India has strongly rejected a New York Times (NYT) report alleging that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), a state-owned aerospace and defence firm, transferred sensitive technology with potential military applications to a blacklisted Russian weapons supplier.
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) dismissed the report as “factually incorrect and misleading,” accusing it of distorting facts to fit a political narrative.
“The Indian entity mentioned in the report has scrupulously followed all international obligations on strategic trade controls and end-user commitments,” the MEA said in a statement. “India’s robust legal and regulatory framework on strategic trade continues to guide overseas commercial ventures by its companies.” The Ministry also urged “reputed media outlets to conduct due diligence before publishing such reports.”
HAL has not yet responded to the claims.
The NYT Report and India’s Response
The controversy arose after NYT published an article titled ‘Major Donor to Reform U.K. Party Sold Parts Used in Weapons to Russian Supplier’ on March 28. The report alleged that British aerospace firm HR Smith Group supplied HAL with nearly $2 million worth of transmitters, cockpit equipment, and other sensitive technology. According to NYT, these components were among those restricted by British and American sanctions against Russia following the Ukraine war.
The report further claimed that “in some instances, the Indian company (HAL) received equipment from HR Smith and, within days, sent parts to Russia with the same identifying product codes.”
NYT, citing reviewed shipping records, stated that HR Smith made 118 shipments of restricted technology to HAL between 2023 and 2024, worth $2 million. In the same period, HAL reportedly sent 13 shipments of the same parts—valued at over $14 million—to Rosoboronexport (ROE), a Russian arms agency blacklisted by the U.S. and U.K.
Rosoboronexport is considered one of HAL’s major trading partners.
Legal Standpoint
HR Smith’s lawyer, Nick Watson, defended the transactions, stating that the sales were lawful and that the equipment was “destined for an Indian search-and-rescue network.” He emphasized that the parts were intended to “support life-saving operations” and were “not designed for military use.”
However, the NYT quoted legal experts as suggesting that HR Smith may have violated sanctions by failing to conduct due diligence on its sales to the Indian company.
In December 2023, the British government issued a ‘red alert’ warning companies that sensitive equipment could potentially be redirected to Russia through intermediaries.
India’s Position
India has firmly denied any wrongdoing, reiterating its commitment to international trade regulations and end-user commitments. The government has maintained that HAL operates within the framework of global strategic trade norms and that the allegations lack factual basis.
Team BharatShakti
