Editorial 2: U.S. defence ties — India needs to keep its eyes open

Context

New Delhi must steer clear of reliance that compromises its strategic autonomy.

Introduction

It is well known that defence public sector undertakings rely on the Indian armed forces as their main buyers. With the ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ campaign, this dependence has grown, putting more pressure on Indian Air Force (IAF) planners as they struggle with fewer fighter squadrons due to the slow production of aircraft by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).

• After the IAF chief voiced his concerns at the Aero India-2025 show in Bengaluru this February, the media has been filled with reports about a renewed effort to deliver Tejas MK1A Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) jets.
• This month, the first rear fuselage for the Tejas, built by a private company, was officially handed over in an event attended by the Defence Minister and the IAF chief, drawing major media attention.
• As the Ministry of Defence reviews its committee report on the IAF’s needs, including possible imports, three key facts must be kept in mind.

SIPRI report and U.S. policy

• India’s Arms Imports
  • According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report (2020-24):
  • India remains the world’s second-largest arms importer.However, India’s arms imports have decreased by 9.3% compared to 2015-19.
  • Implication:
    • While this decline is positive, high-cost weapon systems such as aircraft, tanks, radars, and specialized armaments will continue to be imported for years, adding to India’s defence expenditure.
• Dependence on U.S. for Fighter Aircraft Engines
  • The Indian Air Force (IAF) has committed to indigenous fighter jets:
    • LCA Tejas Mk1A
    • Tejas Mk2
    • dvanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA)
• Concern:
  • All these aircraft depend on American engines, making the IAF’s operational strength subject to U.S. strategic decisions.
    • Question arises: Will India move away from its heavy reliance on Russian arms (which still account for 36% of India’s arms imports) or remain dependent?
• Current Inventory from Russia:

India-U.S. Defence Relations: Short Shelf Life of Policies

• Over the last two decades, multiple U.S.-India defence initiatives have been introduced, but many have faded away quickly.
• Example:
  • 2012: Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) – Promised to bring cutting-edge technology but failed to make a lasting impact.
  • Recent: ‘U.S.-India Major Defence Partnership in the 21st Century’ – Can it deliver concrete results, or will it fade like previous agreements?
• Challenge:
  • U.S. foreign policy is highly unpredictable, especially under a transactional administration (such as that of Donald Trump).
  • India must remain cautious and self-reliant, ensuring its long-term strategic autonomy.

‘Partnership’ is the key word

• The Reality of U.S.-India Defense Relations: Historically, U.S.-India defense ties have been framed as a “key component” of their strategic partnership.
  • This was reaffirmed during-
    • U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s visit (April 2016)      
    • Recent Trump-Modi discussions
• However, the core question remains: Is this a true partnership or a dependency?
• What Defines a True Partnership?: According to Anna Simons (Professor of Defence Analysis, U.S. Army War College):
  • A true partnership is based on mutual indispensability.
  • Dependency is not a partnership—if one side relies more on the other, the relationship becomes imbalanced.
• Key Question: Are India and the U.S. indispensable to each other?

Testing Indispensability: Three Key Factors

• Reality Check: India’s defense R&D and manufacturing sector is not at par with the U.S., leading to an asymmetrical relationship where India could become overly dependent.

How Does India Compare in Other Defense Partnerships?

• The same indispensability test can be applied to India’s relationships with:
  • Russia (India’s largest defense supplier)
  • Israel (high-tech military collaborations)
  • France (Rafale jets & other strategic deals)
• The U.S.-Pakistan case serves as a warning:
  • The U.S. dropped Pakistan when it was no longer geo-politically useful.
  • Could India face a similar fate if its strategic importance declines?

The Uncertainty of U.S. Commitments

• The U.S.’s recent disengagement from Europe raises concerns about its long-term reliability.
• Trump-era policies demonstrated that alliances can unravel quickly if Washington’s interests shift.
• India must remain cautious and ensure its strategic autonomy rather than fall into a dependency trap.

Conclusion: Looking ahead

Are we making the right choice by depending on the U.S. for our defense needs? The real answer depends on Washington—whether it truly wants a strong partnership with India. For that to happen, the U.S. must make India a key political ally by strengthening ties in a special way. On India's side, New Delhi must make sure its decisions protect its interests, even if U.S. policies change in the future. While India imports essential aircraft and equipment, it must stay cautious to avoid becoming too dependent, which could harm its strategic independence.