Scepticism over GE-HAL jet engine deal is unfounded despite stiff export control regulations; iCET is the key

Amid the media hype and hysteria over Narendra Modi’s ongoing visit to the United States — with the chattering classes in both countries shouting over each other to be heard — what has been noticeable is how both sides appear determined to remain fixated on deliverables and tangible outcomes. It is easy to overlook this intent beneath the pageantry and racket that entails a state visit to the US. Being the richest and most powerful country in the world has its perks. The Americans are masters of marketing and branding exercises. If they want to convey the impression that India matters in Washington DC, that message will be delivered loud and clear. Constituencies opposed to this visit aren’t silent either. Western mainstream media, that suffers from an intrinsic distrust of Modi and his nationalist government at the Centre, has been left scratching its head over the respect, recognition, and lavish welcome the Joe Biden administration has showered on the prime minister. It includes, among other things, an all-veg menu for the state dinner personally overseen by Jill Biden where millets are the showstoppers, with a side of saffron-infused risotto. On signalling, the hosts are leaving no stone unturned. It has triggered a bemused reaction from western media that is accusing the Biden administration of betrayal while some claim that the “charm offensive is all about China”. Some members of the Democratic Party have lived up to their ‘reputation’ by announcing they would boycott Modi’s address to the joint session of the US Congress. The list includes usual suspects such as anti-Semite and radical Islamist Ilhan Omar, Rashia Tlaib, and lawmaker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Pramila Jayapal, leader of the ‘progressive caucus’, has mobilized some Democrat members to urge Biden to press Modi on ‘human rights’ but has remained silent on accusations that her actions are funded by Pakistan-appointed lobbyists.

Yet in the larger scheme of things these discordant notes, though inevitable, are not only insignificant but also inconsequential because America’s investment in India is bipartisan, consistent, and scalable — a feature of its foreign policy for over two decades. On the other side, India has grown steadily close to the US in terms of strategic alignment, bilateral trade and investment, technological collaboration and defence cooperation despite its stated policy of strategic autonomy and Cold War-era misgivings and issues of distrust, and beyond the old slogans of non-alignment. The Biden administration is aware, however, that for the relationship to set new benchmarks and for Modi’s first official state visit to the United States to serve as a “real springboard” and a “pivotal moment” in ties, it must ensure tangible outcomes and deliverables. Optimism around US-India ties have often been typified as a case of over-promise and under-delivery. Even now that the Americans have pulled out all stops for Modi’s visit, charges of ‘talk shop’ have been frequently thrown at an event that the Biden administration has billed as “unprecedented”. Speaking to reporters at a press meet Tuesday, America’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan called Modi’s visit “a hinge moment” and ties with India “one of the defining relationships of the 21st century”. Yet to prove that it is actually so, and not just a catchword, both sides are aware that they need to deliver. Mooring the foundation of US-India economic ties — especially in the defence technology sector — and integrating the defence industrial bases of both nations through co-production and co-development can only be done through a formalization of the bureaucratic process, mobilization of export control regulations, coopting multiple stakeholders in the procedure and instilling in various constituencies involved in the development a sense of ownership. What differentiates Modi’s current visit and the promised results from this sojourn is that a lot of painstaking planning, give-and-take and laying down of well-defined agendas has been done before Modi emplaned for the US. And all this has been done keeping in mind the fact, as Sullivan told Hindustan Times in an interview, that “you will see outcomes from this visit that show the gathering momentum in US-India ties and show that we are actually delivering in reality to back up the positive words between our two leaders and between our two countries.” GE Aerospace, the US-based aircraft engine supplier, announced Thursday that it is signing an MoU with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to produce engines for Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jets. In a press note, the American firm said the deal includes the “potential joint production of GE Aerospace’s F414 engines in India, and GE Aerospace continues to work with the US government to receive the necessary export authorization for this.” The effort is part of the IAF Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk2 program. The company called it “a major milestone amidst prime minister Modi’s official state visit” and a “key element in strengthening defense cooperation between the two countries.” Sceptics will point to the fact that despite promises of transfer of technology (ToT), which according to some Indian media reports could be in the region of “80% of value and technology” during co-production of the engines, nothing has been laid out in stone yet beyond assurances from the American establishment that the deal will be “transformative”, and that India will have access to “designs and sensitive technology” involving “more tech transfer than the US has ever authorized,” that apparently signifies “breaking through into new frontiers.” Promises were made that there would be no “black boxes”, and nothing would be off the table. These are tall claims. The scepticism is normal. US export control mechanisms — that were put in place to protect American technologies involved in defence and critical sectors from falling into “wrong hands” during the height of Cold War — have instead been plaguing and hampering technology-sharing with its closest allies and partners. The Australians had bought into the AUKUS promise of Americans sharing nuclear-submarine technology. Now they are caught in maze of export control regulations such as International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Frustrated Australians are blaming the delay on “permafrost layer of middle management” in the US government, wading through which apparently feels like “death by a thousand cuts.” The scepticism that India will get access to sensitive technologies that the Americans consider as the “crown jewel” of their technological advancement and zealously guard with a bevy of export control and other regulatory mechanisms — apart from the fact that it requires ratification from the US Congress — therefore appears genuine. This scepticism was expressed by none other than NSA Ajit Doval, when he had visited Washington DC in January, when talks of fleshing out the India-US Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) were being held with his counterpart Sullivan. The iCET was conceptualized by Biden and Modi on the sidelines of the Quad Leaders’ Summit in Tokyo on 24 May, 2022. At a recent event, Doval recalled, “I was very excited but I was also sceptical. I was not very sure whether the idea would take off. Today, I am much more confident and hopeful, and it is because of not what has happened in the government but because of response of the industry, of the scientists and research scholars and institutions, who took the matter in much greater speed.” This is an example of involving the middle layer of technocrats, domain experts and institutions that would own and eventually take forward the process. According to a report in The Hindu, Doval billed iCET as the framework that will provide an “orbital jump” in bilateral strategic ties and a “very important element in this entire matter.” The importance of iCET, the potential of what it can do, and how it has been conceptualized to cut through the permafrost that has hampered previous attempts at co-production of sensitive technologies, have gone underreported in India. What separates this from the stillborn Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) is that the process takes into account the logistical, navigational and procedural issues that DTTI had thrown up. At every step of the process, there are well-laid-out bureaucratic structures formulated to address specific concerns. It is not a coincidence, for instance, that Modi’s ongoing visit was preceded by a meeting of the first US- India Strategic Trade Dialogue in June, so that “all hurdles under the ITAR and EAR are smoothened for US companies to do engage in joint and production of hi-tech systems such as aircraft engines, munition technologies and armed drones in India.” The Strategic Trade Dialogue was the first step. On Wednesday, the Pentagon and India’s Ministry of Defence jointly launched the India-US Defense Acceleration Ecosystem, called (INDUS-X), “to expand the strategic technology partnership and defence industrial cooperation between both governments, businesses, and academic institutions.” According to a fact sheet released by the Biden administration, “this initiative builds on a commitment by the US and Indian National Security Advisors in January 2023 to launch an ‘Innovation Bridge’ to connect US and Indian defence start-ups as part of the iCET.” The readout is self-explanatory. The end goal of iCET is to enable India — a country which is at the heart of America’s deterrence strategy against China — to get access to critical, advanced technologies through frameworks such as INDUX that goes into granular issues involving procurement, export controls, and industrial security with government, industry, and academia. This is why comparing the GE-HAL deal to produce jet engines for IAF fighter aircraft isn’t comparable to the US-India civil nuclear deal but the iCET is, because its possibilities are endless. It is the well-structured gateway to a range of potentials and options that addresses and bridges the key asymmetry of purpose between India and the United States — the former wants technological help from the US to develop its indigenous defence industry, while the latter wants to involve and include India in its security framework. iCET shows the way how it can be done keeping the interests of both in play. The writer is Deputy Executive Editor, Firstpost. He tweets @sreemoytalukdar. Views expressed are personal. Read all the Latest News , Trending News , Cricket News , Bollywood News , India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook , Twitter and Instagram .