The Government of India on Friday clarified in Parliament that no formal discussions have taken place with the United States regarding the acquisition of F-35 fighter jets, despite references to potential reviews in previous bilateral statements.
In a written reply to the Lok Sabha, Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh responded to a query by Congress MP Balwant Baswant Wankhade about India’s defence cooperation with the US.
“During Prime Minister Modi’s US visit, a joint statement with President Trump mentioned a review of US policy on the release of F-35 aircraft and underwater systems to India. However, no formal discussion has taken place on this issue so far,” the minister stated.
Addressing questions about American diplomatic involvement in efforts to reduce tensions between India and Pakistan, Singh clarified that while conversations with global partners, including the US, did take place, the decision to halt hostilities was made bilaterally between India and Pakistan, and was initiated by Pakistan.
“It was conveyed to US Vice President JD Vance on May 9 that India would respond appropriately if Pakistan launched a major attack,” Singh noted, adding that direct military-level communication between India and Pakistan facilitated the de-escalation.
When asked whether receiving US military assistance could affect India’s foreign policy autonomy, particularly in the context of third-party mediation, the minister reaffirmed India’s principled stance.
“Our longstanding position is that any outstanding issue with Pakistan will be discussed only bilaterally. This has been made clear to all countries, including the US,” he said.
Singh also underscored the strength of the India-US Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, which is built on mutual trust, shared interests, and growing strategic convergence.
“The Government of India evaluates all external partnerships, including those in the defence and strategic domains, through the prism of national interest and our commitment to strategic autonomy,” he concluded.