Latest news with #SmallWarsJournal
&w=3840&q=100)
India.com
2 days ago
- Business
- India.com
India Is Building Weapons Faster And Smarter – And The U.S. Should Be Worried
New Delhi: Operation Sindoor may have been a victory for India, but it might signal something bigger. And that is unraveling of America's defence monopoly. A revolution is underway, and it is not happening in Washington. It is happening in New Delhi. The world noticed when Indian Air Force jets thundered across the border during Operation Sindoor and struck terror camps with surgical precision. In addition to the military success, what foreign observers picked up and what the Pentagon should be losing sleep over is how efficiently India pulled it off. While American weapons manufacturers are stuck in spiraling budgets, bloated procurement cycles and Cold War-era thinking, India is moving fast, building smart and spending less. And as Small Wars Journal notes in a recent essay by John Spencer and Vincent Viola that contrast is growing too big to ignore. Consider this. India's Pinaka rocket launcher costs around $56,000. Its American equivalent, the GMLRS missile, comes in at a hefty $148,000. India developed Akashteer air defence system at a fraction of the cost of a U.S. Patriot battery or NASAMS unit. And even Iran's infamous Shahed-136 drone, which is priced at just $20,000, is proving more agile in combat zones than the $30 million MQ-9 Reaper built in the United States. This is not only about economics but also about agility. In conflict after conflict, whether it is the mountains of Ladakh or the skies over Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, India is proving that good enough and fast beats perfect and late. On the other hand, the U.S. military-industrial complex, dominated by Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and a few others, is beginning to look less like an innovation hub and more like a cartel. As reported by Eurasian Times , nine of the world's top 20 arms companies are American. But this consolidation is proving to be a liability. The Small Wars Journal authors are blunt. 'This is not competition, it is cartelised domination,' they say. With 41 of the top 100 defence firms headquartered in the United States, one might expect agility. Instead, the opposite is true – bureaucracy, complacency and decade-long project timelines. Just look at the F-35 stealth fighter. With a staggering $1.7 trillion lifetime cost, it has become the poster child of America's cost-plus culture – over-promised, under-delivered and nearly impossible to fix. Designed in an era of battleships and nuclear deterrence, the U.S. acquisition system simply cannot keep up with the speed of modern warfare. From counter-IED kits in Iraq to urgent drone requests in Afghanistan, most battlefield innovations have had to go around the system, not through it. The war in Ukraine highlighted this. While Javelins and HIMARS made headlines, U.S. production lines struggled to meet demand. Artillery shells ran dry. Supply chains creaked. And in the background, Russia and China watched and learned. The real disruption? Countries like India are not just buying anymore. They are manufacturing. From the indigenous Sudarshan Chakra (S-400 system) to whispers about India eyeing Russia's S-500 Prometheus, which is capable of intercepting hypersonic missiles and low-orbit satellites, India is preparing for the next generation of conflict. And it is not waiting for the Pentagon to catch up. It is a wake-up call for the United States. Even President Donald Trump once said that U.S. defence companies had 'merged in', killing off negotiation and competition. The previous Biden administration too shared the same view. A recent White House executive order called out the broken procurement system, demanding a full reform plan within 60 days. But will it be enough? The United States needs fewer gold-plated platforms and more rugged and scalable systems. It needs smaller, faster and more modular production networks. It needs to treat allies like Israel as real partners, not passive clients. And, as Spencer and Viola argue, it needs 'permanent and deployable learning teams' in real war zones to feed real-time combat data back into weapons design and battlefield innovation. Think agile warfare at scale. For now, the U.S. still has the tech edge. But as China surges and India masters fast cost-effective lethality, the world's defence balance is beginning to tilt.
India.com
2 days ago
- Business
- India.com
India dropped bombs and missiles on Pakistan but US companies worth billions of dollars are in trouble due to…
Home News India dropped bombs and missiles on Pakistan but US companies worth billions of dollars are in trouble due to… India dropped bombs and missiles on Pakistan but US companies worth billions of dollars are in trouble due to… The Pinaka rockets of India come at cost of $56,000 which is very less compared to the U.S. GMLRS missile at $148,000. US President Donald Trump While India conducted Operation Sindoor on Pakistan, the world saw what the Indian Armed Forces where capable of. While Pakistan tried to attack India with its long-range missiles, India's indigenous Akash Defence Missile saved India on multiple occasions. However, this article is not only about the indigenous 'Made in India' weapons that saved India but also a direct analysis about their costs compared to their US rivals. Media reports have quoted experts like John Spencer and Vincent Viola writing in Small Wars Journal saying that India's 2014 Make in India initiative has now borne fruit, and due to its massive success, India is today able to manufacture the weapons at a much lesser cost. India's weapons vs US weapons For an example, the Pinaka rockets of India come at cost of $56,000 which is very less compared to the U.S. GMLRS missile at $148,000. Likewise, India's Akashteer missile defense system is also far cheaper than America's NASAMS, significantly improving its indigenous defense production. As a result of the Indian defence success, American defence industry like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Technology and General Dynamics are facing massive trouble. BSF shares details on Operation Sindoor The Border Security Force recently said that it targeted 76 Pakistani border outposts and 42 forward defence locations (FDLs) and destroyed three terrorist launch pads in strong retaliation to unprovoked firing and shelling by Pakistani Rangers along the International Border (IB) in the Jammu frontier during Operation Sindoor, as per a report by PTI news agency. The BSF action came after Pakistan launched heavy firing and shelling on 60 Indian posts and 49 forward positions, reportedly providing cover for an attempted infiltration by 40–50 terrorists, officials said. 'Pakistan fired on our 60 border outposts and 49 forward defence locations. In response, we opened fire on 76 of their posts and 42 FDLs,' BSF Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Chiterpaul Singh told reporters here. Singh said a key terror launch pad run by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) near the Sunderbani sector was destroyed. 'There is no movement seen from that area now,' he said. (With inputs from agencies) For breaking news and live news updates, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter and Instagram. Read more on Latest News News on More Stories
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
Modi's India hits back: How Operation Sindoor is the unveiling of a strategic doctrine
Unlike in the past, this time India didn't appeal for international mediation or issue a diplomatic demarche. Instead, India launched such a calibrated military action that defence experts around the world have given a resounding applause read more Operation Sindoor sent a compelling message to Pakistan: this is not the India of 2008, when they could launch the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks (in which over 170 people were killed and 300 injured) and get away with nuclear blackmail. This is a different India, one that is headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the most decisive leader in independent India's history and one of the foremost strategists on the global stage today. This India hits back. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Unlike in the past, this time India didn't appeal for international mediation or issue a diplomatic demarche. Instead, India launched such a calibrated military action that defence experts around the world have given it a resounding applause. The renowned American defence expert John Spencer wrote in an article in the Small Wars Journal: 'India has become a master of the physics of lethality. The United States can learn from their success and model some of their changes for its own needs.' Austrian combat aviation analyst and author Tom Cooper also described India's response as a 'clear-cut victory'. Cooper asserted that Pakistan's decision to ask for a ceasefire was a direct result of India's superior military response. He credited India's success to its advanced firepower and its multi-layered air defence systems. Japanese strategic expert Satoru Nagao praised India's Operation Sindoor, calling it a 'responsible and proper' response against state-sponsored terrorism. He called out Pakistan for supporting terrorism and called it a risky strategy. He added that 'Operation Sindoor is a very good, responsible, proper response against state-sponsored terrorism'. India was attacked on April 22, 2025, when 26 Indian civilians, mostly Hindu tourists, were massacred in Pahalgam in Jammu & Kashmir. The Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), claimed responsibility. As is the case with all terrorist groups which target India from their bases in Pakistan, this group is also backed by that country's notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On May 7, in response to the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India launched Operation Sindoor, a swift and precisely calibrated military campaign. The Indian Air Force struck nine terrorist infrastructure targets inside Pakistan, including the headquarters and operational hubs of Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba. The targets included key terror training camps and hideouts in Bahawalpur, Muridke, Muzaffarabad, Sarjal, Sialkot, Bhimber and elsewhere. When Pakistan retaliated with a massive drone swarm across India's western states, India's multi-layered air defence network—domestically built and augmented by Russian and Israeli systems—neutralised nearly all of them. In retaliation for Pakistan's attack, the Indian armed forces then launched the second phase of Operation Sindoor on May 10. India escalated with additional strikes on six Pakistani military airbases and UAV coordination hubs and broke the spine of Pakistan's air defence network. The targeted air bases were Chaklala in Rawalpindi, Murid in Chakwal, Rafiqui in Shorkot, Rahim Yar Khan, Sukkur and Chunian. This time, key military structures were targeted, and the damage inflicted on Pakistan was so severe that within hours, it forced Islamabad to beg for peace. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A temporary halt in firing was reached. India did not call it a ceasefire. The Indian military referred to it as a 'stoppage of firing'—a deliberate choice of words that reinforced its strategic control of the situation. Not unexpectedly, PM Modi's critics argued that India should not have agreed to the ceasefire and that India should have gone further and inflicted more damage on Pakistan, even perhaps facilitating a regime change. However, they seemed to miss the point that Operation Sindoor was not about causing lethal damage to Pakistan or wanting a regime change. It was a limited war executed for specific objectives and succeeded by having the desired effect. Prime Minister Modi's message went across loud and clear: terror attacks launched from Pakistani soil will now be treated as acts of war. As he said, 'Terror and talks can't go together. Water and blood can't flow together.' More than a retaliation, this was the unveiling of a strategic doctrine. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD An unmistakable feature of this new doctrine was that India will not tolerate any nuclear blackmail. Rather, India will strike precisely and decisively at the terrorist hideouts developing under the cover of nuclear blackmail. Another very significant aspect of Operation Sindoor should not be overlooked. It validated PM Modi's national defence doctrine built around efficient domestic industrial strength. Thus, it was much more than a swift and precise military response to another cross-border terrorist attack. After becoming prime minister in 2014, Modi launched the 'Make in India' initiative, which has led to the reforming of its defence sector. The focus has been on domestic production, self-reliance, and strategic speed. A decade later, that investment paid off in the remarkable success of Operation Sindoor. India used such domestically developed systems like BrahMos missiles, Akashteer air defence units and loitering munitions to strike hardened targets across the border with precision, speed, and overwhelming effect. Pakistani defences—built largely around older Chinese systems—were powerless to detect, deter, or respond to the strikes. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's defence procurement has shifted significantly, with around 65 per cent of defence equipment now being manufactured domestically. This represents a substantial move away from the reliance on imports, which earlier accounted for 65-70 per cent of India's defence needs. This shift is driven by the 'Make in India' initiative and a robust defence industrial base, including public sector units, licensed companies, and micro, small, and medium enterprises. India's execution of Operation Sindoor and the Pakistani request for a ceasefire were a clear strategic victory for India. However, it would be a mistake to think we will no longer face challenges from Pakistan. The ISI is the fountainhead of terror, and all terrorist organisations like Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul Mujahideen have an umbilical relationship with it. The ISI will do whatever it takes to rebuild any parts of the terror infrastructure which were destroyed by India. In this background, the Trump administration's unmistakable cosying up to Pakistan, along with the loan sanctioned to Pakistan by the IMF (where the US has a decisive say), are signs that we cannot lower our guard. Rather, we need to remain on high alert, and PM Modi is doing just that. That is why he has not declared Operation Sindoor to be completely over, as he declared, 'This is not a ceasefire but a halt in operations, as per India's strategic judgement.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Summing up, what exists now is a sensitive halt in operations, a strategic hold following a rare and unambiguous military victory. A clear message has undoubtedly gone across to Pakistan—if you provoke us again, we will strike you again—and we will do so in a decisive, precise and telling manner. This is the hallmark of India's new security doctrine. It remains to be seen whether it makes Pakistan's ISI see the light of reason. My guess is that it will not, though I would be only too happy if I am proved wrong. The writer is a retired Indian diplomat and had previously served as Consul General in New York. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Lockheed to Boeing: How India's Operation Sindoor may loosen the grip of US defence giants
India's recent military advances and cost-effective innovations expose critical weaknesses in the US defence system. As Washington clings to outdated Cold War models and monopolistic defence contractors, it risks falling behind rivals like India and China. Experts call for urgent reforms to speed up acquisition, break up monopolies, and build scalable, adaptable systems. Without change, the US could lose its military edge in future conflicts. The time for reform is now—and the clock is ticking. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What ails US defence industry Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads US acquisition system: Too slow for modern war The cost trap undermining US power Learning from India and others A closed circle resisting change Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What the US must do to stay relevant Facing the challenge from China India's growing military success, especially evident in recent operations like Operation Sindoor , should serve as a sharp warning to the United States. While India innovates quickly and builds cost-effective, scalable warfighting models, the US remains trapped in slow, outdated Cold War contrast is stark. India's Pinaka rocket costs less than $56,000, compared to a US GMLRS missile priced at $148,000. India rapidly developed the Akashteer missile defence system at a fraction of the cost of US-made Patriot or NASAMS platforms. Even Ukraine's use of Iran's $20,000 Shahed-136 drone outpaces the US MQ-9 Reaper, which costs over $30 examples highlight a fundamental problem in the American defence ecosystem. As John Spencer and Vincent Viola argue in the Small Wars Journal , 'The United States is in urgent need of fundamental defense reform. Not just adjustments. Not just marginal gains. A full-scale overhaul.'The US defence industry is dominated by a handful of giant contractors. Lockheed Martin, Boeing , Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Technologies, and General Dynamics rank among the top global arms producers. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), nine of the world's top 20 defence firms by revenue are American, and 41 of the top 100 are US-based, as reported by Eurasian once was a sign of strength now feels more like a cartel. Spencer and Viola warn: 'America's defense manufacturing process is dominated by a small cartel of primes that, while capable, have little incentive to drive innovation, reduce cost, or adapt quickly. There is no real market competition. This is not competition—it's cartelized domination.'Despite soaring defence budgets—expected to near $1 trillion by 2025—the number of prime contractors has shrunk drastically. A Department of Defense study noted that prime defence contractors fell from 51 to fewer than 10. Former President Donald Trump pointed to the problem bluntly: 'Defense companies have all merged in, so it's hard to negotiate… It's already not competitive.'The US acquisition process is notoriously slow. It often takes years, sometimes decades, to field new equipment. The war in Ukraine exposed this painfully. While American weapons like Javelins and HIMARS made a difference, production struggled to keep up with demand. Artillery shell shortages forced the Pentagon to rely on ageing factories and slow supply battlefield innovations since 9/11—such as counter-IED kits and drones—were introduced through emergency channels, bypassing formal procurement. But these stopgap measures do not fix systemic contracting shields defence firms from the consequences of budget overruns. This system discourages innovation and encourages over-engineered, expensive F-35 fighter jet illustrates this problem. With a lifetime cost estimated at $1.7 trillion, it has been criticised for delays and underperformance. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall admitted, 'We're not going to repeat what I think frankly was a serious mistake that was made in the F-35 program.' In May 2023, Kendall warned that without reform, 'What that basically does is create a perpetual monopoly.'While the US struggles to keep up, countries like India show how to innovate efficiently. India's defence industry emphasises cost-effective, rapid development. The Akashteer system and Pinaka rockets are examples of scalable, rugged platforms built with speed and affordability in and Viola highlight the absence of 'an agile, scalable, layered, fast-response production network' in the US. 'There is no real surge capacity,' they write. This gap leaves America vulnerable in fast-paced modern firms increasingly operate in isolation from broader markets. A 2024 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found that 61% of major defence contracts go to companies with no commercial business. This figure rises to 86% when firms like Boeing, whose commercial work is limited, are shift began after Cold War budget cuts in the 1990s, driving consolidation and pushing commercial players out. The result is a defence industry insulated from market pressures and reluctant to and Viola warn bluntly: 'The time for US defense reform is not coming. It's already late.'To avoid falling behind, the US must rebuild its defence acquisition process around speed, iteration, and frontline feedback—not decade-long static programmes. It needs to break up industrial monopolies or foster genuine competition and alternative important is treating allies like India and Israel as co-equal production partners, not merely buyers or technology recipients. White House executive order last month recognised this. 'Unfortunately, after years of misplaced priorities and poor management, our defense acquisition system does not provide the speed and flexibility our Armed Forces need to have decisive advantages in the future,' it said. The order directed the Secretary of Defense to deliver a reform plan within 60 reform cannot stop at factories and procurement cycles. The US should establish permanent, deployable learning teams embedded in conflict zones and logistics hubs. These teams would gather battlefield lessons directly and feed them back into system design—making the US defence ecosystem 'the most efficient, adaptable, and dominant in the world.'China poses the biggest challenge. It has the largest active military force globally, with approximately two million soldiers and a population more than four times that of the future wars will not be about who has the biggest army. It will depend on who can innovate faster, produce economically, and fight at speed.'Wars will be won by those who can think faster, build faster, and fight smarter—and above all, by those who master the physics of lethality required on the modern battlefield,' Spencer and Viola the US to lead again, it must not only revive its defence industrial power but also master lethality at scale, speed, and sustainability. The clock is ticking.
