Avoid knee-jerk reactions in defence scandals
With the AgustaWestland controversy having returned to the political limelight, much is being made of whether the tainted firm was ‘blacklisted' by the Congress-led UPA regime of the day and if the BJP-led NDA Government that came to power afterwards sought to lift that ‘ban'. The Congress is trying to distract attention by shouting from the rooftops how it had killed the deal once reports of bribery came to the forefront while the BJP is going hammer and tongs at its rival as the corruption trail snakes back to the Congress sanctum sanctorum. Meanwhile, the investigative agencies are continuing with the probe. However, no matter how the case pans out, it is important to debate the larger issue of blanket bans and bribes in the defence sector. In the UPA era, it was common for the slightest hint of indiscretion to be meant with a blanket ban on the concerned firm. Of course, as the AgustaWestland case shows, this didn't mean that there was no corruption or that the Government sought to set an example for those who indulged in corruption but only that it engaged in a knee-jerk reaction without adequate investigation. For example, in 2005, South African defence company Denel was banned after being accused of paying kickbacks to secure a deal with the Indian Army but the ban was lifted in 2014 after the Central Bureau of Investigation failed to prove the charges. The same thing happened with Israeli Military Industries which was blacklisted in 2012 and then cleared in 2014. In both cases, the Indian military's defence preparedness was adversely affected while the Denel ban stalled the purchase of 155mm/52-calibre artillery guns, the IMI ban led to a shortage of ammunition for the 155mm guns which the Israeli company was supposed to produce with the state-owned Ordnance Factory. The Air Force would have also suffered similarly had the Modi Government in 2014 imposed a blanket ban on Rolls Royce after the company admitted that it had hired an agent for a maintenance contract with Hindustan Aeronautics limited. This list can go but it should suffice to say that this penchant for blanket bans needs to be checked, and thankfully, it seems like the Modi Government is taking steps in the right direction.
The other issue is that of bribes which, obviously, is a two-way street. Yet, it is mostly bribe-givers who are penalised while bribe-takers evade scrutiny. This is already happening in the AgustaWestland case where the bribe-givers, the chiefs of the tainted Anglo-Italian firm, are behind bars while those who took bribes in India are yet to be held accountable. A generation ago, the Bofors deal followed a similar pattern. This brings us to the third issue of reforms in defence acquisition systems. The Government needs to be realistic about how the business works allow for legitimate agents, for example and only then will it be able to fight corruption in an effective manner.