India-U.S. Defense Industrial and Tech Collaboration Advanced as Colby Concludes Official Visit – March 2026
Elbridge Colby, the American Under Secretary of War for Policy, has concluded a strategic visit to India on March 26, 2026, where he held high-level talks aimed at advancing the 2026 National Defense Strategy and the President’s Peace through Strength agenda. During his stay, Colby met with India’s Minister of External Affairs, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, and Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri. He also co-chaired the U.S.-India Defense Policy Group meeting alongside Indian Defense Secretary Rajesh Kumar Singh. These discussions focused on operationalizing the Framework for the U.S.-India Major Defense Partnership, originally signed in October 2025 by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh. That framework commits both nations to expanding operational coordination, intelligence sharing, regional and global cooperation, as well as defense industrial, scientific, and technological collaboration. The Under Secretary’s agenda also included consultations with Ambassador Sergio Gor, the U.S. Ambassador to India and Special Envoy for South and Central Asian Affairs. In a public address at the Ananta Centre in New Delhi, Colby underscored the enduring nature of the India-U.S. partnership and proposed a strategic roadmap to guide future bilateral defense and security cooperation.
The Speech (March 26, 2026 )
Remarks by Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby at the Ananta Centre in India
Why US-India Defense Cooperation Matters for Global Power Balance
Thank you for that generous introduction, Indrani, and thank you to the Ananta Centre for hosting me here today during my first visit to India as the Under Secretary of War for Policy. It is an honor to be making this visit to a great country that is not only one of the world’s ancient civilizations, but also increasingly one of its pivotal strategic actors.
The United States views India with deep respect—as a republic of continental scale, as a nation with a proud strategic tradition, and as a country whose decisions will profoundly shape the future of the Indo-Pacific and the international landscape more broadly. Our two countries of course differ in history, geography, and perspective in important ways. Yet we share something fundamental: a conviction that the future of Asia should be determined by sovereign nations able to chart their own course.
In that vein, today I would like to outline how the United States thinks about our relationship with India in the geopolitical and defense domains. My goal is to lay out a logical, coherent framework that can help guide the defense cooperation between our two proud and independent countries amid tectonic strategic changes. And my contention is that this approach is fundamentally aligned with that of India’s – thus both reflecting and forming a firm and durable basis for our partnership.
Let me begin with the context.
We are living through one of the most significant shifts in global power in generations. The Indo-Pacific has become the central theater of international politics, economics, and security. Indian but also American interests and long-term prosperity will be decisively shaped by developments in this region.
In addressing these trends, the United States recognizes a basic reality: no single country can sustain a stable balance of power in Asia. The region is too large, too varied, and too important. Stability will instead depend on the collective contributions of capable states that share an interest in maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific. Building on Secretary of War Hegseth’s important speeches at Shangri-La and the Reagan National Defense Forum, I laid out our thinking on what this entails at the Sejong Institute in Seoul.
Viewed from this vantage, India’s role is indispensable.
India’s importance stems not only from its size and economic potential, but also from its geography and strategic position. Your country sits astride the Indian Ocean, the connective tissue of the Indo-Pacific. India possesses a long tradition of strategic autonomy and a growing capacity to shape events beyond its borders. It is the largest republic in the world, with formidable, self-reliant, and capable military forces.
For all these reasons, the United States sees India not merely as a key partner, but as an essential one in ensuring a long-term favorable balance of power in Asia.
At the same time, we approach our partnership with realism, clarity, and humility. Our approach is interests-based, shaped by geopolitics and incentives, not idealism. We recognize that India has its own interests, strategic culture, and priorities—and we welcome that.
As our National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy make clear, the United States wants partnerships with vigorous, self-assured states, not dependencies. We seek partners whose pursuit of their own national interests also advances ours.
This reflects flexible realism—aligning with states capable of advancing their own goals while contributing to shared outcomes. Our cooperation with India aims both to collaborate and to strengthen India’s capabilities, promoting a favorable regional balance of power.
Fortunately, our perspectives are deeply aligned.
Minister of External Affairs Dr. Jaishankar has described India’s approach as “Bharat First” and the “India Way.” Like America First, these emphasize realism, national priorities, and results-oriented diplomacy.
In his 2020 book, he stressed a “hard-headed national perspective,” the importance of geopolitics and balance of power, and called for an unsentimental audit of foreign policy. He critiqued the “rules-based international order”, emphasized the return to history, and affirmed the enduring appeal of nationalism.
From our point of view: exceptionally well said.
Both of us believe in defending national interests, in realism in foreign policy, and in ensuring a stable balance of power in Asia.
As a result, when the United States and India act in pursuit of their own national interests, our efforts will often reinforce one another. We do not require perfect agreement, but rather focus on areas that matter most.
Indeed, a strength of the U.S.–India relationship is that it rests on clear-eyed recognition of overlapping interests, not formalities or dogma. As President Trump said to Prime Minister Modi, our countries share a “special relationship.”
This forms the conceptual framework, within which I highlight several key pillars:
First, we do not need to agree on everything. What matters is convergence on fundamental issues. Our partnership is rooted in lasting strategic self-interest, not optics.
Second, we recognize the centrality of military power. Defense cooperation must enhance real capability, not be symbolic.
Encouragingly, defense ties have never been stronger. Military coordination, exercises, information sharing, and technology collaboration have all expanded.
The U.S.-India Major Defense Partnership Framework provides a strong basis for progress. Our focus is on capabilities that matter—ensuring effective cooperation and strengthening India’s ability to defend its sovereignty.
We are advancing cooperation in areas like:
- Long-range precision fires
- Resilient logistics
- Maritime domain awareness
- Anti-submarine warfare
- Advanced technologies
Third, defense industrial cooperation.
The United States has a premier defense industrial base, while India is emerging as a major industrial and technological power.
Our framework emphasizes co-production and co-development, strengthening both nations’ capabilities. We also support India’s goal of a strong indigenous defense industry, which enhances sovereignty and resilience.
Challenges like regulatory barriers and bureaucratic inertia exist—but they are not insurmountable.
Finally, strategic candor.
Strong partnerships require honesty, respect, and clarity. We will not agree on everything, but disagreement does not hinder cooperation.
Indeed, flexibility and pragmatism—hallmarks of the India Way—enable a durable partnership.
Allow me to close with a broader reflection.
We are in a time of geopolitical transition, often marked by risk and uncertainty. The challenge is to navigate these changes while preserving peace and stability.
The United States is not in decline, but rising. India, meanwhile, is a waxing power, poised to play a central role in shaping the Indo-Pacific.
A strong, confident India benefits not only its own people but also global stability.
Our objective is to build a partnership between two great republics, forming pillars of a stable balance of power.
If successful, the Indo-Pacific will be defined by:
- Sovereign nations prospering
- Open trade and cooperation
- Peace grounded in strength and realism
This is a vision worthy of the American people—and equally of the Indian people.
Together, we can make it a reality.
Thank you very much.
Original Text of The speech
Thank you for that generous introduction, Indrani, and thank you to the Ananta Centre for hosting me here today during my first visit to India as the Under Secretary of War for Policy. It is an honor to be making this visit to a great country that is not only one of the world’s ancient civilizations, but also increasingly one of its pivotal strategic actors.
The United States views India with deep respect—as a republic of continental scale, as a nation with a proud strategic tradition, and as a country whose decisions will profoundly shape the future of the Indo-Pacific and the international landscape more broadly. Our two countries of course differ in history, geography, and perspective in important ways. Yet we share something fundamental: a conviction that the future of Asia should be determined by sovereign nations able to chart their own course.
In that vein, today I would like to outline how the United States thinks about our relationship with India in the geopolitical and defense domains. My goal is to lay out a logical, coherent framework that can help guide the defense cooperation between our two proud and independent countries amid tectonic strategic changes. And my contention is that this approach is fundamentally aligned with that of India’s – thus both reflecting and forming a firm and durable basis for our partnership.
Let me begin with the context.
We are living through one of the most significant shifts in global power in generations. The Indo-Pacific has become the central theater of international politics, economics, and security. Indian but also American interests and long-term prosperity will be decisively shaped by developments in this region.
In addressing these trends, the United States recognizes a basic reality: no single country can sustain a stable balance of power in Asia. The region is too large, too varied, and too important. Stability will instead depend on the collective contributions of capable states that share an interest in maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific. Building on Secretary of War Hegseth’s important speeches at Shangri-La last spring and at the Reagan National Defense Forum last December, I laid out our thinking on what this entails at the Sejong Institute in Seoul this past January.
Viewed from this vantage, India’s role is indispensable.
India’s importance stems not only from its size and economic potential, but also from its geography and strategic position. Your country sits astride the Indian Ocean, which is the connective tissue of the Indo-Pacific. India possesses a long tradition of strategic autonomy and a growing capacity to shape events well beyond its borders. It is the largest republic in the world; its success thus carries profound symbolic and political weight. And it has formidable, self-reliant, and capable military forces, willing and able to shoulder significant security responsibilities.
For all these reasons, the United States sees India not merely as a key partner, but as an essential one in ensuring a long-term favorable balance of power in Asia.
At the same time, we approach our partnership with realism, clarity, and a fair dose of humility. Our assessment of the Indo-American partnership has its roots in practicality – what our President frequently calls common sense. In line with this, our approach to the strategic partnership is interests-based and realistic, shaped by geopolitics and incentives as opposed to gauzy aspirations or detached idealism. We clearly recognize that India has its own interests, its own strategic culture, and its own priorities, and that India is not shy about advancing them.
But that is what we want. As our National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy make clear, the United States wants partnerships with vigorous, self-assured states, not with dependencies. We want key partners that, in resolutely advancing their owninterests, will also have the effect of advancing our own.
This is a manifestation of what the National Security Strategy calls flexible realism. By aligning our efforts with those states that are willing and able to advance their own, we thereby can contribute to attaining both of our goals. In that vein, our efforts to cooperate with India are designed not only to collaborate on key issues but also to strengthen and enable your country, precisely in order to promote and sustain a favorable regional balance of power that serves us both.
Fortunately, our perspective and yours are, it seems, deeply aligned.
Minister of External Affairs Dr. Jaishankar has termed India’s approach “Bharat First” and its strategic approach “the India Way.” Like America First and flexible realism, Bharat First and the India Way emphasize the centrality of a realistic approach to foreign policy, an unabashed willingness to put one’s own national priorities first, and a results-oriented mindset about international politics.
To wit, in his seminal 2020 book, Minister Jaishankar emphasized the importance of viewing and developing India’s foreign policy “from a hard-headed national perspective” and stressed “the need for greater realism in policy.” He contended that “geopolitics and balance of power are the underpinning of international relations.” He noted that “India advanced its interests effectively when it made hard-headed assessments of contemporary geopolitics” and called for “an unsentimental audit of Indian foreign policy.” He critiqued the panjandrums of the “rules-based international order” and questioned the presumptuous supremacy of the foreign policy establishment of the West, observing that “we are witnessing a return to history rather than an end to it.” He affirmed “the enduring appeal of nationalism” and assessed that “a nationalistic foreign policy outlook is likely to approach the world with more confidence and greater realism.” And he announced that “creating a stable balance in Asia is India’s foremost priority.”
From our point of view: Exceptionally well said.
The approach that Minister Jaishankar has laid out resonates deeply with our own on many levels, but most importantly at that of fundamental perspective. Both of us believe that countries must operate with confidence in defending and advancing their own interests – and that that is not only prudent but also right. Both of us believe that foreign policy grounded in concrete national interests creates a stronger and more self-sustaining foundation for cooperation and indeed for peace. Both of us believe that a durable and stable balance of power in Asia is a topmost priority.
As a result, when the United States acts to secure the safety, prosperity, and freedom of the American people, and India acts with equal determination on behalf of the Indian people, our efforts will frequently and materially reinforce one another. At the same time, we do not expect nor require unerring agreement. Rather, we are flexible, looking for areas of agreement where they count most. We recognize that foreign policy should be practical and about results; as Minister Jaishankar wisely advised, the circumstances of today “require flexible arrangements that are customized to the challenge.”
In the same vein, it is actually a key strength of the U.S.–India relationship that it rests not on dusty formalities and unchallengeable shibboleths but on a hard-headed, clear-eyed recognition of overlapping interests. Accordingly, as President Trump said to Prime Minister Modi during his visit to Washington, “India and the United States have a special relationship.”
This, then, appears to be the broad agreed conceptual framework. Within it, I would highlight several key pillars, framed in the spirit of Minister Jaishankar’s admonition that “the key is to develop and sharpen strategic clarity.”
First, the United States and India do not need to agree on everything to cooperate effectively. What matters is that our interests and objectives increasingly converge on the most fundamental issues. Differences and even disputes are fully compatible with deepening alignment and cooperation on strategic matters. The roots of our partnership are deeper than optics and more durable than superficial comity; they are, rather, thickly embedded in lasting strategic mutual self-interest.
Both of our countries benefit from an Indo-Pacific in which no power can dominate the region. Both benefit from open trade and national autonomy. These are the concrete, shared interests that form the foundation of our enduring strategic partnership.
Second, we both recognize the strategic centrality of military power for a stable balance in the region, and thus that defense cooperation should enhance real capability rather than be merely totemic or driven by inertia.
In this light, one of the most encouraging developments in recent years has been the steady expansion of defense cooperation between the United States and India. As Secretary Hegseth put it, “our defense ties have never been stronger.” Coordination between our militaries has grown, exercises have become more complex, information sharing has deepened, regional and global cooperation has become routine, and defense industrial and technology collaboration is taking on new momentum.
The Framework for the U.S.-India Major Defense Partnership that Secretary Hegseth and Minister Singh signed in October provides a very strong basis for such progress. To accelerate that momentum, tomorrow Defense Secretary Rajesh Kumar Singh and I will chair the Defense Policy Group as we look ahead to a critical new decade of our Major Defense Partnership.
Our focus must now be on advancing forward from these important agreements to serve a larger strategic purpose: strengthening the ability of both countries to contribute to a stable balance of power in this vital region.
Because we are focused on results and reality, we are concentrated on capabilities that matter in the Indo-Pacific strategic environment. Our goals should be practical: to ensure that our forces can operate effectively together when our interests align, and in any case to see that India possesses the capabilities necessary to defend its sovereignty and contribute to a favorable regional balance of power.
Following from this, the United States is committed to working with India to hasten and augment cooperation in areas including but not limited to long-range precision fires, resilient logistics, maritime domain awareness, anti-submarine warfare, and advanced technologies.
Third, defense industrial cooperation.
I believe I can say without boasting that America has the world’s premier defense industrial base. Even more, under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth’s visionary leadership, our country is committed to a “national mobilization” of our defense industrial base, as both the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy announce.
India, meantime, is entering the top ranks of global economies and has enormous promise as an industrial and technological powerhouse.
This is a very strong basis for productive and mutually advantageous collaboration.
That is why our Defense Framework calls for our two countries to leverage defense industrial, science, and technology cooperation to enhance our forces’ readiness and to jointly develop and produce defense capabilities. The potential for co-production and co-development is great.
At the same time, even as we seek to expand U.S. sales to India, we also recognize that India’s ambition to expand its indigenous defense industry is entirely reasonable. A strong domestic industrial base enhances sovereignty and resilience. The United States supports that objective. And India is well on its way. India already boasts an impressive defense industrial base and India’s leadership in cutting edge technologies only further helps broaden our defense cooperation.
We are committed to realizing this opportunity and delivering on the goals set forth last year by President Trump and Prime Minister Modi in their landmark joint statement. Such cooperation can strengthen India’s capabilities while also building a more resilient network of defense production. This will require persistence and creativity on both sides. Regulatory barriers, bureaucratic inertia, and differences in procurement systems are real challenges. But they are not insurmountable and we should overcome them.
Finally, strategic candor.
Strong partnerships benefit from honesty, respect, and strategic clarity. The truth is that the United States and India will not agree on every issue. Indeed, in precisely that spirit, we can say without embarrassment that India and America have not always been partners or even friendly. Our histories and strategic cultures are different, and our interests will of course at times diverge.
But, as Minister Jaishankar has so eloquently laid out, disagreement need not pose any hindrance to our cooperation. As he noted, in some ways the lack of rigid tradition and expectations means we can be more pragmatic and flexible in designing a mutually essential partnership suited for the coming decades. If we approach our partnership in this spirit of mutual respect, strategic clarity, and flexible realism – or, to use another framing, in the spirit of the India Way – then the prospects for our relationship are propitious indeed.
Allow me to close with a broader reflection.
Throughout history, moments of geopolitical transition have been dangerous. Today is such a time. States inevitably adjust to new realities, sometimes peacefully but often through conflict. The task before us today is to navigate a period of tectonic shifts in a way that preserves our interests and peace.
The United States is prepared for such an era. Contrary to much idle commentary, the United States is not in decline – rather, it is rising under President Trump’s leadership. Unfortunately, we cannot confidently say the same for some of our traditional partners, even as we urge them to reinvigorate themselves and seek to help them do so.
India is far different: it is a waxing power. As a result, the United States believes that India will play a central role in ensuring a favorable balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. In this context, a strong, confident India is not only good for the Indian people. It is good for Americans as well.
In this context, America’s objective is to build a partnership between two great republics that will form critical pillars of maintaining a favorable and stable balance of power in this critical region.
If we succeed, the Indo-Pacific of the coming decades will be defined by an equilibrium in which sovereign nations will prosper, trade, and cooperate. It is one in which the great national aspirations of the peoples of Asia to chart their own courses and to ascend to the highest levels of human prosperity can be fully realized. And it is one in which there will be peace and stability – not founded in naivete or gauzy abstractions like the rules-based international order, but in strength, reason, and hard-nosed collaboration.
That is a vision worthy of the American people. It is a vision, I would humbly submit, also worthy of the Indian people. And it is a vision that our two countries, working together with others across the region, can make a reality.
Thank you very much.
Core Concepts: US–India Strategic Partnership
US–India Strategic Partnership
See also: Indo-Pacific Strategy; Balance of Power; Defense Cooperation; Strategic Autonomy; Flexible Realism
A long-term alignment between two major democracies based on converging interests in security, stability, and economic prosperity across Asia and the broader international system.
Indo-Pacific Strategy
See also: Balance of Power; Maritime Security; Indian Ocean; Regional Stability; Geopolitics
A framework that positions the Indo-Pacific as the central arena of global politics, emphasizing openness, sovereignty, and multipolar stability.
Balance of Power
See also: Geopolitics; Military Capability; Strategic Stability; Regional Order
A condition in which no single state dominates, ensuring equilibrium through distribution of power among capable actors.
Strategic Philosophy Cluster
Flexible Realism
See also: National Interest; Strategic Autonomy; Pragmatism; Foreign Policy
An approach that prioritizes practical outcomes, aligning with partners based on shared interests rather than ideology.
Bharat First
See also: India Way; National Interest; Strategic Autonomy; Foreign Policy Realism
India’s doctrine emphasizing prioritization of national interests in all external engagements.
America First
See also: Flexible Realism; National Interest; Strategic Partnerships
A doctrine focusing on advancing national priorities while engaging internationally through interest-based cooperation.
India Way
See also: Bharat First; Strategic Autonomy; Geopolitics; Pragmatism
A strategic framework combining realism, cultural perspective, and independent decision-making in global affairs.
Defense and Security
Defense Cooperation
See also: Military Exercises; Interoperability; Defense Technology; Strategic Alignment
Collaboration between states to enhance military capability, coordination, and shared security outcomes.
Military Capability
See also: Defense Industrial Base; Balance of Power; Security Strategy
The operational strength and readiness of armed forces to project and sustain power.
Maritime Domain Awareness
See also: Indian Ocean; Naval Power; Indo-Pacific Strategy
The ability to monitor and respond to activities in maritime environments, critical for regional security.
Anti-Submarine Warfare
See also: Naval Strategy; Military Capability; Maritime Security
Techniques and systems designed to detect and neutralize underwater threats.
Industrial and Technological Cluster
Defense Industrial Base
See also: Co-production; Technological Cooperation; National Security; Industrial Capacity
The network of industries and resources that produce military equipment and technologies.
Co-production and Co-development
See also: Defense Cooperation; Technology Transfer; Industrial Collaboration
Joint efforts between nations to design and manufacture defense systems.
Advanced Technologies
See also: Defense Innovation; Strategic Capability; Technological Power
Emerging and cutting-edge systems that enhance military and strategic effectiveness.
Indigenous Defense Industry
See also: Strategic Autonomy; Industrial Policy; National Security
Domestic capability to design and produce defense equipment, reducing reliance on external suppliers.
Geopolitical Context Cluster
Geopolitics
See also: Balance of Power; Indo-Pacific Strategy; National Interest
The influence of geography and power dynamics on international relations.
Indian Ocean
See also: Maritime Security; Indo-Pacific; Trade Routes
A critical maritime region linking global trade and strategic military routes.
Regional Stability
See also: Balance of Power; Security Cooperation; Strategic Partnerships
A condition of reduced conflict and sustained equilibrium in a specific region.
Strategic Autonomy
See also: India Way; National Interest; Foreign Policy
The ability of a state to make independent decisions without external coercion.
Policy and Governance
National Interest
See also: Flexible Realism; Foreign Policy; Strategic Alignment
Core priorities that guide a nation’s external and internal policies.
Foreign Policy
See also: Geopolitics; Strategic Autonomy; Diplomacy
A state’s strategy in dealing with other nations and global institutions.
Strategic Alignment
See also: Defense Cooperation; Balance of Power; Partnerships
The convergence of interests and policies between states without formal alliances.
Rules-Based International Order
See also: Global Governance; International Relations; Critique of Liberal Order
A system of norms and institutions governing state behavior, often debated in terms of fairness and universality.
Interaction Pathways
Power and Security Linkages
Balance of Power connects directly to Military Capability, Defense Cooperation, and Indo-Pacific Strategy, forming the structural backbone of regional stability.
Ideology and Strategy Linkages
Flexible Realism, Bharat First, and America First converge through National Interest and Strategic Autonomy, shaping pragmatic cooperation.
Industry and Capability Linkages
Defense Industrial Base, Co-production, and Advanced Technologies feed into Military Capability and Defense Cooperation, strengthening strategic outcomes.
Geography and Influence Linkages
Indian Ocean and Indo-Pacific Strategy intersect with Geopolitics and Maritime Security, defining the spatial dimension of power.
Policy Integration Linkages
Foreign Policy, Strategic Alignment, and National Interest integrate all clusters into a coherent decision-making framework.
Read also
- Ukraine and Qatar Sign Landmark 10-Year Defense Cooperation Deal in Doha
- Joint statement on the Strait of Hormuz (19 Mar 2026) by UK, France, Germany, Italy etc
- Joint declaration of President Macron and Chancellor Merz
