Replies

The Saudis have purchased several billions in weaponry-have they influenced US policy against Israel?? What about their concerns on Iran? Taiwan has bought and plans to buy billions-not much support for them either.

I think the question has to be, what would Saudi Arabia's influence and position in the Mideast and the world be if they had historically kept the US at arms length? Would Desert Storm have occurred? Would the Saudi royals still be in charge at all?

And while I agree that there's been a shameful amount of dithering on Obama's part (and Bush's part) wrt to support for Taiwan in the face of PRC opposition, it's likely that the nation of Taiwan wouldn't exist at all today if not for US support.

A close military and diplomatic relationship with the US obviously isn't going to satisfy every item on a nation's wish-list. Pakistan will not be abandoned, India will not be the sole exception to the F-22 export ban, etc. But a close alliance with the US puts India in a much better position to get US action on Pakistan and to confront China in the years to come.

The fact remains that there will remain significant distance between the US and India on issues such as US military aid to Pakistan, India’s energy relations with Iran and nuclear weapons. That would remain so irrespective of whether the MMRCA deal went to an American company or not.

Well, yes - all nations have differences on policies, including the US and it's closest allies. But that doesn't take away the logic for those alliances to exist.

India has brought over 8 billion USD worth of weaponry from US companies since 2005-has military aid and sale/upgrades of Pakistani systems stopped? What is the guarantee that it will stop if an American company won the MMRCA deal.

There is no such guarantee, of course. But there is the certainty that the US will pay much closer attention to Indian concerns if India is more closely aligned with the US. And also the likelihood that India will get access to qualitatively better US technology than the Pakistanis. We've already seen the US agree to Indian access to nuclear technology they won't grant to Pakistan.

About access to US technology, countries such as the UK, Australia and Israel which have had far stronger relations with the US have faced roadblocks on access to JSF technology. Would a single defense deal for all the hype it’s worth make things easier for India?

Again, it's not just the single defense deal but the defense deal as the beginning of a much closer alliance between the US and India. Of course the US is never going to give away the "source code", so to speak, of it's top-of-the line technologies - why would any nation give away it's technology edge? But India would get easier access to the use of those technologies - and while I freely admit that I have no military expertise, I have to believe that for all it's cost overruns and delays the F-35 is likely to end up a better and more cost-effective solution than the Russian PAK-FA for India's purposes.

The question about countries such as Saudi Arabia include this-why is the US embracing a country which is known for religious intolerance, sponsors several extremist groups (openly or covertly) and still doesn’t recognise Israel. The dynamics of the US-Saudi relationship are far too different and revolve heavily around oil. Desert Storm and all events prior to it would have happened exactly the way they did because the major western powers-the US, UK and France had invested in those artificial sheikhdoms. The Saudis have never left the ‘Western fold’ in one sense so the question of how things would be different doesnt arise. The US has turned a blind eye towards the Saudis on several issues for precisely that reason. India doesn’t really have the same luxury, particularly with respect to its primary threat, Pakistan.

About the MMRCA, one question that is not being answered is this-are the selected aircraft the best suited for the Indian air force?? Yes or no. The Super Hornet and F-16IN on a basic level are qualitatively better than Pakistan’s F-16s. But that is not enough. The Pakis have new AEW systems and the same AMRAAM missiles both of which evens things out . In other words, these aircraft are not a quantam leap for the Indian Airforce given the fact that these are essentially legacy airframes. The quality of these aircraft matter as much as any strategic dividend they pay. The Israelis used the French Mirage-III series to good effect for more than a decade after the French embargoed sales.

Is the Indo-US defense relationship dead?? Yes or No-the answer is a resounding No. More arms sales, exercises and coordination are in the pipeline. The problem with over-analysing this deal is that pretty much every contract will follow the same pattern. If today if its the MMRCA, tomorrow it may well be the LCS for the Indian navy. No one will talk about the LCS’s hideous cost, poor armament and design flaws; it will all be about ‘sustaining’ a strategic partnership. Every arms deal cannot be held hostage to supposedly “strategic” priorities-getting the best weaponry for your military is itself a strategic priority. The Indian government and military deserve credit for throwing their bets with SEVERAL US built platforms such as the C-130, C-17, P-8 and possibly the Apache for both their strategic and operational benefits. US companies will very likely be winning more if not the majority of defense contracts from India. But to expect overnight wonders with hawking systems which have competitive rivals is a bit of a stretch.

I can’t figure out why the same din wasn’t caused when the USAF selected Boeing’s tanker for the KC-X. Did ties with the EU collapse because of that? That deal was worth 35 billion USD-more than twice the value of the MMRCA. EADS quietly went back to the drawing board like Boeing and Lockheed Martin seem to be doing.

The F-35 and PAK-FA are two entirely different aircraft. The problem with the F-35 is that its meant to be a jack of all trades unlike the PAK FA which has an air superiority role. The F-35’s agility is little better than the F-16, it cannot supercruise and stealth is primarily frontal. Which is why concerns have been raised about its effectiveness in the air to air domain.