Would you fly a jet with Chinese chips? Veterans say no to Russia's Su‑57, push for India's AMCA instead
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Call for direct oversight
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
A different view
Former chief says no
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Stronger defences the answer
Where AMCA stands now
Former Air Force officer Ajay Ahlawat has sounded a clear warning. He believes India must reject the lure of imported fifth‑generation fighters and put every resource into building its own stealth jet, the AMCA "It would be best if we eliminate the option to import FGFA ( Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft ). We have two bad choices. F‑35 comes with strings attached. US can not be trusted to steer a predictable foreign policy. Su57 is not really a FGFA. Moreover, a large part of electronics, avionics components and chips etc are sourced from China. Imagine being in a shooting war with your equipment vendor," Ahlawat wrote on Tuesday.His words land at a time when Russia has made a tempting pitch: co‑produce the Su‑57E with complete technology transfer.Ahlawat wants more than just a rejection of imports. He wants the AMCA declared a national mission, personally monitored from the top."AMCA is the only viable option. Bring the program under PMO. Call it a mission of national importance. Nominate one IAF 3‑star as program head, reporting to NSA. All agencies under," he added.In his view, India must break free from foreign dependency if it wants real air power.But not everyone agrees. Former Air Marshal Sanjeev Kapoor sees strategic merit in Russia's plan. He thinks India should grab the chance while President Putin is set to visit."Just before Putin's visit on Thursday, Russia proposed a game changer offer for us, full tech transfer for co‑production of the Su‑57E at HAL Nashik (site of 220+ Su‑30MKI builds) plus direct delivery of Su‑35M jets in India's MRFA tender for 117 fighters. The dual offer promises deep localisation, source code access, it is a strategic boost for India's ' Make in India ' and our air power ambitions ," Kapoor said on Monday.For him, Russian cooperation means faster firepower with local jobs and know‑how.Backing Ahlawat's view, former Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria stays firm. No shortcuts, no imported jets. He says India must stick with its plan to finish the AMCA, no matter how long it takes."My answer is no. Now, the government has clearly put their faith in AMCA, and now we need to do everything as a nation to expedite the AMCA," Bhadauria said.He spoke against panic buys, especially since Pakistan is expected to get Chinese J‑20 or J‑35 jets."That cause of concern in terms of what Pakistan is going to get from China in the interim – be it J20 or J‑35 – let them get these. That will be studied. What is important is in the interim how do you handle these threats and there are ways and means of tackling this threat that they will have,' he said.Bhadauria stressed that India's answer lies in tougher air defences, not shopping abroad."We have already demonstrated our capabilities in the air defence zones… in air‑to‑ground precision zones in terms of standoff. So therefore we'll need to have an action plan to be able to sort this out and I think that's the way to go," he said.He accepts that Pakistan may fly stealth jets before India. But he believes that does not have to tilt the balance."In terms of stealth capability Pakistan is likely to get before us, we'll have to take some other measures in order to be able to detect by some means, to be able to still hold them off our borders much inside so that they are unable to launch. And should they be able to launch their cruise missiles or their standoff weapons, we are able to tackle the weapons," Bhadauria added.The AMCA, short for Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft, is India's first attempt to build a fifth‑generation stealth fighter on its own. DRDO, HAL and private firms are working together. The project is now in the detailed design stage. The first flying prototype is likely by the end of this decade.At stake is more than just an aircraft. The real test is whether India can build what it needs without outside help. If it works, the AMCA could close the stealth gap with rivals and cut foreign ties that come with hidden risks.The next few months will show which path India picks: build at home or buy from abroad. The debate has begun.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
32 minutes ago
- Mint
Pentagon official at center of weapons pause on Ukraine wants US to focus on China
WASHINGTON : Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy official, wants to refocus the U.S. military on countering China. That has put him at the center of the Trump administration's abrupt moves on providing weapons to Ukraine. It was Colby, a 45-year-old grandson of a former Central Intelligence Agency director, who wrote a memo to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in early June outlining how Ukraine's requests for U.S. weapons could further stretch already depleted Pentagon stockpiles. The memo didn't have a recommendation and was described by a defense official as a tool for assessing how arms deliveries would affect U.S. stockpiles. But some officials in the administration and in Congress say it figured in the Pentagon's decision to suspend some arms shipments to Kyiv, a move President Trump later reversed. The incident exemplifies Colby's push to make good on years of U.S. vows to boost its military position in the Western Pacific, his supporters say. But it also highlights the contrary pressures on an administration that, in its first months in office, has already launched major military operations against Iran and the Houthis in the Middle East while continuing military deliveries to Ukraine. Colby 'has been thinking very deeply about how the United States can best defend itself in an era of constrained resources," said Dan Caldwell, a former adviser to Hegseth. 'A lot of policymakers have refused to accept that reality." Colby has turned down interview requests about his views on helping Ukraine and in urging U.S. partners in Asia and Europe to step up their defense efforts. But in a social-media message Saturday, he said that he would continue to press allies to boost their military spending, even if some 'might not welcome frank discussions." Some of those frank discussions have included pressing Japan and Australia to make clear what military steps they are prepared to take in the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, according to a person familiar with the exchanges. Colby's efforts have surprised some officials in the region because the U.S.'s longstanding policy of 'strategic ambiguity" has avoided an explicit statement about what actions Washington might take if Chinese forces moved against Taiwan, and even Trump hasn't spelled out what he would do. Colby's discussions were earlier reported by the Financial Times. In arguing for doubling down on China, Colby is known as a 'prioritizer" who favors limiting U.S. obligations outside Asia to free up resources to counter Beijing. In so doing, he has differentiated himself from 'restrainers" who have urged that the U.S. pull back from overseas commitments, as well as traditional Republican hawks. Though presidents from both parties, starting with Barack Obama, have called for focusing U.S. national security strategy on China, putting the idea into practice has proven difficult, partly due to new threats that have emerged outside Asia and partly due to the Pentagon's longstanding commitments in Europe and the Middle East. Colby's calls to de-emphasize demands on U.S. forces other than in Asia have left him out of step with some Republicans. 'For many years, GOP 'prioritizers' have argued that the United States should not strike Iran or aid Ukraine because it must husband its resources for a possible war with China," said Matthew Kroenig of the Atlantic Council, who was a national security adviser to the 2012 Mitt Romney and 2016 Marco Rubio presidential campaigns. 'President Trump, in contrast, believes 'America First' requires continued U.S. involvement in multiple regions of the world." When Trump nominated Colby to serve as undersecretary of defense for policy in December, the fissures among Republicans over national security came to the fore. Colby received a hearty endorsement at his March confirmation hearing from Vice President JD Vance, who has long been a skeptical voice on providing billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine and has called Colby a friend. Colby was grilled by Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) about his past statement that it was feasible to contain a nuclear-armed Iran. Colby amended his stance in that confirmation hearing, saying that Iran cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and that he would provide the president with military options to stop it from doing so. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the only Republican to vote against Colby's confirmation, lambasted him for promoting policies that could lead to 'geostrategic self-harm." Colby has deep family connections to the foreign policy establishment through his grandfather, former CIA Director William Colby. 'Bridge," as he is known in Washington, attended school in Japan, where his father worked for an investment bank, before graduating from Harvard University. At Yale Law School he was a housemate of Jon Finer, the former deputy national security adviser to President Joe Biden. Even then, Colby's contrarian foreign policy priorities were evident: He was a rare Republican who opposed the war in Iraq. Colby has written that the 2003 Iraq war and the lengthy U.S. occupation was a 'historic error" that squandered vast resources. He argued in a 2012 article against striking Iran's nuclear facilities, saying it would provide Tehran 'every incentive to reboot the program with greater vigor." As a deputy assistant secretary of defense during Trump's first term, he played a major role in the drafting of the 2018 national defense strategy, which urged a shift from a focus on counterterrorism that the Pentagon adopted after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to countering China and Russia. Colby's role wasn't without turbulence. Trump's defense secretary at the time, retired Marine Gen. Jim Mattis, was frustrated with Colby's emphasis on defending Taiwan, participants recall. 'I think Bridge did a really good job in managing the strategy formulation process," said Frank Hoffman, a retired Marine colonel who was brought in by Mattis to help draft the strategy document. 'But in making Taiwan the hinge point of our military competition with China, he had a narrower focus than Secretary Mattis on what the strategy needed to do." Colby elaborated on his views in his 2021 book, 'The Strategy of Denial," in which he argued that the defense of Taiwan was vital because of its proximity to China, along with Japan and the Philippines, forming what Pentagon strategists refer to as the first island chain in the Western Pacific. His focus on China, he noted in the book, included arguing that Russia could be a 'potential collaborator" with the U.S. in an anti-Beijing coalition. And he warned against including Ukraine in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization because the country was 'highly exposed" to a Russia attack 'while offering no meaningful advantage to the alliance that is remotely comparable to the costs and risk that their defense would impose on it." But Colby's call for reprioritizing Pentagon strategy was tested after Russia invaded Ukraine the following year and turned to Beijing for help in expanding the Russian defense industry. Instead of dealing with China in isolation, Washington has faced the prospect of simultaneously deterring two geographically disparate adversaries that have been cooperating. Colby is playing a pivotal role in policy debate and the crafting of a new defense strategy that will set spending and force deployment goals for years to come. Some current and former officials who share Colby's goal of boosting American capabilities in the Pacific say he may be better at standing on principle than bringing allies along. Colby has irked Tokyo by urging that it commit to boosting military spending to 3.5% of its gross domestic product, they say. With policy disagreements over military spending and tariffs, Japan put off high-level talks with the U.S. that had been expected in July. A review Colby is conducting of a 2021 agreement—known as Aukus, under which Australia will get nuclear-powered attack submarines from the U.S. while contributing several billion dollars to the U.S. defense-industrial base—has concerned Australian officials. In an interview with Australian television last year, Colby said it would be 'crazy" for the U.S. to provide attack submarines to Australia unless the Pentagon can be assured it would have enough for itself, adding that the U.S. would be 'lucky" to get to the 2030s without a conflict with China. But it was the classified memo that preceded the pause in arms deliveries to Ukraine that especially spotlighted Colby's views. It tallied the numbers of weapons sought by Ukraine along with how many the U.S. has in its stocks for training and warfighting around the world. Trump later told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he wasn't responsible for the pause in shipments that followed, which he has since lifted. Wess Mitchell, a former senior State Department official who once started a policy organization with Colby called the Marathon Initiative, said the Pentagon official's focus on making tough decisions to deter China is driven by concern that the U.S. is overstretched. 'Bridge has put his finger on the real problem and said 'Let's give priority to the main threat even if that means we have to accept trade-offs in the other regions,' " Mitchell said. 'People may disagree with his approach, but it is driven by a legitimate concern, which is we don't currently have the resources for a three-front war." Write to Michael R. Gordon at and Lara Seligman at
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Australia warns China likely to spy on military drills with US amid tensions
The comments by a government minister came as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made a six-day visit to China to bolster recently repaired trade ties. read more Australia's government said Sunday it expects China to spy on major military drills it is conducting with the United States and other allies. It also renewed a charge – denounced by Beijing as a 'false narrative' – that China wants to establish a military base in the South Pacific. The comments by a government minister came as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made a six-day visit to China to bolster recently repaired trade ties. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD More than 30,000 military personnel from 19 nations are set to join in the annual Talisman Sabre exercise from Sunday across Australia and Papua New Guinea. 'The Chinese military have observed these exercises since 2017 and it would be very unusual if they didn't do that this time,' said Pat Conroy, Australia's minister for the defence industry and for Pacific Island affairs. 'We'll obviously observe their activities and monitor their presence around Australia,' he told Australian public broadcaster ABC. 'People observe these exercises to collect intelligence around procedures, around the electronic spectrum and the use of communications, and we'll adjust accordingly so that we manage that leakage.' The strategically important South Pacific region is at the centre of a diplomatic scramble for influence pitting China against its Western rivals. 'We're seeing in my portfolio of the Pacific, China seeking to secure a military base in the region,' said Conroy, who has previously made the same assessment. 'We're working very hard to be the primary security partner of choice for the region, because we don't think that's a particularly optimal thing for Australia.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China inked a secretive security pact with Pacific nation Solomon Islands in 2022. Although the details have never been published, the United States and close ally Australia fear it may be the prelude to some kind of permanent Chinese base. Australia wants 'a balanced region where no one is dominated and no one dominates', Conroy said. China's embassy in Fiji this month insisted claims that it wanted to set up a military base in the region were 'false narratives' driven by 'ulterior motives'. Beijing has spent hundreds of millions of dollars building sports stadiums, presidential palaces, hospitals and roads in Pacific island nations. Kiribati, Solomon Islands and Nauru have in recent years severed longstanding diplomatic links with Taiwan in favour of China.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Russia's standing amongst global rivalries after its last aircraft carrier discontinues
In a historic and symbolic move, Russia is set to scrap its only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov , making it the only permanent member of the United Nations Security Council without an operational aircraft carrier. This decision marks a significant decline in Russia's naval aviation capabilities and reshapes the global balance of maritime power. Western adversaries: Commanding the seas The United States continues to dominate naval aviation with an impressive fleet of 11 nuclear-powered supercarriers, including the technologically advanced Ford-class equipped with electromagnetic catapults (EMALS), cutting-edge radar, and integrated drone operations. Complemented by nine amphibious assault ships capable of deploying stealth F-35B fighters, the U.S. Navy maintains unparalleled global reach and strike capability. NATO allies further strengthen this dominance. The United Kingdom fields two Queen Elizabeth-class carriers operating F-35B stealth jets, while France operates the nuclear-powered Charles de Gaulle with Rafale M fighters and catapult launch systems. Italy and Spain also contribute with smaller carriers integrating advanced aircraft like the F-35B and Harrier jets. Collectively, NATO navies operate over 16 aircraft carriers, maintaining high interoperability and readiness through frequent joint exercises. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Indonesia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You) Container House | Search ads Search Now Undo Ammunition production: Russia surges ahead In 2024 and 2025, Russia's defense industry has shifted to a full "war economy," allowing it to produce about 3 million artillery shells per year, nearly three times the combined output of the United States and Europe. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and U.S. General Christopher Cavoli have both confirmed that Russia now manufactures in just three months what all NATO countries produce in a year. Russia's monthly output of artillery shells stands at around 250,000, while the U.S. currently produces about 40,000 shells per month and aims to reach 90,000 monthly by 2026. The European Union, meanwhile, is racing to catch up, with plans to reach 2.5 million shells annually by 2025. This explosive growth is backed by major investments in new facilities, such as a massive explosives plant in Siberia, which is expected to produce enough RDX to fill over a million 152 mm shells annually. Russia's production costs are also drastically lower, about 10 times less per shell than NATO equivalents, thanks to state subsidies and a managed economy. Live Events Defence budgets: Russia vs NATO This naval gap is mirrored in defense spending. NATO's combined military expenditure reached a staggering $1.5 trillion in 2024, with the United States alone accounting for nearly $997 billion, more than six times Russia's entire military budget. By comparison, Russia's military spending was estimated at $149 billion in 2024, even after a dramatic 38% increase over the previous year. NATO's new target of 5% of GDP for defense could push these numbers even higher by 2035, further widening the gap. In sheer numbers, NATO also outpaces Russia in active personnel, aircraft, and naval vessels by wide margins. While new aircraft carriers are not on the immediate agenda due to financial and industrial constraints, Russia is building large amphibious assault ships ( Project 23900 Ivan Rogov-class ). These vessels can carry helicopters, landing craft, armored vehicles, and troops, providing flexibility for littoral operations, disaster relief, and potentially even supporting short takeoff and landing aircraft in the future. Limited carrier presence among other partners Other Russian partners, including Iran and North Korea, lack aircraft carriers, relying instead on submarines and missile craft. Countries like Brazil, Egypt, and Thailand maintain single, older carriers primarily for regional defense and helicopter operations. The scrapping of the Admiral Kuznetsov highlights a growing technological and strategic divide. Western carriers boast stealth aircraft, EMALS, and integrated drone fleets, while China and India continue to develop but remain behind. Russia's exit from carrier aviation signals a shift in focus toward submarines, hypersonic missiles, and unmanned naval platforms, reducing its ability to project air power at sea.
