| |
Wednesday
Feb 28 2001
| Updated
0909 hrs IST
2239 EST
|
Armed forces look to Budget to meet big bills
NEW DELHI
THE ARMED forces have started down a long road to modernisation after decades of neglect, and their chiefs hope this week's budget will speed them along.
The 1.1-million-strong military has ordered new tanks and fighter planes and is expecting to close long-delayed deals for jet trainer planes and an old Russian aircraft carrier this year.
An airborne warning and surveillance system, artillery-locating radars and advanced listening devices are also on the wish-list of the military, which was caught napping by Pakistan-backed infiltrators in northern Kashmir two years ago.
The 10-week Kargil conflict on the snow-capped peaks of Kashmir exposed vital gaps in the armour of the world's fourth-largest fighting machine, and prompted the government to lift defence spending by a staggering 28 per cent last year.
"Things are no longer looking bleak, but the process must be sustained," said retired Lieutenant General Satish Nambiar, who now heads United Services Institute, a military think-tank.
Analysts said that while a similar year-on-year increase in defence spending may not be possible in Wednesday's budget for fiscal 2001/2002, the military expects the government to set aside enough funds for high priority equipment.
"A 10 to 15 per cent increase (over last year's allocation) seems likely for a sustained defence modernisation programme," said Uday Bhaskar, deputy director of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses.
Finance minister Yashwant Sinha allocated Rs 58,587 crore ($13.62 billion) for defence in 2000/2001 to take defence expenditure to 2.6 per cent of gross domestic product, up from around 2.2 per cent of GDP through much of the 1990s.
Pakistan's defence expenditure in 1999/2000 stood at 4.4 per cent of GDP, according to an IDSA study on defence spending in the Indian neighbourhood. The study estimated that China spent 4.1 per cent of its GDP on defence that year.
"The kind of profile India is seeking, nuclear downwards, would need stamina and ability to go the distance notwithstanding fiscal difficulties," said Bhaskar.
Since its nuclear tests in 1998, which prompted tit-for-tat tests by Pakistan, New Delhi has vowed to forge a "credible nuclear deterrent", which experts say could cost up to $500 million a year on top of building a modern defence force.
Such a deterrent, which India must build almost from scratch, would include warheads, missiles, command and control systems, military satellites, hardened shelters and other infrastructure for the mobility and safety of the strategic force.
"There is a lot of catching up to do now," said S K Mehra, a former Indian Air Force chief. "I am afraid we still don't see any medium- or long-term perspective to weapons planning."
Mehra said it was no use stepping up defence spending one year and then putting the squeeze on the armed forces the next.
"Defence modernisation cannot happen on a knee-jerk basis, there must at least be a five-year rolling programme backed by the government throughout," he said.
Defence officials expect to strike a deal by April with Britain's BAE Systems Plc to buy 66 Hawk trainer aircraft for the air force, which has a woeful record of flying accidents.
The jet trainer which the air force first asked for 15 years ago is intended to help young pilots graduate from basic flying machines to frontline fighter planes. The force has lost 200 planes in accidents since 1991, mostly because of pilot error.
Negotiators are also working to clinch a deal with Moscow for the refit of an old aircraft carrier, the Admiral Gorshkov, which the Russians have agreed to gift to the Indian navy.
But military officials said that merely buying more weapons did not necessarily mean greater security: they argued for a fundamental reform of the armed forces.
Some 70 per cent of the annual defence allocation goes towards wages, pension bills, maintenance, training and spare parts.
A defence ministry official said that about 17 per cent of the 2000/01 budget would have been gobbled up by ex-soldiers' pensions alone.
"Very soon we may be spending more on retired personnel than on the active force that has to do the fighting," he said. - Reuters
|
|
|
|
