Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
Public Education
About Public Education
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      Public EducationAbout Public Education
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      News ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio Channel
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS
Connect
Search
  • RSIS
  • Publication
  • RSIS Publications
  • CO11092 | India’s Medium Fighter Purchase: Strategic Considerations
  • Annual Reviews
  • Books
  • Bulletins and Newsletters
  • RSIS Commentary Series
  • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
  • Commemorative / Event Reports
  • Future Issues
  • IDSS Papers
  • Interreligious Relations
  • Monographs
  • NTS Insight
  • Policy Reports
  • Working Papers

CO11092 | India’s Medium Fighter Purchase: Strategic Considerations
Ron Matthews, Alma Lozano, Pathikrit Payne

20 June 2011

download pdf

Synopsis

India’s decision to purchase 125 medium combat aircraft from Europe has upset the US. However India has also awarded the US a contract for 10 C-17 Globemaster III airlift planes to maintain a strategic balance in its air capability inventory.

Commentary

FOLLOWING THE recent announcement that India will be selecting European fighters for its US$10 billion contract for 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA), New Delhi has also stated that it will be awarding the United States a US$5.8 billion contract for 10 C-17 Globemaster III Strategic Airlift aircraft. This move is seen as a bid to assuage the hurt felt by the Americans as India thinks it important to keep relations with the US sweet, given the strategic fluidity of the Asian region.

While the MMRCA deal delighted the Europeans, it dismayed the Russian, American and Swedish contenders. The importance of the contest went beyond commercial benefits, touching also strategic and diplomatic alignments. Rather than just considering the rationale for selection of the winner, India’s dilemma was how to placate the losers of this mega deal, in particular the Americans.

Why the deal is significant

However, there is a need to take a step back and examine why the MMRCA deal was seen as significant by the bidding countries. It is about India’s growing economic and military power. On a purchasing parity basis, India now ranks as the world’s fourth largest economy, with a US$4 trillion GDP. There is, of course, a direct linkage between India’s economic base and the resources required to fulfill New Delhi’s ambitious military modernisation programme.

With some 85 per cent of India’s military assets designated as either mature or obsolete, military chiefs have been pressing for urgent replacement programmes. The MMRCA is just the start of a massive defence acquisition process. New Delhi has both the resources and the commitment to embark on a broad suite of foreign procurement plans. These include the US$30 billion acquisition of 250-300 Russo-Indian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA); a multi-billion dollar purchase of 272 Russian Sukhoi SU-30 MKI fighters; nearly 200 Tejas (Lightweight Combat Aircraft [LCA]); 12 P-8I Poseidon Maritime Multimission Aircraft; over 40 warships and submarines and over 1,000 helicopters by 2020.

Why the US faced obstacles

As defence is a top priority, India’s 2011-12 defence budget has increased by nearly 12 per cent from the previous year, reaching US$36 billion. This figure is expected to rise to nearly US$50 billion by 2015, with almost 50 per cent of this sum devoted to capital acquisition. Moreover, procurement is anticipated to increase exponentially: between 2012 and 2017, India will spend around US$50 billion on military acquisition. Currently, around 70% of India’s weapons systems are foreign-sourced. Because of the absolute size of its spending, India accounted for some nine per cent of global arms transfers across 2006-10, making it the world’s biggest arms market.

The MMRCA contract provides opportunities for Western countries to participate in India’s burgeoning arms bazaar. For Washington, in particular, the programme provides the perfect opportunity to demonstrate that its recent rapprochement with India had gained tangible traction amongst the higher echelon of policymakers in New Delhi.

Yet, the US faced many obstacles in the Indian market. Outside the political and diplomatic domain, there are a number of reasons why the US bid was unlikely to have been in contention. Firstly, on technical grounds, the F- 18 Super Hornet was not compliant. This fighter falls into the ‘heavy’ combat category of fighter aircraft, and for that role India already has the Russian SU-30MKI ‘workhorse’. As the MMRCA acronym implies, India is seeking a medium combat aircraft.

The other US plane on offer was the durable and proven F-16IN Super Viper. It has benefited from numerous upgrades, but the aircraft is fast approaching the end of its life-cycle. Moreover, Pakistan, India’s long-term adversary, has F-16s in its inventory, and the intent of all air forces is to fly aircraft measurably superior to that of its potential foe. This suggests that the European fighters offered greater combat superiority compared to their Swedish, US and Russian counterparts.

The Eurofighter and Rafale are both relatively new platforms, capable of serving the requirements of the Indian Air Force for the next 40 years. On logistical grounds, a purchase of US aircraft also fails to add up. India’s maintenance, repair, overhaul, training and support systems have Russia and France stamped all over them; to switch to an American model would have added costs and complexity to inventory management.

Finally, at the strategic level, India has probably not forgotten American predilection for imposing arms embargoes on client states, including Pakistan, Indonesia, and India, itself. And even in the absence of embargoes, US weapons sales come with the baggage of the EUMA (End User Monitoring Agreement) and CISMOA (Communication, Interoperability, and Security Memorandum of Agreement).

A two-horse European Race

The MMRCA competition has now become a two-horse European race. The decision will likely be taken by the end of the financial year, 31 March 2012. The winner is uncertain, but the smart money is on Dassault Rafale — for a number of reasons. When the IAF specified its precise MMRCA requirement in 2001, it was suffering an ageing MiG-21 that had the dubious reputation of ‘falling-out-of-the-sky’. Aircraft attrition and a delayed LCA were additional factors fast undermining the IAF’s operational capability. Thus, facing rapid deterioration in operational capability, the IAF sought the advanced version of the French Dassault Mirage 2000-V.

India had enjoyed a long partnership with the French company through its Mirage 2000 fighters. The IAF still fly over 50 of these aircraft, which have proved reliable and cost effective. The French have also been trusted allies, offering unstinting support on numerous geo-strategic challenges, such as India’s nuclear test and the Kashmir issue. Significantly, Dassault has committed, unequivocally, to transfer a ‘complete’ technology package, accommodating India’s stipulation that any deal must include a transfer of technology worth 50 per cent of contract value.

By the time India’s final Request for Proposal was sent in 2007, Dassault’s Mirage 2000-V production line had closed. France’s chance appeared to have disappeared as a global tender was issued, but the French are now back in the fray. The final competition remains tight. The Rafale has no export successes, whilst the Eurofighter is an excellent aircraft, with exports to Austria and Saudi Arabia. However, the smart money is on France rather than the Eurofighter, which carries with it the logistical complexities and political uncertainties of four different collaborating countries.

For India, though, the immediate need was to mollify the US, deeply upset over rejection of both its contender aircraft. India’s Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, has now given approval for the acquisition of the 10 C-17 Strategic Airlift aircraft. The credibility of President Obama, who pushed the MMRCA deal, is intact, and evolving US-India rapprochement survives.

About the Authors

Ron Matthews holds the Chair in Defence Economics at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Alma Lozano and Pathikrit Payne are, respectively, RSIS Doctoral and Masters scholars. 

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / South Asia

Synopsis

India’s decision to purchase 125 medium combat aircraft from Europe has upset the US. However India has also awarded the US a contract for 10 C-17 Globemaster III airlift planes to maintain a strategic balance in its air capability inventory.

Commentary

FOLLOWING THE recent announcement that India will be selecting European fighters for its US$10 billion contract for 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA), New Delhi has also stated that it will be awarding the United States a US$5.8 billion contract for 10 C-17 Globemaster III Strategic Airlift aircraft. This move is seen as a bid to assuage the hurt felt by the Americans as India thinks it important to keep relations with the US sweet, given the strategic fluidity of the Asian region.

While the MMRCA deal delighted the Europeans, it dismayed the Russian, American and Swedish contenders. The importance of the contest went beyond commercial benefits, touching also strategic and diplomatic alignments. Rather than just considering the rationale for selection of the winner, India’s dilemma was how to placate the losers of this mega deal, in particular the Americans.

Why the deal is significant

However, there is a need to take a step back and examine why the MMRCA deal was seen as significant by the bidding countries. It is about India’s growing economic and military power. On a purchasing parity basis, India now ranks as the world’s fourth largest economy, with a US$4 trillion GDP. There is, of course, a direct linkage between India’s economic base and the resources required to fulfill New Delhi’s ambitious military modernisation programme.

With some 85 per cent of India’s military assets designated as either mature or obsolete, military chiefs have been pressing for urgent replacement programmes. The MMRCA is just the start of a massive defence acquisition process. New Delhi has both the resources and the commitment to embark on a broad suite of foreign procurement plans. These include the US$30 billion acquisition of 250-300 Russo-Indian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA); a multi-billion dollar purchase of 272 Russian Sukhoi SU-30 MKI fighters; nearly 200 Tejas (Lightweight Combat Aircraft [LCA]); 12 P-8I Poseidon Maritime Multimission Aircraft; over 40 warships and submarines and over 1,000 helicopters by 2020.

Why the US faced obstacles

As defence is a top priority, India’s 2011-12 defence budget has increased by nearly 12 per cent from the previous year, reaching US$36 billion. This figure is expected to rise to nearly US$50 billion by 2015, with almost 50 per cent of this sum devoted to capital acquisition. Moreover, procurement is anticipated to increase exponentially: between 2012 and 2017, India will spend around US$50 billion on military acquisition. Currently, around 70% of India’s weapons systems are foreign-sourced. Because of the absolute size of its spending, India accounted for some nine per cent of global arms transfers across 2006-10, making it the world’s biggest arms market.

The MMRCA contract provides opportunities for Western countries to participate in India’s burgeoning arms bazaar. For Washington, in particular, the programme provides the perfect opportunity to demonstrate that its recent rapprochement with India had gained tangible traction amongst the higher echelon of policymakers in New Delhi.

Yet, the US faced many obstacles in the Indian market. Outside the political and diplomatic domain, there are a number of reasons why the US bid was unlikely to have been in contention. Firstly, on technical grounds, the F- 18 Super Hornet was not compliant. This fighter falls into the ‘heavy’ combat category of fighter aircraft, and for that role India already has the Russian SU-30MKI ‘workhorse’. As the MMRCA acronym implies, India is seeking a medium combat aircraft.

The other US plane on offer was the durable and proven F-16IN Super Viper. It has benefited from numerous upgrades, but the aircraft is fast approaching the end of its life-cycle. Moreover, Pakistan, India’s long-term adversary, has F-16s in its inventory, and the intent of all air forces is to fly aircraft measurably superior to that of its potential foe. This suggests that the European fighters offered greater combat superiority compared to their Swedish, US and Russian counterparts.

The Eurofighter and Rafale are both relatively new platforms, capable of serving the requirements of the Indian Air Force for the next 40 years. On logistical grounds, a purchase of US aircraft also fails to add up. India’s maintenance, repair, overhaul, training and support systems have Russia and France stamped all over them; to switch to an American model would have added costs and complexity to inventory management.

Finally, at the strategic level, India has probably not forgotten American predilection for imposing arms embargoes on client states, including Pakistan, Indonesia, and India, itself. And even in the absence of embargoes, US weapons sales come with the baggage of the EUMA (End User Monitoring Agreement) and CISMOA (Communication, Interoperability, and Security Memorandum of Agreement).

A two-horse European Race

The MMRCA competition has now become a two-horse European race. The decision will likely be taken by the end of the financial year, 31 March 2012. The winner is uncertain, but the smart money is on Dassault Rafale — for a number of reasons. When the IAF specified its precise MMRCA requirement in 2001, it was suffering an ageing MiG-21 that had the dubious reputation of ‘falling-out-of-the-sky’. Aircraft attrition and a delayed LCA were additional factors fast undermining the IAF’s operational capability. Thus, facing rapid deterioration in operational capability, the IAF sought the advanced version of the French Dassault Mirage 2000-V.

India had enjoyed a long partnership with the French company through its Mirage 2000 fighters. The IAF still fly over 50 of these aircraft, which have proved reliable and cost effective. The French have also been trusted allies, offering unstinting support on numerous geo-strategic challenges, such as India’s nuclear test and the Kashmir issue. Significantly, Dassault has committed, unequivocally, to transfer a ‘complete’ technology package, accommodating India’s stipulation that any deal must include a transfer of technology worth 50 per cent of contract value.

By the time India’s final Request for Proposal was sent in 2007, Dassault’s Mirage 2000-V production line had closed. France’s chance appeared to have disappeared as a global tender was issued, but the French are now back in the fray. The final competition remains tight. The Rafale has no export successes, whilst the Eurofighter is an excellent aircraft, with exports to Austria and Saudi Arabia. However, the smart money is on France rather than the Eurofighter, which carries with it the logistical complexities and political uncertainties of four different collaborating countries.

For India, though, the immediate need was to mollify the US, deeply upset over rejection of both its contender aircraft. India’s Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, has now given approval for the acquisition of the 10 C-17 Strategic Airlift aircraft. The credibility of President Obama, who pushed the MMRCA deal, is intact, and evolving US-India rapprochement survives.

About the Authors

Ron Matthews holds the Chair in Defence Economics at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Alma Lozano and Pathikrit Payne are, respectively, RSIS Doctoral and Masters scholars. 

Categories: RSIS Commentary Series

Popular Links

About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

Connect with Us

rsis.ntu
rsis_ntu
rsisntu
rsisvideocast
school/rsis-ntu
rsis.sg
rsissg
RSIS
RSS
Subscribe to RSIS Publications
Subscribe to RSIS Events

Getting to RSIS

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

Click here for direction to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
    Help us improve

      Rate your experience with this website
      123456
      Not satisfiedVery satisfied
      What did you like?
      0/255 characters
      What can be improved?
      0/255 characters
      Your email
      Please enter a valid email.
      Thank you for your feedback.
      This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
      OK
      Latest Book
      more info