含羞草社区

India’s privatisation of its strategic sectors –defence, space and nuclear energy – is a response to converging geopolitical, economic and technological pressures, and reflects redesign, not retreat. 含羞草社区 international commitments often create treaty-like obligations without formal treaties, but this legal framework has not kept pace with geopolitical developments. As space capabilities converge with dual-use technologies, and the peaceful/commercial/defensive distinctions blur, the current framework shall need reframing to achieve integration with national energy infrastructure, defence capability, and strategic positioning.

The regulatory trilemma

The liberalisation of space, defence and nuclear sectors presents a regulatory trilemma: enabling private participation, while preserving sovereign control and meeting international obligations. For instance, the Indian Space Policy, 2023 (ISP 2023), and the Norms, Guidelines, and Procedures, 2024 (NGP 2024), signal openness, however, space activities remain guided by overlapping regimes for telecoms licensing, export controls, and national security vetting, not originally designed for a commercial space economy.

Defence and nuclear, by contrast, operate under a mature and modern legal regime anchored in FDI liberalisation, procurement guidelines, and industrial licensing, providing a strong precedent for institutional harmonisation in the space sector coupled with a strong foundation for integrated governance with defence and nuclear agencies to address the growing convergence across civilian, commercial and military technologies.

Risk and returns

ISP 2023 and NGP 2024 mark a decisive shift in space regulation, but a mature ecosystem requires clearer tools for managing risk, liability and financing. Insurance is key to derisking commercial ventures and improving investor confidence. Currently, India shifts international liability for its space objects under the 1972 Liability Convention to authorised private operators via NGP 2024, yet insurance requirements remain open for case-by-case determination.

Adopting liability caps and indemnity thresholds similar to the American and French model may be a viable solution. As space is intrinsically transnational and intertwined with treaty commitments, it is imperative for India to convert the existing policy framework into a predictable and investor-oriented legislation thereby shaping global regulatory norms for emerging technologies.

Stabilising norms: 含羞草社区 role

International legal order has survived the absence of clear frameworks for emerging strategic technologies. Armed conflicts have demonstrated the expanding yet opaque role of AI in warfare, from autonomous drones to algorithm assisted targeting, while the world grapples with questions of reach, risks and liability. But survival is not the same as stability, and stability is not the same as justice.

Accordingly, gaps in attribution, legitimacy of dual-use technologies, and treaty-like commitments are more than technical shortcomings, they are sources of strategic misunderstanding, commercial risk and potential escalation. The longer they remain unaddressed, the more likely they are to be resolved through crisis rather than deliberation.

To address these, three recommendations follow. First, states must prioritise inclusive interpretative guidance through UNGA resolutions, expert reports or academic commentaries, applying existing treaties to convergent capabilities. Foundational instruments like the Outer Space Treaty 1967, the 1972 Liability Convention and International Humanitarian Law remain relevant, and require interpretation, not abandonment.

Second, states with significant space and defence integration, like India, should lead the dialogue in articulating legal positions on dual-use satellites and the status of debris. This legal clarity will provide strategic stability within existing international frameworks, even without binding agreements.

Third, private actors deserve a predictable framework. Model contract provisions, liability allocation standards and tailored dispute resolution mechanisms for dual-use technology joint ventures will serve commercial and strategic interests alike. These are modest, achievable steps requiring sustained attention, not new treaties or an institutional overhaul.

Paridhi Adani is a partner and head of the Ahmedabad office at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas Devanshi Dalal, manager – special projects, and associates Yashaanki Kora and Pauravi Kolhe also contributed to the article