Strategic Autonomy in National Security

Defence Procurement Choices

India’s strategic autonomy in national security is severely constrained due to the strategic perspective of the Indo-Pacific think tanks with corporate interests that dominate New Delhi’s policymaking circles. This results in limited, expensive choices for defence procurement and a weak military–industrial complex, both exacerbated by the lack of an effective oversight mechanism.

(Figures accompanying this article are available on the EPW website.)

The conflicts that are taking place in Ukraine and Gaza are essential to understand for making strategic national security choices. The first is because it is between Russia and Ukraine, backed by the Collective West. Overall, it may be argued that it is between equal adversaries due to the continuous supply of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) weapons and live intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (United States [US] aid alone has been over $175 billion to date which is more than the entire defence budget of Russia–$140 billion [SIPRI 2024]), unlike what is projected by the mainstream media of a David (Ukraine) versus Goliath (Russia) battle. This is in sharp contrast to the wars fought by the US with vastly inferior enemies such as Iraq and Afghanistan. The second conflict is the actual David (Hamas) vs Goliath (Israel) battle in Gaza and another parallel situation in the Red Sea featuring another David (Houthis) vs Goliath (US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian coalition and the EU-led Asides programme). Global defence spending is rising, which does not necessarily translate into effective national security. Security experts in India have always advocated that India must increase defence spending to counter rising China. This article advocates that India must make cost-effective procurement choices, considering the relative sizes of the two economies. However, this is possible only if there is an oversight mechanism.