Defence manufacture indigenisation is a long way off
By Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 23rd June 17
Prime Minister Narendra Modi was more optimistic
than accurate in claiming on Tuesday, in a speech in Lucknow, that India is
“marching ahead” towards self-reliance in building defence equipment. True, Mr
Modi has always committed himself to indigenisation in defence manufacture. His
2014 election manifesto pledged to rewrite defence policy, restructure equipment
procurement and make India a defence-manufacturing hub. In early 2015, the
prime minister lamented before an international audience in Bengaluru that 60
per cent of India’s weaponry was still imported; declaring that increasing
domestic manufacture from 40 per cent to 70 would double our defence output. Yet,
today the percentage of weaponry India imports remains above 60 per cent.
On March 17, the defence ministry told
parliament that 65.62 per cent of the military’s procurement for 2015-16 was
done through indigenous sources. It also said that, over the three preceding financial
years, 94 capital procurement contracts involving Rs 82,980 crore were signed
with Indian vendors; while 56 such contracts, involving Rs 53,684 crore, were
signed with foreign vendors during the same period. This would place the
indigenous component at over 60 per cent.
But these answers obscured the large
overseas component in so-called “indigenous” platforms. The Sukhoi-30MKI and
Tejas fighters, the Hawk trainer, Dhruv helicopter and Dornier-228 aircraft are
deemed indigenous, but are actually 40-60 per cent imported, according to
Parliament’s Standing Committee for Defence. Similarly, Bharat Electronics Ltd
imported 44 per cent of the input materials it used in 2015-16, Bharat Earth
Movers Ltd imported 21.68 per cent, and other defence public sector units
(DPSUs) and ordnance factories (OFs) have lesser, but significant, shares.
Adding these import costs would present the real picture of indigenisation.
Meanwhile, the government has been talking
up its policy reforms directed at boosting defence manufacture. On Tuesday, Mr
Modi claimed he had allowed 100 per cent foreign direct investment (FDI) in
defence manufacture. In fact, 100 per cent FDI requires case-by-case clearance;
only 49 per cent FDI is permitted through the automatic route. Other reforms include
the whittling down of defence items that require licences to produce. The
private sector is getting a more level playing field through mechanisms such as
exchange rate variation protection, which was earlier provided only to DPSUs
and OFs. Offset guidelines are now more flexible and easier to fulfil. The
Defence Procurement Procedure of 2016 accords preference to a new category of
procurement, eponymously titled: “Buy (Indian) - Indigenously designed,
developed and manufactured”. A more attractive “Make” category of procurement
allows the defence ministry to fund 90 per cent of the cost a company incurs in
developing new equipment. The ministry will now choose private firms as
“strategic partners”, which foreign vendors can partner to manufacture in
India.
Yet, despite this liberalisation, defence
manufacture lags. While it is true that the goals must be realistic as defence
technology is complex and sophisticated, and rapid indigenisation is probably
not possible when the country doesn't really have a strong hi-tech
manufacturing sector, the fact is the government has been slow in its response.
It has taken three years to build the policy framework, after playing musical
chairs with defence ministers. Without robust ministerial leadership, bureaucrats
shirk decision-making, fearing victimisation in the future by investigative
agencies. Instead they push for policies that do away with discretion and
judgement, with outcomes determined by unthinking procedure. With nobody ever
accountable for overruns or delays, the defence ministry – which, in defence
manufacturing, is the regulator, the sole customer and also a big seller – remains
moribund.
If one looks deep inside a Su-30 or a MiG29, you will find avionics units with 20 year old technology. The Hawk is a 30 year old design. So, why should we still be seeking technology from abroad? If the Strategic Partners are again going to be JVs, how are they going to be different from the 50 year old DPSUs?
ReplyDeleteOverall we completely lack in manufacturing technology .
ReplyDeleteOnly a few local industrialists lies TATA invested in manufacturing .
Rest are mor into stuff like mining, oil , cement etc. look at the big debts most have piled up !
Look at Jio , Ambanis spent so much , but how many lyf phones, network switches were completely manufactured in india. An big opportunity lost.
The impact is felt on defence.
Not to mention, several projects under "Make" category are being shelved, after Indian companies invest a considerable amount in research.
ReplyDelete