India, Oct. 19 -- On September 21, 2026, the Delhi High Court ordered SAP India to restore software support to Nayara Energy. The Indian arm of the German software group had cited European Union sanctions against the refiner. The contract was governed by Indian law. That had not kept the support running. Nayara had encountered a similar problem with Microsoft. In July 2025, the American company suspended digital services following EU sanctions against the refiner, whose shareholders include Russia's Rosneft. Services resumed after Nayara approached the Delhi High Court. Microsoft later attributed the disruption to an automated compliance system that applied sanctions globally by default. Most Indians will never deal with SAP or Microsoft licensing teams.But they will depend on hospitals, banks, telecom networks, and public services that run on similar layers of foreign technology. Digital sovereignty is not freedom from the world. It is the ability to keep essential services running whenforeign laws, suppliers, or sanctions restrict access to technology. It means having choices that can survivepressure. The institutions exercising that power must also answer tocitizens, with remedies whendigital systems deny them services or violate their rights. Territorial sovereignty has never insulated countries from economic pressure. Digital systems spread practical control across several countries. An Indian service may use American software and Taiwanese chips, with maintenance performed remotely and access controlled through licences issued abroad. Indian law may govern the service without ensuring continued access to the licences, updates, and support it needs. A system secure against hackers can still lose its supplier's support. Data localisation establishes where information sits, without necessarily settling who can operate the system, repair itor move it elsewhere. Domestic production can improve our options, although reproducing every component would consume resources India needs for other priorities. Dependence becomes a sovereignty problem when an outside actor can interrupt an essential service, and India cannot restore it beforeserious harm follows. Geopolitics is changing the terms of India's technology choices. American export controls affect access to advanced chips. Chinese mineral restrictions can unsettle manufacturing. EU regulations shape access to an important market. These instruments have different purposes and consequences, but their effect can be similar. An Indian firm may discover that access is conditional on decisions made elsewhere. Friendly relations cannot guarantee that a foreign supplier will remain free to serve Indian customers. A technology partnership needs attention to licensing conditions and plans for what happens if access is cut. The prospect of Starlink's entry into India raises a similar question about connectivity. Satellite broadband could connect remote communities and provide backup when terrestrial networks fail. Ukraine offers a warning: Officials there said unannounced restrictions on Starlink connectivity disrupted military drone missionsduring Russian attacks. Elon Musk said the US government controlledoperating limits for Starshield, themilitary service. India's civilian needsdiffer, but local ground stations would not ensure control over the network. Before essential services depend on it, India needs workable alternatives. India has faced such tests before. APJ Abdul Kalam once recalled that after the 1998 nuclear tests, American sanctions led a US partner to withdraw from the Light Combat Aircraft's flight-control programme. The partner retained Indian equipment, software, and technical information held at its premises. Indian teams completed the system through sustained development and testing, drawing on expertise and institutions built over many years. UPI demonstrates an ability to build digital public infrastructure at scale. Our software firms serve globalmarkets; Indian engineers help develop technologies used worldwide.Such connections bring knowledge, income and influence. Restricting legitimate data flows or making usefulforeign technology needlessly expensive could weaken the very institutions and businesses from which greater Indian capability must grow. Participation in global technology markets does not by itself give Indian firms control over the technology they use. More Indian research must move from papers and prototypes intoproducts we can maintain and improve here. Subsidies shouldsupport demonstrable capacity, including the skills to keep systems running after the foreign supplier has left. Public support must build Indian capability, not shield domestic suppliers from competition. Sovereignty needs a maintenance budget. For essential services, the test should be practical: If access to critical software or equipment is lost, whocan restore the service, with what tools, and how quickly? The likely harm, recovery time and cost ofalternatives should guide public spending. Some gaps will justify domestic development; others will require diversified imports, spare parts or dependable international arrangements. An indispensable import deserves strategic attention even when making it in India is unrealistic. Contracts should specify obligations for service continuity, data retrieval and migration to another supplier. Recovery plans need testing; alternative suppliers must be checked for shared dependencies. India must know which promises are binding, which rest on goodwill, and what fallback exists if access is withdrawn. If a public service fails because access was cut, citizens should not be left facing a supplier, a ministry and a regulator each pointing elsewhere. Sovereignty cannot mean merely shifting power from a foreign vendor to an opaque domestic system. India will continue to need foreign technology, capital and markets. Its freedom of action will depend on whether essential services have workable alternatives before access is withdrawn. Citizens must also be able to question how that power is exercised at home. A sovereign choice carries little weight if someone, elsewhere can make it impossible to carry out....