Context

• India–United States defence cooperation has expanded significantly over the past two decades, reflecting growing strategic convergence in the Indo-Pacific.
• While bilateral defence trade, military exercises, and interoperability have strengthened considerably, the industrial dimension of the partnership has lagged behind.
• Successive initiatives have promised co-development, co-production, and technology transfer, yet most have been hindered by export controls, intellectual property disputes, and differing commercial priorities.
• As a result, the relationship has evolved into a strong procurement partnership but has fallen short of becoming a robust defence-industrial collaboration.

Evolution of India–U.S. Defence Cooperation the Case of the GE Engine

• Evolution of India–U.S. Defence Cooperation
  • Since 2002, India has procured over $22 billion worth of U.S. defence equipment, including Apache and Chinook helicopters, C-17 and C-130J transport aircraft, P-8I maritime patrol aircraft, and M777 howitzers.
  • These acquisitions have enhanced India's military capabilities and established the United States as a major defence supplier.
  • However, meaningful technology transfer and domestic manufacturing have remained limited, keeping the relationship largely transactional.
• The Case of the GE Engine
  • The GE F414 fighter engine programme best illustrates the gap between political ambition and industrial reality.
  • Announced during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's 2023 visit to Washington under the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET), it was projected as a landmark project for defence-industrial cooperation.
  • However, negotiations have faced significant hurdles. The estimated cost of each engine reportedly increased from ₹70–80 crore to over ₹200 crore, while General Electric sought nearly $800 million in Indian investment to establish a production line.
  • Differences over technology transfer, intellectual property, and licensed manufacturing have complicated negotiations involving Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), and the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) for the Tejas Mk-II, Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), and the Navy's Twin-Engine Deck-Based Fighter.
  • The programme has consequently become a symbol of the persistent implementation gap.

Vision, Stagnation & Other Challenges in US-India Defence Ties

• Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI)
  • Launched in 2012, the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI) aimed to promote joint development and production of defence technologies.
  • Despite extensive consultations, it produced few tangible outcomes and gradually lost momentum.
• Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET)
  • Introduced in 2022, iCET expanded cooperation to artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, semiconductors, biotechnology, telecommunications, drones, and resilient supply chains.
  • Nevertheless, several flagship defence projects, including the F414 engine programme, continue to face implementation challenges.
• India–United States Defence Acceleration Ecosystem (INDUS-X)
  • The India–United States Defence Acceleration Ecosystem (INDUS-X), launched in 2023 to connect defence start-ups, academia, and industry, has yet to produce significant co-development outcomes.
• Other Stalled Defence Projects
  • Several other initiatives have followed a similar trajectory. Proposed collaboration on the Javelin anti-tank guided missile and the Stryker infantry combat vehicle has remained unresolved for years.
  • Likewise, India's acquisition of 31 MQ-9B SkyGuardian and SeaGuardian remotely piloted aircraft through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route has largely remained a procurement deal, while promised local assembly, manufacturing, and maintenance infrastructure are yet to materialise.
• The Technology Transfer Divide
  • The core challenge lies in the contrasting approaches of both countries.
  • India views defence partnerships as instruments for strengthening indigenous manufacturing, building domestic technological capabilities, and advancing Atmanirbhar Bharat.
  • In contrast, the United States considers advanced defence technologies strategic assets protected under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which impose strict restrictions on transferring sensitive technologies and manufacturing expertise.
  • The F414 negotiations clearly reflect this divergence. India seeks access to manufacturing know-how and critical technologies to develop long-term domestic capabilities, whereas the United States prioritises security concerns and export-control obligations.
  • Consequently, cooperation has expanded in defence procurement and military interoperability but remains limited in industrial capability creation.

Future Prospects

• The proposed Reciprocal Defence Procurement Agreement (RDPA) represents the next major opportunity to deepen industrial cooperation by granting reciprocal access to defence procurement markets.
• However, India's developing defence industry could face intense competition from larger and technologically superior American firms.
• Without adequate safeguards, such reciprocity may reinforce existing asymmetries instead of fostering balanced industrial collaboration.

Conclusion

• India–United States defence cooperation has made remarkable progress in strategic partnership, defence trade, military exercises, and logistics cooperation.
• However, initiatives such as DTTI, iCET, INDUS-X, and the GE F414 programme demonstrate that political ambition has not yet translated into meaningful industrial outcomes.
• Bridging this gap requires greater policy alignment, mutual trust, and mechanisms that balance India's objective of self-reliance with U.S. security and export-control concerns.
• Only then can the partnership evolve from a buyer-seller relationship into a genuine defence-industrial alliance capable of supporting long-term strategic objectives.