Sardaukar

The Telegraph: Us disarms Indian ship

An article by my friend and colleague on the defence beat Sujan Dutta:

New Delhi, March 14: India bought its second-largest warship, the INS Jalashva, from the US after signing away the authority to use the vessel in the event of a war. It has also granted an unprecedented right to the US to board and take an inventory of the ship’s capabilities whenever it wants to.

The acceptance of a “restrictive clause” in the contract for the ship — it cost about $50 million (around Rs 202 crore) — is political dynamite in India. The Left has been suspecting that India is bending, if not breaking, convention to accommodate US interests as it pursues closer military relations with the Pentagon.

By the navy’s definition, a warship is a “sovereign piece of territory in the seas”. But the US has been granted the right to embark the ship even after selling it to the Indian Navy.

In accepting the Pentagon’s condition that the ship should not be used for “offensive deployment” but only for relief — such as after the Tsunami of December 2004 — the Indian Navy has given up its right to use the vessel for the purpose for which it was built by the US Navy itself.

This damning capitulation of the Indian Navy to conditions imposed by the Pentagon was revealed in a close reading of a report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CA 5 of 2008) tabled in Parliament today. The report does not name the ship, identifying it only as ship ‘X’ before its induction into the Indian Navy and ship ‘Z’ after it joined the fleet.

It, however, describes it as a “landing platform dock commissioned in a foreign navy in 1971”. The Jalashva — called the USS Trenton when it was in service with the US Navy — is the only vessel that fits the description. It joined India’s eastern fleet in September 2007 and is based in Visakhapatnam, the headquarters of the Eastern Naval Command.

“These issues are all valid and have been raised before,” Admiral (retired) Arun Prakash, who was the Chief of Naval Staff when the Jalashva was contracted, told The Telegraph this evening.
A landing platform dock is used for evacuation — like the Trenton did during the Israeli-Hezbollah war of 2006 in the Mediterranean — and for offensive action like landing Marines from the sea to attack an enemy and capture hostile territory. The ship is a troops-carrier and is capable of taking within its hold armoured vehicles and tanks.

The Jalashva’s six embarked SH-60 helicopters are capable of being used both for surveillance and attack. The Indian Navy intends using its small landing craft to transport its marine commandos (Marcos) in stealthy offensive and sabotage missions.

The CAG report is explicit on India’s acceptance of the restrictive clause, however.

“Restrictive clauses raise doubts about the real advantages from this deal. For example, restrictions on the offensive deployment of the ship and permission to the foreign government to conduct an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred under the End-Use monitoring clause of the Letter of Agreement (LOA). Given that the ship is of old vintage, Indian Navy would remain dependent upon foreign-based support,” the auditors wrote.

The Indian Navy also bought the ship without physically verifying its state even though it had run its life and was being de-commissioned by the US Navy that found no further use for it, the CAG report has highlighted. The Indian Navy’s biggest ship is the Viraat.

The CAG report’s focus is on the irregularities in the purchase of the Jalashva. The CAG’s remit does not include an examination of the political circumstances of a defence deal.

Last month, six of the Jalashva’s crew died after a gas leak on board the vessel during a drill in the Bay of Bengal. A naval board of inquiry is investigating the cause of the leak but prima facie reports have pointed to a defect inherited by the Indian Navy.

The US offered the ship to India in September 2004 under its Excess Defense Article (EDA) programme through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route. The USS Trenton was due to be de-commissioned in September 2006. The Indian Navy was convinced “on the basis of a joint visual inspection with the foreign navy (September 2005) that the LPD would meet its requirements for the next 12 to 15 years”, the CAG report noted.

But it pointed out that the non-negotiable offer of the US was accepted without a rigorous technical evaluation.
-----------------------------------------------
LiveFist: The Telegraph: Us disarms Indian ship

Really interesting if true

Adux

Not True, half-truth's; simply. Any ex-military officers will tell you about procurement policies from other countries and also If the Americans did cheat us, then shame on the Indian government and Indian Navy. Good Job Americans, Realpolitik's at its best.

kuku

Oh yes if we have to use it for offensive action, the US will use that good old magic to stop the ship in its track.

What is the definition of this offensive action

This is hilarious, will that be the same rigorous evaluations done on the Gorshkov
Stealthy Offensive missions with Marcos using the Jalashava

Sardaukar

“Aged U.S. warship comes with strings”

Sandeep Dikshit
Curbs on offensive deployment; end-use clauses intrusive
NEW DELHI: India’s most ambitious military acquisition from the United States to date comes with strings attached: there are restrictions on its offensive deployment. And further, the end-use monitoring clauses agreed upon by India could mean intrusive inspections.

A damaging report on the purchase of USS Trenton tabled in Parliament on Friday noted that the $ 50-million deal was finalised after only a “visual inspection” and with “over-reliance” on information by the U.S. Navy.

The Comptroller and Auditor-General raised doubts over the military efficacy of USS Trenton (now INS Jalashwa) especially in view of the “restrictions on offensive deployment” and permission to the U.S. to “conduct an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred under the end-use monitoring clause.”

The report said: “Given that the ship is of old vintage [1971], the Indian Navy would remain dependent upon foreign based support … the cost [of refurbishment] may also go up further.”

Moreover, the acquisition decision and inking of the contract took place the same day, signalling haste in purchasing the ship.

A month ago, six Indian Navy sailors including an officer died aboard the same ship following a toxic gas leak. It later transpired that this class of ships had suffered from this problem and three U.S. Navy sailors lost their lives in a similar incident.

Curbs not revealed
In the past, neither India nor the U.S. revealed the existence of curbs on offensive deployment. Besides, in various interactions there was no mention of the end-use monitoring clause. An attempt during U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates’ recent visit to conclude an end-user clause for further exports of sensitive equipment was stymied by Defence Minister A.K. Antony. The end-user clause for the U.S. ship was signed when Pranab Mukherjee was Defence Minister.

Australia’s case
The Indian Navy also did not draw lessons from Australia’s purchase of similar ships from the U.S. without proper examination, causing time overruns from one to three years and cost escalation by three times. The Navy seemed to be facing a similar predicament because despite inducting the ship, it had to negotiate with a foreign firm for refurbishing the weapon systems and had to sign another agreement to ensure the supply of spares.

Had the Indian Navy not opted for the ship, the U.S. would have decommissioned it in 2006.

A simple “joint visual inspection” led Indian Navy officers to conclude that the ship would last for another 12-15 years. But the CAG report found that the U.S. Navy had concluded in 2003 that the ship was not suitable for modernisation and should be decommissioned.

The CAG report may dampen the Navy’s interest in a U.S. offer to sell another ship of the same class. Jalashwa is the second biggest ship with the Indian Navy and is intended to fill a crucial gap in transporting a large number of men and equipment for beach assaults.
----------------------------------------------
The Hindu : National : “Aged U.S. warship comes with strings”

Adux

Sandeep Dikshit and Pencil Pushers, can there be a better combination

Sardaukar

Do you doubt the authenticity of the articles?

Don't think they are conjuring up facts.

kuku

Where was the CAG in the Gorshkov deal? Could have saved us millions more than this deal.

Well thats the way media has to work, give it a masala twist, here all they are doing is quoting the CAG.

I will wait for the navy to give a reply to all of this.
The left is going to have a field day with this.

KENT

I think Indian Naval officer may have applied their experience of INS Viraat in inspection as Indian Navy itself running Viraat beyonds its stipulated life. They might have applied similar standard to Trenton while inspecting as we used to all other older vessels. Commissioning of Trenton may have become inevitable especially IN had to used their destroyer INS Mumbai to resuce Indian Migrants from Lebanon during Isreali-Mujjahiddin hostilities.

Adux

We paid a measly $50 mil; for the ship and the helicopters, the rest combined. Want to compare that with deal Russians have given us in Gorshkov. Why apply double standards to the Americans and we give the Russians a field day. Where is our CAG???

gamercube

WTF is the point of this ship if it is not to be used in offensive operations? Also, giving the Americans the right to board it anytime even after buying it? Is the Indian government out of it's ****ing mind? Manmohan Singh seems to be bending over as much as possible to accomodate whatever his "American friends" tell him to do.

Thank God for the communists. If not for them, Singh would have even implemented the nuclear deal and ****ed India over for the forseeable future. Professors should stay out of politics-it's not their forte.

__________________
Hasta la Victoria siempre!

gamercube

Are you serious? I mean, you can't really be that ignorant, can you? Do you understand the difference between a transport ship and an aircraft carrier?

kuku

Sea King helicopters came under a USD $39 million Foreign Military Sales agreement.

gamercube

All US equipment always comes with strings attached. And it's not something frivolous, but something that really impinges on a country's sovereignty. Russia, in contrast, in spite of recent troubles with the Gorshkov, has an excellent track record of doing business with India on terms favourable to India.

They sell reasonably advanced equipment at the cheapest prices, without any strings attached, and usually with full ToT.

No other country even comes close to offering us that combination.

kuku

That would require more study of the term offensive operation, what if its a UN mission, or some nation starts the aggressive action etc. etc.

Further more its not like they will stop the ship from USA.

We do not have anything to hide, its a ship meant for carrying troops.

Yes that is the official name for it F***ing mind.

He is more Indian than you could think of, a good man, Indias interest are his prime concern.

The communists who killed people in Kerela and Bengal, they are a opinion which is opposite to the government, a very important thing.

Sardaukar

Hey Gamercube, you forgot all the invisible strings attached to russian military deals like unreliability, lack of spare parts, manufacturing delays etc...