing thought process.

Level 2

The entire Oil producing part of the Middle East:-- With monarchs having a strong alliance with the US, their position of power is strong as long as they keep the value of US dollars high.

Philippines: Again, a major recipient of American aid and assistance, the country is a mini-USA in southeast Asia. They are peaceful and gentle people but largely rely on US for major defence concerns due to a small economy size.

Argentina before Kirchner, Colombia and Chile are in the same boat. Only Brazil has enough muscle to keep afloat without any leanings.

Level 3

Former Libya, Shah's Iran, Iraq post Saddam and Pakistan and a handful countries in Africa.

Despite some of them trying to free themselves, these countries have largely been used brutally, thrown out, reused again and then thrown out. No matter what they do, they are unable to come up on their own.

Some are innocent while others just don't want to leave their comfort zones.




Unlikely. Sorting out border issues that is mutually acceptable will take quite a long time. And as long as China keeps the same equation with USA as they do today, it is only going to get in favour of China. Which means Americans will soon have bigger disadvantage against them.

It is even possible that they might have a sort of quasi-alliance to establish 'sectors of influence' in Asia in mutual agreement.

That will press us to be prepared by increasing our economic might followed by indigenous defence capabilities.




A true RIC or BRICS will take some time as we are economically not that strong to match as an equal as China or militarily not even remotely anywhere near Russia. Brazilians have a different set of problems and the South Africans are not very keen on projecting their influence.

Therefore, this RIC setup will take some time.



Anything less than 12,000 Km doesn't serve purpose.



More like supplying weapons for ISIS.

Can't boomers go those extra 4000 kms ??

To bring down US first $$ needs to be brought down. Hit them where it hurts most.

KSA is ruining their shell technology , which costs 60 $ per barrel at the source itself.

 

[Tshering22]

Can't boomers go those extra 4000 kms ??

To bring down US first $$ needs to be brought down. Hit them where it hurts most.

KSA is ruining their shell technology , which costs 60 $ per barrel at the source itself.

Our objective is not to ruin them.

It is to make sure that there is an 'insurance' policy in case tomorrow we have an anti-India president there.

Obama is pro-India so far and is keen to ramp up ties with us. Which is a good thing.

This is exactly what is AT PRESENT benefitting both USA and India.

But if we have another Nixon or someone with the mentality of Henry Kissinger, then there will be trouble.

We all know what Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and even Shah's Iran went through.

The additional problem is that we don't have Soviet Union's raw power to keep us insulated.

Meaning, whatever measures have to be taken, have to be taken by us, within the resources available to us, at the very best.

As for boomers, stretching them from beyond IOR would be a strategic risk, no matter how well calculated. Arihants are not Typhoon class submarines that can hold dozens of SLBMs with 10k+ strike range.

In order to ensure the worst possible scenario goes safe for India, we will need something that brings the entire world within our nuclear strike range.

All the countries, including USA, China, Russia and France have that capability. In hard-nosed reality, it is the best possible insurance policy which keeps hostile states at bay and future potential enemies to rethink any aggression.