India has taken big strides in submarine production. But dependence on foreign vendors is hurting indigenous efforts
It does not require the legendary Naval expert Alfred Thayer Mahan to state the obvious: That no state can ever aspire to be a sea power without indigenous fighting ship production line. Again, one does not require the opinion of an Einstein to state — since submarine is technologically challenging, and difficult to master, being lethal, expensive and sophisticated offensive platform, India must try, and go all out to reduce, if not obliterate, its complete dependence on foreign vendors to equip its submarine squadron, through in-house production. Although it is easier said than done, yet, it is time to explore as to what the world market is like, and where India stands today!
In the South Asian perspective, India's foray into submarine squadron began in July 1968. However, Pakistan, which began submarine operation before India, in 1963, realised the importance of joint-venture, leading to indigenous production thereof. The irony is that even after operating submarine for 48 years, India's helpless dependence on foreign vendors, for conventional diesel-electric boats, speaks for itself. So much so that three European shipyards of former USSR (Russia), West Germany (now Germany) and France continue to supply conventional non-nuclear submarines to New Delhi Navy, belated initiative for indigenous strategic missile nuclear submarine construction by Visakhapatnam dockyard notwithstanding.
No doubt, India is making strides as “approval for the construction of six conventional subs, with air-independent propulsion, was given by the Defence Acquisition Council October 26, 2014.” No doubt, “the boats are to be built in India”. Yet, the fact remains that “contenders include further French Scorpene class, Spanish S 80, German Type 214, and Russian lada class”. And there lies the catch-22 situation for India. The dependence on multiple foreign vendors is too conspicuous for comfort-level of indigenous production initiative; and too powerful a tool at the hands of foreign technology lobby to be withstood or countered by the ‘Make in India’ and ‘Made in India’ proponents.
The point is simple: India has shown exemplary initiative and expertise to produce highly sophisticated and state-of-art indigenous nuclear strategic missile submarine, but strangely, is not confident yet to make less challenging and less sophisticated conventional sub-surface boat despite having mastered operation thereof for more than 48 years!
That leads us to the contemporary world market of conventional diesel electric boats and ask a question: Is India that helplessIJ Does India have any option or choiceIJ Can India go for a long-term technical collaboration with any foreign company or country to fulfil basic minimum need of its Navy's conventional underwater combat capabilityIJ
Of all world submarine producers, Germany reigns. WhyIJ Because, Berlin-made submarines have the highest number of foreign customers. Apart from making six boats for its own Navy, the user list of German product spans from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela (South America) to India, Indonesia, Israel (Asia) to Egypt, South Africa (Africa) to Europe's Greece, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Turkey. What makes things more curious is that Germany has never been a major Naval power. Geography being against it, Berlin has always been a “European heartland”, 1290 nautical mile shoreline with North Sea and a “landlocked” Baltic Sea. Yet, Germany is the leading sub exporter! Not Japan, UK or the USIJ Traditionally, the three well-known Naval states of the 20th century, with impressive record of combat ship-building industry, favourable geography and superior technologyIJ
After Germany, however, it is the Moscow-made boats which adorn the inventory of eight navies. Question again. Why only eight Moscow customersIJ Because traditionally, in China and India, Moscow has had two steady, big ticket buyers.
The US and the UK, however, have been extremely careful and cautious, selling subs. Thus, whereas the US has given subs to Taiwan, london's sole foreign customer is Canada. This is perhaps because the Anglo-Saxons fraternity do not want to part with their perceived “superior” underwater technology to anyone except their “own” trusted confidante.
Japan has been a great maritime/island nation with a long Naval tradition, both ashore (ship-building industry) and afloat (naval warfare). Japanese men and machine's fighting capability constitute the well-documented Naval history, beginning late 19th and early 20th century with China, Russia, and with the British and Americans in the Second World War (1940s). It will also be diplomatically logical because if China provides submarines to India's western and eastern flank, with further possibilities looming around the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean, there is absolutely no reason as to why India should not look after its own long-term interest by tying up with Tokyo for conventional diesel electric submarine production line at an early date.
Nnevertheless, a question may be asked as to why should India first not explore the possibility with three nations (Russia, Germany and France) whose boats New Delhi have used thus farIJ Point well taken. However, it is time to go for, say, fresh plan for 25-50 year co-production, expertise, experience and technology operations for India. One is talking today only for conventional submarines. There are several surface ships like aircraft carrier, battle ship, cruiser, destroyer, frigate and corvette. The field is large and wide open. Multiple choices exist.
(The writer is an alumnus of National Defence College of India. Views are personal)