The delays in the delivery of GE’s F404-IN20 engines for the TEJAS MK-1A program have already slowed down India’s indigenous fighter production. With only the seventh engine delivered after nearly five years since the 2021 contract, the situation has exposed India’s vulnerability in relying on American propulsion systems.

The larger crisis, however, lies in the indirect denial of GE’s F414 engine, which India had selected for its next-generation fighter triad — TEJAS MK-2, TEDBF, and AMCA.

These projects were designed to replace ageing fleets and maintain the Indian Air Force’s combat strength. Yet, without a guaranteed domestic production line under licence, India’s planners committed a strategic misstep that now threatens timelines and force modernisation.

This vacuum is creating an opening for Russia. The Su-57E stealth fighter, particularly the twin-seat variant, is being positioned as an interim solution to bridge India’s fifth-generation capability gap.

With Pakistan expected to induct the Chinese J-35 stealth fighter by 2027 and China already fielding both the J-20 and J-35 while developing a sixth-generation aircraft, India faces mounting pressure to secure a credible counter.

Russia’s offer includes co-development and co-production within India, leveraging HAL’s existing Su-30MKI facilities. This would allow integration of Indian radar, avionics, weapons, and missile systems into the Su-57E, creating a potent strike and air superiority platform.

For the Indian Air Force, the Su-57E could serve as a generational successor to the Su-30MKI fleet, enhancing lethality and survivability.

For Russia, struggling financially after spending an estimated $2.5 trillion on the Ukraine war since 2022, the deal would provide a crucial multi-billion dollar lifeline.

It would also serve as a powerful endorsement of the Su-57 platform, with India’s acquisition boosting its credibility in the global export market. The Indian Air Force, ranked among the world’s most powerful, would lend significant legitimacy to the aircraft’s operational value.

The American strategy of nudging India towards the F-35 may backfire. Instead of deepening Indo-US defence ties, the GE engine crisis risks manoeuvring India back into Russia’s orbit.

This would reverse the trajectory of recent decades, during which India invested billions in American aircraft and helicopters, including C-130Js, C-17s, P-8Is, Apaches, Chinooks, and MH-70s.

For India’s indigenous fighter programs, the denial of engines may delay progress but could also catalyse propulsion indigenisation. European aerospace partners, such as Safran and Rolls-Royce, stand to benefit from long-term collaboration opportunities, filling the gap left by GE’s retreat. This would mark a backward drift towards traditional partners, reinforcing India’s strategic autonomy.

Advantages of A Su-57E Deal

Immediate Capability: Provides India with an interim fifth-generation fighter to counter China and Pakistan.
Co-Development Model: Ensures localisation, integration of Indian systems, and technology transfer.
HAL Infrastructure: Utilises existing facilities, reducing costs and timelines.
Strategic Autonomy: Strengthens India’s independence in defence procurement.
Russian Lifeline: Provides Russia with crucial financial support, ensuring sustained partnership.
Export Endorsement: Boosts Su-57’s credibility in the global market through Indian adoption.

Disadvantages of A Su-57E Deal

Engine Maturity: Questions remain about the reliability and performance of Russian engines.
Stealth Effectiveness: Uncertainty over radar cross-section and survivability against advanced adversaries.
Sustainment Costs: Long-term maintenance and logistics could be expensive and complex.
Geopolitical Risks: Deepening ties with Russia may strain relations with the US and Europe.
AMCA Delay: Interim reliance on Su-57E could slow momentum for India’s indigenous AMCA program.
Technology Dependence: Despite co-development, India may remain dependent on Russian core technologies.

India’s decision on the Su-57E will not only shape its air power trajectory but also redefine its geopolitical alignments. The deal could accelerate operational readiness and strategic autonomy, yet it carries risks of dependence, cost burdens, and strained Western ties.