Abdul Basit Alvi
India’s defense procurement surge, approved by the Defence Acquisition Council at around $25 billion, represents its largest set of military approvals in years and goes far beyond routine modernization, covering land, air, sea, and joint-service capabilities that could significantly alter South Asia’s military balance. The scale—larger than many countries’ entire defense budgets and nearly triple Pakistan’s annual military spending—has sparked sharp debate, with critics calling it “war hysteria” and India arguing it is necessary to counter threats from China and Pakistan, citing the 2020 Galwan clashes and ongoing Line of Control tensions.
The wide array of acquisitions, including S-400 air defense systems, drones, transport aircraft, artillery, advanced tank ammunition, communications and surveillance systems, fighter jet engine overhauls, and coast guard hovercraft, reflects a doctrinal shift toward high-intensity, multi-front warfare without reliance on nuclear escalation. Systems like the S-400 could extend defensive coverage deep into Pakistani airspace, while transport aircraft, advanced radar, and long-endurance drones enhance India’s ability to rapidly deploy forces, sustain prolonged operations, and conduct precision or gray-zone strikes below full-scale war, supported by improved mobility, firepower, and integrated, network-centric battlefield awareness.
At the same time, India’s buildup has triggered countermeasures from Pakistan, including plans for electronic warfare, stealthier cruise missiles like the Ra’ad-II, possible acquisition of Chinese HQ-9BE air defense systems, upgrades to tank protection and armor, and expansion of its own drone programs alongside potential purchases from Turkey, illustrating a classic security dilemma in which each side’s defensive moves appear offensive to the other.
The broader package also reflects political and ideological factors under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP, where military strength is tied to nationalist narratives, past conflicts such as 1962 and Kargil, and actions like revoking Kashmir’s autonomy, raising concerns that enhanced capabilities could embolden risk-taking. Internationally, major powers face a dilemma between supporting India as a counterweight to China and preventing escalation between two nuclear-armed rivals with unresolved disputes over Kashmir, Sir Creek, Siachen Glacier, and water resources. Past crises like the 2019 Balakot episode demonstrate how quickly tensions can escalate, and with more advanced weapons now in play, the threshold for conflict is both higher due to mutual deterrence and lower due to perceived opportunities for limited war, increasing the risk of miscalculation or even nuclear escalation.
Analysts who warn that the “fundamentalist and conservative Modi government” might pose a danger to the world base their argument on the prime minister’s track record of militarized nationalism, including the 2016 surgical strikes across the Line of Control, the 2019 air strikes into Pakistani territory, and the 2020 Galwan Valley clash with China where India suffered 20 fatalities but reportedly inflicted much heavier losses on Chinese forces. They note that Modi’s government has systematically weakened India’s secular institutions, promoted Hindu majoritarianism through policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens, and used external threats to consolidate domestic power, often conflating criticism of the government with anti-nationalism. In such an environment, advanced weaponry—especially offensive systems like unmanned attack aircraft, long-range cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs)—could be used not just for defense but for preemptive strikes, regime change ambitions in Pakistan, or even to provoke a short, victorious war to boost electoral prospects, much like the 1999 Kargil War was used to boost the BJP’s fortunes at the time.
The $25 billion spending surge, while justified by New Delhi as a response to China’s own massive military modernization (including the deployment of DF-17 hypersonic glide vehicles, DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles, and a fifth-generation stealth fighter, the J-20) and Pakistan’s alleged cross-border terrorism (including the 2008 Mumbai attacks and more recent grenade attacks in Jammu), is seen by critics as a self-fulfilling prophecy. By acquiring weapons that negate Pakistan’s conventional deterrents—such as the S-400 neutralizing Pakistan’s air force, the new tank ammunition neutralizing Pakistan’s armor, and the drones neutralizing Pakistan’s artillery—India forces Pakistan to rely more heavily on its tactical nuclear weapons (the Nasr and Ababeel systems, which are short-range, battlefield nuclear missiles designed to stop an Indian armored thrust). This reliance lowers the nuclear threshold dramatically, because Pakistan has explicitly stated that it would use Nasr against massed Indian conventional forces if they penetrate Pakistani territory, a doctrine known as “full spectrum deterrence.”
To Be Continued
