Karnataka policy member pitches NewWay National Security Framework for 2027–2037
Synopsis
A Karnataka State Policy and Planning Commission member has proposed a decade-long NewWay National Security Framework covering 16 domains — from AI-driven risk forecasting to climate preparedness — asking the Centre to commission a feasibility study. The proposal is notable for explicitly keeping consequential decisions in human hands and for building on existing institutions rather than creating new bureaucratic layers.
Key Takeaways
Mohanadass Hegde of the Karnataka State Policy and Planning Commission proposed the NewWay National Security and Strategic Resilience Framework on 23 October 2026 .
The framework covers 16 components including cybersecurity, energy security, public health, space and maritime security, and climate preparedness.
A periodic National Strategic Risk Assessment is among its central recommendations.
AI and predictive analytics are proposed for risk forecasting, but consequential decisions must remain with authorised human officials .
Implementation is envisaged in four phases from 2027 to 2037 , starting with a policy review and ending with independent evaluation.
The proposal is a policy concept for consultation — not an approved government programme — and requires Union government examination.
S. Mohanadass Hegde, a member of the Karnataka State Policy and Planning Commission, on Friday, 23 October 2026, formally proposed a NewWay National Security and Strategic Resilience Framework for 2027–2037, calling on the Union government to examine a sweeping, decade-long approach to strengthening India's long-term security and preparedness. The proposal, submitted from Bengaluru, is a policy concept intended for consultation — not an approved government programme.
What the Framework Proposes
At its core, the framework argues that national security extends well beyond conventional military defence. According to the proposal, interconnected risks arising from disruptions to energy supplies, digital infrastructure, international supply chains, public health systems, water resources and essential public services must be treated as security concerns in their own right.
The framework identifies 16 components for policy consideration: defence and military security, internal security, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, economic and financial security, energy security, water and food security, public health, climate and disaster preparedness, strategic technology, space and maritime security, supply chains, information resilience, institutional governance, citizen preparedness and international diplomacy.
Key Recommendations
A central recommendation is the establishment of a periodic National Strategic Risk Assessment to identify vulnerabilities, existing safeguards, capability gaps and possible mitigation measures across security, economic, technological and environmental sectors. The proposal emphasises that any public reporting must be restricted to information suitable for disclosure, protecting classified, sensitive and personal data.
On technology, the framework suggests examining secure digital coordination systems and the use of artificial intelligence and predictive analytics for risk forecasting, infrastructure mapping and early warnings. However, it explicitly states that consequential security, legal and administrative decisions must remain with authorised human officials — a safeguard against unchecked algorithmic decision-making.
The proposal recommends building on existing institutions — including CERT-In, the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre (NCIIPC) and disaster-management authorities — rather than duplicating responsibilities or creating parallel structures.
The Four-Phase Roadmap
Hegde has outlined a phased implementation roadmap spanning a decade. The first phase (2027–2028) would focus on reviewing existing policies and identifying coordination gaps. Capability development would follow during 2029–2031. The third phase (2032–2034) would concentrate on improving integrated national resilience. The final phase (2035–2037) would involve independent evaluation, expenditure assessment and identification of future priorities.
What Hegde Is Asking the Centre to Do
Hegde has appealed to the Union government to undertake a preliminary examination of the framework, invite inputs from Union ministries, state governments, security institutions, regulators, scientific establishments, industry and technical experts, and commission a feasibility study. The study would assess institutional suitability, technical requirements, legal implications, financial viability and implementation risks, potentially resulting in a costed options paper identifying ways to strengthen existing mechanisms.
The stated objective is to strengthen national preparedness, protect citizens, ensure continuity of essential services, reduce vulnerabilities and improve India's ability to recover from major disruptions — while safeguarding constitutional values and strategic autonomy. Whether the Centre takes up the proposal for formal examination remains to be seen.
Point of View
Which is an unusual degree of epistemic honesty for a policy pitch. Its real value may lie less in its specific recommendations and more in the question it forces: does India have a coherent, coordinated national resilience doctrine that spans cyber, climate, health and conventional security, or does it rely on siloed institutions responding independently to overlapping threats? The insistence on human oversight for AI-driven decisions is timely, but the harder challenge is political — Centre-state cooperation on security has historically been fraught, and a framework that depends on it without a binding mechanism risks remaining aspirational. The feasibility study Hegde seeks would be the real test of whether this moves beyond a well-structured document.
NationPress
23 Oct 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the NewWay National Security and Strategic Resilience Framework?
It is a policy concept proposed by S. Mohanadass Hegde of the Karnataka State Policy and Planning Commission on 23 October 2026, calling on the Union government to examine a decade-long national security framework spanning 16 domains from 2027 to 2037. The proposal is not an approved government programme; it has been submitted for examination and consultation.
What are the 16 components of the proposed framework?
The framework covers defence and military security, internal security, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, economic and financial security, energy, water and food security, public health, climate and disaster preparedness, strategic technology, space and maritime security, supply chains, information resilience, institutional governance, citizen preparedness and international diplomacy.
What role does artificial intelligence play in the proposed framework?
The framework suggests examining AI and predictive analytics for risk forecasting, infrastructure mapping and early warnings. However, it explicitly states that consequential security, legal and administrative decisions must remain with authorised human officials.
What is the four-phase implementation roadmap?
Phase one (2027–2028) focuses on reviewing policies and identifying gaps; phase two (2029–2031) on capability development; phase three (2032–2034) on integrated national resilience; and phase four (2035–2037) on independent evaluation and expenditure assessment.
What is Hegde asking the Union government to do?
Hegde has asked the Centre to undertake a preliminary examination of the framework, invite inputs from ministries, state governments, security institutions and industry, and commission a feasibility study assessing institutional, legal, financial and implementation dimensions of the proposal.
