Disclaimer-This editorial may not be important from MAINS point of view, however can come in handy in case of interview.(If the panel asks for opinion on this matter). Although the editorial mentions the names of politician etc, it is more diplomatic and prudent to refer the government than naming a person in particular.
On 23 September, the Rafale fighter jet deal was signed by French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar. Over half a month later, on 15 October, India and Russia signed an inter-governmental agreement for the supply of the S-400 missile system. The two deals are significant for the Indian Air Force (IAF), which is struggling with insufficient squadron numbers. While the IAF has a sanctioned strength of 45 fighter squadrons, it is currently operating at a low 35 squadrons and facing an alarming shortage in the near future when many MiG-21 and MiG-27 squadrons will be retired.
The long-winded acquisition of Rafale aircraft
When Dassault Aviation was declared the L1 winner of the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) contract for acquisition of 126 fighter planes on 31 January 2012, the decade-long quest of the IAF for a multi-role combat aircraft finally seemed to be hitting the right stride. However, progress on negotiations over the next two years were beset with several problems. The overall cost of acquisition inflated substantially from $12 billion to a purported $25 billion as the details of maintenance, transfer of technology (ToT) and spares support were negotiated as per Indian specifications. There were other impediments, as Dassault Aviation and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) could not reach an agreement on the terms of guarantee for HAL-produced airframes. Even as the negotiations proceeded at a slow pace with ever-increasing complications, the sword of corruption charges hung over the whole deal. The charges were spearheaded by Subramanian Swamy on the basis of a “Carla Bruni-Sonia Gandhi bribery axis”.
French Rafale fighter jets
The basis of all the confusion with respect to negotiations, as well as the scope for corruption charges, stems from the mishandling by then-Defence Minister A K Antony. At least three senior officials in the Finance Ministry have made a file noting that the formula used for L1 bid estimation by Dassault Aviation was different from that used by the other shortlisted vendor EADS, resulting in an unfair advantage to the eventual winner, Dassault Aviation. The right course of action would have been to evaluate bids by both competitors on exactly the same terms. However, either due to the IAF’s preference for the Rafale or due to extraneous factors, Antony sanctioned further cost negotiations with a non-compliant L1 bid.
Complicating matters more, to minimise risk to his image, he instructed the negotiation committee to report to him if the computation for the L1 bid had to be handled differently. This meant that if the negotiation committee indeed found Dassault Aviation’s L1 bid non-compliant, the two years of time spent on the negotiation was wasted. It was a ludicrous decision that made no sense at all. Such gross mishandling led to not only complicated contract negotiations with major impediments but also left the door open for the deal to be a target for corruption charges.
In this backdrop of inflating cost, non-agreement on guarantee terms and cost for HAL-produced airframes and impending corruption charges, Prime Minister Narendra Modi took decisive action in scrapping the MMRCA deal and announcing an inter-governmental agreement with the French government for direct delivery of 36 Rafale fighter jets on 10 April 2015.
Inter-governmental agreement for the S-400 missile system
The inter-governmental agreement signed for the S-400 missile system on the sidelines of the BRICS summit at Goa made no detailed references to cost or induction timelines. However, it has been reported that the contractual negotiations are likely to be completed in next six to nine months with a targeted signing of the deal by April 2017. The contract is likely to result in the delivery of at least five units of the S-400 missile system.
Besides Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBM), the S-400 system is also capable of shooting down subsonic cruise missiles, which Pakistan is likely to use for the delivery of tactical nukes. The S-400 system would be able to target an F16/JF-17-sized fighter at a range exceeding 300km, making it a highly potent addition to the IAF.
Analysis of IAF’s squadron strength
The IAF has a sanctioned strength of 45 fighter squadrons. However, the IAF is currently operating only 35 squadrons, which includes 11 squadrons of legacy aircraft like MiG-21 M/Bis/Bison and MiG-27. These 11 squadrons are due for retirement between 2018 and 2022. In the same period, the IAF is projected to add only six to seven squadrons, resulting in a major shortage in squadron strength.
Over the next few years, the IAF will add two more squadrons of Su-30MKI (2016-2019) from the current production line while two squadrons of Rafale will be delivered between 2019 and 2022. The IAF has also contracted 40 Tejas Mk1 & 80 Tejas Mk1A aircraft, of which three squadrons will be delivered by 2022.
In the first week of October this year, the IAF has sent out a request for information for a single-engine fighter to be manufactured in India under full ToT. The likely contenders are the F-16 Block 70 (purported Indian configuration) and the Gripen E. It is imperative that the Modi government moves quickly on this front so that the deliveries of the single-engine fighter could start by 2022-2024.
Currently, planned production of 14 squadrons of Su-30MKI (272 aircraft), two squadrons of Rafale, 120 Tejas Mk1/1A and a projected six squadrons (120 aircraft) of a single-engine fighter under ToT will constitute “nominal induction plan” for the IAF, representing the bare minimum modernisation path.
The IAF has publicly said that it would like to induct more Rafale fighter jets. Simultaneously, the Russian side is informally pushing the Indian government to extend the Su-30MKI production line by another 40 aircraft. Considering the falling squadron strength, it would be prudent to order two more squadrons of either Rafale or Su-30MKI. It should also be a straightforward decision to extend the production lines of Tejas Mk1A and a single-engine fighter under ToT to add two more squadrons between them. This represents an “optimistic induction plan” for the IAF, which is fairly straightforward and extremely feasible without any complications. This is easily doable with some coordination between the IAF and the Defence Ministry.
Clearly, even in the most optimistic scenario, the IAF will not realise its sanctioned squadron strength (45 squadrons) in the next 20 years. If the induction of fighter jets follows the nominal induction path, except for four years between 2016 and 2020, the IAF will operate below existing squadron levels for the major part of the next 17 years. Therefore, it is imperative that the IAF & Defence Ministry coordinate well to chase the “optimistic induction path”. Only such proactive planning will ensure a suitable squadron strength for the IAF in the longer term. Nevertheless, the bad news is that the IAF will have to operate at a low 32-33 squadrons during 2019-2024.
Rafale & S-400 as force multipliers
In this backdrop, the signing of the Rafale deal and the inter-governmental agreement on the S-400 missile system are crucial developments, as both systems can act as huge force multipliers in their own way for the IAF.
The Rafale jet is an excellent 4.5 generation fighter jet that comes equipped with potent armaments in the form of Storm Shadow stand-off ALCM and Meteor long-range BVRAAM. However, it is the low observable airframe equipped with an AESA radar and a SPECTRA jammer that makes it a potent force multiplier when the IAF’s inventory of aircraft is equipped with an ODL. Rafale would be able to leverage its low observable and long-range detection capabilities to detect enemy aircraft earlier, and share tactical combat information with other aircraft (such as Tejas, Mirage 2000 and MiG-29) equipped with an ODL. With its ability to act as a mini-AWACS or fighter director in a network-centric environment, the Rafale aircraft can be a significant force multiplier for the IAF.
The Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C aircraft act as a buffer or balancer for the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) against the air superiority enjoyed by the IAF. With a targeting range exceeding 400km for the AEW&C operated by the PAF, the S-400 system makes it near-impossible for the PAF to operate their AWACS system while the IAF would be able to freely deploy its AWACS due to PAF lacking equivalent systems that can endanger the AWACS flying inside Indian territory. Any PAF fighter deployment will also have to contend with the threat of being targeted by the S-400 missile system. By virtually plugging the western border and severely limiting the deployment of PAF AWACS, the S-400 acts as a huge force multiplier.
Conclusion
The multi-pronged force multiplier impact provided by the Rafale and S-400 missile systems is a much-needed shot in the arm for the IAF. Even with lower squadron numbers, the IAF would be able to establish air superiority over the western border with the upgraded Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 fighters supported by a small compliment of Rafales and/or Su-30MKI. This essentially allows the IAF to deploy a major portion of its best fighter assets (Rafale & Su-30MKI) to defend the northern border in the eventuality of a two-front conflict.
While the low and falling squadron strength of the IAF is a big concern, the Rafale and S-400 acquisitions can act as a bulwark against the inevitable low squadron strength in the near future. After a decade of decadence, the Modi-Parrikar duo deserve accolades for their decisive action in untangling the Rafale fighter jet deal, and for the very quick progress on the S-400 deal.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)