Should India sign CISMOA ?

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by SHASH2K2, Jul 27, 2010.

  1. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    As part of the Clinton-Krishna 5-pillar strategy agreed in July 2009, strategic cooperation (nonproliferation, counterterrorism and military cooperation) forms the first pillar, and as such represents one of the most important and promising elements of the bilateral relationship as India plans to procure over $45b worth of advanced military and security equipment to modernize its armed forces over the next five years.

    To overcome roadblocks that stand in the way of critical tools addressing “areas of convergence” such as counter-terrorism, maritime security, cyber security, regional as well as global security, the Communications and Interoperability Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA), among other agreements, must be signed.

    We must partner in combating terror. This means greater defense/security cooperation. The Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) sale (126 fighter aircraft procurement which includes Lockheed Martin and Boeing as strong contenders) is a crucial step in intensifying this vital relationship. Several other major programs, for which USIBC members are vying, are an important element in intensifying defense and strategic collaboration between the U.S and India.

    USIBC suggests raising the FDI cap for investment in India’s defense sector from 26% to 74%. This move will bolster confidence and enable U.S. companies to make more robust investment in activities that facilitate technology transfer.

    USIBC supports a robust strategic relationship with India, including transfer of defense technology and licensing – in consonance with U.S. National Disclosure Policy and believes export controls policy should be reflective of the evolving strategic relationship between both countries.
     
  2.  
  3. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    NEW DELHI: The seniormost US military commander, Admiral Michael Mullen, will be in town on Thursday and Friday but India still remains cold to inking three military pacts connected with technology safeguards and logistics being pushed by Washington.

    Interestingly, Admiral Mullen's visit comes at a time when the selection process to choose one of the six foreign aviation majors in the race to supply 126 fighters to IAF, in a lucrative $10.4-billion project, is entering the last lap. Two American companies, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, are among the contenders.

    Moreover, Washington is also on the verge of clinching the biggest-ever Indo-US defence deal till now, the supply of 10 C-17 Globemaster-III giant strategic airlift aircraft to IAF, which will come with a price tag upwards of $3 billion to overtake the $2.1 billion contract for eight Boeing P-8I maritime reconnaissance aircraft inked last year.

    As the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mullen will, of course, discuss the changing dynamics in the volatile Af-Pak region and the terrorism emanating from it, as also other security issues of interest to India, during his talks with defence minister A K Antony, national security adviser Shiv Shankar Menon and top military brass here.

    But the virtual deadlock over the three pacts -- Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) and Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-Spatial Cooperation (BECA) -- is also expected to figure in the parleys.

    US wants CISMOA and BECA to be inked as soon as possible, holding that otherwise it will not be possible to transfer high-tech avionics and electronics to India like the ones required in the P-8I deal.

    But while US managed to push through the EUMA (end-use monitoring agreement), finalised during the visit of secretary of state Hillary Clinton a year ago, India remains quite unconvinced about the three pacts.

    "LSA strictly remains a non-starter. We also have some serious misgivings about CISMOA and BECA. The continuing inclusion of some DRDO labs and defence PSUs in the American government's `entity list' is another sore point here,'' said a top official.

    Modelled on the Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements the US has inked with scores of countries, LSA envisages Indian and American militaries providing logistic support, refuelling and berthing facilities for each other's warships and aircraft on a barter or an equal-value exchange basis.

    "It's a politically contentious pact. While we have a thriving defence relationship with US, we don't want to be seen as its direct military ally. Moreover, the pact will benefit American forces more since they operate in our region, while we do not operate near their bases,'' said the official.

    During the last visit of US defence secretary Robert Gates here, Antony in fact had made it clear India was unsure of the benefits that would accrue to it by inking pacts like CISMOA and LCA.
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Even-as-top-US-chief-comes-visiting-India-reluctant-about-military-pacts/articleshow/6197364.cms
     
  4. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Should we sign Cismoa to get latest weapons from USA or we can afford not to sign in and getting inferior systems instead. I want to know pros and cons of the CISMOA .
     
  5. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    What is CISMOA?
    17 Dec 2009 Jason Verdugo: The Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement or “CISMoA” is another facet of bureaucratic and sometimes political attributes of doing business and allying with the United States. The CISMoA should not be confused with the EULA which is a totally different agreement covering the use of systems purchased. The CISMoA provides guidance on how the systems will function with other systems. The CISMoA however, can be abused as an agreement and become an extension of /or a replacement for a EULA which can defeat the entire purpose of any cooperation and the purpose of the CISMoA.

    The recent exercises between the Indian and U.S. militaries were a success and both sides are continuing to get acquainted with each others people, equipment, and doctrine. There were probably issues with interoperability that were uncovered for which, neither side is telling. They will however work to fix any technical and collaborative issues, so that when the next joint exercise occurs, at least those first problems will be fixed.

    In the 21st century, communications equipment aren’t just some solid state radios where each side only needs to know a particular frequency to communicate on. Communications equipment are highly complex pieces of computerized hardware running equally complex software and encryption products. Sometimes it’s difficult to get the same equipment with the same country to work properly much less trying to conduct joint operations with different countries using different equipment.

    The CISMoA attempts to facilitate agreements on how each nation’s radios will communicate with each other effectively. For example, India troops may want to call in an air strike with U.S. air assets, this will require Indian ground radios to be compatible with U.S. strike aircraft radios to include encryption. Likewise, U.S. Special Ops may want to call in Indian long range artillery. The U.S. SpecOps on the ground will need their radios to communicate with Indian ground based artillery batteries.

    Communications such as these are only a fraction of what CISMoA can cover. Going back to the air strike scenario, if laser guided bombs are employed, the Indian ground troops may require a laser designator. It’s not just point and the aircraft shoots as the press and media will have you believe. That laser designator must be set to a specific agreed upon frequency of invisible laser light. The laser guided bombs loaded on the aircraft will also be set to accept that specific frequency. You can’t have the enemy using a similar frequency of laser light to direct our bombs back on us (unlikely). If the frequencies do not match, the bombs won’t register a signal.

    Another real world example is with the Patriot missile system that the U.S. has sold to Japan. It turns out that the frequency the U.S. system uses to send a launch command to the missiles is the same frequency used by Japanese commercial cell phone carriers. OOPS! This required a tweaking of the Patriot systems in Japan to use a different frequency that likewise while good for military use in Japan, can not be used inside the U.S.

    A current real world problem for which the U.S. and other allies in the war theater’s (possibly even Indian units) are experiencing issues with unmanned air vehicles (UAV’s) communications. The frequencies are becoming ever more difficult to manage and they are jamming each other, making command and control more and more difficult if not impossible. Actually, the U.S. lost another Reaper last week in Afghanistan for an “unknown” reason which has already been traced to a loss of comm link.

    A further problem is the creation of device to defeat the improvised explosive device or IED. The U.S. Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization or JIEDDO based out of the Pentagon has poured billions of dollars in development & deployment of specialized electronic equipment. One such device is used to jam the cell phones and other devices used to remote detonate IED’s. Unfortunately one of these devices uses the same frequency that the Blackhawk helicopter uses for firing IR countermeasure flares. OOPS!

    Ultimately the term for this is called “Spectrum Management” and the U.S. and her allies try diligently to prevent problems like this from occurring. CISMoA helps, but in a fluid theater of operations with many different nations with many different types of communications platforms operating, this is showing to be impossible.

    CISMoA may also cover electronic warfare or EW. (see the EW article link). EW, if properly employed can be a powerful weapon against your enemies. However, since it’s an area weapon with broad reach, if the management of operations and spectrum are not perfect, then you may jam your own forces and/or your allies to your own detriment.

    At least with India and the U.S. there will be fewer different systems and only two players. Theoretically spectrum management should be easier and more feasible.

    CISMoA does not just cover hardware and software; it also covers doctrine and interaction. We can share a command center which could be transferring Indian commanders to U.S. ships or transferring U.S. Commanders to Indian ground command facilities. These commanders will be responsible for their respective forces. They will need to know how each other works. One Generals decision to bomb a target may be in conflict with the other Generals plan to take the target, hence, friendly fire incident. Or one General may want to continue negotiating while another General might want to bypass a village instead. CISMoA tries to create a framework for commanders to operate in so that they don’t have to halt operations and call Washington or New Delhi for guidance. One regulating factor for a CISMoA can be the Rules of Engagement or ROE.

    An example is the ongoing media blitz of the German commander in Afghanistan who called in an American aircraft to conduct an airstrike on a fuel tanker truck that had been compromised. Needless to say there was a lot of death and destruction. The communications and weapons performed exactly as designed and agreed upon, however the politics and media have twisted the event from a proper combat decision of a valued commander to a television treasure trove that the Taliban and or Al-Qaeda can take to the Pakistani mountains.

    A CISMOA can be a powerful tool to help operations, but it can be horribly tainted and twisted into a hindrance or a scapegoat of policy because of politics.
    http://www.8ak.in/8ak_india_defence_news/2009/12/what-is-cismoa.html
     
    Hemant Gaikwad likes this.
  6. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Sign the agreement and go for European aircraft. Screw the Americans in EW. We can build our own along with Israel instead of buying it. Indian armed forces will not buy American EW anyway.

    Now, American radars, that's a different story.
     
  7. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    If we go for European planes question of Signing it becomes irrelevent . I meant to ask that shall we go for it or not . what are pros and cons of Cismoa?
     
  8. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    I think more than CISMOA, it is the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA) that is probelematic. Since it allows mutual access to military ships and jets. It is as good as signing an alliance pact with the US and this would unnecessary needle China and Russia. That is why LSA is a non-starter as mentioned in earlier posts.

    The other treaties can be inked after getting ISRO and DRDO removed from blacklists as well as modifying it for"Indian sensitivities". CISMOA is actually alright as long as India negotiates appropriate "chink" of the spectrum for tis own communication, does not have to part with too many details of its own frequencies used and gets as much as possible information regarding frequencies used by other countries.
     
  9. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    We need to sign the agreement to make use of the P-8Is and C-130Js.

    What I meant was we sign the agreement but procure offensive weapons platforms like fighters from Europe and buy passive electronics like radars from US.
     
  10. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Good point . But will USA be ready to sell just Radars for our planes ? They will be selling only complete packages rather than spare parts like Israelis. so situation is that we cannot swallow or spit it out as well .
     
  11. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    Communication systems and radars for other needs and not fighters. We can go for the Wedgetail and UAVs or more P-8Is. Radars for our Army and navy can be procured too. We don't have to go for American technology for fighters.
     
  12. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    When it comes to integration of AESA tech for planes USA is way ahead from other players and they will all be only in catching mode . Best selling point for SH is its radar which is much more capable than competitors. Best RADAR for army which can be provided will be Xband which seems very difficult. anything Inferior to that we are already working on them and will get it sooner and later . Also as I mentioned earlier USA will be selling us Systems like PAC 3 . They will not be selling just radar or missiles to be integrated with our systems. For these requirement Israel is the best option as they are willing to customize their systems as per our needs.
     
  13. neo29

    neo29 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,284
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    india
    Why do we need to sign CISMOA when US is not the only country offering us technology. Its not like we dont have a option but to buy from US only.

    Signing CISMOA is like i buy a washing machine and the vendor can come to my house on regular basis to see if i use it properly. This agreement is totally ridiculous in first place. When i buy any equipment that i am paying for why should you know how i use it. After payment its mine and i use it however i want to.
     
  14. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    USA is not the only country willing to sell but they are the only one with best equipments . compare USA equipments with others and you will come to know. Question is that are the good enough to accept so many strings attached to it?
     
  15. venkat

    venkat Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    904
    Likes Received:
    195
    If rape is inevitable lie down and enjoy!!!!:emot158:
     
  16. prateikf

    prateikf Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    41
    if India is buying high tech equipment fro the US then it has got to sign these pacts. otherwise why pay so much for flying junks?
     
    asianobserve likes this.
  17. neo29

    neo29 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,284
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    india
    True ... in case of P8i's its the best. We need it. If at all india signs CISMOA it should be for hardware that US's arm twist/pressure may not have much impact. Something like Javelin's and m777.
     
  18. prateikf

    prateikf Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    41
    who knows when the m777 deal will be signed? the trial's for the howitzer's are scheduled for december of this year and the agreement would only be signed in 2011 or 2012. if the deal is so important the MOD must cut the red tape and get the deal done at the earliest possible movement.
     
  19. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    Air force gets US planes minus security net
    New Delhi, Aug. 2: The Indian Air Force has contracted six aircraft for the special forces for $1 billion without military-grade secure equipment because Washington denied the technology after New Delhi refused to sign a communications secrecy pact.

    The air force is now in the process of contracting another 10 very heavy strategic airlifters under the same technology-denial regime for an estimated $3 billion.

    India contracted six C-130J Super Hercules in 2007 and the first of these aircraft is likely to be delivered by January 2010 ahead of schedule by its maker, Lockheed Martin, under a government-to-government foreign military sales programme.

    One of the scenarios in which the Hercules (“Hercs” for short) is to be used involves inserting special airborne troops (paratroopers) by flying into hostile territory where an adversary can try to intercept and/or jam electronic communication.

    “We are aware that some of the equipment we desire may not be available. But it is up to us to use the platform the way we want to with modifications once we have it,” a senior air force officer told The Telegraph.

    A US defence official told this newspaper “anything that requires encryption, which includes military-grade global positioning systems (GPS)” will not be mounted on the C-130J or the C-17 Globemaster III (made by Boeing) because India has not yet signed the Communications Inter-Operability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA).

    The CISMOA was proposed by the Pentagon to the Indian defence ministry in 2006. A standard text for another crucial agreement, the End-User Monitoring Arrangement, was agreed last year after more than three years of negotiations.

    A secure GPS is indispensable for mobile military platforms that are designed to track targets in all-weather and all-time circumstances.

    “The military GPS system is encrypted and thus not available without a communications agreement,” the US defence official said. He claimed that “US military equipment is designed utilising the best systems available, such as military-grade GPS, which is more accurate and less likely to be spoofed (intercepted) than civilian GPS”.

    Asked if there was any way India could access the equipment without signing the CISMOA, he replied “there is no way around this”. He said the CISMOA would apply to the proposed sale of the C-17 also. Trials for the aircraft were completed last month and the Indian Air Force has decided to buy it.

    The four-engine turbo-prop Hercs — a workhorse for the US military — is a “tactical airlifter” with a payload capacity of 20 tonnes or about 120 fully-equipped airborne troops capable of landing on dirt strips and with short take-off and landing capability.

    The giant C-17 jet is also rugged but capable of flying much longer distances with much heavier payloads. The Indian Air Force has projected a dire need for these two different classes of aircraft because its Russian/Soviet-origin aircraft are outdated.

    The air force is set to order six more Hercs in addition to the six already contracted. The Coast Guard and the Border Security Force are also in line to acquire two Hercs each.

    The Hercs are to be based at Hindon, just east of Delhi, where the Indian Air Force base is being refurbished. The Hercs for India have been modified for special missions and are equipped with an infrared detection set for low-level flying in adverse conditions.

    Although the communications systems would not have the desired level of security for the Indian Air Force, an official said that India was getting the Hercs with the configuration it wants. They will have self-protection and mid-air refuelling ability. The Hercs is in service in 10 countries.
    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100803/jsp/nation/story_12763774.jsp
     
  20. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/08/us-dod-no3-in-delhi-after-hawking-uavs.html
    US DoD No.3 In Delhi, After Hawking UAVs To Pak [UPDATED]
    Will be attending a briefing tomorrow morning by US Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, Michèle Flournoy, visiting Delhi to push forward Indo-US defence cooperation. She arrived in the city after giving the Pakistan Army a rousing round of encouragement in Islamabad two days ago. "There's no doubt about Pakistan's commitment to the war on terror," she said there. Flournoy is part of what is likely to be one unending barrage of high-level visits to India ahead of President Obama's in November. The US is working hard to (a) get the contentious CISMOA/LSA/BECA troika of agreements concluded, and (b) finish up all the paperwork for at least one big deal that could be signed during President Obama's visit. Sources say, this could either be the deal for 10 C-17 heavy transports (in the bag, for all practical purposes) or the follow-on deal for six more C-130Js (also in the bag, for all practical purposes). Other high-value deals awaiting decisions or in process of evaluations, apart from the MMRCA, include ultralight howitzers, attack and heavylift rotorcraft and the re-engining bid for the IAF Jaguar fleet. Hope she says more than the last couple of American babus who came. Stay tuned.

    [[email protected]] The briefing yielded little. When asked about the troika of agreements pending, Flournoy said, "The agreements are not a requirement for defence trade, but are necessary if defence trade is to be taken to the next level." She also said the US was "mindful" of India's concerns about the supply of conventional weaponry to Pakistan.
     

Share This Page