In its first innings, the UPA’s track record of defence procurements was quite dismal. The only positive feature was the defence minister’s spotless image. Banking on his enhanced credibility he can now with confidence take the bold decisions necessary to banish the paralysis that envelops his ministry’s procurement procedures. His announcement recently that the procurement mechanism will be re-examined every year, and completely overhauled this year,

is a sign of that.

Ever since the Bofors controversy, the belief of successive dispensations that rigid procedural policies will cleanse the system and make it efficient continues to be belied. The label of inefficiency, and the vague suspicion that matters are not entirely above board, remain affixed to our defence ministry unlike any other department of our government; perhaps unfairly so.

This impression has real costs. Given the imperatives of national security and the criticality of speedily addressing the infirmities and gaps in our military capability, our procurement approach requires serious and urgent re-examination.

Currently, it is procedure- and technicality-driven, a ritual of endless trials and reams of paperwork but no acquisitions. Take the case of the army’s need for self-propelled artillery, first articulated in 1978. The acquisition process started in 1982. No outcome yet. The path traversed for towed guns is almost identical. (The jet trainer story is too well known to require retelling.) Among the many reasons for such delays is our obsessive and overriding preoccupation with sanitising (like the mindless “no agents” obsession) the procurement system. Consequently, it has been rendered devoid of judgment and discretion.

... contd.