Windjammer
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 41,319
- Reaction score
- 181
- Country
- Location
After Balakot if India had Rafale, things would have been different: Retd Air chief BS Dhanoa
He said that the attacks on Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama were clear signs that conventional deterrence was inadequate to withhold the enemy from executing terrorism on Indian soil.
Follow Zeenews on
Jan 04, 2020, 17:16 PM IST
New Delhi: Retired Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa claimed that had India procured Rafale jets after Balakot attacks "things would have been different". He also lamented about the politicization of the procurement of defence equipment.
"After Balakot if you had Rafale, things would have been different. If Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman had been flying a Rafale and not a MIG21, things would have definitely been different I feel. Why was he not flying a Rafale? Because it took 10 years to decide which aircraft you want to buy. The entire process is delayed if defensive procurements are politicised. So it affects you," he said, adding, "If you politicise a defence acquisition system, the whole system goes behind and the entire process delays and you start moving ahead in a slow pace because people start becoming very conscious."
Live TV
Dhanoa also gave the example of Bofors and the controversy around it comparing it to the Rafale jet deal. He said "See for example in the Bofors - it’s a very good gun but the whole thing got mired in controversy. Rafale also the same questions were asked and it’s a good thing for us that the controversy has somewhat died and the Supreme Court has given a very good judgement on the issue. You have many agencies that do audit in the deal."
The former Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee further revealed that the Indian Air Force had proposed punitive action through airstrikes in response to both the 2001 Parliament attack as well as the 2006 Mumbai attack but it was rejected by the then ruling government as not a "viable option".
The retired Chief of Air Staff opined that since India never took any punitive action the terrorists got confident that India will not retaliate in case of another terrorist attack. Attacks on Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama were clear signs that conventional deterrence was inadequate to withhold the enemy from executing terrorism on Indian soil.
While it's to be seen in IAF hands what miracles can or will the Rafale pull, however, if IAF is relying on the French fighter to be it's saving grace, one wonders what's the use of having over 300 SU-30s and Mirage-2000s which were once claimed to be an overkill of PAF.
But since we know the obvious, better come clean Mr Dhanoa.
He said that the attacks on Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama were clear signs that conventional deterrence was inadequate to withhold the enemy from executing terrorism on Indian soil.
Follow Zeenews on
Jan 04, 2020, 17:16 PM IST
New Delhi: Retired Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa claimed that had India procured Rafale jets after Balakot attacks "things would have been different". He also lamented about the politicization of the procurement of defence equipment.
"After Balakot if you had Rafale, things would have been different. If Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman had been flying a Rafale and not a MIG21, things would have definitely been different I feel. Why was he not flying a Rafale? Because it took 10 years to decide which aircraft you want to buy. The entire process is delayed if defensive procurements are politicised. So it affects you," he said, adding, "If you politicise a defence acquisition system, the whole system goes behind and the entire process delays and you start moving ahead in a slow pace because people start becoming very conscious."
Live TV
Dhanoa also gave the example of Bofors and the controversy around it comparing it to the Rafale jet deal. He said "See for example in the Bofors - it’s a very good gun but the whole thing got mired in controversy. Rafale also the same questions were asked and it’s a good thing for us that the controversy has somewhat died and the Supreme Court has given a very good judgement on the issue. You have many agencies that do audit in the deal."
The former Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee further revealed that the Indian Air Force had proposed punitive action through airstrikes in response to both the 2001 Parliament attack as well as the 2006 Mumbai attack but it was rejected by the then ruling government as not a "viable option".
The retired Chief of Air Staff opined that since India never took any punitive action the terrorists got confident that India will not retaliate in case of another terrorist attack. Attacks on Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama were clear signs that conventional deterrence was inadequate to withhold the enemy from executing terrorism on Indian soil.
While it's to be seen in IAF hands what miracles can or will the Rafale pull, however, if IAF is relying on the French fighter to be it's saving grace, one wonders what's the use of having over 300 SU-30s and Mirage-2000s which were once claimed to be an overkill of PAF.
But since we know the obvious, better come clean Mr Dhanoa.
jahan mighty bhagwan's own weapon SU-30MKI failed in front of paksitanis what chance mig-29 have there ?
