India has made varied attempts since Independence to achieve self-reliance in defence-related requirements but its achievements have been limited.
The quest for self-reliance has to keep abreast of scientific discoveries and harness them for military purposes. Contemporarily, self-reliance has been rechristened as Atmanirbharta, and cast within a larger national agenda that engages R&D Institutes, academia, industries, start-ups, individual innovators and users. In political and strategic terms, this ecosystem approach aims to protect and preserve India’s ability to take independent policy decisions in an increasingly volatile and anarchic global environment.
In the realm of defence, there has been a slew of policy decisions seeking to promote self-reliance and therefore the government’s intentions cannot be doubted.
But the relevant question is whether these steps will achieve the lofty goals of self-reliance. Here I analyse two policy initiatives—the import ban lists, and Innovations for Defence Excellence (iDEX) scheme—before touching upon defence budget considerations.
Exaggeration of progress
The Ministry of Defence (MoD)’s ban on the import of sub-systems, assemblies, sub-assemblies and components is expected to promote the development of indigenous capability. So far, the MoD has notified four Positive Indigenous Lists (PIL) that also specify the timeframes for the bans. Released between August 2020 and May 2023, these lists banned 351, 107, 780, and 928 items. The latest one included low-value critical spares and components.
The MoD’s website, called Srijan, provides information regarding the lists and explains the processes and procedures to the interested parties. Details given on the indigenisation achieved for the first three lists suggest fairly reasonable progress and the Navy having achieved the most. But the devil lies in the details and with the inclusion of the low-value spares and components, it would require an in-depth analysis to identify the actual progress of indigenisation as statistically, a washer/bolt would equate to a marine X-band radar. Such obfuscation could distort the reality of indigenisation achieved and artificially magnify the progress in self-reliance.
The claims of achievement can only be analytically discerned when the latest figures of India’s arms imports are viewed and expressed relatively with reference to previous years. Currently, those figures are not reflecting the claims.
There are also claims about boosting arms export, but even that conceals the reality that when one starts from a low base the suggestion of increase is largely deceptive. While gross exaggeration of achievements continues to be the norm, certain schemes are facing the headwinds of processes and procedures. It has been the bane of the defence acquisition system. One such scheme is iDEX.
Also read: India’s quantum jump in defence exports is high on rhetoric and low on substance
Exploitations of iDEX scheme
The iDEX has been projected as the flagpole scheme that could leverage talent and innovative capability from entities and individuals outside the government. It endeavours to engage MSMEs, startups, individual innovators, R&D institutes and academia, and provide them grants/funding and other support to carry out work that has good potential for the future needs of Indian defence and aerospace.
The scheme has three different categories termed challenges—DISC, Prime and Open.
One of the anxieties pertains to the protection of the proprietorship rights of technologies developed/applied. Representatives of the Defence Public Sector Undertakings like Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) are sitting on the review committees and are gathering information about the product from the vendors that could be utilised later to be developed by themselves or a large corporate entity. Some small entities could sacrifice their long-term interest as the Rs 1.5 crore offered in the scheme is tempting. But that does not take away its exploitative nature.
The second anxiety arises from the ‘March in Clause’ in the contract. The clause stipulates that the MoD could completely take over production and utilisation on grounds of national security. However, the ministry would be liable to pay the acquisition cost/license fee/royalty. To a start-up, this clause is perceived as exploitative, since the MoD can negotiate the terms of take over from an advantageous position.
The consequences of such exploitation are that they could fail to tap into full potential that resides outside the government and undermine the main objective of the iDEX. Considering the budget allotted to the scheme for the five-year period, the entities that can navigate the procedural hurdles faster will be advantaged unlike individuals and smaller entities who would find it difficult to compete for the funds that are certainly limited and average between Rs 66 to 148 crore per year.
Procedure over delivery
Considering the pattern of defence budget allotment, it seems that the MoD is attempting to reallocate meagre resources under new and different heads to give the impression of efforts being put into the achievement of self-reliance. But to expect that innovation and capability development will happen with the quantum of funds actually available is self-deception. Also, to expect innovation to bloom without accepting failures while constantly subjecting entities to audits during development is likely to kill creative thinking, which is counter-productive.
Though the government’s good intentions cannot be doubted, it seems that legacy mindsets and management practices continue to dominate. Many touted achievements are largely hyperbole. The need here is to change the fundamental outlook of the research, development, acquisition and production system of India’s defence sector, which is yet to jettison its proclivity for according precedence to procedure over delivery while projecting the false narrative that significant progress towards self-reliance has been achieved.
Lt Gen (Dr) Prakash Menon (retd) is Director, Strategic Studies Programme, Takshashila Institution; former military adviser, National Security Council Secretariat. He tweets @prakashmenon51. Views are personal.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)