LEMOA Pact: Is It a Usual Defence Deal or a Strategic Blunder?

Has India achieved anything substantial by signing the LEMOA pact with US, senior analysts debate on The Quint.

Defence Secretary Ashton Carter and Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar participate in a joint news conference at the Pentagon, 29 August 2016. (Photo: AP)

No sooner had the Defence Minister Parrikar signed the LEMOA (Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement) with his US counterpart, Ashton Carter, a debate was sparked off about whether the defence pact is in fact in India’s strategic interest.

The opposition, including the Congress and CPI (M), has expressed its discontent with the deal, going so far as to state that the Modi government has compromised the country’s sovereignty and surrendered its strategic autonomy. The deal allows both the countries to share each other’s military assets and bases.

The Quint brings to its readers view and counterview, analysing whether the move will increase India’s outreach or if it will result in the country being drawn into unnecessary military operations, resulting in a deadly blow to its foreign policy.

Senior expert on strategic affairs, Uday Bhaskar is of the view, that the pact will lead to a mutual sharing of logistics such as food, water, petroleum, means of communication, and medical services which is no ordinary feat. The very fact that India can depend on the US as an ally during relief operations will be a force multiplier. Opposition’s fears are misplaced and their reaction is Pavlovian so to say.

Here are the important arguments made in the piece:

• LEMOA has paved way for sharing of basic logistics such as food, water, petroleum as well as communication means and medical services.
  
• LEMOA may come in handy during disaster relief operations when India sends humanitarian relief to other countries.
  
• Beijing is very anxious with respect to the recent military alliance as it perceives a threat to its dominance in the region.
  
• India will have to dispel the perception of mistrust both within as well as outside the country.

You can read the complete article here.

Taking a contrarian view, defence analyst Bharat Karnad has lashed out at the government for the move which he refers to as “foreign policy boondoggle”. The author begins by quoting the statement released by the Ministry of defence, which is not so reassuring as one tries to read between the lines.

The agreement does not create any obligations on either party to carry out any joint activity. It does not provide for the establishment of any bases or basing arrangements.

Statement by the Ministry of Defence (MoD)

While the obligation may not be to carry out any joint operation, does that negate the possibility of the Indian base being used by the US for a military operation to target its adversary? Perhaps not. And this is what the article highlights as it talks about the possibility if the US chooses an Indian base to target its bete noir, Iran, how will Delhi tackle the utterly complex military situation, given the fact that India has been warming to Tehran and helping the country develop the Chabahar port? These are disturbing questions indeed and the NDA government may find it tough assuaging such fears.

Here are some of the compelling arguments made in the piece:

• One of the criticisms is that the Indian military will hardly access the US bases as India’s focus is limited to territorial defence.
  
• On the other hand, the US accessing Indian bases can wreak havoc on the foreign policy front.
  
• If the US decides to target Iran, it would pose a dilemma for India which is counting Tehran as a strategic ally in developing the Chabahar port.
  
• It would be a grave attack on India’s sovereignty if the US military operations are carried out from Indian ports and air bases.
  
• India’s foreign and military policy will be guided by the Pentagon and Delhi, which may not be necessarily in our interests in the long-run.
  

You can read the complete article here.