World Turns Cold On Su-57E: Will India Still Consider To Buy Russia's ‘Stealth Beast'?

New Delhi: Su-57E - Russia's fifth-generation stealth fighter - is under scrutiny once again. No country across the globe seems to be interested acquiring the fighter jet despite Moscow's consistent efforts to sell it to countries such as India, Algeria and Malaysia.
Rosoboronexport, a Russian defence firm, said that it would put on display the aircraft at the LIMA 2025 International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition in Malaysia. However, the fighter jet, as reported by the media, never made it to the exhibition. In an absence that raised many eyebrows, only a scale model of the jet was showcased at a booth of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) in the Malaysian exhibition.
Malaysia's indifference towards Su-57E in its Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA), India's exit from the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) programme and the fighter aircraft's absence at LIMA 2025 all narrated the same saga - the Russian "Felon" is likely to turn out are a big "failure".
Let's understand the Su-57E.
It is an export variant of Russian Su-57 fighter jet, which is a fifth-generation stealth aircraft that is armed with cutting-edge missile systems and designed for multi-role operations and radar evasion. It is capable of carrying long-range air-to-air missiles such as R-37M and can strike targets up to 400 kilometres away.
Without disclosing the name of the country, a confident Russia had earlier claimed that the first buyer of the jet would start operating it by this year (2025). Algeria was seen as the possible acquirer. But neither the countr nor Russia has so far confirmed the deal.
Why is Malaysia delaying its fighter jet programme?
Began in 2009, Malaysia's MRCA programme is aimed at replacing its aging MiG-29s. Earlier, the programme featured jets such as Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, Saab Gripen, Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon, but the country's focus in recent years seems to have turned towards acquiring fifth-generation or near-fifth-generation fighter aircraft.
Malaysia, despite this apparent shift, has not so far made any final decision. As a result, the role of Su-57E remains uncertain.
Russia's Continued India Push
Meanwhile, Russia continues to try pushing India to buy the Su-57E even after the latter's withdrawal from the FGFA project in 2018.
India exited from the project, as reports suggest, because of unsatisfactory performance of the fighter jet and its high cost.
Russia apparently has not given up and continues to pursue the deal. It is seeming attempting to capitalise on India's rising need for advanced fighter aircraft.
Russia offered India a "Golden Deal" during Aero India 2025 - a mega aerospace and defence exhibition organised at Bangaluru's Yelahanka Air Force Station from February 10 to 14. Moscow offered New Delhi prompt delivery of Su-57E's, its local production in India and assistance in India's indegenous fifth-generation fighter aircraft program (AMCA).
Moscow also told India that if it accepts the deal, Indian firms manufacturing the Su-30MKI can soon begin producing the Su-57E.
New Approach Post Pakistan Conflict
Following recent exchange of firepower with Pakistan in response to the April 22 deadly terror attack on tourists at Baisaran meadows in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam, Russia has been aggressively making efforts aimed at promoting the Su-57E.
In an interview with Sputnik, a Russian state-run news agency and radia broadcast service, a military observer from Moscow, Igor Korotchenko, said India should, without a second thought, go for acquiring the Su-57MKI that is especially designed for New Delhi and equipped with long-range missiles like the R-37M - keeping its requirements in mind.
At the same time, a few Russian bloggers are trying to project Su-57 as superior to the Rafale. They are leaving no stone unturned to urge India to invest in it.
New Delhi, however, has not so far respond to the suggestions, either unofficially or officially. It appears that the path for Su-57E's acquisition is not an easy one. It will be interesting to note that whether the fighter jet manages to find a place in the international defense market in the years to come.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Standard

16 minutes ago

• Business Standard

With Trump involved, wartime Nato summit may shift focus from Ukraine

At its first summits after Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Nato gave President Volodymyr Zelenskyy pride of place at its table. It won't be the same this time. Europe's biggest land conflict since World War II is now in its fourth year and still poses an existential threat to the continent. Ukraine continues to fight a war so that Europeans don't have to. Just last week, Russia launched one of the biggest drone attacks of the invasion on Kyiv. But things have changed. The Trump administration insists that it must preserve maneuvering space to entice Russian President Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table, so Ukraine must not be allowed steal the limelight. In Washington last year, the military alliance's weighty summit communique included a vow to supply long-term security assistance to Ukraine, and a commitment to back the country on its irreversible path" to Nato membership. The year before, a statement more than twice as long was published in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius. A new Nato-Ukraine Council was set up, and Kyiv's membership path fast-tracked. Zelenskyy received a hero's welcome at a concert downtown. It will be very different at a two-day summit in the Netherlands that starts Tuesday. Nato's most powerful member, the United States, is vetoing Ukraine's membership. It's unclear how long for. Zelenskyy is invited again, but will not be seated at Nato's table. The summit statement is likely to run to around five paragraphs, on a single page, Nato diplomats and experts say. Ukraine will only get a passing mention. If the G7 summit is anything to go by Recent developments do not augur well for Ukraine. Earlier this month, frustrated by the lack of a ceasefire agreement, US President Donald Trump said it might be best to let Ukraine and Russia fight for a while before pulling them apart and pursuing peace. Last weekend, he and Putin spoke by phone, mostly about Israel and Iran, but a little about Ukraine, too, Trump said. America has warned its allies that it has other security priorities, including in the Indo-Pacific and on its own borders. Then at the Group of Seven summit in Canada, Trump called for Russia to be allowed back into the group; a move that would rehabilitate Putin on the global stage. The next day, Russia launched its mass drone attack on Kyiv. Putin is doing this simply because he can afford to continue the war. He wants the war to go on. It is troubling when the powerful of this world turn a blind eye to it, Zelenskyy said. Trump left the G7 gathering early to focus on the conflict between Israel and Iran. Zelenskyy had travelled to Canada to meet with him. No meeting happened, and no statement on Russia or the war was agreed. Lacking unanimity, other leaders met with Zelenskyy to reassure him of their support. Questions about US support for Ukraine Trump wants to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. He said he could do it within 100 days, but that target has come and gone. Things are not going well, as a very public bust up with Zelenskyy at the White House demonstrated. Trump froze military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine's armed forces for a week. The US has stepped back from the Ukraine Defence Contact Group that was set up under the Biden administration and helped to drum up weapons and ammunition. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth skipped its last meeting; the first time a Pentagon chief has been absent since Russian forces invaded in February 2022. Addressing Congress on June 10, Hegseth also acknowledged that funding for Ukraine military assistance, which has been robust for the past two years, will be reduced in the upcoming defense budget. It means Kyiv will receive fewer of the weapons systems that have been key to countering Russia's attack. Indeed, no new aid packages have been approved for Ukraine since Trump took office again in January. The message from the administration is clear: Far from guaranteed, future U.S. support for Ukraine may be in jeopardy, said Riley McCabe, Associate Fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a US-based policy research organization. Cutting aid, McCabe warned, could make the Kremlin believe that US resolve is fleeting, and that time is on Russia's side. Putin has less incentive to negotiate if he believes that US disengagement is inevitable and that Russia will soon gain an advantage on the battlefield, he said. What the summit might mean for Kyiv Trump wants the summit to focus on defence spending. The 32 allies are expected to agree on an investment pledge that should meet his demands. Still, the Europeans and Canada are determined to keep a spotlight on the war, wary that Russia could set its sights on one of them next. They back Trump's ceasefire efforts with Putin but also worry that the two men are cozying up. Also, some governments may struggle to convince their citizens of the need to boost defense spending at the expense of other budget demands without a strong show of support for Ukraine and acknowledgement that Russia remains Nato's biggest security threat. The summit is highly symbolic for Ukraine in other ways. Zelenskyy wants to prevent his country from being sidelined from international diplomacy, but both he and his allies rely on Trump for US military backup against Russia. Concretely, Trump and his counterparts will dine with the Dutch King on Tuesday evening. Zelenskyy could take part. Elsewhere, foreign ministers will hold a Nato-Ukraine Council, the forum where Kyiv sits among the 32 allies as an equal to discuss its security concerns and needs. What is clear is that the summit will be short. One working session on Wednesday. It was set up that way to prevent the meeting from derailing. If the G7 is anything to go by, Trump's focus on his new security priorities right now, the conflict between Israel and Iran might make it even shorter.

News18

24 minutes ago

• News18

Several Countries Ready To Give Iran Their Nuclear Warheads After US Strikes: Putin's Top Aide

Last Updated: Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev claimed on Sunday that a "number of countries" are ready to supply Iran with nuclear warheads Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev claimed on Sunday that a 'number of countries" are ready to supply Iran with nuclear warheads after the US joined Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities earlier on Sunday. The US forces on Sunday struck Iran's key nuclear sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—in the first such attack since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The US joining the ongoing Israeli attacks have further escalated tensions in West Asia, with Tehran vowing 'strong response.' First Published: June 22, 2025, 16:08 IST

NDTV

26 minutes ago

• NDTV

Many Nations Ready To Supply Iran With Their Nuclear Warheads: Top Putin Aide

New Delhi: Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced on Sunday that he will travel to Moscow for high-level talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, following overnight US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Speaking at a press conference on the sidelines of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit in Istanbul, Mr Araghchi said the consultations with President Putin would take place Monday morning. The move comes in the immediate aftermath of the US targeting three key Iranian nuclear sites, in what Washington has described as a "necessary step" to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. "Russia is a friend of Iran, we always consult with each other," Araghchi told reporters. "I'm going to Moscow this afternoon for serious consultations with the Russian president tomorrow morning." The strikes, ordered by US President Donald Trump, took place late Saturday night, nine days into an Israeli-led aerial campaign targeting Iranian nuclear infrastructure. U.S. officials claimed the attacks were focused on neutralising Iran's potential nuclear weapons programme. The Iranian foreign minister condemned the strikes as a gross violation of international law, adding that they had "crossed a very big red line by attacking nuclear facilities." He warned that Tehran would invoke its right to self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. "We have to respond," he said. Medvedev: "Trump Has Started Another War" In Moscow, Dmitry Medvedev, ex-Russia president and the Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, launched an attack on President Trump, accusing him of plunging the United States into a new war in the Middle East. Medvedev published his reaction on Telegram, stating bluntly, "Trump, who came in as a peacemaker president, has started a new war for the U.S." The former Russian president questioned the effectiveness of the US operation, saying it had failed to achieve any substantial military objectives. "Critical infrastructure of the nuclear fuel cycle appears to have been unaffected or sustained only minor damage," he wrote. "The enrichment of nuclear material - and now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons - will continue." In one of his most provocative assertions, Medvedev claimed that "a number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads." He did not identify which nations he was referring to. Medvedev further stated that the Israeli population was now living under constant threat, with explosions rocking multiple parts of the country. "The US is now entangled in a new conflict, with prospects of a ground operation looming on the horizon," he added. He also suggested that the attacks had politically strengthened Iran. "Iran's political regime has survived - and in all likelihood, has come out even stronger. The people are rallying around the country's spiritual leadership, including those who were previously indifferent or opposed to it." Iran's Position Mr Araghchi, meanwhile, dismissed any suggestion that Tehran would rejoin diplomatic talks under current conditions. "We were in the middle of diplomacy. We were in the middle of talks with the United States when Israelis blew it up," he said. He added that negotiations with European interlocutors were ongoing in Geneva just two days prior to the US strikes. "And again, this time, Americans decided to blow it up," he said. "So it was not Iran, but the US who betrayed diplomacy. They betrayed negotiations." Iran's top diplomat asserted that the Mr Trump administration had effectively disqualified itself from any future peace initiatives. "They have proved that they are not men of diplomacy, and they only understand the language of threat and force. And this is very unfortunate," Mr Araghchi said.