New Delhi: Amnesty International on July 29 accused India of continuing to supply weapons, ammunition and military components to Israel despite “clear and public warnings” about alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Gaza, saying New Delhi had become “a significant actor in the supply chains enabling Israel’s military operations.”In a 42-page report titled ‘Made in India: The Supply of Weapons and Ammunition to Israel,’ Amnesty said it had identified 2,596 shipments of small arms, ammunition and military vehicle components exported from India to Israel between the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks and November 30, 2025.Drawing on publicly available shipment-level trade data, the international human rights advocacy group said its investigation documented “the scope and magnitude of India’s material support for the Israeli defence sector and the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza”.Its investigators said they had conservatively identified exports of at least 390,516 small arms parts for military-grade weapons, 564,970 explosive ordnance components, including drone warheads and artillery shell casings, and 298 military vehicle components.Amnesty argued that while some countries supplying Israel had come under sustained international scrutiny, others had largely escaped attention. “India has become a significant actor in the supply chains enabling Israel’s military operations, including those that Amnesty International, the UN and local NGOs have determined amount to genocide,” it asserted.By July 1, more than 73,000 Palestinians had been killed and over 173,500 injured, according to figures from the Palestinian health ministry cited by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. More than 1,000 of those deaths occurred after the October 10, 2025 ceasefire.The companies behind the exportsAgainst that backdrop, Amnesty identified nine Indian companies that it said continued exporting “weapons, ammunition, parts and components or dual-use items to Israel long after clear and public warnings had been made regarding the possible commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli armed forces and decision makers.”Three of those companies, the report noted, are defence public sector undertakings operating under the Ministry of Defence and “directly owned and operated by the Government of India”.According to Amnesty, Munitions India Limited exported 1,000 155-mm high-explosive artillery rounds to Elbit Systems, while Advanced Weapons and Equipment India Limited supplied 120 81-mm mortar launchers to the Israeli company in February 2024. A third state-owned company, India Optel Limited, exported 178 semiconductor items, including vanadium oxide sensors, to Semiconductor Devices Ltd, which the report described as a joint venture between Elbit Systems and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems.Amnesty argued that the ownership and control exercised by the Indian government over the three companies meant their exports should be treated as acts of the state itself. Applying the test laid down by a seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, it said all three entities were financially, functionally and administratively dominated by the government.The report also argued that they met the International Court of Justice’s test of “complete dependence”, under which an entity is regarded as “ultimately merely the instrument” of the state.“When MIL, IOL and AWEIL transfer arms to Israel, they do so as state entities, which means the Indian state transfers arms to Israel, and India’s obligations under international law are engaged as a manufacturer,” the report said.The Wire had previously reported in May 2024 that Munitions India had been cleared to ship to Israel in January that year.According to Amnesty, private Indian companies accounted for much larger volumes of military exports than the state-owned firms.PLR Systems Private Limited, a joint venture between the Adani Group and Israel Weapon Industries, exported 10,571 parts for IWI Negev machine guns along with 33,033 bolt carriers. Indo-MIM Private Limited shipped more than 59,637 automatic sears, internal components that enable a weapon to fire in fully automatic mode. Kalyani Strategic Systems Limited, a Bharat Forge subsidiary, exported 9,600 bodies for 155 mm artillery shells to Israel Military Industries, an Elbit Systems subsidiary.The report also identified exports by Alpha Elsec Defence & Aerospace Systems Private Limited, another Elbit joint venture, which supplied 122 explosive warheads labelled “WH 5 KG Armed Assy” in December 2025. Amnesty said the only Elbit munition built around a five-kilogram warhead is the SkyStriker loitering munition, remnants of which have been documented in Gaza, including at Khan Younis in April 2025.Why Amnesty says India knew the risksAmnesty asserted that these transfers continued despite mounting international legal warnings over Israel’s conduct in Gaza. “Amnesty International believes that the Indian authorities knew, or should have known, that arms transfers to Israel carried a substantial risk of contributing to serious violations of international law,” the report said.In support of its finding, Amnesty cited a series of international legal developments.In January 2024, the ICJ’s provisional measures had directed that “Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent” the commission of acts prohibited under the convention. Three months later, the world court had in its order in the case brought by Nicaragua against Germany on supply of arms to Israel that it reminded “all states of their international obligations relating to the transfer of arms to parties to an armed conflict, in order to avoid the risk that such arms might be used to violate the above-mentioned Conventions [Geneva Conventions and Genocide Convention].”The report also referred to an older ICJ order that the obligation to prevent “arise[s] at the instant that the State learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed.”Amnesty further pointed to India’s abstention on a UN Human Rights Council resolution in April 2024 calling on states to halt arms transfers to Israel, arguing that it “suggest[s] that it was aware of the specific call for halting of arms transfers and the legal concerns underlying it”.It also cited the ICJ’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful and requiring states not to render aid or assistance in maintaining it. India abstained again when the UN General Assembly endorsed that opinion in September 2024.The report additionally noted that several countries including Japan, Germany, Canada, Italy and Spain had suspended or restricted arms exports to Israel, arguing that those decisions further demonstrated growing international recognition of the legal risks. It also cited public appeals by Indian civil society groups urging the government to revoke export licences and parliamentary replies in which the external affairs minister justified continuing exports on grounds of national interest and existing contractual commitments.Taken together, Amnesty concluded, “it seems clear that the threshold has been met for India having the requisite knowledge to trigger relevant obligations under international law, including the duty to prevent genocide and the obligation to ensure respect for IHL.”How India approves military exportsThe report argued that India’s own export control regime places responsibility for such decisions squarely on the government. Defence items fall within the restricted SCOMET list administered by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade. Before an export licence is issued, applications are reviewed by an inter-ministerial group comprising representatives of the ministries of external affairs, home affairs and defence.The guidelines require the working group to weigh the “credential of end-user, credibility of declaration of end-use of the item or technology, integrity of chain of transmission of item from supplier to end-user”, along with the potential of the item to contribute to end uses inconsistent with obligations “under treaties to which it is a State Party”. That reference, Amnesty argued, means the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions should have been weighed before any licence for Israel was issued.The deliberations of the inter-ministerial review are confidential, and only the grant or refusal of a licence is disclosed. As per the report, an application under the Right to Information Act was filed with the Directorate General of Foreign Trade in September 2025, seeking details of export licences issued to Premier Explosives Limited and Blue Stampings & Forgings Limited, but it went unanswered. The rights group had also sent letters to the defence ministry and the DGFT on June 16 this year and letters sent to 15 companies and their parent firms between June 23 and July 10.The Wire has sought a response from the Ministry of External Affairs on Amnesty’s report.In its recommendations, Amnesty called on India to halt all transfers of arms, ammunition, military parts and related technology to Israel and urged Indian companies to end business relationships with Elbit Systems, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries.It also called for “an urgent and comprehensive arms embargo on Israel that covers the direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer of arms and military materiel, including related technologies, parts and components, technical assistance, training, financial or other assistance.”As part of its obligations under the Genocide Convention, the organisation said, the government should open independent investigations into “the potential civil and criminal responsibility of the nine companies and their responsible officers for potential complicity in genocide”, and enact legislation making genocide and war crimes offences under domestic law so that they can be investigated and prosecuted.The rights group also urged India to accede to the Arms Trade Treaty, which it had rejected when the multilateral treaty was adopted in April 2013.How New Delhi has responded to the Gaza WarIndia had established diplomatic ties with Israel in 1992, following which it had developed close defence ties. Israel is now India’s third largest arms supplier after Russia and France, accounting for 15% of Indian arms imports between 2021 and 2025, while India is by far the largest buyer of Israeli weapons, purchasing 29% of Israel’s arms exports over the same period, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.New Delhi’s posture became more publicly aligned towards Israel under the Narendra Modi government, with the Indian prime minister making the first ever stand-alone visit to Israel in July 2017.Modi was among the first world leaders to declare “solidarity” with Israel after the October 7, 2023 attacks. In the initial resolutions brought before General Assembly seeking a humanitarian truce, India abstained, citing lack of condemnation of the October 7 attacks. But, eventually India voted in favour of a resolution in December 2023 that called for a ceasefire and advocated for a peaceful solution.In recent months, India has more prominently reiterated its longstanding support for a two-state solution while increasingly stressing the protection of civilians in its public statements, though without explicitly criticising or naming Israel in its public statements.Launching India’s campaign for a non-permanent Security Council seat for the 2028-29 term at UN headquarters on July 13, foreign minister Jaishankar folded support for Palestinians into the pitch, telling the audience that the refugee agency UNRWA counts India as its “top emerging donor” and announcing commitments made at the Palestine donor group meeting in Brussels the previous day to set up a specialty hospital, an artificial limb fitment centre and a vocational training institute. The pledges were in keeping with a longstanding position on a two-state solution, he said.At the Security Council on July 28, the messaging was pushed further. India’s permanent representative Parvathaneni Harish delivered his statement in English before switching to Arabic to speak about Gaza, Indian development assistance to Palestinians and support for a two-state solution, in what was thought to be the first time an Indian diplomat had used the language at the Council. Attention on the Strait of Hormuz, he cautioned in Arabic, must not pull focus from the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.