You are here
Events
| Title | Date | Author | Time | Event | Body | Research Area | Topics | File attachments | Image |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar : Influence Operations: Winning Without Waging Wars in the 21st Century | July 20, 2023 | Adil Rasheed | Fellows' Seminar |
An MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar presentation by Dr. Adil Rasheed, Research Fellow, on “Influence Operations: Winning Without Waging Wars in the 21st Century” was held on 20 July 2023. It was chaired by Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Rakesh Sharma (Retd.), Member, Executive Council, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA). The External Discussants were Maj. Gen. Roopesh Mehta, ADG CD (B) IHQ, and Mr. Vinit Goenka, Secretary, Centre for Knowledge Sovereignty (CKS). Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), Deputy Director General, MP-IDSA; Lt. Gen. Akshat Upadhyay, Research Fellow, MP-IDSA; and Ms. Shruti Pandalai, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA were Internal Discussants. Executive SummaryInfluence Operations (IO), a battle of narratives, is considered a new and rapidly-evolving field of study. Russia, China, the US, and Pakistan have been at the forefront of using their strategy. It pertains to clandestine operations that can manipulate and influence individuals’ and governments’ perceptions, decisions, and cognition of individuals and governments. IO includes active measures carried out by the erstwhile Soviet Union and is a non-kinetic form of warfare. It also gives each country relying on this strategy plausible deniability while conducting its activities. Social media, big tech, and artificial intelligence are crucial in this regard. Detailed ReportIn his opening remarks, the Chair, Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Rakesh Sharma (Retd.) stated that Information Warfare (IW) is the future warfare strategy. He further stated that besides India’s victory in 1971, no wars have genuinely been won in the 21st century. Dr. Adil Rasheed began by introducing the topic of his paper, Influence Operations (IO), a form of high-tech and hybrid warfare. One of the key definitions provided by the speaker was borrowed from Facebook, according to which IO refers to coordinated efforts to manipulate or corrupt public debate for a strategic goal. It was initially defined by RAND Corporation in 2009. IO could also be divided into three categories, i.e., political and economic, information, and psychological. Dr. Rasheed clarified that his study encompasses the assessment of IO carried out by Russia, China, the United States (US), and Pakistan. He added that wars are now fought in the virtual space and cognitive domain. These operations include offline and online measures to infiltrate political institutions and processes of other countries, making them incapable of going to war. He elaborated on IO benefits, such as being highly adaptive and effective, low-cost, and sustainable in peacetime. Today, it is associated with a foreign and maligned sharp power technique, including subversive public diplomacy, crowd manipulations, engineering colour revolutions and agitations, and election meddling. In addition, social media has amplified IO’s impact through trolling, flaming, doxing, posting dark advertisements, presenting Potemkin villages of evidence, and participating in cognitive hacking. He said that countries like China have relied on their diaspora based in foreign countries, such as the US, to act as spies and carry out industrial espionage. As per the Mueller Report, Russia was involved in elected meddling in the US in 2016, resulting in President Trump’s victory. At the same time, the US, despite referring to IO as a threat to democracy, has intervened in approximately 81 foreign elections, often accused by Russia and China of instigating colour revolutions and the Arab Spring. The speaker delved into ISI and ISPR’s (PR wing of ISI) role in spearheading and sustaining Pakistan’s IO, articulating that ISI engages in Soviet-styled active measures. Simultaneously, the role of diaspora and radicalisation through madrassas based in Jammu and Kashmir, Bangladesh, and Nepal have been essential to Pakistan’s IO strategy. The speaker suggested that therefore, some key counter-measures India can adopt to address such threats include censorship of programmes aired on online streaming platforms, formulating a coherent and regulated social media policy and guidelines for protests and agitations, and reforming madrassas. Dr. Rasheed stated that digital and online tactics and techniques are associated with IO strategy, and some of the counter-measures involve capacity building, implementing effective and regulatory legal frameworks, and deterrence. Maj. Gen. Roopesh Mehta spoke about the need to simplify IO as a term to counter these operations effectively. He also explained that Information Warfare (IW)/IO timeline is immaterial, regardless of whether it occurs in peacetime or war. IO is a long-term strategy involving a battle of narratives. IO has two fundamental aims: turning a rival power into a modern vassal state or weakening it sufficiently to ensure it is neutralised as a threat. There are multiple layers of intervention concerning IO, which is not amenable to positive control. He also underscored how high-quality and appealing content must be disseminated swiftly in the IO/IW space as an antidote to misinformation and disinformation. Furthermore, he presented his perspective on the Indian Army’s role in Kashmir and how ISI has been exploiting social media since 2014. Between 2015 and 2017, i.e., when Burhan Wani was active, there was immense synergy between the local media in the Kashmir Valley and developments in Pakistan. Therefore, India must draw lessons from this example. As far as China is concerned, its IO has proven more effective internally, while its impact externally remains debatable. Nevertheless, Indian leaders cannot rely on examples of authoritarian states such as Pakistan and China to establish IO-related institutions in the country. The US, however, has struggled to be effective in this domain and is a soft target since it has mainly relied on brute force to implement its agendas. He talked about some key issues to be considered while discussing IO/OW. Firstly, ISIS successfully exploited social media to convince people worldwide to join its caliphate since 2014. Secondly, social media is an unfair terrain. Thirdly, India’s geography and diversity make the establishment of centralised control a challenging task. Fourthly, developments in IO are multiplying faster than legislative actions can be introduced to address them. Fifthly, information space is a reality. He said that therefore, these trends require a robust Indian response, an improved fact check and tech ban eco-system, collaboration with agencies such as Tech Against Terror, and sensitising the citizens towards challenges such as fake news and propaganda. Mr. Vinit Goenka explained how colonisation by might in the erstwhile times has transformed into colonisation by big data today. Additionally, IO, a non-kinetic form of warfare, is not a time-bound strategy. He further presented three cases about IO potency. As per one of them, India’s western neighbour had used the local Marathi dialect online to stir up agitation against the development of a metro station near the Aarey colony in Mumbai. One of the other examples was a BBC documentary (1998) aired over 83 times in one year about AIDS-afflicted Indian truck drivers as a form of psychological warfare. He recommended that the speaker examine the role of lone wolves who seek to gain notoriety through IO and are not beholden to an ideology or a country. Maj. Gen (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) expounded on the multiple terminologies being used in this context, which he felt, need to be simplified, to make the paper more comprehensible. He went on to trace the terminology’s evolution over the past decades. In the World War era, he explained that the only terms in use were psychological warfare and deception. With the advent of electronic and digital media, he mentioned the evolving terminologies of perception management, cyber warfare, information operations, and strategic communication. He further delved into the linkages between Arthashastra and IW and how the latter has always been a part of Chinese military strategy in Sun Tzu's writings, therefore the concepts are actually age-old. Moreover, he explained that information operations had been broadly segregated by the US military into two components, i.e., information technical operations and information and influence operations, an error according to him, given the Russian and Chinese integrated approach in this domain. The discussant also spoke about how, in recent times, unverified bulk transmissions have been occurring with no editorial oversight, while assessing the differing components of perception management (PM) and the correlation between IW and PM. Additionally, the US Military Cyber Command Team’s role in training Ukrainians since 2014 against Russian IO, the inauguration of Singapore’s fourth military branch – Digital and Intelligence Service –, Chinese and Russian IO, the need to secure information space, India’s 2010 IW doctrine, and the November 2020 regulation about monitoring online streaming platforms was also discussed. In addition, he underlined the need for states to flood the information space with timely, credible data to avoid conjecture by uncontrolled media in an information vacuum. Regarding the disclaimer in the the paper wherein Non- State actors and terrorist organisations were not being covered, he suggested a greater focus on state response to this challenge, with particular reference to India. He outlined the various organisations working in this space in India and recommended the establishment of an HR vertical in IO/ IW domain. He also underlined the need to synergise organisations working separately in Cyber, Cognitive and Physical dimensions, with a nominated lead agency to better coordinate the state response in the Information domain. He further recommended that we must generate an All of Nation response to this challenge, and integrate at two levels; Firstly the physical, cyber, and technical dimensions, and Secondly, Government, Military, Industry, Academia, and Civil Society. Finally he suggested that the speaker may review if IO is actually a new constituent of hybrid warfare, and whether the cognitive domain is the sixth domain of warfare, as mentioned in the paper, or actually a part of the fifth domain- Information Domain, the first four being land, sea, air and space. Lt. Col. Akshat Upadhyay stated that the speaker must introduce more clarity into his paper, modify its title and scope, and provide contextualisation for various terminologies mentioned. He also emphasised the need to expand the IO ambit as part of his research and expound on relevant statistical and anecdotal examples. There is also a need to examine the relationship between IO and truth, list sharp techniques associated with IO, and provide a more nuanced understanding of cognitive warfare. At the same time, the speaker must account for how IO is not inherently malicious or positive and is merely a tool that state and non-state actors can use. It is also a battle of narratives. The discussant presented examples from the Gulf of Tonkin incident (Vietnam War) and humane treatment meted out by Indian officers to dead Pakistani soldiers during the Kargil War to support his argument. Lt. Col. Upadhyay delved into how the paper presented must re-orient from a West-centric approach and assess how Western countries have carried out IO elsewhere. Moreover, concrete examples are required to support assertions regarding US’ involvement in IO abroad. He also suggested that Dr. Rasheed analyse how the Soviet Union (now Russia) earlier used active measures to weaken NATO and establish continuity between its cold war strategies and contemporary tactics in Ukraine. Furthermore, India must institutionalise IO instead of relying on reactive counter-measures since the recommendations suggested in the paper will increase countries’ vulnerabilities instead of reducing them. Ms. Shruti Pandalai lauded that Dr. Rasheed has attempted to simplify a complex and evolving field, and it is improbable that one can distinguish between IW and IO. She said that there are divergences, convergences, and collaboration between Russian and Chinese IO, as visible in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Ukraine. An assertive China has increasingly adopted Russian tactics, which have ranged from controlling the diaspora and external and internal narratives in China’s favour. According to her, the events in Ukraine demonstrate big tech and the West’s role in controlling and strengthening the narrative in Ukraine’s favour. She also pointed out that US’s Global Engagement Council, run by the US State Department, a grouping focused on combating disinformation, is inward-looking in its outlook. She pointed out that Dr. Rasheed needs to examine contemporary debates about IO, including artificial intelligence and big data, while being more cognisant of Western IO. At the same time, she emphasised that censorship of online streaming platforms, as suggested by the speaker, will be an ineffective deterrent in India. Finally, she believes it is necessary to focus on lessons learned. Lt. Gen. Rakesh Sharma (Retd.) suggested modifications to the paper’s title to adequately capture the core arguments and for Dr. Rasheed to account for how states use non-state actors in the IO/IW domain and refrain from using disclaimers. At the same time, he urged caution in using terms such as hybrid warfare while he elaborated on Chinese IO in the US, the United Nations Human Rights Council and India, and Russia’s IO in the United Kingdom during the Brexit vote and differing interpretations about war. Furthermore, he emphasised the need to establish a national cognitive agency in India. He also recommended that the speaker provide clarification about actors in India empowered to conduct cognitive warfare, India’s endgame regarding IO against China, and simplify terminologies used in the paper. Q/A SessionDirector General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy affirmed the need to examine all narratives concerning IO, including the insidious attempts by the West or current adversaries like Pakistan and China to prepare for the future adequately. He suggested that the paper look deeper into the role of IO/IW within India and the transboundary civil society actors’ involvement in these domains since their potency rivals big tech. At the same time, there is a requirement to assess if proposed Indian narratives are based on consensus and where challenges lie. Finally, an agnostic approach to values in IO/IW domain must be practiced. Some of the other themes discussed in the Q/A session included strategic relevance behind IO/IW in fields of health and disease, for example, the anti-vaccine campaign in the West, the scope of visibility of Indian IO, the need to analyse vulnerabilities in each segment of the population for antidotes to be forged, lack of domestic consensus on responding to IO threats against India, the synergy between state and non-state actors, and quantification of influence. Dr. Rasheed responded to the comments and questions raised. This report was prepared by Ms. Saman Ayesha Kidwai, Research Analyst, Counter-Terrorism Centre, MP-IDSA. |
|||||
| MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar: Defence Public Sector Units and Exports | May 31, 2023 | S. Samuel C. Rajiv | Fellows' Seminar |
MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar by Dr. S. Samuel C. Rajiv, Associate Fellow, on ‘Defence Public Sector Units and Exports’ was held on 31 May 2023. It was chaired by Mr. Amit Cowshish, Former Financial Advisor (Acquisition) Ministry of Defence, and Former Distinguished Fellow, MP-IDSA. The external discussants for the paper were Dr. Manisha Mathur, Sr. Dy. GM, International Marketing, Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and Dr. Sameer Patil, Senior Fellow, ORF, Mumbai. Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Rajiv Kumar Narang (Retd.), Senior Fellow, MP-IDSA, and Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh, Research Fellow & Centre Coordinator, Defence Industry and Economics Centre, MP-IDSA, were the internal discussants. Executive SummaryIn recent years, India has experienced a significant surge in defence exports. The paper explored the primary issues faced by DPSU’s in research and development, marketing, and competition from international aerospace businesses. The DPSUs’ future success in the fiercely competitive defence export market would be essential for India’s military manufacturing and indigenisation aims. Detailed ReportThe Chair, Mr. Amit Cowshish opened the session by highlighting the 23 per cent growth in India’s defence exports from Rs. 686 Crore in Financial Year (FY) 2013-2014 to Rs. 16,000 Crore in FY 2022-2023. This denotes the advancement in the design and development of the Indian defence industry in the global defence manufacturing sector. Dr. Rajiv in his paper ‘Defence Public Sector Units and Exports’ noted that during the ten-year period 2012-23, India exported defence equipment worth about Rs. 67,500 cr. Exports surged from Rs. 446.77 crores in 2012-13 to Rs. 15,918.16 cr in 2022-23. The paper examined issues related to exports by DPSUs and the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB). Dr. Rajiv stated that ships overwhelmingly comprise the quantity of defence exports from India, followed by helicopters/aircraft and sensors (radars etc). This is as against major global defence exporters, like the US, Russia, France, China and the UK, for whom aircrafts constitute the major chunk of exports. The share of DPSU defence exports was over 56 per cent during 2013-14 and was about 9 per cent in 2021-22. The OFB share in the defence exports pie has reduced from nearly 3 per cent in 2013-14 to less than 1 per cent in 2021-22. During the ten-year period from 2012-22, around Rs. 9600 crores is the value of exports (both defence and civil) executed by eight DPSUs. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has accounted for more than 37 per cent of all exports by DPSUs, followed by Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) at over 30 per cent and Goa Shipyard Limited (GSL) at nearly 13 per cent. As for exports by the OFB during 2012-22, about Rs. 688 crore worth of items/equipment have been exported. The OFB has exported various items like brake parachutes and ammunition to many countries over the years. Dr. Rajiv gave certain examples of some significant export items by DPSUs. These included Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) and helicopters to countries like Mauritius, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, Seychelles, Namibia, Ecuador and Suriname. Some of the significant contracts that the DPSUs did not succeed in securing have included the $300 mn contract for Frigates by Philippines in 2016 (which went to a South Korean firm) and $900 mn contract for Trainer Aircraft by Malaysia (which was again bagged by a South Korean competitor in 2023). Dr. Rajiv then highlighted issues relating to DPSUs and R&D, their marketing and strategic partnership efforts and use of Lines of Credit. He noted that most DPSUs have tie-ups with academic and research institutions like IITs. BEL has more than 300 collaborative R&D partners, including with more than 150 MSMEs. BEL has also been granted a total of 24 patents, Mishra Dhatu Nigam Limited (MIDHANI) - five and Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML) - 12 patents respectively, while shipyards like Garden Reach Shipbuilders and Engineers (GRSE) have filed over 100 IPRs out of which more than 60 have been granted. BEL has the highest R&D spending among DPSUs while average R&D spending of Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) over the five-year period from 2017-22 has been less than 2 per cent. DPSUs have also been making efforts to increase their marketing footprint overseas, with BEL, HAL and GRSE at the forefront of such efforts. Dr. Rajiv noted that countries like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, and Surinam have used LoCs to source Indian defence equipment. DPSUs are actively participating in Request for Information (RFIs) and Request for Proposal (RFPs), to enhance their export profiles. Mazagon Dock Limited (MDL), for instance, as of December 2021, had responded to over 30 RFIs and RFPs, involving nearly 200 vessels. The last vessel that was exported by MDL though was way back in 2014. DPSU shipyards point out that highly competitive markets and low pricing of the products from North–East Asian countries were some of the challenges. DPSU’s like HAL will continue to have stiff competition from global aerospace majors with their T-50 (Korea Aerospace Industries and Lockheed Martin), T-7A (Boeing and SAAB), or M 346 (Leonardo) Trainer Aircrafts. HAL though unveiled a new Hindustan Lead in Fighter (HLFT-42) Trainer Aircraft at the Aero India 2023. Going forward, Dr. Rajiv noted that DPSU’s face a highly competitive export market for defence products. DPSUs are some of the biggest defence companies in the world in terms of sales. With the government’s stress on Atmanirbhar Bharat and ambitious targets relating to defence production, defence exports and defence indigenisation, the ability of the DPSUs to contribute to the exports pie will continue to be in focus. Dr. Manisha MathurDr. Mathur began by complimenting the author for the meticulous presentation of data and stated the need to analyse the challenges and various initiatives to increase India’s defence exports. She spoke about the various initiatives which Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) has been making in the expanding global defence market. Dr. Mathur delved into the challenges in dealing with developing countries in the South Asian region, particularly on the limited flexibility in the operations of the DPSUs compared to Chinese counterparts. In comparison, the private sector might have greater flexibility. She delved into the various initiatives and efforts by the Indian Government, High Commissions, and Embassies to provide support through brand promotion, participation in exhibitions, and financial assistance such as Lines of Credit (LoC) from the Export-Import Bank of India to facilitate exports to these developing countries. Secondly, she flagged that India is not part of the NATO supply chain, which could have added to the exports pie. Thirdly, Dr. Mathur stressed the need to focus on R&D, customised solutions, product support, and leveraging licensed production of Russian platforms. However, she also expressed caution in sharing sensitive defence information and maintaining the confidentiality of partner countries in the public. She was optimistic about the future course of defence exports and spoke on the upward trend in collaboration with foreign and private sectors; she was optimistic about swift clearance regarding defence exports and obtaining NOCs (No Objection Certificates). She added that there is growing interest in India’s defence sector, pushed forward actively by the Raksha Mantri in his visits to countries in India’s extended neighbourhood as well as by a few countries appointing Defence Attaches to explore collaborative partnerships with the Indian defence industry. Dr. Sameer PatilDr. Sameer Patil appreciated the comprehensive research and use of statistics. He stated that the declining share of Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) might be attributed to factors such as the absence of critical technologies, poor design capacities, long gestation periods, weak industry-academia interface, and limited success in the commercial arena. He remarked that the paper would benefit from providing background information on the role of DPSUs and the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) in defence manufacturing and the government’s initiatives to boost defence exports. Dr. Patil further suggested that the author may include an explanation for concepts like legacy liabilities and strategic partnerships and the link between capturing new markets and leveraging partnerships. He indicated that the paper may include a uniform usage of units and currency (USD or INR) throughout for clarity and comparison. Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Rajeev NarangGroup Captain (Dr) Rajeev Narang emphasised the importance of understanding the factors that contribute to successful defence exports and identifying obstacles that hinder them. The Indian Government has implemented initiatives like Make in India, Strategic Partnerships, Joint Venture, Transfer of Technology (TOT), and Aatmanirbhar Bharat to achieve self-reliance in technology and become a defence export hub. He commented that as the percentage of defence exports has increased, the private sector has shown more significant growth than DPSUs. He stated that it is essential to differentiate between DPSUs to assess their value addition and export potential. Gp. Capt. Narang stated that collaboration with global manufacturers, civil product exports, and adherence to international standards are crucial to improve technology and export quality. Each institution has strengths, challenges, and associated areas influencing their export goals. Gp. Capt. Narang stated the importance of user feedback from friendly countries, which is crucial to evaluate the perception and quality of Indian defence products. He stressed that understanding limitations, hurdles, and reasons for missed projects helps assess export potential. He discussed the significance of factors like testing facilities, standardisation, accreditation, and quality assurance that contribute to the growth of the export ecosystem. Gp. Capt. Narang elaborated on the challenges in global market entry, user satisfaction, supply lines, and regional variations. Comparison with other countries, such as China, highlights the importance of assessing technology transfer and understanding their approach. Collaboration with global manufacturers, civil product exports, and understanding international standards and testing procedures play a role in improving technology and export quality. Col. (Dr.) Rajneesh SinghCol. (Dr.) Rajneesh Singh highlighted the decline in the share of defence exports by DPSUs in recent years from over 56 per cent in 2013-14 to approximately 9 per cent in 2021-22. In contrast, the private sector’s share has surged to over 90 per cent during the same period. He stressed the need to study the reasons behind this substantial shift to understand the underlying factors. The Ordnance Factories turned DPSUs have witnessed a decline in their share of defence exports. He expanded on the potential reasons for this decline, including unattractive product lists, lack of competitive production quality/prices, and marketing issues that should be analysed. Col. Singh recommended that Ordnance Factories turned DPSUs should focus on establishing joint ventures with foreign Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), producing critical items through technology transfer, and engaging in collaborative innovation for defence research and development in niche technology areas. This strategic approach would optimise capacity utilisation, enhance efficiency, and facilitate modernisation with capability development. Moreover, the assessment of defence export volume should carefully consider aspects like After-Sales Maintenance and Support, overhaul, and training and clarify whether these services are accounted for when receiving/executing the export order or at the time of payment realisation. Col. Singh suggested that a collaborative approach between various government ministries, including the Ministry of Defence, Ministry of External Affairs, Department of Economic Affairs, and Ministry of Corporate Affairs, is vital to provide diplomatic support for achieving export orders, facilitating technology transfer deals, implementing offsets effectively, producing dual-use technology items, establishing joint ventures with foreign OEMs, and forming strategic market partnerships. Furthermore, DPSUs can be crucial in supporting defence Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) by providing a suitable forum/platform for exports, extending market support, offering technological guidance, and enhancing capability. Lastly, to obtain a realistic assessment of the defence industry, he suggested that a time period longer than a 10 years be considered. Such a timeframe would account for any spikes or irregularities in orders, ensuring that accurate conclusions are drawn. Mr. Amit CowshishThe Chair appreciated the suggestions and recommended certain changes to be incorporated into the paper. Firstly, he suggested including a list of policy measures the government has taken as it pertained to defence exports, including issues like the Open General Export License (OGEL) and other procedural changes. Thirdly, Mr. Cowshish flagged data points on exports and value of authorisations and noted that countries like France consider both physical exports and authorisation values, to get a better picture of the country’s defence exports. Fourthly, he clarified that DPSUs also manufacture civilian products and make efforts to segregate defence export figures from civilian products. Finally, he also highlighted the role of the private sector in defence exports, along with changes in acquisition procedures and offsets. He commented on the limitations of obtaining user inputs and mentioned the limited market in the neighbourhood but expressed hope for success in Southeast Asia, Central Asia, and South America. Finally, the significance of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in the defence export story and their collaboration with DPSUs was flagged. Dr .Rajiv expressed gratitude for the constructive comments and suggestions and stated that he intended to incorporate them to the extent possible while revising the paper and also use the suggestions for future research. Questions and CommentsThe Director General Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy began his comments on the paper by suggesting the inclusion of the initiatives for critical and emerging technologies between India and the US, as India was recognised as a major defence partner in 2016 and was given the STA-1 status in 2018 by the US. These steps aim to boost India’s technology and R&D capabilities, which can potentially impact the country’s defence as well as high-technology exports. He cited the example of the GE 414 afterburning turbofan engine, on which India and the US are expected to sign a major deal during the visit of Prime Minister Modi to the US. Amb. Chinoy enquired as to how best we can utlisise such opportunities to enhance the domestic manufacturing base. Secondly, he advised the author to include the contribution of positive indigenisation lists for Atmanirbhar Bharat, on Indian manufacturing capabilities and its effect on exports. Thirdly, he enquired whether we can categorise long-term lease arrangements as defence exports, like the transfer of the Kilo-class submarine, INS Sindhuvir to Myanmar. Amb. Chinoy also flagged the Chinese example of using a European engine in the C919 commercial aircraft, which they are aggressively marketing for exports. He also asked the author to explore the connection between Indian Armed Forces’ procurement decisions and exports. If the Indian Armed Forces purchase in large quantities significant equipment like the LCA Tejas, given the Rs 48,000 crore deal, it should naturally translate, sooner or later, into possible export opportunities for the indigenous fighter aircraft powered by the US engine. Lastly, Amb. Chinoy flagged the need for appropriate decision-making vis-à-vis R&D investments, including on aspects relating to when to enter the technology lifecycle and which specific technologies to focus on. Deputy Director General Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi commented on Dr. Mathur’s statement where she mentioned the importance of entering the NATO supply chain and highlighted the substantial defence budget of the US. Gen. Bakshi flagged the possibility of Indian companies benefiting if and when India and the US sign the Reciprocal Defence Procurement (RDP) Agreement, which seems to be in the works. He flagged business opportunities in terms of Maintenance, Repair and Operations (MRO) of Russian equipment in the inventories of other countries, given the current geo-political scenario. Gen Bakshi suggested that testing and accreditation facilities in the public sector need to be made more accessible to the private sector defence companies as well. The limitations in critical technologies such as chips, engines, and precision guided munitions was flagged. The Q/A session broadly revolved around the themes of indigenisation, defence exports, joint ventures arrangements, as well as public and private defence industries. The speaker responded to the comments and questions. (Report prepared by Ms. Shayesta Nishat Ahmed, Research Analyst, Defence Economics and Industry Centre, MP-IDSA). |
Defence Economics & Industry | ||||
| Effective Utilisation of MP-IDSA Library Resources | May 26, 2023 | Other |
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha, Sr. Library Assistant and Dr. Vivek Dhankar, Technical Officer, GIS Section, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “Effective Utilisation of MP-IDSA Library Resources” on May 26, 2023. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), the Deputy Director General of MP-IDSA and scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive SummaryThe library is a major source of information for research scholars. MP-IDSA has a rich collection of books and journals about different subject areas. In order to help MP-IDSA scholars in efficiently utilising the library, Mr. Jha and Dr. Dhankar gave presentations to familiarise scholars with the library resources. While giving a brief historical account of the library, Mr. Jha shed light on MP-IDSA’s collection of books and journals. Dr. Dhankar talked about the GIS section. He explained how maps are prepared at MP-IDSA and policies with regard to maps. Detailed ReportMr. Mukesh Kumar Jha began by explaining that the term library is based on the Latin word ‘liber’ which means document or book. Libraries have gone through a radical transformation from being made up of clay tablets to the digital era. Earlier it used to be like a storehouse, but with time its form kept changing. As the storehouse capacity is limited, the information got converted into digital format. There are three types of libraries- academic, public and special. MP-IDSA’s library is a special library since it’s a research library and is focused on a particular subject area. We saw the advent of information society in the 1990’s. Our society is completely dependent on information now and we send and receive it in a digital format. There are three types of sources of information- primary, secondary and tertiary. The most important are the primary sources. The researcher community is the only community who is not only the consumer of information but also its generator. Information communication also has a drawback. It brought with itself information explosion. With information explosion, the recall value increased, but it resulted in a lack of precision. The library is the only place where information gets compiled, repackaged, and consolidated. The most important role of a library is to provide ‘right information to the right user at the right time.’ MP-IDSA’s library is a fine library; it is air conditioned, and Wi-Fi enabled. It has more than 60,000 books other than monographs and reports. Its main focus is on military affairs, national security, strategic technologies, defence studies, etc. MP-IDSA’s library does generation and dissemination of information. It has diversified publications with more than 250 plus current journals subscription and 21,499 old volume journals. It is open to outsiders as well. MP-IDSA’s library is the only library in India now which provides indexing and abstracting services. Mr. Jha demonstrated how to use the digital library in an efficient way. Dr. Vivek Dhankar began his presentation by saying that the Geographic Information System is a small section limited to one room in the library. It is a system comprising of a computer system and an expert which capture or collect, manage (editing & updating) and display (maps) geographically referenced information or data. GIS helps in bringing out or displaying the relationship, trends and pattern from the data. Therefore, maps are important in studies because they help us look at the patterns and visualise data in a new way. Maps are a powerful means of providing information. The GIS lab in MP-IDSA was set up in September 2009. Currently, it has five GIS licenses. Since 2009, 2514 customised maps have been prepared so far on the request of the scholars. All GIS maps are chargeable. There are two exceptions where the charges can be waived off. If the map is being prepared by an MP-IDSA’s scholar for MP-IDSA’s official work, then there would be no charges. If maps are for MP-IDSA’s scholars own work but are endorsed by the respective Centre Coordinator or from the DG, MP-IDSA, then the charges would be waived as well. The charges for a colour map are Rs. 750 and Rs. 1000 for a black and white map. For non-MP-IDSA members, charges are Rs. 2000 for a colour map and Rs. 2,500 for a black and white map. It is mandatory to get the map approved from the Director General or the Centre Coordinator. The form needs to be filled where one needs to mention if the map is for personal use or official purpose. Dr. Dhankar explained that there are two types of data in GIS- spatial data and non-spatial data. Any data which has geographical information like satellite images and coordinates related to it is called spatial data. The non spatial data is attribute data which describes the data. For instance, describing total population in a district is non spatial data whereas a district boundary is spatial data. In the GIS section, the data has been classified into political, economic, natural, social and cultural data. For instance, in political data, we have international boundaries, India’s administrative boundaries and province level boundaries. For economic data, we have rail network data and road infrastructure data, airports, seaports etc. We also have raster data which is picture form of data. For instance, we have topographical maps, gas pipelines, US Army topographic sheet of the South Asian region. He also brought attention to collecting data/information from open sources. If the MP-IDSA’s scholars are using maps from open sources, the Indian territorial integrity must be given attention. The maps from the online sources can also get checked and corrected at the GIS section. Comments and QuestionsGp. Capt. R.K. Narang asked whether the MP-IDSA’s library has Government reports from Ministry of Defence. In response to his question, Mr. Jha said that since the Ministry of Defence compiled its documents on its own website, there is no need for us to recompile it in our library. Gp. Capt. Narang also asked Dr. Dhankar about the software used for GIS. Dr. Dhankar said that the software’s name is ArcGIS. It is developed by an American company called Esri. 99% organisations all over the world use ArcGIS since it is the most advanced. The next best alternative is QGIS which is free. Dr. Uttam Kumar Sinha asked how many new book recommendations we get per month. To which Mr. Jha replied that the library gets 5 to 10 new book recommendations every month. He further asked Dr. Dhankar what we can do about the resolution of the map getting distorted. Dr. Dhankar said that the resolution of the maps get distorted after being inserted into the word document, which is then sent for publication. We need to ensure that the size of the map does not get changed. It is often better to change the map independent of the text, so that it does not get squeezed or its resolution get lowered. Mr. Anit Kumar, Intern asked Dr. Dhankar that can QGIS maps be gotten by directly downloading them or does one need special knowledge to do it? Dr. Dhankar replied that they can be downloaded but one needs to have an idea of using GIS beforehand. One must have an idea how to create boundaries, how to add text on the map and how to create the layout. One needs to be aware of copyrights for using different data. The Report was prepared by Mr. Harshit Sharma, Intern, MP-IDSA. |
||||||
| Talk by Professor Aki Sakabe-Mori on China-Japan Relations and Security Issues of Regional Concern | July 25, 2023 | 1030 to 1300 hrs | Talk |
Professor Aki Sakabe-Mori will deliver a talk on China-Japan Relations and Security Issues of Regional Concern Today on July 25, 2023, at 1500 hrs in Board Room no. 104. DG, MP-IDSA, Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy will chair the interactive session. |
|||||
| Monday Morning Meeting on “India and the Geopolitics of Antarctica” | July 24, 2023 | Monday Morning Meeting |
Mr. Bipandeep Sharma, Research Analyst, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “India and the Geopolitics of Antarctic” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 24 July 2023. The meeting was moderated by Capt. Anurag Bisen (IN), Research Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General of MP-IDSA, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.), the Deputy Director General of MP-IDSA and scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive SummaryThe Antarctic region holds significant importance for scientific research, resource exploration, and geopolitical interests. It serves as a natural laboratory for various fields of study and is home to vast untapped resources, including potential hydrocarbon reserves and fisheries. India's role in the Antarctic has grown steadily, with multiple research expeditions and operational bases focused on climate change and related scientific research. As global events and territorial claims shape the future of Antarctica, India must proactively prepare from potential emerging challenges and opportunities from the region. Detailed ReportThe discussion was opened by Capt. Anurag Bisen, who highlighted the significance of the Antarctic Treaty, which came into force in 1961 and was signed by India in 1983. Currently, the Treaty has 56 member states. The differences between the Arctic, Antarctic, and Antarctica were outlined by him. Despite maintaining peace in the region for the last 60 years, he highlighted that differences are slowly arising between states as a result of geopolitical event occurring in the other parts of the world. Mr. Bipandeep Sharma started his presentation by giving a brief overview of the region. He clarified the main difference between the two commonly used interchangeable terms; ‘Antarctic’ and ‘Antarctica’. Mr. Sharma also briefly familiarised the audience with the term ‘Antarctic convergence’. In his presentation Mr. Sharma highlighted that the Antarctic region remains primarily important for three reasons. Firstly, it is a natural laboratory for research on astronomy, glaciology, geophysics, oceanography, and other scientific disciplines. Around 111 research stations are operational in the region, with India having two operational bases in Antarctica. Secondly, the importance of resources is crucial; however, the Madrid Protocol prohibits all activities related to the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources, except for scientific research. Nonetheless, various assessments estimate Antarctica to contain 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 106 trillion cubic feet of gas. The region is also home to fisheries, which are regulated by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). Finally, the region is gaining prominence as a result of geopolitical complexities emerging between states that could have implications for the future governance in the region. Mr. Sharma highlighted that seven sovereign states - Argentina, the U.K, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, and Norway - have made their territorial claims in Antarctica. Many of these claims overlap, but according to Article 4 of the Antarctic Treaty, all these claims remain frozen. He further talked about the scientific bases and highlighted the dual use infrastructures at the bases of States like China which currently has four operational bases in Antarctica, and is in the process of constructing the fifth. These bases support China's BeiDou satellite navigation system and also facilitate intelligence collection. Mr. Sharma also highlighted that China's Great Wall station strategically oversees the Drake Passage, a key sea line of communication between the South Atlantic and South Pacific Oceans. In the second part of his presentation, Mr. Sharma talked about the governance mechanism in Antarctica. He mentioned that it mainly comprises of five international mechanisms that include the Antarctic Treaty, Madrid Protocol, the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (1972), CCAMLR, and Annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings (ATCM). The Antarctic Treaty, signed in 1959 and now joined by 56 countries, emphasises freedom of scientific investigation and peaceful purposes while prohibiting military establishments, weapon testing, nuclear explosions, and radioactive waste disposal. Mr. Sharma clarified that the Antarctic Treaty does not have any expiry date, but as per article 25 of the Madrid Protocol, there is a provision that after the first fifty years from the protocol`s entry into force (1998), it can only be modified through unanimous agreement of all consultative parties. In the final part of his presentation, Mr. Sharma talked about India's presence in Antarctica. He mentioned that India sent its first expedition to Antarctica in 1981, and signed the Antarctic Treaty in 1983. After the initial base i.e. Dakshin Gangotri was abandoned due to submersion, India's current bases are ‘Bharati’ and ‘Maitri’. To date, 42 expeditions to Antarctica have been conducted by India, with the latest one scheduled for October-November 2023. India's Antarctic program primarily focuses on climate change research. Currently, Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is collaborating with National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on an important NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) mission for Antarctic which is expected to be launched in January 2024. NISIR will observe sea ice characteristics over the seas surrounding India’s Antarctic polar stations. It could further detect the marine oil spill and disseminate the spill location during accidental oil seepage for preventive measures. Mr. Sharma also talked about The Indian Antarctic Act, 2022, that is an important instrument to protect the Antarctic environment and associated ecosystems, and grants jurisdiction to Indian courts for disputes or crimes committed in parts of Antarctica. In the concluding part of his presentation Mr. Sharma emphasised on the future complexities of Antarctic governance and highlighted various challenges as a result of geopolitical events occurring in other parts of the world. He mentioned that China's presence in the region has already garnered attention among other countries. Mr. Sharma highlighted that India should consider acquiring or constructing its independent polar research vessel with advanced icebreaking capabilities at a fast pace. He mentioned that the country needs to prioritise its scientific research in certain areas that could enable India a strategic edge in Polar Regions. He suggested that R&D in Antarctic Bioprospecting could be one such area that can offer immense opportunities for India’s Pharmaceutical Industry. Lastly, he called for the need to promote Indian investments in Antarctic Fishing Industry and training Indian seafarers for Polar Waters.
Questions and CommentsCapt. Anurag Bisen (IN) highlighted that India is also part of COMNAP [Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs] & SCAR [Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research]. He reiterated that it's already been 9 years since the Cabinet Committee on Security sanctioned the polar research vessel, which is still in the design phase. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy applauded the presentation and asked questions regarding the possible scenario in terms of the balance of power in the Antarctic region by 2048, how it is decided that a country will have how many stations, and China's engagement in IUU (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated) fishing & dual-use infrastructure. Bipandeep answered - it is important to do scenario-building in different conditions. Additionally, according to the Antarctic Treaty, decisions are taken by consensus in the annual ATCM, and permission to set up research stations is granted based on the kind of research a state is undertaking. As for military use, he mentioned that as per Antarctic treaty, any kind of military activity is banned in the Antarctic, but there may be dual-use of military equipment such as antennas and communication systems by countries in the realm of space exploration. Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd) discussed the inhospitable conditions of Antarctica and also highlighted that India provides fewer seafarers in comparison to our population. To which Bipandeep answered – we can definitely increase our seafarers, as we are growing in terms of commercial shipping and expeditions. Capt. Bisen highlighted the DG's question on IUU, mentioning that China occasionally engages in IUU fishing in the garb of research, violating fishing norms throughout the world, and doing it in a very organized way. He noted that China has the highest subsidies on distant water fishing in the world. Mr. Arvind Khare asked about many IT firms putting their data centers in the region, to which Bipandeep replied that those data centers are in the Arctic, not Antarctic. Dr. Gulbin Sultana had a question on certain unclaimed areas shown on the map of Antarctica, asking who governs them? Bipandeep explained that those are the areas that haven't been claimed by any of the seven states that have made claims on other parts of the continent. Ms. Yukti Panwar asked a question regarding the clash of jurisdiction of the area of the High Seas Treaty with that of the Antarctic Treaty to which Capt. Bisen gave a detailed explanation. -The report has been prepared by Mr Anit Kumar, Research Intern, Internal Security Centre, MP-IDSA, New Delhi. |
Non-Traditional Security | |||||
| Report on Monday Morning Meeting on “India’s Turn to Minilateralism in the West Asia Context” | July 10, 2023 | Monday Morning Meeting |
Dr. Deepika Saraswat, Associate Fellow, West Asia Centre at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), delivered a presentation on “India’s Turn to Minilateralism in the West Asia Context” during the Monday Morning Meeting on 10 July 2023. The session, moderated by Dr. Prasanta Kumar Pradhan, Research Fellow and Coordinator, West Asia Centre, was attended by Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General of MP-IDSA, and scholars from the Institute. Executive SummaryIndia’s focus is growing on minilateralism in the West Asian region. The region’s geopolitical landscape is transitioning to a multipolar structure, coinciding with concerns over the perceived US disengagement and the diversification of partnerships among US allies. The Abraham Accords have reshaped Israel-Arab Gulf dynamics, while efforts towards wider de-escalation are promoting scope for minilaterals. The US has recalibrated its role from traditional bilateral alliances to an integration-based regional approach. India’s turn to minilateralism is exemplified by the India-Israel-UAE-US (I2U2) initiative, which facilitates joint investments and practical cooperation in various sectors. A few other minilateral initiatives, such as the India-UAE Strategic Partnership and the India-Israel-US Strategic Partnership, emphasise shared interests in energy, food security, trade, and investment. These partnerships and initiatives aim to foster stability, prosperity, and connectivity in West Asia while advancing India’s independent strategic vision. Detailed ReportIn his opening remarks, Dr. P.K. Pradhan briefly outlined the idea behind India’s focus on minilateral groupings in West Asia. He specifically mentioned the India, Israel, UAE and USA (I2U2) Grouping, which was conceptualised in 2021. In 2022, the first Leaders’ Summit took place and six key areas, namely water, energy, transportation, space, health and food security, were identified to encourage joint investments. The significance of this grouping is also highlighted through the meeting held in May 2023, where National Security Advisors (NSAs) of India, the United States and the United Arab Emirates met in Riyadh. With this brief introduction, Dr. Pradhan requested Dr. Saraswat to begin her presentation. Dr. Saraswat commenced her presentation by discussing the geopolitical context of West Asia, highlighting the transition towards a multipolar landscape. She emphasised the concerns expressed by US allies in the region regarding the perceived US disengagement, leading to a diversification of partnerships and the exploration of regional alternatives. Abraham Accords and de-escalation created space for minilateral and regional frameworks. US National Security Strategy 2022 highlights the recalibration of the US role as the external security guarantor, emphasising integration-based approaches. US interest is being seen in synergising the Middle East and Indo-Pacific Strategy through building economic, political and security connections between and among US partners. Moreover, the transformation of India’s key bilateral relationships with the UAE and Israel from transactional to ‘strategic partnerships’ enabled India to engage in minilateral formats. The speaker drew attention to India’s growing focus on minilateralism in its engagement with West Asia, highlighting the India-Israel-UAE-US (I2U2) initiative. The I2U2 Summit held in July 2022 laid the foundation for practical cooperation, with joint investments and initiatives in six sectors. The initiative capitalises on the participating countries’ relative strengths and trade synergies, leveraging factors like capital, technological prowess, and market size. During her presentation, Dr. Saraswat provided specific examples of collaboration within the I2U2 framework. The nexus between technology, energy, and climate change has resulted in substantial investments from the UAE in integrated food parks across India and hybrid renewable energy projects in Gujarat. The importance of trans-regional connectivity, particularly through the India-Arab-Mediterranean Connectivity Corridor, was also emphasised. The inaugural I2U2 Business Forum held in February 2023 aimed to mobilise private sector capital and expertise for joint projects in renewable energy. India has joined the US-UAE-led Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate (AIM4C). In addition, establishing the I2U2 Joint Business Coalition in April 2023 enhanced technological and private-sector collaboration. Dr. Saraswat discussed additional minilateral initiatives in which India has been involved in the West Asia. These included the India-Saudi Arabia-US-UAE NSAs meeting, which also discussed the establishment of an integrated railway network among Gulf and Arab countries, with India linked through maritime routes. However, progress on the India-Saudi bilateral front since the creation of the Strategic Partnership Council in 2019 has been slow. Other limiting factors in minilateral engagement include Saudi Arabia’s efforts to balance its relations with India, Pakistan, and China, strained Saudi-US ties, and Riyadh’s reluctance to fully normalise relations with Israel and Saudi-UAE economic competition. Egypt was highlighted as a country where India’s stabilising role alongside its Gulf partners has been crucial during the economic crisis, positioning Egypt as a gateway to markets in Europe, West Asia, and Africa. It is also an important destination for agriculture and defence exports. While contextualising Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s approach of ‘peace through strength’, Dr. Saraswat discussed India’s de-hyphenation of its Israel-Palestine policy and Prime Minister Modi’s visits to Israel in 2017 as crucial for the emergence of a technological and development partnership between India and Israel. She noted that as negotiations are underway for the India-Israel Free Trade Agreement, the two sides are leveraging the complementarities of Israel’s technological prowess and India’s market size. Dr. Saraswat concluded by mentioning that India’s growing focus on minilateral engagements and strategic partnerships reflects a transformation in New Delhi’s approach towards West Asia. The geopolitical shifts and the US recalibration in West Asia have created some convergences between the US and India as both share a vision of an ‘interconnected’ cooperative region. However, India will continue to have its independent strategic vision towards the region. In the present scenario, India is unlikely to engage in ‘hard’ security issues beyond the freedom of navigation in the region’s waterways. Comments and QuestionsDr. Pradhan opened the floor for comments and questions. The Director General, Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, argued that minilaterals are as good as the sum of their parts. Minilateral groupings demonstrate the resilience of bilateral relations, showcasing their ability to deliver outcomes that larger groups cannot. These smaller collaborations harness the collective strengths of their members, surpassing the limitations of broader multilateral efforts. However, he cautioned that minilaterals, which are flexible in nature, should not be confused with permanent commitments. The Director General also noted that the I2U2 has been erroneously labelled as the “second QUAD” in media circles. Minilaterals offer flexibility, as evidenced by the NSAs meeting in Saudi Arabia, where UAE, USA, and India participated. However, Israel did not attend due to its current relationship dynamics with Saudi Arabia. Ambassador Chinoy highlighted the aspect that the US profile in the region should be considered with the leverage Gulf nations possessed earlier due to their significant supply of oil, gas, and other fossil fuels to the US market. The US, now having transitioned to a net energy exporter, is recalibrating its approach. The US is exploring virtual range or over-the-horizon capabilities to be deployed as needed in the Gulf region. Moreover, Gulf and Arab nations have gained leverage with Europe. As India absorbs Russian oil, these nations are in a better position to meet the supply demands in Europe. The Director General mentioned that China is often considered a very good alternative destination, market, and arms supplier, as well as a major consumer of oil and gas. However, India is also being viewed as a significant emerging market with great potential. Consequently, countries like UAE and Saudi Arabia are likely to increase their investments in India, recognising its growth prospects and economic opportunities. Dr. Adil Rasheed mentioned Indian PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Egypt in June 2023 and emphasised the need to boost bilateral relations. He asked about the possibility of India’s minilateral arrangement with Egypt. Dr. Rajiv Nayan highlighted the geopolitical rivalry between the US and China in West Asia and asked about the possibility and implications of the US withdrawal from the region. Gp. Capt. ( Dr.) Rajiv Kumar Narang (Retd.) asked questions on India’s partnership with UAE on petroleum reserves, India-Israel research and development partnership and progress in agriculture cooperation. Capt. Anurag Bisen (IN) mentioned the absence of ‘security’ in the six agendas of I2U2 and asked about the possibility of including maritime security in the agendas. Dr. Deepika Saraswat gave comprehensive responses, addressing the comments and questions from the Institute’s scholars. The report has been prepared by Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Research Analyst, West Asia Centre, MP-IDSA. |
||||||
| Interaction with H.E. Mr. Wada Yoshiaki, Japan’s State Minister of Cabinet Offic | July 19, 2023 | 1000 to 1100 hrs | Talk |
Japan’s State Minister of Cabinet Office, H.E. Mr. Wada Yoshiaki, accompanied by a delegation, will be visiting MP-IDSA on Wednesday, July 19, 2023 for a meeting with Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy, DG MP-IDSA. The Institute will organise an interactive session with him from 1000 hrs to 1100 hrs in Room # 104 (Boardroom), First Floor. |
|||||
| Report of Monday Morning Meeting on Indo-US Defence Industrial Cooperation and Aatmanirbharta | July 17, 2023 | Monday Morning Meeting |
Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Rajiv Kumar Narang, Senior Fellow, Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA), spoke on “Indo-US Defence Industrial Cooperation and Aatmanirbharta” at the Monday Morning Meeting held on 17 July 2023. The session was moderated by Dr. S. Samuel C. Rajiv, Associate Fellow, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, the Director General of MP-IDSA, and scholars of the Institute were in attendance. Executive SummaryThe recent India-US defence industrial cooperation between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Joe Biden held from 21-24 June 2023 depicted the significance of technology in strengthening bilateral relationships with strategic partner countries. The speaker advocated the need to understand the complexities, implementing agreements and challenges in reciprocal agreements. He highlighted the need for protecting Indian intellectual capital, analysing impact of procurements on indigenous programs and civil-military fusion in aeronautics technologies, He concluded by emphasising the need for creating India’s defence technology innovation roadmap,instituting structural, policy and procedural reforms for enhancing contribution of Indian defence forces, pursuing joint development, joint IP creation and procurement; and instituting measures for inter-ministerial coordination to make R&D and innovation collaborations with international partners successful and pave the way for self-reliance (Aatmanirbharta) in defence technologies. Detailed ReportDr. S. Samuel C. Rajiv gave a brief introduction to the subject before describing how defence industrial cooperation between India and the United States has recently benefited from the jointly agreed upon defence industrial roadmap in June 2023. He briefly mentioned the previous defence framework agreements between the two countries that provided the structure to facilitate this cooperation further. Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Narang cited the importance of technology in strengthening the relationship between partner countries. He drew attention to the latest India-US defence industrial cooperation between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Joe Biden held from 21-24 June 2023. Although the initiatives adopted during this meeting have the potential to enhance collaboration between the two states through technology-driven approaches, yet there is the need to comprehend the details of the agreement and complexities to effectively implement them rather than relying on expectations. He discussed the key initiatives and agreements signed and attempted to relate them to innovations, technology collaborations and the impact of such initiatives on achieving aatmanirbharta in the defence sector of the country. Finally, he made certain observations and gave certain recommendations. India and the US have been close strategic partners since the signing of the 2005 framework agreement on defence relations, which was renewed in 2015. Along with the above, various other defence agreements were signed between the two countries to promote technology-sharing, co-development and co-production, such as the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) in 2012, and Strategic Trade Authorisation Tier-1 (STA-1) in 2016. The annual 2+2 ministerial dialogue was initiated in 2018. Since the initiation of the US-India Defence Dialogue in 2008, there has been significant growth amounting to USD 20 billion in the year 2020 from collaborations such as the C-17, C-130, Apache, Chinook, P-8i, and M-777. There were many other dialogue mechanisms like the Defence Policy Group (DPG), Defence Joint Working Group (DJWG), Joint Technical Group (JTF), Military Cooperation Group (MCG), and the Executive Steering Group (EG). However, there are still challenges to be addressed, such as the lack of reciprocal agreements between the Indian defence forces and US startups. The speaker then spoke about several critical agreements relating to information exchange, aircraft technologies, fuel exchange and foundational agreements signed between India and US. These were the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) in 2002, the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) in 2016, the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) in 2018 and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) in 2020. He argues that there has been significant progress in India-US defence industrial cooperation in recent years, but that there is still more work to be done. Before the beginning of Prime Minister Modi’s to the US, the Indian Defence Secretary Giridhar Armane and the US Under Secretary of Defence and Policy Dr. Colin Kohl co-chaired the Indo-US Defence Policy Group in Washington on 17 May 2023. They deliberated on enhancing defence industrial cooperation, partnerships, identifying opportunities for co-development of new technologies and production of existing and new systems, and R&D. This was followed by the visit of US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin’s visit to conclude the Roadmap for India-US Defence Industrial Cooperation on 4-5 June 2023. On 13-14 June 2023, US NSA Jake Sullivan also paid a visit to India to review the progress on the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) and signed MOU on semiconductors. Discussions also centred around areas of space, AI and security of supply agreement and regulation of critical design in defence technologies, and placement of a liaison officer in each other’s military organisations. Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Narang emphasised the significance of Reciprocal Defence Procurement (RDP) agreements and streamlining of regulatory mechanisms to promote the export of defence technologies from US start-ups for the Indian defence industry and vice-versa. The most important agreement signed during Prime Minister Modi’s US visit, was the India-US Defence Accelerator Ecosystem (INDUS-X) – Defence Innovation Collaboration between the US Defence Innovation Unit (DIU) and the Indian DIO-iDEX. It is intended to complement government-to-government collaborations between Indian companies, investors, startup accelerators and academic research institutions to co-develop and co-produce advanced technology by Indian and US start-ups. This was followed by the acquisition and manufacturing deal of the GE-414 Aero-engine, and the 31 MQ-9B Sea Guardian/ Sky Guardian UAS Acquisition Deal. Additionally, the US Department of Defense (DoD) Space Force had signed an R&D Agreement with the 114-Ai and 3rdiTech, however, there have been no reciprocal agreements by Indian defence forces or the Ministry of Defence (MoD) with US-based startups. In the context of the signing of the MoU for Joint production of 99 GE 414 for LCA Mk-2 and AMCA Mk-1 between HAL-GE on 22 June 2023, Gp. Capt. (Dr) Narang elaborated on the increase in the ToT from the earlier 58 per cent to 80 per cent for the GE414 engine, pending US congressional approval for the export administration regulation (EAR) and International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). He also expounded on six other such aero-engine joint development initiatives with other companies in the US, France, the UK, Russia and China. In the case of France, it is working with India for the development of an engine for the Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) and the Intermediate Medium Range Helicopter (IMRH). Furthermore, the Master-Ship Repair Agreement (MSRA) and the iCET were two other major agreements signed to further work in the areas of science and technology such as AI, quantum, space and telecom, among others. The speaker then offered some observations. He pointed out that although India has a sizable defence budget, much of it is spent on foreign military hardware, so the country needs to concentrate on developing its defence technology, particularly in the areas of civil-military fusion and dual-use technologies to achieve civil-military integration in areas like aviation technologies. The INDUS-X defence partnership with the US has the potential to be a major boost for India’s defence industry, but it is important to ensure that India benefits from the partnership in a meaningful way. Several challenges need to be addressed to make the INDUS-X partnership a success, including IP sharing, ownership rights, co-production between Indian and US partners, and the prevention of the migration of Indian intellectual capital. Additionally, the Indian defence forces need to be prepared to take on a more active role in the development and procurement of defence technology. Gp. Capt. Narang maintained that it is also crucial for the government to proactively work towards an inter-ministerial approach to create a more equitable space for co-development and co-production defence projects through collaborative research, identify technological gaps, formulate proper problem statements, and funding, to gainfully leverage joint deference technology and innovation collaborations for capability development and pave the path towards Aatmanirbharta in the defence sector. India’s defence ecosystem is currently fragmented, with different ministries and agencies working in silos. This makes it difficult to coordinate and implement defence technology projects effectively. The speaker concluded by stating that it is also essential to examine how procurement of foreign equipment impacts indigenous programs as India has a history of importing foreign military equipment, which sometimes leads to the neglect of indigenous programs. The government needs to ensure that procurement of foreign equipment does not come at the expense of indigenous development. Hence a comprehensive innovation roadmap, inter-ministerial coordination, and ownership for technology development are crucial for gaining ground towards Aatmanirbharta in India’s defence manufacturing and technology development roadmap. Questions and CommentsDr. Rajiv thanked the speaker for his detailed presentation and opened the floor for questions and comments. During the discussion which followed, the Director General Amb. Sujan R. Chinoy enquired about the purpose and associated cost benefit analysis of fitting an afterburner version of Kaveri aero-engine onto the LCA Mark 1 prototype for technology validation. He also enquired whether working on proven designs such the GE-F404 and GE-414 would be better approach. He added that India needs to collaborate with the US owing to the highly regulated defence industrial ecosystem of the latter. He stressed India’s ability to absorb and develop advanced technologies, both in the public and private sectors and the need to develop a more robust ecosystem for technology development and acquisition. Mr. Arvind Khare enquired whether problem statements have been identified for the INDUS-X initiative from both sides and who will be the nodal agency from the Indian side. He also wanted some clarity on whether the INDUS-X initiative will fall within the same pattern as the bilateral innovation agreement between the DRDO and the Directorate of Defence R&D of Israel. Dr. Abhishek Mishra enquired about the ToT percentage of the GE-414 jet engine cores and the requirement of the MQ-9B for the Indian Navy. Dr. Rajiv Nayan commented upon the importance of engine development for various applications, including unmanned systems and shipbuilding, and the need for India to become more self-reliant in this regard. He stressed increasing investment in R&D in the private sector to develop expertise in critical technologies. Cmde. Abhay Singh commented on the lack of evidence-based research in defence and security due to the paucity of information in the public domain. Dr. Om Prakash asked the speaker about the advantages gained by the defence start-ups from the particular defence cooperation with the US. Dr. Anand Kumar commented on the recent order of around 1000 commercial aircraft which was placed by Indigo and Air India reflecting on the growth potential of the Indian aviation industry. Secondly, he enquired about why India might have a problem with replicating co-development models with the US as had been previously done with Russia while working on the BrahMos. Col. Rajneesh Singh remarked that China’s success in negotiating and establishing collaborative agreements with foreign companies is due to the availability of a conducive ecosystem for technological collaboration. Overall, the discussion revolves around India’s technological capabilities, collaboration with other countries, and the need for a strategic approach to technology development and acquisition. Gp. Capt. (Dr.) Narang 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. |
North America & Strategic Technologies | |||||
| Talk on "Evolving Political Situation in Pakistan and Prospects of India-Pakistan Relations" | June 14, 2023 | 1500 hrs | Talk |
The South Asia Centre at MP-IDSA is organising a talk by Prof Ishtiaq Ahmad, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, Stockholm University on "Evolving Political Situation in Pakistan and Prospects of India-Pakistan Relations" on Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 1500 hrs in Seminar Hall I, Second Floor. You are cordially invited to participate and enrich the discussion. A short bio-profile of Prof Ahmed is appended below: Professor Emeritus of Political Science, Stockholm University; Honorary Senior Fellow, Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore. Latest publications, Jinnah: His Successes, Failures and Role in History, New Delhi: Penguin Viking, 2020 won the English Non-Fiction Book Award for 2021 at the Valley of Words Literary Festival, Dehradun, Indian; innah: His Successes, Failures and Role in History, Vanguard Books, Lahore 2021; Pakistan: The Garrison State, Origins, Evolution, Consequences (1947-2011), Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2013; and, The Punjab Bloodied, Partitioned and Cleansed, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2012- It won the Best Non-Fiction Book Prize at the 2013 Karachi Literature Festival and the 2013 UBL-Jang Groups Best Non-Fiction Book Prize at Lahore and the Best Book on Punjab Award from Punjabi Parchar at the Vaisakhi Mela in Lahore, 2016. |
|||||
| Report of Fellows Seminar on The Geopolitics of Europe's Quest for Energy Security: Significant Achievements amid Myriad Challenges | February 07, 2023 | Swasti Rao | Fellows' Seminar |
A MP-IDSA Fellows Seminar by Dr. Swasti Rao, Associate Fellow, on "The Geopolitics of Europe's Quest for Energy Security: Significant Achievements amid Myriad Challenges” was held on 7 February 2023. It was chaired by Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva, Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. The external discussants were Dr. Lydia Powell, Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), and Mr. Rajeev Lala, Associate Director, S&P Global. Ms. Anandita Bhada, Research Analyst at MP-IDSA, was the internal discussant. Executive SummaryAlmost a year into the war in Ukraine, European nations have fast-tracked their energy diversification in order to reduce their dependency on Russia. The main issues are policies adopted by Europe to diversify, the available options, and prognosis for the future. Detailed ReportThe Chair, Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva, in his opening remarks, stated that diversification of energy supplies would likely have a major geopolitical implication. For example, Europe moving towards the US for oil and Russia diversifying its energy exports away from Europe, towards Asia would significantly impact the international arena. Dr. Swasti Rao began her presentation with a question – “Does Europe want to diversify its energy requirements from Russia?” She replied in the affirmative but pointed out that the main issue is implementing this vision. The speaker then highlighted the structure of her paper before briefly delving into the ongoing developments in Russia-Ukraine war. Dr. Rao stressed that Europe is seeking to completely wean itself away from Russian crude oil, natural gas and coal. She highlighted Europe’s dependency on Russian energy amidst the differentiation in patterns and volume of such trade. She elaborated on the internal and external differences in Europe regarding the diversification process. She pointed out Europe’s plans to focus on alternative fuels in the form of hydrogen and nuclear, apart from creating new energy maps and import corridors. The fact is that today Europe is looking into both short-term and long-term energy measures, anchored to avoiding any potential dependency. For Europe, the supply chains should not only be cost-effective but also more resilient. Dr. Rao highlighted the diversification measures undertaken by Europe. These include import diversification, short-term energy imports, protection of the most venerable cohorts, and acceleration to new renewables. The speaker elaborated on the macro and micro energy trends in Europe – both before and since the conflict started. At the macro level, there has been a systemic and sustainable shift away from Russian energy. At the micro-level, Europe has sought to cut down domestic demand apart from transition to renewables. These steps are, however, hampered by limitations that include pipeline disruption, oil re-routing, global liquefaction capacity, and failure to meet market goals. Moving to the issue of transition to renewables such as green hydrogen, blue hydrogen, and bio-methane, Dr. Rao highlighted the sense of urgency in the form of new European pathways to develop these alternatives. She also referred to Europe’s attempts at developing new import corridors. She emphasised that one of the reasons for Europe's ongoing support to Ukraine is anchored to Ukraine emerging as a promising option for green hydrogen. On the issue of expanding avenues of energy cooperation between India and Europe, Dr. Rao referred to the Trade Technology Council and ongoing bilateral discussions in the field of hydrogen. Dr. Rao concluded by stating that Europe appears to have shown a strong political will to diversify yet it would need strong political leadership in what would likely be a very painful period ahead. Dr. Lydia Powell:Dr. Powell, while complimenting the author for her presentation, felt that there is scope for enhancing the analytical rigour of the paper by moving beyond the summarizing and descriptive aspects. This includes a more rigorous analysis of the post-Ukraine energy situation in Europe and its future. She observed that the speaker could qualitatively improve the section on “geopolitics of Europe's quest for energy security”. Dr. Powell gave a few more suggestions to improve the paper. First, she suggested revising the opening section, particularly the framing of whether the European Union (EU) can replace Russia in the context of energy. Second, one needs to dwell on who the winners and losers of the current geopolitical scenario are – this includes Russia, EU and the US. Also, whether Russia’s calculations are long-term vis-à-vis short term? Third, the speaker could address the question of whether the fossil fuel and nuclear industries are the winners in this climate. Fourth, the speaker should address whether Asia has become the winner given the renewed focus on the continent amidst Russia's growing energy exports to India and China. Similarly, has the developing world lost out in the short term on account of their energy crisis? Fifth, the paper must address its policy relevance, particularly for India. Mr. Rajeev Lala:Mr. Rajeev Lala highlighted the need to add a caveat around hydrogen – “hope”, especially on green hydrogen. Meanwhile, there exists two proponents around hydrogen; one is the blue hydrogen proponent (led by Saudi Arabia) and the other being the green hydrogen proponents (led by Japan, Korea, Switzerland, and South Korea). The key issue is financing, as both technologies are expensive; hence it is still most policymakers' hope. There also exists a significant variation in European countries dependency on Russia. This has a direct bearing on each country’s national position on Russia with the most critical stand being taken by countries which have the least dependency. Mr. Lala suggested the need for a chart to show this correlation by providing the examples of energy dependencies of Germany and the United Kingdom on Russia. The discussant called upon Dr. Rao to focus on the interconnectivity issue and the status of interconnectors across Europe. Meanwhile, a section could be added on the risks for 2023 and what could go wrong. Mr. Lala elaborated on ongoing discussions on “winter approaching” and its potential impact on Ukraine, and stressed that winter has in fact already arrived in South Asia in the June-August period since all the gas markets are interconnected. He referred to its impact on Pakistan which is undergoing a prolonged energy crisis. In the same vein, Europe’s energy diversification could impact the Indian gas market, which the author should also focus on. Ms. Anandita Bhada:The discussant stressed on the need to highlight the winners and losers of the ongoing crisis. She referred to the eastern European countries, who being less economically developed, have found cheaper Russian energy more attractive. Ms. Bhada felt that the importance of interconnectors must be emphasized since several eastern European countries are landlocked or have a small coastline. In this, the significance of Poland-Lithuania interconnector should be emphasised. She also referred to the concept of projects of common interests which help secure energy across the continent. This includes the Baltic Gas Pipeline connecting Norway via Denmark to Poland. Apart from raising the question of financing, Ms. Bhada highlighted the use of rare earth elements sourced from China for energy transition to renewables. She wondered whether a significant focus on renewables would mean Europe would have an increased dependence on China for rare-earth elements? Ms. Bhada also observed that the Brexit deal must be resolved for any substantial gains between Europe and the United Kingdom. Finally, regarding the reduction of demand, she pondered that by the time there is a reduction in the market for Russian energy sources, the need for the substitute would increase; thus, how would Europe balance it out? Prof. Gulshan Sachdeva:The Chair complimented the author for her work. He also highlighted some of the areas of the paper which could be further improved. First, the title could be formulated for a more precise understanding. Too many aspects within the title may create problems. There is also a need for more in-depth analysis of the geopolitical factors at play. Second, there is a need to have a discussion on the concept of energy security and what is the European understanding of energy security. There is also need to discuss the history of the European understanding of energy security from the past to the current era. Fourth, he highlighted the need to re-arrange the paper. In the introduction, the researcher could highlight the European concept of energy security, and then delve into the current geopolitical situation as a result of which Europe has chosen to adjust its energy security policies. Fifth, concerning the figures, there is a need for primary data, and the use of multiple graphics is confusing for the readers. For example, a graph could be there for the situation before the Ukraine war and the current situation. Sixth, there is a need to refer to more primary documents from the European Union; for instance, the Repower EU Plan needs to be added. Seventh, Prof. Sachdeva observed that on India-EU collaboration, the researcher could avoid the over-emphasis on hydrogen since it may divert from the crux of the paper. In this, the paper needs to focus more on the impact of energy diversification on India. A country like India is significantly dependent on Russian arms and energy, and there could be severe implications for the geopolitics of the Eurasian region. Eighth, the author must expand the conclusion. Questions and CommentsDeputy Director General, Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) agreed with the Chair on specific aspects of the paper which need to be reviewed. He observed that multilateralism is weakening, maybe to a certain extent even fracturing, which has led to multipolarity and emergence of regional groupings. In the past, regional groupings were linked to geography but several of those links are now fractured. In the same vein, he observed that geopolitics and ideology are fracturing existing trade agreements, for example, the EU- Russian energy mix and the US-China trade war. New alignments are shaping up, and old friends and alliances are finding themselves on opposite sides of the energy alignment; simultaneously, they are adapting and harmonizing with the current geopolitical situation. On green hydrogen, he emphasised that Indian researchers have been active. Nevertheless, cost is a factor and the focus has also been more on blue hydrogen. The questions of economics trumping geopolitics and the success of the shift to hydrogen could be addressed. The Q/A session broadly revolved around the themes of transition to greener energy, energy security, energy politics within Europe, nuclear energy option, North-South divide, India’s ability to deal with global risks and the need to focus on West Asia. The speaker responded to the comments and questions. (Report prepared by Dr. Jason Wahlang, Research Analyst, Europe and Eurasia Centre, MP-IDSA) |