Arming the Armed Forces: Why Capability Development Cannot Wait

Editor’s Note

This article examines a key concern in India’s defence planning: whether acquisition procedures are truly aligned with the core objective of building and sustaining military capability. The author argues that while procurement frameworks emphasise indigenisation and manufacturing goals, they appear to pay limited attention to systematically identifying and bridging military capability gaps before threats fully emerge. By comparing successive acquisition policies over the past decade, the piece raises an important question for policymakers—should defence acquisition be driven primarily by process and industrial ambition, or by a clear, structured approach to closing operational gaps and strengthening combat readiness?

Capability Development: A Strategic Imperative Capability

Capability

It refers to the ability to perform a specific task or function effectively, and it blends skills, resources, organisation and adaptability into effective action. In short, it’s the ability or capacity to perform a task, achieve an objective or produce a desired outcome. It combines resources (tools, technology, manpower), skills (knowledge, training) and organisation (structures, processes) into a functioning whole.

National Capability: National Capability is a nation’s overall strength to safeguard and advance its interests. It is the broader, collective strength of a nation to protect its sovereignty, pursue its interests and respond to challenges. It goes beyond just military power; it includes economic strength, technological advancement, industrial base, diplomatic influence and human resources. National capability also encompasses disaster response, cybersecurity, and international cooperation.

Military Capability: In a military sense, having the right combination of equipment, trained personnel, organisation and technology to carry out an operation. A nation’s military capability reflects its ability to defend sovereignty, deter adversaries, and project power in alignment with its strategic objectives. Yet, capability gaps between desired operational effectiveness and actual resources persist across the armed forces. These gaps arise from outdated platforms, technological lag, insufficient training, industrial limitations and budgetary allocations and thus need to be strategically addressed.

Military Capability

Military capability is not just about acquiring weapons; it is about building a coherent, sustainable and technologically relevant force. Acquisition procedures should provide an institutional backbone to ensure that capability development is systematic, transparent and aligned with national security. priorities. In essence, capability defines the ‘what’, while acquisition defines the ‘how’. Together, they shape the future readiness of armed forces.

It also refers to the process of enhancing a nation’s ability to deter threats, conduct operations and achieve strategic objectives. It encompasses doctrine, training, organisation, technology and equipment.

Drivers

• Evolving threat environments.
• Technological advancements.
• Strategic doctrines.

Outcome: A balanced force structure that integrates personnel, platforms and systems to deliver combat effectiveness.

Capability Development: Inseparable from Acquisition

Military capability development is inseparable from acquisition procedures, as the latter provides the structured pathway through which armed forces translate strategic needs into operational assets. Without a coherent acquisition framework, capability development risks becoming fragmented, delayed or misaligned with national security objectives.

Acquisition procedures are the formal mechanisms by which military requirements are translated into procurement actions. For India, the Defence Acquisition Procedure is the guiding framework, and the key features are:

• Acquisition Categories: ‘Buy (Indian)’, ‘Buy and Make’, ‘Make’, and leasing options.
• Indigenous Content Mandates: Prioritising domestic industry to strengthen self-reliance.
• Innovation Pathways: Special provisions for startups, MSMEs and DRDO-developed systems.
• Fast Track Procedures: For urgent operational needs.
• Post-Contract Management: Ensuring lifecycle support and accountability.

Military capability development and acquisition are linked through a capability-driven procurement cycle:

Contemporary Challenges

• Balancing speed vs scrutiny: Fast-track acquisitions may bypass detailed evaluation but risk inefficiencies.
• Indigenisation vs operational urgency: Domestic industry may not always meet immediate needs.
• Financial constraints: Defence budgets must balance modernisation with sustainability.
• Global partnerships: Strategic tie-ups (e.g., joint ventures) influence both capability and acquisition.

Military Capability Gaps & Gap Bridging

Military capability gaps are the mismatches between a nation’s strategic ambitions and the resources, technologies, and readiness of its armed forces. Addressing these gaps requires a mix of modernisation, acquisition reform and strategic partnerships.

Gap Identification

Definition: A capability gap arises when existing forces cannot fully meet operational requirements across domains – land, sea, air, cyber and space.

Causes:

Technological lag: Adversaries field advanced systems faster than our own procurement cycles allow.

• Budgetary constraints: Limited defence spending delays modernisation.
• Doctrine vs reality: Strategic doctrines may envision missions that current forces cannot execute.
• Industrial limitations: Domestic defence industries may lack capacity or expertise to deliver cutting-edge systems.
• Training and readiness shortfalls: Even with equipment, inadequate training or maintenance reduces effectiveness.

Military capability gaps are not just about missing equipment – they reflect deeper issues of strategy, industry and readiness. To close these gaps, nations must pursue holistic modernisation, combining acquisition reform, industrial growth, technological innovation and strategic partnerships. Ultimately, bridging capability gaps ensures that armed forces remain credible, agile and prepared to meet evolving threats.

Gap Bridging

Capability Gap Bridging refers to the systematic process of identifying and addressing shortfalls between existing capabilities and the desired operational or strategic outcomes. It involves analysing current strengths, recognising deficiencies and then implementing targeted measures – such as new technologies, training, organisational reforms or acquisitions – to close these gaps.

The essence of capability gap bridging lies in ensuring that resources, processes and skills evolve in alignment with mission requirements, so that organisations remain effective and resilient in dynamic environments. By treating gaps not as failures but as opportunities for structured improvement, capability gap bridging fosters adaptability, enhances readiness and supports long-term growth.

In the defence acquisition context, Capability Gap Bridging is the disciplined effort to align military capability development with operational requirements by systematically identifying shortfalls and mapping them into structured project management lifecycles. The process begins with capability assessment – evaluating current force structures, technologies and doctrines against mission scenarios. Gaps are then defined as measurable deficiencies that hinder effectiveness, whether in equipment, training, logistics or organisational processes.

Bridging these gaps requires a mix of acquisition strategies: fast-track procurement for urgent needs, phased modernisation for evolving threats and indigenous development for long-term sovereignty. Within project management terms, this translates into initiating projects with clear scope definitions, planning with milestone-based capability targets, executing through coordinated acquisition and integration and monitoring outcomes against operational benchmarks.

By embedding capability gap analysis into acquisition lifecycles, defence organisations ensure that resources are not wasted on redundant procurements but directed toward closing the most critical gaps. Ultimately, this approach enhances readiness, supports joint force interoperability and ensures that capability development remains both scientifically grounded and strategically relevant.

Finally

The military capability of a nation reflects its ability to defend sovereignty, deter adversaries and project power in alignment with strategic objectives. Yet, capability gaps – mismatches between desired operational effectiveness and actual resources – persist across many armed forces. These gaps arise from outdated platforms, technological lag, insufficient training or industrial limitations, leaving vulnerabilities in domains such as air defence, cyber resilience and precision strike.

Addressing them requires a structured procedure that begins with strategic assessment, moves through acquisition reforms and industrial strengthening and culminates in integration of advanced technologies and training. By systematically identifying shortfalls and applying transparent, capability-driven acquisition processes, nations can transform gaps into opportunities for modernisation and ensure their forces remain agile, credible and future-ready.

The Concern

It is important to analyse whether our Defence Acquisition Procedures show concern about Military Capability Gaps and whether they have focused on bridging them. That is too well before a threat is manifested. Let’s compare the Procurement Aim set by the DPP-2016, the Acquisition Aim set by the DAP-2020, and the Acquisition Objective set by the DAP-2026.

Apparently, there has been no change in the Objective or Aim of an Acquisition Procedure over the Last 10 years; in fact, the text of DPP-2016 has been repeated in the DAP 2020 and 2026.

DAPs aim to develop India as a global Manufacturing hub, yet, ironically, there is no mention of military capability or gap bridging.

Air Marshal (Dr) Rajeev Sachdeva (Retd) (Author served as DCIDS (PP&FD) at HQ IDS, Member Secretary to Defence Acquisition Council and Chairman of SCAPCC, DAP 2020.)

Air Marshal (Dr) Rajeev Sachdeva (Retd)

+ postsBio ⮌

Commissioned on 11 Dec 1981, was alumnus of Flying Instructors’ School, College
of Defence Management and National Defence College. Cat ‘A’ Qualified Flying
Instructor was also an Air Force Examiner with over 7200 hours on various Transport and Trainer aircraft.

Important Appointments held includes, Command of An-32 Squadron, AOC (Base
Commander) of Chandigarh Airbase, Chief Instructor at Fixed Wing Training Faculty,
Centre Director (Aviation) at NTRO (an intelligence agency) and Senior Air Staff Officer, HQ Southern Air Command.

In Joint-Services institution he served at Intelligence, Training, Operations,
Policy Planning & Force Structuring. He was also the Commandant of College of
Defence Management, which received the President’s Colours last month. He raised the Defence Cyber Agency, Defence Space Agency and the Armed Forces Special Ops Division.

Holds a Doctorate, M Phil, Masters in Management and B.Com (Hons), Certified
‘A’ Project Manager by International Project Management Association, a Distinguished
Fellow at USI, Centre of Air Power Studies, Centre for Land Warfare Studies & at the
academic council of i2p2M (an International Project Management training institute).

He is also certified as a Management Instructor by All India Management Association.
He has published papers for various journals, including chapters in books published
by NDC, CAPS, USI and Strive India. Lectured in Military, Civil and Academic Institutions.

Doctorate was in Business Management from Osmania University and the research topic was on Decision Making in Aviation.

Recipient of Presidential medal, Ati Vishist Seva Medal and Commendation by the
Chief of the Air Staff.

This author does not have any more posts.