English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Rafale deal: French Govt, Dassault refute ex French Prez Hollande’s reported statement, he stands by it

Published

on

Rafale deal

The bombshell of former French President Francois Hollande’s reported statement about Indian government proposing Reliance as Dassault’s partner company for offset contract set off a spate of claims and denials.

While the French government and Dassault aviation sought to refute Hollande’s claim, the former President stood by his statement, reported NDTV.

France’s Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs said that the French government had no role to play in choosing partner companies in India for the purpose of offsets contracts in the Rafale deal.

The French government clarified that they were not involved in the choice of Indian partners. The French government said their role was just to ensure the delivery and quality of the aircraft. “The French government is in no manner involved in the choice of Indian industrial partners who have been, are being, or will be selected by French companies,” the French government said.

Dassault Aviation also reacted, issuing a statement to say, “This offsets contract is delivered in compliance with the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2016 regulations. In this framework, and in accordance with the policy of Make in India, Dassault Aviation has decided to make a partnership with India’s Reliance Group. This is Dassault Aviation’s choice…”

Francois Hollande’s reported statement

France’s former President Hollande had reportedly told French media that the Indian government proposed Reliance Defence as the partner for Dassault Aviation in the Rs 58,000 crore Rafale deal and France did not have a choice.

The former French President’s remarks contradict the Indian government’s claim that the deal between Dassault and Reliance was a commercial pact between two private parties and the government had nothing to do with it.

The deal for 36 Rafale aircraft in a government-to-government agreement was announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on April 10, 2015 during his visit to Paris, which led to the cancellation of the 126 aircraft deal being negotiated by the previous government. The deal was eventually signed on September 23, 2016 in Delhi between then Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his French counterpart.

The Congress has been accusing massive irregularities in the deal, alleging that the government was procuring each aircraft at a cost of over Rs.1,670 crore as against Rs.526 crore finalised by the UPA government when it was negotiating procurement of 126 Rafale jets.

According to Mediapart, a French language publication, Hollande said the original deal was to be 126 aircraft, “but with the change of government (in India in 2014), the Indians reformulated their proposal, which was less attractive for us, since it was 36 aircraft only. But the manufacture was planned in France, contrary to the previous proposal. So we lost on one side, but we won the other.”

Opposition parties, including the Congress, have also alleged that undue favours had been granted to Ambani’s firm in this deal, a company without any defence manufacturing experience.

The report in ‘Mediapart’ quoted Hollande as saying, “It was the Indian government that proposed this service group, and Dassault which negotiated with Ambani. We had no choice, we took the interlocutor who was given to us.”

Asked who selected Reliance as a partner and why, Hollande replied, “We had no say in this regard.” Dassault Aviation, the makers of Rafale, had chosen Reliance Defence as its partner to fulfill offset obligations of the deal.

Offset clause and Reliance

Under the offsets clause, France is to invest 50 per cent of the total order cost in local contracts in India, worth Rs 30,000 crore, as per an Indian Express report. The offset obligations of the deal are to be discharged from September 2019 to September 2023, as per the contract.

The Rafale offset was the first project of this magnitude won by Reliance Defence, which placed it at the centre of a major political row. The government has been maintaining it did not have any role in selection of the offset partner by Dassault.

In a statement, the Ministry of Defence had stated on February 7 that “no Indian Offset Partner for the 2016 deal for 36 Rafale Aircraft has been so far selected by the vendor (DA) because as per the applicable guidelines, DA is free to select the Indian Offset Partners and provide their details at the time of seeking offset credits, or one year prior to discharge of offset obligation.”

The opposition parties have also alleged that the Reliance Defence was formed just 12 days before the announcement of the Rafale deal by the prime minister on 10 April 2015. The Reliance group has rejected the charges.

Former HAL chief’s statement

In an oblique justification of the government not pressing for the offset contract being given to state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman had also raised questions about the public sector company to produce Rafale fighter jets. Howvere, T Suvarna Raju, who was heading HAL till three weeks ago, told HT on September 19 that the public sector undertaking could have built Rafale fighters in India had the government managed to close the original negotiations with French aerospace firm Dassault Aviation for 126 fighters and that there was a work-share agreement between the two companies. However, he admitted that it would have cost HAL more to make the aircraft. Former air chief AY Tipnis told HT that HAL may have found it challenging to build the Rafale.

Now, as allegations flew thick and fast after Hollande’s statement, a defence ministry spokesperson tweeted that the report “is being verified” and that “neither GoI (government of India) nor the French Government had any say in the commercial decision.”

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, who was in Cairo when Hollande’s bombshell came, called off  her visit to France for a meeting with her counterpart there this week, reported The Indian Express.

French government’s statement

As Hollande’s statement set off an intense verbal war in India, the French government came out with a statement refuting the former President.

“The intergovernmental agreement signed on 23rd September 2016 between the French and Indian governments for supplying India with 36 Rafale aircraft concerns the obligations of the French government solely with regard to ensuring the delivery and quality of this equipment,” it said.

Further stating that the French government is in no manner involved in the choice of Indian industrial partners who have been, are being, or will be selected by French companies, France said, “In accordance with India’s acquisition procedure, French companies have the full freedom to choose the Indian partner companies that they consider to be the most relevant, then present for the Indian government’s approval the offsets projects that they wish to execute in India with these local partners so as to fulfil their obligations in this regard.”

“As it happens, agreements have already been signed by French companies with many Indian firms, both public and private, under the framework of Indian laws.”

Dassault Aviation

In a statement, Dassault Aviation said it has decided to make a partnership with the Reliance Defence in accordance with the policy of ‘Make in India’.

Providing clarifications regarding the contract, Dassault Aviation said, “This contract is a government-to-government agreement, it provides for a separate contract in which Dassault Aviation commits to make compensation investments (offsets) in India worth 50 per cent of the value of the purchase.”

It added, “This offsets contract is delivered in compliance with the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2016 regulations. In this framework, and in accordance with the policy of Make in India, Dassault Aviation has decided to make a partnership with India’s Reliance Group. This is Dassault Aviation’s choice as CEO Eric Trappe=ier had explained in an interview published in MINT newspaper on April 17, 2018. This partnership has led to the creation of the Dassault Reliance Aerospace Ltd (DRAL) joint venture in February 2017.Dassault Aviation and Reliance have built a plant in Nagpur for manufacturing parts for Falcon and Rafale aircraft.”

Ten days after India sealed the government-to-government agreement on the Rafale deal, Reliance Defence and Dassault had announced a joint venture (JV) in the aerospace sector and a year later, the foundation stone of a manufacturing facility was laid in Mihan, Nagpur.

Dassault Aviation provides the following clarifications regarding the contract signed in 2016 for 36 Rafale aircraft to India:

  1. This contract is a government-to-government agreement. It provides for a separate contract in which Dassault Aviation commits to make compensation investments (offsets) in India worth 50% of the value of the purchase.
  2. This offsets contract is delivered in compliance with the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2016 regulations. In this framework, and in accordance with the policy of Make in India, Dassault Aviation has decided to make a partnership with India’s Reliance Group. This is Dassault Aviation’s choice, as CEO Eric Trappier had explained in an interview published in MINT newspaper on April 17, 2018. This partnership has led to the creation of the Dassault Reliance Aerospace Ltd (DRAL) joint-venture in February 2017. Dassault Aviation and Reliance have built a plant in Nagpur for manufacturing parts for Falcon and Rafale aircraft. The Nagpur site was chosen because of the availability of land with direct access to an airport runway, an essential condition of aeronautic activities.
  3. Other partnerships have been signed with other companies such as BTSL, DEFSYS, Kinetic, Mahindra, Maini, SAMTEL,… Other negotiations are ongoing with a hundred-odd other potential partners.
  4. Dassault Aviation is very proud that the Indian authorities have selected the Rafale fighter.

India News

Two election commissioners complained against senior poll officer, RTI reveals

An RTI response has shed light on complaints by two Election Commissioners against a senior poll panel officer and the Cabinet Secretariat’s decision not to intervene directly.

Published

on

An RTI response has brought fresh details to light about complaints submitted by two Election Commissioners against a senior official of the Election Commission of India (ECI), including the Cabinet Secretariat’s decision not to intervene directly in the matter.

Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan on July 29, 2026, raising concerns about the working of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg.

The complaints followed an order concerning the allocation of responsibilities among senior officers in the poll panel. The Cabinet Secretariat subsequently acknowledged the communications and shared them with relevant offices, while noting that direct action could be inappropriate without an official communication from the Commission as a whole.

Why the two Election Commissioners raised concerns

The dispute centred on a work-allocation order issued on July 28, when Garg took temporary charge as the link officer for the Deputy Election Commissioner handling administration, who was on leave.

According to the complaints, Garg issued an order reallocating responsibilities among senior and equivalent-ranking officers without discussing the changes with the Commission or the officers concerned.

Sandhu reportedly objected that the revised allocation had been made without consultation, while Joshi stated that a file he requested from the Administration Division was not provided to him.

The two Commissioners also referred to previous instructions against making such changes without prior discussion or approval from the Commission.

Why the Cabinet Secretariat did not intervene

Records disclosed through the RTI process indicate that the Cabinet Secretariat considered the complaints but concluded that direct intervention could be inappropriate.

In its internal deliberations, the Secretariat noted that the Election Commission is a constitutional body designed to function independently of executive interference. It also observed that the letters had been sent by the two Commissioners in their individual capacities rather than as an official communication from the Commission collectively.

The Secretariat therefore considered it appropriate to acknowledge the letters and inform the Chief Election Commissioner’s office, rather than take direct action against the official.

The Department of Personnel and Training was also informed so that the matter could be placed on record for future consideration concerning the officer.

What happened after the complaints

The Cabinet Secretariat’s records show that internal discussions took place on August 3 and August 4. The Cabinet Secretary acknowledged the two letters on August 5 and forwarded the matter to the relevant offices.

The Election Commission had also issued a clarification on September 26, stating that the dispute did not concern a policy matter or the Commission’s IT division, but the functioning of an officer posted to the poll panel.

The Commission said the work-reallocation orders were not implemented following directions from the two Commissioners and that oversight of the IT division had not actually been withdrawn.

The RTI disclosures provide an official record of how the complaints were handled by the Cabinet Secretariat, while also highlighting the institutional considerations involved in deciding whether the executive should intervene in the functioning of a constitutional body.

Continue Reading

India News

Punjab strike hits public services as 3 lakh employees and roadways workers protest

Punjab is facing disruption to government work and public transport as over three lakh government employees participate in a mass leave protest and roadways workers continue their strike over pending demands.

Published

on

Public services in Punjab have been affected as government employees and transport workers continue their agitation over long-pending demands. The protests involve a mass casual leave programme by more than three lakh government employees and a separate strike by workers associated with state-run transport services.

The agitation has disrupted government office operations and public bus services, adding to the pressure on the Punjab government to address employees’ grievances.

Why Punjab government employees are protesting

Government employees have been pressing for the release of pending dearness allowance (DA) instalments and arrears, restoration of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), regularisation of contractual workers and resolution of pay-related issues.

The demands also cover service conditions and benefits for workers employed across different government departments. Employee organisations have called for concrete decisions on these matters, arguing that several issues remain unresolved despite discussions with the state government.

The mass casual leave programme has affected the functioning of government offices and administrative establishments across the state.

Roadways workers’ strike affects bus services

Separately, workers associated with Punjab Roadways, PUNBUS and the Punjab Road Transport Corporation (PRTC) have continued their agitation over employment-related demands.

The transport workers’ protest has affected the availability of public buses, creating difficulties for commuters who depend on state-run services for their daily travel.

The transport workers’ demands include regularisation under applicable service rules, changes to employment arrangements for outsourced workers and action on cases linked to previous protests.

The government employees’ agitation and the transport workers’ strike are separate actions, although both concern outstanding demands and the state government’s response to employee organisations.

Talks fail to resolve the deadlock

Discussions between employee representatives and the state government have so far failed to produce a comprehensive resolution to the dispute.

Employee organisations have continued to seek assurances and concrete action on their demands. The continuation of the agitation reflects the lack of an agreement that would persuade the protesting groups to withdraw their actions.

The dispute has also placed the state government under pressure to restore normal public services while addressing the concerns raised by government staff and transport workers.

Continue Reading

India News

Amit Shah says congress won’t return to power for 30 years

Union Home Minister Amit Shah took a swipe at Rahul Gandhi over the Opposition’s vote theft allegations, asserting that the Congress would not return to power for the next 30 years.

Published

on

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday launched a fresh attack on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, questioning the Opposition’s allegations of vote theft and asserting that the Congress would not return to power for the next 30 years.

Addressing an event in New Delhi, Shah criticised Gandhi over his absence from the country and challenged the Congress’s objections to the Election Commission of India (ECI), arguing that the party accepted the electoral process when it won elections but questioned it after defeats.

The remarks came during an event related to projects for the rejuvenation of the Yamuna, where Shah also targeted the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) over their political record in Delhi.

Amit Shah’s warning to Rahul Gandhi

Taking a dig at Gandhi over his reported foreign visit, Shah said the Congress leader would have to remember his words when he returned to Delhi.

The Home Minister argued that the Congress’s political setbacks had begun long before Narendra Modi became Prime Minister and said the party could not attribute its electoral losses solely to allegations of irregularities in elections.

Shah also defended his confidence in the BJP’s electoral prospects, contrasting his prediction of the party remaining in power with the Congress’s prospects under its current political approach.

He asserted that the Congress would not get another opportunity to form a government for the next 30 years. The statement was a political prediction made by Shah, rather than an established electoral outcome.

Shah questions Congress over vote theft allegations

Shah accused the Congress and other Opposition parties of adopting inconsistent positions on the Election Commission, depending on whether election results favoured them.

Citing electoral victories in states including Kerala, Telangana and Himachal Pradesh, he argued that the Congress and its allies had accepted the electoral process when they won.

He questioned why the same institutions and electoral arrangements became subjects of criticism when the Opposition lost elections.

Shah also targeted the Opposition’s protests against alleged electoral irregularities and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. He alleged that the Congress was using vote theft claims to protect the votes of infiltrators.

These were allegations made by the Home Minister and should be understood as his political assertions, not as independently established findings.

Amit Shah targets Opposition’s protest strategy

The Home Minister also criticised the Opposition’s demonstrations in Delhi, arguing that protests could not overturn the public mandate.

He said political parties seeking electoral victories should engage with people and address their concerns rather than rely on demonstrations and allegations against constitutional institutions.

Shah further accused the Opposition of applying different standards to court decisions, suggesting that it welcomed judgments in its favour while questioning those that went against it.

His remarks came amid continuing political disagreements over the electoral process and the Opposition’s criticism of the Election Commission.

Yamuna projects and attack on AAP

During the same event, Shah inaugurated and laid the foundation stones for 43 Delhi Jal Board projects worth Rs. 8,941 crore, aimed at improving wastewater treatment, drinking water infrastructure and the rejuvenation of the Yamuna.

He criticised previous governments in Delhi over the river’s pollution and accused the Congress and AAP of failing to address the problem adequately.

Shah also targeted AAP national convenor Arvind Kejriwal, arguing that political parties should be judged by their performance rather than their explanations for failing to deliver results.

He said the BJP would work towards cleaning the Yamuna and improving water and sewerage infrastructure in the national capital.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com