CAG REPORT AND RAHUL

The Comptroller and Auditor General report on the purchase of Rafale, among other defence purchases, provides little comfort to the critics of the deal. There is no hanky-panky in the deal, according to the CAG. In fact, the NDA deal is nearly three per cent cheaper than the UPA deal which was negotiated but failed to fructify into a firm order. In reality, it would have been fully justified if the NDA deal was a little costlier due to the costs of design and development of the jet fighter to be paid for 36 aircraft as against 126. But, actually, the NDA deal was still cheaper by three percent. Nonetheless, the report finds fault with the entire procurement process of defence purchases. To begin with, the 2007 deal with Dassault was flawed. The CAG says neither the Dassault offer was cheaper than the rival bidders nor did it meet all the technical specifications. Indeed, the bid of the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) was the lowest, even though it did not meet fully the Indian Air Force requirements. In 2007, when the UPA selected Rafale as the bid-winner, the EADS offered a further 20 percent price-cut over the price it had quoted in the original bid. Why the UPA Government did not consider this offer is not clear. Nor is it clear why the NDA did not consider this offer by the Euro fighter. The report finds fault with both the Medium Multi — Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) on offer from Rafale and the European conglomerate. Clearly, the implication is that the UPA favoured Rafale and Modi went with its choice. Now, on the offsets partners. The CAG report does not go into the selection of offsets partner in this deal or several others, which it promises to do in a separate report. But the fact that the NDA deal was 2.9 per cent cheaper knocks the bottom of the campaign that the price was jacked up to benefit Anil Ambani who emerged as the offsets partner in the Rafale deal. Notably, the NDA deal, does not have the financial and performance guarantees. This could well have saved Dassault some money. The report also finds fault with the IAF which kept changing its specifications. The Air Staff Qualitative Standards were unclear and changed four times, notes the CAG. This led to further delay in the acquisition process. The India-specific enhancements in the NDA deal saved the taxpayers a lot of money which accounts for the overall 2.9 per cent savings. On the offsets link-up with Hindustan Aeronautical Limited, the report says under the UPA no agreement could be reached over the man-hours required — the demand was in several multiples of what Dassaul was ready to grant. Besides there was no meeting point possible over performance guarantees of HAL-built Rafale. (Given the way HAL — built and — maintained aircraft keep falling, causing the loss of precious lives and aircrafts, who can blame Dassault for not wanting to sign up with the government-owned behemoth to partner it for offsets.) In sum, the NDA deal is clean.

Meanwhile, it is unlikely that the Rafale drum-beaters fall silent, accepting the findings of the CAG report. If they did not heed the Supreme Court in this regard, it is hard to expect that they will terminate their one-issue campaign ahead of the general election. For, the objective behind the Rafale raga by Rahul Gandhi is not as much to find fault with the actual deal but to somehow by hook or crook pull down Modi in the eyes of the people so that on corruption he stands level with the Gandhis. Undermining faith in the defence procurement to establish some sort of equivalence with themselves is the unsaid but vitally known agenda of the critics of the deal. Besides, the fact that ordinary voters are impressed that Modi has successfully run a scam-free government, handicaps the opposition which wants to oust him by all means foul or fair from power in the coming poll. So, politically the CAG report will not stop the shrill noises about chowkidar chor hai and, lately, Modi gaddaar hai and must be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act. You need to be mature to avoid the use of such hyperbolic abuse against an incumbent prime minister. It is best to ignore such imprecations from a 48-year-old leader who is still raw in politics, though he might have come to head the Grand Old Party by dint of a hereditary right.