tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post2385289897747836282..comments2024-03-28T05:22:10.255-07:00Comments on Broadsword by Ajai Shukla - Strategy. Economics. Defence.: DRDO policy gaffes attract international flakBroadswordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13076780076240598482noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-35858581517272324452010-06-30T07:43:37.494-07:002010-06-30T07:43:37.494-07:00Hi Ajai,
DRDO has publicly issued statement refut...Hi Ajai,<br /><br />DRDO has publicly issued statement refuting ur article. The article is available at the following location<br />http://sify.com/finance/b-letters-b-defensive-military-strategy-news-analysis-kg4b5ucabah.html<br /><br />The refutal has been issued by Ravi Kumar Gupta who is the director of public interface in DRDO.spanky's Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12479278534002001182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-58489442162794173492010-06-30T07:30:06.740-07:002010-06-30T07:30:06.740-07:00Ajai how does it feel to be a channel for your cou...Ajai how does it feel to be a channel for your countries enemies, must be great, eh?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-54590483947430458192010-06-30T01:45:17.230-07:002010-06-30T01:45:17.230-07:00Ajai there seems to be a letter in sify regarding ...Ajai there seems to be a letter in sify regarding your article!<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">http://sify.com/finance/b-letters-b-defensive-military-strategy-news-analysis-kg4b5ucabah.html</a><br /><br />This refers to "DRDO policy gaffes attract international flak" by Ajai Shukla (June 22). It needs to be reiterated that DRDO has not announced any road map for military space programme. Also, it has no programme to develop anti-satellite weapons. Moreover, the document "Technology perspective and capability road map" has not been published by DRDO.<br /><br />DRDO’s programmes are in tune with India’s no-first-use policy in terms of nuclear weapons and are aimed at providing effective deterrence, credible second strike capability and reliable defence against weapons aimed at undermining India’s security and integrity. Such defensive programmes are developed with a view to ensuring neutralisation of the enemy’s assets targeted at India.<br /><br />Ravi Kumar Gupta, director of public interface, DRDOAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-34345226586031279812010-06-27T11:52:39.669-07:002010-06-27T11:52:39.669-07:00Our politicians are known for talking out of both ...Our politicians are known for talking out of both sides of their mouths. Few Indians trust them much, what to say of the international community. It's hard not to favour the DRDO on this one if they are seen to be doing some plain speaking. Maybe there's a generational gap here as the politicians are from the pre-partition generation while DRDO is populated by post-partition people.KRnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-31266695274398361152010-06-27T06:52:21.818-07:002010-06-27T06:52:21.818-07:00DRDO is long on wet dreams and short on deliverabl...DRDO is long on wet dreams and short on deliverables.<br /><br />Making its wet dreams public adds fodder to India's detractors.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-19262244071322136912010-06-26T06:55:00.758-07:002010-06-26T06:55:00.758-07:00why the us cant win afghan war
http://www.pakista...why the us cant win afghan war<br /><br />http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com/2010/06/26/why-the-us-can%E2%80%99t-win-afghan-war/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-56308236966851492332010-06-25T11:13:05.837-07:002010-06-25T11:13:05.837-07:00Ajai,
USA first demonstrated ASAT capability in 1...Ajai,<br /><br />USA first demonstrated ASAT capability in 1985! So much for it being hush-hush. Just because China was secretive about its ASAT capability, doesn't mean India has to take the same path. In fact, since China has already openly demonstrated that capability, India has no option but to counter the Chinese capability. There's no reason to be secretive anymore. <br /><br />And the most important point seems to be missed in the debate - there is no disconnect between the official Indian position and the DRDO road-map. Possessing ASAT technology doesn't mean India is suddenly in favor of weaponization of space. How did you come to that judgement?<br /><br />I believe you are one of our finest defense journalists. But I'm sorry, this article doesn't live up to your own standards.Manuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10316927735571151982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-42066421219160785502010-06-24T10:00:49.465-07:002010-06-24T10:00:49.465-07:00Ajai,
Why have you not published my last comment ...Ajai,<br /><br />Why have you not published my last comment correcting your interpretation of what I said? Spefically that I'm not suggesting that Hoey need to be "fair" to India but that he's not at all credible if his analysis doesn't consider India's defence needs.Brownian Motionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17692003963430593812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-63770336194174267272010-06-24T09:29:33.755-07:002010-06-24T09:29:33.755-07:00One thing. While I see your point about contradict...One thing. While I see your point about contradictory statements and policies, this is nothing new in this field. Obama and Putin are also being hypocritical every time they talk about how they are against the weaponisation of space.<br /><br />Additionally, you have to take the two statements in their proper contexts. While our leaders may be against the development of ASAT weapons per se, until such a time comes when a binding ASAT treaty comes into place, we still need to have a credible deterrence in this field.<br /><br />This was the same philosophy that drove our nuclear weapons program even as successive generations of leaders publicly called for global nuclear disarmament.Gautamhttp://godkingofdivineroad@yahoo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-6432635510302630532010-06-24T09:18:52.464-07:002010-06-24T09:18:52.464-07:00This article is astounding in its hypocricy and I&...This article is astounding in its hypocricy and I'm surprised you published it as if it held any relevance instead of writing to the author about his own double standards. <br /><br />Why should the US, Russia, China and various European countries have their own ASAT programs(whatever they may speak against it in public) but not India?<br /><br />While I am in favour of pushing an ASAT treaty(there's no way we will be able to match the Chinese in a space arms race, best to disable both our ASAT arsenals), until such a treaty comes into place we should make every effort to have an adequate ASAT deterrent. In fact we should ask the Russians for technology like the Chinese did early on, given there are no treaties on transferring such tech yet.Gautamhttp://godkingofdivineroad@yahoo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-3502322254047624582010-06-24T06:21:31.284-07:002010-06-24T06:21:31.284-07:00ajai says :
Exactly the same way the first officia...ajai says :<br />Exactly the same way the first official statement about our ASAT capability should have been the image of a missile smashing into a satellite... not some barely-credible promise from the DRDO.<br /><br />Only problem being that DRDO has no mandate to conduct such a test, a fact you seem hell bent on ignoring. therefore they have to make do with statements and you can bet your last paisa that GOI is completely with saraswat's statement.<br /><br />lastly, do mention where ANYONE has lied from either DRDO or GOI ! this is a very serious allegation, but you seem to be making it quite lightly. the only one who is lying here is your friend hoey.fighterclassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-90951656998362210632010-06-24T02:30:37.795-07:002010-06-24T02:30:37.795-07:00Although I do agree about the fact that DRDO shoul...Although I do agree about the fact that DRDO should not have mentioned about their work on ASAT - but instead should have developed the weapon and tested it anyway, I do not agree with the fact that you are giving Hoey importance. If you take the time to read his website, it seems to be blatantly biased against India. It would be the same as giving importance to a pakistani article which blamed the RAW for everything that is happening in Pakistan. <br /><br />Journalism is meant to be unbiased, by using a biased source, you are breaking that fundamental rule. Think about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-81930229674958737562010-06-24T02:03:30.722-07:002010-06-24T02:03:30.722-07:00Shukla ji,
A few decades ago when our then leader...Shukla ji,<br /><br />A few decades ago when our then leaders and scientific and strategic community decided to embark on a nuclear weapons program, they displayed a remarkably enlightened and pragmatic attitude (like you do in your article!). They kept the entire nuclear weapons development program under wraps, all govt. departments and agencies spoke in one voice, our leaders overindulged in continuous and rather frequent harping over complete nuclear disarmament, risks of proliferation…yada yada. Guess what happened after we tested a supposedly ‘peaceful’ nuclear device? The world slapped tough sanctions on our face, some fancy three-four letter treaties came in to existence and a super duper club of nations was formed based on the sole criteria that they conducted their tests a decade before us!<br /><br />So, dear Shukla ji pls tell me what did we achieve by behaving ourselves then? What will we achieve by behaving ourselves now? <br /><br />But hey who cares? We are Indians- we were born to behave, the purpose of our existence is to fit in- who are we to flout international norms, we vermins were born to obey and follow diktat till another ABCD treaty comes into affect making possession ASAT weapons legal only for the super duper club! <br /><br />Jeez why are these Indians misbehaving now? Why are these Gandhiji's puttars speaking out of turn? Beats me! But isn't it ironic that only Hoey and you should have problem with it.<br /><br />By the way Shukla ji I think I missed your article on Gen. Deepak Kapoor's 'GAFFE'. You know the one in which you picked up some XYZ's article and criticized Gen. Kapoor for speaking out of turn about a supposed two front war under a nuclear overhang.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-79314084748657348782010-06-24T01:38:04.757-07:002010-06-24T01:38:04.757-07:00Anonymous 11:06:
Your statement: "Ajai, nice...Anonymous 11:06:<br /><br />Your statement: "Ajai, nice spin on Pranab's statement. Right from Rajiv Gandhi's time, every single PM has advocated universal nuclear disarmament just like Pranab is advocating non-military use of universal space. Does that mean that DAE developing nuclear weapons is wrong?"<br /><br />Anonymous, since you really don't seem to get the point, let me use your own example to illustrate for you what I'm saying.<br /><br />When all the PMs, from Rajiv's time onwards, were advocating universal nuclear disarmament, we didn't have scientists from the DAE making public statements about when the DAE would have the technology to test. That organisation remained entirely in line with national policy.<br /><br />The first officially authentic statement about our nuclear weapons capability was BOOOOOM... BOOOOM... BOOOOM. When the first three bombs were tested on 11th May 1998.<br /><br />Exactly the same way the first official statement about our ASAT capability should have been the image of a missile smashing into a satellite... not some barely-credible promise from the DRDO. <br /><br />That, you might remember, is the way China and the US did it.<br /><br />You might also remember (though I doubt it... you sound pretty wet behind the ears) that India successfully maintained nuclear ambiguity, even without the DAE giving out statements that contradicted India's Prime Ministers. We didn't need the DAE to openly contradict ministers in order to maintain ambiguity.<br /><br />Ambiguity, for the ignoramuses who don't know it, is not maintained by one arm of government officially contradicting another. That is actually a way of dispelling ambiguity --- ambiguity about whether that country is totally stupid or not.<br /><br />When two arms of government are contradicting each other, the world gets up and says: "well one of them is lying."<br /><br />India's international credibility, won over 63 years, comes from NEVER lying officially.Broadswordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13076780076240598482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-74235199847956617332010-06-23T22:36:23.821-07:002010-06-23T22:36:23.821-07:00Ajai, nice spin on Pranab's statement. Right f...Ajai, nice spin on Pranab's statement. Right from Rajiv Gandhi's time, every single PM has advocated universal nuclear disarmament just like Pranab is advocating non-military use of universal space. Does that mean that DAE developing nuclear weapons is wrong? We are for universal nuclear disarmament, we are for peaceful use of space, we are for a peaceful world. It is the stated policy that we want to have peaceful relations with all our neighbours. That doesnt mean Army can't come up with cold start doctrine, right? Or that IN can't have naval blockade as a policy? <br /><br />If you as a defence journalist is so naive as to think that such statements are matter of policy and inviolable, then I have no words for youAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-22462439750282558602010-06-23T12:12:43.945-07:002010-06-23T12:12:43.945-07:00@AK
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"...@AK<br /> "Speak softly and carry a big stick" is not a Chinese proverb. The phrase was was used by U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt at a speech in 1901. It was used as a corolary to the Monroe Doctrine.<br /><br />But your point is well taken.pmukherjeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-40968923544935212262010-06-23T10:43:07.755-07:002010-06-23T10:43:07.755-07:00Brownian Motion:
"You call my writing a diat...Brownian Motion:<br /><br />"You call my writing a diatribe! Please! That my friend is trenchant commentary!"<br /><br />Brownian, I like that! Point granted.<br /><br />"BTW, Hoey's "analysis" doesn't take into account India's legitimate defence needs at all - it's just what the US wants (even though it's ostensibly a peacenik agenda)."<br /><br />Brownian, why the *&#@ should his "analysis" take into account India's legitimate defence needs??? That is where all you guys go so wrong... you believe that the world owes you a living.<br /><br />It is for you to look after your legitimate defence needs and to do so in a manner that does not make you look like a bumbling, uncoordinated idiot... the way the DRDO statements have made India look.<br /><br />Anonymous 21:04:<br /><br />"Like many have mentioned here, shooting down satellites isn't considered weaponisation of space. "<br /><br />I'm certain that you know how to read, even if you're piss poor in logic. So read the statement by Pranab Mukherjee, which is reproduced in full in my article.<br /><br />Since it seems too much trouble for any of you to actually read what I write, here is Pranab again: "the security and safety of assets in outer space is of crucial importance for global economic and social development. We call upon all States to redouble efforts to strengthen the international legal regime for the peaceful use of outer space.”<br /><br />Now tell me, does he or does he not say that shooting down satellites in space is bad stuff???Broadswordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13076780076240598482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-2265783682793984052010-06-23T09:18:40.140-07:002010-06-23T09:18:40.140-07:00You guys are talking as if DRDO has already develo...You guys are talking as if DRDO has already developed this weapon and has militarised space.<br />Going by their word it will take another 30 yrs to get it working if it works that is.<br />I think this is just one of DRDO's tricks to gather some attention and show that they are doing something.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-2977440722307647252010-06-23T08:45:20.861-07:002010-06-23T08:45:20.861-07:00No one should bother about trifling persons like M...No one should bother about trifling persons like Matthew Hoey.<br /><br />India should move ahead with the military plans that is suitable to themselves with the national interests.Anonymoushttp://(optional)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-51037120771730551812010-06-23T08:34:03.753-07:002010-06-23T08:34:03.753-07:00Ajai, so what if there are contradictory signals? ...Ajai, so what if there are contradictory signals? Keeping enemy confused is also a confucious policy :)<br /><br />As such, the politicians have to talk and they talk something. Their audience is different from those of the DRDO's. If some journalist asks about space weaponization, they say that they are for peaceful uses. Isn't that what they say about nuclear weapons too? That doesn't mean India shouldn't develop them.<br /><br />The main issue many of the postors here have is using a two-bit anti-India anal-yst like Mathew Hoey to criticize the policy contradictions. You could have mentioned him in passing in one line. Instead, you did a beautiful PR job on an anti-India analyst and gave him lot of press. And you are using his useless arguments as basis of your arguments. <br /><br />Like many have mentioned here, shooting down satellites isn't considered weaponisation of space. And you are using that as centerpiece of your argument!! <br /><br />Sometimes, it is better to accept a gaffe and move on, instead of trying to defend the undefensible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-5629808763738855602010-06-23T06:23:48.908-07:002010-06-23T06:23:48.908-07:00You call my writing a diatribe! Please! That my fr...You call my writing a diatribe! Please! That my friend is trenchant commentary!Brownian Motionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17692003963430593812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-76695125457525464452010-06-23T06:02:52.503-07:002010-06-23T06:02:52.503-07:00Ajai,
Why spend so much of your efforts indulging...Ajai,<br /><br />Why spend so much of your efforts indulging in retoric and being "sarcastic back"? If you have some justification on the importance of Hoey and why we should be listening to him, please educate us. Tell us why using terms like "international flak" and "US based NGO" are justified instead of asking me how much Hoey is paid.<br /><br />And most importantly, tell us why India must be entirely consistent in words and deeds. Countries always talk through both sides of their mouths (that's one interpretation). China, for example, for years criticized the super powers for having nuclear weapons while simultaneously developing them. (and of course everyone knew that they were working on them). Almost all the nuclear powers criticize others for aspiring to go nuclear while maintaining their own stockpiles. Even china feels free to criticize India on that score - is that the height of hypocrisy?<br />And you're demanding that if Indian leaders demand that outer space be weapons free, India should also ignore the fact that countries are developing methods of destroying space based assets and remain blissfully impotent in that area?<br />You can interpret this as India saying, we want outer space to be peaceful but we are going to develop the capability to arm ourselves in this regard if there's no progress. Ditto with India's N weapons program - India demanded disarmament while simultaneously developing weapons technology ...<br />BTW, Hoey's "analysis" doesn't take into account India's legitimate defence needs at all - it's just what the US wants (even though it's ostensibly a peacenik agenda). Exactly what use is such "analysis"?<br /><br />Regards (really :-)),<br /><br />P.S. BTW, the last I checked, my arse doesn't speak (not independently anyway).Brownian Motionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17692003963430593812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-3405702668938130682010-06-23T05:46:47.972-07:002010-06-23T05:46:47.972-07:00wah ajai wah, you are doing the very thing that yo...wah ajai wah, you are doing the very thing that you are accusing readers of, i.e discrediting the ones whose views you do not approve.<br /><br />a number of people including me have raised various points other than matthew hoey's neutral credentials(or the lack of them).<br /><br />you however have studiously ignored all those and latched on to only the comments about the person.<br /><br />I gave you the links to his posts at BR where he had no answers to questions raised about his blatant hypocrisy and twisting facts. yet that doesn't stop him from continuing to use bharat-rakshak forum for naked self-promotion, which included posting your article multiple times over multiple threads.<br /><br />I know enough about hoey and his work, far more than you could guess. his kind survive on govt handouts and to do that it is necessary that there is one designated bogey nation. it used to be iraq but now that is done so they are re-opening a case against India. so, yes my comments about zambia stands. <br /><br />oh and btw, it does matter where the information comes from, that is why people flock to your blog and not some other military blog of which there are dime a dozen.<br /><br />if a pakistani source says that R&AW is responsible for bombings in karachi, I would question the source first, not write a long breast beating article on how R&AW is destabilising poor pakistan, which is what you have done here.<br /><br />I gave you the reason why DRDO chief's comments were necessary to create a deterrence in ASAT weapons vis-a-vis china given that we were not going to physically test. secondly, even the comment about adding KALI <b>DOES NOT</b> violate the outer space treaty.<br />you OTOH have ignored anything approaching a fruitful discussion here and washed off your hands after tarring all your critics as some kind of nutjob. way to go !!!<br /><br />somehow I get the feeling you haven't even bothered to read the outer space treaty text, which is easily available on the net and are treating hoey's open lies as gospel.<br />don't be so trusting !fighterclassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-87891580878724239522010-06-23T05:29:35.632-07:002010-06-23T05:29:35.632-07:00last time when obama visited china, LICKED CHINESE...last time when obama visited china, LICKED CHINESE BOOTS AND FELT CLENSED ......<br /><br /><br />he told buffalo is better than bangalore.....<br /><br />didnt helped india for any consultancy for naval lca....<br /><br />tommorow if china attacked indian satellites in space.....he will go into NON ALIGNMENT MODE towards india and china.......if at all or may get into FRIENDSHIP WITH CHINA....<br /><br /><br />WHAT THE ---- WILL AMERICA HELP INDIA IF IT CANNOT AGREE FOR A consultancy.<br /><br /><br /><br />FOR BEING SIDED WITH AMERICANS FOR THESE DAYS.......IT IS BETTER FOR INDIA TO GET CLENSED AND BY DEVELOPING ASAT WEAPON AND TELL AMERICANS TO MEND AND MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS.......Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8726844009873922462.post-5714768021535455272010-06-23T05:15:41.501-07:002010-06-23T05:15:41.501-07:00Ajai,
People are never going to get your point (ma...Ajai,<br />People are never going to get your point (made in the comments). No one is arguing the merits of the case. Not one. Sad case of jingoism and latent rage. Of course the old "pre-colonial mindset" is rolled out here just as for everything else.<br /><br />To Anonymous quoted below...<br /><br />"it is you sir who is incurably stupid, better keep your head where the sun doesn't shine, it might not survive open air"<br /><br />You sir are a rare intellect. How can one argue with your perfectly reasoned and well articulated position? Absolutely ironclad....beyond refutation.....all hail - pie!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com