UNCONVENTIONAL political leader that he is, Donald Trump chose to make Saudi Arabia his first port of call as President of the United States. After his first-ever major speech on Islam to leaders of 50 Muslim-majority countries, the jury is out: did he flunk his first test or did he develop cold feet? The leader of the most powerful country in the world is supposed to be indefatigable. But according to his spin masters, Trump was so exhausted in Saudi Arabia that instead of railing about “radical Islamic terrorism” he made a turnaround in the birthplace of Wahabism whose severe, puritan and, often, intolerant strain of Islam is held responsible for terrorism in many spots of the world.During this kind of dialogue with the new boss in the Oval Office, the Muslim leaders would have noticed that Trump forgot to berate Saudi Arabia for providing ideological fuel (and often direct military sustenance) to terrorists. The obvious explanation is Saudi Arabia’s massive $100 billion sweetener to the American military complex in the form of orders for war machines. For the most part, Trump had quite a mouthful to say about Islam and terrorism — that too in a tone and tenor radically different from the Muslim-bashing during his election days. He has jettisoned, more or less, the “clash-of-civilisation” thesis so eagerly embraced by neo-conservatives.But Trump’s obvious backsliding, even when laced with a $100 billion purchase order, did not go unnoticed. When he called on other nations to isolate Iran, Tehran promptly pointed out that these comments were a result of “milking Saudi Arabia”. His past record of backsliding, especially vis-à-vis China, had already made his reconciliatory speech to Muslims appear insincere. The $100 billion “gift” from Saudi Arabia and his refusal to pin it down must have only confirmed to the Arab political class that Trump was yet another US leader who dexterously strains to bridge the gulf between his words and deeds. Trump has barely started negotiating the treacherous world of West Asian politics. And he has pulled up short on his maiden outing.
The IAF has 33 fighter squadrons compared with almost 25 units, including those for training, of the neighbouring country, translating into a combat ratio of 1.3 to 1, defence experts say. A squadron usually has 16 to 18 fighters.
That is a significant dip from 3 to 1 in IAF’s favour in the 1980s. Five years ago, the figure stood at 1.6 to 1.
“I don’t recall the combat ratio being below 1.8 to 1,” says air chief marshal Fali Major, who headed the IAF during 2007-08.
He, however, said a squadron-to-squadron comparison wasn’t fair. “The more important thing is how many aircraft are available for missions at any given time. The IAF’s serviceability is way better than the PAF’s,” he said.
The IAF hopes to strengthen its combat units with the induction of the Tejas light combat aircraft, more Sukhoi-30s, Rafale warplanes, Indo-Russian fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) and possibly a medium-weight fighter that could be built in India in collaboration with a foreign player.
Up in the air
The upgrade plan, however, has hit a few hurdles.
The fate of the FGFA appears uncertain. While a government panel is to submit its report on the viability of the multi-billion dollar programme to develop the stealth fighter with the Russians, IAF sources said budgetary constraints could come in the way.
“We do need the platform but where is the money,” an IAF officer said on condition of anonymity.
There is a sense within the IAF that the FGFA programme is too expensive for the force. A final decision would be taken by the government after the three-member panel, conducting the cost-benefit analysis, submits its report.
Plans to build single-engine and twin-engine fighters in collaboration with foreign military contractors are yet to take off.
These proposals are covered under the government’s strategic partnership model that is still being fine-tuned.
The 36 Rafale fighter planes ordered from France after a long delay also fall short of the IAF’s original requirement of 126 medium-weight fighters.
Days before he retired in December 2016, former IAF chief air chief marshal Arup Raha said the 36 Rafale warplanes ordered for $8.7 billion were not enough and India needed at least 200 such fighter jets to sharpen its military edge.
The Rafale, equipped with latest weapons and tailored for Indian needs, will be delivered to the IAF between 2019 and 2022.
Tech edge
The IAF fleet has 14 squadrons of ageing MiG-21and MiG-27 fighters that will be retired in phases by 2024. The IAF has ordered 123 Tejas aircraft that would be delivered by 2025, if all goes to plan.
Fighters such as the Rafale, Su-30, and the upgraded Mirage-2000s were superior to any fighter in the Pakistani arsenal, former chief Major said.
“The PAF’s planes such as the F-7s and older French Mirages aren’t relevant today. In terms of technology, they really don’t match us,” he said.
The PAF operates more than 80 F-16s, including second-hand F-16A/B Block 15 jets bought from the Royal Jordanian Air Force.
Bulk of the Pakistani fleet consists of older F-16A/B fighters, now upgraded to Block 52 standards in Turkey. It also has 18 F-16C/D Block 50/52 planes. Block refers to the F-16 evolution, with a higher number representing technological upgrades.
The PAF is also inducting JF-17 Thunder fighters, sometimes compared with the Tejas. Developed jointly with China, the PAF has nearly 90 JF-17s in its fleet.
Air vice-marshal Manmohan Bahadur (retd) said India needed to act fast to retain the superiority it has traditionally enjoyed over the PAF.
“The IAF has conveyed the urgency to the government and it understands. We have been slow but if the planned inductions progress smoothly, there’s not much to worry,” said Bahadur, a distinguished fellow at New Delhi-based think tank Centre for Air Power Studies.















































