Kamal Ghorui
As May 31, 2026, approaches, the question of who will succeed Dr Samir V Kamat as secretary of Defence R&D and Chairman of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is no routine bureaucratic matter. It is, quite simply, a question of national importance—one that rises above electoral cycles and political rhetoric. At stake is not just institutional continuity, but the technological backbone of India’s Viksit Bharat mission.
DRDO today sits at the heart of India’s strategic ambitions. Its work spans deterrence, advanced weapons systems, cyber capabilities, and emerging technologies that will define warfare—and economic strength—in the decades ahead. The choice of its next leader will influence how India navigates this critical intersection of security and innovation.
Traditionally, DRDO leadership has emerged from its most celebrated domain: missile systems. This is not without reason. India’s missile programme has been the organisation’s flagship success story, delivering credible deterrence and technological confidence.
The organisation of 2026 is not the DRDO of two decades ago.
Its recent strides in naval systems, naval nuclear platforms, electronic warfare, artificial intelligence, and quantum technologies signal a diversification that cannot be ignored. Laboratories working on electronics and communication systems, aeronautics, and advanced combat engineering have demonstrated capabilities that rival—and in some cases complement—the traditional missile domain.
Leadership, therefore, need not be confined to a single legacy stream.
Also, we must include some of the failures in drones, which are now the essence of warfare, from ISR to Combat, from aerial to underwater, engines and slowing fighters programmes, among a few others.
This broadening of capability presents both an opportunity and a dilemma. Several directors general (DGs) from across DRDO’s clusters possess the depth, experience, and institutional knowledge required to lead. However, an immediate challenge looms: impending retirements. The window for selecting a leader from within is narrowing, raising concerns about continuity versus renewal.
This is where the debate sharpens. Should DRDO, an organisation often described as too large and too complex to disrupt, consider an outsider at its helm? Not at all, as I think, but some part as I write below.
Only merit, brilliance, and band of courage
The idea is not without merit. An external leader—someone with deep scientific credibility and a track record in applied technology—could bring fresh perspectives, challenge entrenched processes, and accelerate integration with industry and academia. In a world where innovation cycles are shrinking and dual-use technologies dominate, such disruption might be precisely what is needed.
Yet, caution is equally warranted. DRDO is not merely a research body; it is a vast ecosystem of laboratories, classified programmes, and long-gestation projects. Its internal dynamics, security sensitivities, and layered hierarchies demand a leader who understands its intricacies. Seniority and institutional memory, often dismissed as inertia, can in fact ensure continuity in critical programmes that cannot afford missteps.
For example, DRDO’s silent but commendable work in the naval nuclear programme, AIP, torpedoes, among such continuous and credible projects, again like the K-series SLBMs (Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles), led by DRDO scientists/directors and DG, must be given credit and choice for leading first and foremost.
There is also an irony that must be acknowledged. Despite frequent criticism—over delays, cost overruns, and missed timelines—it is DRDO that has delivered India’s most strategic capabilities, often with limited support from private industry. Any leadership transition must therefore strengthen, not weaken, this core competence, while also enabling greater collaboration beyond its walls.
DRDO’s structuring: Chairman, R&D Secretary
Complicating the decision further is the long-pending question of organisational reform. Recommendations to separate the roles of DRDO Chairman and secretary (Defence R&D) have yet to be implemented. Experts have long argued that combining these roles creates conflicting priorities—between administrative oversight and scientific leadership.
A bifurcated structure, with two distinct leaders, could resolve this tension. It could also open the door to a hybrid model: one leader emerging from within DRDO to ensure continuity, and another—potentially from outside—driving innovation and reform.
Such a structural shift would not merely be administrative; it would signal a reimagining of how India approaches defence innovation.
Who will push for the R&D budget?
Another factor that needs attention is the fact that country does not spend enough on R&D. India allocates only about 0.65% of its GDP to research and development, far below global competitors that invest over 2% or more. Even within defence, R&D accounts for just around 5.75% of the defence budget, whereas advanced countries spend over 10%.
The next DRDO leadership would be expected to push, speak boldly and pullout money for the tech and systems that we want indigenously. The chosen leader should be one who can then raise the bar for India’s scientific systems, which is at the threshold, with so many tasks, new policies and aspirations to fulfil.
Ultimately, the choice before the government is not just about selecting a successor. It is about defining the next phase of India’s technological journey. Should DRDO double down on its proven strengths, or should it pivot more aggressively towards emerging domains? Should it prioritise continuity, or embrace calculated disruption?
There are no easy answers. But one principle must remain non-negotiable: merit. The leader of DRDO must be chosen not for seniority alone, nor for symbolic value, but for the ability to steer one of India’s most critical institutions through an era of rapid technological change.
The decision will echo far beyond the corridors of South Block—now Kartavya Bhawan. It will shape India’s defence preparedness, its innovation ecosystem, and its aspiration to become a technologically advanced nation.
In the march toward Viksit Bharat, leadership at DRDO is not just an appointment. It is a strategic choice about the future.
END OF ARTICLE
