India and China, Asia's two largest powers, have historically been among the world's top arms importers. However, their approaches to military procurement and self-reliance have diverged significantly in recent years.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), India remains the second-largest global arms importer, accounting for 9.8% of worldwide imports as of 2023. Despite this, India's arms imports declined by 33% between 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 due to efforts to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers, particularly Russia, and streamline complex procurement processes. India is actively promoting its domestic defence industry through initiatives like Atmanirbhar Bharat, aiming to double domestic procurement and achieve $25 billion in defence production by 2025, including $5 billion in exports.

In contrast, China has significantly reduced its reliance on foreign weapons and emerged as the world's fifth-largest arms exporter. Between 2011-2015 and 2016-2020, Chinese arms exports decreased by 7.8%, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Algeria being its primary buyers. China's focus has shifted toward indigenous production of advanced military technologies, enabling it to modernise its forces and reduce external dependency.

While both nations are heavily militarising their shared border along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), their broader strategies reflect differing priorities. India's push for self-reliance is coupled with efforts to balance relations with key defence partners like the U.S., Russia, and Israel. Meanwhile, China's advancements in domestic production allow it to focus on power projection globally. The ongoing border tensions underscore the strategic rivalry between these nations, further shaping their defence policies.

India’s Defence Imports

India has historically relied heavily on foreign arms to meet its defence requirements, but recent trends indicate a shift in its approach. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), India’s arms imports declined by 11% between 2020–24 compared to the previous five-year period (2015–19). Despite this reduction, India remains the world’s largest arms importer, accounting for 9.8% of global imports during 2019–23. This shift reflects not a decrease in dependency but a diversification of suppliers and strategic realignment.

Russia, once India’s dominant arms supplier, saw its share in Indian imports drop significantly from 72% in 2010–14 to 36% in 2020–24. This decline is attributed to India’s efforts to reduce dependence on Moscow amid geopolitical concerns and supply chain issues. France emerged as a key supplier during this period, contributing 29% of India’s arms imports, driven by major acquisitions such as Rafale fighter jets and Scorpene-class submarines. The United States and Israel are also notable suppliers, reflecting India’s growing strategic ties with Western nations amidst tensions with China and Pakistan.

India’s defence strategy has also focused on boosting indigenous production under initiatives like Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat. The government has implemented reforms to enhance domestic manufacturing capabilities, including increased budget allocations for local procurement and relaxed foreign investment limits in the defence sector. Despite these efforts, more than 60% of India’s defence equipment is still imported, underscoring the challenges of achieving self-reliance.

While imports dominate, India has made strides in defence exports, reaching a record ₹21,083 crore (approximately $2.63 billion) in FY 2023-24. This marks a significant increase over the past decade, reflecting growing global acceptance of Indian defence products.

China’s Reverse Engineering And Dubious Ethical Practices

China's rapid military modernisation and reduced reliance on arms imports underscore its push for self-reliance in defence, supported by significant investments in domestic research and development. A key driver of this transformation has been China's acquisition and reverse engineering of foreign military technologies, particularly from Russia. For instance, the Su-27 fighter jet served as the basis for China's domestically produced J-11, while other systems like the Harbin Z-20 helicopter and Y-20 transport aircraft have faced allegations of being reverse-engineered from U.S. and NATO designs.

This approach, however, has sparked significant ethical and geopolitical concerns. Critics argue that China's reliance on unauthorised reverse engineering violates intellectual property rights and undermines innovation globally. The country has been accused of using industrial espionage and cyber theft to acquire sensitive military technologies, including designs from the U.S. and Europe. For example, the Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter has been linked to stolen design elements from the U.S. F-22 Raptor, while the Harbin Z-20 helicopter allegedly draws from a modified U.S. Black Hawk captured in Pakistan.

Despite these controversies, China's strategy has not been without challenges. Complex modern technologies, such as advanced jet engines, have proven difficult to replicate, develop or innovate upon. For example, China’s domestically developed WS-10A engine has faced reliability issues, highlighting limitations in its indigenous capabilities.

Furthermore, experts argue that reverse engineering alone cannot sustain long-term military-technological superiority due to the increasing complexity of modern systems and the evolving nature of global competition.

Ethical debates surrounding China's practices extend beyond intellectual property concerns to broader geopolitical implications. By leveraging reverse-engineered technologies for rapid military expansion, China has intensified global security concerns, particularly as it exports these systems to nations with questionable human rights records or adversarial relations with the West. As Beijing continues its pursuit of technological self-reliance, it faces mounting pressure to address ethical considerations and foster innovation through legitimate means rather than imitation or theft.

Copying Russian Fighter Jets: The J-11, J-15 And J-16

China’s development of the J-11, J-15, and J-16 fighter jets showcases its strategy of reverse-engineering foreign military technology, particularly from Russia, to build its own advanced aircraft. These jets are based on Russian designs but incorporate domestic modifications and advancements.

J-11 Fighter

The Shenyang J-11 is a Chinese adaptation of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27 “Flanker.” Initially, in 1995, China signed a licensing agreement with Russia to assemble 200 Su-27s using Russian kits. However, after the agreement ended, China allegedly continued production without authorisation, leading to tensions with Moscow. The J-11 evolved into variants like the J-11B, which featured Chinese-made avionics and weapons systems. This move allowed China to reduce reliance on Russian components while advancing its aerospace capabilities.

J-15 “Flying Shark”

The J-15 is a carrier-based fighter derived from the Russian Su-33. After Russia declined to sell Su-33s, China acquired an unfinished prototype (T-10K-3) from Ukraine in 2001 and reverse-engineered it. The J-15 made its maiden flight in 2009 and performed its first carrier landing on the Liaoning in 2012. While structurally similar to the Su-33, the J-15 incorporates Chinese avionics and technologies from the J-11B program. However, its performance has been criticised due to engine limitations that restrict payload capacity during carrier launches.

J-16 “Red Eagle”

The J-16 is based on the two-seat Su-30MKK, which China purchased from Russia in the early 2000s. It is optimised for strike missions and tailored to integrate Chinese weapons and avionics. The aircraft represents a significant upgrade over its Russian counterpart, featuring advanced radar systems and long-range air-to-air missiles. The J-16’s development underscores China’s ability to adapt foreign designs for specific operational needs.

China’s approach extends beyond these jets. Its stealth fighters, such as the J-20 “Mighty Dragon,” have faced accusations of incorporating stolen U.S. and Russian technologies. For instance, similarities between the J-20 and Russia’s defunct MiG 1.44 program have raised concerns about intellectual property theft. Despite controversies, these developments highlight China’s rapid progress in military aviation.

Atmanirbhar Bharat Push For India

India's Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative aims to reduce dependence on foreign arms suppliers and achieve self-reliance in defence manufacturing. The government has introduced significant measures, including raising the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) limit in the defence sector to 74% and implementing the Defence Acquisition Procedure (DAP) 2020, which mandates 50% indigenous content in procurement contracts. Additionally, phased import bans on over 1,000 military items and incentives for foreign manufacturers to establish facilities in India have been introduced. These efforts align with India's broader goal of becoming a net exporter of defence equipment.

Progress has been made in developing indigenous platforms like the HAL Tejas fighter jet, missile systems, and warships. Defence exports have surged significantly, reaching nearly ₹16,000 crore in FY 2022-23 compared to ₹686 crore in FY 2013-14. However, challenges persist, as India remains reliant on foreign technology for critical components such as jet engines, advanced avionics, and submarines. In comparison, China has achieved greater self-reliance by heavily investing in research and development (R&D) and acquiring key technologies.

To overcome these gaps, India is focusing on enhancing domestic R&D capabilities and fostering collaboration between industry, startups, and academia. The government has also allocated a significant portion of its defence capital budget for domestic procurement and aims to achieve a turnover of ₹1.75 lakh crore in the defence sector by 2025. While the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative has laid a strong foundation for self-reliance, sustained efforts in innovation and technology development are essential to fully realise its potential.

India’s Path To True Self-Reliance

India's Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative aims to reduce dependence on foreign arms suppliers and achieve self-reliance in defence manufacturing. The government has introduced significant measures, including raising the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) limit in the defence sector to 74% and implementing the Defence Acquisition Procedure (DAP) 2020, which mandates 50% indigenous content in procurement contracts. Additionally, phased import bans on over 1,000 military items and incentives for foreign manufacturers to establish facilities in India have been introduced. These efforts align with India's broader goal of becoming a net exporter of defence equipment.

Progress has been made in developing indigenous platforms like the HAL TEJAS fighter jet, missile systems, and warships. Defence exports have surged significantly, reaching nearly ₹16,000 crore in FY 2022-23 compared to ₹686 crore in FY 2013-14. However, challenges persist, as India remains reliant on foreign technology for critical components such as jet engines, advanced avionics, and submarines. In comparison, China has achieved greater self-reliance by heavily investing in research and development (R&D) and acquiring key technologies.

To overcome these gaps, India is focusing on enhancing domestic R&D capabilities and fostering collaboration between industry, start-up's, and academia. The government has also allocated a significant portion of its defence capital budget for domestic procurement and aims to achieve a turnover of ₹1.75 lakh crore in the defence sector by 2025. The Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative has laid a strong foundation for self-reliance, sustained efforts in innovation and technology development are essential to fully realise its potential.

Based On FirstPost Report