Blue Skies Thinking?

Last month has seen the eight year bidding war to supply India with fighter jets culminating in India choosing the French company Dassault’s Rafale over the British, German, Italian, and Spanish built Eurofighter Typhoon. The deal is for 126 fighter jets and is worth up to $20biliion. It is the most important defence decision of the last 12 months.

‘So what does India want with all those big expensive toys anyway’ I hear you say. Good question! Well, apart from the obvious: that fighter jets are fun and exciting, India has two longstanding best enemies to protect herself from. Pakistan to the West with a fleet of ‘retro’ American built F-16s and China to the North with home–grown Chengdu J-10 combat aircraft. So India’s choice of aircraft would be based on more than matching China and Pakistan’s air capabilities.

India had several options. She could have gone the route of Pakistan and buy from the Americans (Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet or Lockheed Martin’s F-16 Super Viper were likely options). But after Pakistan’s realisation that all their jets came with a surprise gift of ……, it’s not so unexpected that they passed up that option. Alternatively, since China’s jet is a spin-off of the Russian craft, it would make sense to buy from them; however for some unknown reason India also eliminated the Russians from the competition quite early on. So the two remaining options were the Typhoon and Rafale.

By most accounts the Eurofighter is better than the Rafale. For a start, the Typhoon is much newer (the Rafale is the same generation as Pakistan’s F-16s). And trade links also make it seem the likelier choice. So how did the French do it? It’s argued that the deciding factor was that Rafale was cheaper by up to 10%. Other theories suggest that Sarkozy might have, in true French style, bartered and haggled a deal and thrown in bargain civil nuclear energy to clinch it. Alternatively, perhaps, (shock horror!) they chose the Rafale because it is the better jet. The recent intervention in Libya presented the perfect opportunity for arms dealers to show off their wares to the Indians. So perhaps the display persuaded India of the merits of Rafale’s strength in air-to-ground attacks over the Eurofighter’s better air-to-air combat capabilities.

So what can we draw from this? Well firstly, if India was dissuaded by Typhoon’s relatively clumsy air-to-ground performance then it hints at the type of defence demands they predict experiencing in the future, and it would also shape the type of future campaigns they would be willing to embark upon too. Perhaps, indicating India’s perception of a stronger threat from Pakistan than China. Secondly, we could conclude that the 10% price difference was what swayed India, or, alternatively, that India’s concern was not with the immediate price, but in fact to start a bidding war between Dassault and BAE/EADS to receive the most competitive price for both. On the other hand, the fact that India whittled down the choice to two 4th generation jets when 5th generation stealth fighters such as Russian Pak-Fa or the American F-35 and F-22 were available might also tell us something (although even for all the oil in Saudi Arabia I couldn’t tell you what).

The office of US defence manufacturer Lockheed Martin used to house a gigantic map of America which showed how, for every single congressional district in America, their company’s actions influenced that area in some significant way. India’s fighter jet choice has the same effect, but on a global scale.

For instance, as we know; every cat has a mat and every military aircraft has an aircraft carrier, or so the saying goes. What I mean by this sadly oft forgotten maxim is that the choice made by India’s air force will also have knock on effects on the choices made by their Navy. Fighter jets require aircraft carriers to be tailor engineered for compatibility. India’s choice of the Rafale aircraft means it’s likely that they might also buy a French Thales aircraft carrier. BAE are building carriers for the Royal Navy, at the time of the Defence Review last year there was some discussion as to their eventual owners, the Indian decision ends all speculation, once built these will remain here but what flies from them is still anyone’s best guess.

Not receiving the Indian fighter jet deal, and therefore also missing out on an aircraft carrier deal and in a time of Europe-wide defence cuts, we are likely, as a result, to see large swathes of Job losses in the defence manufacturing sector in UK. Even before the India deal was known, in September last year BAE announced plans to cut 3,000 jobs in their military aircraft division. Not only would these job losses have a destructive effect on economic prosperity, but it would have a devastating effect on the UK manufacturing base and in turn a ruinous effect on our sovereignty and defensive capabilities.  For once we have lost our capacity to manufacture weapons independently of other countries, we lose that capacity permanently.

It would seem odd that the Government would be willing to leave matters like this, if the French can offer nuclear treats to India why could we not build a third Carrier designed for Naval Eurofighters and make the price too attractive to refuse?  Once you have built the first two Carriers the cost of running the system a third time would be a fraction of the initial outlay. Just thinking aloud, which seems preferable to not thinking at all.