Register/ Login   
Submit Mobile RSS Java Script Feed  
Home Blogs Spotlight Videos Movies Cartoon Photos Submit Media Space  Feed Directory 
World |  National |  Entertainment |  General |  Columnist


Published on 06-03-2008 In World
Viewed 2001 times
India should read tea leaves on Chinese military spending
Written by
C. Uday Bhaskar
Over the past week, both India and China have announced their respective annual budgetary allocation towards defence spending and the contrast is striking. This contrast has long-term implications for the South Asian strategic framework.

On the face of it, India has announced a budgeted estimate (BE) for the financial year 2008-09 as Rs.1,056 billion which is about $26 billion. China has pegged its corresponding figure at $57 billion, which is more than twice that of India. The increase over the last year in the case of India is 10 percent while in the case of China it is 18 percent. However, in relation to GDP, the Chinese defence spending is estimated to be under 1.5 percent while for India it is under two percent.

Mild alarm bells have rung in different countries over the Chinese defence allocation and this stems from the opacity that surrounds Beijing's budgetary process for the officially stated Chinese figure is perceived to be less than the actual spending on defence. It is instructive that the Pentagon put out its estimate a day before the official Chinese statement and pegged the annual Chinese expenditure at between $97 billion and $139 billion. This of course is dwarfed by the US defence projection for the next fiscal year beginning September which is pegged at $515 billion.


Where does India stand in the correlation between defence outlay and actual military outcome by way of translating fiscal resource into discrete military capability? The defence allocation for financial year (FY) 2008-09 (beginning April 1) has been pegged at Rs.1,056 billion and this is to be seen against the actual expenditure of the fiscal 2007-08 which has been announced as Rs.925 billion. Prima facie, this is an increase of 14 percent and may seem to be adequate - but this inference is misleading. The underlying reality is that while the finance minister is providing reasonable fiscal outlay annually, this is not translating into appropriate creation of military outcome. A brief review of previous allocations and expenditure is revealing.

Every year, the defence allocation is classified as the annual budgeted expenditure - or BE. This is a projection made in end-February. This year, the BE for 2008-09 is Rs.1,056 billion. The BE for 2007-08 was Rs. 960 billion. The actual expenditure for the year that is concluding end-March is classified as the revised expenditure - or RE.

It is instructive that for the year 2007-08, the RE was only Rs.925 billion - meaning thereby that the Indian defence ministry had returned Rs.35 billion as unspent. This is anomalous given the critical need for modernization of inventory for all the three armed forces.

Thus, while the apparent increase is from Rs.960 billion to Rs.1,056 billion - which is a 10 percent increase - the focus ought to be on amounts that remain unspent. Barring 2004-05 - when the BE and the RE were equal at Rs.770 billion - for the last nine years running, the Indian defence establishment has been returning money from the overall defence budget to the national exchequer. While this may be a good sign for the fiscal health of the nation - it has very adverse consequences for the Indian military.

This is revealed in the following breakdown of allocations. The Defence Expenditure (DE) is usually sub-divided into the revenue and capital heads. Of this, the former is the expenditure towards pay and allowances, training and annual establishment costs towards maintaining a standing military of under 1.2 million uniformed personnel.

Of this, the Indian Army alone is a million plus, the air force is 100,000 plus and the navy is 50,000 plus personnel. Given the manpower intensity of the total Indian military - the revenue expenditure is closer to 60 percent and the balance is spent towards capital costs and defence R&D.




The capital component is the crucial indicator and gives an indication about what kind of modernization and new acquisitions are in the Indian military pipeline.

It is disappointing to note that annually, the capital component of the Indian DE remains unspent. And this when the three armed forces have been crying hoarse about serious operational voids - by way of new platforms - be they tanks/artillery, aircraft or ships. The real handicap is that the prevailing defence procurement procedures have become so sluggish and cumbersome that large capability gaps have been created.

For example, successive air chiefs have drawn attention to the need for the Indian Air Force (IAF) to acquire a replacement fighter for its Russian MiG fighters - and as of now, India urgently needs 126 combat aircraft. However, we are still in the stage of inviting tenders and trying to evaluate the bids.

The timeline involved is so large as to make military planners despair. This is revealed in the AJT (advanced jet trainer) experience. First mooted by the IAF in 1983, the AJT is a critical requirement for the training of fighter pilots. Yet this aircraft - the British Hawk - was actually inducted in February this year. In other words, it took almost 25 years to acquire a platform as basic as a trainer aircraft.

This absurd process is a reminder of the Bofors-HDW shadow that has seriously impaired the procurement process in India. It may be recalled that during the Rajiv Gandhi years (1984-89), the Indian government had acquired the Bofors artillery gun from Sweden - and this acquisition process was mired in political controversy about kickbacks and middlemen. Since that time, every major defence deal has generated one controversy or the other - the current turbulence being over the Barak deal with Israel during the NDA regime wherein former defence minister George Fernandes and former naval chief Admiral Sushil Kumar are currently being questioned by the CBI.

But reverting to the budget, it is again relevant that the RE for 2007-08 shows that as regards the capital component, while Rs.419 billion was allocated - the actual expenditure was only Rs.377 billion - or that Rs. 321 billion was returned. This is not a happy augury and it is this lacunae that must be plugged at the earliest. This year - 2008-09 - the capital outlay has been hiked to Rs.480 billion. The challenge for the UPA government and Defence Minister A.K. Anthony in particular is to ensure that none of this amount is returned in February 2009 and that it spent judiciously to enhance military capability. Only then will the annual fiscal outlay be translated into a meaningful national security outcome.

The contrast with China is striking. This year's allocation marks the 20th successive year when Beijing has increased its annual defence outlay by double digit percentages closer to 20 and has translated fiscal outlay into distinctive military outcome. The focus is on trans-border military capability relating to ordnance delivery (missiles, long range fighter aircraft and ships) and surveillance (satellites). China is relating its military capability in relation to the US, Japan and Russia and this is a logical policy initiative for a nation that has a clear strategic vision of the next 50 years.

India does not exude the same degree of determination and consequently, the existential military advantage will inevitably grow in China's favour. This asymmetry will have abiding politico-diplomatic implications for the South Asian strategic grid and New Delhi should read the tea leaves more astutely.
 
 2 Comments    Share    Blog      Print
 

Add Your Comment

Join Indiainteracts for free to comment on this story. Have an account already? to comment
2 Comments

The author will talk about the big spending china and pakistan but will not talk about SELF RELIANCE OF CHINESE in Defence procurement. They make fighter planes which they export and make laser weapons which kill satellites in orbit.India is always license producing junks like the HAWKS which is never used in any modern airforce.all modern airforce use SIMULATORS. The uthor will not advice procurrement of SIMULATORS FOR FIGHTER TRAINING or battle field simulators. All these retired THINK TANKS will always advocate import and not selfreliance. Our small arms are so bad that even sriLnak rejected them and using Pakistan small arms and night vision devices. Our CRPF will fight naxalites without body armour and our pot bellied police which fight the jehadies are pitiable sight and everyone knows what ARMY SUPPLY CORPS means and why GenPanang is becoming a redbull. Self reliance is the key to maintaining parity with China and also the very psychology of Army which is oriented towards Pakistan must change to FIGHTING CHINA. They must show stomach for this by using Indian DRDO made systems or tell the truth about quality of DRDO products.

 
captainjohann - Comments as on 08-03-2008

Let’s first analyze similarities between the Nazis and the CCP.

1) Nazis were national socialists - CCP is a national socialist.

2) Nazis considered Germans to be the master race - CCP considers Han Chinese to be the master Race.

3) Nazi torch bearers were athletic, strong examples of the “master race” - CCP torch bearers are athletic, strong examples of the “master race”.

4) Nazis glorified the Olympic flame with a mythical, pagan, semi-spiritual status - CCP glorifies the Olympic flame with a mythical, pagan, semi-spiritual status. The men in blue suits are called “The Olympic Holy Flame Protection Unit” and one of them watches the flame while others sleep.

5) Nazis used the games to promote national socialism - CCP uses the games to promote national socialism.

6) Nazi torch bearers loved the Fatherland and gave their life if necessary for the Fuhrer - CCP torch bearers must love the Motherland and give their life if necessary for the CCP.

7) Nazi oath of allegience is to the Fuhrer and to acknowledge The Fuhrer as the savior of Germany - The Chinese oath of allegience is to the CCP and to acknowledge the CCP head as a “Living Buddha”.

8) Nazis had live shooting ranges where they would hunt down civilians and kill them as practice for troops - Chinese have live shooting ranges where they would hunt down civilians and kill them as practice for troops.

9) The Nazi torch bearers actually went back and invaded every country they went through even murdering the gypsies in Bulgaria - The Chinese have already invaded Tibet and other areas and murdered millions of people.

10) The Nazi torch bearers were fanatical national socialists - The Chinese torch bearers were fanatical national socialists.

11) Nazis performed medical experiments and murdered prisoners for medical research and body parts - Chinese murder prisoners to order for body parts and medical research.

The CCP has a clear agenda - “expansionism” at all costs under the guise of peaceful liberation. Once a territory is gone, it’s gone. There will be 1.3 billion brainwashed fools who will come here and defend war crimes of the CCP and brag about Xinhua as free press. If the West remains complacent, South-East, Australia, New Zealand, Pacific would be occupied or rather “liberated” territories in a few decades. Don’t come back and ask us “Why they hated China” or all we had to do is give the Chinese more time to think about the nicety of Western Liberalism.

China’s human rights abuses are “staggering”: the detention of hundreds of thousands of people, including political activists, for “reeducation” programs, and forced labor camps; and the liberal use of the death penalty in China — including for political prisoners — which makes China the site of 8 of every 10 government administered executions carried out in the world!

CCP is full of deceit and has figured out how to play the West. They can’t be trusted at all and they have a bag full of tricks to fool not only Tibetans but the whole world with a state-controlled press. The best solution is a free Tibet. There is no doubt that a sovereign Tibet would be a savior state not only for Tibetans but for all ethnic groups of China who have nowhere to go if they disagree with the CCP. A free Tibet would be such a free democratic heaven and a safe haven.

 
Chrisna - Comments as on 13-04-2008







     

Panthaya Kozhi...

Pandhayam...

Adhey Neram Adhey ...


Durai...

Jegan Mohini...

Balam...

Ashta Chemma Trail ...

Director Sasi And ...

Ganesha speaks Ast ...


Pan IIT 2008 Globa ...

Jai Audition For T ...

Ganesha speaks Ast ...
     


About | Content providers | Support | Beta feedback | Report abuse | Contact us | Careers | FAQ