India’s Multi-Domain Deterrence And Defence-Industrial Strategy Challenges

Hard choices in defence strategy

• Strategic dilemma: India faces a widening capability gap with China and must decide what to buy, build, and prioritise amid rapidly evolving technology
• Technology-doctrine gap: Technological change is outpacing doctrinal evolution, complicating long-term defence planning
• Deterrence objective: India must reconceptualise doctrinal and technological choices to build credible deterrence against the PLA

Three strategic approaches

Bold approach:

• Technological leapfrogging: Invest in entirely new war-fighting technologies
• Risk factor: Failure could create capability gaps and weaken deterrence
• Industrial limitation: India lacks scale and speed in production to match China
• Potential gain: Success could reduce the capability gap

Conservative approach:

• Integration strategy: Combine emerging technologies with existing systems
• Focus areas: Cyber, space, and electronic warfare to digitise battlespace
• Outcome: Improves efficiency but does not shift balance of power
• Suitability: More relevant for short conflicts (e.g., with Pakistan)

Middle-path approach:

• Hybrid model: Retain legacy platforms while investing in enabling layers
• Core concept: Build capabilities gradually toward multi-domain operations (MDO)
• Challenge: MDO is difficult to define and operationalise
• Outcome: Leads to evolution into a syncretic multi-domain force

Concept of enabling layers in warfare

• Command and Control (C2): Centralised coordination of military operations
• ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance): Real-time battlefield awareness
• Strike layer: Integration of missiles, aircraft, and drones for deep strikes
• Close-battle layer: Tanks, artillery, and infantry for frontline combat
• Logistics layer: Infrastructure, supply chains, and rear-area support
• Nuclear deterrence: Compensation for conventional asymmetry with China

Systemic challenges in India’s deterrence posture

Industrial limitations:

• Structural issue: Defence-industrial base not designed for speed and scale
• Key gaps: Missiles, munitions, drones, ISR and C2 networks, legacy platforms
• Requirement: Expansion through private sector participation

Procurement inefficiencies:

• Constraint: Existing system restricts rather than enables military evolution
• Reform need: Faster, adaptive procurement aligned with technological needs
• Budget strategy: Increase spending with prioritisation of key deterrent capabilities

Institutional coordination:

• Alignment need: Synchronisation of R&D, industry, doctrine, and military structure
• Strategic clarity: National security institutions must define deterrence goals collectively
• Political-military interface: Military must communicate costs of inaction and trade-offs

Reforms for defence-industrial strengthening

Policy reforms:

• Administrative changes: Reduce red tape and ensure budgetary stability
• Contractual support: Provide long-term contracts for specialised platforms
• Private sector role: Recognise efficiency advantages over government sector

Time sensitivity:

• Shrinking window: Delay in reforms may worsen capability gaps
• Incremental gains: Gradual improvements can yield long-term benefits

Fixing critical enabling layers

C4ISR vulnerability:

• Weakness: India’s C4ISR systems are underdeveloped
• Strategic importance: “The side that can see can fight”
• Requirement: Affordable, expendable ISR platforms in large numbers

Electronic warfare integration:

• Capability need: Cyber, space, and electronic warfare to degrade enemy ISR
• Layered approach: Enhance own ISR while disrupting adversary’s systems

Strike and battlefield integration:

• Deep strike: Missiles, aircraft, and drones to disrupt enemy depth
• Frontline combat: Coordinated use of tanks, artillery, and infantry

Logistics and sustainment:

• Importance: Integrated logistics essential for prolonged conflict
• Infrastructure: Supply chains and rear-area systems must be robust

Nuclear dimension:

• Strategic role: Nuclear deterrence compensates for conventional gaps
• Balance factor: Necessary against a nuclear adversary like China

Industrial capacity and deterrence gap

Missile inventory gap:

• China advantage: Large missile stockpile and high production capacity
• India’s risk: Limited surge capacity in prolonged conflict

Production imperative:

• Policy need: Incentivise defence production through targeted investments
• Strategic risk: Weak industrial base may embolden China in prolonged war scenarios

Doctrinal and structural considerations

Focus shift:

• Priority change: Move beyond service-specific acquisitions to system-wide capability building
• Enabling layers: Central to effective deterrence

Theatre-isation limitation:

• Structural reform: Theatre commands alone insufficient
• Requirement: Deep doctrinal convergence to support multi-domain capability