ZORAWAR light tank with private major L&T being the development-cum production partner

The release of the Defence Procurement Manual (DPM) 2025 by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh comes at a time when the principles of self-reliance, indigenous innovation, and industrial capability remain central to India’s strategic objectives.

Yet, the foundational spirit of the ‘Buy (Indian–IDDM)’ category, introduced under the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2016, is increasingly being diluted through procedural preferences granted to alternative categories like ‘Buy (Indian)’ and Emergency Procurement (EP).

Conceptualised under the leadership of the late Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, the Buy (Indian–IDDM) category was designed to promote systems that are indigenously designed, developed, and manufactured. It sought to discourage import dependency and reward Indian firms that genuinely invest in intellectual property creation and indigenous R&D. The category was positioned as the apex of the procurement hierarchy, symbolising the essence of ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’.

In practice, however, the spirit of IDDM has often been weakened by bureaucratic workarounds. The introduction of the Fast Track Procedure (FTP) and the extensive application of the Emergency Procurement (EP) route since 2020 have enabled rapid acquisitions but also created avenues that bypass IDDM compliance. During the 2020–22 border tensions with China, such flexibility proved essential, helping bridge immediate capability gaps through swift inductions across all three services.

The aftermath of Operation Sindoor in May 2025 exposed systemic weaknesses in some platforms acquired under the IDDM category from newly formed companies. Performance deficiencies led to operational setbacks, prompting procurement authorities to re-evaluate their risk appetite. Consequently, a shift emerged towards the broader Buy (Indian) category, which permits technology imports with local assembly, undermining the intent of incentivising indigenous design.

Several advanced defence nations strike a balance between urgency and industrial self-reliance without compromising sovereignty. The United States enforces domestic preference through its Buy American Act and Defence Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), ensuring American firms with local IP benefit from structured priority. Israel actively supports firms with unique innovations through direct award mechanisms, while France embeds preference clauses into tender documents, strengthening its national industry base. These models underline that speed and strategic autonomy can coexist with prudent policy frameworks.

For India, reaffirming the Buy (Indian–IDDM) priority is a strategic necessity, not merely an administrative choice. Overreliance on imported technology—however locally assembled—risks eroding the indigenous industrial base and undermines confidence among domestic developers. Without sustained commitment to IDDM, India may regress into a system of licensed production rather than genuine capability growth.

To restore equity and purpose, the Ministry of Defence should adopt precise measures:

Issue formal guidelines prioritising IDDM-compliant products during Technical Evaluation Committee reviews and field trials, even within the Buy (Indian) category.
Permit direct awards to sole IDDM-compliant bidders, based on validated IP ownership and manufacturing localisation.
Restrict the L1 (lowest bidder) principle to competition among IDDM-qualified vendors to maintain incentives for genuine innovation.
Establish a retrospective audit cell within the Ministry, including DRDO and industry representatives, to identify past EP acquisitions where IDDM solutions were overlooked.
Offer structured incentives such as advance payment mechanisms, time-bound reimbursements, and tax relaxations for recognised IDDM suppliers.

Summary

Effective reinforcement of the IDDM framework will cultivate trust among innovators, stimulate private R&D, and secure India’s technological sovereignty. Conversely, continued neglect could relegate domestic firms to mere assemblers and reverse years of progress under Make in India. The moment calls for decisive policy direction—anchoring defence procurement once again in the principles of indigenous design, development, and manufacturing.