India’s defence preparedness will not be judged by how many weapons it buys, but by whether it can sustain their availability when a conflict places its military and industrial capacity under pressure. Can India replenish its missiles, expand production and keep critical supply chains functioning if a crisis becomes prolonged?
The Defence Acquisition Council’s decisions on 26 October 2026 bring this question into sharper focus. The Ministry of Defence granted Acceptance of Necessity (AoN) to capital acquisition proposals worth approximately ₹2.12 lakh crore for the three services. About 82 per cent of the proposed procurement value is intended to come from Indian industry. The approvals include short-range air defence systems, counter-drone systems, surveillance and strike drones, and other military capabilities.
These proposals are not yet signed contracts. Their significance lies in the direction they signal: India’s operational requirements and domestic industrial capacity must increasingly develop together.
This follows the government’s 25 August 2026 approval for transferring technology for DRDO-developed conventional missile systems to Indian industry, including systems identified in reporting such as ASTRA, RUDRAM, VSHORADS, NAG and the Naval Anti-Ship Missile.
Together, these developments raise a larger strategic question. Can India move beyond acquiring capable weapons to building an industrial system that can replenish them reliably during a prolonged conflict?
The battlefield demands endurance
The Russia–Ukraine war and the fighting in West Asia have demonstrated how quickly missiles, air defence interceptors and precision weapons can be consumed during sustained operations. Advanced equipment matters, but so does the ability to replace what has been expended.
For India, the implications are direct. The unsettled borders with China and Pakistan demand sustained readiness across different terrains and operational environments. The Indian Navy must also protect maritime approaches and safeguard national interests across the Indian Ocean.
Read Also: Beyond the Chairman’s Chair: When the Rulebook Becomes the Real Test
These challenges place different demands on the armed forces. Yet all depend on reliable equipment, adequate stocks and responsive logistics.
A military may enter a conflict with modern weapons and substantial inventories. If replenishment cannot keep pace with operational consumption, its options narrow over time. Production lead times, access to specialised components and the availability of skilled personnel can become as consequential as the initial procurement decision.
India must therefore plan for the duration of a conflict, not merely its opening phase.
From technology transfer to production at scale
Bringing private manufacturers into missile production can widen India’s industrial base, attract investment and introduce competition. It can also reduce dependence on a limited number of production facilities.
But technology transfer alone does not create manufacturing capability.
Missiles require precision engineering, specialised materials, reliable electronics, rigorous testing and strict quality assurance. Companies must absorb the technology, qualify their production processes and demonstrate that their products meet military standards.
The distinction matters. A company receiving technology is not necessarily a company ready to deliver operationally reliable missiles at scale.
The government’s success should be measured by qualified production lines, delivery performance, consistent quality and the ability to expand output when required.
Public-sector manufacturers also have an important role. Their infrastructure, experience and programme knowledge can complement private-sector investment. The objective should be a stronger industrial ecosystem, not a contest between public and private ownership.
The latest AoN points to a wider industrial opportunity
The 26 October approvals offer an important illustration of how procurement and manufacturing policy can reinforce each other.
The proposed acquisition of VSHORADS and platform-based counter-unmanned aerial systems reflects the need to address evolving aerial threats. Surveillance UAVs and long-range drone systems point towards growing requirements for persistent observation and precision strike. Other approvals address mobility, firepower, air defence and naval protection.
These are not missile production decisions alone. They represent a broader demand signal for India’s defence industry.
For manufacturers, the opportunity extends beyond assembling finished platforms. Electronics, sensors, precision components, materials, testing equipment and maintenance support all contribute to operational capability. Indian MSMEs and specialised technology companies can strengthen these supply chains if they receive credible opportunities and meet demanding quality standards.
However, the 82 per cent domestic sourcing target must translate into genuine industrial depth. Domestic assembly should not conceal continued dependence on imported critical components.
The next task is to identify vulnerabilities, develop alternative suppliers where feasible and ensure that essential technologies can be supported within India. Otherwise, the country may increase domestic production without removing the supply-chain risks that matter most during a crisis.
Wartime replenishment must become part of defence planning
From a military veteran’s perspective, the central question is simple: how quickly can the industrial base respond when operational demand rises sharply?
Can production increase without compromising quality? Are critical components available from alternative sources? Can suppliers recover from disruption? Are trained personnel and manufacturing facilities ready to meet additional orders?
These questions cannot be left until a crisis begins.
The Ministry of Defence, DRDO and the armed forces should assess industrial readiness alongside operational readiness. Procurement planning must account for production lead times, expected consumption, maintenance requirements and the capacity to replenish stocks.
Manufacturers should develop credible surge-production plans where required. These arrangements must be tested, not merely documented. The objective is not unlimited spare capacity at public expense; it is the ability to identify critical bottlenecks and activate additional capacity when necessary.
India also needs better alignment between frontline requirements, inventory planning and industrial investment. Long-term demand visibility, wherever security permits, will help manufacturers make the investments needed to deliver reliably.
Procurement needs accountability
AoN is an important step in the acquisition process, but it is not the finish line. Proposals must move through subsequent procurement stages before contracts are awarded and equipment is delivered.
The challenge is to maintain momentum without weakening scrutiny. Time-bound evaluation, clear qualification standards and accountable contract management can help reduce avoidable delays.
Technology transfer agreements and production contracts must also establish responsibility for quality failures, intellectual property, software updates, cybersecurity and post-production support.
Competition should improve delivery, cost and innovation. It must not compromise reliability.
Export opportunities may strengthen India’s defence manufacturing base, but commitments must remain aligned with domestic requirements, available capacity and government approvals. Commercial expansion cannot come at the cost of military readiness.
The strategic test
India’s defence manufacturing push must ultimately answer one question: can the country sustain combat power when normal production schedules and supply chains come under pressure?
The August missile technology transfer decision and the October AoN approvals create opportunities to strengthen the domestic industrial base. Their real value, however, will depend on execution: technology absorbed, contracts delivered, critical dependencies reduced and production capacity available when needed.
For a country with India’s continental and maritime responsibilities, industrial resilience is not separate from military strength. It is one of its foundations.
India must move from self-reliance measured by what it manufactures to strategic resilience measured by what it can sustain. A weapon developed at home is an achievement. The ability to replenish it reliably during a prolonged conflict is the stronger test of national preparedness.
(The Author is Defence & Strategic Affairs Expert, Certified Independent Director (IICA), ESG Advocate and Governance Thought Leader.)
Disclaimer—(The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Indian Masterminds. For feedback or queries, please write to [email protected].)
Also Read – BRICS Was India’s Diplomatic Test. Strategic Influence Is the Real Prize.
