Rarely would a defence R&D agency get an actual operational scenario to test the capability of a military system before attaining total technological maturity. The much-maligned U.S. Missile Defence Agency (MDA) silenced its long-time critics by utilising such an opportunity through a successful interception of a dysfunctional military reconnaissance satellite which threatened to hit the Earth with hazardous fuel. The seemingly successful interception and destruction of the orbiting satellite on February 21 by an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system is a landmark in the US BMD development and in all likelihood would galvanise other such programmes currently under development-stage.

Being the first ever real-time outer space interception by a BMD system, the MDA used the ship-based Aegis system, the US’ only operational BMD currently deployed in Pacific Ocean (also employed by Japan and Australia). The Standard Missile-3 (SM-3), the main interceptor used in this mission, has a ‘hit-to-kill technology’ to intercept and destroy an incoming threat in ‘Exo-atmosphere’ (outside Earth’s atmosphere). With a 250+ km range, the SM-3 operates in conjunction with the Aegis AN/SPY-1 radars and sensors. For this particular mission, the Aegis was complemented by the powerful Cobra Dane and X-band radar (deployed on a floating platform) to impart precision tracking and targeting.

Mission-analysis reveals that the MDA has a multi-stage interception plan. The USS Lake Erie (Ticonderoga class cruiser) was to launch the first SM-3 and possibly a second one, if the first intercept failed. A second ship, the Decatur (Arleigh Burke class destroyer) kept ready a third SM-3 to be used if the initial two attempts failed. The SM-3s deployed in the USS Lake Erie was modified (through changes in its targeting software) to track the cold satellite, unlike its actual design capability of targeting heated warheads. The intercept convoy was deployed off the Hawaii Islands to track the satellite in its orbit and launch the interceptors when the intercept window was opened on the morning of February 21. Along with the radar and tracking systems, various space-based platforms were also put into service for data collection that fed to the mission controls at the Vandenberg Air Force Base and at the space command in Colorado Springs. In the end, the MDA mission proved successful after the first SM-3, reportedly launched from the USS Lake Erie, destroyed the satellite on impact thus taking out the target in the first hit, but sparking of debris some of which might re-enter the atmosphere in the coming days.

This landmark mission was necessary. The satellite planned to be destroyed had stopped communicating with mission control facilities shortly after it was launched 14 months ago, and thereafter began a slow descent towards Earth. The primary objective of the intercept mission was to destroy a fuel tank aboard the satellite which was holding over 450-kg of hydrazine, a toxic fuel. Had the tank survived a re-entry of the falling satellite, it could have caused serious danger to the point of impact and more so if it was a population centre. Though it is yet to be confirmed whether the intercept successfully destroyed the fuel tank, the mere fact that this was the first ever operational intercept outside Earth’s atmosphere by a US is significant in many ways, particularly as a major milestone in the global evolution of BMD technology.

The successful intercept assumes further significance for the US MDA which has increasingly been under the scanner for its slow progress. Such widespread criticisms led to unrelenting Congressional insinuations and budgetary cuts. While the Agency has sensibly deployed an operational system (Aegis BMD), it only partially clears misgivings on whether the Ground Based Mid-Course Defence System (GBMDS), the main US mid-course interceptor for exo-atmopsheric interception, is capable of undertaking similar interception in the future. Employing the Aegis BMD, which is an early ascent/late descent mid-course system, for this task carried a calculated technological risk as the system was assigned with a complex task of intercepting a target cruising at a high closing speed of more than 22,000 miles per hour. The Aegis BMD system has hitherto only been tested against slower-moving targets under pseudo-operational conditions.

Though the GBMDS and the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) are being developed to undertake interception at this speed outside Earth’s atmosphere, considering that these systems are yet to achieve development maturity, the MDA had no other options but to employ an operational system for this high-risk task. The other limited choices would have been to either use an Anti-Satellite (ASAT) system or employ extended-range theatre-wide defence systems like the Theatre High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD). Using the THAAD was an unfeasible option as the system is yet to be operationally deployed, and has the range (90-120 km) to undertake interception only at the threshold of the Earth’s atmosphere. This would have been highly risky as the interceptor might not necessarily gain the velocity to intercept the satellite outside the Earth’s atmosphere eventually causing the satellite or its debris to make re-entry into the atmosphere and causing damages to the area of impact.

On the other hand, deploying the ASAT systems, tailored for such tasks, was considered a political risk considering the momentum being generated against weaponisation of space and the usage of ASAT weapons. Washington had strongly criticized the recent ASAT test by China for destroying a defunct satellite, and had termed the action as a provocative step towards weaponisation of space. Taking the same method to destroy a non-military asset would have been viewed as hypocritical. Moreover, as soon as the Pentagon contemplated an outer space destruction of the satellite using a missile system, Russia and China lost no time in criticizing the US plans and unequivocally stating that it would not only harm other space assets but also lead to space weaponisation.

Though the SM-3 or GBMDS are designed as exclusive anti-ballistic missile systems with the objective of shooting down hostile ballistic missiles, their utility in attacking space assets of rival country cannot be underestimated. While the debate regarding the BMD had rarely touched upon the ASAT dimensions, the event of February 21 is likely to trigger a conundrum on the usage of BMD systems in outer space. However, the US officials have tried to reassure the international community on the distinctiveness of this mission compared to the Chinese ASAT test arguing that the Chinese effort was to test an ASAT weapon while their mission was not a missile test but to intercept the falling satellite in a much lower orbit than most working satellites.

Such arguments notwithstanding, the successful intercept of February 21 would clearly go down as a significant phase in the evolution of the BMD technology. Importantly, the MDA can now with rejuvenated confidence convince the Congress and its stakeholders on the reliability and efficacy of such systems in undertaking successful interceptions in actual operational conditions. This test could thus be deemed as a testament to the feasibility of BMDs.

The India Chief of Harkat-ul-Jihadi Islami (HuJI), Bashir Ahmed Mir also called as Sabha, was killed in an encounter with the security forces in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) on January 24, 2008. HuJI was allegedly involved in a number of deadly operations in Uttar Pradesh (UP), Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan in the recent past. Bashir Ahmed Mir is believed to be the mastermind behind some of these attacks.

HuJI’s objective is to establish Islamic rule by waging jihad. It is the largest international terrorist organisation created by Pakistan. There is little information about its exact origins and date of founding. However, it had a significant involvement in fighting the Soviets alongside the Afghan mujahideen, which indicates that, perhaps, it was founded sometime in the 1980s. In 1985, the outfit split into two groups, with the splinter group calling itself Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM). Both groups continued to thrive even after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989. They re-amalgamated in December 1993 to form the Harkat-ul-Ansar (HuA). But this unity did not last long and they split in the wake of the 1997 American proscription of HuA as a terrorist organisation because of its connections with Osama bin Laden. While HuM was fully involved in terrorist attacks in J&K, the HuJI was not that active.

In 1992, the Bangladesh unit of HuJI – HuJI-B – was established with direct support from al Qaeda and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). The unit was involved in recruiting Bangladeshi, Rohingya (Myanmarese) and Indian Muslims to fight in J&K and other parts of India. It recruits students from madrassas, with several of which it has very close links. By 2005, the outfit had spread its tentacles to almost 24 countries, including the Philippines, Malaysia, Fiji, Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, United Kingdom, the United States, Ireland and parts of Africa. Apart from fuelling extremism in India’s Northeast, the Bangladesh unit is reported to have set its sight on carrying out subversive activities in other parts of India as well.

Over the past few years, the outfit has been involved in a series of bombings in India. The first significant attack was carried out on January 22, 2002 on the US Consulate in Kolkata, in which four security personnel were killed and 17 others, including civilians, were injured. It was also involved in the suicide attack on the Special Task Force (STF) office of Hyderabad police on October 12, 2005. On March 7, 2006, the outfit triggered three serial blasts at Sankatmochan Temple and the railway station in Varanasi, killing 21 civilians and injuring 62 others. Subsequently, the group was believed to have been involved, along with the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, in the 2006 Mumbai suburban train blasts. The blast in Samjhauta Express that left 66 people dead on February 19, 2007, is also believed to have been perpetrated by HuJI. Similarly, it was accused of setting-off blasts at Mecca Masjid, Hyderabad, on May 18, 2007, in which 11 devotees died. The Hyderabad police charged HuJI terrorist Mohammed Abdul Sahed alias Bilal for the attack and held that Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX) and Trinitrotoluene (TNT), used in the attack, were procured from Bangladesh. Again, in Hyderabad on August 25, 2007, serial blasts claimed the lives of 44 civilians at the Lumbani Park and Gokul Chat Bhandar. It was suspected that the operation was carried out by the same group and investigators subsequently arrested a Bangladeshi woman, Shareefa Rustomji, in Hyderabad, in this connection. On October 11, 2007, HuJI reportedly set-off an explosion killing two devotees at a dargah (shrine) in Ajmer in Rajasthan. In the latest incident of this kind, the group is believed to have carried out the coordinated blasts in Varanasi, Faizabad and Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh, killing 15 people and injuring 80 others on November 23, 2007.

The HuJI Chief has been accused of masterminding all these strikes across India. He and his assistant, Aftab Alam Ansari, who was arrested by the West Bengal Criminal Investigation Department and the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force from Kolkata on December 28, 2007, were accused of organising the multiple bombings in UP in November 2007. Bashir Ahmed Mir went to Pakistan in 1992, trained in Pakistan occupied Kashmir from 1994 to 1995, and recruited youth from within and outside India. After serving as an instructor at Alaq-e-Ghair in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, he returned to J&K, but was arrested by the police in 2000. As soon as his detention was revoked in 2002, he went underground and became the Commander-in-chief of HuJI in 2004.

The death of its chief is unlikely to weaken the group or decrease its subversive actives in India. Perhaps, its activities may reduce in J&K, but will remain the same in other parts of the country. Unlike other outfits such as the LeT and HuM, its cadre strength in J&K is very limited given that most have been neutralised by the security forces.

HuJI’s terrorist activities in J&K over the past few years have been few. There was a lone report in 2007; one in 2006; three in 2005; four in 2004; and five in 2003. These reports were based on incidents such as killing, arrest or surrender of HuJI cadres.

While the outfit is arguably weak in J&K, it is challenging the Indian state in other parts of the country with support from HuJI-B, local sleeper cells and the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Perhaps, HuJI’s abilities to operate beyond J&K today is based on the support from its well organised and structured counterparts, HuJI-B and local SIMI activists. HuJI-B has a stronger network than HuJI in India, because of the former’s relatively easy access to India’s Northeast and eastern states. Nevertheless, both have launched strikes together in Assam, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, etc. The elaborate network came to light following the interrogation of activists arrested in connection with the various blasts.

In the immediate term, HuJI might seek to avenge the death of its chief. The group is known to have conducted revenge attacks. As the outfit claimed in an e-mail that originated in Delhi, the serial blasts in UP were perpetrated to avenge the arrest of three JeM terrorists on November 16, 2007. It is important to note here that Maulana Masood Azhar, the founder of JeM, was closely linked with the HuJI chief. Both worked together in HuJI’s earlier incarnation as HuA.

The possibility of revenge attacks appears more likely in the wake of revelations made in late December 2007 by five HuJI terrorists, arrested from Barabanki (UP) and Doda (J&K). They reportedly told their interrogators that the outfit was planning to attack important and busy locations in India, including the Gateway of India in Mumbai.

Moreover, it may not be difficult for the outfit to launch attacks because it has an elaborate network –– comprising cadres, sleeper cells and local supporters/sympathisers –– across the country. Therefore, pragmatism persuades one to suggest that instead of rejoicing over the elimination of Bashir, or considering it a significant achievement, intelligence and security agencies should be extra vigilant in order to prevent a revenge terror strike by the outfit.

The ongoing attempt to unify Naga insurgent groups is unlikely to end the two-decade old factional rivalry and killings in Nagaland. This is because the unification idea is largely seen as a deliberate attempt to sideline Thuingaleng Muivah and his Tangkhul tribe’s hegemony over the Naga insurgency movement. The end result of this effort is likely to be an escalation in fratricidal killings.

On November 23, a section of Naga insurgents led by Azheto Chophy of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) and C. Singson of the NSCN-(NSCN-K), signed a ‘Joint Declaration’ at Niuland near Dimapur, which claimed that the two warring factions are being united. This development also confirmed rumours about a split within the NSCN-IM, with a small section led by Azheto Chophy forming a new group under the name of NSCN-Unification Camp. The new group, reportedly stationed at Vihokhu near Dimapur town, seeks to unite all Naga insurgent groups for the common cause. In its view, Muivah has been an obstacle to the unification of Nagas and was wont “to give vent to his ire on those opposing his hegemony.” For its part, the NSCN-IM has announced the dismissal of 27 of its former members who had “defected” along with Azheto Chophy.

A few days after the ‘Joint Declaration’ was signed, a six-month inter-factional ceasefire was announced between the NSCN-K, the Naga National Council (NNC), the Unification Core Committee (UCC), and the Azheto Chophy-led NSCN group, as has been proposed by civil society groups like the Joint Forum of Nagaland Goanbura Federation and the Nagaland Dubashis Association.

While a section of Nagas hailed this development, others chose to remain silent. The Western Sumi Hoho, for instance, appealed to all Nagas and civil society groups to support the recent unification move. But most of the major civil society groups, which are known to be close to the NSCN-IM, remained silent.

The NSCN-IM has criticised the unification move as “something against the honesty of approach towards initiating a genuine search for unity among the Nagas.” General Secretary Thuingaleng Muivah said in a statement on December 21, 2007 that: “Some talk of unity devoid of common agenda, some talk of unity only for the sake of unity. And some other talks of it with ulterior motive behind to deceive the people. Unity among the Nagas is a serious matter which can never be dealt with by any irrational, un-authorised and un-mandated individual or group of individuals…”

Muivah put out the view that some Indian-backed elements were attempting to disturb the on-going peace process. The NSCN-IM also accused the union government of using vested groups of a particular tribe to confuse the people. It accused Sumi/Sema civil society groups like the Western Sumi Hoho and the Sumi Hoho of collaboration with Azheto Chophy and betraying the Naga cause.

On January 12, 2008, the NSCN-IM declared an ‘emergency’ in Nagaland and its Tartar Hoho (parliament) was placed under suspended animation from the next day. It has said that this move was necessitated by the precarious situation in the state that increasingly threatens “peace and normal state of affairs.” Two days later, NSCN-IM cadres gunned down three senior members of the NSCN-K.

The ongoing unification move – sugar-coated unification as the NSCN-IM calls it – can be seen as an attempt to sideline Muivah and his Tangkhul tribe’s hegemony over the Naga issue. This was evident from the recent ‘Joint Declaration’, which proposed that the unification move would be led by the current NSCN-IM chairman Isak Chishi Swu (who seems to have had no prior knowledge of this) and the NSCN-K chairman S.S. Khaplang. Earlier in 2006, the Khaplang faction had issued a ‘Quit Notice’ asking the Tangkhuls to leave Nagaland at the earliest. At that time, it had alleged that Nagas have borne the brunt of the cruelty of the Tangkhuls who are from Manipur.

The recent unification move also seems to be an attempt to strengthen the NSCN-K’s position, in collaboration with other smaller groups/factions. It is doubtful that this move will succeed because Muivah is still considered the most respected leader among Nagas and his hold over the NSCN-IM remains intact. The outfit is unlikely to be affected in a major way by the defection of Azheto Chophy along with 27 others. Here it is worth noting that, since entering into a formal ceasefire with the union government in 1997, the NSCN-IM has reportedly raised its cadre strength from 3,000 to 5,000 and has also nearly doubled its weapon holdings. At the same time, almost all major Naga civil society groups like the Naga Hoho, the Naga Mother’s Association, the Naga People’s Movement for Human Rights, the Naga Students’ Federation and the United Naga Council are known to be actively supporting the NSCN-IM’s cause. For instance, in its reaction to the ‘Joint Declaration’, the influential United Naga Council said in a press statement that “it demeans the very purpose of Naga political struggle … Any kind of unification must be inclusive of all Nagas and that unification must be achieved in uniformity with the political aspiration of the Naga people and the ongoing political negotiations."

One possible outcome of the latest development could be the emergence of a Sema/Semi- based militant outfit. This would, no doubt, strengthen the NSCN-K. But it would also certainly pave the way for a further escalation in factional killings in the state.

President Nicolas Sarkozy’s first visit to India on January 25-27, 2008 (along with 300 delegates) provided fresh impetus to the strategic partnership between the two countries. The visit reinforced the interests of both countries in maintaining close and friendly ties and in strengthening a multipolar world order. During his visit, Sarkozy had one-to-one talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, followed by discussions between the two sides on various sectors. The two countries signed several major agreements related to defence, nuclear research, space and healthcare. Stating that there is a convergence of ideas on international issues and releasing a Joint Statement and Joint Declaration on Global warming, the French president asserted that Indo-French strategic partnership would get fresh impetus from his visit.

At present Indo-French co-operation lies on three pillars – defence, academic exchanges and co-operation in science and technology. In spite of immense opportunities in each other's economy, bilateral trade in 2006-07 was quite nominal. It is evident that economic and trade engagement needs a significant boost. Promises were made by the leaders of both countries earlier as well as this time to nearly triple trade to 12 billion euros by 2012. But the Indian business community feels that certain practical issues and concerns need to be addressed first, like the easing of visa regulations for Indian businessmen and facilitating easy work permits for skilled Indian workers.

While addressing issues and concerns related to trade and economic co-operation, Sarkozy articulated the point that both countries are fast growing market-oriented economies and therefore there is a need to make greater efforts to penetrate each other's market. He promised that French companies will invest 10 billion euros over the next four years and that he will put in place the conditions for easing the entry of Indian businesses into the French market and engage more Indian companies for joint collaborative projects in sectors like healthcare/pharmaceuticals, encourage joint research and development in information and technology, telecommunications, automobile sector, consumer goods and high technology including nano and bio-technology sectors. The French side has shown interest in engaging India’s private sector companies as well as small and medium enterprises. Talks on expansion of inter-banking co-operation were also focused upon.

In the energy sector, the French president mentioned that his country is ready to co-operate with India in the civilian nuclear domain. France and India together, he said, could promote nuclear energy with the highest standards of safety and security in accordance with their respective nuclear policies and international obligations. He even showed keenness for the construction of twenty new nuclear power units in various parts of India. Of course, these are contingent upon the Nuclear Suppliers Group revising its guidelines. Sarkozy stated that France will work at that forum to help India's case for grant of a waiver. He also said that France has been a strong supporter of the Indo-US nuclear deal, though he did not wish to comment on India’s domestic debate on the issue. But he gave the assurance that once the domestic Indian debate on the issue is resolved and as soon as the international waiver is obtained, France would actively involve itself in India’s nuclear energy programme.

Joint development in agriculture is another significant feature of the evolving relationship between the two countries. India and France are also expanding the scope to venture further into the roads and railways sector.

Military ties between India and France are developing steadily and today it includes joint research and development, production, marketing, regular co-operation between the different branches of arms and joint training exercises. During the Sarkozy visit, the two countries also discussed the scope for upgrading India's ageing 52 Mirage-2000 fighter aircraft. Under this programme, Indian Mirages would be upgraded to Mirage 2000-9 levels as flown by the French Air Force. Through the upgradation, the Indian Air Force is hoping to increase the life of its Mirage fighters by 25 years. The upgradation will involve fitment of advanced radars and avionics, and arming the aircraft with air-to-air missiles that have beyond visual range. It is important to note here that the Mirages will form one of the frontline aircraft of the Indian Air Force till the new 126 multi-role combat fighter jets are inducted by 2014. It is expected that the upgradation of Mirages would be undertaken at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) with the support of French companies Thallus International and Dassault. While it is true that defence co-operation between the two countries is significant, there is also a need to develop an institutional mechanism to link institutions and thus spur innovation as well as commercialisation of new technologies.

On issues relating to extremism and terrorism, both countries have decided to address the threat bilaterally and globally. It is envisaged that the India-France Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism would be strengthened and both countries have decided to step-up ‘operational contacts’, to face this common threat.

While addressing the conference on Indo-France Economic and Political co-operation, Sarkozy emphasised the point that “India is the perfect example of democracy and diversity in the [Asian] continent.” He also expressed support for including India in an expanded G-8. To quote: “Why should the G-8 be a meeting of just eight countries, how can only few of us … solve the global problems with India, China, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa invited only for lunch on the final day? France does not accept this 20th century decisions, it is a matter of right for India to be part of an expanded G-13 or G-14. How can you deal with the major problems of the world without these significant countries of the world?" The French president also contended that India’s role is essential to “resolve the major crises of the world in the 21st century and not only regional crises [and] therefore we need to increase the members in UNSC too.”