Angola to source defence equipment from India, Modi announces $200 million credit line
New Delhi: Angola will be sourcing defence equipment from India, especially to overhaul its aging Soviet-era defence platforms, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi Saturday announced a $200-million line of credit during President João Manuel Goncalves Lourenço's maiden state visit to India.
The Indian prime minister also announced that the two countries are looking to broaden their energy partnership. For India, Angola is the second largest supplier of oil and liquid natural gas (LNG) from the African continent after Nigeria. Of the roughly $3.5 billion worth of export of goods from Luanda to New Delhi, around 90 percent is energy supplies.
At a special briefing after the press statements, Dammu Ravi, the Secretary (Economic Relations) in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), highlighted that Luanda has a fleet of Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets, for example, which requires repair and overhauling, which India could aid in.
'They (Angola) will be sourcing defence equipment from India. Already, they are in touch with the private companies and also public sector companies for various items to be sourced from India and the important aspect is there is a commonality—they have a large number of Soviet defence equipment, which needs to be serviced, overhauled and (requires) maintenance,' Ravi said.
He added that even before the visit, there were some discussions among public sector units of the two countries as well as the private sector businesses for Angola sourcing transport equipment and ammunition from India.
A meeting between Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and his Angolan counterpart Joao Ernesto Dos Santos was expected to be held Friday. However, the meeting was cancelled due to scheduling issues.
The Angolan president is the first Head of State to visit India following the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam. During his talks with Modi, Lourenço condemned the attack and conveyed his condolences to the victims. The President of Angola is also the current chair of the African Union (AU). The larger organisation has not made a statement on ghastly attack.
'We are committed to take firm and decisive action against the terrorists and those who support them. We thank Angola for their support in our fight against cross-border terrorism,' Modi said during the joint press statement.
At least four terrorists killed 26 tourists—25 Indians and one foreign national—near Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam on 22 April, in what was one of the deadliest attacks against civilians in the region in recent years.
The two countries also exchanged three Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) in the fields of agriculture, traditional medicine and culture. A framework agreement for Angola's entrance into the International Solar Alliance (ISA) was also signed. This is the first major visit by the President of Angola to India since 1987.
Apart from defence and security, the Angolan president also requested India's aid in the health sector and agriculture, as Luanda looks to become self-sufficient in food. Modi and Lourenço also sought deeper cooperation in the railway sector. Currently, Angola has three railway lines connecting the coastal parts of the country in the West to the interiors in the East. There are no interconnections between the three lines.
One of the country's rail lines is also a part of the Lobito corridor, a US and European Union (EU)-led project to connect the mineral rich Katanga province in the Democratic Republic of Congo, to the port of Lobito in Angola, via Zambia. The Lobito Corridor was announced on the margins of the G20 Leaders' Summit in New Delhi in September 2023, alongside the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC).
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)
Also read: First Angolan president to visit India in 38 yrs, Lourenço receives ceremonial welcome
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Reading the outcome of the Alaska summit
The Alaska summit between American President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin may have ended inconclusively, but it clearly indicated that if the Ukraine war ends during Trump's presidency, Ukraine will likely have to sacrifice a part of its territory. The usual aggression that Trump displays when meeting other world leaders was hardly present when he met Putin; if anything, there was a great deal of chemistry between them. In the run-up to the summit, Trump had warned of 'severe consequences' if Putin continued the Ukraine war after the summit, but that appears to be an empty threat now. As a matter of fact, Trump seems to have gone in the opposite direction. After the summit, Trump agreed with Putin that the best way to end the war was through a peace settlement — not a ceasefire, which Ukraine, Europe, and even the US had preferred prior to the summit, but not Russia. The apparent rapport between the two leaders and Trump's reversal on the ceasefire issue suggest that Trump is likely to, going forward, show more understanding of the Russian position than the Ukrainian one. Apart from the growing certainty, underscored by this summit, that the war is likely to end on Russia's terms, the rest is just noise and drama — including, it seems, Trump's recent threat to impose an additional 25% duty on Indian goods for buying Russian oil. A key reason Russia is unlikely to give up the captured Ukrainian territory is not only its military strength but also that, under Trump, Washington lacks the political will to enforce such a change. Even if the US had the political will to do so, as it did under the Biden administration, it might still have been unable to dislodge Russia from the occupied territories. At best, the US could have made it tough for Russia to hold onto the captured territory and generally made life difficult for Moscow. Trump is not keen on doing so; he appears to have decided to abandon Ukraine. America's lack of commitment to this war is hardly born out of a realistic assessment of the balance of forces on the battlefield or due to Russian staying power in the occupied territories; it is simply a function of Trump's personal proclivities. Trump is simply not convinced of the need to push back against Russia because he doesn't believe in that cause: He wants a great power rapprochement with Russia. Trump's war termination talks with Russia without Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky at the table, America's reduced military assistance to Ukraine, and the summit with Putin are all part of the American president's attempts at controlling the narrative, something Trump enjoys immensely. Europe is deeply worried but has limited capacity to help Ukraine. Its security predicament stems from its deep reliance on American security guarantees. If it doesn't have the wherewithal to look after its own security, its ability to help Ukraine without the US is far less certain. Notwithstanding Europe's good intentions and its constant assurances to Ukraine, it will eventually have to swallow the bitter pill and walk the line dictated by Washington. Good intentions are not enough to win wars. Russia is now acting from a position of strength — militarily, diplomatically and geopolitically. The Alaska summit has further strengthened Moscow's position regarding the war. By agreeing to a peace settlement to end the war, as opposed to a ceasefire, Trump has effectively agreed to the Russian position. Even if we are not sure what Trump has in mind when he refers to a peace settlement, we do know what Putin means by it. The Russian view of a settlement has the following four key elements. One, international legal recognition of Crimea, captured in 2014, as part of Russia, as well as Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions; two, Ukraine must become neutral, outside any military alliance, host no foreign forces, and make a commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons; three, major limits on Ukraine's armed forces; four, ending the sanctions on Russia. Even if Russia is able to get some, if not all, of these demands met — which doesn't seem impossible at this point— it is likely to walk away from this war victorious. Russia is on its way back into the ranks of great powers and the global balance of power, and Putin has much to thank Trump for creating that shift. Even though Ukraine is the most important, and aggrieved, party in this conflict, unfortunately, it appears to be the least consequential one at the negotiating table, at least for the moment. It neither has the military power to push back against Russia on its own nor does it have the geopolitical standing to convince Trump to come to its aid. Kyiv's best friends, the European States, are finding it harder to do for Ukraine any more than what they are already doing. Ukraine's fate is a grave wake-up call for small and medium powers worldwide, especially those bordering ambitious great powers. If so, the eventual outcomes of the Ukraine war are broadly clear; unless of course, there are major shifts in geopolitics in the months to come. We are likely to witness a great power détente between the US and Russia. The chemistry between the two leaders left us in no doubt that the world is headed that way. Such a US-Russia détente will leave Europe insecure, which will seek to build its defence outside of Nato. Ukraine is caught between having to make concessions it detests and being embroiled in a long war with Russia without any US military assistance. It can afford neither, nor can it avoid a choice. Happymon Jacob is the founder and director of the Council for Strategic and Defense Research and the editor of INDIA'S WORLD magazine. The views expressed are personal.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Reforming the GST regime
The Goods and Services Tax (GST), when it was finally implemented after decades of labour, was India's largest ever indirect tax reform. It created a nationally unified market and a unique federal forum for governing it. Doing away with state-level bumps in the indirect tax regime, however, was only one of the GST's promises. It was also expected to make the tax regime simple, especially in terms of slabs. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Independence Day speech has raised hopes of this promise being fulfilled eight years after GST's roll out. Speaking from the ramparts of Red Fort — the directional changes were later shared by finance ministry officials — Modi said that the Union government has sent a proposal to the Group of Ministers (GoM) constituted by the GST Council to unleash second generation reforms in GST, which, among other things, will bring most items under just two slabs of 'standard' and 'merit' with some exceptions being put under 'special rates'. HT reported earlier that the Centre has been mulling this, but also pointed out how the GST Council has not met for a long time now. While Modi announced that the reforms, especially on the slab front, would likely be rolled out before Diwali (second half of October), a GST Council meeting is yet to be notified. The idea, at least in principle, ought to be welcomed unequivocally. It will simplify the tax regime and take politicking out of setting tax slabs. However, the devil may very well lie in the details. Any large-scale revision in GST slabs will have to take into account its revenue implications as well as a possible inflationary impact. These two are likely to work in opposite directions and are critical factors for the fiscal and political health of the governments in charge, both in the Centre and the states. One would like to believe that a large part of this homework has been done by the GoM and state governments are on the same page with some of these salient findings. We will know more when these proposals are discussed in the next GST Council. A simplified GST is a much-needed step in India's long, even if gradual, road to reforms. Ideally, this reform should have happened earlier and definitely not in the current environment of global economic turmoil. But that's what political friction to reform sometimes entails.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Stalemate in Alaska is a gain for Moscow
The summit between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin ended without any concrete outcomes regarding the ending of the war in Ukraine, currently in its fourth year. It was clear after the meeting in Alaska that Trump had given up his push for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine while Putin had demanded that Ukraine should give up control of the entire Donbas region, including areas that have not been taken by Russian troops. It will be foolhardy for the Europeans to expect the US to play its traditional role even though they have no choice but to continue with Trump as the only broker who has a direct line to Putin. (@mfa_russia via PTI) The summit was a symbolic win for Putin, who became a virtual outcast for the West even before the launch of the invasion, as he secured an invitation to the US without making any concessions. Both Trump and Putin have spoken of security guarantees for Ukraine, while the US President has said he believes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky should cut a deal. However, Ukraine has already ruled out any territorial concessions while European leaders have expressed doubts about Putin's intentions, pointing out that he has not delivered on past commitments. The planned meeting between Trump, Zelensky and other European leaders on Monday is expected to offer indications of the way forward, though it will be foolhardy for the Europeans to expect the US to play its traditional role even though they have no choice but to continue with Trump as the only broker who has a direct line to Putin. The Indian government, which followed the Alaska summit closely because of Trump's threat of resorting to secondary sanctions against the country after imposing a 25% tariff over the continued purchases of Russian oil, has welcomed the Alaska summit and commended Putin and Trump for their pursuit of peace. The Indian side's wish for an early end to the conflict in Ukraine will require more protracted diplomacy.
