US and India Trade deals and how they have changed the security balance in South Asia (written in 2010)

“There are many cumbersome ways to kill a man” is the title of a poem by Edwin Brock’s 1997 Poem. He says that ‘in the age of aero planes, one may fly miles above his victim and dispose of him by pressing one small switch. All one then requires is an ocean to separate him, two systems of government…’ and so on. With over 62 years of animosity Pakistan and India do not seem to require the ocean that Edwin Brock speaks of and clearly has a much more complex situation. However the USA through its nuclear technology focused 2006 deals and aircraft focused 2010 deals has no doubt changed the political scenario of South Asia and is continuing to have drastic effects on the entire world. For India Edwin Brock forgot to mention that the equipment should state ‘made in USA’.

 

  However whose interest is the deal in and who is benefiting from it is questionable. There are two aspects to this deal (a) The US is exploiting India by selling weapons and aircrafts to a poor developing country which are in turn being used against Pakistan and other states in the region by the Indian government or (b) the US is supporting Indian military build up and increased importance in the region and is therefore fuelling a militant mindset within India by providing weapons and signing deals.

The first aspect is that of India acquiring weapons for the modernization of its military. These weapons are primarily being brought from the US and include weapons that the US would not supply to any other country. In February this year at the DefExpo 2010 trade fair in New Delhi the Defense Minister A.K Antony stated that the Indian defense expenditure is going to increase. Further he stated “our defense industry is open up to 100 percent for Indian private sector, while foreign direct investment is allowed up to 26 percent.”

Over the next 12 years, India is set to spend a whopping US$200 billion on defense acquisitions to replace its outdated inventory. In this regard, on February 15, 2010, a report of the Indian strategic defense magazine (India Strategic’s DefExpo) revealed that 70 per cent of the inventory of the Indian armed forces is 20-plus years old, and needs to be replaced with the modern technology. It explained that nearly half of this funding ($100b) will go to the Indian Air Force (IAF), which would need to replace more than half of its combat jet fleet as well as the entire transport aircraft and helicopter fleet. The army needs new guns, tanks, rocket launchers, multi-terrain vehicles, while the navy needs ships, aircraft carriers and new range of nuclear submarines. 

The US has emerged as a potential military supplier to India since the two countries signed a deal of civil energy technology in 2008, which lifted sanctions on New Delhi in order to import nuclear technology. India is likely to become a major customer for the US military-industrial complex over the next few years. During the recent visit of the US Secretary of State Robert Gates to New Delhi, American Defence officials, however, have said that US weapons sales to India would not be a focus of the trip. Regardless of such denials, the key reason for the Gates’ visit can be found in the fact that India is planning to raise its military budget by 50% to almost $40 billion. In contrast to India’s planned defence expenditures, Pakistan’s entire 2009-10 budget amounts to little over $30 billion. Such spending on military expenses is very questionable by a third world country with a majority of its population still in abject states of poverty.

India, the largest arms buyer among emerging nations, accounted for 7.5 per cent of all international arms sales between 2000 and 2007. It has spent billions of dollars in the past few years on purchases of planes, radars and ships from US, Britain, France, Germany and Russia and Israel. In recent years, India has bought reconnaissance aircraft from US aerospace major Boeing worth 2.1 billion-dollars, medium range missiles for 1.4 billion dollars from Israeli Aerospace Industries, and signed an upgrade service contract with the Russian Aircraft Corporation to upgrade its MiG 29 squadrons for 965 million dollars. Several deals are planned for the near future including one of the largest arms contracts of recent times—a 11-billion-dollar project to acquire 126 multi-role combat aircraft from the US. 

 Whether this is because India wants to become a mini-superpower of the region and hence it uses the pretext of deterrence against Pakistan and China or is being exploited and coaxed into spending money on acquiring weapons by the US is of course still unknown.

Currently, more than half of India’s budget is allocated for military, paramilitary, various security forces and debt servicing. That leaves less than half for everything else including infrastructure development projects, education, healthcare, poverty alleviation, and various human services. New Delhi’ s latest arms buildup will leave even less for what India needs most to lift hundreds of millions of its citizens from abject poverty, hunger illiteracy and disease which continues to hamper any chances of real economic progress within the country. 

Indian civil society organisations, while complaining of excessive defence spending indicated that the government spends twice as much on defence as on the social sector. The defence budget for 2009-2010 is 29 billion dollars, up 34 percent over the previous one. Indian defence analyst Ravinder Pal Singh, while calling New Delhi’s unending defence spending at the cost of poverty-alleviation—with security requirements competing with socio-economic concerns for money calls it guns-versus-butter question Even some of Indian officials are surprised in relation to Indian defence expenditure which has no bounds. For example, an official of the country’s finance ministry remarked, “There is a dilemma…poverty needs to be eradicated to prevent men from taking to the guns…but more funds for security means less money for poverty alleviation.”

Meanwhile, a report of United Nations pointed out that India ranks 134th of 182 countries on the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index. It estimated that 50 per cent of the world’s undernourished population lives in India. Nearly 31 per cent of the billion-plus Indians earn less than a dollar a day. Secretary General of the Control Arms Foundation of India Binalakshmi Nepram said, “When people are dying of poverty and bad sanitation, what protection will arms provide them?” On the one hand, international community has been making strenuous efforts for world peace in wake of global financial crisis and war against terrorism, on the other, India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia where people are already facing multiple problems of grave nature. Majority of South Asian people are living below the poverty level, lacking basic facilities like fresh food and clean water. While yielding to acute poverty, every day, some persons commit suicide in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc due to the ongoing wars in the region.

Setting aside regional problems, and resolution of Indo-Pak issues-especially thorny dispute of Kashmir, Indian rulers state that they don’t have any aggressive designs. But it becomes a big joke of the 21st century, reminding a maxim, “armed to the teeth, but no enemy”, if we take cognisance of India’s unending defence expenditure.

However these arms are being used to uphold some devious designs either from the US government or the Indian government. The full transcript issued by the pentagon following the South Asian Tour of US defense Secretary clearly stated that "I would tell you that the United States clearly has not or has ever propped up India. India has not needed us for that purpose and, in fact, those familiar with the history would know that our relationship with India was fairly strained until not too many years ago," These remarks were made when the Defense Secretary was volleyed by questions from Pakistani journalists who accused him of propping India against Pakistan. These questions were thrown at him in response to his statement “India has responded with great restraint and statesmanship after the Mumbai terror attacks. But the ability to continue with it after another attack is under question… It is not reasonable to assume that Indian patience is unlimited in case of another attack”. These remarks were issued after a joint meeting with Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony.

These statements clearly reveals the admission of a new role for India in the region. There is ample talk of how India is being used to counter China and Russia. The US plans for regional domination can only be achieved through India by keeping other forces in check and accessing the natural resources of Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Caspian region or by denying access to the same to China and Russia. The increased Indian diplomatic efforts in Central Asia and its extremely heavy involvement in Afghanistan with linkages with the US are clear indicators that India is fulfilling a role.

Yet such statements issued by the Foreign Secretary who is the only remaining legacy of Bush in the Obama Cabinet have harkened memories of sadness for Pakistan who were awaiting a change in government and indeed a change in the US policy towards the region. These statements were labeled as ‘very irresponsible’ by the Prime minister Yousaf Raza Gillani. The statement has clear underlying implications. Firstly that non-state actors can easily nudge the states into a total state of war. Secondly the long history of CBM’s and composite dialogue has been futile and the peace of both nations hangs by a thread. Thirdly the US will not intervene if India attacks Pakistan because inevitably the non-state actors will be Pakistani’s and therefore Pakistan will be responsible.

Ever since 2006 two major incidents have taken place in India for which Pakistan was blamed through use of Non-state actors. Firstly the Samjhuata express bombing of February 2007 and then the Mumbai attacks of 26 November 2008. In both cases India was quick to levy accusations against Pakistan in a very unthoughful and impulsive manner. Later investigations have revealed the contrary. The investigations showed that the Samjhuata express bombings took were planned and executed by retired Indian Army officers most prominent of them being Lt. Col P.S.Purohit whose network included ties to Shiv Sena and BJP. Similarly Ajmal Kasab has revealed to the Indian Courts that he was under custody of the Indian intelligence agencies and was brought to the place of the attack and was asked to participate in the attack. Such revelations are vital for understanding the Indian designs and its new found thirst for power.

Indian involvement has been uncovered at FATA and Balochistan within Pakistan. Reports of their involvement were shared with the US and with Indian Governments. Yet the US keeps pressing Pakistan to continue its wars on the western borders against the Afghanistani Taliban therefore denuding its forces on the eastern border. Adding to the military problems is the Indian stance on major unresolved issues like Kashmir, Water, Siachen and Sir Creek on which it continues to be stubborn. Such matters indicate that the security balance has indeed changed ever since the deal. India continues to abstain from signing the NPT and deals with the US have allowed India the quantitive advantage over Pakistan to produce nuclear weapons and fissle materials. Ever since the 2006 deal India is able to use freed up resources to make atleast 280 nuclear weapons a year. Pakistan has questioned the Conference on Disarmament’s only focus on ‘cutting-off’ further production, however it needs to be kept in mind by Pakistan that delays in the same will only exacerbate the nuclear race in India until a consensus is reached.