Drone maker Raphe raises $100m in India's largest defense startup deal
SAYAN CHAKRABORTY
BENGALURU -- Indian drone maker Raphe mPhibr said Thursday that it had secured $100 million from global investors to expand manufacturing, marking the largest venture funding round for a defense startup in the country.
U.S.-based venture capital firm General Catalyst, which has backed defense startups like Andruil in its home market and Helsing in Europe, led the funding with participation from existing investors, including Think Investments, a Silicon Valley VC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
3 days ago
- The Diplomat
US Solar Manufacturers Seek New Tariffs on Imports From India, Southeast Asia
Previous tariffs have prompted Chinese manufacturers to shift their operations to Indonesia and Laos, while low-cost Indian solar imports are also on the rise. A group of American solar panel manufacturers has asked the U.S. Commerce Department to impose tariffs on solar imports from Indonesia, Laos, and India, a month after Washington imposed hefty tariffs on solar products from four Southeast Asian nations. According to Reuters, the complaint was filed by the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee, a group representing several major solar equipment producers, including South Korea's Hanwha Qcells USA Inc. and the U.S. firm First Solar Inc. The complaint requests investigations into 'illegal trade practices by largely Chinese-owned manufacturers operating in Laos and Indonesia, as well as companies headquartered in India,' according to a statement from the Alliance. It accuses companies based in three nations of receiving unfair government subsidies and of selling their products below the cost of production in the United States, which threatens to undercut U.S. producers. 'We have always said, vigorous enforcement of our trade laws is critical to the success of this industry,' Tim Brightbill, the lead attorney for the Alliance, said in the statement. As PV magazine noted, the new cases 'extend a marathon struggle begun in 2011 that has focused on imports from Chinese companies. As they have relocated factory assets ahead of tariffs resulting from the cases, the domestic industry has refocused on litigation against imports from new country targets.' In May, the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) ruled in the Alliance's favor in two similar complaints regarding solar imports from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. In its ruling, the Commission determined that the U.S. solar industry had been 'materially injured by reason of imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules,' from the four nations. The Commerce Department subsequently imposed a series of varied tariffs on solar products from the four countries, which reached as high as 3,500 percent in the case of some solar panels and components from Cambodia. The tariffs came into effect on June 16. However, as with previous rulings, this action merely prompted agile solar manufacturers to relocate their operations to nations not yet subject to U.S. tariffs. Trade data showed a sharp decline in U.S. solar imports from Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand after the initiation of the complaint in April 2024. Meanwhile, even before the latest batch of complaints had been concluded, 'the same Chinese-backed companies wasted no time shifting operations to Laos and Indonesia, and companies in India joined in to continue undercutting American producers,' Brightbill said in the statement. 'We have always said vigorous enforcement of our trade laws is critical to the success of this industry.' The Alliance cited figures showing that solar imports from the three nations combined were $1.6 billion last year, up from just $289 million in 2022. However, the Alliance's campaign against cheap imports has not been universally supported. Opponents, including the Solar Energy Industries Association, which testified to the USITC against the petitioners in its last case involving imports from Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia, said that the May decision was 'concerning for American solar manufacturers' and would harm 'solar module producers that depend on access to imported solar cells.' This is especially the case given the broader policy orientation of the Trump administration, which, in an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on July 7, announced that it was tightening up on access to federal solar and wind credits. 'For too long, the Federal Government has forced American taxpayers to subsidize expensive and unreliable energy sources like wind and solar,' the order stated. 'Ending the massive cost of taxpayer handouts to unreliable energy sources is vital to energy dominance, national security, economic growth, and the fiscal health of the Nation.' Today, Politico reported that 'solar and wind energy projects must now get Interior Secretary Doug Burgum's personal sign-off to receive permits across the hundreds of millions of federal acres under his department's control,' citing an internal memo from the Department of the Interior. It said that the memo 'puts wind and solar projects under heightened scrutiny, potentially slowing approvals and construction across vast swaths of some of the most sun- and wind-rich portions of the country.'
Nikkei Asia
3 days ago
- Nikkei Asia
India's 1st private orbital rocket launch on track: Skyroot CEO
A model of Skyroot Aerospace's Vikram-1 rocket is displayed at the space startup's campus in Hyderabad, India. (Photo by Skyroot Aerospace) NEETA LAL NEW DELHI -- Pioneering Indian space startup Skyroot Aerospace is on track for India's first private orbital rocket launch later this year, co-founder and CEO Pawan Chandana told Nikkei Asia, as the country emerges as a major player in the space industry. Tests on mission-critical systems for the Vikram-1 rocket, such as the separation of expended fuel stages and the protective nose cone around the payload, have been successfully completed, Chandana said. The Skyroot team has also completed tests of the fairing separation system.
The Diplomat
3 days ago
- The Diplomat
Balancing Prosperity and Protection: India's Place in a Complex Global Economy
Over the 33 years since I first walked into the American Embassy on Shanti Path in New Delhi, there is one change that looms over all the others — the rise of global Indian companies innovating and adding value around the world. Groups like Tata, Mahindra, and Reliance have become global players and widely known marquee brands — something that was hard to imagine in the days of 'license Raj' and an Indian economy defined by scarcity. I have been thrilled to be an observer and sometimes a participant in the rise of global India – a development that has seen the Indian GDP grow by a total of 1100 percent since the early 1990s. This rising India phenomenon has given Indian companies a significant stake in the system of international economic norms and increasing openness that the United States had championed since 1945. This successful globalization also gives Indian companies a stake when countries like Russia or China use economic power as a tool of coercion – as in China's exploitation of its monopoly in rare earth materials and permanent magnets, or Russia's manipulation of gas markets. Around the globe, countries are grappling with how to balance the prioritization of economic growth and cooperation with the imperative of protecting their country's security. This is a legitimate trade-off, particularly as countries seek to protect specific industries considered vital to their economic and national security. As countries increase their use of economic tools for national security-related ends in recent years, however, the dividing line between valid national security considerations and economic coercion for vindictive or political ends is blurring. There have been many cases in recent years when the use of economic tools has been more akin to arbitrary economic coercion. Examples include the Russian government's takeover of the Domodedovo Airport, claiming the strategic asset was at risk of foreign influence, notwithstanding the fact that its assets were owned by Russian businessman Dmitry Kamenshchik and his companies . Similarly, Russia's cutoff of gas supplies to the European Union, beginning with Bulgaria – one of the most vulnerable European states – was an effort to break European solidarity following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Other notable examples include the Maldives' cancelation of a contract with India's GMR Infrastructure Ltd for modernization and operation of the country's main airport (for which it was later ordered to pay $270 million in compensation by an international tribunal), and China's new rare earth export regime, which has effectively blocked most exports to United States and European companies. The common thread is clear. These actions damage investment environments by creating the perception (or reality) of risk. The result in many cases is a significant decrease in foreign investment (Russia and the Maldives), and in some cases, a wholesale global effort to diversify supply chains away from the offending country (China). India stands to gain as it rejects such examples and reinforces its reputation as a reliable destination for investment. This is not the India I first got to know as a junior political officer in 1992. Since those days, India's economic transformation has been powered in large part by the trust it has gained in its business-enabling environment, allowing it to attract vast amounts of investment and spur the unprecedented growth of jobs and its economy. Now India is in a unique moment; it is already a global leader in services, and thanks to a move to reduce supply chain reliance on China, it is poised to emerge as a manufacturing powerhouse, with the workforce and skills to match its ambitions. At the same time, India faces a familiar dilemma: how to protect its national security without appearing to take arbitrary action against individual companies or engage in economic coercion. This challenge is perfectly illustrated by the case of Celebi, which recently had its security clearance and operating rights revoked by the Government of India. While the government must act in the country's security interest, and I know better than most that Indian courts will always fiercely defend their constitutional independence, it is important that this case is pursued in a manner that is seen to uphold due process. We all understand that the matter is now before the courts, which must be allowed to proceed without interference. But the government's next steps, if not carefully approached, risk being viewed as economic coercion when viewed from the outside. In particular, there is a risk that this action could be seen as an act of retribution against a Turkish company (Celebi) with a diversified set of foreign investors, in response to actions taken by the Turkish government. Notably, Indian companies and investors hold substantial assets in Turkiye, and both Indian investors abroad and foreign investors in India expect economic tools to be used with care and fairness. Hastily considered actions against companies like Celebi risk undermining the remarkable progress that India has made as a destination for foreign investment, marking a step backward, which echoes the examples we know from Russia, China, and India's own experience with the Maldives. Fair processes and the rule of law in the commercial environment within India are crucial for the country's success and will likely yield benefits in two major ways. First, foreign companies and investors will have the confidence to invest in India if they do not fear arbitrary or capricious action. Second, Indian companies working around the world will reap the benefits of goodwill and stable investment environments elsewhere – free from the tit for tat economic coercion that arbitrary and unfair processes experienced by international companies within India might spur. Additionally, if India treats foreign companies and investors in India fairly, the Indian government will have a strong foundation to stand on if it needs to go to bat for its own companies in other jurisdictions. This is extremely important: India today is globally exposed and has overwhelmingly benefited from a rules-based system. All countries are making decisions based on national security, but need to do so in a way that appropriately weighs economic factors, ensures due process, and sustains investor confidence. This is the path to ensure India's economic miracle sustains itself for the long-term and to cement India's position as the major player it desires to be on the world stage and in the global economy.
