DEFENCE NOTES
New Delhi, 29 May 2006
Spend But Be
Accountable
CAG FINDS FLAWS IN
ARMS DEALS
By B.K. Mathur
Defence expenditure is one thing which has never been
objected to by anyone in the country, including leaders of the Opposition
parties. It is a matter of national
security, which can’t be compromised at any cost. But what is invariably
questioned in Parliament and outside is misuse of massive
budgetary allocations and lack of accountability. Even if budgetary allocations of the Defence
Ministry have not been discussed on
the floor of Parliament for years, institutions and individuals connected with
the Ministry’s policy and planning point out grave misuse of funds in military
purchases. Parliamentary Committee
reports and scrutiny by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India highlight
again and again financial irregularities.
In its latest report tabled in Parliament the other day, the
CAG has pulled up the Government for its failure to exercise adequate care in
negotiating huge armament deals with Russia, a country which even
today is one of the major weapons and systems supplier to India. The CAG has pinpointed three major defence
deals from that country – Rs.6,500-crore agreement for the purchase of
Sukhoi-30 multi-role fighter aircraft signed in 1996, Rs.3,000-crore deal to
buy T-90 Main Battle Tanks concluded in 2001 and even the earlier agreement to
acquire T-72 MBTs was flawed, observed the country’s financial watchdog and noted
“there is need for the Government to freeze cost parameters, especially in
cases of licensed-production.”
The CAG has cautioned that care need to be taken to ensure
that transfer of technology for such expensive machines and systems should
encompass the lifetime support
system for the weapons. Failure to do
that invariably ends in a disaster. There has been an almost one hundred per
cent cost escalation in the licensed-production of Sukhoi aircraft project. The
indigenously-manufactured Sukhoi aircraft is presently costing about Rs.28.60
crore more than the import cost. In the
case of T-90 MBT kits, the supply has not been forthcoming, as time-bound
clause has not been incorporated at the agreement stage. The Assembly
of the 186 tanks was to start by March 2005, but so far only 85 tanks had been
delivered.
In this connection, remember, the stipulation of
license-production at home was the main reason why the Indira Gandhi Government
preferred to go in for modernized military armament from the erstwhile Soviet Union in late 1960s. Western equipment, though superior
to the Russian machinery, was not
preferred because the suppliers, including the US companies, were not willing to
export technology for the production of their state-of-the-art machinery. Also,
two other considerations weighed in favour of the Russian
machinery – reliability for the supply of spares etc. and Rupee-payment for all
the purchases.
Both reliability and Rupee-payment advantage are not really
available for the induction of Russian
machinery after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Only transfer of technology for indigenous production of the Russian machinery is still on offer. And, importantly, India’s defence production units
have by now become accustomed to handling or producing Russian
machinery under licence. The users too are
now comfortable on Russian machines,
be they aircraft, warships or mechanized machines for the Army. The present UPA Government at the Centre has
plans to induct several state-of-the-art military machines at high cost. Russian, American and European companies have offered their produce.
In fact, the Service Headquarters had never had it so good
as now, with Pranab Mukherjee as the Defence Minister. Official figures show
that during 2004-05 India’s
armed forces spent a staggering $6 billion to purchase from abroad weapons and
weapon systems. With India
going on a buying spree for military machines, defence industry in militarily
advanced countries has got busy in marketing their produce in the country, as
reflected in the foreign participation at the Def-Expo in New Delhi earlier this year. As many as 20 armament majors had their eyes
on India’s
plan to acquire 126 multi-role combat aircraft for the Indian Air Force,
involving a large expenditure of about $6.5 billion. Negotiations for these are on, while France has already finalized contract for the $3.5
billion submarine project and the UK has completed deal for $1.8
billion Hawk AJT (advanced jet trainer) deal.
Before going into the controversies about the charges of
slush money in the AJT and Scorpene deals, let us first understand that the
defence industry is quite different from any other production unit. State-of-the-art military machines cannot be
produced under one roof, because each one has hundreds of components, big and
small, many of which are to be imported.
It is never economically viable to set up a separate unit for their
production, and hence the easy option of direct import. That also helps the
people in authority to not only travel abroad frequently but also to make
money, call it slush money or bribery. Take the case of the AJT deal at the end
of which India
agreed to pay about Rs.800 crore more than the Price Negotiations Committee,
(PNC) had finalized. Later the, then, Defence Secretary told this writer that
extra money had been agreed to for “spares and other services.”
The latest controversial deal that constitutes part of the
present Government plan of induction of sophisticated weaponry in the three
military services is the Scorpene submarine deal involving as high an amount as
Rs.18,798 crore. This deal has many
disturbing elements, involving massive
kickbacks as revealed by the NDA Government’s former Defence Minister, George
Fernandes. The NDA has claimed that the recent exposure is one of the biggest corruption scandals of
the UPA Government which, as the Navy itself has now admitted, has gravely
jeopardized India’s
national security. This includes the infamous “War Room Leak” at the Naval
Headquarters in New Delhi.
Worse, certain foreign and Indian nationals have been
charged of involvement in the deal, leading to illegal entry of middlemen. A
four per cent commission on the
contract amount, between Rs.500-700 crore, has reportedly been offered to make
the deal through by the Thale, the French company known internationally for
bribing political leaders all over the world. The company, which has been
blacklisted by the World Bank for its questionable dealings, has offered to the
Indian agents and other concerned people the biggest-ever amount as bribery,
one that is far bigger than the much-publicised Bofors gun deal, which caused
the fall of a Government at the Centre.
The amount in that deal was a meagre chillarh,
Rs.64 crore by the present standard.
One can go on and on describing how vested interests have
finalized major defence deals in utter disregard of the national security
interest. Demand for bribery means lacunae left in final agreement. These have been repeatedly pointed out, and
for years, in this column, in Parliament and outside. But anti-national practices to serve self
interests do not seem to be ending. What the CAG has pointed out in its latest
report requires a serious thought.
Defence planners must exercise care in negotiating huge armament deals.
Failure to do that will surely be at the nation’s peril.---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|