Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
The India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) is a proposed initiative to enhance economic connectivity and integration between Asia, the Arabian Gulf, and Europe. Announced on September 9, 2023, during the G20 summit in New Delhi, the corridor is envisioned to facilitate trade and development across these regions. The IMEEEC will be a “game changer” for trade and geopolitics, promising more robust connectivity between Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. However, its success depends on aligning diverse national interests and addressing the geopolitical and security challenges.
INDIA–MIDDLE EAST–EUROPE ECONOMIC CORRIDOR
The corridor will connect India to Europe via the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Greece. It includes an Eastern Corridor (linking India to the Gulf) and a Northern Corridor (linking the Gulf to Europe). It will consist of a railway network providing a reliable and cost-effective cross-border ship-to-rail transit system, supplementing existing maritime and road transport routes. Beyond the transport infrastructure, undersea cables would facilitate data exchange, while long-distance hydrogen pipelines would boost the participants’ climate and decarbonisation goals. Its integration into regional strategies emphasises connectivity and infrastructure investment. The IMEC aligns with energy security and climate resilience objectives, including green hydrogen and renewable energy collaborations.
Objectives. The IMEEEC is a strategic initiative to foster economic growth and strengthen ties. It involves several nations and entities, including India, the United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the European Union, France, Germany, and Italy. The primary goals of IMEEEC are to:-
Stimulate Economic Development: Enhancing connectivity and economic integration between the participating regions.
Secure Regional Supply Chains: Providing alternative routes and reducing dependence on existing trade routes like the Suez Canal.
Promote Environmental Sustainability: Focusing on clean energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Strategic Importance. The India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) is not just an economic initiative but also a significant geopolitical project that has the potential to reshape regional dynamics, global trade routes, and power structures. It is considered a counterbalance to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). While the BRI focuses on expansive infrastructure projects under China’s leadership, the IMEEEC emphasises multilateral cooperation, with India, the Middle East, and Europe taking centre stage. By providing an alternative trade route, the corridor reduces reliance on China-centric supply chains and offers participating countries a way to diversify their geopolitical alliances.
Current Status. The India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), announced in September 2023, is in its early planning and implementation stages. In February 2024, India and the UAE signed the first formal agreement for the corridor’s development. European nations like Greece and France have also shown active involvement, with France appointing a special envoy to the project. In May 2024, India and the United Arab Emirates held inaugural discussions to advance the IMEEEC corridor, focusing on streamlining cargo movement and enhancing trade connectivity.
Benefits of India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor
The India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) offers transformative benefits, from bolstering economic growth and strengthening geopolitical alliances to promoting sustainability and advancing technology. As a strategic initiative, it promises to redefine trade, enhance connectivity, and promote sustainable development across its participating regions. It is beneficial to all the participants.
India’s Role. IMEEEC enhances India’s position as a rising global power and manufacturing hub, enhancing its ability to engage strategically with the Gulf and Europe.
Middle East. The corridor leverages the geographical position of Gulf nations, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, strengthening their roles as logistical and energy hubs and diversifying their economies.
Europe’s Connectivity. It offers European nations an alternative trade route for accessing Asian markets and reducing supply chain vulnerabilities.
Economic Benefits. The Corridor will enhance trade efficiency by providing faster trade routes. It aims to reduce transit times and costs by offering a multimodal transportation network integrating ship-to-rail connectivity, bypassing the congestion-prone Suez Canal. It will provide access to critical markets and facilitate seamless trade between Asia, the Gulf, and Europe, creating a vast economic network connecting major global economies. The corridor’s infrastructure development will attract foreign direct investment (FDI) and create jobs in the construction, logistics, energy, and technology sectors.
Geopolitical Benefits. The project aligns with nations’ interests, seeking non-aligned cooperation models that enhance economic ties without overly depending on a single global superpower. It will strengthen relations between participating countries, promote collaboration among diverse nations and foster stability and mutual economic growth in strategically significant regions.
Technological and Digital Benefits. The corridor includes plans to lay fibre-optic cables, enhance digital communication, and enable smart trade networks across the regions. It will facilitate technological collaboration in artificial intelligence, logistics, and trade monitoring. The project will transfer technology and expertise across regions by integrating advanced infrastructure and energy systems, benefiting participating economies.
Supply Chain Resilience. The corridor bypasses critical chokepoints like the Suez Canal, offering a resilient alternative for global trade. This is crucial in mitigating risks from geopolitical instability or blockages in traditional routeslike the Suez Canal. A streamlined supply chain will ensure the timely delivery of goods and strengthen resilience to disruptions in global trade networks.
Environmental Benefits. IMEEEC incorporates clean energy components like hydrogen pipelines, aligning with global efforts for decarbonisation. The corridor’s focus on rail and clean energy transport will help lower greenhouse gas emissions associated with global trade. It will promote eco-friendly transportation networks with a lower carbon footprint than traditional maritime routes.
Cultural and People-to-People Connectivity. The corridor will strengthen cultural ties and exchanges between Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. It will facilitate tourism and mobility by improving regional connectivity and infrastructure.
Challenges and Threats
While ambitious and promising, the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) faces numerous challenges spanning geopolitical, technical, and financial domains. The success of IMEEEC hinges on the political and economic stability of its key transit regions. Instability in any participating country could disrupt the entire corridor. These hurdles must be addressed to ensure the project’s feasibility and success.
Geopolitical Instability. Regional Conflicts like the ongoing Israel-Hamas war and broader Middle Eastern instability would threaten and raise concerns about the corridor’s security and stability, particularly in critical areas like the Red Sea and Gulf. Frequent disruptions could be caused due to Houthi-type attacks on shipping lanes, underscoring the risks of relying on Middle Eastern transit routes. Regional rivalries, such as between Iran and Saudi Arabia, could disrupt cooperation or sabotage infrastructure. The IMEEEC is viewed as a counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), potentially leading to strategic pushback from China, which could leverage its partnerships (e.g., with Iran or Pakistan) to counter the corridor’s influence.
Diverging National Interests. Participating nations—India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the EU—have differing priorities for the corridor. Balancing these interests while ensuring cooperation remains a significant challenge. Countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE are pursuing multi-alignment strategies and maintaining ties with the West and rivals like China, which could lead to conflicting commitments affecting the corridor’s long-term alignment.
Economic Challenges. The infrastructure investment required for rail, ports, energy pipelines, and digital connectivity is enormous. Securing sustained funding and balancing returns on investment will be critical. Established trade routes, such as the Suez Canal, continue to dominate due to familiarity with the existing infrastructure. Convincing stakeholders to shift trade flows could be challenging.
Infrastructure Development Challenges. Integrating multimodal rail, road, sea, and energy pipeline systems across diverse geographies would require advanced logistics and technological collaboration. Diverging priorities and differences in national interests among participants could delay decision-making or create inefficiencies in implementation. For example, India may prioritise trade efficiency, while Gulf nations focus on energy export diversification.
Political and Institutional Coordination. Establishing uniform regulations, trade policies, and customs frameworks across multiple countries is critical but challenging and would require policy harmonisation. Countries involved may need more bureaucratic or institutional capacity to handle such a complex, cross-border project.
Environmental and Social Concerns. While green energy is a focus, large-scale infrastructure projects often raise environmental and social concerns, such as land acquisition and displacement. Extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and other climate-related challenges may affect long-term infrastructure resilience.
Security and Strategic Risks. Vulnerabilities in the Red Sea, Gulf waters, and overland transport routes pose risks to trade flow. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and potential pushback from non-participating powers like Iran could create additional hurdles. External powers like Russia or China might leverage regional instability to disrupt the corridor’s progress, viewing it as a competitor to their strategic initiatives. Countries excluded from the corridor, such as Iran or Turkey, may view it as a threat to their economic or geopolitical interests and act to undermine its development.
Security Aspects
The security aspects of the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEEC) are critical to its successful implementation and operation. Given the corridor’s strategic importance, multiple factors must be considered to safeguard its infrastructure, trade routes, and stakeholders.
Maritime Security
Vulnerabilities in Strategic Waters: The corridor relies on key maritime routes through the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and Mediterranean Sea. These are vulnerable to piracy, terrorist activities, and geopolitical tensions. Recent attacks on shipping lanes in the Red Sea, such as Houthi operations, highlight the risks to cargo and energy transportation.
Chokepoints and Blockades: Critical chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb are susceptible to blockades or military conflict, which could potentially disrupt trade flows.
Naval Protection: Ensuring safe passage for goods requires increased naval collaboration among IMEEEC participants, including India, the Gulf States, and European nations.
Land Route Security
Terrorism and Insurgency Risks: Overland routes passing through politically sensitive regions in the Middle East could be targets for terrorist groups or insurgencies, such as those in Syria, Yemen, or Iraq. Infrastructure projects like railways, pipelines, and highways may face sabotage risks, particularly in areas lacking robust governance.
Border and Customs Security: Secure and efficient border management is essential to prevent illegal trade, smuggling, or other disruptions along the corridor.
Cyber Security
Digital Infrastructure Risks: The corridor’s digital backbone, including fibre-optic cables and data-sharing platforms, is susceptible to cyber attacks that could disrupt trade or compromise sensitive information. Participating nations must collaborate on cyber security frameworks to safeguard these systems.
Technological Collaboration: Integrating secure technologies, including blockchains for transparent supply chain management, can reduce vulnerabilities.
Energy Security. Critical Energy Infrastructure: Pipelines for green hydrogen and other energy resources are integral to the IMEEEC. These assets are at risk of sabotage or terrorist attacks. Protecting energy supply chains involves deploying advanced monitoring systems and international cooperation on threat mitigation.
Air Threats. Air threats to the IMEEC pertain to the vulnerabilities of infrastructure, supply chains, and participating nations’ security in the context of aerial domains. Air threats underscore the need for comprehensive security measures, both physical and digital. Ensuring aerial safety through coordinated efforts, investment in advanced technology, and robust international cooperation will be essential to the corridor’s success and resilience.
Drone and Missile Attacks
Weaponised Drones. The growing use of drones in conflicts, particularly in the Middle East, poses a significant threat. Non-state actors like the Houthis in Yemen have used drones to target infrastructure, including oil facilities and ports. Similar attacks could disrupt IMEEEC operations. Advanced drones can target key corridor elements, such as railway systems, pipelines, and cargo hubs.
Missile Strikes. Hostile nations or insurgent groups could use ballistic or cruise missiles to target critical infrastructure, especially in the Gulf region. Regional rivalries, such as those involving Iran and Saudi Arabia, amplify this threat.
Airspace Security and Geopolitical Conflicts.
Restricted or Contested Airspaces: Conflicts in the Middle East, such as the Israel-Hamas war, may lead to restricted or contested airspaces, which can delay or reroute cargo flights and reduce operational efficiency. Potential future conflicts could escalate to involve airstrikes that directly or indirectly impact the corridor’s infrastructure.
No-Fly Zones: Political tensions could lead to the imposition of no-fly zones, complicating the movement of goods via air and undermining the corridor’s efficiency.
Terrorism and Aerial Hijacking.
Aerial Terrorism: Commercial or cargo flights associated with the corridor could be targets for hijacking or aerial sabotage by terrorist organisations operating in the region.
Attacks on Airports: Key air logistics hubs in participating nations (e.g., Dubai, Riyadh, Mumbai, and European capitals) could face threats from terror groups seeking to disrupt the corridor.
Conflict-Related Military Air Operations.
Interference by Rival Nations: Military air operations by nations opposing the corridor’s objectives (e.g., non-aligned states or rivals like Iran) could create disruptions. Surveillance flights or show-of-force manoeuvres by adversaries could intimidate stakeholders or delay operations.
Air Defence Systems: Nations along the corridor may deploy advanced air defence systems to protect critical infrastructure. However, miscommunication or misidentification during regional conflicts could lead to accidental escalations.
Protecting IMEEEC
Protecting the IMEEEC requires a multifaceted approach encompassing geopolitical, economic, and security dimensions. Ensuring its success and security involves addressing several key challenges and strategies
Geopolitical Stability.
Addressing Regional Conflicts: Stability in the Middle East, particularly in areas like the Gulf, is critical. Regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran must be engaged diplomatically to minimise conflicts.
Multilateral Cooperation: Strong partnerships among participating countries (India, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel, Jordan, and European nations) are vital to maintaining the corridor’s integrity. Organisations like the UN and regional blocs (e.g., the EU, GCC) can help mediate disputes.
Countering External Threats: Rival powers or non-aligned nations might attempt to undermine the corridor. Pre-emptive diplomacy is essential to prevent opposition, particularly from China and Pakistan.
Security Measures
Maritime Security: The corridor relies heavily on sea routes (Arabian, Red, and Mediterranean). Navies of participating nations must collaborate to counter piracy and secure critical chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeb, and the Suez Canal.
Cyber security: Digital infrastructure along the corridor, including smart ports and communication systems, requires robust protection against cyber attacks. Strengthening the cyber security of aviation systems to prevent hacking or sabotage.
Counterterrorism: Enhanced surveillance and intelligence-sharing are crucial to preventing militant groups from targeting critical infrastructure.
Advanced Air Defence and Monitoring: To ensure safe and uninterrupted aerial operations, establishing airspace security agreements among IMEEEC participants. Deploying missile and drone defence systems in vulnerable areas, such as ports and logistics hubs.
Energy Security: The corridor involves pipelines and power grids; safeguarding these from disruption is key to operational stability.
Infrastructure Development and Maintenance. Building robust and sustainable infrastructure that can withstand political instability, climate change, or sabotage is crucial. This includes building redundancy in air logistics and ensuring rapid adaptability in case of rerouting or disruptions.
Strategic Partnerships and Alliances. Quad and I2U2: Collaboration between India, the US, UAE, and Israel through platforms like the I2U2 Group or the Quad can enhance security and investments. Given its terminal role in the corridor, the EU should be a key player in financing and protecting the project. As a global guarantor of maritime freedom and a key promoter of the IMEC, continued US interest is critical for the corridor’s protection.
Economic Integration and Public Support. Enhancing trade benefits for nations along the corridor will encourage cooperation and shared responsibility for security. Involving local communities along the route in economic benefits can deter sabotage or insurgency.
Conclusion
The IMEEEC is a geostrategic initiative reflecting the shifting power balance in a fragmented world. Enhancing connectivity, reducing reliance on traditional chokepoints, and fostering sustainable energy partnerships address some of the most pressing geopolitical and economic challenges. The corridor could reshape global trade networks, enhance supply chain resilience, and counterbalance China’s Belt and Road Initiative if fully implemented. The IMEEEC’s potential to transform global trade is counterbalanced by significant challenges requiring sustained political will, robust institutional frameworks, and effective conflict management. Addressing these issues will be critical for the project’s long-term viability. The IMEEEC’s success depends on navigating complex geopolitical rivalries, economic constraints, security threats, and environmental risks. Sustained multilateral cooperation, robust conflict mitigation strategies, and secure funding mechanisms will be essential to counter these threats and realise the corridor’s full potential. Ensuring the security of the IMEEEC requires addressing a complex mix of maritime, land, cyber, and political risks. Collaborative efforts among participating nations, supported by robust multilateral frameworks, will mitigate threats and ensure the corridor’s long-term viability.
Your valuable comments are most welcome.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
Ministry of External Affairs, India. India’s Vision for IMEEC: Security and Economic Opportunities. New Delhi: Government of India.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP). Regional Economic Integration and Security Corridors: The Case of IMEEC. Bangkok: UNESCAP.
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). Emerging Trade Corridors and Global Security Risks. London: IISS.
Brookings Institution. India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor: A New Era for Global Trade. Washington, D.C.: Brookings.
Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA). India’s Strategic Role in Global Trade Corridors. New Delhi: IDSA.
Chatterjee, P., & Mahapatra, D. Geopolitics and Global Trade Routes: A Study of Strategic Corridors. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Bhadrakumar, M. K. Middle East: Security, Diplomacy, and Trade Routes. London: Routledge.
Raghavan, S. India and the Middle East: Historical and Strategic Ties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kumar, R., & Ahmad, F. “Geostrategic Implications of the IMEEC on Regional Security,” Journal of International Affairs, 45(3), 78-95.
Al-Mansoori, Y., & Patel, A. “Energy Security and Economic Corridors: Analyzing the Role of IMEEC,” Middle East Policy Journal, 30(2), 112-129.
Verma, P. “India’s Security Challenges in the Middle East: A Corridor Perspective,” Strategic Studies Quarterly, 16(1), 34-58.
World Economic Forum. (2023). “IMEEC: Building a New Trade Link Between Asia, the Middle East, and Europe.” weforum.org.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2023). “Security Implications of New Trade Corridors.” carnegieendowment.org.
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
Sputnik News, a Russian news agency and radio broadcast service, sought inputs on the Analakshya Project.
Article on the subject:-
RUSSIAN USE OF THE ORESHNIK MISSILE AND ITS STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
The development and deployment of the Oreshnik missile, a hypersonic, intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) by Russia, marks a significant shift in global military power dynamics. First publicly revealed in November 2024 during a strike on Ukraine, the Oreshnik has been described as a highly advanced missile capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads with hypersonic speeds exceeding Mach 10. The missile’s introduction highlights Russia’s continued push towards leveraging next-generation military technology to assert its influence, challenge adversaries, and fortify its strategic deterrence capabilities
Oreshnik Missile
Hypersonic Speed and Manoeuvrability. The Oreshnik missile stands out for its hypersonic velocity, with reports indicating speeds of around 2.5 to 3 kilometers per second (Mach 10). This speed renders it nearly immune to current air defence systems, as interception at such velocities requires cutting-edge detection and response technologies. Hypersonic missiles like Oreshnik can also perform mid-flight manoeuvres, making their trajectory unpredictable and further complicating interception efforts.
Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs). Oreshnik reportedly carries multiple independently targetable warheads (MIRVs), with estimates ranging from three to six warheads per missile. These MIRVs can be programmed to strike different targets simultaneously or overwhelm defence systems through sheer volume. The MIRV capability enhances the missile’s destructive potential, especially in scenarios where multiple high-value targets are prioritized.
Intermediate Range and Versatility. The missile’s range is believed to fall between 3,000 and 5,000 kilometers, making it an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM). This range covers a significant portion of Europe and parts of Asia, but falls short of reaching the United States. However, this strategic range allows Russia to maintain a strong regional deterrence posture, capable of targeting European NATO members and other adversaries within proximity.
Operational Deployment and Combat Testing. Russia’s first known operational use of the Oreshnik missile occurred in November 2024, when it was deployed against the Ukrainian city of Dnipro. According to reports, this strike served as a combat test for the missile in a non-nuclear configuration. Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that the test was successful, with the missile reaching its intended target without interception. The deployment was designed to demonstrate Russia’s capability to strike with precision and lethality, even in high-pressure combat environments. This deployment signals a shift in Russian military doctrine, emphasising the operational use of hypersonic weapons for both deterrence and offensive purposes. By using Oreshnik in combat, Russia showcased its ability to field advanced missile systems under real-world conditions, sending a clear message to both adversaries and allies regarding its military prowess.
Strategic Implications
Strengthening Regional Deterrence. The Oreshnik missile significantly enhances Russia’s ability to deter regional adversaries. Its intermediate range allows Russia to project power across Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Central Asia, creating a buffer zone of influence where neighbouring countries must consider the risk of hypersonic strikes. This capability provides Russia with a powerful bargaining chip in diplomatic negotiations, particularly in contexts involving NATO expansion, territorial disputes, and geopolitical tensions.
Challenging NATO’s Defence Systems. NATO’s current air defence systems are primarily designed to intercept traditional ballistic and cruise missiles. The deployment of Oreshnik, with its hypersonic speed and manoeuvrability, presents a significant challenge to these systems. NATO countries may be forced to accelerate the development of hypersonic defence systems or pursue alternative deterrent measures, increasing military expenditures and deepening the arms race between Russia and Western powers.
Arms Control Frameworks. The introduction of Oreshnik further undermines the already fragile state of global arms control agreements. In 2019, both Russia and the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which previously prohibited the development of missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. The Oreshnik missile, with its intermediate range and potential nuclear capability, exacerbates concerns over the proliferation of such systems and the absence of regulatory frameworks to mitigate their deployment.
Global Reactions and Countermeasures
United States and NATO. In response to the growing hypersonic threat, the United States and NATO have intensified efforts to develop next-generation missile defence systems. Programs focusing on space-based sensors, directed-energy weapons, and hypersonic interceptors are being accelerated to counteract Russia’s advancements. Additionally, NATO may consider deploying more conventional deterrents, such as forward-deployed forces and ballistic missile defence systems in Eastern Europe.
China’s Perspective. China, a close military partner of Russia, may view the Oreshnik missile as an opportunity for technological collaboration. Given its own hypersonic weapon developments, China could seek to integrate lessons from Oreshnik’s deployment into its missile programs. Alternatively, the missile’s success might prompt China to accelerate its efforts to match or surpass Russian capabilities, potentially increasing regional tensions in Asia.
India’s Strategic Calculations. For India, the development of the Oreshnik missile poses both a strategic challenge and an opportunity. India’s focus on developing its own hypersonic weapons, such as the Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV), aligns with the need to counter future threats from China. Furthermore, India may consider enhancing its missile defence systems and investing in early-warning systems capable of detecting hypersonic threats.
Broader Implications for Global Stability
Escalation of the Hypersonic Arms Race. The successful deployment of Oreshnik signals the start of a new era in missile technology, prompting other nations to accelerate their hypersonic weapons programs. This arms race could destabilize existing power balances, increasing the likelihood of miscalculations and accidental escalations during geopolitical conflicts.
Shift in Military Doctrine. The introduction of hypersonic missiles like Oreshnik is reshaping military doctrines worldwide. Traditional reliance on nuclear deterrence is now supplemented by hypersonic weapons, capable of delivering swift and precise strikes without the political fallout associated with nuclear weapons. This shift is likely to result in the development of new tactical doctrines.
Conclusion. The Oreshnik missile represents a bold leap in Russia’s military capabilities, reflecting the country’s commitment to leveraging advanced technologies for strategic dominance. Its deployment in Ukraine served as a clear demonstration of Russia’s readiness to use hypersonic missiles in both conventional and nuclear contexts, reshaping the global security landscape. As nations around the world grapple with the implications of this new weapon, the Oreshnik missile underscores the urgent need for renewed international dialogue on arms control and missile defence. Without such measures, the risk of a hypersonic arms race escalating into broader conflict remains a profound concern for global stability.
Inputs:-
(The views expressed are of the Individual, not IAF or GOI).
The missile’s ability to carry multiple homing warheads and reach extreme temperatures of 4,000°C presents a significant threat to conventional missile defence systems.
India’s military establishment would likely view Russia’s Oreshnik missile with a strategic interest.
India may closely study the technology behind Oreshnik’s hypersonic speed, multi-warhead capabilities, and extreme heat resistance.
India might assess this development in terms of its missile defence upgrades and hypersonic capabilities development programs.
This could drive India to accelerate its hypersonic programs, such as the HSTDV (Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle), and enhance its missile defence systems.
This could influence India’s strategic partnerships and technology acquisition efforts, particularly bolstering its Ballistic Missile Defence and hypersonic deterrence programs.
India would be careful about directly acquiring the Oreshnik missile due to its commitment to Indigenous defence development under Atmanirbhar Bharat.
India may seek technology partnerships with friendly nations to develop home-grown versions of similar advanced missile systems while maintaining strategic independence.
Your valuable comments are most welcome.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
BelTA News. (2024). Oreshnik: A Precision Weapon Comparable to Nuclear Strike Capability.
Asia Times. (2024). Russian Oreshnik Missile: A Warning to NATO, US, and Ukraine.
Komsomolskaya Pravda via BelTA. (2024). Military Expert Commentary on the Oreshnik Missile’s Impact in Ukraine.
Global Security Review. (2024). Hypersonic Missiles and Modern Warfare: The Russian Edge.
Military Balance Report (2024). International Institute for Strategic Studies.
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
