(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India
(Marxist)
Vol. XXXIV
No.
46
November
14,
2010
Obama Lifts Export
Controls for India:
Dual Use Has Dual Purpose
Raghu
THE world has
certainly
changed in the past decade or so. There was a time when Western
dignitaries
visiting India were
always
expected to give various things to India most of which would
translate
into money. Not any more.
When US president Clinton visited India in 2000, the first US
leader to do
so in over two decades, the world had already changed greatly. The
Soviet Union
was no more, the cold war had ended and India had long dropped its
begging
bowl. The US was
looking to
change strategic dynamics in the region and beyond, and counter-balance
the new
rising power China,
while Indian
governing circles were seeking a breakthrough with the US in the post-Soviet era and vis-à-vis
South Asia. Money was not the
currency, geo-political considerations
were. Soon the US
under president
Clinton was, for the first time, to openly side with India
against Pakistan
in the wake of the latter’s Kargil adventurism, and a prolonged broader
strategic
dialogue ensued. President George W Bush’s visit to India
was heavy with his promise to help India
become a great power on the broad shoulders of the US. To
cement a “strategic partnership” with India,
Bush was to break through the seemingly impenetrable barriers of US non-proliferation orthodoxy and
shook up the
global nuclear architecture, having secured Indian strategic
concordance and an
unprecedented defence agreement with the
US.
President
Obama’s visit to
India
has continued this trend and taken it a step further. But there have
been some
significant departures as well. For one, the US did not have a great
deal to
offer strategically except a few incremental steps beyond those already
taken,
and that much sought after endorsement of Indian permanent membership
of the UN
Security Council, itself an idea whose time has come and which was
destined to
become reality before too long. For another, a substantial portion of
the visit
did indeed revolve around money, but fromIndiato the US!
Yet
there is more continuity than change, and both tell us a good deal
about
the unfolding US-India relationship.
US MILITARY
SALES
Reeling under
the massive
reverses suffered by the Democrats in the US
Congressional elections on the eve of Obama’s trip to India, attributed largely to the poor
state of
the US economy
especially
high unemployment there, the US
president understandably stressed the economic deliverables of his
visit. $10
billion to the US
and 53,000 American jobs were claimed as direct outcomes. But given the
economic woes in the US, president Obama had been harping on the theme
of
opening up markets, especially in India and elsewhere in Asia, for
several
months and has in fact continued harping on this theme as he has
continued his
Asian tour in Indonesia and South Korea. When the first leg of Obama’s
visit in
Mumbai was dominated by what seemed to be purely commercial dealings,
and the
US president was keeping his geo-political cards close to his chest, it
was
widely speculated that what India was seeing was Obama the salesman
rather than
Obama the statesman. But were the two really that different?
The defence
purchases
announced during the visit had actually been struck much earlier. A
deal for India
acquiring
ten C-17 Globemaster III heavy-lift transporters at a cost of $4
billion, with
the possibility of acquiring a few more later,was announced even though the US Congress was notified about it
a few
months ago. Similarly, the sale of over 100 General Electric GE-414
engines for
India’s
light
combat aircraft (LCA) at around $800 million was agreed to in
September. It
was important for president Obama to announce these deals in Mumbai so
as to
boost the sense of what the visit had achieved.
Other deals
in the
pipeline and which were not announced were those for the acquisition of
197 light
utility helicopters, which was postponed by India
earlier to facilitate
participation of US firms in the tender, and those for some artillery
systems,
missiles and so on. These deals come on the back of India
having acquired from the US
eight (later increased to 12) P8-I maritime reconnaissance and
anti-submarine
aircraft from Boeing at over $2 billion and Hercules C130J transporters
for
over $1 billion. India’s
decision
on the “mother of all defence deals”, the acquisition of 126 medium
multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) at over $10 billion is not expected
for
several months yet.
President
Obama is clearly
under pressure to secure these military deals. He desperately wants to
show the
US domestic audience
good
sales and creation of jobs in the US. Not surprising given
the
political atmosphere he faces back home, and the other salesmen
following him
to India soon in the form of high-powered delegations from major
competitors in
military hardware France and Russia, all bidding for a share in the
huge Indian
pie of defence acquisitions expected to amount to $50-80 billion over
the next
five years.
On the Indian
side though,
the moot question is whether India
has driven a hard bargain to extract what it wants from president Obama
and the
US, or has India
just played
good boy and signed away billions of dollars for a few brownie points?
STRATEGIC
TERMS
One heard a
lot about the
equipment and their monetary value but little about the nitty-gritty
involved,
especially the important inter-governmental agreements that usually go
along
with such US
military sales and in which their strategic implications really lie.
All the
defence deals
struck by India
with the US
are through
the government-to-government foreign military sales (FMS) route. The US has been pushing India
hard to sign three major defence agreements which the US
regards as
“foundational” agreements essential for allies who seek to acquire
military
hardware under the FMS. With these allies usually coming under US defence protection, and often under
its
nuclear umbrella as well, the US
expects full adherence to numerous conditions that together bind the
buyer into
a subordinate and dependent relationship. The agreements ensure that
the US retains full
control over the use, deployment
and maintenance of this military hardware, even to the extent of
compelling
buyers to acquire spares only from the US and to refrain from
making any
modifications to the equipment as local conditions may require.
The logistics
support
agreement (LSA) would bring India
into a set of US allies that use each others’ military facilities and
equipment,
and pay for the same through long- term arrangements. It takes little
imagination to deduce that this is meant chiefly to facilitate US use
of Indian
facilities and that the LSA virtually amounts to a military alliance.
CISMOA or
the communications, inter-operability and security memorandum of
agreement would,
apart from promoting the ability to operate each others’ military
hardware in
joint operations, also ensure US
control over communications software and sensitive equipment that can
be sold
only under CISMOA conditionalities. The US
is linking India
signing CISMOA to sales of some military hardware or components, and
also to
the lifting of some Indian defence-related agencies from its “entities
list”
against whom sanctions were imposed following Pokhran-II. The third of
these is
the BECA or basic exchange and cooperation agreement. The end-use
monitoring
agreement is overarching, but more about this later.
It is well
known that the
Indian armed forces have been staunchly opposing India
signing such agreements and have resisted attempts by the political
leadership
and the bureaucracy to give in to US
pressure arguing, like the US,
that the agreements are routine and innocuous. They are nothing of the
kind. The
ministers and civil servants routinely deny that they have signed an
end-use
agreement but concede that they have “agreed on language” concerning
end-use of
US-origin military hardware which is referred to in the contract
relating to
each deal. And no-one knows what this language is! The Air Force chief
and
current chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee P V Naik even went
public
with his opposition a few months back. Official US
documents, with crucial portions blackened out as confidential,
available on
the internet, testify that the US
is intent on securing Indian concurrence on these agreements. Indeed,
it may
already have done so as far as end-use monitoring goes, even if in a
roundabout
way.
The joint
statement issued
after the Obama visit reaffirming the US-India global strategic
partnership in
fact pointedly refers to some hitherto secret letters exchanged between
the two
governments in 2004. It also refers to the end-use visit agreement
concluded
earlier and signed between US
secretary of state Hillary Clinton and India’s
external
affairs minister, which specifically relates to the on-site monitoring
of US military
hardware by
US officials including some posted in the US
embassy in New Delhi.
India
appears to have gotten away so far without signing CISMOA and the LSA
but is
already on the hook on end-use monitoring.
How long can
this
continue? One of the high points of the Obama visit was the US declaration that it is ending
restrictions on
US
export of high-tech dual-use items. But the more India
seeks to acquire such items, the more the US
will press India
to sign these agreements.
THE
NOOSE
TIGHTENS
The growing
Indian
acquisition of US
military
hardware thus takes India
further into the US
circle of “allies” who ultimately find themselves with little space for
sovereign manoeuvre. The removal of the Indian “entities” such as the
four DRDO
subsidiaries and several ISRO sub-agencies is a self-serving move by
the US.
While appearing
to remove hurdles on India
acquiring high-tech dual-use items, it actually serves a dual purpose
of the US.
It opens
the door for US exports of military hardware which India
could otherwise have acquired, and simultaneously ties India
up into
various long-term binding defence agreements that restrict its
strategic space.
US state department, commerce department and White House official notes
and
policy papers written up prior to the Obama visit make it clear that
the “dual
use” export controls are being removed not as any correction of past US
mistakes or as an act of great friendship but for commercial and
strategic
interests of the US.
Bush’s vision
of the
US-India partnership may have been dominated by the strategic and
military,
with the commercial aspects as a useful by-product. President Obama,
facing a
domestic recession, has fallen back on that old American staple, the
military
industrial complex. Obama’s vision of the US
partnership with India
may
resound with the rhetorical flourishes of his famous oratory, but his
main take
away from the visit will be the commercial tie-ups with India that also binds India
closer into the US
strategic embrace, converting an American necessity into a virtue. And India is getting more firmly entangled
in the US
strategic
web.