The Race to Conquer: New Technology Revolutionizing Wars

People have witnessed conflicts as a result of the race for power. These battles have shown a persistent underlying need to remain on top while absolving oneself of all responsibility for the collateral damage that results. 

World War I, was the first modern mechanised industrial war, in which material resources and manufacturing capabilities were just as important as military competence. Machine guns, tanks, motorised transport vehicles, high explosives, chemical weapons, aeroplanes, field radios and telephones, aerial reconnaissance cameras, and quickly improving medical technology and research were only a few of the sectors that transformed twentieth-century combat. The new military technology was chronicled as completely as any other part of the conflict by the AEF painters. The first large-scale use of aerial warfare occurred during World War I. Killing from afar became more effective with the development of sea and aerial weaponry. Ship-mounted guns could fire at targets up to twenty miles inland. German submarines’ stealth and speed provided them a significant edge in their control of the North Sea. 

During World War II, both sides, the axis and the allies worked tirelessly to develop increasingly complicated and lethal weaponry. Throughout the war, nations developed more sophisticated aircraft, culminating in the Messerschmitt Me262, the world’s first jet fighter. On the ground, extremely powerful tanks like the Panther and T-34 ruled the battlefield, while at sea, technologies like sonar helped remove the danger of U-boats, and aircraft carriers ruled the waters. Perhaps most importantly, with the Little Boy bomb launched on Hiroshima, the United States became the first country to produce nuclear weapons.

The demands on a nation’s resources are immense during wartime. From supplies to military people, these resources are all available. Fighting a war is costly and thus imposes a cost on the population of a country. People left behind must labour even harder to protect the nation’s infrastructure from collapse while warriors march off to combat. War, on the other hand, may have a positive impact on technical progress. In general, conflicts build up a tendency to speed up technical progress in order to adapt instruments to meet specific military requirements.                                                                                 

With the world watching as nations demonstrate advanced warfighting capabilities, military drone use will grow significantly, led by the widespread adoption of surveillance and attack UAVs across the world. The expanding size and capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can be a force multiplier for naval operations in the near future, thanks to increased investment in procurement, research, and development. As AI technology improves, these UAVs will be able to carry out increasingly complex missions. The most appealing feature of a UAV is that it is unmanned. When a person is added to a machine, it loses its design and operating flexibility. Furthermore, unmanned systems are best suited to long-duration missions involving strongly defended targets, which are more dangerous for manned operations.

Countries with limited defence budgets can improve their airpower by investing more in drones rather than expensive human combat aircraft. As technology advances, low-cost drones will take to the sky and the oceans. Small and medium combat UAVs offer a cost-effective boost to the country’s air capabilities on the tactical front line with little escalation when deployed in large numbers.

World Outlook:               

For over two decades, the United States has used armed unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Since 1995, the American Predator drone has been in service and assisted in recognising and marking Osama bin Laden’s presence in Afghanistan in 2000. The incident had accelerated the development of weapons-carrying unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The MQ-9 Reaper, produced by General Atomics, is America’s primary combat drone, which the Air Force has employed to assist missions around the world for over a decade.

Israel is the world’s leading supplier of drones. Harpy drones were sold to China for $55 million in 1994 by Israel. Israel since then has delivered UAVs worth $4.6 billion to Europe, Asia, and the United States since then. Israel exports drones to 56 countries. The IAI Heron, on the other hand, is meant to compete with the Reaper. According to a database developed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Israel accounted for 41% of all drones exported between 2001 and 2011.                                        

Indian Outlook:

India has been making significant progress into the procurement and development of UAVs. The nation has recently procured 50 Heron unmanned aerial vehicles from Israel. India is also looking at US-made MQ-9 Reaper drones. The indigenous Rustom II, a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) combat drone created by DRDO, is in development. Rustom II may carry a variety of payloads, such as made gap radar, electronic insight frameworks, and situational mindfulness frameworks. The UAV is similar to the American Predator UAV and has a 24-hour autonomy. The UAV may carry a variety of payloads, including synthetic aperture radar, electronic intelligence systems, and situational awareness payloads, among otachers. Due to the creation and testing of domestic drones, India is the leading customer of drones.                             

Conclusion:

Proliferation threats via the international weapons market are increasing, as is the potential that more nations may deploy drones for military reasons at home and in neighbouring countries, as countries as different as Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Russia, and China engage in their own military drone programmes. Drone use on the ground and/or against a suspected hostile neighbour raises the possibility of reprisal and additional military escalation, albeit not necessarily to full-scale war. However, the proliferation of drones is only a step away from an anticipated drone arms race, which has already been hinted at by recent breakthroughs in anti-drone defence systems as well as stealth drones.

Drones will increasingly be perceived as serving national and international security goals better than expeditionary campaigns as drone technology progresses and proliferates. However, the temptation for more countries to employ drones more frequently will not necessarily make the globe a safer or less violent place.

/0 Comments/by

The Power Struggle: Parallels of an Arm Race

The raging war impetus has got people at the edge of their seats looking at the world giving into the glory of violence. Frequent tension amongst countries over disputes that doesn’t weigh into the collateral damage. Witnessing nations build narratives on who saves who, whilst they speciously try conning one another.

The India-China standoff, the Afghanistan crisis and now the Russian-Ukraine War, have had countries building their military strengths. A high capital expenditure and revenue expenditure being incurred by countries into strong-arming one another, displaying their military strength, deftly gatekeeping their enemies. Studies suggest there is a constant rise in the defence equipment expenditure since the 2000s – the United States, China, India, Russia, and the United Kingdom were the top five spenders in 2020, accounting for approximately 60 per cent of global military spending.  There is a seething increase in defence sourcing. The Indian government recently released its budget, which allocated almost 70% of the defence capital procurement budget to the domestic industry for the years 2022-2023. In addition, private players would be encouraged to develop and improve military platforms to help the Aatmanirbharta campaign and lessen the country’s reliance on imports. 

The rising demand for defence equipment has led to an influx of demand for equipment such as riot control equipment, and body armours. The urgency to protect oneself against the advancing technology and defence sourcing has stirred up the geopolitical front. Countries strategically forming alliances, to cut down the cost of procurement and production has helped them make an evident stand, which has further accelerated the pace of this arms race. India recently signed a $375 million contract with the Philippines for the BrahMos shore-based anti-ship missile system, marking the country`s first big defence system export transaction. The supersonic missile with a range of 290 kilometres was developed in collaboration with Russia and is manufactured in India. While Japan and the United States appear to have strengthened their defence relations with two significant defence treaties. The agreement will pave the way for the two countries to collaborate on advanced defence research and development, including a defence system against destructive supersonic missiles. The agreement establishes a new mechanism for the two countries to share the costs of the US military deployment in Japan.

Since the Taliban took power in Afghanistan. The Taliban has amassed a considerable amount of weapons that were abandoned on their soil by US forces. The Taliban was rumoured to be providing Pakistan with a large amount of American weaponry taken from the Afghan Army. These hush-hush deals have closely impacted the growth of defence equipment in the South Asian continent. Surrounding countries fear a rise in terrorism. The Indian home ministry suspects a high chance of these weapons being used for violence in Pakistan and neighbouring states suggesting an unjust turmoil against the deeply ingrained communal clashes in the territory. Apart from the unsought threats, India has found itself in a showcase of gallantry against China. India seems to have been building and strengthening their military while China setting up bases in Sri Lanka and Pakistan. The Chinese debt-trap strategy has played a vital role in giving way to these military advancements in the debt-ridden countries. Concerns have been raised about China’s loans to Sri Lanka, with fears that the government would be unable to repay them, and that it will use them to undermine India and the United States supremacy in the Indo-Pacific region.   

The Russians invading Ukraine makes people wonder if the world will experience another world war. If I were to give my opinion, the war was inevitable, and so is the arms race that follows. The USA has officially sanctioned $350 Million for Ukraine’s aid for weaponry. Following a wave of the US and other western sanctions against Russian banks and billionaires, intended at punishing Putin and his inner circle for the invasion of Ukraine and hurting the Russian economy, the new help comes as a welcome relief. 

Deviating from the terms of a treaty is an act of war, bringing the treaty to stand null and void. It raises questions, manoeuvring the greys of the circumstances – is humanity collateral damage? Is powering through ranks in terms of strength important to have caused a stir in peace that a treaty held secured? Humanity often gets side-lined in chaos stirred by the wrath that war brings along. 

While on the sidelines, another contest is brewing. China has long claimed Taiwan as its own, intimidates it with its armed forces, and maintains the right to attack it. The recent decision by the US President to send a delegation to Taiwan has given additional validity to fears that China may take action against Taiwan. China’s military, known as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is undergoing enormous reforms, and the government is spending more money on defence than it has in the past, bolstering China’s influence in international issues such as the South China Sea. A domino effect has been set in motion for us to see, who’ll come on top. 

Never did we know power has such a hold over our consciousness. Not being content with what one possesses has led to this psychological concept of being on top. The power players lay out strategic plans, to aggravate conditions just to benefit and not think of how the preceding consequences will haunt what is left of humanity. Will the arms race come to an end, or we shall remain unthought for as collateral damage?

/0 Comments/by

Self-Driving cars making headway- A step into the future

Introduction:

For decades, engineers have experimented with self-driving automobile prototypes. The concept is simple: equip a car with cameras that can track all of the things in its immediate vicinity and have the car respond if it is going to drive into one. Teach in-car computers the laws of the road before releasing them to find their own way to their destination. 

This straightforward summary conceals a great deal of intricacy. Driving is one of the more difficult tasks that humans engage in on a regular basis. Following a set of rules isn’t enough to drive like a person, because humans do things like establish eye contact with other drivers to affirm who has the right of way, respond to weather conditions, and make other decisions that are difficult to codify in rigid rules.

With automated driving systems on pace to improve much more, it’s logical to believe that the technology will be a tremendous boon for organisations that are well-positioned to benefit. According to Business Insider Intelligence, by 2020, there will be around 10 million automobiles on the road with automatic navigation technology. According to McKinsey, around 15% of autos sold in 2030 will be completely driverless. Intel predicts that by 2050, the worldwide market for driverless vehicles, or “the passenger economy,” would be worth more than $7 trillion per year. With an expected 300 million autonomous vehicles on the road in 2050, Morgan Stanley estimates that providing service to driverless vehicles would be a $200 billion annual market for telecom companies.

Before the year 2000, the road to self-driving automobiles was paved with incremental automation technologies for safety and convenience, such as cruise control and antilock brakes. Advanced safety systems, such as electronic stability control, blind-spot recognition, and collision and lane change alerts, were available in automobiles after the century. Sophisticated driver assistance features like as rearview video cameras, automated emergency braking, and lane-centring assistance debuted between 2010 and 2016. Automobile manufacturers have attained Level 4 of autonomous driving technology as of 2019. Before completely autonomous cars may be purchased and operated on public roads in the United States, manufacturers must cross a number of technology hurdles and solve a number of critical challenges. Even though Level 4 autonomous vehicles are not ready for public usage, they are employed in various ways.

LevelsDefining Characteristics
Level 0The driver is responsible for all core driving tasks. Level O vehicles may still include features like automatic emergency breaking. blind-spot warnings, and lane departure warnings.
Level 1Vehicle navigation is controlled by the driver, but driving-assist features like lane centering or adaptive cruise control are included.
Level 2Core vehicle is still controlled by the driver, but the vehicle is capable of using assisted driving features like lane centering and adaptive cruise control simultaneously.
Level 3Driver is still required but is not needed to navigate or monitor the environment if certain criteria are met. However, the driver must remain ready to resume control of the vehicle once the conditions permitting ADS are no longer met.
Level 4The vehicle can carry out all driving functions and does not require that the driver remain ready to take control of navigation. However, the quality of the ADS navigation may decline under certain conditions such as off-road driving or other types of hazardous situations. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.
Level 5The ADS system is advanced enough that the vehicle can carry out all driving functions, no matter the condition. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.

The need for Self-driving vehicles:

  • Improved safety would be the most often acknowledged advantage. In the United Kingdom alone, there were 1,770 traffic deaths reported last year, with over 26,000 people seriously wounded. The statistics in the United States are considerably worse, with 36,750 pedestrian and biker deaths. With human error accounting for the bulk of accidents, even a 90% adoption rate of self-driving cars might result in the annual saving of 22,000 lives.
  •  Another benefit would be that it would provide transportation to persons who have previously been denied it: children, the disabled, and the elderly could theoretically travel without a driver, expanding accessibility.
  • Up to 60% of hazardous pollutants can be reduced by self-driving automobiles. Furthermore, these automobiles can be designed to optimise potential reductions, which is fantastic news for environmentalists and everyone who wants to have the least possible influence on Mother Nature.

Indian Outlook:

When it comes to the deployment of self-driving cars, India cannot afford to turn a blind eye. On the one hand, given that urban Indians spend 1.5 hours more each day in traffic than their Asian neighbours, it has the potential to revolutionize the way we happen to be living, aiming to make our roads safer, reducing traffic congestion, and improving efficiency. They could, on the other hand also be overburdened under the country’s most congested traffic circumstances, and they may fail to function correctly in the absence of the infrastructure changes required to normalise their presence. While autonomous vehicles would also allow users to make better use of their travel time instead of squandering it on driving. They have the potential to save lives by minimising human errors, which are the major cause of traffic collisions. Driverless cars are also a terrific method for people who are physically unable to drive themselves to go about. While autonomous vehicles may take longer to reach Indian roads, self-driving tractors and trucks have already taken the first step. Companies like Escorts, Mahindra & Mahindra, and Flux Auto are intending to debut them soon.

Several Indian start-ups are developing AV solutions for trucks, minibuses, and vehicles, with the goal of exporting to other nations in certain circumstances. Infosys claimed a few years ago that it had created a “driverless” cart at its Mysuru centre in southern India. India’s ingenuity and technology are its greatest assets. It has the potential to become the world’s top supplier of autonomous vehic  le technology and to nurture a whole “SV for AV” — a Silicon Valley for Autonomous Vehicles. The objective is to develop unique and niche uses for AVs, such as in-plant logistics, on-campus movement, and public transportation, where they may bring value, safety, and efficiency.

It is a bit risky to deploy autonomous automobiles in a labor-intensive country like India, where the percentage of the working population, especially unskilled labour, is large. But it shouldn’t stop us from taking use of cutting-edge technology. Furthermore, autonomous cars are now only effective on highways and face difficulties on regular routes. As a result, it is preferable to allow autonomous cars in India once the technology has matured.

Conclusion:

It’s practically hard to predict whether fully autonomous vehicles will eventually replace human-driven automobiles. However, technology has advanced tremendously in recent years, such as the Budweiser driverless truck that delivered beer in Colorado in 2016, and the rate of technical growth has not slowed since the Renaissance, so it’s reasonable to predict we’ll see more autonomous cars in the future.

/0 Comments/by

North Korea’s steps towards advanced tactical weaponry.

North Korea has one of the world’s largest conventional military forces, which, when paired with its missile and nuclear tests and belligerent rhetoric, has sparked global worry. However, international powers have been powerless to stop it from acquiring nuclear weapons.

North Korea’s nuclear arsenal is unknown in terms of quantity and power. According to experts, Pyongyang has conducted six nuclear tests and produced ballistic missiles capable of hitting the US and its allies Japan and South Korea. According to varying estimations by specialists, Pyongyang might have between twenty and sixty nuclear warheads constructed. North Korea has enough fissile material—the fundamental component of nuclear bombs—for 65 nuclear warheads, according to US intelligence sources, and it creates enough fissile material for twelve more weapons per year. By 2027, according to a RAND Corporation assessment from 2021, North Korea might have roughly 200 nuclear bombs and hundreds of ballistic missiles. The dictatorship has the know-how to make nuclear bombs out of weapons-grade uranium or plutonium, which are the basic ingredients in fissile material. Under previous Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Il, North Korea conducted six nuclear tests, the first in October 2006 and the second in May 2009. The nuclear programme expanded dramatically under Kim Jong-un, Kim Jong-son, who took control in late 2011. Kim has ordered four nuclear tests—in February 2013, January and September 2016, and September 2017—as well as over 125 missile launches, significantly more than his father and grandfather, North Korea’s founder, Kim Il-sung, did.

The destructive potential of North Korea’s nuclear weapons has increased. In 2006, a plutonium-fueled atomic bomb with a yield equal to two kilotons of TNT, an energy unit used to quantify the force of an explosive detonation, exploded for the first time. According to statistics from the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a nonpartisan think tank located in Washington, DC, the 2009 test yielded eight kilotons; the 2013 and January 2016 tests both yielded roughly seventeen kilotons, and the September 2016 test yielded 35 kilotons. Experts think the nuclear test on September 3, 2017, was far bigger, indicating that the country has developed much more potent bomb-making technology. According to estimates based on seismic activity, the explosion was likely more than 200 kilotons. A massive explosion like this lends validity to North Korea’s claims of developing a hydrogen bomb.

North Korea has demonstrated a number of new ballistic missiles since then. The first was an ICBM larger than the Hwasong-15, which was displayed at a military parade in October 2020. Although it hasn’t been labelled or tested, it is believed that it may be equipped with several nuclear warheads or decoys to fool missile defence systems. In October 2020, a new submarine-launched ballistic missile, the Pukkuksong-4, was unveiled, followed by the Pukkuksong-5 in January 2021. The Pukkuksong-5 is estimated to have a range of roughly 3,000 kilometres (1,864 miles), allowing it to target Guam. Both missiles have not been tested yet, according to experts. Pyongyang tested solid-fueled short-range ballistic missiles in 2021, improving a technology that makes rockets simpler to transport and fire. It also tested a highly agile long-range cruise missile, which, when fired in concert with ballistic missiles, may confuse missile defence systems. North Korea tested missiles from a train launcher for the first time in September, making them less detectable by the US and its allies.

North Korea recently test-fired a new type of tactical guided weapon aimed at improving its nuclear-weapons capabilities, only days after it celebrated its most important state anniversary without the usual military parade, which it uses to announce provocative weapons systems. According to the report, the missiles travelled roughly 110 kilometres (68 miles) at a maximum speed of Mach 4, with an apogee of 25 kilometres (16 miles). According to the statement, intelligence agencies in South Korea and the United States are looking into further facts about the launches. The test, Pyongyang’s 13th this year, comes amid fears that Pyongyang would soon undertake a greater provocation, such as a nuclear test, in an effort to enhance the country’s weapons arsenal and boost pressure on its adversaries amid stalled talks. 

Aid from other countries:

Although the nuclear programme is mostly indigenous, it has benefited from outside help throughout time. From the late 1950s through the 1980s, Moscow aided Pyongyang’s nuclear programme by providing missile blueprints, light-water reactors, and some nuclear fuel. China and North Korea worked together on defence in the 1970s, including ballistic missile research and manufacture. In the 1970s, Pakistan also became a significant military ally of North Korea. Bilateral nuclear cooperation began during the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), when experts from both nations were in Iran working on ballistic missiles. North Korea had access to Pakistani centrifuge technology and blueprints in the 1990s, according to physicist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who oversaw Pakistan’s nuclear armament. Pyongyang also acquired blueprints for a uranium-enrichment bomb, which Pakistan most likely obtained from China. Pakistan obtained North Korean missile technology in exchange. It’s unclear if Khan acted on behalf of the Pakistani government directly or indirectly. (In addition to Iran and Libya, Khan’s worldwide network traded nuclear technology and material illegally.) North Korea’s nuclear know-how from Pakistan most certainly enabled it to operate centrifuges and develop a uranium-based weapon.

Conclusion:

The underlying philosophical ideas of North Korea have been juche (self-reliance) and songun (unity) (military-first politics). The military plays an important role in politics, and its status has progressively risen during the Kim dynasty. The North Korean leadership is concerned that hostile external forces, like South Korea and the United States, may launch an assault. As a result, Pyongyang believes that developing asymmetric military capabilities to counter its perceived threats is the only way to ensure national existence. Punitive measures implemented against Pyongyang, on the other hand, appear to have merely strengthened Kim’s resolve to build the military. And, while diplomatic engagement has slowed North Korea’s testing pace in the past, it has not resulted in disarmament.

/0 Comments/by

Is technology taking over?

Humans have been developing tools and technologies to help us achieve our goals since the beginning of time. Huge technological breakthroughs have resulted in large adjustments in social structures, as well as how people contribute to society and make a livelihood. Today’s technological advancements are fast allowing much of the labour that is now done by people to be automated. This applies to both blue-collar and white-collar employment, thanks to robotics and the Internet of Things, as well as artificial intelligence. The widespread application of these technologies has sparked widespread worry about job loss. Although technology has almost always made certain occupations obsolete, it has also created new ones. Technology is a collection of tools that are employed in a variety of ways to boost productivity. Some occupations were lost as a result of the Industrial Revolution, but many more were created. It also enhanced society’s overall wealth and began to develop a middle class that could benefit from health, education, and other services previously solely available to the wealthy. It can be difficult to forecast what kind of employment will be created and in what quantities as a result of this new revolution, making the situation appear worse than it is.

This illustration may appear unduly hopeful to some. The new positions need an entirely different skill set – an assembly line worker cannot be transformed into a data scientist overnight, if at all. Despite the fact that the Industrial Revolution lasted several decades, it resulted in immense social upheaval, discontent, and severe hardship for many people. The digital revolution might unfold far more quickly, affecting enormous swaths of a complex, interconnected economy with strong feedback loops. Artificial intelligence (AI) will play a bigger role in how we live, work, and play in the future. However, we are still a long way from a day when computers will completely replace the global workforce, particularly invocations that need parts of the human brain (perception, social intelligence, and creativity). As technology’s breadth and capabilities develop, those that embrace and leverage AI to incorporate efficiency into routine operations while infusing human talents and knowledge into the system are likely to gain the most. Rather than taking an all-or-nothing strategy to boost abilities, embrace the human-in-the-loop method and benefit from the one-two punch of artificial and human intellect while planning for the future.

Whilst, AI still falls short – Surgery is best left in the hands of skilled surgeons, the fine motor skills and capacity to recognise and appraise each scenario are considerably superior to that of any machine. Similarly, AI cannot replace the amount of social intelligence required for HR professionals to connect with candidates and workers and develop healthy relationships. Finally, robots will never be able to match an attorney’s inventiveness or intelligence when it comes to drafting, negotiating, or enforcing complicated contracts. Humans in the loop aids workflow which further combines artificial and human intelligence to complement people and generate a better result than either could separately. To obtain the desired outcome, a person working alongside a machine or computer enters data into the system. Humans train, tune, and test algorithms that get smarter and more accurate over time, and this process form a continuous cycle. Complex AI systems have emerged into tools that are more powerful and efficient than what could be accomplished with purely automated or totally manual systems alone by adding human judgement and preference into the loop.

In order to address the issue of whether AI systems will be able to replace humans, one must first recognise that human psychology and an AI system are fundamentally different.

While both work with cognitive processes including problem-solving, memorization, planning, reasoning, and perception gathering, the human mind is significantly more competent in these simple activities. The human brain is capable of incorporating emotional intelligence, self-awareness, and human experience into various activities, giving each one a distinct flavour. On the other hand, the AI system is currently too immature to learn on its own. Humans must still teach it with data sets in order for it to accomplish various jobs. At the end of the day, artificial intelligence is a creation of the human intellect. Because of human inventiveness, total automation of certain activities is now conceivable. Even while the topic of whether or not humanity will be replaced by AI remains unanswered, we may be comfortable that, for the time being, AI is nowhere near to reaching the level of technological maturity required to take over the human race.

Conclusion:

The subject of AI replacing humans in many areas may never have a definitive solution. Predictions and observations are all we have. Before the negative impacts of AI technology grow too great, it needs ongoing supervision and inspection. AI takeover will be restricted to the exciting tales of dystopian movies and fictitious worlds if adequate rules are in place to protect users. It’s never too early to start thinking about the future. People must challenge themselves to comprehend the data and automation technologies on the horizon now in order to be prepared for tomorrow’s advancements in automation. However, capturing value from automation needs more than just data and technological know-how. The biggest obstacles will be the personnel and organisational adjustments that leaders must implement when automation upends whole business processes, as well as the culture of businesses, which must come to see automation as a dependable productivity lever. Senior executives, on the other hand, will have to “let go” in ways that go against a century of organisational growth.

/0 Comments/by

India’s strategic relations with Australia.

Australia’s developing strategic connections with India are defined by defense alliances, people-to-people links, and prospective trade pacts that are being expedited. After five decades of tense or distant strategic relations, India and Australia began to build a more cooperative defense and security collaboration in the early 2000s. Similar worries about China’s ascent, behaviour, and aggressiveness, as well as shared perspectives on the regional strategic situation, were the key causes. Following the mainstreaming of India’s nuclear program, the easing of Australia’s uranium prohibition, and the India–Australia civilian nuclear accord, India’s nuclear status is now a non-issue. Large numbers of Indian visitors, students, and immigrants contribute to Australia’s economy and society, and people-to-people relations have grown.

History:

Prior to Indian independence, the two nations established diplomatic relations during WWII, with the first high commissioners arriving in New Delhi and Canberra in 1944 and 1945, respectively. Despite becoming a republic in 1950, Australia initially backed India’s ambition to remain a member of the Commonwealth. After years of disagreements against the backdrop of the early Cold War, the two countries joined the United States and the United Kingdom in air force exercises, ‘shiksha’ in 1963, and senior officials from both countries met in 1967 for talks, coinciding with the beginning of Australia’s re-engagement with Asia. While there was no complete lack of security cooperation between the two nations throughout the Cold War – an Australian was among the first class of military commanders to be taught at India’s Defense Services Staff College in 1950. Military education for professionals remained a point of engagement. Australia’s Governor-General Sir Peter Cosgrove, who graduated from the National Defense College in New Delhi in 1994, was one of the recipients. Nonetheless, until 2000, the elements that normally identify a beneficial relationship between capable military forces — strategic talks, information sharing, military exercises, training and education, and defense trade and technical cooperation — were conspicuously absent.

The current conditions in which Australia and India now find themselves are inextricably linked to the four historical stumbling blocks. The new geopolitics is the first of these scenarios. While there is no clear consensus on the nature of the post-Cold War international order, there are a few distinct tendencies to be seen. The influence of China’s ascent and behaviour, which has had deep repercussions for both Australia and India, is the most significant. Both India and Australia have raised worries about China’s centralised decision-making, state-led economic policies, territorial revisionism, and erosion of standards, as well as its overall security posture in the Indo–Pacific. As a result, India and Australia have started working on their own and with like-minded allies to compete with China in regions and subjects that are important to their national security interests.

Cooperation between the two countries:

In 2006, strategic relations between Australia and India reached a new high point, coinciding with India’s increased engagement with the US and Japan. Growing fears about China’s ascent, as well as political orientation in the two nations’ leaderships, looked to be driving this. During John Howard’s visit to India in March 2006, an India–Australia defence framework deal — a Memorandum of Understanding on Defense Cooperation — was signed, along with a slew of other accords relating to the economy, commerce, and technology. Terrorism, defence cooperation, information exchange, and extradition were all highlighted. As a result, bilateral defence interaction accelerated dramatically during the following two years. Australia’s Minister for Defence Brendan Nelson visited India in July 2007, sandwiched between visits by Australia’s Chief of the Defence Force and Chief of Navy, during which he signed an agreement on the protection of classified information.  While, Australia also took part in the Malabar naval exercise (Malabar 07–02), in which the US, Japanese, and Singaporean navies had also participated in the Bay of Bengal, as well as the first Quad meeting involving the foreign ministries of India, Australia, the United States, and Japan in Manila, became linked in the public consciousness. Malabar 07–02 was a large-scale operation involving around 25 ships, 150 aircraft, and 20,000 people, including three carrier strike groups from the US and India.

The first trilateral senior official meetings between Australia, India, and Japan took place in New Delhi in June 2015. During the MBC chief’s visit to India in August 2015, a high-level Indian Coastguard meeting including Australia’s Maritime Border Command (MBC) took place. In September 2015, the Bay of Bengal hosted the first significant bilateral naval exercise AUSINDEX. All of these developments were followed by the now-standard conversations between the defence and foreign ministries, a senior official dialogue led by the foreign ministry, two-way military leadership visits, and a port call by two Indian navy warships in Fremantle.

Nuclear non-proliferation problems, which had long been a sore point in ties, also took a dramatic turn between 2014 and 2017. During Tony Abbott’s September 2014 visit to India, a civil nuclear energy cooperation deal was reached after three rounds of discussions in mid-2014. In November, more talks took place over the implementation of a uranium selling agreement with India, and the civil nuclear agreement was signed in November 2015. In the two years that followed, Australia supported India’s application to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)[31], and bilateral discussions on non-proliferation and disarmament were held in 2016. One of the primary irritants in the strategic partnership has been resolved as a result of these developments.

During the G20 Summit in Osaka following, Scott Morrison’s and Narendra Modi’s re-elections in 2019, big changes had transpired. A virtual summit was conducted in June 2020 after multiple postponements owing to the worldwide coronavirus epidemic, during which they declared a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the two countries. They reached an agreement on a framework for marine cooperation as well as cyber technology collaboration. At the level of foreign secretaries, an India-France-Australia discussion was also launched in September 2020, including three capable resident marine governments in the Indian Ocean. India and Australia also participate in a number of regional and global forums together, with some cooperation. IORA, the G20, and ASEAN-led organisations such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM–Plus), and the East Asia Summit are among them (EAS). In 2020, there will be new issue-based groups linking India and Australia, such as 5G telecommunications, artificial intelligence, and supply chain resilience. The governments of India and Australia, as well as Japan, have taken the lead on this subject.

While, a rising number of common platforms, as well as improved chances for collaborative training and interoperability, have benefited the Indian and Australian forces. C-17 strategic transport planes, C-130 tactical planes, P-8 maritime surveillance planes, and Chinook heavy-lift helicopters are among them. The Indian military has also received confidential briefings on prospective future platforms, including airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, from the Australian armed forces.

Conclusion:

The deepening of variable aspects of connections might enhance strategic relationships to some extent. This will naturally extend to interpersonal relationships, especially given Australia’s growing number of Indian immigrants. As a result, there will be more instructional interactions in both directions. Deepening and widening commercial and economic ties in both nations would contribute to the bilateral relationship’s trust, stability, and interest. Although trade does not necessarily follow the flag, in an era of strategic decoupling, any two nations’ commercial and security relationships will become increasingly crucial.

/0 Comments/by

India deepening its ties with Israel.

Introduction:

In 1992, India and Israel established full diplomatic ties, and the two nations’ bilateral relationship has since bloomed on economic, military, agricultural, and political levels. Both nations perceive themselves as isolated democracies endangered by neighbors that train, finance, and promote terrorism, hence their cooperative relationship is viewed as a strategic requirement by both. The relations were not always cordial. Despite the fact that both countries gained independence from the United Kingdom within months of each other, they have been heading in opposite directions for nearly four decades – India as a leader in the Non-Aligned Movement with close ties to the Arab world and the Soviet Union, and Israel with close ties to the United States and Western Europe.    

Both countries have reaped enormous benefits since establishing diplomatic ties. India has become one of Israel’s most important commercial partners, and many of the world’s best high-tech businesses are forming joint ventures in Israel and India that are effectively competing in the global market. Security-related transactions and help in sectors like agriculture and water desalination are now the mainstays of trade and collaboration between the two countries. The key to developing India-Israel ties, though, is security and defense cooperation. The Indian army announced its desire to execute a modernization program in the early 2000s, allocating tens of billions of dollars to the project. Since then, defense sales with Israel have increased at an exponential rate, and India is now Israel’s top export destination.

To give you an idea of how much commerce between Israel and India has grown, overall trade between the two countries was $200 million in 1992 and $4.13 billion in 2016. Without diamonds, Israel shipped $1.15 billion worth of commodities to India in 2016, accounting for 2.5 per cent of the country’s overall exports.

During Modi’s visit to the US in 2017, the two nations inked a number of collaboration agreements. The Israel Space Agency and the Indian Space Research Organization have signed a memorandum of understanding to promote collaboration in the development of electric propulsion systems for tiny satellites and the development of equipment to precisely monitor the severe conditions of space. Officials from Israel and India have signed a memorandum of understanding to establish the India-Israel Innovation Initiative Fund (I4F). Over a five-year period, each of the two countries has pledged $4 million to I4F. Elbit Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries are among the Indian companies that inked eight trade agreements with Israeli enterprises. During Modi’s trip to Israel, the Asher Space Research Institute at the Technion and the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology inked a collaboration agreement. The goal of this agreement is to set up cooperative study and research initiatives.

The defence front:

In July 2020, both nations inked a cyber security pact in the age of fast digitalisation and increased exposure to the risks of the virtual world. As a first step, India and Israel are working together to establish secure systems and services to defend their civilian and strategic assets from ever-increasing cyber-attacks. It’s a key sign of the Indian government’s faith in Tel Aviv to collaborate on defensive technologies as part of the Atmanirbhar Bharat Initiative. 

The Indian Air Force recently introduced a medium-range surface-to-air missile (MRSAM) system capable of destroying aerial threats such as enemy fighter planes, missiles, helicopters, and unmanned aerial vehicles. The MRSAM, or Barak 8 air defence system, was developed jointly by India and Israel and comprises modern radar, command and control systems, and mobile launchers. For maximum manoeuvrability in the terminal phase, the missile is propelled by a locally built rocket motor and control system.

Israel Aerospace Industries and the Defense Research and Development Organization collaborated to create the system (DRDO). Rafael, Bharat Electronics Limited, Bharat Dynamics Limited, and Larsen & Toubro are among the other companies collaborating on the project.

Over the previous four years, India and Israel have signed separate deals totalling roughly $3 billion for upgraded surface-to-air missile systems for the three services. Last year, India was compelled to speed up the procurement of military gear from various nations, including Israel, due to the continuous border confrontation with China in Ladakh, authorities claimed. As a result of a 2017 order worth $2 billion for advanced systems to take down hostile aircraft and missiles, India is sourcing Firefly loitering ammunition, Spike anti-tank guided missiles, Spice guidance kits that can be mounted on standard bombs to convert them into smart weapons, and an operational surface-to-air missile system from Israel.

Conclusion:

Even while the three-decade-old India–Israel defence alliance is expected to deepen and solidify in the coming years, India’s quest for defence self-reliance will have an influence on the relationship’s size. India has significant modernization demands, as well as the need to adequately address rising security concerns on both the internal and foreign fronts. For India’s security strategists, the all-encompassing Pakistan–China defence cooperation, which provides Islamabad with advanced weaponry and platforms, is just too significant to ignore. India’s defence partnership with Israel is also being looked at as a way to boost the country’s defence exports. BEL, for example, has indicated interest in forming a partnership with the IAI in order to increase the DPSU’s export profile. HAL partnered with IAI to market the Advanced Light Helicopter back in 2003. (ALH). It’ll be interesting to watch how BEL and the IAI go forward with this. The IAI has a well-established worldwide profile and marketing skills, which may be studied and learned from by Indian DPSUs and private sector enterprises.

A greater range of non-traditional fields, such as information and cybersecurity, water conservation, education, health, and research, are supporting ‘India-Israel 2.0.’ The strategic partnership’s elevation of connections aims to strengthen this nascent collaboration in new areas. PM Modi’s tricennial commemoration address echoed this attitude, with equal emphasis on developing geopolitics and mutual prospects. The fresh strategy will help individuals on both ends while also increasing and bolstering government trust.

/0 Comments/by

India & UK aim to strengthen their defense ties.

With the signing of the 2030 Roadmap for India-UK Ties, which sets goals for the partnership over the next 10 years, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a crucial step forward for the future of India-UK relations. The UK government stated that it has begun preparations for a trade deal between the UK and India. The UK government has been hopeful that the consultation would yield additional information that will help guarantee that the deal is representative and that cooperation in future-oriented industries is secure. Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, is a longtime proponent of strong India-UK ties and a self-professed Indophile. The strategic importance of this economic partnership for the United Kingdom, which is based on strong cultural and diplomatic ties, had been highlighted in the UK’s Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development, and Foreign Policy, and will become even more so as the UK embarks on its proposed ‘Indo-Pacific tilt.’ The UK government had asked Prime Minister Modi to attend the G7 conference at Carbis Bay, in recognition of India’s critical security role in the area in the face of a growing China. 

The Roadmap is the first since the formal ‘Comprehensive Strategic Partnership’ agreement in 2005, and hopes for its ability to significantly enhance the partnership are divided. Recognizing the need to rectify the bilateral relationship’s falling importance – India has moved from being the UK’s second-largest trade partner in the late 1990s to 17th in 2019 – the UK Government hopes to restart this initiative with renewed vigour as part of its Global Britain strategy. The two countries aim to work together to combat cyber, space, criminal, and terrorist threats, with the goal of creating a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific region that maximises democratic participation and economic opportunity while fending off dangers presented by a growing China and now Russia. Because these are areas of competence for both countries, the UK and India will focus on research, innovation, and technology to build new capabilities in the defence and security realms. With long-running border issues with China in Eastern Ladakh, India is gradually recognising the value of increased defence and security cooperation with the UK, US, and EU, and the “roadmap” agreement is a significant first step in that direction. 

The Quad, a security alliance involving the United States, Japan, Australia, and India, had convened digitally for the first time during their first formal meeting. Following the summit, the Quad had vowed to work together on telecommunications, especially to expand and diversify 5G supply chains in order to counter China’s dominance. Despite the fact that the alliance did not specifically reference China, all four nations have banned Huawei’s 5G technology, acknowledging rising concerns and a shifting security paradigm. Increased defence cooperation between the UK and India will be crucial to the UK’s success in the Indo-Pacific area, and the deteriorating ties between India and China give a fresh chance to do so. 

Current Scenario:

Following a summit in New Delhi, recently, Britain and India have inked a new defence cooperation pact and  finalised a free trade agreement, which shall be implemented by the end of the year. The arrangement relies on an open general export licence for India to reduce delivery times for guns and other defence equipment. At the moment, only the European Union and the United States have such permits. According to the British High Commission, part of the British offer includes “next-generation” defence and security collaboration spanning land, sea, air, space, and cyber. The agreement, according to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, would assist New Delhi shift away from its reliance on Russia by boosting economic and defence relations with the West, including British backing for India’s domestic weapon manufacture.

The leaders have emphasised on the importance of strong defence industrial collaboration for manufacturing defence equipment, systems, spare parts, components, aggregates, and other related products and key capabilities under the Make-in-India programme, which includes co-development, indigenization, technology transfer, and the formation of joint ventures to meet the needs of India’s and other countries’ armed forces. They mentioned cooperation in important vital sectors including modern fighter aircraft and advanced core technology for jet engines. Both parties committed to collaborate bilaterally and with important partner nations to ensure Indian business had the best possible access to technology. Prime Minister Modi appreciated the United Kingdom’s offer of a ‘open general export licence’ to enable technical collaboration with India, as well as India’s open participation in the UK’s aviation and navy shipbuilding programmes.

Both nations have expressed zero tolerance for terrorism in all its forms – and for all those who encourage, support and finance terrorism or provide sanctuary to terrorists and terror groups – whatever their motivation may be. They have called upon all countries to work together to root out terrorist safe havens and infrastructure, disrupt terrorist networks and their financing channels, and halt cross-border movement of terrorists. The condemnation was reiterated for the terrorist attacks in India and the UK, including the Mumbai and Pathankot attacks. The importance of perpetrators of terrorist attacks being systematically and expeditiously brought to justice, and agreeing to work together to take concerted action against globally proscribed terrorist entities and individuals, is being emphasised by the two nations. The gratitude for the continuous collaboration through the Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism (JWG-CT) is tremendous, particularly in terms of exchanging information and intelligence on terror organisations and persons. The two nations have agreed to form a counter-extremism sub-group within this framework in order to strengthen cooperation between the two sides in ensuring that all possible actions are taken against groups and individuals based in or operating out of either country who seek to incite violent extremism and terrorism, as well as those involved in financing such activities.

Conclusion:

The India-UK defence partnership will no longer be restricted to a buyer-seller relationship in the future. It will not, however, be limited to defence manufacturing. The two nations have the capacity to establish a genuinely comprehensive strategic relationship in action via close maritime cooperation and a coordinated approach to ensuring regional security and stability in the Indo-Pacific.

/0 Comments/by

Evolution of Defense- Advancing Artificial Intelligence

What do we understand from Artificial Intelligence? Artificial intelligence, in its most basic form, is a subject that combines computer science with large datasets to solve problems. It also includes the sub-fields of machine learning and deep learning, both of which are usually referenced when discussing artificial intelligence. AI algorithms are used in these industries to develop expert systems that make predictions or classifications based on input data. Governments have been making progress in adopting AI as an important element of their defence systems in order to gain a military advantage over their competitors and to satisfy the proverbial unquenchable need for power. 

The strength of a country’s army is one of the factors that defines its power. In some of the most developed countries, investment in this area is the highest when compared to other sectors. A large chunk of this money will go into rigorous research and development in contemporary technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) in military applications. Large volumes of data can be efficiently handled by AI-enabled tactical equipment. Furthermore, such technologies have increased self-regulation, self-control, and self-actuation as a result of their greater computing and decision-making abilities. Advances in artificial intelligence have opened up new possibilities in defence technology. In addition to increasing the effectiveness of armed personnel, the potential for conducting a war may be boosted by incorporating Artificial Intelligence into military operations. Several countries throughout the world are using AI to improve the performance of their defence forces. 

Applications:

  • Surveillance:

AI is used with geospatial analysis to help extract relevant data from connected devices like as radars and automated tactical systems. The information might be used to investigate and uncover any illegal or questionable activity. Military drones have become increasingly popular in recent years. Drone technology has come a long way since its origins. These remote-controlled vehicles can be used for a range of purposes, such as terrain mapping and unmanned aerial vehicle flight.                                                               

  • Cyber-Security:

With so many military sites becoming digitised, it’s more important than ever to keep the information contained on these web portals safe. A maliciously hacked network might put the entire region’s security at jeopardy. Defence organisations are employing machine learning to predict and guard against illegal breaches. Intrusion detection is often achieved by classifying the network as either normal or intrusive. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based approaches can improve the accuracy of such categorisation and provide protection alternatives in response to malware, phishing, and brute force assaults on data centres and government websites.

  • Logistics:

One of the most important factors in determining whether or not a military operation succeeds is logistics. Military logistic systems are combined with machine learning and geospatial analysis to save labour, costs, and inaccuracy.

  • Weaponry:

AI in defence is being used to build targeted missiles, sophisticated armaments, and high-performance fighter jets. Advanced missiles, for example, can estimate and assess target levels for kill zones without the involvement of humans. These applications, which need extensive study, have the potential to change the face of defence in the not-too-distant future.

In addition to its various applications and benefits, the employment of AI in defence poses an ethical quandary as well. Unintentionally, experts and organisations all around the globe have elevated such technologies, creating tensions between countries. One concern is that if an AI system fails to function as intended, it might have disastrous consequences. Several human and civil rights organisations have called for an outright prohibition on autonomous devices in defence, particularly armament.

/0 Comments/by

Countries increasing their defense expenditure, stalwarting their dominance in the geopolitical scenario.

All revenue and capital expenditure on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces of defence ministries and other government agencies engaged in defence projects, and paramilitary forces when judged to be trained, equipped, and ready for military operations, is referred to as defence expenditure. It typically reflects a country’s perception of the possibility of threats against it, as well as the level of aggressiveness it desires to use. It also provides an estimate of how much funding should be allocated for the future year. A budget’s size also reflects an organization’s capacity to support military actions. The size of that entity’s economy, other financial pressures on that entity, and the government’s or people’s willingness to pay such military activities are among the factors.

  • Capital expenditure refers to the money spent by the government on the development of machinery, equipment, buildings, health facilities, education, and other similar projects. It also includes the price of acquiring long-term assets like land and defence equipment, as well as government investments that will generate future revenues or dividends. These expenses result in the creation of assets, which allow the economy to produce income by expanding and improving production facilities and improving operational efficiency. It also improves labour participation, examines the economy, and boosts the economy’s future ability to create more.
  • Revenue expenditure refers to the portion of government spending that does not result in the creation of assets; such expenditures are spent to fulfil the government’s running needs. Salaries, salaries, pensions, subsidies, and interest are all examples of revenue expenditures. 

According to new figures released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, total worldwide military expenditure grew to $1981 billion in 2020, up 2.6 per cent in real terms from 2019. (SIPRI). The United States, China, India, Russia, and the United Kingdom were the top five spenders in 2020, accounting for 62 per cent of worldwide military spending. 

India’s budget allocation has continually increased over time. Between 2011-12 and 2020-21, defense spending climbed by 127 per cent. The distribution of this allocation between revenue and capital spending, on the other hand, is skewed, with revenue expenditure expanding faster than capital expenditure. The key driver of greater revenue expenditure growth is increased spending on defense pensions. To achieve India’s new set aim, ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat,’ the country’s drive toward an enduring indigenous defense manufacturing industry, as well as to build a strong upholding for the new system, more revenue spending will be required. India is also one of the world’s largest importers of military equipment. The nation has aimed to bolster the expenditure by increasing private sector involvement in defense production and research and development. Manufacturing still is moving slowly, but research and development is gaining traction. India’s total defense budget has increased at a rate of 9% per year over the last 10 years. 

Between 2011-12 and 2018-19, defence revenue spending increased by 140 per cent, while capital expenditure increased by 101 per cent. During the same time period, the percentage of the total defence budget spent on pensions increased from 18 per cent to 26 per cent.

Furthermore, China’s, regional expenditure growth slowed in 2020 as countries like Thailand, South Korea, and Indonesia lowered their defence budgets in order to finance emergency relief efforts in the aftermath of the outbreak. The majority of the time, expected growth was slashed rather than actual cutbacks to the previous year’s budget. Asia’s defence expenditure growth slowed to 4.3 per cent in 2020, down from 4.6 per cent in 2019, as a result of the slowdown in China and the rest of the region. Despite this, the region’s share of global defence spending is expected to rise to 25.0 per cent in 2020, from 17.8 per cent in 2010 and 23.2 per cent in 2015. Despite increased investment in Europe, this is expected to remain relatively flat in 2021. 

While in real terms, total European defence spending had increased by 2.0 per cent in 2020. This was a relatively smaller increase than the 4.1 per cent increase witnessed in 2019, and Europe’s proportion of global defence spending declined somewhat in 2020, from 17.8% to 17.5 per cent. However, over the previous years, average spending across European NATO members has gradually climbed as a percentage of GDP, rising from 1.25 per cent in 2014 to 1.52 per cent in 2019 and rising further to 1.64 per cent in 2020. This is still well below the NATO recommendation that its members aim to spend 2% of GDP on defence, despite the significant 7.0% average economic contraction expected in 2020. When it comes to spending on defence equipment, NATO’s European members maintained the higher investment share of defence spending that they achieved in 2019, allocating 23% on average in 2020, beyond the NATO-recommended level of 20%.

The defence expenditures in the Middle East and North Africa have declined, falling to US$150 billion (excluding security expenditure), while the percentage of global defence spending fell to 8.9%, down from 10.5 per cent in 2017. Despite dedicating by far the highest share of economic production to defence, at 5.2 per cent of GDP, compared to the world average of 2.08 per cent, the area continues to struggle. Other oil-dependent economies began to feel the pinch as well. Following a significant 3.8 per cent real rise in the core ‘national defence’ budget in 2020, Russia was only able to execute a minuscule 1.4 per cent increase in 2021, resulting in a 3.6 per cent real reduction. Total Russian military spending (which includes pensions, military housing, and health and social assistance) is expected to drop from over 4.1 per cent of GDP in 2020 to under 3.8 percent in 2023.

Conclusion:

Peace is important to maintain fruitful trade relations in a given region. However, this peace can only be achieved if military spending is done. Military spending builds military might. This power acts as a deterrent for aggressors. In the absence of military spending, opponents may view the nation as a soft target. Hence, even though local defense spending may be more expensive, it creates more value in the form of more robust national security and fewer disruptions to trade and commerce. If the defense system of a country is fully integrated, there are economic benefits to it. Defense expenditure is, without a doubt, an unambiguous demonstration of power, as current patterns of growing defense spending shows.

/0 Comments/by