The decision for India to acquire either the US-made Stryker Infantry Combat Vehicle (ICV) or to continue developing its indigenous Futuristic Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) raises significant questions about national defence policy, particularly concerning the concept of Atmanirbharta (self-reliance) versus the urgency of modernizing military capabilities.

Stryker ICV

The Stryker is an eight-wheeled armoured vehicle designed for rapid deployment and versatility in combat. It has been used extensively by the US military and comes in various configurations, including infantry carriers and support vehicles.

India is considering acquiring approximately 530 Stryker ICVs, with an initial purchase followed by joint production in India under the Make in India initiative. This approach aims to enhance domestic manufacturing capabilities while addressing immediate operational needs.

The Stryker's specifications include a 350-horsepower engine, which may be upgraded for Indian conditions, particularly for high-altitude deployments in regions like Ladakh. However, it is not amphibious and has been criticized for being underpowered compared to alternatives like the WhAP (Wheeled Armoured Platform) developed by DRDO.

Indigenous FICV

The FICV project, spearheaded by India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), aims to develop a next-generation infantry combat vehicle tailored to Indian conditions. This project has faced delays but is seen as crucial for achieving self-reliance in defence manufacturing.

The FICV initiative aligns with India's long-term strategic goals of reducing dependency on foreign military imports and fostering a robust domestic defence industry. However, the timeline for the FICV's deployment remains uncertain, raising concerns about whether it can meet the immediate needs of the Indian Army.

1. Urgency Vs. Self-Reliance

The Indian Army urgently requires modern ICVs to replace aging BMP-II vehicles, especially given ongoing border tensions with China. Acquiring Strykers could provide a quick solution to enhance operational readiness.

Conversely, opting for the Stryker may undermine India's Atmanirbharta goals if it leads to prolonged reliance on foreign technology and limits domestic innovation in defence.

2. Technology Transfer

A critical aspect of the Stryker deal involves Transfer of Technology (ToT) to enable local production. However, there are concerns regarding the extent of this transfer and whether it will be comprehensive or partial, potentially limiting India's ability to fully develop its own systems in the future.

3. Capability Gaps

While the Stryker offers proven capabilities, its limitations—such as lack of amphibious capability and lower power—may not fully meet the diverse operational requirements of the Indian Army. The indigenous WhAP has been noted for its modular design and superior performance in varied terrains.

Conclusion

The choice between acquiring US Stryker ICVs or continuing with the indigenous FICV project encapsulates a broader debate within India's defence strategy. While immediate operational needs may favour a quicker acquisition of Strykers, long-term strategic interests strongly advocate for fostering self-reliance through indigenous development. Balancing these priorities will be crucial as India navigates its defence modernization efforts amidst evolving geopolitical challenges.

Agencies