Back to news

July 13, 2020 | International, Land

Russia and US jostle for arms sales to India after tensions with China over border

  • India is a top buyer of foreign weapons on the international market and Russia has been its main supplier since the Soviet era
  • The June 15 clash between China and India in the contested Galwan Valley lends an urgency to New Delhi's arms programme

Russia and the United States are racing to sell weapons to India as New Delhi seeks to boost arms supplies for its ongoing military tension with Beijing.
The Indian government last week rushed to approve a proposal to acquire 33 new Russian warplanes for US$2.4 billion and upgrade 59 more, in addition to an earlier US$5.43 billion deal for S-400 air defence missile systems, after the deadly skirmish with Chinese troops last month on their disputed border.
However, Russia's close relationship with China raised questions over Moscow's reliability by some in India, while the US, which has been stepping up ties with New Delhi through the Indo-Pacific strategy, has been pushing for arms sale to India.
“Many believe that India must not put all its eggs in one basket, rather continue to follow the middle path by pushing for engagement with both Russia as well as the United States,” said Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan, a distinguished fellow and head of the Nuclear and Space Policy Initiative at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi.

India is a top buyer in the international arms market, with billions of dollars of imports every year. In the past 10 years, it has spent more money on foreign weapons than any other country in the world, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Russia has been the main supplier to India since the Soviet era. Since 2000, it has sold about US$35 billion worth of weapons, accounting for more than two-thirds of India's arms procurement of US$51 billion.

Most of India's strategic weapons – from its only active aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya with its ship-borne MiG-29 and Ka-31 aircraft, to its only nuclear attack submarine in service, the Chakra II, to its T-90 and T-72 main battle tanks – are from Russia. Additionally, Russia licensed Indian firm HAL to build the Su-30 MKI, the main fighter for the Indian Air Force, and contributed to India's only nuclear-capable supersonic cruise missile – the BrahMos.

In comparison, arms deals with the US have totalled just US$3.9 billion over the past 20 years but America has been rapidly catching up since 2010 to rise to number two vendor to India, surpassing Israel and France.

India has equipped its military with Boeing C-17 and C-130J airlifters. Earlier this year, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi pledged to US President Donald Trump to buy US$3 billion worth of US equipment, including helicopters, as the two converged on a course to counter China in the Indo-Pacific region, and gradually formed much closer military ties with a series of strategic military pacts

Then the tension between India and China suddenly escalated, culminating in a clash on June 15, in which at least 20 Indian soldiers were killed in the contested Galwan Valley between Indian-administered Ladakh and Chinese administered Aksai Chin. The continued stand-off added urgency to India's arms shopping.
“Russians profit from a Sino-India clash. I don't think the Americans would be so happy to see that,” said Zhou Chenming, a Beijing-based military analyst. “The Trump administration has been trying very hard to grab a bigger share in this market of billions every year, which they wouldn't want to miss.”
The US has leverage. The 2017 Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) punishes whoever engages in “significant transactions” over US$15 million with the Russian state-owned defence industry. And Washington has remained non-committal despite the constant request for an exemption from the Indian side.
“I don't think the US will actually implement the sanction at the end of the day. That was part of the effort to pressure India to choose American arms over Russian,” said Song Zhongping, a military commentator in Hong Kong. “And Russia will not sit by. They will also take action to keep India on.”

Other efforts include discussions earlier this year in which the US offered to develop for India a “super F-16”, and even transfer the production line to India as preferred by the Modi government, as well as other air defence missile alternatives to the S-400.
The US has delivered Apache and Chinook helicopters now deployed in Ladakh.
Song said India's buying spree could increase its strength against the Chinese army but only to a limited extent.
“India could buy some advanced weapons but cannot buy real combat capability. A modern military is an organic system,” he said.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3092710/russia-and-us-jostle-arms-sales-india-after-tensions-china

On the same subject

  • Polish defense minister: F-35 acquisition ‘not far away’

    May 1, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Polish defense minister: F-35 acquisition ‘not far away’

    By: Jarosław Adamowski WARSAW, Poland — Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Blaszczak said April 29 that the Polish government aimed to sign a deal to station U.S. troops in Poland this year, and a contract to purchase F-35 fighter jets was “not far away” from being signed. Blaszczak's announcement in an interview with local broadcaster TVP indicates that Warsaw could aim to negotiate on the potential troop deployment in parallel with the aircraft acquisition. Poland has pitched for the United States to build a permanent military base in the country, offering to pay at least $2 billion toward the project, dubbed “Fort Trump.” On April 25, during her visit to Warsaw, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said that a U.S. Air Force team was to be sent to Poland in May to demonstrate the capabilities of the F-35 to Polish defence ministry officials, as reported by local news agency PAP. Last February, Blaszczak said the planned acquisition of 32 fifth-generation aircraft would be carried out as part of the country's military modernization program. Under the initiative, Warsaw aims to spend 185 billion zloty ($48.5 billion) on new weapons and equipment by 2026. The envisioned procurement is part of Poland's efforts to to replace its outdated Soviet-designed Sukhoi Su-22 and Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter jets. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/04/30/polish-defense-minister-f-35-acquisition-not-far-away/

  • Congress aims to strip funding for the US Navy’s next-gen large surface combatant

    June 26, 2020 | International, Naval

    Congress aims to strip funding for the US Navy’s next-gen large surface combatant

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy's interminable quest to design and field a next-generation large surface combatant is going back to the drawing board once again, a victim of the Pentagon's disorganization around this year's long-range shipbuilding plan, according to documents and a source familiar with the situation. The Senate Armed Services Committee stripped $60.4 million dollars from the Navy's proposed fiscal 2021 budget intended to be used for preliminary design work for the future large surface combatant, according to documents released by the committee. Instead, the money is being funneled into a land-based testing facility in Philadelphia that will work on the future combatant's power system, which is the raison d'être for the envisioned class, a source familiar with the deliberations told Defense News. The money for the large surface combatant design is one of the victims of the Pentagon's inability to produce an annual 30-year shipbuilding plan, an annual requirement that is intended to give Congress an idea of where the Navy wants to steer its fleet, the source said, adding that the large surface combatant was not in the five-year future years defense program which is submitted with the President's budget. The 30-year shipbuilding plan has been held up this year by the Office of the Secretary of Defense as the Pentagon struggles to come up with a fleet that more closely integrates the Navy and Marine Corps for the Pacific theater and incorporates a significant fleet of unmanned surface and subsurface systems. It's the latest setback in the effort to field next-generation surface combatants, which has seen more than 20 years of false starts and setbacks. The Navy initially intended to field a fleet of 21st Century cruisers and destroyers to replace the current Arleigh Burk-class DDGs and Ticonderoga-class cruisers. But the DDG-1000 program was truncated to just three hulls, and the so-called CG(X) cruiser was cancelled in 2010 at the beginning of the Obama Administration. Given the long lead times for new ship development, as much as a decade or more, the situation is becoming increasingly urgent for the U.S. Navy. Many of the cruisers have reached their effective service lives and the oldest Arleigh Burke-class ships are closing on 30 years of age, but the Navy is not currently planning a class-wide service-life extension program. For its next-generation large surface combatant, the Navy is looking to field a ship that uses the latest AEGIS combat system destined for its Flight III DDG, but with a hull and power system that has ample margin for integrating future systems such as lasers and rail guns, and with missile magazines able to haul larger hypersonic strike missiles. But according to the SASC, the Navy is way too early in the process to justify funding for design, especially when Congress doesn't know what the Navy's plans are for fielding it and when. “The committee lacks sufficient clarity on the Large Surface Combatant (LSC) capability requirements... to support the start of preliminary design for the LSC program or completion of the Capabilities Development Document,” according to a document released by the committee. The document also shows the SASC directing $75 million toward the Integrated Power and Energy Systems test facility in Philadelphia, known as the ITF, which a source said is where the heavy work of fielding a power system with plenty of margin for future weapons would be performed. That facility should be up and running by 2023, according to the documents. The FY21 NDAA is currently working its way through Congress and is not yet in its final form, meaning funding for large surface combatant design work could still be reinstated at some point in the process. Subsystem Development Congress has been increasingly agitated by the Navy's design-on-the-fly approach to fielding new capabilities, such as the littoral combat ship's mission modules or several of the key technologies that have been holding up the lead Ford-class carrier. In the view of lawmakers, the delays could be mitigated by taking a more cautious approach to developing new classes of systems, by maturing technologies ahead of launching into construction. For example, if the Advanced Weapons Elevators on Ford had been developed before the start of construction, there would not be a months-long delay in getting the carrier ready for deployment because the system would work before it was installed. To that end, Congress has been inserting itself heavily into the development of unmanned surface vessels, restricting funding for procurement until the Navy can produce a reliable system. In its markup of the 2021 NDAA, the House Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee called for restricting funding for procurement of any large unmanned surface vessels, or LUSV, until the Navy can certify it has worked out an appropriate hull and mechanical and electrical system, and that it can operate autonomously for 30 consecutive days. Furthermore, the Navy must demonstrate a reliable operating system and that any systems integrated into the platform — sonars, radars, etc. — are likewise functioning and reliable. In short, the language would mean the Navy could not spend procurement dollars on a large unmanned surface vessel until it has a working model, and it may not try to develop those technologies on the fly. The Defense Department has been championing a major shift away from large surface combatants, based on decisions by Defense Secretary Mark Esper that are in line with his in-house think tank, the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office. The Pentagon wants to focus on fielding more unmanned platforms with missile cells that can be more expendable in a fight and act as an external missile magazine for larger manned combatants with more exquisite sensors. But Congress has repeatedly balked at the idea because the Navy has yet to produce a concept of operations or a coherent public strategy to back up the investment plan. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/25/congress-aims-to-strip-funding-for-the-us-navys-next-generation-large-surface-combatant/

  • Production Approval Moves U.S. Standoff Jamming Beyond ALQ-99 | Aviation Week Network

    July 22, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Production Approval Moves U.S. Standoff Jamming Beyond ALQ-99 | Aviation Week Network

    The U.S. Navy plans to modernize the most critical standoff jamming system in the military’s inventory for the first time since 1971.

All news