Context:

• India's pursuit of Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence aims to reduce dependence on foreign weapons and strengthen strategic autonomy. However, complete self-reliance can be prohibitively expensive.
• The challenge is to balance indigenous technological capabilities with cost-effectiveness, timely procurement and integration into global defence supply chains.

India's Defence Indigenisation Drive:

• The government has promoted defence self-reliance through initiatives such as Make in India (2014), Vocal for Local (2020) and Atmanirbhar Bharat (2020).
• Indigenous defence capabilities are considered essential for reducing dependence on foreign suppliers, strengthening strategic autonomy and protecting national security.
• Recently, the Defence Minister of India also reiterated the vision of designing, developing and manufacturing in India - a country which is world’s 5th-largest defence spender, and the 2nd-largest importer of weaponry after war-torn Ukraine.
• India's indigenous defence and aerospace production increased from ₹46,000 crore in 2014 to ₹1.78 lakh crore in 2025–26.
• Defence exports also rose significantly, from ₹600 crore in 2014 to ₹38,434 crore in 2024–25. The government has set a target of ₹50,000 crore in defence exports by 2028–29.

The Economic Cost of Complete Self-Reliance:

• Defence acquisition follows a broad cost hierarchy -
  • Leasing: Generally the most cost-effective and timely option when equipment is required for a limited period.
  • Direct procurement: Buying an existing platform is generally more expensive than leasing it.
  • Technology transfer: Acquiring manufacturing technology and establishing domestic production facilities involves higher costs.
  • Indigenous development: Designing, developing, testing and manufacturing an entire platform is generally the most expensive approach.
• Thus, complete self-reliance may impose substantial financial and technological costs, particularly when domestic alternatives are still under development.

Limitations of India's Defence Indigenisation:

• Several indigenous platforms, including the Tejas fighter, naval warships and tactical missile systems, continue to depend on imported components, subsystems and materials.
• In some cases, overseas inputs account for nearly 40% of a platform's cost.
• Developing every component domestically can lead to duplication of effort, increased expenditure and delays.
• Even technologically advanced defence economies rely on international suppliers for specialised components.
• For example, a significant proportion of the world's combat aircraft use ejection seats manufactured by British company Martin-Baker.
• Even Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II and China’s F-7 Guizhou, went for Martin-Baker.
• This demonstrates that strategic self-reliance does not necessarily require complete technological autarky.

Strategic Technologies - The Core of Atmanirbharta:

• India should prioritise technologies that are critical to operational superiority and national security rather than attempting to indigenise every component.
• The Tejas fighter programme illustrates this approach.
  • The aircraft's manoeuvrability depends on its unstable aerodynamic design.
  • This requires an advanced digital flight control computer and quadruplex fly-by-wire software.
  • India successfully developed this critical technology for the Tejas Mk1.
  • The technology is being upgraded for the Tejas Mk2 and the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).
• Developing such critical technologies enables India to retain control over essential capabilities while sourcing non-critical components from global suppliers.

Project Management - The Key to Cost-Effective Self-Reliance:

• Successful defence indigenisation requires strong project management and technological prioritisation.
• Key requirements include -
  • Strategic prioritisation: Identifying technologies essential for national security and operational superiority.
  • Resource optimisation: Combining domestic capabilities with international technological expertise.
  • Time-bound development: Establishing realistic deadlines and preventing prolonged delays.
  • Accountability: Periodically reviewing projects and discontinuing those that are technologically or financially unviable.
• Efficient project management can prevent cost overruns and ensure that indigenous development delivers tangible strategic benefits.

Global Supply Chains and Strategic Autonomy:

• Dependence on foreign suppliers can expose India to export restrictions, sanctions and political pressure. However, participation in global defence supply chains can also reduce such vulnerabilities.
• When domestic industries become important suppliers to international original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), foreign companies also become dependent on Indian components.
• This creates mutual interdependence, potentially discouraging arbitrary supply disruptions. However, defence self-reliance alone cannot guarantee strategic autonomy.
• India's continued dependence on imported commodities, particularly crude oil, highlights the broader economic vulnerabilities that influence national security.

Way Forward:

• Adopt selective self-reliance, prioritising critical technologies over complete indigenisation.
• Promote domestic research and development while leveraging international partnerships.
• Strengthen project management, technological assessment and accountability.
• Integrate Indian defence industries into global supply chains to enhance exports and create mutual dependencies.
• Balance indigenous production with leasing and imports wherever they are more economical and operationally necessary.

Conclusion:

• Atmanirbhar Bharat should be viewed as a strategy for achieving technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy, rather than complete economic or technological isolation.
• India's success will depend on identifying critical defence capabilities, managing development costs and building a competitive domestic defence industry integrated with global supply chains.