💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2-19.Effect of policies and politics of developed and developing countries on India’s interests, Indian diaspora.

  • Conflict in Middle East: As world watches oil, why India must watch its fertiliser supply 

    Why in the News?

    The Iran-Israel conflict has drawn global attention for its impact on oil prices, but a less visible and equally serious issue is emerging in fertiliser supply, which poses a significant risk to farming and food security in India.

    What are the fertiliser security risks for India amid geopolitical conflicts?

    • Disruption of Import Routes: India relies heavily on fertiliser imports from Gulf countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Oman. These imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route vulnerable to blockades during conflicts like the Iran-Israel standoff. Eg: A naval blockade in the Strait could delay shipments of urea and DAP, affecting timely supply during sowing seasons.
    • Volatile Global Prices: Geopolitical tensions raise the prices of natural gas (used to produce urea) and finished fertilisers. Eg: A conflict-induced surge in natural gas prices increases the cost of domestic urea production, straining India’s fertiliser subsidy bill.
    • Dependence on Conflict Zones: India imports 100% of MOP (Muriate of Potash), including from Belarus and Israel, both affected by global instability. Eg: Escalation in the Iran-Israel conflict can disrupt MOP imports, impacting crops like sugarcane and cotton that need potash-based fertilisers.

    What lessons from the Russia-Ukraine crisis remain unaddressed?

    • Lack of Strategic Buffer Stocks: Despite 2022 supply disruptions, India still lacks a fertiliser buffer stock policy or minimum stocking norms for critical imports like DAP and MOP. Eg: During peak sowing seasons (like Kharif), 30–45 days of operational stock is inadequate to absorb external shocks.
    • Failure to Diversify Import Sources Meaningfully: While India talks of diversification, it continues to rely heavily on Gulf countries and politically unstable regions. Eg: After disruptions in nitrogen and potash from Russia and Belarus, the current dependence on Israel and Jordan for DAP remains high, risking repetition.
    • Reactive Rather than Proactive Policymaking: The policy response has focused more on short-term procurement than long-term resilience building through joint ventures, domestic innovation, or alternative fertilisers. Eg: No significant scaling of nano, bio or organic fertilisers occurred post-2022, leaving India stuck with high subsidy bills for synthetic inputs.

    Why should fertilisers be part of India’s national security planning?

    • Critical for Food Security: Fertilisers are essential for sustaining agricultural output in an input-intensive farming system. Eg: Disruptions in urea or DAP supply during sowing seasons can directly impact crop yields and food availability.
    • Vulnerability to Geopolitical Shocks: Heavy reliance on imports from unstable regions exposes India to external risks.  
    • Impact on Economic and Rural Stability: Fertiliser shortages or price hikes raise subsidy burdens and can lead to rural distress.  

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government?

    • Boosting Domestic Production: Reviving closed urea plants (e.g., Gorakhpur, Sindri, Talcher) to achieve 90% urea self-sufficiency by 2025. Focus on reducing import dependency for nitrogen-based fertilisers.
    • Diversifying Import Sources: Forming long-term agreements and joint ventures with countries like Morocco (for phosphates) and Canada (for potash) to ensure a stable supply. Exploring partnerships beyond the Middle East to reduce geopolitical risk.
    • Subsidy and Distribution Reforms: Implementing the Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) system for fertiliser subsidies to ensure transparency. Promoting alternative fertilisers like Nano Urea and encouraging balanced nutrient usage.

    How can India build resilience in fertiliser supply chains? (Way forward)

    • Develop Strategic Fertiliser Reserves: Establish buffer stocks of key fertilisers like urea, DAP, and MOP, especially for critical sowing seasons (e.g., Kharif and Rabi) to cushion against global disruptions.
    • Expand and Diversify Import Partnerships: Forge long-term agreements and joint ventures with stable countries (e.g., Morocco, Canada, Jordan) and explore alternative shipping routes to reduce overdependence on the Middle East and de-risk supply chains.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2017] The question of India’s Energy Security constitutes the most important part of India’s economic progress. Analyze India’s energy policy cooperation with West Asian Countries.

    Linkage: The article explicitly states that India relies heavily on Gulf countries for “natural gas — the key raw material used to produce” urea, a vital fertilizer. The ongoing conflict threatens “ammonia, urea, DAP, and liquified natural gas (LNG) — all vital for agriculture”. This PYQ precisely captures the energy dimension of India’s dependency on the Middle East, which is a critical underlying factor contributing to the fertilizer crisis.

  • Is U.S. imperialism a threat to the world?

    Why in the News?

    The U.S. recently carried out unprovoked attacks on three Iranian nuclear sites during a 12-day war with Iran. These actions, especially under a renewed Trump administration, have restarted discussions about U.S. imperialism and how it affects the global balance of power.

    Note: Imperialism is a policy or ideology by which a powerful country extends its control over weaker territories politically, economically, or militarily, often for strategic or resource-driven gains.

    Is U.S. imperialism a threat to the world?

    U.S. imperialism is often viewed as a threat to global stability for the following reasons:

    • Violation of International Law: The U.S. has engaged in unilateral military interventions without UN approval, undermining global legal norms. Eg: The 2003 invasion of Iraq was based on unverified claims of weapons of mass destruction and violated the UN Charter.
    • Destabilization of Regions: U.S. actions often leave countries in prolonged conflict, weakening state institutions and increasing terrorism or refugee crises. Eg: U.S. interventions in Afghanistan and Libya led to power vacuums and regional instability.
    • Erosion of Multilateralism: By acting outside global institutions, the U.S. encourages disregard for international cooperation, weakening collective decision-making. Eg: Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement (2017) under the Trump administration weakened global climate unity.

    Why does the U.S. view China’s rise as a threat?

    • Economic Rivalry: China’s rapid growth and its emergence as the world’s second-largest economy ($20 trillion GDP) challenge U.S. dominance in trade, infrastructure (e.g. Belt and Road Initiative), and manufacturing.
    • Technological Competition: China’s progress in semiconductors, AI, and green technologies (e.g. leading in renewables and EVs) threatens U.S. supremacy in global innovation and strategic industries.
    • Geopolitical Influence: China’s expanding presence in global institutions and alliances like BRICS and SCO counters U.S.-led systems. Its assertiveness in the South China Sea and strategic investments in Africa and Latin America reflect an alternative world order.

    What challenges does bipolarity pose for rising powers like India?

    • Reduced Strategic Autonomy: In a U.S.-China bipolar world, India may face pressure to align with one power bloc, limiting its independent foreign policy. Eg: India’s participation in Quad may strain ties with China-dominated SCO and BRICS.
    • Limited Global Influence: Bipolarity can marginalize middle powers in global decision-making, making consensus harder. Eg: India’s efforts in climate negotiations may be overshadowed by U.S.-China disagreements.
    • Geopolitical Vulnerability: Tensions between major powers can destabilize regional security, impacting India directly. Eg: Escalation in the Indo-Pacific due to U.S.-China rivalry increases India’s strategic risks.

    Why is the Global South crucial amid failing multilateralism?

    • Collective Voice Against Hegemony: As traditional multilateral institutions like the UN or WTO lose credibility, the Global South offers a platform for developing nations to assert their interests. Eg: BRICS expansion allows emerging economies to challenge Western dominance in global financial systems.
    • Alternative Frameworks for Cooperation: The Global South promotes minilateralism and regional alliances to address shared challenges like debt, climate change, and trade inequities. Eg: India’s role in the International Solar Alliance (ISA) reflects South-South cooperation in climate governance.
    • Safeguarding Sovereignty and Development Needs: It helps countries resist coercive trade or security alignments and focus on inclusive development models. Eg: G77 bloc resists WTO reforms that could harm public procurement protections vital to developing economies.

    How can India balance strategic ties and Global South leadership? (Way forward) 

    • Pursue Strategic Autonomy: India must maintain an independent foreign policy despite partnerships like Quad. Eg: It joined the BRICS Bank while deepening ties with the U.S., showcasing multi-alignment.
    • Take Principled Stands in Global Forums: India should speak out against violations of international law even by allies. Eg: India’s silence on U.S. strikes in Iran undermines its credibility as a Global South leader.
    • Champion Collective South-South Agendas: India can lead in climate justice, debt relief, and trade equity for developing countries. Eg: Through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance and Voice of Global South Summit.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2023] The expansion and strengthening of NATO and a stronger US-Europe strategic partnership works well in India.’ What is your opinion about this statement? Give reasons and examples to support your answer.

    Linkage: The expansion of NATO and strengthening of the US-Europe strategic partnership represent key elements of U.S.-led alliances and its approach to global security. This directly relates to the U.S. acting as the “world’s sole superpower” engaged in “aggressive military behaviour” and violating the international order.

  • [2nd July 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A triangular dynamic in South Asia’s power politics

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2015] Terrorist activities and mutual distrust have clouded India-Pakistan relations. To what extent the use of soft power like sports and cultural exchanges could help generate goodwill between the two countries? Discuss with suitable examples.

    Linkage: This question directly linked with the central issue of “mutual distrust” and “terrorist activities” between India and Pakistan, which are explicit drivers of the complex “triangular relationship”. The article mentions India’s diplomatic campaign to isolate Pakistan globally and impose accountability on the state apparatus enabling terrorist groups.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The renewed ties between the Trump-led U.S. government and Pakistan’s military, seen in events like the high-profile lunch with Field Marshal Asim Munir and the return of military aid, show a clear shift in America’s approach to South Asia. This change, similar to the Cold War era, could weaken the strong U.S.-India partnership built on shared concerns over terrorism and China. At the same time, India has moved away from its earlier cautious approach, as shown by Operation Sindoor, raising the risk of conflict on two fronts against both Pakistan and China. As the U.S. balances between long-term strategy and short-term deals, the power dynamics in South Asia are being reshaped.

    Today’s editorial analyse the renewed ties between the Trump-led U.S. government and Pakistan’s military. This topic is important for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    In the complicated power politics of South Asia, the relationship between the United States, India, and Pakistan tells an important story.

    What drives the recent shift in U.S.-Pakistan relations?

    • Transactional Diplomacy Over Strategic Values: The U.S., particularly under the Trump administration, has adopted a deal-based approach rather than value-based alliances. Eg: Authorisation of $397 million for Pakistan’s F-16 fleet for “counter-terrorism” signals a shift towards immediate tactical gains rather than long-term strategic alignment with India.
    • Pakistan’s Geostrategic Leverage: Pakistan’s location at the crossroads of Afghanistan, Iran, and China enhances its strategic utility for U.S. regional interests, especially amid tensions in West Asia. Eg: Trump’s praise of Pakistan’s role in understanding Iran and his meeting with “Field Marshal” Asim Munir show a willingness to engage Pakistan despite its terror-linked image.

    How is it affecting U.S.-India strategic relations?

    • Erosion of Strategic Trust: India-U.S. partnership, built over counterterrorism cooperation and convergence on China, is being undermined by the U.S.’s renewed engagement with Pakistan. Eg: Trump’s claim of mediating a ceasefire between India and Pakistan contradicted India’s “no third-party” policy, leading to diplomatic discomfort.
    • Increased Strategic Caution in India: India’s concern over U.S.-Pakistan proximity may lead it to recalibrate its own foreign policy posture, especially in South Asia and the Indo-Pacific. It may reduce India’s reliance on U.S. support in regional disputes, focusing instead on self-reliant deterrence and regional alliances.
    • Undermining of U.S.-India Indo-Pacific Vision: The Quad framework and Indo-Pacific cooperation, key pillars of U.S.-India ties, risk losing momentum due to America’s distracted diplomacy in South Asia.

    What is the significance of India’s “new normal” doctrine in South Asia?

    • Departure from Strategic Restraint: India’s “new normal” reflects a proactive military and diplomatic posture against cross-border terrorism, moving away from its earlier defensive doctrine. Eg: In response to the Pahalgam terror attack, India launched Operation Sindoor, signaling its intent to punish provocations decisively.
    • Global Isolation of State-Sponsored Terrorism: The doctrine aims to internationally isolate Pakistan by linking terror acts to state support, thereby shifting global opinion and increasing diplomatic pressure.
      Eg: India’s efforts in UN forums to designate Pakistan-based terror groups under sanctions align with this approach.
    • Regional Deterrence and Strategic Signaling: It serves as a deterrent by altering Pakistan’s cost-benefit calculation of supporting non-state actors, while also sending a message to China amid a two-front threat perception. Eg: Statements by PM of India calling the ceasefire a “pause, not peace” indicate sustained pressure on both Pakistan and its backer, China.

    Who gains or loses from the U.S.’s ambivalent role in India-Pakistan dynamics?

    • Pakistan Gains Strategic Leverage: The U.S.’s ambiguity allows Pakistan to portray itself as a valuable security partner, especially in the context of Afghanistan, Iran, and regional logistics.
    • India Faces Diplomatic Setbacks: U.S. engagement with Pakistan undermines India’s strategic trust in the U.S., weakening its position on issues like cross-border terrorism and Kashmir.  
    • The U.S. Risks Losing Credibility: By oscillating between idealism and transactionalism, the U.S. dilutes its reliability as a consistent global partner, particularly in the Indo-Pacific strategy. Eg: India’s growing ties with Russia and Iran, and its push for strategic autonomy, partly stem from concerns over U.S. inconsistency.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen India-U.S. Strategic Dialogue: India should deepen institutional-level engagement with the U.S. to reaffirm mutual interests in the Indo-Pacific, counterterrorism, and technology partnerships, reducing the influence of personality-driven shifts.
    • Pursue Regional Strategic Autonomy: India must continue to build bilateral and multilateral ties with like-minded countries (e.g., France, Japan, UAE) to diversify strategic options and reduce overdependence on U.S. foreign policy swings.

  • In a perilous world, India must read the tea leaves well 

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the world’s growing preference for military force over peaceful talks have made India’s old policy of staying neutral and keeping strategic independence no longer enough.

    Why is India’s neutrality no longer viable in the current global conflicts?

    • Erosion of Strategic Leverage in Multilateral Crises: Neutrality has diminished India’s influence during major global conflicts where clear moral or strategic stands are expected. Eg: During the Israel-Iran conflict, India’s equidistant stance failed to garner goodwill from Iran, while Israel saw no added strategic value either.
    • Increased Global Polarisation and Military Alignments:  The world is now split into rival power groups, and staying neutral is often seen as being unsure or unwilling to take a stand. Eg: The U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites with bunker buster bombs, along with the growing China-Russia-Iran partnership, shows that being neutral in such a situation can actually be a liability and hurt a country’s interests.
    • Loss of Support from Traditional Partners: India’s neutral approach during its own security crises has failed to rally international support. Eg: During the recent India-Pakistan conflict, most West Asian countries and even the U.S. remained non-committal, despite India’s outreach in the Global South.
    • Reduced Credibility of Non-Alignment in a Hard Power World: Global forums are increasingly emphasising military strength over moral positioning. Neutrality is no longer seen as leadership. Eg: At the Shangri-La Dialogue, the U.S. stressed hard power and Indo-Pacific dominance, sidelining softer, non-aligned narratives like India’s.

    What are the threats posed by the China-Pakistan military alliance?

    • Two-Front War Scenario: India faces the real risk of a coordinated military confrontation on both eastern and western borders. Eg: During the India-Pakistan conflict in May, intelligence revealed Pakistan’s preparedness using Chinese-supplied J-10C and JF-17 fighter jets, suggesting synchronised planning with China.
    • Enhanced Pakistani Military Capabilities: China’s transfer of advanced weaponry has significantly boosted Pakistan’s defence systems, improving its precision strike and surveillance capacity. Eg: Chinese radar, missile systems, and drone technology are now integrated into Pakistan’s command and control network, enhancing its offensive potential against India.
    • Asymmetric Nuclear Threat: The alliance magnifies the nuclear imbalance in the region, putting India at a strategic disadvantage. Eg: China and Pakistan together possess nearly a 5:1 advantage in nuclear warheads over India, escalating the deterrence challenge and increasing the risk of nuclear brinkmanship.

    How has India’s Israel-Iran policy impacted its West Asia standing?

    • Loss of Credibility as a Neutral Mediator: India’s attempt to balance ties between Israel and Iran has diluted its influence in the region, as it failed to take a principled stand when it was needed most. Eg: During the Israel-Iran conflict, India’s mere call for “restraint on all sides” disappointed Iran, which expected vocal support against targeted attacks by Israel and the U.S.
    • Strained Relations with Key Regional Powers: India’s visible tilt towards Israel in recent years has alienated several West Asian countries, undermining its strategic and energy interests. Eg: India’s growing defence and technology cooperation with Israel has made its Iran policy less credible, especially after Iran was diplomatically isolated in the recent conflict.

    What are the reforms needed to prepare India for a two-front war? (Way forward)

    • Strengthen Long-Duration War Capabilities: India must boost its ammunition reserves, logistics systems, and supply chain resilience to sustain prolonged conflicts on both fronts. Eg: The UK’s defence audit revealed critical gaps in its own war readiness—India too must conduct similar assessments to plug vulnerabilities.
    • Develop Advanced Technologies and AI Warfare: Investing in Artificial Intelligence (AI), drone warfare, loitering munitions, and electromagnetic systems is crucial to match modern battlefield requirements. Eg: Lessons from the Russia-Ukraine war show the growing role of AI-guided drones and precision weapons in shaping war outcomes.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] How will I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics?

    Linkage: India’s role in emerging strategic alliances, emphasizing the need to understand how new groupings can re-shape India’s influence and standing in global politics. The article underscores that India’s foreign policy is currently facing an “existential crisis” due to events like the India-Pakistan conflict, the China-Pakistan nexus, and the Israel-Iran conflict, where “neutrality is no longer an option.

  • [27th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Fathoming America’s plan to manage AI proliferation

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2021] The USA is facing an existential threat in the form of a China, that is much more challenging than the erstwhile Soviet Union.” Explain.

    Linkage: The article explicitly state that the US views AI technology control as a means to “preserve its lead” against adversaries like China and Russia, seeing advanced AI capabilities as a determinant of national power, similar to nuclear weapons.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The United States’ decision to withdraw the AI Diffusion Framework marks a clear change in policy, but not in its overall strategy to control AI technology. The framework had treated AI like a nuclear threat, aiming to tightly control the export of AI chips, especially to China and Russia. Its removal is seen as positive news, especially for countries like India, which were not treated fairly. However, the U.S. is now trying to achieve the same goals through technology-based controls instead of direct trade rules. This shift from open policy to hidden enforcement could hurt global AI cooperation, cause strategic caution among allies, and lead to repeating the same problems in a new way.p

    Today’s editorial talks about the impact of the United States’ recent decision to cancel its AI Diffusion Framework. This topic is useful for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The United States recently cancelled its AI Diffusion Framework, a set of rules that controlled the export of AI technology. This decision is being seen as a positive move.

    What is the AI Diffusion Framework?

    The AI Diffusion Framework was a set of export control rules announced by the United States in early 2025. It aimed to regulate how advanced AI technology, such as AI chips and model weights, could be shared or sold to other countries.

    What were the key goals of the U.S. AI Diffusion Framework?

    • Restrict Access to Strategic Competitors: The framework aimed to block countries like China and Russia from obtaining advanced AI chips and model weightsto prevent them from enhancing their military and surveillance capabilities through powerful AI systems.
    • Preserve U.S. Technological Leadership: By limiting the global spread of high-performance computing resources, the U.S. sought to maintain its edge in AI development and ensure that cutting-edge innovations remained concentrated within the U.S. and trusted allies.
    • Create a Structured Export Control System: It introduced a clear set of rules combining export controls and licensing, aiming to simplify regulatory procedures and standardize how AI-related technology was shared or restricted across countries.

    Why was the U.S. AI Diffusion Framework seen as counterproductive?

    • Damaged trust among allies and partners: The broad restrictions impacted both rivals and friendly countries, causing diplomatic friction. Some nations that were not classified as preferred allies began investing in independent AI ecosystems to avoid overdependence on the U.S.
    • Accelerated innovation in restricted regions: By limiting access to advanced AI chips, the framework pushed affected countries to create more efficient algorithms that required less computing power. This led to the development of competitive AI models that challenged the dominance of those built with high-end hardware.

    Why is the framework’s withdrawal seen as beneficial for countries like India?

    • Improved Access to AI Hardware and Resources: With the framework withdrawn, countries like India now face fewer barriers in acquiring high-performance AI chips and related technologies. Eg: Indian startups and research institutions can more easily procure advanced GPUs necessary for developing large AI models.
    • Support for Strategic and Technological Autonomy: The removal of restrictions allows India to pursue its own AI development agenda without being constrained by another country’s policy. Eg: India can strengthen initiatives like the IndiaAI Mission and the Semiconductor Mission to build domestic capabilities.
    • Enhanced Global Collaboration Opportunities: The rollback encourages deeper cooperation between India and other nations, including the U.S., in AI research and innovation. Eg: Indian firms may now engage in joint ventures or technology partnerships with U.S. companies without facing restrictive export barriers.

    How do new U.S. AI chip controls reflect a continuation of earlier strategies?

    • Ongoing Restriction on Adversaries: The U.S. continues to block access to advanced AI chips for countries like China by expanding export controls and adding more firms to the Entity List, just as the earlier framework aimed to do.
    • Shift from Trade to Technological Enforcement: Instead of broad trade bans, the new approach focuses on hardware-level restrictions, such as embedding features in chips to monitor or limit usage, reflecting the same strategic intent in a new form.
    • Sustained Focus on Controlling AI Diffusion: The introduction of location tracking mandates and usage controls in AI chips shows the U.S. is still trying to control how and where AI technology spreads, continuing the goals of limiting proliferation and maintaining dominance.

    What are the global implications of U.S. AI export controls on innovation and technological sovereignty?

    • Push for Technological Self-Reliance: Countries affected by the controls are investing in domestic AI ecosystems and indigenous chip manufacturing to reduce dependence on U.S. technology, leading to the rise of multiple, parallel innovation hubs around the world.
    • Erosion of Trust and Collaboration: Export restrictions create privacy concerns, surveillance risks, and a sense of strategic vulnerability, prompting both allies and adversaries to hedge against U.S. influence, thereby weakening global scientific cooperation and technological integration.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government in AI chips?

    • IndiaAI Mission (2024): A ₹10,000 crore initiative focused on developing compute infrastructure, datasets, and talent.
    • Semiconductor Mission (ISM): Includes financial incentives and infrastructure support for AI chip manufacturing and design.
    • Collaborations with the private sector: Partnerships with companies like Micron, AMD, and Tata Group to build chip fabs and R&D centres in India.
    • Supercomputing initiatives: Under PARAM and National Supercomputing Mission, India is developing indigenous high-performance compute for AI workloads.
    • IndiaAI compute platform: Aimed at giving startups and researchers access to high-end GPU clusters.

    Way forward: 

    • Promote Inclusive and Transparent AI Governance: The U.S. and other major powers should work through multilateral platforms to create balanced AI export norms that protect security interests without stifling global innovation or alienating partners.
    • Strengthen Global AI Collaboration Frameworks: Countries like India should advocate for open-access research, joint AI development programs, and capacity-building initiatives to ensure equitable access to AI technology and reduce dependency on a single ecosystem.

  • [26th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The ‘Axis of Upheaval’ in the West Asia conflict 

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2022] How will I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics?

    Linkage: This question highlights a new grouping involving Israel and the USA, both central to the West Asia conflict described as the origin point for the “Axis of Upheaval”. The formation and impact of such new strategic groupings, particularly in the context of the Middle East, are directly relevant to the evolving power dynamics and strategic realignments that define the concept of the “Axis of Upheaval.”

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The recent U.S.-Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear sites and the weak ceasefire that followed have shown that today’s global alliances, often compared to Cold War groups, are not very strong or united. Even though Iran has close economic and political ties with Russia and China, neither country gave any military support. This clearly shows the limits of strategic partnerships when there is a real military threat. The so-called ‘Axis of Upheaval’ made up of Iran, Russia, and China is really just a loose group, without any formal military treaties like those in Western alliances such as NATO. This crisis breaks the idea of a bipolar world and highlights the unequal power dynamics in today’s global politics.

    Today’s editorial discusses global power alliances in the context of the Israel-Iran war. This topic is helpful for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The recent U.S.-Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, followed by a weak ceasefire, has shown that today’s global alliances, often compared to Cold War blocs, are not as strong or united as they appear.

    What are the new global power blocs?

    New global power blocs refer to emerging alliances among countries like China, Russia, and Iran that seek to challenge the dominance of the Western-led global order. These blocs focus on economic cooperation, strategic alignment, and institutional alternatives such as BRICS and SCO, but lack formal military treaties like NATO.

    Why has the Israel-Iran conflict weakened the idea of new global power blocs?

    • Lack of Military Support: Despite Iran’s close ties with Russia and China, neither provided military assistance during the conflict. Eg: Russia, engaged in the Ukraine war, offered only diplomatic mediation, while China limited itself to verbal condemnation.
    • Absence of Binding Alliances: The so-called ‘Axis of Upheaval’ lacks formal military treaties that require collective defense. Eg: Iran’s strategic partnerships with Russia (2025) and China (2021) are primarily economic, not military.
    • Diverging Strategic Interests: Russia and China used the conflict to advance their own interests, letting the U.S. get entangled in West Asia. Eg: The U.S. bombing of Iran may distract American focus from the Indo-Pacific and Europe, which suits Beijing and Moscow.

    What are the strategic limits of Iran’s ties with Russia and China?

    • No Binding Military Pact: Iran’s ties with Russia and China are largely economic and diplomatic, with no formal military alliance or commitment to joint defense.
    • Conflicting Strategic Priorities: Russia is deeply engaged in the Ukraine war, and China is focused on maintaining its economic growth and regional stability, limiting their readiness to back Iran militarily. Eg: Russia has turned to North Korea for troops, showing its own resource constraints.
    • Unequal Benefits: Iran is heavily dependent on these relationships, while Russia and China gain economic and geopolitical advantages without taking on direct strategic risks. For instance, China secures discounted Iranian oil under sanctions, while offering limited concrete support in return.

    How have Russia and China responded to Iran’s crisis post-ceasefire?

    • Diplomatic Support without Military Action: Russia offered to mediate the conflict through a call by President Putin, but this was ignored by the U.S., and no military support was extended.
      Putin’s involvement reflected symbolic backing, not a commitment to defend Iran.
    • Condemnation of Israeli Actions: China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi criticised Israeli airstrikes as violations of international law, showing support through official statements while avoiding direct intervention. This response aimed to maintain China’s global diplomatic posture without escalating tensions.
    • Strategic Caution for Self-Interest: Both countries used the conflict to their advantage by letting the U.S. get entangled in West Asia, potentially weakening its focus on the Indo-Pacific and Ukraine. The crisis served to advance Beijing and Moscow’s strategic space without direct involvement.

    Where does Iran stand diplomatically and militarily after the recent conflict?

    • Diplomatic Isolation and Limited Support: Despite having strategic partnerships with Russia and China, Iran received only verbal and symbolic backing, with no concrete military or institutional support.
      Its regional alliances failed to activate, reflecting a gap between rhetoric and action.
    • Military Weakening and Proxy Setback: Iran suffered a decapitation of leadership and capacity, while its key proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthiswere unable to respond effectively.
      This has weakened Iran’s role as a regional power and exposed its dependence on non-state actors.

    Way forward: 

    • Formalize Strategic Partnerships: Iran, Russia, and China should work toward institutionalising their ties through defense cooperation frameworks, joint military exercises, and security dialogues to build trust and operational coordination.
    • Align Long-term Strategic Interests: The three nations need to develop a shared geopolitical vision that goes beyond transactional ties, ensuring mutual support mechanisms during crises while balancing individual regional priorities.

  • [24th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Pakistan’s role in the U.S.-West Asia calculus

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] In what ways would the ongoing US-Iran Nuclear Pact Controversy affect the national interest of India? How should India respond to this situation?

    Linkage: This question directly addresses a central component of the “U.S.-West Asia calculus”—the US-Iran dynamic. The article explicitly states that the U.S. conducted military strikes against Iranian nuclear installations and that the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) was focused on the situation in West Asia and how to deter Iran with Pakistan’s support.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  On June 22, U.S. President Donald Trump launched The USA recently carried out military attacks on three of Iran’s nuclear sites—an action that could influence the future of West Asia for a long time. on three of Iran’s nuclear sites—an action that could shape the future of West Asia for years. This decision may trigger a long-term conflict between the U.S. and Iran, but it also has major links to South Asia. Just days before the strikes, Pakistan’s Army Chief Asim Munir had an unusual private lunch with President Trump at the White House—something rare for anyone who isn’t a head of state. This points to deeper strategic changes. At the same time, Pakistan is facing rising sectarian tensions, serious economic troubles, and higher defense spending. Its sudden border closure with Iran and growing support from the U.S. raise important questions about Pakistan’s new role in the Iran-Israel conflict and what it could mean inside the country.

    Today’s editorial looks at how the USA’s military strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites and Pakistan’s Army Chief Asim Munir’s rare private lunch with President Trump could affect international relations. This is useful for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The USA recently carried out military attacks on three of Iran’s nuclear sites—an action that could influence the future of West Asia for a long time.

    What could be the impact of a U.S. strike on Iran have on West Asia and the subcontinent?

    • Escalation of Conflict: The strike may trigger a prolonged confrontation between Iran and Western allies, increasing instability in West Asia. Eg: Past U.S. interventions in Iraq (2003) and Libya (2011) resulted in regime change but long-term chaosand extremist expansion.
    • Realignment of Regional Powers: Countries like Pakistan may shift alliances to support U.S. actions, potentially isolating Iran and affecting critical land-based trade routes. Eg: Pakistan closed its land border with Iran in June 2025, limiting Iran’s trade access to South Asia.
    • Security Tensions: U.S. engagement with Pakistan’s military leadership amid regional conflict could embolden Pakistan strategically, raising concerns for India.  

    Why is General Munir’s meeting with Trump strategically significant?

    • Geopolitical Signalling to India and Iran: The timing and optics of the meeting send a message to both India and Iran about Pakistan’s rising strategic relevance in U.S. calculations. Eg: Coinciding with Pakistan closing borders with Iran and India-Pak tensions easing, the visit reshapes regional power equations.

    How do Pakistan-Iran ties affect regional dynamics?

    • Border Tensions and Proxy Conflicts: Pakistan and Iran share a volatile border in Balochistan, where militant groups operate across both sides, causing frequent skirmishes. Eg: In early 2024, both countries exchanged missile strikes after attacks on Iranian security forces allegedly by groups based in Pakistan.
    • Geopolitical Rivalry in Afghanistan: Both countries compete for influence in Afghanistan, affecting regional alliances and the balance of power in Central Asia. Eg: Iran backs Shia groups, while Pakistan supports Sunni factions, intensifying sectarian divides and shaping Afghanistan’s internal politics.
    • Strategic Role in U.S.-Iran Tensions: Pakistan could play a critical role in isolating Iran, especially during a U.S.-Iran conflict, by shutting trade routes and cooperating with U.S. military interests. Eg: On June 15, 2025, Pakistan closed its border with Iran, coinciding with the Pakistani Army Chief’s visit to Washington, signaling alignment with U.S. strategy.

    Where does Pakistan stand economically amid rising defence spending?

    • High Debt Burden : Interest payments consume 74% of revenue, leaving little for other public services. Eg: In FY2025‑26, PKR (Pakistan’s revenue)  8.207 trillion was allocated to interest, out of PKR 11.07 trillion in total revenue.
    • Defense Budget Surge at Development’s Expense: Despite an overall cut in spending, defense gets a 17% increase, while developmental funds are halved. Eg: Defense allocation in FY2025‑26 is PKR 3.29 trillion, whereas development spending dropped to PKR 1 trillion.
    • Heavy Reliance on Bailouts: Pakistan depends on IMF packages and debt rollovers to meet fiscal commitments amid shrinking revenues. Eg: After its 25th IMF bailout, Pakistan secured PKR 1.4 billion in climate resilience funds, along with PKR 16 billion in loan rollovers.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government? 

    • Strategic Engagement with Iran and Gulf Nations: India continues to balance its ties with Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to safeguard energy security and trade interests. Eg: India is actively involved in developing the Chabahar Port in Iran, enhancing access to Afghanistan and Central Asia while bypassing Pakistan. At the same time, India is deepening partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, including in defence and energy sectors.
    • Heightened Border Surveillance: The Indian government has directed increased surveillance and intelligence gathering along the western borders, especially in Jammu & Kashmir, to counter any proxy threats or destabilisation efforts. Eg: Deployment of UAVs and satellite imaging systems has been intensified across vulnerable stretches, and border infrastructure under the Vibrant Villages Programme is being upgraded.

    What should India do? (Way forward)

    • Strengthen Strategic Autonomy in West Asia: India must maintain balanced relations with both Iran and the U.S., ensuring that its energy security and regional interests are safeguarded. Eg: Continue investing in Chabahar Port, a strategic counter to China-backed Gwadar, while also deepening ties with the Gulf monarchies for energy and investment.
    • Enhance Intelligence and Military Vigilance along Western Borders: With increasing Pakistan-U.S. military cooperation and Iran-Pakistan tensions, India must stay alert to any spillover effects. Eg: Boost surveillance in Jammu & Kashmir, especially given General Munir’s renewed rhetoric on Kashmir and increased Pakistani defense spending.

  • India needs a strategy to deal with China’s restrictions on exports of rare earths

    Why in the News?

    The growing trade war between the U.S. and China, marked by rising tariffs, has drawn attention to rare earth elements and critical minerals.

    What is the role of critical minerals in key industries?

    • Clean Energy and Digital Technologies: Critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt are essential for lithium-ion batteries, which are widely used in electric vehicles (EVs) and portable electronics.  
    • Renewable Energy Infrastructure: Minerals like dysprosium and neodymium are used in wind turbines, while tellurium, indium, and gallium are critical for solar photovoltaic cells, vital for clean energy generation.
    • Defence and Strategic Industries: Rare earth elements are critical for manufacturing missile guidance systems, jet engines, and advanced communication equipment. Eg: Gallium and indium are used in high-frequency radar systems and military-grade semiconductors.

    Why is China’s control over rare earths a global concern?

    • Supply Chain Vulnerability: China controls over 90% of global rare earth refining and has the largest reserves, making other countries highly dependent on its exports. In May 2025, China’s export restrictions on rare earth magnets led to global panic and supply concerns in the automobile and electronics sectors.
    • Geopolitical Leverage: China’s dominance allows it to use rare earths as a strategic tool in trade wars or diplomatic tensions, affecting global industrial stability. In response to U.S. tariffs, China imposed restrictions on rare earths, disrupting supply to key U.S. industries.
    • Disruption of Global Industries: Restrictions can hinder production in sectors like renewables, EVs, and defence, slowing global progress in critical technologies. Eg: India’s automobile sector expressed concern about rare earth shortages impacting EV manufacturing and sought government intervention.

    How are countries responding to China’s restrictions?

    • Diplomatic and Trade Negotiations: Major economies like the U.S. and EU are engaging with China to secure continued access to rare earth supplies. Eg: The U.S.-China framework includes commitments that “Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied… by China.”
    • Diversification of Supply Sources: Nations are turning to alternative producers to reduce dependence on China. Eg: Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Vietnam are actively exploring their critical mineral resources to establish new supply options.
    • National Self-Reliance Missions: Countries are launching domestic initiatives to boost exploration, mining, and processing of critical minerals. Eg: India’s National Critical Mineral Mission (2025) aims to conduct 1,200 exploration projects by 2030–31 to bolster local supply chains.

    What measures has India taken for mineral self-reliance?

    • Launch of the National Critical Mineral Mission (2025): A central initiative aimed at securing India’s future needs in critical and rare minerals. This mission includes plans for 1,200 exploration projects by 2030–31 under the Geological Survey of India.
    • Expanding Domestic Exploration & Mining: India is ramping up on-ground efforts to locate and extract critical minerals within its own borders. Eg: The Geological Survey of India is actively spearheading new lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elementexploration programs across several states.
    • Building Processing and Supply Chain Ecosystems: The government is promoting infrastructure for domestic processing, refining, and manufacturing related to critical minerals. Eg: Policy support and incentives are being extended to companies to set up mineral processing plants, reducing dependence on foreign sources.

    Why is a multi-level strategy needed in this sector?

    A multi-level strategy refers to a comprehensive approach that operates on different layers or fronts simultaneously to address a complex issue effectively. 

    • To Ensure Short-Term Supply Security: Relying on a single country like China for essential minerals creates risks of disruption during geopolitical tensions or trade restrictions. Eg: After China’s 34% tariff and export restrictions in 2025, global industries, including India’s auto sector, faced supply uncertainty.
    • To Develop Domestic Capabilities: Long-term resilience requires countries to invest in local exploration, mining, and processing infrastructure. Eg: India launched the National Critical Mineral Mission with plans for 1,200 exploration projects by 2030–31 to reduce import dependence.

    Way forward:

    • Strengthen International Collaborations for Strategic Reserves: India should forge long-term mineral supply agreements and joint ventures with resource-rich countries. Eg: Bilateral ties with Australia, Argentina, and Africa can help secure lithium and cobalt through assured offtake deals.
    • Boost Domestic R&D and Green Mining Technologies: Investing in sustainable exploration, extraction, and recycling technologies will reduce environmental impactand enhance efficiency. Eg: Support for CSIR and private firms in developing indigenous technologies for rare earth processing and battery recycling.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2024] The West is fostering India as an alternative to reduce dependence on China’s supply chain and as a strategic ally to counter China’s political and economic dominance.’ Explain this statement with examples.

    Linkage: The article highlights that China dominates the production and reserves of rare earth elements and has placed export restrictions on them, causing panic over supply shortages. This question encapsulates the broader geopolitical and economic context that necessitates India’s strategy to counter China’s dominance and secure critical supplies, such as rare earths.

  • Places in news: Strait of Hormuz

    Why in the News?

    Iran’s Parliament has approved a motion to block the Strait of Hormuz, raising concerns worldwide.

    Strait of Hormuz

    About the Strait of Hormuz:

    • Geographic Location: The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway that connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and eventually to the Arabian Sea.
    • Dimensions: It is about 167 km long and 33 km wide at its narrowest, making it one of the world’s most strategic maritime chokepoints.
    • Bordering Countries: The strait lies between Iran (north) and Oman (south), with nearby cities such as Bandar Abbas, Khasab, and Dubai.
    • Shipping Lanes: It contains designated lanes just 3 km wide in each direction to manage heavy oil tanker traffic.
    • Key Islands: Important islands include Qeshm, Hormuz, and Hengam (controlled by Iran) and disputed ones like Abu Musa and the Tunbs, claimed by both Iran and the UAE.
    • Naval Depth Advantage: Waters near the Musandam Peninsula reach depths over 650 feet, ideal for deep-draft oil tankers.
    • Security Risks: Due to its narrowness, the strait is vulnerable to disruption from mining, military action, or cyber interference.
    • Historical Tensions: It has witnessed frequent maritime tensions, especially during Iran–West conflicts but has never been fully blocked.

    Its significance:

    • Global Oil Flow: Over 20 million barrels of crude oil per day pass through the strait, accounting for 25% of seaborne oil trade and 20% of global consumption.
    • Gas Exports: It is vital for LNG exports, especially from Qatar, reaching markets across the globe.
    • Asian Dependence: Countries like India, China, Japan, and South Korea import 69% of the oil that flows through the strait.
    • Market Sensitivity: Any disruption can spike global oil prices, increasing fuel and commodity costs worldwide.
    • Limited Alternatives: Overland pipelines like Saudi Arabia’s East-West (5 million bpd) and UAE’s Habshan-Fujairah (1.8 million bpd) offer only partial alternatives.

    Implications of Blockade:

    • Shipping Costs: During geopolitical tensions, insurance and freight charges for using the strait surge significantly.
    • India’s Vulnerability: India relies heavily on the region for oil imports, so instability could raise inflation, disrupt energy supplies, and impact the trade balance.
    • Strategic Response: A full blockade could trigger direct military action, particularly from the US 5th Fleet based in Bahrain.
    • Mutual Economic Impact: Disruption would affect both exporters and importers, including Iran and its major customer, China.
    [UPSC 2010] Which one of the following can one come across if one travels through the Strait of Malacca?

    Options: (a) Bali (b) Brunei (c) Java (d) Singapore*

     

  • [19th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Why are oil prices rising amid Iran-Israel war?

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] In what ways would the ongoing US-Iran Nuclear Pact Controversy affect the national interest of India? How should India respond to this situation?

    Linkage: This question explicitly links “escalating tensions between Iran and Israel” to oil prices “spiralling upwards” due to fears of “potential disruption in oil supplies globally”. The article talks about the Iran’s threats to close the Strait of Hormuz as the “primary reason” for rising prices, as this chokepoint is crucial for transporting a significant portion of global petroleum liquids and oil supply from the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  Oil prices have jumped sharply due to rising tensions between Iran and Israel, mainly because of fears that the Strait of Hormuz — a key route for global oil supply — could be blocked. Brent crude prices rose by 9%, showing how sensitive global markets are to such conflicts. Although prices eased slightly after news of diplomatic talks through Gulf countries, the threat of disruption still remains. For India, which buys over 80% of its oil from abroad, this is a serious concern. It affects not just fuel availability, but also inflation, economic stability, and business investments, making it a major challenge for India’s economy.

    Today’s editorial analyses the impact of tensions between Iran and Israel on crude oil prices. This content would help in GS Paper II (International Relations) and GS Paper III (Indian Economy) in the mains Paper.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, oil prices have risen a lot because of increasing tension between Iran and Israel, mainly due to worries that the Strait of Hormuz — a major route for global oil transport — might be closed.

    Why is the Strait of Hormuz vital for global oil trade?

    • Major Oil Transit Chokepoint: The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints, through which nearly 20 million barrels per day (mb/d) of oil passed in 2024 — about one-fifth of global consumption. Eg: The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported that the strait handled the world’s largest oil tankers transporting oil from Gulf nations.
    • Exports from Key Producers: It serves as the primary export route for major oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, and Qatar. Eg: According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), about one-fourth of the global oil supply exits the Gulf through this strait.
    • Dependency of Asian Markets: A significant portion of oil transiting the Strait goes to Asian economies, which are heavily dependent on West Asian oil. Eg: In 2024, 84% of crude oil and 83% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) transported via the Strait was destined for countries like India, China, Japan, etc.

    What are the economic implications of the Israel-Iran conflict on India’s growth and inflation?

    • Rising Crude Oil Prices Increases Import Costs: A spike in global oil prices due to the conflict raises India’s import bill, as the country imports over 80% of its crude oil needs. Eg: Brent crude surged to $78.50/barrel in June 2024 amid Israel-Iran tensions, directly increasing India’s energy costs and widening the current account deficit.
    • Pressure on Inflation and Input Costs: Higher oil prices translate into increased transportation and production costs, leading to inflationary pressure on goods and services. Eg: Experts like Amit Kumar of Grant Thornton noted that global price shocks could affect India Inc’s profitability and raise inflation even though India doesn’t import oil directly from Iran.
    • Threat to GDP Growth Projections: Prolonged geopolitical instability may lead to delayed private investments and lower industrial output, affecting economic growth. Eg: ICRA’s Chief Economist, Aditi Nayar, warned that a sustained oil price rise could prompt a downward revision of India’s 6.2% GDP growth forecast for FY25.

    How has India reduced its vulnerability to oil price shocks amid West Asian tensions?

    • Diversification of Crude Oil Import Sources: India has expanded its import basket beyond traditional Gulf suppliers to include countries like the U.S., Russia, and Latin American nations. Eg: Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri stated that India is “comfortably placed” due to diversified crude sourcing, reducing overdependence on West Asia.
    • Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR): India has built strategic oil reserves to buffer against short-term supply disruptions or price spikes. Eg: The Indian Strategic Petroleum Reserves Ltd (ISPRL) manages reserves that can support 9–10 days of crude demand, offering resilience during crises.
    • Promoting Renewable Energy and Domestic Production: India is ramping up solar, wind, and ethanol-blended fuels to lower long-term reliance on imported oil. Eg: Initiatives like PM-KUSUM and National Bio-Energy Mission aim to reduce fossil fuel dependence and enhance energy security.

    What are the key drivers of the recent oil price surge?

    • Geopolitical Tensions Between Iran and Israel: The escalation in Israel-Iran conflict, including threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, triggered fears of significant supply disruptions, sending oil prices sharply upward. Eg: Brent crude shot up nearly 9% on June 13, reaching $75.65 per barrel, after heightened tensions.
    • Strait of Hormuz Chokepoint Risk: As a critical maritime chokepoint, any threat to close the Strait could drastically affect global oil flow and increase shipping and insurance costs, contributing to higher prices. Eg: Iran’s repeated threats to disrupt transit through the Strait instilled market anxiety, pushing Brent to an intraday high of $78.50 per barrel.
    • Supply Constraints Due to Sanctions and Regional Export Bottlenecks: U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil exports and potential disruptions to routes via the Suez Canal or Red Sea limit available global supply, exacerbating price volatility.

    Who ensures safe oil transit through Hormuz?

    • United States Navy – Fifth Fleet: The U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, regularly patrols the Strait to deter threats like piracy or military aggression, especially from Iran. Eg: In 2019, after Iranian threats, the U.S. deployed additional naval assets to escort commercial tankers through Hormuz.
    • International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC): A coalition of Western and Gulf nations, including the UK, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain, established the IMSC to protect freedom of navigation in the Gulf region. Eg: The UK Royal Navy has deployed warships like HMS Montrose to escort oil tankers through Hormuz during periods of heightened tension.

    What global actions can reduce related risks? (Way forward)

    • Strengthening Multilateral Naval Patrols: Enhancing joint maritime security through coalitions like the International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC) can deter potential blockades and ensure safe passage. Eg: The U.S. and UK-led naval missions in 2019 escorted oil tankers after Iran’s threats, maintaining uninterrupted oil flow.
    • Diversifying Global Oil Supply Routes: Investing in alternative pipelines and trade routes (e.g., via Red Sea or land-based pipelines) reduces overdependence on chokepoints like Hormuz. Eg: The UAE’s Habshan-Fujairah pipeline bypasses the Strait and delivers oil directly to the Arabian Sea, reducing exposure to disruption.