NEW DELHI: India will buy more than 160,000 guns worth $553 million for troops on its disputed, high-altitude borders, the defence ministry said on Tuesday.

The country’s defence acquisition council cleared the purchase of 72,400 assault rifles and 93,895 carbines for $553 million in a meeting presided over by Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman.

The weapons will be bought to “enable the defence forces to meet their im-mediate requirement for the troops deployed on the borders,” the ministry said in a statement.

New Delhi has signed several big-ticket defence deals since Prime Minister Narendra Modi stormed to power in 2014.

India — the world’s largest defence importer — has been investing tens of billions in updating its Soviet-era military hardware to counter long-standing territorial disputes with its nuclear-armed neighbours, China and Pakistan.

India and China fought a brief war in 1962 over their border and last year they were involved in a months-long showdown over a disputed Himalayan plateau.

India is also mired in conflict in the Himalayan region of Kashmir where roughly 500,000 soldiers are deployed.

Published in Dawn, January 17th, 2018

Opinion

Editorial

Impending slaughter
Updated 07 May, 2024

Impending slaughter

Seven months into the slaughter, there are no signs of hope.
Wheat investigation
07 May, 2024

Wheat investigation

THE Shehbaz Sharif government is in a sort of Catch-22 situation regarding the alleged wheat import scandal. It is...
Naila’s feat
07 May, 2024

Naila’s feat

IN an inspirational message from the base camp of Nepal’s Mount Makalu, Pakistani mountaineer Naila Kiani stressed...
Plugging the gap
06 May, 2024

Plugging the gap

IN Pakistan, bias begins at birth for the girl child as discriminatory norms, orthodox attitudes and poverty impede...
Terrains of dread
Updated 06 May, 2024

Terrains of dread

Restored faith in the police is unachievable without political commitment and interprovincial support.
Appointment rules
Updated 06 May, 2024

Appointment rules

If the judiciary had the power to self-regulate, it ought to have exercised it instead of involving the legislature.