Hussain Saqib
India
may have acquired a nuclear-powered submarine of a very old Russian vintage, it
only serves the purpose of power projection. The toothless power, so to say.
But its project of development of conventional submarine, Scorpene, in India
under a transfer-of-technology program is not faring any better. The whistle-blower report of India’s Auditor-General, the Controller and
Auditor-General (CAG), raises alarms and concerns.
The
report is clearly critical of the Scorpene acquisition. Indian Defense Minister
had to admit to India’s Parliament that the project was running about 2 years
behind schedule, due to “some teething problems, absorption of technology,
delays in augmentation of industrial infrastructure and procurement of MDL
purchased materials (MPM).” The CAG report criticizes the fact that the
submarine requirement was approved in 1997, but no contract was signed until
2005, and then for only 6 of the envisioned 24 boats. Overall, the project cost
had increased from Rs 12,609 crore in October 2002 to Rs 15,447 crore by October
2005 when the contract was signed. Once it was signed, the CAG believes that
“the contractual provisions resulted in undue financial advantage to the vendor
of a minimum of Rs 349 crore.”
The
overall project, which includes a submarine construction facility at Mazagon
Dockyards Ltd. (MDL), is placed at Rs 18,798 crore, or 187.98 billion rupees
(currently about $4 billion). The Times of India believes that the final
program cost will be over Rs 20,000 crore (currently about $4.3 billion), as
the cost of key equipment that MDL shipyards needs is rising quickly. Rediff
News notes other excerpts from the CAG report, adding that an accompanying Rs
1,062 crore deal for Exocet anti-ship missiles will have issues of its own:
“But
even before the missiles become operational on the submarine, the warranty
period of first two batches of the missiles supplied by the company would have
expired, it added. India also extended to the [submarine] vendor “Wide ranging
concessions” on warranty, performance bank guarantee, escalation formula,
arbitration clause, liquidated damages, agency commission and performance
parameters….”
The
update on the project is that the program has been delayed several times and
the price has gone up to $5 billion ($834 million each), a cost-over-run of 25%.
While this effort will leave India with thousands of workers and specialists
experienced in building modern submarines, all that will be wasted due to this
delay. The deal was mismanaged to the extent that it is now three years behind
schedule. But it is even more behind schedule if you count the several years delay
in even getting started. The original plan was to have the first Indian built
Scorpene delivered at the end of this year. But now, because of problems
getting the construction facilities and skilled workmen ready, the first
Scorpene won't be delivered until 2015, with one each year after that until all
six are delivered. That schedule is subject to change, and probably will, for
the worse.
According
to Strategy
Page, this is a not a good news because India's submarine fleet is dying of
old age and new boats are not going to arrive in time. The plan was to have a
dozen new subs in service by the end of the decade. At present, there will be
(with a bit of luck) six of them in service by then. The procurement
bureaucracy is still seeking a supplier for the second six diesel-electric
subs. There's some urgency to all this because this year, five of India's 16
diesel-electric subs (10 Kilo and two Foxtrot class Russian built boats and four
German Type 209s) were to be retired (some are already semi-retired because of
age and infirmity). Type 209s are being kept in service but not allowed out to
sea much for several more years, because of project delay. That leaves India
with 14 subs. But in the next year or so several of the older Kilos will reach
retirement age. Thus, by the time the first Scorpene arrives in 2015, India
will only have five or six working subs. India believes it needs at least 18
non-nuclear subs in service to deal with Pakistan and China. India is also
building and buying nuclear subs. India received a Russian Akula nuclear attack
(SSN) sub earlier this year. This one is on lease with the option to buy.
Indian SSNs and SSBNs (missile carrying boats) are under development, as they
have been for decades.
According
to comparative technical details publically available, the Scorpenes are
similar to the Agosta 90B subs (also French) that Pakistan bought in 1990s. The
first of the Agostas was built in France, but the other two were built in
Pakistan. The Scorpenes purchase was seen as a response to the Pakistani
Agostas. The Scorpene are a more recent design, the result of cooperation
between French and Spanish sub builders. The Agosta is a 1,500 ton (surface
displacement) diesel-electric sub with a 36 man crew and four 533mm (21 inch)
torpedo tubes (with 20 torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles carried). The
Scorpene is a little heavier (1,700 tons), has a smaller crew (32), and is a
little faster. It has six 533mm torpedo tubes and carries 18 torpedoes and/or
missiles. Both models can be equipped with an AIP (air independent propulsion)
system. This enables the sub to stay under longer, thus making the sub harder
to find. AIP allows the sub to travel under water for more than a week, at low
speed (5-10 kilometers an hour). The Pakistanis have an option to retrofit AIP
in their current two Agostas.
While
India was largely concerned with the Pakistani navy when the Scorpene contract
was negotiated and signed, China is now seen as the primary adversary due to a
new role assigned to India by the US. The Chinese subs are not as effective as
the Pakistani boats; both because of less advanced technology and less well
trained crews. India could use their Scorpenes to confront any Chinese attempt to
expand their naval presence into the Indian Ocean. Thus the delays and cost
overruns with the Scorpenes are causing quite a lot of commotion in India. But
at the rate India is going, it will be nearly a decade before all six of the
Scorpenes are in service. At that point, India would have about a dozen subs
(including nuclear powered models under construction). China will have over 60
boats, about 20 percent of them nuclear. China does have a lot for its warships
to deal with off its coasts and in the Western Pacific but it does retain the
capability of putting more subs off the Indian coast than can the Indian Navy.
Like its national symbol, the elephant, India moves painfully slowly, and seemingly oblivious of the challenges and threats in the immediate vicinty, and further afield. And again, like the elephant, a little mouse terrifies it. Pakistan that has a defence budget of much less than half of India's is able not only to develop a credible defense and counterweight against India, it is able to build the Agostas in less than half the time. The same could be said about the LCA, a running joke and embarrassment to all Indians. When is the aircraft be ready for the IAF? Maybe I should ask if it would be ever ready? Although Indians would like to see full indigenization of the defense industry, it takes forever to get anything done in India. India would have been better off to have bought off-the-shelf American, and European fighters, and not place in danger all Indians. The 2 LCA squadrons, notwithstanding all the optimistic forecasts, and all the bombastic chest thumping about how good it is compared to Pakistan's recent fighter aquisitions, has not been delivered as yet, and we may not see this aircraft in use until 2015. Imagine that it took DRDO one year to deliver 2 aircrafts, and #8 LSP will not be tested and released until mid 2013. It is easily 10 years too late, and by the time it is, if it is ever ready, it would be obsolete. As noted in the article, the problem is with the governement, not the military. The government seems at times paralyzed; at other times oblivious of the threats in the vicinity and dangers to which they expose Indians; and most times unconnected to reality and outright stupid. The problem is that they know how to win elections, but not how to rule; they know how to imagine and make great plans but have no or greatly diminished zeal to carry them out to the end; they talk about defending the borders, but endanger the men on the frontiers when they will not deliver the equipment they need to do the job or have it delivered too late. And then India talks about catching up with China. Dreamers they are, but they have their hands around the throat of India and is strangling it to death. India need to remove these older men, who peaked in the 50s and 60s and elect a new cadre of leaders, who are more interested in the security of the country of India - the main raison d'etre, and the idea of India, than their own pocket books. This geriatric club of paternalistic septa- and octagenarians should be commissioned to perpetual debate in an institution, somewhat like the House of Lords or the Canadian Senate, wher they are paid a little, and they will surely be out of the way but yet enjoying themselves, whilst not endangering the future of India. Many of them have criminal backgrounds and are useless so far as leading ministries, and should be removed. I will lay the blame for any international embarassment to India, by the likes of Pakistan, China, or even Bangladesh, at the feet of fools that make up India's current parliament. China and Pakistan, and even the Maldives are not a threat to India; it is geriatric parliamentarians who are still stuck in the mindset and the geopolitics of the 1960's.
ReplyDelete