.
For decades, India has occupied a comfortable position in the Western imagination – the so-called world’s largest democracy, a strategic partner and a net security provider in the region. That flattering portrait has encouraged a habit of looking away from inconvenient evidence. Today, that habit is becoming dangerous. India’s pursuit of the Agni-VI intercontinental ballistic missile, as recently stated by Chairman of India’s Defence Research and Development Organization, with a reported range of up to 12,000 km, is not merely a technological milestone. It is a strategic signal – and the world is not yet reading it clearly enough.
A missile with a 12,000 km range signals a potential inflection point in New Delhi’s nuclear thinking – one that may extend beyond focusing on regional dominance to global nuclear blackmailing. Agni VI range is not built to deter regional actors but to reach Washington, London and Paris. No honest strategic analyst can conclude that India’s nuclear ambitions remain confined to its immediate neighborhood. The US now needs to update its 2026 Annual Threat Assessment in which it conveniently avoid India’s ICBM capability as a threat.
India’s expanding nuclear posture cannot be assessed in isolation from its demonstrated institutional failures. In March 2022, India accidentally launched a BrahMos cruise missile – a dual-capable, supersonic weapon – deep into Pakistani territory. The missile traveled approximately 124 km inside Pakistan before crashing near Mian Channu. Islamabad showed commendable restraint. The episode was a near-catastrophic failure of the most basic nuclear safety protocols, occurring during a period of relative calm.
This matters enormously as Agni-VI moves from development toward deployment. A command-and-control structure that permitted an accidental missile strike on a nuclear-armed neighbour is now preparing to manage a weapons system with intercontinental reach. The margin for error at intercontinental distances is not diplomatic embarrassment – it is civilisational catastrophe.
Compounding these structural vulnerabilities is a dimension that Western policymakers have been even more reluctant to address: the ideological transformation accelerating within India’s military and political institutions. Under successive BJP governments, the Hindutva ideology has steadily permeated into India’s armed forces. This process, widely described as ‘saffronisation’, encompasses visions of regional dominance, including the concept of ‘Akhand Bharat’. When such ideas gain currency among military officers who operate weapons systems of escalating destructive power, the long-theorised ‘mad colonel’ dilemma ceases to be a theory. The scenario has historically been treated as a remote edge case in stable nuclear states. India, through the combination of ideological militarisation and demonstrated command-and-control failure, is methodically eroding the conditions that kept it remote.
If any residual doubt remained about the rationality of India’s current leadership, the events of May 2025 should have extinguished it. India, a declared nuclear power, launched a missile attack on Pakistan, also a declared nuclear power. Whatever justification New Delhi offered, the act itself represented a profound failure of nuclear logic that the possession of nuclear weapons prevent rational actors from taking aggressive actions that can lead to nuclear catastrophe. A nuclear exchange on the subcontinent, even a limited one, would have global consequences.
Agni-VI is not India’s private military business. Accidental missile launches into nuclear-armed neighbours are not bilateral incidents. The saffronisation of a nuclear-armed military is not an internal cultural matter. Each of these, individually, would warrant serious international engagement. Together, they constitute a threat to global stability. The clock is ticking. The ideology is spreading. The command structures have already failed once. The missile is being built. The question is whether the world will act before it is launched – or after.
