Defence Minister Rajnath Singh flagging-off Suryastra Universal Rocket Launcher at NIBE unit
While the government has consistently promoted Make in India as a cornerstone of self-reliance, critics argue that some recent procurements risk undermining the spirit of the policy by relying heavily on foreign designs that are merely assembled in India.
This practice, often derisively referred to as ‘Screwdriver Giri’, raises questions about whether the country is genuinely building indigenous capabilities or simply rebranding imported systems.
Following Operation Sindoor, the armed forces identified gaps in their ability to fight short, sharp conflicts. Emergency Procurement provisions were introduced to address these immediate needs, and for a time they worked effectively.
However, concerns have grown that certain firms with strong connections are exploiting the system by importing platforms and passing them off as indigenous products. The Suryastra case has become emblematic of this trend.
On 23 May 2026, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan inaugurated NIBE Defence’s 200-acre manufacturing complex in Shirdi. The centrepiece was the Suryastra Universal Rocket Launcher, for which the Indian Army had signed an emergency procurement contract worth ₹292.69 crore.
Promoted as India’s first 300 km universal rocket launching system, the platform is in fact based on Elbit Systems’ Predator Hawk design from Israel, according to serving and retired officials. This revelation has fuelled criticism that the system is not truly indigenous.
The speed of the procurement has also raised eyebrows. The contract was signed in January 2026, and by May the system had already undergone flight tests at Chandipur and was flagged off for delivery. Such rapid induction is unprecedented in India, but questions remain about whether proper user trials were conducted.
Reports suggest that in one of the four test flights, the missile disintegrated after just 15 km, far short of its claimed 300 km range. Moreover, DRDO officials have stated they were not privy to telemetry data, leaving uncertainty about who processed the results.
The cost of each rocket, estimated at around ₹14 crore, adds another layer of concern. Critics argue that the rush to induct such systems disincentives Indian firms that are investing in research and development to create original intellectual property. These companies risk being side-lined in favour of quick imports that offer little long-term value to India’s defence ecosystem.
The risks of relying on foreign OEMs are not hypothetical. Global disruptions or political decisions could abruptly cut off supply chains, leaving India vulnerable. The recent case of Anthropic in the United States, where the government ordered the suspension of access to advanced AI models for foreign nationals, illustrates how even friendly nations may impose restrictions in the name of national security. Similar actions could affect defence platforms, spares, or upgrades.
Brigadier NP Singh (Retd), a founding member of the Army Design Bureau ecosystem, has emphasised that future battlefields will reward countries that build adaptive ecosystems rather than merely assemble platforms.
He has long advocated for strategic partnerships between the armed forces, industry, start-ups, academia, and research institutions to foster genuine innovation. His perspective underscores the importance of ecosystem building over short-term procurement gains.
India’s defence policy must therefore be reviewed to ensure that Atmanirbharta is not reduced to a slogan. Genuine self-reliance requires investment in indigenous design, development, and manufacturing, not just assembly of foreign systems.
Wars will not be won by imported platforms but by products that are truly India-made and India-owned. The Suryastra case serves as a warning that shortcuts may undermine long-term strategic autonomy and weaken the credibility of the Make in India initiative.
Agencies
