India’s future as a global aerospace power is currently being deliberated at a high level in New Delhi over a bold Russian proposal: the joint production of the Su-57 fifth-generation stealth fighter. This development, first reported by CNBC TV18 on June 11, 2025, underscores a critical moment for Indian defense policy. It pits Moscow’s long-standing defense partnership with India—highlighted by promises of extensive technology sharing—against Washington’s offer of its most elite combat platform, the F-35A Lightning II.
At stake is more than just the modernization of the Indian Air Force (IAF). This decision holds profound implications for India’s indigenous defense industry, strategic autonomy, and geopolitical alignment in an increasingly polarized global order.
India’s consideration of the Su-57 is grounded in its deep-rooted strategic and industrial ties with Russia. Over 70% of the IAF’s current inventory—including the Su-30MKI, MiG-29, and aging MiG-21—is of Russian origin. The Su-30MKI, India’s premier air superiority fighter, is not only a symbol of Indo-Russian collaboration but also a model for defense industrial partnership. It is assembled domestically by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) at Nashik, with a robust local supply chain that has matured over two decades.
By leveraging this infrastructure, the Su-57 could be seamlessly integrated into India’s ecosystem. Russia’s offer goes beyond mere aircraft sales—it includes full technology sharing, collaborative development of stealth technologies and avionics, and a dedicated production line on Indian soil. This approach directly aligns with India’s long-term objectives under the ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ (self-reliant India) initiative and its push for defense manufacturing indigenization.
Dubbed “Felon” by NATO, the Su-57 is Russia’s first fifth-generation fighter, developed by Sukhoi as a response to the U.S. F-22 and F-35 platforms. Ambassador Denis Alipov, speaking at the India Today Conclave 2025, described the aircraft as “the most advanced combat aircraft currently operational,” boasting a unique blend of stealth, speed, agility, and firepower.
Its low-observable airframe, internal weapons bay, and use of radar-absorbing materials enhance survivability, while 3D thrust-vectoring nozzles and supercruise capability ensure superior dogfighting agility and range. Although its radar cross-section (RCS) is believed to be higher than that of the F-35, its performance in long-range missions and conventional warfare scenarios is widely seen as superior.
Critically, India’s experience in operating and maintaining Russian systems would ease the logistics of introducing the Su-57 into service. Training, maintenance, and parts procurement could be streamlined, avoiding the costly infrastructure overhaul required for Western systems.
In parallel, the United States is intensifying its pitch for the F-35A—a platform that arguably sets the benchmark for fifth-generation fighter technology. Equipped with AI-assisted target recognition, full-spectrum stealth, sensor fusion, and superior electronic warfare (EW) capability, the F-35A is the linchpin of U.S. and allied air superiority in modern theaters.
The fighter is designed for seamless interoperability with NATO forces, operating as part of a networked warfare doctrine. The F-35 has been battle-tested in Syria, Iraq, and Eastern Europe, with proven survivability and kill rates in contested airspace. Its multirole versatility, particularly in Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), far surpasses legacy platforms.
However, the U.S. proposal comes with critical limitations. Washington is offering the F-35A as a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) product, with no scope for co-production, license manufacturing, or core technology transfer. The aircraft’s software architecture is tightly controlled, its maintenance system centralized, and modifications severely restricted.
India is at a pivotal juncture in its defense-industrial journey. The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project, being developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), aims to produce an indigenous fifth-generation fighter by the early 2030s. Complementing this effort, France’s Safran and the UK’s Rolls-Royce have offered 100% technology transfer deals for developing a fifth-generation engine within India.
In this context, a joint Su-57 program could be invaluable. It would serve as a practical training ground in stealth airframe construction, radar-absorbing coating application, and next-gen sensor development. Indian engineers, technicians, and pilots would gain hands-on experience, shortening the learning curve for AMCA and future indigenous aircraft programs.
Conversely, while the F-35A would immediately catapult India into a new echelon of combat capability, it offers little in terms of domestic industrial growth. The tightly guarded proprietary systems and software limit India’s participation in upgrades, customization, and parallel development.
Cost is another major factor. The F-35A is priced at approximately $80 million per unit, excluding life-cycle support, training, weapons integration, and base infrastructure, all of which could drive the total program cost significantly higher. Moreover, adopting the F-35 would require an entirely new logistics ecosystem, ground equipment, and pilot retraining—a massive departure from the Russian-standard systems that dominate the IAF.
In contrast, the Su-57 offer is projected to cost less per unit—partly due to local production—and promises easier induction, shared supply chains, and compatibility with existing Russian-origin platforms.
Yet, the F-35’s unmatched battlefield network integration offers another kind of value: strategic interoperability with Western partners. As India deepens its defense ties with the U.S. under mechanisms like the Quad and foundational agreements like COMCASA and BECA, the F-35 could be a force-multiplier for regional deterrence in the Indo-Pacific.
The fighter jet decision also underscores India’s careful balancing act in a fragmented geopolitical landscape. While India maintains a time-tested relationship with Russia, it is also increasingly aligned with the U.S. and its allies, especially amid rising tensions with China and instability in West Asia.
Choosing the Su-57 could trigger sanctions or scrutiny under the U.S. Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), although India was previously granted a waiver for purchasing the Russian S-400 missile system. The possibility of secondary sanctions remains a persistent concern in strategic circles.
On the other hand, opting for the F-35 would align India more closely with Western defense architecture but at the cost of distancing from Russia—a reliable partner during times when other suppliers balked, such as during the 1971 Indo-Pak war or post-nuclear sanctions.
From an operational standpoint, IAF insiders acknowledge that both aircraft fulfill different roles. The F-35A is optimized for first-day-of-war missions, penetrating dense air defense networks and executing precision strikes with low observability. It excels in EW-heavy environments and is designed for information-dominant warfare.
The Su-57, while stealthy, is also a high-maneuverability air superiority fighter, capable of engaging adversaries in both BVR and WVR combat. Its larger weapons payload, greater fuel capacity, and aerodynamic agility make it a powerful asset for conventional deterrence and extended combat patrols.
Yet the overarching question is whether India should buy capability or build it.
Ultimately, India’s fifth-generation fighter decision represents more than a tactical acquisition—it is a strategic signal. A Su-57 partnership would reaffirm India’s commitment to multipolar defense sourcing and self-reliance. It would preserve its defense autonomy and significantly advance its domestic aerospace knowledge base.
The F-35 path, meanwhile, would enhance India’s deterrence against regional threats like China and Pakistan, deeply integrate its forces with the West, and offer battlefield dominance in contested environments.
The Modi government, keen to present India as a rising technology and military power, will have to weigh near-term capability boosts against long-term sovereignty and industrial development. Both choices carry risks and rewards.
India’s eventual selection—whether Felon or Lightning—will shape not only the next generation of IAF fighters but also the broader contours of India’s strategic orientation. The global defense community watches closely, aware that this decision could set a precedent for how emerging powers pursue power, partnerships, and progress in an era of uncertain alliances and rising great-power competition.
