This article is a continuation (Part 2) of the series. You can read Part 1 here.

The Agniveer Scheme and Geopolitical Implications

The Agniveer scheme is India’s ambitious plan to overhaul its military by recruiting young, tech-savvy soldiers for a four-year term, moving away from the traditional lifetime service model. The goal is to build a nimble, adaptable force ready for modern challenges. However, the media has created hype around this scheme, fuelled by vested interests from the Western lobby aiming to derail India’s defense improvement. When India focuses on defense improvement rather than the protests, it can become a major defense exporter.

There’s also a geopolitical twist. Some suggest the United States might be quietly pleased with this turmoil. The reasoning goes like this: if India can’t sort out its military reforms—like Agniveer—and keeps facing internal pushback, it stays reliant on foreign arms, especially from the U.S. India has already spent £15.5 billion on American military equipment since 2008—planes, helicopters, and more. Now, talks of dropping another £7.8–11.6 billion on F-35 fighter jets and Patriot missile systems are circulating. That’s a hefty bill, and it locks India deeper into a dependency trap. The more India leans on U.S. gear, the harder it gets to break free and build its own.

Self-reliance is the real prize here — crafting a military that stands on its own, not one tethered to foreign suppliers for every spare part. The protests over Agniveer, whether fuelled by local discontent or subtly nudged from abroad, risk pulling India off that path. Sorting out this mess internally isn’t just about calming the streets; it’s about taking control of India’s defense future. Why let chaos—or whispers from across the ocean—keep India from that goal?

Incidents and Accidents Involving the F-35

The F-35 Lightning II, a family of single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole fighters, has experienced several notable accidents and incidents since its introduction. These events have involved engine fires, crashes, and collisions, often resulting from human error, mechanical failures, or design issues. Below is a summary of key incidents based on available information:

These accidents have contributed to debates about the F-35’s safety and reliability, given its complexity and high cost. However, with over 721,000 flight hours and 965 aircraft delivered, some argue its accident rate is within expected norms for a new military platform.

Autonomous Incidents Involving the F-35

The F-35 is a manned aircraft, not designed for fully autonomous flight. While it features advanced automation and artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities—such as sensor fusion, target detection, and tracking—these are decision-support tools controlled by the pilot, not autonomous flight systems. As a result, there are no documented incidents of the F-35 operating autonomously or crashing due to autonomous flight operations.

However, automation-related issues have played a role in some incidents:

• 2022 Utah Crash: The crash at Hill AFB was caused by a software glitch in the air data system, which stopped responding to pilot inputs after being triggered by turbulence. While this involved automation, it was not an autonomous operation—rather, it highlighted risks of reliance on complex software systems.

The F-35’s AI and automation are designed to enhance pilot situational awareness and combat effectiveness, not to replace the pilot. Unlike unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the F-35 requires human control, and all reported incidents stem from human error, mechanical failures, or design flaws rather than autonomous behaviour.

Strategic Decision-Making: Building Self-Reliance

India must approach this decision with caution. The smart move is to negotiate with America to share the F-35’s blueprints so it can be built domestically—otherwise, India should decline the offer. Russia’s Su-57 deal allows for domestic production, aligning with the “Make in India” initiative and saving costs while fostering local expertise. Additionally, India should advocate for global regulations on AI warfare to prevent major powers like China and America from dominating with advanced technology that India lacks. HAL’s track record—delays in delivering the Tejas—indicates the need for external assistance to catch up. However, purchasing advanced jets like the F-35 without acquiring the necessary know-how keeps India dependent, rather than empowering it to stand independently.

Evaluating the F-35, it offers impressive capabilities: speeds of 1,975 km/h, a range of 2,220 km, and stealth features with a radar cross-section of 0.001 m². However, it comes with a hefty price tag—£62 million per jet, plus additional costs for spares and fuel—and carries only 10 weapons, fewer than some competitors. In contrast, the Su-57, while less stealthy (0.1 m²), is cheaper to co-build, and Russia is willing to share technology. The AMCA represents India’s future aspirations—stealthy, domestically produced, and AI-ready—but its completion is projected for 2035, which is too far off to address immediate needs.

The real fight is shifting to the skies, with AI jets—no pilots, just computers making decisions, outthinking and outflying anything human. China is advancing rapidly in this domain, and America is not far behind. India’s own Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), intended to be a high-tech response, won’t be ready until 2035—ten years too late to catch up. This delay poses a significant challenge, as AI-driven jets represent the future of air combat.

Moreover, there is no global rulebook for AI wars. Existing agreements like the Geneva Convention cover human soldiers, not machines. If an AI jet goes rogue and hits the wrong target, accountability becomes a complex issue. This regulatory gap leaves nations vulnerable to unforeseen consequences.

While the F-35 is currently a solid option—it flies, fights, and hides effectively—it is not designed for the AI-driven future. Investing in the F-35 now could mean buying yesterday’s technology for tomorrow’s war, potentially leaving India at a disadvantage as AI jets become the norm.

India requires a solution now that not only meets current defense needs but also contributes to long-term self-reliance. The focus should be on building capabilities that empower India, rather than creating dependency on foreign suppliers.

Conclusion

India’s decision between the American F-35 and the Russian Su-57 fighter jets is a complex and multifaceted one, with significant implications for the country’s defense strategy, geopolitical alliances, and long-term self-reliance. The F-35 offers advanced stealth and technology, but it comes with high costs and potential dependencies on the United States. In contrast, the Su-57, while less stealthy, aligns with India’s “Make in India” initiative, fostering local expertise and reducing reliance on foreign suppliers.

The rapid evolution of AI-driven aviation further complicates this decision, as the future of air combat will likely be dominated by pilotless jets. Investing in the F-35 now could mean buying technology that may soon be outdated, whereas the Su-57 offers a platform for future innovations and self-reliance.

The Agniveer scheme and the geopolitical dynamics surrounding India’s defense reforms highlight the importance of focusing on long-term strategic goals rather than short-term fixes. Ensuring India’s freedom to choose its path and building a robust, independent defense capability are paramount.

This decision isn’t just about picking planes—it’s about ensuring India retains the freedom to choose its path. The Indian Air Force (IAF) needs strength to guard the skies, and with only 31 squadrons against the required 42, the gap is significant. China is not waiting, and the urgency is clear. However, opting for the F-35 could lock India into America’s grip, costing billions—£62 million per jet, with dozens needed and years of upkeep. This dependency could bleed resources and limit strategic autonomy.

Russia offers a partnership with the Su-57, allowing India to build and learn domestically. This aligns with the “Make in India” initiative, fostering local expertise and reducing reliance on foreign suppliers. The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) represents a home-grown hope, but it’s a decade away from being operational. The future of air combat lies in AI-driven, pilotless jets, which come with no established rules and significant risks.

India must avoid trading tomorrow’s freedom for today’s quick fix. The focus should be on strategic choices that build long-term self-reliance and resilience. Choosing wisely now will prevent future regret and ensure India’s defense capabilities are robust and independent. Ultimately, the choice between the F-35 and the Su-57 is not just about acquiring new aircraft; it’s about shaping India’s defense future. By making strategic decisions that prioritize self-reliance and resilience, India can secure its position as a major defense power and avoid the pitfalls of dependency on foreign suppliers.

Vikram Mohan is an independent writer with a keen eye for global defense and geopolitics. While not a formal specialist, he brings a fresh, analytical perspective to complex strategic issues, blending meticulous research with insightful commentary.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The F-35 Trap: A Geopolitical Game Beyond India’s Reach appeared first on The Commune.

The F-35 Lightning II, a fighter jet from the United States, is a marvel of modern engineering—its design makes it nearly invisible to enemy radar, it can strike targets with deadly accuracy, and it links up instantly with other allied planes and bases to share what it sees. America is offering this jet to India, presenting a tempting upgrade for the air force. However, Russia’s S-400 system can blast threats out of the sky from 400 kilometers away, while the U.S. Patriot system is built to stop missiles closer in, within 160 kilometers. These aren’t just machines—they’re bargaining chips in a tense global standoff, and India is caught right in the middle, needing to decide what keeps it safest.

This situation escalated when the Prime Minister visited the U.S. in February 2025, and President Donald Trump pitched the F-35 as a game-changer. Some believe it’s a golden ticket to match China’s growing air power, but others see a catch—it’s massively expensive, and buying it might mean relying on America for spares and support for decades. The Indian Air Force (IAF) is stretched thin with just 31 squadrons—each squadron has about 18 planes—when experts say 42 are needed to handle threats from Pakistan to the west and China to the north and east. China is not standing still either; they’re working on sixth-generation jets—faster, smarter, and harder to spot than anything India has. The F-35 could quickly plug that gap, but it’s not just about getting new planes—it’s about whether the cost and the strings attached make sense for India.

The Indian Air Force’s Breaking Point

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is in a tight spot. With only 31 squadrons instead of the 42 needed, there is a shortfall of over 200 planes to feel secure against neighbouring threats. This gap is significant—it’s like having half the guards needed to watch a long border. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the company relied upon to build jets like the Tejas, has been painfully slow. In October 2024, IAF Chief Air Marshal AP Singh called them out at a major air show, highlighting delays in Tejas deliveries—meant to be an affordable, home-grown fighter—leaving the IAF exposed. Currently, the IAF is flying aging MiGs from the Soviet era and Sukhois from Russia, which are decent but outdated compared to what’s emerging next door. China’s sixth-generation jets use artificial intelligence (AI) to fly smarter, dodge radar better, and react faster than human pilots ever could. The F-35 is a ready-made answer—it’s available now, it hides from radar, and it fights well—but each one costs £62 million, and dozens are needed, plus years of American help to keep them running.

Steps have already been taken to protect India. In 2018, a £4.2 billion deal was signed with Russia for the S-400 system, which fires missiles to stop planes or rockets before they get close. Three of the five units are operational along the borders, with the last two due by late 2025. The S-400 can see threats 600 kilometers away and hit them at 400 kilometers, far outstripping the Patriot’s 150-kilometer sight and 160-kilometer reach. That’s why it was chosen — India has vast frontiers, and something that covers the distance is needed. The Patriot didn’t meet the requirements back then. However, if the F-35 is purchased, America might insist on pairing it with Patriots because their tech doesn’t mix well with Russian gear. This could mean the £4.2 billion S-400s sit half-useless, forcing additional spending to start over with American systems. It’s crucial to figure out what each system does and whether this new deal is worth upsetting the existing one.

Tech Titans Compared: F-35, Patriot, S-400

The following table provides a detailed comparison of the technical specifications of the F-35 Lightning II, the MIM-104 Patriot (PAC-3), and the S-400 Triumf:

The F-35 is a jet designed for offensive operations, hiding from radar with a signal so small (0.001 m²) it appears like a bird to enemy scanners. It’s AN/APG-81 radar sees far and clear, guiding missiles like the AARGM-ER to hit targets 97 kilometers away. However, at £62 million per jet, the costs are steep, and repairs and fuel add even more expenses.

The Patriot is a ground-based system firing missiles at 6,174 km/h to stop threats it detects 150 kilometers away. It excels at intercepting large missiles but struggles with low-flying threats. Each unit costs £775 million, with missiles priced at £3 million each.

The S-400, also ground-based, launches missiles up to 400 kilometers at 17,297 km/h, detecting threats 600 kilometers away with its 91N6E radar and handling up to 384 missiles. It is cheaper at £388 million per unit but remains untested in actual combat. 

India needs both reach and reliability—S-400 provides distance, F-35 offers offensive capabilities, while the Patriot represents a middle ground previously deemed insufficient.

The S-400 Precedent: A Bold Stand

In 2018, India chose the S-400 over the Patriot because its 400-kilometer reach and 600-kilometer sight fit the need to guard long borders against planes or missiles sneaking in. America wasn’t happy—they threatened sanctions, especially after India didn’t take sides in the Ukraine war, showing independence from American influence. Fast forward to Modi’s U.S. visit in February 2025, and President Donald Trump offers the F-35—a jet previously shared only with NATO allies until Turkey bought S-400s and got booted from the F-35 program. The catch? F-35s don’t work smoothly with Russian tech like the S-400—their systems clash—so America might push India to buy Patriots instead, side-lining the £4.2 billion S-400 investment.

Turkey’s situation illustrates the risk: they wanted Patriots, but when America delayed, they acquired S-400s. The U.S. cut them off from F-35s, imposed sanctions, and left their air force weaker. America fears Russia could study S-400 data to crack how F-35s hide from radar—a danger India would face too. Trump’s offer isn’t necessarily a favour—it’s a business move aimed at making a sale, not necessarily strengthening India’s defense. The critical question is whether this deal genuinely benefits India or merely serves American interests while complicating India’s defense plans.

America’s AI Gambit and F-35 Clearance Sale

India faces a critical decision in choosing between the American F-35 and the Russian Su-57 fighter jets, especially as global aviation technology races toward AI-driven, pilotless aircraft. The United States is aggressively advancing toward AI-piloted jets that can react faster than any human pilot. They’ve already tested this technology with F-16s in 2024 and plan to deploy hundreds of such aircraft by 2028. This shift suggests that even the F-35—currently a pinnacle of stealth and technology with its radar cross-section of just 0.001 m²—could soon become outdated. If AI-driven jets are the future, the F-35 might be a short-term asset, potentially explaining why the U.S. is eager to sell it to countries like India now. For India, buying the F-35 could mean investing in a jet that’s nearing the end of its dominance, leaving India reliant on America for spares and support as their focus shifts to newer systems.

Russia offers the Su-57, a jet with a larger radar cross-section of 0.1 m², making it less stealthy than the F-35. However, its real advantage lies elsewhere: Russia is willing to let India manufacture the Su-57 domestically under the “Make in India” initiative. This aligns perfectly with India’s goal of building its own defense industry. Producing the Su-57 at home would create jobs, develop technical skills, and give India control over its own supply chain—benefits the F-35 simply can’t offer, as it would keep India dependent on American production and maintenance.

Strategic Trade-Offs

• Short-Term Capability vs. Long-Term Growth: The F-35 offers superior stealth and technology today, but its edge may fade as AI jets emerge. The Su-57, while less advanced in stealth, provides a platform for India to strengthen its industrial base and prepare for future innovations, like the indigenous Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).
• Dependence vs. Independence: Buying the F-35 ties India to the U.S., with little say over costs or restrictions. Building the Su-57 fosters self-reliance, reducing vulnerability to foreign supply chains or geopolitical pressures.

Given the rapid evolution of AI-driven aviation, investing heavily in the F-35 risks locking India into a system that could soon be overshadowed. The Su-57, despite its stealth disadvantage, offers a strategic win: the chance to grow India’s own capabilities and maintain autonomy. By building the Su-57 locally, India can create a foundation for its defense industry while keeping pace with global trends—potentially even adapting the Su-57 or future designs for AI enhancements down the line.

Geopolitical Alliances and Dependencies

Choosing the F-35 would integrate India more deeply into the U.S.-led defense alliance. The F-35 is already a key component of multinational air defense alliances, with countries like Australia, Japan, South Korea, and several NATO members incorporating it into their air forces. This integration ensures coordinated responses to shared threats and reinforces collective security. However, it also means that India would be dependent on the U.S. for operational support, software updates, and maintenance, potentially limiting India’s strategic autonomy.

There are concerns about the F-35’s reliance on U.S. control systems, such as the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) and its successor, the Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN). These systems could theoretically allow the U.S. to exert control over the aircraft, raising fears about a “kill switch” that could disable foreign-operated F-35s. While this is largely speculative, it underscores the potential vulnerabilities and dependencies associated with choosing the F-35.

On the other hand, the Su-57 offers a different set of geopolitical implications. By opting for the Su-57, India would strengthen its defense ties with Russia, a long-standing partner. This choice aligns with India’s goal of building a self-reliant defense industry and reduces dependency on Western suppliers. The Su-57’s affordability and advanced capabilities present Russia with both economic and strategic opportunities, potentially securing new military alliances and export agreements. Additionally, Russia’s willingness to share technology and allow domestic production under the “Make in India” initiative fosters local expertise and control over the supply chain.

References

[1] The F-35’s Role In Multinational Air Defense Alliances – Simple Flying

[2] The F-35 ‘Kill Switch’: Separating Myth from Reality

[3] Sukhoi Su-57 Felon: Russia’s Fifth-Generation Stealth Fighter

[4] https://debuglies.com/2024/11/11/technological-superiority-and-strategic-advancement-the-su-57-and-su-35s-fighter-jets-in-russian-aerospace-dominance/ …

This is Part 1 of article, you can read Part 2 of the series here.

Vikram Mohan is an independent writer with a keen eye for global defense and geopolitics. While not a formal specialist, he brings a fresh, analytical perspective to complex strategic issues, blending meticulous research with insightful commentary.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The F-35 Trap: Why It’s A High-Stakes Geopolitical Gamble For India appeared first on The Commune.