Events

Dr. Ashish Shukla, Associate Fellow, Manohar Parrikar IDSA, will speak on “The Ongoing Political Crisis in Pakistan” at the Monday Morning Meeting which will be held on 18 September 2023 at 10 AM. The venue is Seminar Hall I, Second Floor.

Dr. Ashok K. Behuria, Senior Fellow, Manohar Parrikar IDSA, will be the moderator.

Ms. Sneha M, Research Analyst, will be the rapporteur.

Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Ajey Lele (Retd), Consultant, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, spoke on “India’s Moon Program” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 28 August 2023. The session was moderated by Dr. Cherian Samuel, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. The scholars of MP-IDSA were in attendance.

Executive Summary

India's space journey began on 21 November 1963, with the launch of a US Nike Apache sounding rocket from Thumba near Thiruvananthapuram. Following this, the Indian Space Program went through various phases, the latest being the moon program. The discussion also highlighted the differences between Chandrayaan 1, Chandrayaan 2, and Chandrayaan 3 Missions, and shed light on India's commitment to using space technology for societal betterment and knowledge advancement rather than merely competing with more technologically advanced nations. This approach aligns with Sarabhai's original vision and emphasizes India's unique and innovative contributions to global challenges through space technology.

Detailed Report

In his opening remarks, Dr. Lele elaborated on the beginning of the Indian Space Program. The nation embarked on its celestial journey on 21 November 1963, when the US Nike Apache sounding rocket took off from Thumba, near Thiruvananthapuram. This maiden step epitomised the visionary aspirations of Dr. Vikram Sarabhai, who prioritised the quest for solutions to societal issues over any desire to outpace advanced nations in the space race. Dr. Lele also elucidated how humanity has always been fixated on the moon and other celestial bodies, often exemplified through artistic and poetic expressions. With scientific advancement and the incessant quest for exploring Space, humanity reached the lunar surface when Neil Armstrong became the first human to reach the Moon.

Dr. Lele also emphasised the significant role played by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) in the development of India’s rural areas by investing in and leveraging remote sensing to supply relevant information to stakeholders. In fact, ISRO's substantial budget goes to projects to address broader societal problems. Furthermore, for India, the Moon became an agenda in the 2000s when the Government of India approved ISRO's proposal for the first Indian Moon Mission, called Chandrayaan-1 in November 2003. Later the Space Law and Planetary Exploration Conference was organized in Bangalore from 26- 29 June 2005.

Furthermore, he provided more detailed explanations of the prevailing theories concerning the Moon's evolution, encompassing concepts such as the Capture Theory, Fission Theory, and various others. Capture Theory suggests that the Moon was a wandering celestial body like a asteroid and was captured by Earth’s gravity as it passed nearby. The Fission Theory suggests that Moon was once part of Earth that broke away and began to orbit the planet. The other prevailing explanation about the existence of Moon is that a planet called Theia interacted with Earth with some of the resulting debris gathering to form the Moon. The Moon's topography presents a significant challenge due to its extreme temperature. The temperatures at the Moon can plummet to as low as -130 degrees Celsius.

Dr. Lele delved into the distinctions between the Chandrayaan 1, Chandrayaan 2, and Chandrayaan 3 Missions, shedding light on the rationale behind humanity's lunar endeavors. Dr. Lele explained that the Chandrayaan 1 Mission, initially designed for a two-year duration, ultimately remained operational for only one year. It entered lunar orbit at an altitude of 100 kilometers to capture images of the Moon's surface. Additionally, Chandrayaan 1 was equipped with 11 scientific instruments from various international partners and successfully detected the presence of water on the Moon. The data provided by Chandrayaan's 11 payloads were used by the scientific community to study the Moon and its environment and played a significant role in bettering our understanding of the Moon.

At the outset, Chandrayaan 2 was conceived as a collaborative endeavor between ISRO and Russia's Roscosmos. In this arrangement, ISRO was responsible for supplying the orbiter, and rover, and overseeing the launch, while Russia's role was to furnish the lander. Subsequently, ISRO decided to proceed independently and assumed the responsibility of developing the lander on its own. The Chandrayaan 2 Mission's failure can be attributed to two primary factors. One of these factors was a software glitch, and the other was a deviation in the trajectory when the spacecraft was at an altitude ranging from 2.1 to 0.2 kilometers above the intended landing zone. Despite these setbacks, the mission yielded a wealth of valuable data about the Moon's terrain, including insights into its craters and other features.

Chandrayan 3 was a solo mission, featuring only one NASA sensor. ISRO capitalised on the lessons learned from the setbacks encountered during the Chandrayaan 2 Mission. The mission design employed a failure-based approach, with extensive simulations conducted to address potential challenges. To ensure the mission's success, significant enhancements were made to the algorithms. Hardware modifications included reinforcing the lander's legs, and equipping it with four engines.

Expanding on the mission payloads and objectives, Dr. Lele provided some additional details. The lander is equipped with three payloads, and the rover also carried two payloads of its own. These payloads are specifically designed for tasks such as analysing the chemical and elemental composition of lunar soil and measuring its thermophysical properties.

In a more detailed discussion on the global lunar exploration agenda, Dr. Lele highlighted key milestones and initiatives. The Soviets were the pioneers in achieving a robotic lunar landing. Several decades ago, Japan articulated ambitious lunar plans, although progress has been relatively slow. More recently, countries like the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia have shown significant interest in developing their Space Programs.

South Korea successfully launched the Danuri, also known as the Korean Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter (KPLO), to the Moon. Israel, with its limited Space Program mandate, made history with Beresheet, its first lunar mission.

The United States introduced the Artemis program, encompassing both robotic and human lunar exploration efforts. NASA leads this program, with support from the European Space Agency (ESA) and Space agencies in Japan and Canada.

China embarked on its lunar journey with the launch of Chang'e 1, an orbiter, in October 2007. The first successful Chinese lunar landing occurred during the Chang'e 3 Mission, which included a lander and rover system. Presently, China operates the Chang'e 4 and Chang'e 5 systems, with the latter achieving a successful sample return mission from the Moon.

Dr. Lele went on to emphasise the significance of Moon missions, underscoring their primary objectives. One of the key aims of these missions is to locate sources of water that can be used to support human activities during future lunar missions. Additionally, the Moon is known to have valuable mineral resources, including rare earth metals (RREs), which are essential for various technological applications. Furthermore, the lunar surface also has an abundance of non-radioactive helium-3, a resource scarcely found on Earth. According to theoretical calculations, helium-3 holds great potential for powering nuclear fusion reactors, offering a promising avenue for clean and efficient energy generation. Moreover, Moon missions carry geopolitical advantages, as they enable participating nations to establish a presence and influence in space exploration, which can have broader implications for international relations and cooperation.

The successful outcome of the Chandrayaan 3 Mission holds several positive implications for India. Firstly, it can pave the way for increased collaboration on international Space projects involving India, fostering stronger ties in the field of Space exploration. Additionally, such missions have the potential to popularize STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education in India, inspiring and educating the next generation of scientists and engineers. Successful lunar missions can also lead to the emergence of technology spin-off companies, capitalising on the innovations and expertise developed during these missions to fuel entrepreneurship and innovation in various sectors.

Questions and Comments

The floor was opened for questions and comments. When asked about how India's Chandrayaan 3 Mission fits into the Artemis Accord, Dr. Lele expressed some skepticism regarding the Accord but found it to be an interestingly designed document. He mentioned that India has been steadily building its heavy lift capacity domestically and has been working on semi-cryogenic technology, which has the potential to transport heavy payloads in the future.

Dr. Lele also emphasised that using terms like 'Space race' is unnecessary when discussing India's Space endeavors due to the country's limitations. Instead, he suggested that it is more productive to consider how such missions can benefit humanity as a whole.

Regarding the role of private players in India's Space programs, he acknowledged that ISRO depends on private players to a certain extent, but he noted that in the United States, private companies play a more prominent role, particularly in the forefront of Space exploration. He also mentioned ISRO's commitment to avoiding the militarisation of Space missions. Furthermore, he encouraged the strategic community to focus on the technological advancements and spinoff technologies that can be derived from such missions.

The Report has been prepared by Mr. Rohit K. Sharma, Research Analyst, Strategic Technologies Centre, MP-IDSA.

Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh (Retd.), Research Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “The Road to War Termination: Navigating Strategies and Conflict Resolution Efforts in the Russia-Ukraine War” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 07 August 2023. The session was moderated by Dr. Jason Wahlang, Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General of MP-IDSA and scholars of the Institute were in attendance.

Executive Summary

The Russo-Ukrainian war has defied expectations of a swift resolution, characterised by continued attrition from both sides. Despite increasing violence, international peace proposals from various countries have failed to gain traction due to a lack of willingness from both sides. The complexity of the conflict was highlighted through differing interpretations of agreements, NATO discussions, and Putin’s miscalculations as key factors leading to the outbreak of the war. Efforts for peace before and during the war illustrated the difficulty in resolving the conflict amidst varying stances and tensions. The war’s conclusion might entail victory, armistice, or political settlement, with negotiation likely playing a pivotal role.

Detailed Report

In his opening remarks, Dr. Jason Wahlang briefly highlighted how the unfolding of the Russo-Ukrainian war has broken the commonly understood expectation that Russia’s special operation in Ukraine would be short and swift. However, with the strong nuclear posturing and continued attrition from both sides, there is no end in sight. Amidst the escalating levels of violence and destruction on both sides there have been several peace proposals internationally that have attempted to bring to close this prolonged conflict. Israeli Prime Minister’s and Turkey’s early interventions for the peace and grain deal and China and Ukraine's peace proposals are some of the more significant ones. However, the world is yet to see any strong will from both sides to agree upon a solution.

Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh initiated his presentation by discussing the ongoing Russia-Ukraine War which started on 24 February 2022, has entered its 17th month and is nowhere nearing culmination. The ‘special military operation’ was initiated to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO and preventing NATO from exerting influence over its territory. The objectives of the war have evolved, and both sides have faced challenges in achieving their goals. Additionally, the conflict has also led to the formation of several new alliances and realignments globally and regionally.

Col. Singh explained that Ukraine has launched a three-pronged counter-offensive in June 2023, with the main thrust towards the south while focusing on Zaporozhe. The Ukrainian offensive aimed to breach gaps in Russian defences to threaten the land bridge connecting Ukraine's occupied territories to Crimea. However, as the Russian defences are in layers covered with anti-tanks and anti-personnel devices, this offensive has been cost-intensive in terms of human and material damages. Historically it has been witnessed that defensive formations are difficult to breach by an offensive formation unless there is an asymmetry in tactical and strategic capabilities. Some examples of this are the Gulf War I and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict of 2010.

Col. Singh, stated that the circumstances of victory and war termination maybe be conditional to certain objective criteria for each party, however, the ultimate analysis of victory in war is an assessment of the political conditions for war termination. He also stressed on the distinction to be made between victory and war termination as both are two distinct and antagonistic ideas. However, victory is subjective and doesn’t always lead to a preferred outcome; conflicts can end without a clear winner. It is with this understanding the war objectives of all the stakeholders have to be assessed to understand the future trajectory of the war and the shape of the end situation.

Col. Singh delved into the reasons for the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War and attributed it mostly to three important reasons. Firstly, in 2015, the second Minsk Agreement, facilitated by France and Germany, aimed to address the conflict arising from Russian-backed separatists seizing territory in Donetsk and Lugansk in 2014. The agreement was interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine and remained partially unimplemented. Russia denied involvement, while Ukraine sees it as a path to reclaim rebel-held regions, each with distinct objectives concerning the status of Donbas. In 2021, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin expressed concern and hinted at a strategic approach regarding the future of Ukraine. Russia was concerned regarding the prospect of Ukraine’s NATO membership, which was discussed during the 2008 NATO summit. Secondly, President Yanukovych’s removal in 2014 was assessed as a step forward in the West’s attempt at the eastward expansion of NATO. This led to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and Donbas. In 2021, a US-Ukraine Strategic Partnership supporting NATO membership drew Putin’s opposition. In December 2021 Russia proposed treaties opposing NATO expansion and military presence in Ukraine, but these demands were rejected. Thirdly, Putin’s underestimation of Western resilience to support Ukraine led him to initiate his ‘special military operations.’ 

The speaker then highlighted the war objectives of the multiple parties interested in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict who happen to have their distinct national interests, resulting in diverse war objectives. Russia’s objectives have changed with the progress of war and presently consist of preventing Ukraine’s NATO membership, recognizing Donetsk and Lugansk sovereignty, demilitarisation, and decommunization. Ukraine’s objectives have also evolved. Initially Ukraine was amenable to the idea of abandoning NATO membership in return for Russian withdrawal from occupied areas. President Volodymyr Zelensky sought Western security guarantees. However, as Ukrainian forces gained ground against Russia, goals shifted to the cease of hostilities, withdrawal of Russian troops, and restoration of territorial integrity. The US, which is a key Western actor, leads in providing military and economic aid to Ukraine.  The US aims to ‘win and weaken’ Russia and the present war is considered incredibly cost-effective, however, defining victory is challenging. President Biden and members of his administration have asserted their support to bolster Ukraine’s negotiating position and strengthen Ukraine militarily and diplomatically. The war’s complexity stems from the varying interests of Russia, Ukraine, and Western nations, leading to shifting goals and an evolving conflict landscape.

Col. Singh then spoke on how the Ukrainian conflict in Donbas has now taken an unpredictable path, making it difficult to predict the outcome. A successful Ukrainian counter-offensive in August 2022 forced Russian forces to withdraw from occupied areas like Kherson and Kharkiv. However, this success has created a paradox: the stronger Ukraine performs on the battlefield, the harder it becomes to negotiate a settlement, despite Ukraine’s advantage in negotiating from a position of strength. Ukrainian interests don’t perfectly align with those of Western allies. Kyiv can take risks in continuing the war, while the Western alliance faces economic costs and the direct threat of escalation or nuclear exchange.

Despite Ukraine’s battlefield victories, the US Department of Defense (DoD) isn’t very optimistic about Ukraine’s chances of ending the war favourably. General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, believes neither Ukraine nor Russia can achieve a military victory. The DoD believes that Ukraine will struggle to fully expel Russian forces from all occupied areas, which is Kyiv’s stated goal. The US recommends that Ukraine should take any opportunity for a negotiated settlement. This perspective aligns with leaked US documents (“Discord Leaks”), which express deep concerns about the war’s direction and Ukraine’s ability to successfully combat Russian forces. This pessimistic assessment is also reflected in the US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s suggestion that Ukraine should reconsider its objectives, including the aspiration to regain Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014.

Col. Singh talked about the fact that the delay in providing military aid to Ukraine enabled Russia to strengthen its position and provides an insight regarding Western interests and Ukrainian military capabilities. Additionally, there are concerns about the long-term commitment of the West to fund the war. Despite public statements by Western leaders pledging ongoing aid to Ukraine, recent developments suggest a shift. Attachments of caveats to aid packages from Congress and allied nations indicate that these aid packages are seen as Kyiv’s best opportunity to significantly alter the war’s course. This situation raises doubts about the sustained willingness of the West to financially support the war effort.

Col. Singh then spoke about the war termination efforts which were put forth in the pre-war period before 24 February 2022. Before the conflict escalated, the US made efforts to dissuade Russia from invading Ukraine and diplomatic talks continued between Presidents Biden and Putin from June 2021 till the outbreak of the conflict. Post 24 February 2022 Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett attempted a mediation in March 2022, leading to concessions from both Zelensky and Putin. The list of other peace plans which were discussed included - Turkish President Erdogan’s mediation in March 2022, G-7’s Just Peace Plan on 11 October 2022, the Ukrainian President Zelensky’s 10-point peace plan on 15 November 2022, China’s 12-point peace proposal in February 2023 that called for a ceasefire and lifting of certain sanctions, and the Indonesian Defence Minister’s proposed peace plan of 3 June 2023. In June 2023, an African delegation visited Moscow to talk about the African Peace Mission. Despite a number of peace initiatives, achieving a resolution has proven challenging due to shifting positions and differing national interests of stakeholders.

Despite the uncertainties associated with wars and battles, in all probability, the Russia-Ukraine War is likely to conclude through a negotiated settlement which may take the form of either, armistice or political settlement. Over last seven weeks, Ukrainian forces have engaged in a counteroffensive, focusing on Zaporizhzhia and attempting to breach Russian defences. However, they have faced challenges like Russian minefields. Russia’s objectives, including regime change and demilitarization, have not been met, and their control over seized territories is under threat. Ukraine’s counteroffensive might result in a frozen frontline, which may then lead to war termination through negotiations. Negotiating an end to the war is likely, encompassing discussion on issues such as NATO and EU membership for Ukraine and security guarantees. Russia may insist on removal of sanctions imposed by the West.

Questions and Comments

After the presentation, Dr. Wahlang opened the floor for comments and questions. The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy reflected on the Russia-Ukraine War and its implications for war termination and peace. He emphasised that ending war doesn’t guarantee true peace, and drew comparisons to Crimea's situation and historical conflicts, suggesting potential unresolved issues. Ambassador Chinoy highlighted the various peace resolutions that various countries India, China, and South Africa, are attempting to negotiate for the Ukraine conflict. He addressed the concept of investigating war crimes, highlighting the intricacies, the UN Security Council’s role, and the limitations of the International Criminal Court (ICC) due to the actions of countries like the US, China, and Russia. The complexities of demanding trials and the reluctance of superpowers to partake in such processes was discussed.

Acknowledging President Zelensky’s demands, Ambassador Chinoy underscored that these are often initial negotiation positions and might not all be fully realized. Overall, he highlighted war termination challenges, the intricacies of war crime investigations, the influence of powerful nations on international justice, and the evolving nature of negotiation demands.

Dr. Rajorshi Roy enquired whether communication channels should be established between Russia and the West, as well as between Russia, Ukraine, and other nations. He questioned how recent geopolitical developments, like the US considering Ukraine’s NATO membership, are examined in terms of their influence on Russia's interests and actions in the conflict.

Col. Vivek Chadda (Retd.) asked about the role of domestic constituencies in Russia and Ukraine in shaping ongoing war efforts and their potential influence on international relations. He commented on the significance of external support from countries like China for both Russia and Ukraine, considering how this support could potentially impact the outcome of the conflict. Dr. Rajiv Nayan enquired about how the objectives of war for domestic constituents are framed how does one ensure they are aligned with political objectives.

Dr. Vishal Chandra asked the speaker to comment on the evolution of NATO’s unity and strength over the last year. He also emphasised on how economic factors shape the dynamics of the conflict and its potential long-term implications.

Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh then responded to the comments and questions.

The report has been prepared by Ms. Shayesta Nishat Ahmed, Research Analyst, Defence Economics and Industry Centre, MP-IDSA.

Chair: Amb. Sujan R Chinoy

U.S. delegation comprises:

1. Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL), Republican Co-Chair

2. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Democratic Co-Chair

3. Rep. Deborah Ross (D-NC)

4. Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL)

5. Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI)

6. Rep. Jasmine Crocket (D-TX)