New Delhi’s reported push to buy 90 more Rafale F4 fighters from France, in addition to the 36 it already operates. Supporters call it a necessity for the Indian Air Force (IAF), while critics see it as another expensive distraction from building genuine self-reliance. From Pakistan’s perspective, the deal raises questions: Is India buying strength, or simply renting it from abroad?
The Indian Air Force seeks a government-to-government deal with France for 90 Rafale F4 fighters, complementing 36 existing jets to fulfill the 2007 MMRCA tender. The IAF argues that Rafales are needed because squadron strength is falling fast. With MiG-21s retiring by 2025, numbers could dip to just 29–31 squadrons against the sanctioned 42. Indigenous solutions like the Tejas Mk1A are not rolling out fast enough. In this situation, Rafale is seen as the only “ready-made” option. The new F4 version comes with advanced networking, electronic warfare, and precision strike systems, making it a capable platform on paper. But capability on paper and reality in the field are two very different things.
India already spent billions on 36 Rafales in 2016, calling them a “game changer.” Yet in 2019, when the PAF responded to the Balakot episode with its own strikes, it wasn’t Rafales that defended India’s skies. Instead, the world saw an Indian pilot captured and later returned by Pakistan. Expensive fighters may boost headlines, but they don’t guarantee success. There are also long-term consequences to consider. Pouring tens of billions into Rafales risks starving India’s local projects, Tejas Mk2, and the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) just when they need the most funding and attention. Every hour the IAF spends integrating and training on Rafales is an hour taken away from developing its own jets. Despite all the speeches about a self-reliant India, the Rafale deal makes France, not India, the real winner.
Dependency is another issue that the Rafale ecosystem is firmly under French control. From Pakistan’s perspective, the deal raises questions: is India buying lasting strength, or simply renting it from abroad? India cannot freely integrate its own weapons or make key upgrades without Dassault’s approval. Strategic autonomy is not just about having hardware parked on the tarmac; it’s about controlling the software, codes, and future upgrades. On this front, India will remain dependent. Pakistan, meanwhile, has followed a different path.
By co-developing the JF-17 with China, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has gained a modern, affordable fighter fleet that it can upgrade according to its own needs. The latest Block III variant carries advanced radars and long-range missiles that compete well in the region. Add the induction of J-10Cs, and the PAF maintains a credible balance without spending fortunes. This approach gives Pakistan flexibility and independence at a fraction of the cost. From Pakistan’s viewpoint, the message is clear. The Rafale F4 is undoubtedly a capable aircraft, but it does not fundamentally tilt the balance of power. The PAF has already shown that careful planning, smart training, and efficient resource use can counter more expensive platforms. What matters is not how flashy or costly a jet appears, but how effectively it is integrated into strategy. A cheaper but well-suited fighter can be just as decisive as a premium import.
The financial burden of Rafales also deserves scrutiny. There are also long-term consequences to consider. Every rupee poured into Rafales risks starving India’s local projects just when they need the most funding and attention. The Tejas Mk2 and the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) are meant to be India’s future, but they cannot progress if money and focus keep flowing abroad. Modern air warfare is not just about fighters. Tankers, early warning systems, drones, and integrated air defences are just as vital. Each Rafale squadron costs billions, money that could instead strengthen these other capabilities. By focusing so heavily on imports, India risks leaving other critical areas underdeveloped.
India speaks loudly about becoming a defence producer, yet keeps running back to foreign suppliers. The Tejas, after decades of effort, still relies on imported parts. AMCA remains years away from reality. Rafales may fill a short-term gap, but they also delay the moment when India can finally stand on its own feet in defence. For Pakistan, the message is clear. The Rafale F4 is a capable aircraft, but it doesn’t tilt the balance of power. The PAF has proven before that training, planning, and efficient use of resources can match and even outmaneuver more expensive platforms. What matters is not how much a jet costs, but how effectively it is used.
In conclusion, Rafale may give India a temporary boost, but at a very high price in money, in dependence, and in lost opportunities for its own industry. So the question remains: is Rafale a necessity for India, or just expensive redundancy? Supporters of the Rafale argue that the aircraft’s advanced capabilities do strengthen deterrence against both Pakistan and China. They point out that indigenous jets are not yet ready, and that modern wars demand proven platforms. In this sense, the Rafale may provide a stopgap, ensuring that the IAF does not face a dangerous shortage in the next decade. However, this argument overlooks the price being paid in lost opportunity. Short-term reassurance may come at the expense of long-term independence. Looking at the costs and the strings attached, it seems more like the latter. For Pakistan, the Rafale is less a threat than a reminder that true strength comes from self-reliance, not from shopping trips to Paris. India’s reported plan to acquire 90 Rafale F4 fighters has divided opinion between those who see it as essential for deterrence and those who fear it will delay the country’s long-term quest for self-reliance in defense.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
