Then why have the "superior negotiation tactics" resulted in a three year (and counting) delay, not to mention that aircraft carrier fiasco.
I had already explained both. Our bureaucratic process takes 3 years for negotiations to finish. Even the deal between India and the US for the F414 took 3 years, negotiations started in 2010 and contract was signed in 2013.
Shortlist - 2010
Finalization - 2013
The upgrade deal with France took 3 years as well, as did the Mig-29 upgrade deal. Rafale is much more complex than any of those, so it is actually a miracle they did it in 3. There are a certain number of days the file needs to stay in particular departments and ministries. When they fasttrack the process, the number of days reduces, but it is still not enough to finish negotiations quickly. According to the MoD, the tendering and negotiations process takes 6-7 years, they want to overhaul the system to reduce it to 3 years now. Hopefully, future deals take much lesser time.
The FGFA deal has taken 4 years in contract negotiations due to technical issues. The IAF has been changing requirements and HAL has been delaying the process.
Rafale will be similar too. Shortlisted in 2012. Expected to be finalized in 2015. There are more hiccups compared to the F414 deal.
And the carrier was a technical fiasco, not bureaucratic. The Russians and Indians didn't know what they were doing. Blame it on lack of experience. I don't see how negotiations help when both sides didn't know more work was required. The F-35 was the same. Or should I accuse the US of cheating partner nations by underestimating the work required? And unlike what the US plans on doing, Sevmash never made a profit on Vik. They are very happy that they got to work on a carrier, their first time.
Based on previous official statements, I think the main sticking point is with the issue of contingent liabilities and ownership. The Indian position on the surface appears to be rather perplexing considering that it goes against the norm of sensible commercial practice. A deal will come from navigating and addressing this issue and any solution will have to come from firstly understanding what is driving such a position by the Indians. Unfortunately so far the Indians had not exactly been helpful in explaining the rationale for taking such a position.
Dassault has not agreed to the liability clause. Ownership shouldn't be a problem, Dassault own almost everything except for specific Indian avionics. It is true that the liability clause is a bit of a stretch for sane minds, but we don't know all the details to comment on it.