US Warns India Not to Buy Russian Weapons

geoBR

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
161
Likes
172
Country flag
US Warns India Not to Buy Russian Weapons

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/01/us-warns-india-not-buy-russian-weapons.html



The US does not shy away from openly threatening its allies and friends into submission. America’s major defense partners could face tough sanctions for purchases of Russian military equipment. Since January 29, the US has been imposing punitive measures under the CAATSA on foreign entities and individuals who cooperate with Russia in the field of defense or intelligence gathering. Congress is not inclined to give the administration the right of waiver to make an exception from the rule for some close allies. Despite that, many of them remain adamant in their intent to purchase the weapons they need from Russia.

Washington is exerting pressure on Turkey to make it abandon the plans to purchase Russia S-400 Triumf state-of-the-art air defense systems. So far, Ankara stood tall refusing to bow. US Congress is already considering the proposals on halting US arms sales to that country.

Unlike Turkey, India is not a NATO ally but its desire to acquire the Triumf triggers a negative reaction in the US. American lawmakers not only express concern over the planned deal but also issue warnings that sensitive American military technology may be banned from being shared with India in future. According to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, “There is a lot of concern in the US administration and Congress with the S-400.” India’s decision will be made final before the October Russia-India summit. During the informal talks in Sochi in May 2018, President Putin and Prime Minister Modi discussed the ways to get around the US potential sanctions when the deal goes through. Both countries have pledged to jointly create a plan to keep it out of CAATSA. New Delhi has just concluded price talks on the S-400 deal with Moscow, saying it will go ahead, no matter what the US says or does.

Those who follow the news on arms trade know well that India is interested in purchasing 22 American Predator Guardian drones for its Navy. It’s also willing to acquire the weapon the US has not sold anyone so far: 80-100 Avenger (Predator C) armed drones for the Air Force. The price may be as high as $8 billion. The F-16 production on Indian soil is also in doubt. All these projects are questioned as the US sticks to its guns implementing the “do it or else” policy. But it will hardly work with India, a nation known for its independent foreign policy. It has never bowed to any pressure from outside since its independence.

Iraq, Egypt, the UAE, Qatar, Morocco, Indonesia and Vietnam are among the countries threatened by sanctions if they go on with the plans to purchase Russian weapons. Many of them are particularly interested in the S-400. There is a catch here. If you make an exemption, others will feel humiliated and demand waivers too, but if you punish nobody then what is CAATSA for? Perhaps, the entire policy of punishing others in case of non-compliance with US laws is fundamentally wrong. It may not push Russia out of the international arms market but rather make its products a commercial success. After all, it’s an open secret that the S-400 is much more capable than the US Patriot air-defense system.

Turkey is told that if it buys Russia arms, the US won’t sell it F-35 aircraft. India may not get drones in case it purchases the S-400s. The essence is the same: sovereign countries are to be deprived of their right to have the best. They’d better be satisfied with what the US imposes or face punitive measures for daring not to comply. But many of them will not. For instance, there is little doubt that the pressure will make US-Indian relations hit a rough patch.

Defense Secretary James Mattis sought waivers for allies buying Russian weapons but failed to persuade Congress to give the administration this right. Besides, State Secretary Mike Pompeo holds a different view on the issue.

The “arms twisting” approach is prevalent in US foreign policy and even NATO allies are no exception. According to The Times, President Trump is expected to scale back America’s commitments or even issue an ultimatum over further American involvement in Europe.

No world leaders taking part in the St. Petersburg’s economic forum (SPIEF-2018) in May were happy about the US ultimatums as well as the sanctions against Russia, especially at a time it is leaving recession behind and oil prices are going up. The complains were made heard and concerns voiced at the conference held in the country, which is the prime target of American attacks. Nobody admired the trade wars the US has unleashed. May was the month the US stepped up its attacks on the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline – the project Germany, Austria and some other European countries want to go through so much.

Israel was the only country to greet the US withdrawal from the Iran deal. Nobody endorsed the President Trump’s decision to cancel the meeting in Singapore with the North Korean leader (it may still take place, the talks are underway).

The US and its European allies appear to go separate ways on defense. On May 27, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz called for a European operation in North Africa to stem the immigrants’ flows. Austria will take over the EU Presidency for six months starting in July. The idea has been being floated since a long time ago. Europe’s main security concern is the protection of its borders, not taking part in US ventures in faraway places or provoking Russia by deploying forces near its borders. The EU is gradually moving to its own deterrence and defense posture, which may not necessarily meet US interests.

The US policy of diktat will backlash, bringing together those who are threatened by US sanctions. The EU is about to fight back, Turkey sticks to its guns, India has refused to bow. American allies will have to work out their own approaches to international problems, using quite different instruments to achieve the desired goals. The US global standing will be weakened. By trying to isolate others America will isolate itself. But the addiction to teach, dictate and bark orders is too great to get easily rid of. It takes time to realize that the times have changed. What worked well yesterday has become counterproductive today.

Tags: India
 

WARREN SS

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
5,370
Likes
20,226
Country flag
This BS US never warn India for Sanctions it only said that it will be difficult for them to share cutting edge US technology after that
 

proud_hindustani

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
247
Likes
4
Country flag
Let them do whatever they want. We know U.S. is known for its blackmail to some countries.

We should buy S-400 as soon as possible with a middle finger and sticking out tongue to uncle Sam.
 

mayfair

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
6,032
Likes
13,109
This BS US never warn India for Sanctions it only said that it will be difficult for them to share cutting edge US technology after that
Under Section 231 of CAATSA, any third-country firm or individual that engages in a "significant transaction" with Russia's defense or intelligence sectors will face a penalty.

It's very clear that this goes far beyond "difficulties in sharing cutting edge US technology". Do not it specifies "firm or individual" and "significant transaction".

An Indian bank that is involved in making payments to the Russian firms "will face a penalty."

Now denying "cutting edge US technology" will not penalise the bank will it? How to penalise the bank then? By curtailing their operations in the US, by restricting their ability to handle and transact in US dollars and by blacklisting them for US companies, individuals and vendors and all those non-US firms that transact with the bank.

Still think it's as innocuous as denying "cutting edge US technology"?
 

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
7,420
Likes
12,945
Country flag
Under Section 231 of CAATSA, any third-country firm or individual that engages in a "significant transaction" with Russia's defense or intelligence sectors will face a penalty.
USA can do what ever it wants, India is not new to sanctions. Right after Nuke tests in 1998, India faced sanctions from western world. Come 2006 the same USA came with a nuke deal.
Russia is a trusted ally and a strategic partner for India. USA as usual is an unreliable country which looks after its own interests. India learnt its lesson from 1962 war with China.


It's very clear that this goes far beyond "difficulties in sharing cutting edge US technology". Do not it specifies "firm or individual" and "significant transaction".

An Indian bank that is involved in making payments to the Russian firms "will face a penalty."

Now denying "cutting edge US technology" will not penalise th
e bank will it? How to penalise the bank then? By curtailing their operations in the US, by restricting their ability to handle and transact in US dollars and by blacklisting them for US companies, individuals and vendors and all those non-US firms that transact with the bank.

Still think it's as innocuous as denying "cutting edge US technology"?
Becoming a self sustained economy and indigenous products is the thing India should seriously think about.
There is no such thing as USA's cutting edge technology that India can buy, USA sells outdated tech and keeps its advanced defense toys for itself.
 

mayfair

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
6,032
Likes
13,109
I was posting in response to @WARREN SS claims that CAATSA would only affect technology transfer. It's way beyond that.

I gave the example of banks. Suppose SBI continues to carry out transactions with Russia under previously signed agreements. Under CAATSA, US will be obliged to impose a penalty on SBI. This will affect not only SBI operations based in US, but also its transactions with other countries, where US dollars are involved.

Since, international trade is mostly in USD, it will severely hamper Indian entities who bank via SBI to continue their banking transactions. Importers banking with SBI will not be able to pay their suppliers, Exporters will not receive payments for their exports. Any remittances via SBI in USD will be halted and affect a large number of people who remit money back to India or elsewhere via SBI.

The only way for SBI to avoid the sanctions is to apply for a waver and give a firm commitment to "scaling down all future transactions with Russia", which adds another set of complications.

This is why SBI has halted all payments to Russia and Rosboronexport.
 

Haldiram

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
5,708
Likes
28,648
Country flag
I was posting in response to @WARREN SS claims that CAATSA would only affect technology transfer. It's way beyond that.

I gave the example of banks. Suppose SBI continues to carry out transactions with Russia under previously signed agreements. Under CAATSA, US will be obliged to impose a penalty on SBI. This will affect not only SBI operations based in US, but also its transactions with other countries, where US dollars are involved.

Since, international trade is mostly in USD, it will severely hamper Indian entities who bank via SBI to continue their banking transactions. Importers banking with SBI will not be able to pay their suppliers, Exporters will not receive payments for their exports. Any remittances via SBI in USD will be halted and affect a large number of people who remit money back to India or elsewhere via SBI.

The only way for SBI to avoid the sanctions is to apply for a waver and give a firm commitment to "scaling down all future transactions with Russia", which adds another set of complications.

This is why SBI has halted all payments to Russia and Rosboronexport.
It was the right thing for SBI to do. There is no need for us to use SBI to settle this bill. We can simply purchase Russian oil at a higher price and ask them to use the difference to settle this invoice.
 

Immanuel

Senior Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
3,551
Likes
7,468
Country flag
While there are ways to get around these sanctions, best is always to get clearly laid down exemptions from the US, this way we force them to change their note when it comes to India.
 

mayfair

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
6,032
Likes
13,109
While there are ways to get around these sanctions, best is always to get clearly laid down exemptions from the US, this way we force them to change their note when it comes to India.
The trouble is the exemptions themselves are nothing but a demand for concessions. I am sure you are aware that the exemptions or wavers "require U.S. authorities to certify not only that the exemption would not harm the United States' national security interests but also that Russia had made "significant efforts to reduce the number and intensity of cyber intrusions."

Hell will freeze over before Russia will agree to give such an undertaking- it is tantamount to admitting culpability for a crime that most Amreekis themselves have no proof of!! Would you shoot yourselves voluntarily in the foot?

This is not all. You see, there's a waiver as well.

"countries wishing to continue trade with Russia's defense or intelligence sectors could opt for a waiver under Section 231. The waiver, which has a maximum length of 180 days, requires U.S. officials to certify that the applicant is "substantially reducing the number of significant transactions" with targeted Russian interests."


So you see India can get a waiver for 180 days and therefore "complete all pending payments" as long as India commits to ""substantially reducing the number of significant transactions" with targeted Russian interests."


In other words we formally agree NOT to buy more Russian arms and ammo in the future, including spares for the Su-30 MKIs, T-90s, T-72s, AN-32, IL-78, IL-76, Mig-29K, INS Chakra etc. that we WILL need from the OEMs. We will also have to commit not to extend the Brahmos co-operation and collaboration on nuclear subs and procurement of frigates. In other words we must agree to shoot ourselves in the foot and backside and ground 2/3rd of our combat systems for the foreseeable future!!!

Are people really daft or insane to consider something like this
 

kalakaar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2018
Messages
109
Likes
145
Why put everything on India's court. Russia wants to sell India wants to buy. Russia can play its card to sell it to India, when India is not backing off.
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
While there are ways to get around these sanctions, best is always to get clearly laid down exemptions from the US, this way we force them to change their note when it comes to India.
Did USA request India while signing CAATSA? Why should India request USA while signing military deal with Russia? Why this one-sided attitude?
 

Icarus

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
671
Likes
1,035
Country flag
Just a general question on this, and I hope experts on weapons-related matters can chime in. I was recently watching Scandal (the tv show). In one of the episodes, the intelligence officer tells the american president, "What if Pak asks for drone technology so they can wipe India off the map?"

Just a rhetorical query she asks, but it got me thinking. Is the US weapons technology superior enough to cause heavy damage to India, with or without Pakistan? I know it's only a tv show, but I am just wondering.
 

nongaddarliberal

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
3,988
Likes
22,684
Country flag
Just a general question on this, and I hope experts on weapons-related matters can chime in. I was recently watching Scandal (the tv show). In one of the episodes, the intelligence officer tells the american president, "What if Pak asks for drone technology so they can wipe India off the map?"

Just a rhetorical query she asks, but it got me thinking. Is the US weapons technology superior enough to cause heavy damage to India, with or without Pakistan? I know it's only a tv show, but I am just wondering.
Drone technology to wipe India off the map? LOOOOOL. Short of nuclear weapons, there is no such technology that can "wipe India off the map".
 

roma

NRI in Europe
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
3,582
Likes
2,538
Country flag
My reply is that
in addition to

make in India
we should add

MAKE BY INDIA .... and gradually that should replace the former

US Warns India Not to Buy Russian Weapons

Tags: India
India Will Continue to Stick to S-400 Deal g
This BS at
Let t Sam.
USA Nuke tests i.
American sanctions cannot impact our defence deal with Russia including S-400 missile deal.

It was the right thing for SBI to do. There is no need for us to use SBI to settle this bill. We can simply purchase Russian oil at a higher price and ask them to use the difference to settle this invoice.
Why put everything on India's court. Russia wants to sell India wants to buy. Russia can play its card to sell it to India, when India is not backing off.
Did USA request India while signing CAATSA? Why should India request USA while signing military deal with Russia? Why this one-sided attitude?
off the map".

addenda
Out of curiosity, what is make by India?
.....that is to say conceptualized in india , designed in india, manufactured fabricated in india and deployed in india .... whether defence products or otherwise
 
Last edited:

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
31,905
Likes
147,980
Country flag
Just a general question on this, and I hope experts on weapons-related matters can chime in. I was recently watching Scandal (the tv show). In one of the episodes, the intelligence officer tells the american president, "What if Pak asks for drone technology so they can wipe India off the map?"

Just a rhetorical query she asks, but it got me thinking. Is the US weapons technology superior enough to cause heavy damage to India, with or without Pakistan? I know it's only a tv show, but I am just wondering.
My two paise...

There is no such defence technology that can wipe off any country off the map, unless of course we are talking about small countries like marshal island.

Sometimes even in our theoretical discussions we forget that a single missile (Brahmos to Agni series) has a limited impact without nuclear warheads.

Ex: it took Americans 50 tomahawks to partially disable a Syrian airfield last year.
 

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
Mod
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
31,905
Likes
147,980
Country flag
My reply is that
in addition to

make in India
we should add

MAKE BY INDIA .... and gradually that should replace the former
Out of curiosity, what is make by India?
 

Indibomber

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
584
Likes
1,039
Just a general question on this, and I hope experts on weapons-related matters can chime in. I was recently watching Scandal (the tv show). In one of the episodes, the intelligence officer tells the american president, "What if Pak asks for drone technology so they can wipe India off the map?"

Just a rhetorical query she asks, but it got me thinking. Is the US weapons technology superior enough to cause heavy damage to India, with or without Pakistan? I know it's only a tv show, but I am just wondering.
American Aviation wing is strong and was designed to carry out strikes afar since they do not have threat from fighter crafts. While Russia focused on taking down fighter plane and designed S-200 which is still used and is considered a considerable threat If India gets S-400 and build on Akash and Barak 8 Systems. Predators and F-35 will not consider attacking India only long range missile strikes.

 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top