💥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.

  • Amidst regional ferment, Kurds’ quest for statehood

    Why in the News?

    The chances of Kurds achieving statehood have improved, but they are still divided by national, tribal, and internal ethnic differences.

    What is the current geopolitical situation in West Asia?

    • Rising Tensions Between Israel and Arab States: The Israeli government’s hardline stance on the Palestinian issue is at odds with Arab nations’ insistence on a two-state solution. The expansion of the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and certain Arab countries, is now being challenged by this conflict. Eg, the Israeli government’s policies have led to a strained relationship with countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, who continue to push for Palestinian statehood.
    • Weakened Iran and Resumption of U.S. Pressure: Iran’s geopolitical influence is diminishing due to both internal instability and external pressure from the U.S., including sanctions and military threats. Iran has agreed to negotiate its nuclear program as part of this dynamic. Eg, the U.S. has imposed “maximum pressure” tactics, leading to renewed discussions on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, showing a shift in regional power balances.
    • Economic Instability Due to Declining Oil Prices: The decline in oil prices by 20% in 2025 has raised concerns about the economic stability of the region, which heavily depends on oil exports. This has already caused volatility in the economies of Gulf countries, impacting countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, where the oil sector is a significant source of revenue.

    How is it impacting the Kurdish quest for statehood?

    • Weakened Regional Powers Create Opportunities for Kurdish Autonomy: The instability and weakening of central authorities in Iraq, Syria, and Iran have created opportunities for Kurdish groups to assert autonomy and establish a foothold in the region. Eg, the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq has gained considerable autonomy since the 1990s, and the Kurdish Self Defense Forces (SDF) control significant portions of northern Syria, both reflecting a push for Kurdish statehood amidst regional chaos.
    • Absence of a Unifying Kurdish National Movement: Despite these opportunities, the Kurds lack a unifying ideology or transnational political entity to consolidate their ambitions for statehood. Eg, while some Kurdish factions in Iraq and Syria have made strides towards self-governance, the absence of a coordinated regional Kurdish political structure has hindered their ability to form a fully recognized Kurdish state.

    Why did the Kurds fail to achieve statehood after the 1920 Treaty of Sevres?

    • Opposition from the Turkish Nationalists: The Treaty of Sevres in 1920 promised the Kurds an autonomous state in eastern Turkey, but it was thwarted by the rise of Turkish nationalism under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Eg, the Turkish nationalist movement rejected the idea of a Kurdish state, and Atatürk’s forces succeeded in establishing the Republic of Turkey, which vehemently opposed Kurdish autonomy.
    • Geopolitical Interests of Western Powers: The Western powers, who supported the Treaty of Sevres, were more focused on dismantling the Ottoman Empire and securing their own geopolitical interests in the region, rather than prioritizing Kurdish self-determination. Eg, the Treaty was eventually replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which ignored Kurdish aspirations and reinforced the territorial integrity of Turkey, sidelining the Kurds.

    How has Turkish repression of Kurds led to the formation of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party)?

    • Suppression of Kurdish Identity: Turkish repression of Kurdish culture, language, and political rights led to widespread resentment among the Kurdish population. Eg, in the 1980s, the Turkish government officially classified Kurds as “mountain Turks” and banned the use of the Kurdish language, which prompted a reaction from Kurdish activists.
    • Formation of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party): In 1978, Abdullah Öcalan founded the PKK to demand Kurdish independence through armed struggle, responding to decades of discrimination and oppression. Eg, the PKK launched an insurgency in 1984, which led to a prolonged conflict with the Turkish state, causing tens of thousands of deaths.

    What role has the Kurdish Self-Defence Force (SDF) played in Syria? 

    • Fighting Against Terrorist Groups: The Kurdish Self Defence Force (SDF) played a crucial role in fighting against ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria, particularly in the northern regions. Eg, the SDF, with support from the U.S., was instrumental in the liberation of Raqqa, the de facto capital of ISIS, in 2017.
    • Control Over Syrian Territories: The SDF currently controls nearly 40% of Syria, establishing significant political and military influence. Eg, the SDF’s control over areas like Kobani and Manbij has been a source of tension with Turkey, which accuses the SDF of having links to the PKK.

    How is the potential reduction of American military presence affecting their future?

    • Loss of Strategic Support for Kurdish Forces: The reduction of American military presence in Syria could undermine the Kurdish Self-Defense Forces (SDF), who have heavily relied on U.S. military support in their fight against groups like ISIS. Without this backing, the SDF may face greater vulnerability to Turkish military operations, which view the Kurdish forces as aligned with the PKK. Eg: The SDF’s influence in Syria could diminish, particularly in regions where they have fought hard to establish autonomy, such as in the northeast of the country.
    • Increased Regional Instability: The pullback of U.S. forces could embolden regional powers like Turkey, Iran, and Syria to exert more control over Kurdish regions, weakening their position in any future negotiations for statehood or autonomy. It could lead to more internal conflict and repression within Kurdish-majority areas. Eg: Turkey, already critical of the SDF’s alignment with PKK, could launch more aggressive military operations, further displacing Kurdish communities in Syria.

    How can India take advantage of it? (Way Forward)

    • Strategic Partnerships and Influence in West Asia: India can leverage the evolving geopolitical dynamics in West Asia to strengthen its strategic ties with Kurdish regions, particularly in Iraq and Syria. India can increase its diplomatic and economic engagement with Kurdish political entities to gain influence in the region. Eg: India can build stronger relations with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, offering support in areas like education, healthcare, and infrastructure, which may enhance India’s influence in the region.
    • Energy and Trade Opportunities: As Kurdish regions, especially in Iraq, are rich in oil resources, India can increase its energy imports from Kurdish-controlled areas. Securing energy deals with the KRG could help India diversify its energy supply sources and reduce reliance on traditional suppliers. Eg: India could expand its participation in oil exploration and infrastructure projects in the Kurdish region, similar to its involvement in the development of oil fields in Iraq.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2019] Explain how the foundations of the modern world were laid by the American and French revolution.

    Linkage: Both the American and French Revolutions championed the ideals of self-determination and nationalism, which have been significant drivers for various ethnic groups, including the Kurds, seeking statehood. Understanding the impact of these revolutions on the formation of the modern nation-state system provides a broader context for the Kurdish quest.

  • [17th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: How China is fighting U.S. tariffs

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] What are the key areas of reform if the WTO has to survive in the present context of ‘Trade War’, especially keeping in mind the interest of India?

    Linkage: A “trade war” means a situation where countries, like the U.S. and China, put extra taxes (tariffs) on each other’s products. In this article, we saw how Trump delayed these reciprocal tariffs for most countries but kept them in place for China.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  In the three months since U.S. President Donald Trump introduced his “America First” trade policy—using trade measures to pressure other countries into giving concessions—there are signs it could seriously harm the global economy. A key part of this plan was the introduction of “reciprocal tariffs” to counter what Trump saw as unfair trade practices by other nations. However, on April 9, the day these tariffs were supposed to begin, Trump changed his mind and delayed their implementation by 90 days for all 57 target countries—except China.

    Today’s editorial discusses how Trump’s views on reciprocal tariffs have changed over time. This topic is useful for General Studies Paper 2 (International Relations) and Paper 3 (Indian Economy).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, China’s unexpected response to Trump’s trade war showed its smart long-term planning. By preparing for risks from aggressive trade partners, it managed to handle one of the worst trade tensions ever.

    What are the main features of Trump’s “America First” trade policy?

    • Imposition of Reciprocal Tariffs: The U.S. aimed to impose tariffs on imports from countries that had higher duties on American goods. Eg: A 34% tariff was imposed on Chinese goods, leading to retaliation from China.
    • Push for Bilateral Trade Deals: Trump preferred one-on-one negotiations over multilateral agreements to secure favorable terms. Eg: He delayed tariffs for 90 days to pressure 57 countries into bilateral deals.
    • Targeting Trade Deficits: The policy aimed to reduce U.S. trade deficits by demanding more access to foreign markets. Eg: The U.S. demanded that India open its agricultural market and relax patent laws.

    Why was the implementation of “reciprocal tariffs” postponed?

    • Facilitating U.S.-India Trade Negotiations: The U.S. paused the tariffs to create a conducive environment for bilateral trade discussions with India. Both nations aim to finalize the first phase of a trade agreement by autumn 2025, targeting a bilateral trade volume of $500 billion by 2030. Eg: India is contemplating significant tariff reductions on over half of its $23 billion worth of U.S. imports, marking its most substantial tariff cut in years.
    • Avoiding Economic Disruption for Indian Exporters: The tariff pause offers relief to Indian exporters, particularly in sectors like seafood, which would have been adversely affected by increased duties. Eg: Indian shrimp exporters, who rely heavily on the U.S. market, benefit from the temporary suspension, allowing continued access without additional tariffs.
    • Strategic Focus on U.S.-China Trade Tensions: By postponing tariffs on India and other countries, the U.S. can concentrate its trade enforcement efforts on China, where it has imposed tariffs as high as 125%. Eg: The U.S. maintains a 10% reciprocal tariff on Indian goods, contrasting with the significantly higher tariffs on Chinese imports.
    • Encouraging Indian Concessions in Trade Talks: The delay serves as an incentive for India to make concessions in ongoing trade negotiations, such as reducing tariffs and increasing imports of U.S. goods. Eg: India has agreed to lower tariffs on products like motorcycles and whiskey and to increase purchases of American defense and energy goods.
    •  Preventing Market Volatility and Economic Uncertainty: Immediate implementation of reciprocal tariffs could have led to market instability and economic uncertainty. The pause allows for a more measured approach to trade policy. Eg: Following the announcement of the tariff pause, Indian stock markets rebounded, with the Nifty 50 and BSE Sensex indices experiencing significant gains.

    What hurdles does the U.S. face in negotiating trade deals with countries like India?

    • Tariff and Regulatory Differences: India maintains higher tariffs on several U.S. goods, and there are strict regulations in sectors like agriculture, dairy, and e-commerce that clash with U.S. interests. Eg: The U.S. has long pushed for greater market access for its dairy products, but India restricts imports based on religious and cultural norms around animal feed.
    • Concerns Over Intellectual Property (IP) and Data Localization: The U.S. demands stronger IP protection and opposes India’s data localization rules that require storing data within Indian borders—citing it as a barrier to digital trade. Eg: U.S. tech giants like Amazon and Mastercard have raised concerns over India’s personal data protection policies impacting cross-border data flows.
    • Divergent Strategic and Economic Priorities: India prioritizes strategic autonomy and developmental needs, which often conflict with U.S. demands for liberalized trade and investment norms. Eg: India walked out of the RCEP partly due to fears of opening up markets too quickly, showing its cautious stance in trade liberalization.

    How can global economies respond to U.S. trade unilateralism?

    • Strengthening Regional Trade Blocs and Multilateral Agreements: Countries can reduce dependence on the U.S. by forming or deepening trade alliances within regions to maintain economic stability. Eg: The EU signed trade agreements with Japan and Mercosur to diversify away from U.S.-centric trade after tariff tensions.
    • Filing Disputes Through the WTO Framework: Nations can challenge unfair U.S. tariffs or trade actions at the World Trade Organization to uphold rules-based trade. Eg: The EU, China, and others filed WTO complaints against U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs imposed under national security grounds.
    • Promoting Strategic Bilateral Partnerships: Economies can build stronger bilateral trade ties with other major players to counterbalance U.S. influence and create alternative economic hubs. Eg: China and ASEAN deepened trade through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), enhancing trade flows in Asia-Pacific.

    Way forward: 

    • Revitalise Multilateralism and WTO Reforms: Global economies should work together to strengthen the rules-based trading system and push for WTO reforms to address dispute resolution and emerging trade challenges.
    • Promote Inclusive and Balanced Trade Partnerships: Encourage fair, equitable trade agreements that consider development concerns of the Global South, ensuring that trade fosters mutual growth rather than unilateral advantage.

  • This Word Means: Semiconductor

    Why in the News?

    During the ongoing U.S.-China tariff war, the Trump administration announced that smartphones, computers, and some electronics would be excluded from the 125% tariffs, easing concerns for firms like Apple.

    What decision did the Trump administration make regarding smartphones and computers in the tariff war with China?

    • Exemption from High Tariff Slab: The Trump administration decided that smartphones, computers, and certain other electronics would not be subjected to the 125% reciprocal tariffs on China. Eg: Apple products like iPhones and MacBooks were spared from the highest tariff bracket.
    • Reclassification to Lower Tariff Bucket: These items were instead moved to a lower tariff category of 20%, which was presented as a strategic decision, not a full exemption. Eg: Laptops and other consumer electronics faced a reduced tariff rate instead of the originally proposed higher one.

    Why are semiconductors considered critical for the United States’ national security and economy?

    • Foundation of Modern Technology: Semiconductors power essential devices from smartphones and laptops to defense systems and AI tools, making them indispensable to both daily life and strategic operations. Eg: Military drones and radar systems rely on advanced microchips for data processing.
    • Supply Chain Vulnerability: Heavy reliance on a few countries, especially Taiwan, for chip manufacturing exposes the U.S. to supply disruptions and geopolitical risks. Eg: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted global chip shortages, affecting car and electronics industries.
    • Need for Technological Sovereignty: Boosting domestic semiconductor production ensures technological leadership, economic resilience, and reduces dependence on potentially hostile nations. Eg: New tariffs and subsidies aim to encourage U.S.-based chip manufacturing to reduce reliance on China.

    Where is most of the world’s semiconductor manufacturing currently concentrated?

    • Taiwan: Taiwan leads global semiconductor manufacturing, especially in advanced chips, due to companies like TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company). Eg: TSMC produces over 50% of the world’s advanced semiconductors.
    • South Korea: A major player in memory chip production, with giants like Samsung and SK Hynix dominating the market. Eg: Samsung is a global leader in DRAM and NAND flash memory chips.
    • China: Rapidly expanding its semiconductor industry through state support, though still dependent on foreign technology for advanced manufacturing. Eg: SMIC (Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation) is China’s largest chipmaker but faces U.S. export restrictions.

    When did the US’s share in global semiconductor manufacturing decline significantly? 

    • Since the 1990s: The U.S. share fell from 37% in 1990 to 12% by 2020, as production increasingly shifted to Asia due to lower costs and better infrastructure. Eg: Companies like TSMC (Taiwan) and Samsung (South Korea) became dominant players.
    • Post-globalization era: With the rise of global supply chains and outsourcing, the U.S. focused more on chip design than manufacturing, leading to a production gap. Eg: Firms like Intel design chips in the U.S. but get them manufactured overseas.

    Can India grab the semiconductor supply chain?

    India has strong potential to become a major player in the global semiconductor supply chain.

    • Government Push & Incentives: India has launched a ₹76,000 crore (US $10 billion) semiconductor incentive scheme to attract global chipmakers and boost domestic production. Eg: Micron is investing $2.75 billion in a chip assembly plant in Gujarat under this scheme.
    • Strategic Location & Talent Pool: India offers a large, skilled workforce in electronics and IT, and is strategically located between key markets like Southeast Asia and Europe. Eg: Tata Group is setting up a semiconductor assembly and testing unit in Assam to tap both local and export markets.
    • Global Diversification Needs: Countries and companies want to reduce reliance on Taiwan and China due to geopolitical tensions. India is being seen as a reliable alternative. Eg: U.S. firm Lam Research plans to train 60,000 Indian engineers and invest $1 billion to strengthen India’s semiconductor ecosystem.

    Way forward: 

    • Accelerate Ecosystem Development: Strengthen infrastructure for fabs, ensure reliable electricity and water supply, and support R&D and design capabilities to build a complete semiconductor ecosystem.
    • Foster Global Collaborations: Partner with global semiconductor leaders for technology transfer, workforce training, and joint ventures to fast-track domestic capability and integration into the global supply chain.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2018] How would the recent phenomena of protectionism and currency manipulations in world trade affect macroeconomic stability of India?

    Linkage:  The basic idea behind a tariff war is protectionism, where countries impose taxes on imports to shield their own industries from foreign competition. In this case, India’s manufacturing sector could benefit from the trade war between the USA and China.

  • [14th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Will Trump’s tariffs bring in a recession?

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] How would the recent phenomena of protectionism and currency manipulations in world trade affect macroeconomic stability of India?

    Linkage:  Trump’s administration was known for implementing protectionist trade policies, primarily through tariffs, starting around that period as discussed in the article. The question asks about the impact of “protectionism” on “macroeconomic stability,” which is directly linked to concerns about a potential recession.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The U.S. has been a strong supporter of free trade and a key driver of globalization since the mid-20th century. However, in a surprising shift, President Donald Trump took drastic action on April 2, calling it “Liberation Day,” by drastically changing U.S. trade policy. Until 2024, the U.S. had a low tariff rate of 2 to 3% on imports for two decades. But on April 2, Trump announced that the U.S. would now charge a minimum of 10% tariff on all imports. For imports from around 60 countries, the tariffs would be much higher, called “reciprocal” tariffs. These include a 20% tariff on the European Union (EU), 27% on India, and 46% on Vietnam.

    Today’s editorial analyzes how the U.S. tariffs will affect India and the rest of the world. This topic is useful for GS Paper 2 and 3 in the UPSC Mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    On April 2, U.S. President Trump announced that the U.S. would start charging at least 10% tariffs on all imports.

    What change did Trump announce on April 2 regarding U.S. tariffs?

    • Introduction of a Minimum 10% Tariff on All Imports: Trump declared that the U.S. would levy a minimum 10% tariff on all imported goods, ending decades of low tariff policy. Eg: A previously tariff-free $100 imported item would now cost $110 with the new 10% tariff.
    • “Reciprocal” Tariffs for Select Countries: Tariffs would be significantly higher for around 60 countries, based on what the U.S. perceives as unfair trade practices. Eg: Imports from India now face a 27% tariff, Vietnam 46%, and China a staggering 145%.
    • Highest Tariffs Targeted at China: China, the largest source of U.S. imports, was hit hardest — facing 145% tariffs, as part of an aggressive move to reduce trade deficits and pressure China economically. Eg: A $100 Chinese product would now cost $245 after the new tariff.

    How did markets respond?

    • Stock Markets Nosedived: The announcement caused panic among investors, leading to sharp declines in stock markets around the world. Eg: The U.S. stock market dropped significantly, with major indices like the Dow Jones and S&P 500 seeing large declines as investors feared the impact of the tariffs.
    • Increased Economic Uncertainty: The abrupt tariff increases created a sense of economic uncertainty, particularly regarding trade relations and the global supply chain. Eg: The value of the U.S. dollar fluctuated, with the dollar weakening against several currencies as concerns about a trade war heightened.
    • Commodity Prices Rose: The market anticipated higher costs for goods, especially imported items, leading to a rise in the price of key commodities. Eg: Goods like electronics and consumer products became more expensive, reflecting the expected rise in tariffs and trade barriers.

    What could be the chance of recession after US tariffs? 

    • Reduced Consumer Spending Due to Higher Prices: Higher tariffs make imported goods more expensive, which can lead to inflation and reduced purchasing power among consumers. This slowdown in consumer spending—a key driver of the U.S. economy—can drag growth. Eg: A $1,000 smartphone imported from China may now cost $2,450 due to 145% tariffs, making consumers delay or avoid big purchases.
    • Strained Global Supply Chains and Business Uncertainty: Companies reliant on international supply chains may face higher input costs and uncertainty, leading to reduced investments, production delays, and job cuts.Eg: U.S. auto manufacturers sourcing parts from Asia may cut production or delay expansion due to rising costs and disrupted logistics.
    • Global Retaliation and Slowing Trade: Other countries may retaliate with their own tariffs, triggering a trade war that slows global trade and weakens demand for U.S. exports, increasing the risk of a global economic downturn. Eg: If the EU or China impose counter-tariffs on U.S. agricultural or tech exports, American farmers and companies may face losses, increasing joblessness and recession risk.

    Why is China better prepared for a trade war?

    Reason Why China Is Better Prepared Example
    Diversified Export Markets Reduced reliance on U.S. by expanding trade with Asia, Europe, and Africa. U.S. share in China’s exports dropped from 21% (2006) to 16.2% (2022).
    Lower Export Dependence on GDP Exports now form a smaller part of China’s economy, reducing vulnerability. Export-to-GDP fell from 35% (2012) to 19.7% (2023).
    Focus on Tech & Innovation Heavy investment in AI, EVs, and domestic tech industries to cut foreign dependence. Made in China 2025 boosted self-reliance in high-tech sectors.
    Manufacturing Shift to Neighbors Relocating production to East Asia (e.g., Vietnam) to bypass U.S. tariffs. Maintains supply chains while avoiding direct U.S. tariffs.
    Strong Forex Reserves & Bond Holdings Large reserves used to buy U.S. treasury bonds, ensuring financial strength. U.S. dollar assets reduce trade/finance risks and secure China’s position.

    How will higher U.S. tariffs impact India’s exports? 

    • Reduced Export Earnings: Higher U.S. tariffs could decrease India’s export earnings as Indian goods would become more expensive for U.S. consumers, potentially leading to lower demand. Eg: Products like textiles and gems & jewelry, which are major export items to the U.S., might see a drop in sales due to increased tariffs.
    • Impact on Key Sectors: India’s manufacturing sectors, such as automobiles and electrical machinery, might face stiffer competition due to higher tariffs, reducing their ability to compete in the U.S. market. Eg: Indian automobile exports, especially in segments like small cars, might struggle as U.S. tariffs raise the prices and reduce competitiveness.
    • Diversification of Export Markets: Since the U.S. accounts for 21.8% of India’s total exports, any tariff hike could push India to explore new markets outside the U.S., reducing the impact of the tariff increase. Eg: India might increase its focus on the European Union or Southeast Asian markets, where demand for Indian goods remains strong.
    • Pharmaceutical and Service Exports Unaffected: Higher tariffs on goods may not impact India’s pharmaceutical and services exports as significantly, as they are major contributors to India’s trade surplus with the U.S. Eg: Generic medicines and IT services, such as software development, will likely continue to thrive in the U.S. market despite higher tariffs on other goods.
    • Pressure on Domestic Industry: Increased tariffs could also drive higher production costs in India, as it may face higher input costs for raw materials imported from the U.S. This could hurt the competitiveness of India’s export products. Eg: Sectors like steel and chemicals, which rely on U.S. exports for raw materials, may see a rise in production costs, potentially reducing profit margins.

    When did the U.S. maintain low tariffs?

    • Post-World War II Period (1945–1970s): After World War II, the U.S. championed free trade and maintained low tariffs to encourage global economic recovery and integrate global markets. During this period, the U.S. was seen as the chief architect of globalization. Eg: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), established in 1947, played a crucial role in reducing global tariffs, and the U.S. led many rounds of negotiations to lower its own import duties.
    • 1980s to Early 2000s: During this period, particularly under the Clinton administration, the U.S. kept tariffs low to support global trade liberalization and its dominant position in the world economy. This made the U.S. an attractive market for exports and facilitated the growth of international trade. Eg: The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) signed in 1994 between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico aimed to eliminate tariffs and increase trade between the countries, further reinforcing the U.S.’s low-tariff approach.

    Why was it seen as the chief architect of globalisation during that time?

    • Promotion of Free Trade Agreements: The U.S. led the establishment of various international trade agreements to reduce tariffs and promote open markets. It actively negotiated trade deals that facilitated the movement of goods, services, and capital across borders. Eg: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), later replaced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, was strongly influenced by the U.S. and aimed at creating a more liberalized global trade system.
    • Economic Influence and Dollar Dominance: The U.S. played a dominant role in global finance, with the dollar as the primary global reserve currency. This position helped facilitate international trade and investment, as countries around the world held U.S. dollars for foreign exchange and international transactions. Eg: Countries like China and Japan invested heavily in U.S. Treasury bonds, reinforcing the U.S.’s economic influence and fostering the expansion of global markets.
    • Technological and Industrial Leadership: The U.S. led technological innovation and industrial development, particularly in sectors like technology, finance, and manufacturing. This leadership helped drive global supply chains, with many countries relying on the U.S. for both innovation and as a key export market. Eg: U.S. tech giants such as Microsoft, Apple, and Google set the global stage for the digital economy, helping integrate economies worldwide into a globalized tech ecosystem.

    Way forward: 

    • Diversify Export Markets: India and other countries should explore new markets outside of the U.S., especially in emerging economies and regional trade agreements, to reduce dependency on the U.S. and mitigate the effects of tariff hikes. Eg: Strengthening ties with the European Union, Southeast Asia, and Africa could help reduce reliance on the U.S. market.
    • Enhance Domestic Innovation and Self-Sufficiency: Countries should focus on boosting domestic production, innovation, and technological advancements to reduce vulnerability to external trade barriers and tariffs. Eg: India could prioritize self-reliance in sectors like pharmaceuticals, electronics, and renewable energy to counter tariff pressures.

  • [5th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A case for the Global South in securing Ukraine peace

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2019] The long-sustained image of India as a leader of the oppressed and marginalised Nations has disappeared on account of its new found role in the emerging global order”. Elaborate.

    Linkage:  India’s historical role as a voice for the “Global South” and how its current global positioning might be perceived differently. This article argues for the Global South to take a leading role, which resonates with India’s past image.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  As the Ukraine war moves toward a fragile ceasefire, the big question is who will ensure lasting peace. Western countries suggest a European-led peacekeeping force, but Russia rejects NATO troops. Instead, nations from the Global South—Africa, Asia, and Latin America—could lead a neutral UN mission, showing they can help maintain global peace and stability.

    Today’s editorial looks at how countries from the Global South could lead a peacekeeping mission in the Ukraine war. This topic is useful for General Studies Paper 2 in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The war in Ukraine gives the Global South a chance to show it can be a fair and trusted force in bringing peace and stability to the world.

    Why is a Global South-led peacekeeping mission preferred over a European-led one in Ukraine?

    • Neutrality and Trustworthiness: Global South countries are not directly involved in the Ukraine war and have largely remained neutral, making them more acceptable to both parties Example: India maintains diplomatic ties with both Russia and Ukraine — PM Modi met both leaders within weeks, signalling impartiality.
    • Avoiding NATO-Russia Tensions: European-led missions are viewed by Russia as NATO extensions, which could escalate rather than resolve the conflict. Example: Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov warned that European troops would “fuel the conflict,” not ease it.
    • Strong UN Peacekeeping Experience: Global South nations have a proven record in UN peacekeeping across various conflict zones. Example: The African Union has led missions in Somalia and Sudan; India has contributed over 2,90,000 peacekeepers to UN missions.
    • Public Opposition in Europe: European populations are reluctant to support troop deployments in Ukraine, limiting the viability of a European-led mission. Example: French citizens largely opposed Macron’s suggestion to send French troops for peacekeeping earlier this year.
    • Symbol of Multipolar Global Order: A Global South-led mission would demonstrate their growing role in global governance and diplomacy. Example: Countries like Brazil, Indonesia, and South Africa are part of BRICS and actively engage in UN initiatives, signalling rising influence.

    Why does Russia oppose European or NATO-led peacekeeping forces in Ukraine?

    • Perceived NATO Expansion: Russia sees any European-led force as a cover for NATO expansion, violating its red lines on NATO’s eastward movement. Example: Moscow described a European-led mission as a “NATO Trojan horse” — a disguised attempt to increase NATO’s footprint in Ukraine.
    • Threat to Russian Security: A European or NATO presence near Russian borders is seen as a direct security threat, escalating tensions. Example: Russia strongly reacted when NATO troops were deployed in Eastern Europe after 2014, citing encirclement fears.
    • Lack of Impartiality: Russia considers NATO countries partial and hostile, incapable of mediating fairly between Ukraine and Russia. Example: NATO nations have supplied Ukraine with weapons and intelligence, eroding their neutrality in Russia’s view.
    • Potential for Escalation: Deploying NATO-aligned forces could turn peacekeepers into targets, risking direct confrontation between Russia and NATO. Example: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that NATO troops in Ukraine would “further fuel the conflict.”
    • Undermining Diplomatic Efforts: Russia believes a NATO role in peacekeeping would delegitimize any ceasefire, making negotiations harder. Example: Russia has supported talks in neutral venues like Riyadh, avoiding NATO-influenced settings for peace discussions.

    Which Global South countries are suited for peacekeeping in Ukraine, and what proves their capability?

    • India has vast experience in UN peacekeeping, having contributed over 2,90,000 troops to 50+ UN missions. Example: In 2007, India deployed the first all-women peacekeeping contingent to Liberia, showcasing professionalism and inclusivity.
    •  Brazil has led several UN missions, especially in Latin America and Africa, and is known for diplomatic balance. Example: Brazil commanded the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) from 2004 to 2017, showing leadership in volatile environments.
    •  South Africa: With deep regional peacekeeping experience via the African Union and UN, South Africa balances diplomacy with force. Example: South Africa has contributed troops to peacekeeping missions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) under challenging conditions.
    • Indonesia has a consistent record of contributing troops and police to UN missions, emphasizing neutrality and professionalism. Example: It currently contributes forces to UN missions in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and the Central African Republic (MINUSCA).
    • Chile specializes in demining and post-conflict reconstruction, vital for Ukraine’s recovery. Example: Chilean experts have worked with UN missions on landmine removal in post-war zones, a skill urgently needed in Ukraine.

    How can India’s peacekeeping legacy support a UN mission in Ukraine?  

    • Reputation for Neutrality: India maintains balanced diplomatic relations with Russia, Ukraine, and the West, making it a credible and neutral peacekeeping leader. Example: PM Modi’s meetings with both President Putin and President Zelenskyy within weeks reflect India’s impartial diplomatic posture.
    • Extensive Peacekeeping Experience: India is one of the largest contributors to UN peacekeeping, with over 2,90,000 troops having served in 50+ missions worldwide. Example: India’s leadership in UN missions in South Sudan (UNMISS) and Congo (MONUSCO) shows operational effectiveness in complex conflict zones.
    • Pioneering Gender-Inclusive Peacekeeping: India was the first country to deploy an all-women police contingent in a UN mission. Example: In 2007, Indian women peacekeepers served in Liberia, enhancing community trust and addressing gender-based issues in post-conflict societies.

    Way forward:

    • Leverage India’s Neutral Diplomatic Standing: India can lead or coordinate a Global South-led mission due to its balanced ties with Russia, Ukraine, and the West — ensuring credibility and acceptance by all parties. e.g. India’s PM meetings with both Putin and Zelenskyy show diplomatic neutrality.
    • Utilize India’s Peacekeeping Expertise:
       India should offer experienced troops, including women contingents, to promote trust, inclusivity, and effectiveness in conflict zones. e.g. India’s success in UNMISS and the all-women unit in Liberia reflect its capability.

  • Heard and McDonald Islands

    Why in the News?

    Donald Trump imposed a 10% tariff on imports from the Heard and McDonald Islands, despite no human presence there for nearly a decade.

    About the Heard and McDonald Islands

    • The Heard and McDonald Islands are located in the Southern Ocean, approximately 4,100 km south-west of Perth, Australia, and 1,600 km to the north of the Antarctic coast.
    • The islands are unincorporated external territories of Australia, meaning they are not part of any Australian state but are directly administered by the Australian government.
    • The islands are home to seals, penguins, and albatrosses, and serve as crucial breeding grounds for these species.
    • The islands have been designated as UNESCO World Heritage Sites due to their ecological significance, particularly their rich biodiversity.
    • Heard Island:
      • Heard Island spans an area of approximately 368 square kilometers.
      • The island’s highest point is Mawson Peak, an active volcano standing 2,745 meters (9,006 feet) above sea level.
      • Mawson Peak is one of the most active volcanoes in the southern hemisphere, with eruptions as recent as 2016.
    • McDonald Islands:
      • It is much smaller, covering only 2.5 square kilometers.
      • Geological Nature: These islands are volcanic and part of the same volcanic chain as Heard Island.
      • Climate
      • Both islands experience an extremely cold subantarctic climate, with heavy winds, snow, and ice for much of the year.
      • Temperatures rarely exceed 5°C (41°F) even in summer.

    Strategic Significance

    • The islands are strategically located between Australia and Antarctica, important for monitoring the Southern Ocean, vital for global biodiversity and climate studies.
    • They play a key role in scientific research, particularly in volcanology, glaciology, and climate change, with Australia operating a research station on Heard Island.
    • The islands are protected under the Antarctic Treaty System, ensuring no military activity or commercial exploitation in the region.
    • Rich in marine resources, the surrounding waters are also safeguarded to prevent overfishing and environmental harm.
    • Their geopolitical importance grows as international competition and territorial claims around Antarctica and the Southern Ocean increase.

  • India holds fire as Trump announces tariffs

    Why in the News?

    India faces lower U.S. tariffs than its rivals, making its exports more competitive. This can help expand market share and strengthen trade ties, possibly securing better terms through a future Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

    India faces lower U.S. tariffs than its rivals, making its exports more competitive. This can help expand market share and strengthen trade ties, possibly securing better terms through a future Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

    Why did Trump impose “reciprocal tariffs” on countries like India?

    • Addressing Trade Deficits: Trump viewed large U.S. trade deficits as a national emergency and sought to correct them. Eg: India had a $30+ billion trade surplus with the U.S. in 2019, prompting higher tariffs.
    • High Tariffs by Trading Partners: Claimed that countries like India imposed higher tariffs on U.S. goods while enjoying low tariffs in return. Eg: India’s 52% tariff on U.S. goods (as per Trump’s claim) led to a 27% tariff on Indian exports.
    • Legal Justification Under IEEPA (1977): Used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify tariffs as a response to economic threats. Eg: Trump declared April 2 as “Liberation Day”, marking U.S. retaliation against trade imbalances.
    • Targeting Specific Sectors with Unfair Trade Practices: Accused India of protecting key industries with high tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Eg: India’s high tariffs on motorcycles (100% in 2017, later reduced to 30%) were cited as unfair.
    • Political Strategy for U.S. Domestic Industry: Aimed to protect American jobs and industries by reducing competition from low-cost imports. Eg: Tariffs targeted India’s gems, jewelry, and textiles sectors to favor U.S. producers.

    Why was India’s response to the U.S. tariffs muted compared to others?

    • Ongoing Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) Talks: India was engaged in negotiations with the U.S. for a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) and did not want to escalate tensions. Eg: The Commerce Ministry stated that India values its Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership with the U.S. and remained committed to BTA discussions.
    • Lower Tariff Impact Compared to Regional Competitors: India’s 27% tariff penalty was lower than those imposed on Vietnam (46%), Thailand (37%), Bangladesh (37%), and Sri Lanka (44%), offering a slight comparative advantage. Eg: Indian exports faced less severe tariffs than competitors, reducing the immediate urgency for a retaliatory response.
    • Focus on Exploring New Trade Opportunities: Instead of retaliation, India sought to leverage shifting global trade patterns and assess how the tariffs might create new export opportunities. Eg: The Commerce Ministry stated that it was studying “opportunities that may arise due to this new development.”
    • Avoiding Direct Confrontation with a Key Strategic Partner: India prioritized maintaining strong diplomatic and strategic ties with the U.S., especially given their defense, geopolitical, and economic partnerships. Eg: Unlike China or the EU, which threatened countermeasures, India’s official statement was measured and non-confrontational.
    • Selective Impact on Indian Industries: While some sectors like gems and jewelry were hit hard, others, such as automobiles and auto parts, were not significantly affected, reducing the immediate urgency for a strong reaction. Eg: The Gems & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) called for a quick resolution but did not demand aggressive retaliation.

    Which Indian sectors are most affected by the 27% U.S. tariff?

    • Gems & Jewelry Industry: The U.S. accounts for over 30% of India’s $32 billion annual gems and jewellery exports, making it the hardest-hit sector. Eg: The Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) warned that sustaining India’s $10 billion export volume to the U.S. would be challenging.
    • Textile & Apparel Sector: India is a major exporter of textiles and garments to the U.S., and higher tariffs could reduce price competitiveness against rivals like Vietnam and Bangladesh. Eg: The tariff increase could lead to order cancellations or a shift in sourcing to lower-tariff countries.
    • Processed Food & Agricultural Exports: India exports rice, tea, spices, and processed food to the U.S., which are now subject to higher tariffs, making them more expensive for American consumers. Eg: Indian basmati rice and processed mango products could face a drop in demand due to higher costs.

    How could India gain a comparative advantage? (Way forward) 

    • Lower Tariff Impact Compared to Competitors: India’s 27% tariff is lower than Vietnam (46%), Thailand (37%), Bangladesh (37%), and Sri Lanka (44%), making Indian goods relatively cheaper in the U.S. market. Eg: Indian textile and leather exports could remain more competitive than those from Bangladesh or Vietnam.
    • Potential Market Share Expansion: Higher tariffs on regional competitors may shift U.S. import preferences toward India, increasing Indian exports in affected sectors. Eg: If Bangladesh’s apparel exports become too costly, U.S. buyers may turn to Indian manufacturers for sourcing.
    • Strengthened Trade Relations with the U.S: By maintaining a measured diplomatic response and continuing trade negotiations, India can secure long-term benefits through a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA). Eg: A favorable BTA could lead to tariff reductions or exemptions for key Indian industries like pharmaceuticals and IT services.

    Mains PYQ:

    Question: How would the recent phenomena of protectionism and currency manipulations in world trade affect the macroeconomic stability of India? [UPSC 2022]

    Linkage: The potential impact of protectionist measures (like tariffs) on India’s economy.

  • [1st April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Why are tensions high in the Arctic?

    PYQ Relevance:

    Question: “If the last few decades were of Asia’s growth story, the next few are expected to be of Africa’s.” In the light of this statement, examine India’s influence in Africa in recent years. [UPSC 2021]

    Linkage: The broader context of competition for influence in the continent. 

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The Arctic has been isolated for centuries, but climate change is melting ice, which leads to opening access to valuable resources like oil, gas, and rare earth metals. Melting ice is also creating new trade routes. Unlike Antarctica, the Arctic has no strong legal protections, leading to territorial claims and military activity, increasing global tensions.

    Today’s editorial discusses the geopolitical impact of climate change in the Arctic. This topic is relevant for GS Paper 2 (International Relations) and GS Paper 3 (Environment).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Global experts are concerned about increasing tensions in the Arctic, cautioning that if not controlled, they might cause conflict in the area.

    arctic

    What are the key factors driving increased geopolitical tensions in the Arctic?

    • Climate Change & Melting Ice: The Arctic ice cap is shrinking, making previously inaccessible natural resources and trade routes viable. Example: The opening of the Northeast Passage along Russia’s coast could significantly reduce shipping times between Asia and Europe.
    • Competition for Natural Resources: The region holds an estimated 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30% of untapped natural gas, along with rare earth minerals. Example: Greenland has significant deposits of rare earth elements, attracting interest from China and the U.S.
    • Territorial Disputes & Overlapping Claims: Countries are extending their maritime boundaries under UNCLOS to claim more of the Arctic seabed. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark have overlapping claims to the Lomonosov Ridge, a key Arctic seabed area.
    • Military Posturing & Strategic Control: Nations are increasing their military presence to assert dominance and protect interests. Example: Russia has expanded its Arctic military bases and deployed nuclear-powered icebreakers, while NATO has increased Arctic exercises.
    • New Maritime Trade Routes & Geopolitical Rivalry: The melting ice is opening faster, alternative shipping lanes, bypassing traditional routes like the Suez Canal. Example: China is promoting the Polar Silk Road via the Northeast Passage, while Russia maintains strict control over Arctic navigation.

    Who are the primary stakeholders controlling different regions of the Arctic?

    • Arctic Coastal Nations (Arctic Council Members): Eight countries control Arctic land and territorial waters: Canada, Denmark (via Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the U.S. Example: Russia has the largest Arctic coastline and controls key ports, while Canada claims sovereignty over the Northwest Passage.
    • International Governance & UNCLOS: The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regulates maritime claims, allowing nations to extend seabed claims if proven as a continental shelf extension. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark have all submitted overlapping claims to the Arctic seabed under UNCLOS.
    • Non-Arctic Global Powers & Observers: Non-Arctic nations like China, India, the UK, and the EU monitor Arctic developments due to strategic interests in trade routes and resources. Example: China declared itself a “Near-Arctic State” in 2018 and is investing in icebreaker ships to influence Arctic shipping lanes.

    Where do territorial disputes and conflicting claims arise among Arctic nations?

    • Competing Seabed Claims under UNCLOS: Arctic nations claim extended seabed areas beyond their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) by proving geological extensions of their continental shelves. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark (via Greenland) have overlapping claims to the Lomonosov Ridge in the central Arctic Ocean.
    • Northwest Passage Dispute (Canada vs. U.S.): Canada considers the Northwest Passage part of its internal waters, granting it control over navigation. The U.S. and other nations claim it is an international strait, allowing free passage. Example: The U.S. has conducted “freedom of navigation” operations in the passage, challenging Canada’s sovereignty.
    • Svalbard Archipelago (Norway vs. Russia): Norway administers Svalbard under the Svalbard Treaty (1920), granting access to signatory nations for commercial activities. However, Russia argues for broader rights. Example: Russia continues to expand mining operations in Svalbard and has politically challenged Norway’s restrictions on military activity there.
    • Greenland Sovereignty & U.S. Interest (Denmark vs. U.S.): The U.S. has questioned Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland and previously attempted to purchase the island due to its strategic location and rare earth minerals. Example: In 2019, then-U.S. President Donald Trump expressed interest in buying Greenland, leading to diplomatic tensions with Denmark.
    • Barents Sea & Arctic Borders (Norway vs. Russia): Russia and Norway have had disputes over their maritime boundary in the Barents Sea, an area rich in oil, gas, and fisheries. Example: A 2010 agreement settled much of the dispute, but tensions persist, especially with increasing Russian military activity near Norwegian waters.

    Why is the Arctic considered strategically important for global powers?

    • Rich Natural Resources: The Arctic is estimated to hold 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30% of its untapped natural gas, along with rare earth elements, phosphates, and fisheries. Example: Russia has significantly invested in Yamal LNG projects, while Greenland has attracted interest from China and the U.S. for its rare earth deposits.
    • New Trade Routes Due to Melting Ice: The Northeast Passage (along Russia’s coast) and the Northwest Passage (through Canada) could drastically reduce global shipping distances, saving billions in transportation costs. Example: China’s “Polar Silk Road” seeks to use the Northeast Passage for trade, reducing travel time between East Asia and Europe by 40% compared to the Suez Canal route.
    • Military & Geopolitical Significance: The Arctic provides strategic military advantages, including submarine deployment zones, early warning radar systems, and missile defense capabilities. Example: Russia has established new Arctic military bases, the U.S. has expanded its Thule Air Base in Greenland, and NATO has increased military exercises in the region.

    How are nations like Russia, China, and NATO asserting their influence in the Arctic region?

    • Russia: Militarization and Territorial Claims: Russia has the largest Arctic military presence, including nuclear-powered icebreakers, air bases, and missile defense systems. It has also made territorial claims under UNCLOS to extend its control over the Arctic seabed. Example: In 2007, Russia planted its flag on the Arctic seabed at the North Pole and continues to expand its Arctic military bases, such as in Franz Josef Land and the Kola Peninsula.
    • China: Economic Investments and Strategic Partnerships: China, though not an Arctic nation, calls itself a “Near-Arctic State” and is expanding its influence through investments in Arctic infrastructure, scientific research, and trade routes (Polar Silk Road). Example: China has invested in Arctic mining projects in Greenland and collaborated with Russia on LNG projects, like the Yamal LNG plant. It is also building nuclear-powered icebreakers.
    • NATO: Strengthening Military Presence and Alliances: NATO has intensified military exercises and surveillance in the Arctic, especially after Finland and Sweden joined the alliance following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Example: In 2024, NATO conducted large-scale Arctic military drills near the Russian border in Finland and strengthened defense ties with Canada and Norway.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthening Arctic Governance & Diplomacy: Enhance international cooperation through the Arctic Council and UNCLOS to manage territorial disputes, resource exploration, and environmental challenges. Example: Establish legally binding agreements for sustainable Arctic resource extraction and conflict resolution mechanisms to prevent geopolitical tensions.
    • Balancing Economic Development with Environmental Protection: Promote responsible Arctic development by enforcing strict environmental regulations while ensuring indigenous rights and sustainable economic activities. Example: Encourage renewable energy projects, scientific research, and eco-friendly shipping practices to mitigate the impact of Arctic exploitation.

  • [29th March 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Advantage China in Africa’s nuclear energy market race 

    PYQ Relevance:

    Question: “If the last few decades were of Asia’s growth story, the next few are expected to be of Africa’s.” In the light of this statement, examine India’s influence in Africa in recent years. [UPSC 2021]

    Linkage: The broader context of competition for influence in the continent. 

    Mentor’s Comment:  The Russia-Ukraine war highlighted the need for energy security, affecting even Africa. As African leaders rethink their energy sources, nuclear power is becoming a key solution. Currently, South Africa has Africa’s only nuclear plant, but countries like Ghana, Nigeria, and Kenya plan to adopt nuclear energy. By 2035, Africa could generate 15,000 MW, attracting $105 billion in investments.

    Today’s editorial talks about how African countries are changing their energy sources and how China is becoming a major player in Africa. This content would help in GS Paper 2 International relation.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    With several African nations reshaping their energy sources. China is likely to become their top choice for partnership, offering financial support, technology, and infrastructure to expand their nuclear energy sector.

    What are the key factors driving Africa’s shift toward nuclear energy?

    • Energy Security & Reduced Dependence on Imports: The Russia-Ukraine war exposed energy vulnerabilities, forcing African nations to diversify energy sources. Example: South Africa relies on coal but is now exploring nuclear expansion to ensure stable energy supply.
    • Expanding Electricity Access: Many African countries face severe power shortages, affecting economic growth and quality of life. Example: Nigeria has frequent blackouts and signed an MoU with China to develop nuclear power plants.
    • Clean Energy Transition & Climate Goals: African nations aim to reduce carbon emissions and shift from fossil fuels to meet global climate commitments. Example: Uganda plans a 2 GW nuclear plant to support its clean energy goals by 2031.
    • Economic & Industrial Growth: Nuclear energy can power industries, create jobs, and attract foreign investments. Example: Ghana is developing Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) with U.S.-based NuScale Power to boost industrialization.
    • Foreign Investment & Technological Advancements: Countries like China, Russia, and the U.S. are investing in Africa’s nuclear sector, providing funding and expertise. Example: Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger signed nuclear agreements with Russia’s Rosatom to develop their energy sector.

    Which countries are leading the race to invest in Africa’s nuclear market, and why?

    • China – The Dominant Player: Offers easy financing and infrastructure development under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Example: Nigeria & Uganda signed MoUs with China to build nuclear power plants, with Uganda planning a 2 GW nuclear plant by 2031.
    • Russia – Strategic Engagement: Through Rosatom, Russia has signed agreements with multiple African nations, leveraging its nuclear expertise. Example: Egypt’s El Dabaa nuclear plant is being built by Rosatom, though progress is slow due to economic challenges.
    • United States – Seeking a Foothold: Organizing the US-Africa Nuclear Energy Summit (USANES) to strengthen ties and push for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). Example: Ghana partnered with NuScale Power and Regnum Technology Group to develop SMRs.
    • France – Losing Influence: Historically dominated Africa’s nuclear sector but is now struggling to maintain relevance, especially in Francophone Africa. Example: South Africa’s Koeberg nuclear plant was built by a French consortium, but new projects are going to other players.
    • South Korea – Emerging Contender: Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power (KHNP) is actively exploring opportunities in Africa’s nuclear energy sector. Example: South Korea is negotiating to supply nuclear reactors to various African countries, competing with China and Russia.

    How is China strengthening its dominance in Africa’s nuclear energy sector?

    • Financial Support & Infrastructure Investment: China provides easy financing and builds transmission networks through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Example: Uganda signed an MoU with China in 2024 for a 2 GW nuclear plant, with the first 1 GW unit expected by 2031.
    • Training & Scholarships for African Engineers: The China Atomic Energy Authority, in cooperation with the IAEA, offers nuclear training programs for African students. Example: Since 2012, African students have been trained in Chinese nuclear procedures and technology, making China a preferred partner.
    • State-Owned Companies Leading Expansion: China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) and China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) spearhead projects across Africa. Example: Nigeria signed a deal with CNNC in 2024 to develop nuclear power plants, covering design, construction, and maintenance.
    • Comprehensive Agreements Beyond Just Nuclear Plants: China integrates nuclear power development with broader energy and infrastructure investments, making deals attractive. Example: Kenya is considering China for both a research reactor and potential future nuclear plants as part of wider infrastructure projects.
    • Exploiting Gaps Left by Other Players: With France losing influence and Russia struggling financially, China steps in with better financing and execution capacity. Example: Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, despite approaching Russia’s Rosatom, may turn to China for funding and technology due to Russia’s economic constraints.

    Where are African countries planning to build new nuclear plants, and what are their projected timelines?

    • Egypt – El Dabaa Nuclear Plant: Egypt is building a large nuclear plant with help from Russia’s Rosatom.The first reactor is expected to start working by 2028.
    • Uganda – 2 GW Nuclear Power Plant: Uganda signed an agreement with China in 2024 to build a big nuclear plant. The first part (1 GW) should be ready by 2031.
    • Nigeria – Future Nuclear Plants: Nigeria signed an agreement with China in 2024 to develop nuclear energy. The timeline is not confirmed yet.
    • Kenya – Research Reactor: Kenya plans to build a small research reactor by 2030 to learn more about nuclear energy. It has not yet chosen a partner for a full power plant.
    • Ghana – SMRs & Large Reactor: Ghana is working with U.S. company NuScale for small reactors and China for a big reactor. The exact timeline is still unclear.

    Why is India’s access to African uranium becoming more challenging?

    • Growing Chinese Influence: China is investing heavily in Africa’s nuclear sector, securing long-term uranium supply deals. Example: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) funds energy projects, strengthening its ties with uranium-rich nations like Namibia and Niger.
    • Geopolitical Realignments: Many African nations are aligning with China and Russia, reducing India’s negotiating power. Example: Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have strengthened ties with Russia, which may affect India’s access to uranium deals.
    • Competition from Other Global Players: France, Russia, and the U.S. are also competing for uranium resources, making it harder for India to secure long-term agreements. Example: France has historical control over Niger’s uranium exports, limiting India’s access.
    • Economic & Infrastructure Constraints: India lacks direct investment in African uranium mining compared to China, which provides infrastructure and financial support. Example: China’s CNNC (China National Nuclear Corporation) has mining rights in Namibia, while India only has agreements without major investments.
    • Security & Political Instability: Many uranium-rich African countries face political instability and security risks, making long-term agreements uncertain. Example: Niger’s 2023 military coup created uncertainty in uranium exports, impacting India’s potential deals.

    What should India do to secure a uranium supply from Africa? (Way forward)

    • Increase Direct Investment in Mining & Infrastructure: India should partner with African nations to develop uranium mines, processing facilities, and infrastructure instead of just relying on purchase agreements. Example: India can invest in Namibia’s uranium mining sector, similar to how China’s CNNC has secured long-term rights.
    • Strengthen Bilateral & Multilateral Agreements: India must negotiate long-term uranium supply deals with African nations through trade pacts and diplomatic engagement. Example: India can expand its agreements under India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) to secure uranium from Niger, Malawi, and South Africa.
    • Leverage India’s Civil Nuclear Agreements & Technology: India should offer nuclear technology collaboration to African nations as an incentive to secure uranium supply. Example: Partnering with Ghana and Kenya on Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) could help India gain better access to uranium sources.

  • India must address illegal emigration with empathy and urgency

    Why in the News?

    The U.S. deporting dozens of Indians for being illegal immigrants is not unexpected or new.

    What are the reasons behind it? 

    • Illegal Immigration Enforcement: The deportations are part of intensified Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations aimed at identifying, detaining, and deporting individuals who are in the U.S. without proper documentation.
    • Large-Scale Illegal Migration – Many Indians, particularly from Gujarat, Punjab, and Haryana, attempt to enter the U.S. illegally through Mexico and Canada due to economic distress and job shortages.

    What is the potential impact of US immigration policies on Indian students and professionals?

    • Legal Migration Channels: The Indian government is keen on ensuring that legal migration channels to the U.S. for Indian nationals are not restricted by the U.S. administration. These legal routes include H-1B visas for skilled workers and visas for students.
    • Deterrence of Illegal Migration: Both the U.S. and India are engaged in deterring illegal migration while creating more avenues for legal migration from India to the U.S.
    • Increased Deportations: Deportation of Indian nationals from the United States surged by 400% in the past three years. In 2024, 1,529 Indians were deported, a significant jump from 292 in 2021.
    • Impact on Undocumented Indians: Approximately 725,000 undocumented Indians reside in the U.S., primarily from Punjab and Gujarat. As of November of the previous year, 20,407 undocumented Indians were either facing final removal orders or were held in detention centers of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    How will this impact the USA? 

    • Labour Market Disruptions:  Deportations can create labor shortages in sectors reliant on immigrant workers, such as construction and hospitality. (Example: Indian workers contribute significantly to the U.S. IT and service industries.)
    • Diplomatic Tensions:  Large-scale deportations may strain U.S.-India relations, especially if handled insensitively. (Example: The use of military flights for deportations sparked protests from other countries like Colombia.)

    How might the deportation of Indian nationals affect the political landscape in India? 

    • Domestic Political Fallout: The deportation of thousands of Indians could become a political issue, with opposition parties blaming the government for failing to create adequate job opportunities at home.
    • Diplomatic Challenges: The mass deportations could strain India-U.S. relations, particularly if deportees face harsh treatment, triggering diplomatic interventions.
    • Public Backlash: The use of military flights and reports of inhumane treatment, such as shackling, may create anti-U.S. sentiment among the Indian public.
    • State-Level Political Implications: States with high numbers of deportees (Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana) may experience political unrest, with local governments facing pressure to provide jobs and reintegration support.
    • Rise in Anti-Illegal Migration Policies: The Indian government may be compelled to introduce stricter measures against illegal immigration and human trafficking networks, affecting those attempting to migrate illegally.
    • Impact on Indian Diaspora Relations: The large-scale return of undocumented migrants could impact remittances, economic support for families, and the broader perception of Indian migrants globally.

    What should India do? (Way forward)

    • Strengthen Domestic Employment Opportunities: Implement targeted economic reforms, boost job creation in high-migration states (Gujarat, Punjab, Haryana), and address the root causes driving illegal migration, such as agricultural distress and unemployment.
    • Enhance Public Awareness & Legal Migration Channels: Conduct awareness campaigns on the risks of illegal immigration while expanding safe and legal pathways for skilled migration through bilateral agreements with the U.S. and other countries.
    • Engage in Diplomatic & Policy Advocacy: Strengthen diplomatic efforts to ensure fair treatment of deported individuals, negotiate favourable visa policies for Indian professionals and students, and collaborate with the U.S. on workforce mobility solutions.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q ‘Indian diaspora has a decisive role to play in the politics and economy of America and European Countries’. Comment with examples. (UPSC IAS/2020)