💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS3-21.Role of External State and Non-state Actors in creating challenges to Internal Security.

  • To build Roads is to build peace: Developmet in tribal hinterlands affected by Maoist Insurgency

    Introduction

    Roads in India’s Maoist-affected areas are more than physical infrastructure; they are symbols of the state itself. For communities long governed by neglect or non-state actors, the arrival of a road often marks the first visible sign of governance. Research and field evidence indicate that road development improves access to electricity, healthcare, education, and security while simultaneously displacing the influence of insurgents. Yet, roads alone cannot resolve conflict—they must be embedded in an ecosystem of justice, dignity, and inclusion.

    Why is this in the news?

    In regions affected by Maoist insurgency, particularly in Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Odisha, roads have emerged as a strategic instrument of peacebuilding. Recent studies (Jain & Biswas, 2023) show a correlation between road connectivity and reduced crime, while international evidence (Prieto-Curiel & Menezes, 2020) highlights how poor connectivity perpetuates violence globally. This marks a shift in governance strategy, from viewing infrastructure as purely developmental to recognizing it as a political and stabilising force.

    How do roads reclaim governance from insurgents?

    1. Governance presence: Roads bring schools, clinics, and police stations, representing visible and accountable state authority.
    2. Displacement of parallel systems: Maoists often establish informal courts, taxation systems, and welfare activities in remote areas. Roads weaken these structures by enabling the state to reclaim legitimacy.
    3. Diego Gambetta’s insight: Like the Sicilian Mafia, insurgents thrive where the state withdraws. Infrastructure fills the governance vacuum.

    What role do insurgent groups play in governance gaps?

    1. Informal welfare: Research by Alpa Shah (2018) and Human Rights Watch (2009) shows Maoists provide rudimentary health and welfare services in villages.
    2. Strategic legitimacy: As Zachariah Mampilly (2011) argues, such services are not altruistic but intended to gain legitimacy.
    3. Coercion with care: Maoist medical aid or welfare is tied to fear and control, not democratic accountability.

    Why are extralegal institutions problematic?

    1. Absence of safeguards: Maoist-run “jan adalats” often issue punishments, even executions, without due process.
    2. Opaque justice: Decisions reflect entrenched hierarchies, patriarchy, and mob reprisals rather than rule of law.
    3. Comparison with khap panchayats: Like insurgent institutions, caste councils also deliver swift but exclusionary justice outside constitutional norms.

    How do roads act as political infrastructure?

    1. Symbolic presence: Each road signals that “the state is here to stay,” as seen in Chhattisgarh under B.V.R. Subrahmanyam’s governance strategy.
    2. Crime reduction: Jain and Biswas (2023) show connectivity lowers rural crime rates.
    3. Global parallels: Prieto-Curiel & Menezes (2020) demonstrate that poor connectivity correlates with higher violence across contexts.

    What safeguards are essential for success?

    1. Justice mechanisms: Roads must be accompanied by functioning courts and legal institutions to prevent arbitrary authority.
    2. Healthcare and welfare: Clinics, schools, and social infrastructure ensure that development is inclusive.
    3. Community participation: Roads must be built with the village, not just through the village, to ensure legitimacy and trust.

    Conclusion

    Roads in conflict-prone tribal regions represent more than mobility, they embody the arrival of governance and the possibility of peace. Yet, infrastructure without justice risks becoming a symbol of control rather than inclusion. For lasting impact, roads must be accompanied by democratic institutions, safeguards, and rights-based governance. To build roads, then, is indeed to build peace.

    Value Addition

    Naxalism: Definition & Origins

    • Definition: Left-Wing Extremism (LWE); armed, rural-based movement rooted in land alienation, poverty, displacement, forest rights, and state neglect.
    • Origins: Began with the 1967 Naxalbari peasant uprising in West Bengal; later consolidated under CPI (Maoist) formations.
    • Areas Most Affected — Historical Peak (late 2000s)
      • Spread: Nearly 180 districts across multiple states — the so-called Red Corridor.
      • Core states: Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh/Telangana, parts of Maharashtra & Madhya Pradesh.
    • Areas Most Affected — Recent (2024–25)
      • Reduced footprint: Down to ~38 districts (2024); further shrinking per 2025 statements.
      • Residual hotspots: Bastar (Chhattisgarh), Gadchiroli (Maharashtra), parts of Jharkhand & Odisha, and Chhattisgarh–Telangana border.
    • Why This Shift Matters 
      • Then: Widespread insurgency → blanket rural development response.
      • Now: Concentrated in forested pockets → targeted counter-insurgency + development (roads, police camps, rehabilitation).

    What is Operation Black Forest?

    • What / where / when: Operation Black Forest (also reported as Operation Kagar in some outlets) was a focused anti-Maoist offensive launched along the Chhattisgarh–Telangana border in April–May 2025 targeting PLGA (People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army) units in hilly forest belts such as the Kareguttalu/Karegutta hills. 
    • Claimed outcomes (official account): The government/security forces announced significant results — arrests, large recoveries of IEDs, explosives and weapons and the neutralisation (killed/captured) of several Maoists; the Home Minister hailed the operation as a major success and linked it to the government’s goal of a “Naxal-free India.’’

    India’s Current Strategy Against Naxalism

    • Security operations & coordination – Intensified offensives (e.g., Operation Black Forest), joint CRPF/state police actions, inter-state Unified Commands.
    • Connectivity first – Roads → schools → clinics → police camps; infrastructure as the entry point of governance.
    • Surrender & rehabilitation – Incentives for cadres to lay down arms, with livelihood and legal reintegration support.
    • Technology & intelligence – Use of UAVs, better signal interception, geolocation, and joint intel sharing.
    • Development & governance – Focus on PESA, land and forest rights, MGNREGA, social welfare schemes to address grievances.
    • Exam angle: India uses a mix of “hard” (security, tech) and “soft” (development, rights, rehab) measures — success lies in balancing both.

    Way Forward (Practical + Scholarly Insights)

    • Consolidate gains, avoid militarised development – Pair operations with public-goods delivery to build trust.
    • Rights-based development – Implement PESA/FRA in spirit; ensure Gram Sabha consent and agency.
    • Build accountable institutions – Mobile courts, health camps, schools, and police with transparency; replace jan adalats with constitutional justice.
    • Credible rehabilitation – Beyond cash payouts, provide skills, jobs, and long-term livelihood security.
    • Address political economy – Regulate mining/plantation projects; enforce benefit-sharing and consent to prevent discontent.
    • Theoretical insights – Gambetta: extralegal actors thrive in governance vacuums → fill with state services. Mampilly: insurgent welfare is strategic → counter with accountable service delivery.
    • Human rights monitoring – Independent oversight of security and development efforts to ensure legitimacy.
    • One-liner synthesis for mains: Operational successes show improved reach, but a true “Naxal-free” India requires roads + rights + jobs anchored in constitutional justice and inclusive governance.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] Naxalism is a social, economic and development issues manifesting as a violent internal security threat. In this context, discuss the emerging issues and suggest a multilayered strategy to tackle the menace of Naxalism.

    Linkage: The article shows how roads act as instruments of governance, reducing isolation and weakening insurgent legitimacy, thereby addressing the socio-economic roots of Naxalism. Yet, it cautions that infrastructure alone cannot resolve conflict unless coupled with justice, healthcare, education, and community participation. This aligns with the PYQ’s call for a multi-layered strategy—combining development, security, and rights-based governance.

  • Technology Perspective and Capability Roadmap (TPCR-2025)

    Why in the News?

    The Ministry of Defence has released the Technology Perspective and Capability Roadmap 2025 (TPCR-2025), a 15-year blueprint for military preparedness and modernization.

    About Technology Perspective and Capability Roadmap (TPCR-2025):

    • Overview: A strategic modernization blueprint released by the Ministry of Defence to guide India’s Armed Forces for the next 10–15 years.
    • Scope: Covers tri-services for multi-domain operations across land, sea, air, cyber, and space.
    • Industry Role: Provides clear requirements to defence industry, MSMEs, and start-ups to focus R&D, manufacturing, and innovation.
    • Policy Alignment: Linked to Atmanirbhar Bharat, reducing import dependence and strengthening indigenous production.
    • Objective: Ensure forces remain technologically competitive, prepared for emerging threats, and resilient in a dynamic security environment.

    Key Features of TPCR-2025:

    • Nuclear & CBRN Preparedness: Strengthening nuclear command systems, survivability infrastructure, radiation detection, decontamination units, unmanned CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear) vehicles.
    • Drones & Unmanned Systems: Development of stealth drones (range 1,500 km, altitude 60,000 ft), AI-enabled loitering munitions, anti-drone EW bubbles.
    • Electronic & Cyber Warfare: Deployment of advanced jammers, EW payloads, info-dominance systems, and readiness for cyber and space warfare.
    • Service Modernization:
      • Army: New tanks, light tanks, UAV-launched PGMs, electromagnetic weapons.
      • Navy: New destroyers, corvettes, mine vessels, nuclear-powered warships, third aircraft carrier.
      • Air Force: Stratospheric airships, long-range cruise missiles, hardened PGMs.
    • Implementation: Regular industry–services consultations, engagement with MSMEs and start-ups, periodic updates.

    Significance:

    • Serves as a capability roadmap for long-term defence planning.
    • Strengthens domestic defence ecosystem.
    • Ensures future combat readiness in multi-domain operations.
    [UPSC 2020] In India, why are some nuclear reactors kept under “IAEA safeguards” while others are not?

    Options: (a) Some use uranium and others use thorium

    (b) Some use imported uranium and others use domestic supplies

    (c) Some are operated by foreign enterprises and others are operated by domestic enterprises

    (d) Some are State-owned and others are privately owned *

     

  • What is Free Movement Regime (FMR)?

    Why in the News?

    Ahead of PM Modi’s Manipur visit, United Naga Council (UNC) has announced a trade embargo from against the India–Myanmar border fence and the suspension of the Free Movement Regime (FMR).

    What is Free Movement Regime (FMR)?

    About the Free Movement Regime (FMR):

    • Overview: Introduced in the 1970s, FMR allowed residents within 16 km of the India–Myanmar border to travel freely up to 16 km across without visa requirements.
    • Border length: India–Myanmar border stretches 1,643 km across four states: Arunachal Pradesh (520 km), Nagaland (215 km), Manipur (398 km), Mizoram (510 km).
    • Purpose: To recognize ethnic, cultural, and familial ties of communities (Kuki, Naga, Mizo, etc.) living across the unfenced border.
    • Revision: Last revised in 2016 under the Act East Policy.
    • Suspension: On February 8, 2024, MHA formally announced its scrapping, citing:
      • Internal security risks.
      • Illegal immigration and demographic changes in NE states.
      • Cross-border drug trafficking and insurgency links.

    Stakeholder Perspectives:

    • Kuki groups: View FMR suspension and fencing as an attack on shared ethnic ties, even comparing it to the Berlin Wall. Recently reached an understanding with MHA negotiators.
    • Naga groups (UNC): Strongly opposed to border fencing and FMR suspension, claiming it undermines homeland, land rights, and identity. Announced a trade embargo in protest.
    • Meiteis (Valley population): Support suspension, arguing that FMR facilitated illegal migration, illicit drug trade, and aggravated ethnic tensions.
    • Government of India: Defends suspension on security and demographic grounds, while attempting to balance peace talks with tribal groups.
    [UPSC 2016] Consider the following statements:

    I. Assam shares a border with Bhutan and Bangladesh

    II. West Bengal shares a border with Bhutan and Nepal

    III. Mizoram shares a border with Bangladesh and Myanmar

    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    Options: (a) I, II and III * (b) I and II only (c) II and III only (d) I and III only

     

  • Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025

    Why in the News?

    The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has issued the Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025, notified under Section 33 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.

    What is Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025?

    • Enactment: Passed by Parliament, effective 1 Sept 2025.
    • Objective: Unifies scattered immigration laws into a single framework, balancing national security, demographic protection, humanitarian obligations, and economic openness.
    • Repeals: Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920; Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939; Foreigners Act, 1946; Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Act, 2000.
    • Key Provisions:
      • All foreigners must enter, stay, exit with valid passport & visa, unless exempted.
      • Digital system with biometrics, AI-based monitoring, and real-time agency coordination.
      • New visa categories: Skilled Talent, Startup, Investor, Digital Nomad, Business Plus.
      • Mandatory reporting by hotels, landlords, universities, hospitals on foreign guests/students/patients.
      • Entry to protected/restricted areas subject to special permits; mountaineering expeditions need prior approval.
    • Penalties: Up to 7 years imprisonment and ₹10 lakh fine for forged documents; detention centres allowed for illegal foreigners till deportation.
    • Institutions:
      • National Immigration Authority for policy and central database.
      • Bureau of Immigration, led by Commissioner, for operations.

    About Immigration and Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 2025:

    • Overview: Issued by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on 1 Sept 2025 under Section 33 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.
    • Objective: Consolidates earlier scattered exemptions to simplify rules, enable regional mobility with Nepal & Bhutan, extend humanitarian relief to refugees/persecuted minorities, and provide legal clarity to carriers.
    • Replaces: The Registration of Foreigners (Exemption) Order, 1957 and Immigration (Carriers’ Liability) Order, 2007.
    • Exemptions:
      • Indian Armed Forces members on duty and families using govt transport.
      • Indian citizens entering via Nepal/Bhutan borders.
      • Nepal & Bhutan citizens (except if entering from China, Hong Kong, Macau, Pakistan).
      • Tibetans registered with India, religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan (who entered before Dec 31, 2024), and Sri Lankan Tamils sheltered till Jan 9, 2015.
      • Diplomats, visa-on-arrival nationals, foreign military personnel on goodwill or exercises.
    • Carriers’ Liability: Rail, road, air, sea operators exempted where forged documents need expert verification or ships/aircraft are diverted.
    [UPSC 2021] With reference to India, consider the following statements:

    1.There is only one citizenship and one domicile.

    2.A citizen by birth only can become the Head of State.

    3.A foreigner, once granted citizenship, cannot be deprived of it under any circumstances.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    Options: (a) 1 only* (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3 (d) 2 and 3

     

  • How have deception techniques evolved

    Introduction

    Modern warfare is no longer about firepower alone; it is equally about deception. As precision-guided missiles, drones, and AI-enabled targeting systems grow deadlier, militaries are turning to decoy technologies to confuse radars, mislead missiles, and protect valuable assets. India’s reported use of the AI-enabled X-Guard decoy during Operation Sindoor shows how deception has become a central element of national security strategy.

    The Growing Relevance of Deception in Modern Warfare:

    1. Evolving threat environment: Precision-guided munitions, drones, and AI-enabled targeting systems make military platforms highly vulnerable.
    2. Strategic asset: Decoys create confusion, waste enemy munitions, and buy crucial time for retaliation.
    3. Game-changing event: Operation Sindoor showcased India’s successful use of an AI-enabled decoy, termed by experts as “the best instance of spoofing and deception ever seen.”

    Inside the X-Guard Fibre-Optic Towed Decoy 

    1. Lightweight & reusable: At just 30 kg, retractable and deployable in flight.
    2. Radar mimicry: Replicates the Rafale’s Radar Cross Section (RCS), doppler velocity, and spectral signature across multiple bands.
    3. 360-degree jamming: Works seamlessly with the Rafale’s SPECTRA suite to form a layered defensive shield.
    4. Operational success: Reports suggest Pakistan’s J-10C fighters misidentified decoys as actual aircraft, wasting advanced PL-15E missiles.

    Global landscape of comparable decoy systems: 

    1. BriteCloud (Leonardo UL): Used on Eurofighter Typhoons, Gripen-Es, and some F-16s.
    2. AN/ALE-50/55 series (Raytheon/BAE Systems): Deployed on U.S. Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.
    3. Adaptability to UAVs: Modified for platforms like Israeli Herons and U.S. MQ-9 Reapers.

    Battlefield deception on Land Forces: 

    1. Inflatable & heat-emitting decoys: Simulate tanks, artillery, and missile batteries to divert strikes.
    2. Ukraine’s wooden & 3D-printed fakes: Exhaust Russian drone and missile stocks.
    3. Russia’s Inflatech decoys: Create entire armoured formations in minutes.
    4. Indian Army initiative (2025): Issued a request for decoys mimicking T-90 tanks, including thermal and acoustic signatures.

    Naval countermeasures and Decoy strategies

    1. Layered naval countermeasures: Chaff, acoustic decoys, and offboard active deception protect against missiles and submarines.
    2. Nulka decoy (Australia–U.S.): Self-propelled system mimicking large ship radar signatures to mislead missile guidance.

    Conclusion

    Deception, once limited to camouflage and dummy equipment, has evolved into a sophisticated digital-age shield. Airborne fibre-optic decoys, inflatable ground tanks, and naval missile deflectors now define modern survivability. India’s reported use of the X-Guard highlights its adaptation to the evolving battlefield. For a relatively low investment, such systems deliver high-impact protection, proving that in the wars of tomorrow, deception may be as decisive as destruction.

    PYQ Relevance

    “How is S-400 air defence system technically superior to any other system presently available in the world?”

    Linkage: This question shows UPSC’s focus on defence technology and comparative capability analysis. The same lens applies to India’s deployment of AI-enabled decoys like the X-Guard FOTD, which enhance survivability against advanced missile systems. Both highlight the importance of evaluating cutting-edge military technology for national security.

  • The Waning of Insurgency: Decline of Naxalism in India

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2013] Left Wing Extremism (LWE) is showing a downward trend, but still affects many parts of the country. Briefly explain the socio-economic issues that contribute to LWE, and the measures taken by the government to address them.

    Linkage: The question resonates with the article’s focus on the downward curve of Naxalism while stressing that socio-economic deprivations among tribals and the rural poor have historically sustained the movement. It also connects with the state’s twin approach of security operations and development interventions that are gradually weakening Left Wing Extremism.

    Mentor’s Comment: The narrative of militancy in India is shifting. While the world warns of AI-fuelled terrorism and increasingly sophisticated threats, India is witnessing a rare counter-trend, a decline in ideologically-driven insurgencies such as Naxalism. This moment is not just a statistic; it’s a significant turning point in the country’s internal security landscape, marking the potential closure of a decades-long chapter that once defined violent dissent in India.

    Introduction

    At a time when global terrorism persists ranging from lone-wolf attacks to fears of AI-enabled bio-terrorism India is witnessing an unprecedented success story. Naxalism, an ideologically-driven insurgency that once gripped large parts of the country, is in clear decline. For the first time, the Union Home Minister has set a timeline, predicting its “final demise” by mid-2026.

    The Changing Global and Indian Terrorism Landscape

    How does global terrorism contrast with India’s current experience?

    1. Persistent global threat: A quarter-century after 9/11, jihadist violence remains potent, with incidents such as IS-inspired vehicle rammings in Europe and the U.S.
    2. Emerging AI-driven dangers: Concerns over terrorists accessing bio-weapons or misaligned AI pose new challenges.
    3. India’s divergence: While global trends show intensification, India is experiencing a declining curve in ideologically-oriented militancy, particularly Naxalism.

    From ‘Spring Thunder’ to a Fading Echo — The Rise and Decline of Naxalism

    1. Revolutionary origins: Inspired by Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and Che Guevara, the late 1960s Naxalite movement attracted students, intellectuals, and marginalized groups.
    2. Loss of ideological cohesion: Splits into regional factions eroded the all-India character of the movement.
    3. Degeneration into violence: From targeted political action, it shifted to indiscriminate killings, losing public sympathy.

    Why is Naxalism Declining?

    1. Sustained Offensive (2024 onwards): Coordinated security operations across states have eliminated thousands of cadres.
    2. Major Losses: Even the banned CPI (Maoist) admitted 357 cadres killed in one year, over one-third of them women.
    3. Leadership & Territorial Shrinkage: The removal of top leaders like Ganapathi and confinement of the insurgency to the Dandakaranya region reflect its weakening base.
    4. Weakening: Infighting and loss of ideological cohesion have eroded its strength.

    India’s Approach vs. U.S. ‘War on Terror’

    1. U.S. model: Heavy reliance on brute force in places like Somalia and Yemen.
    2. India’s model: A calibrated strategy with checks on use of force, mindful of the Naxalites’ local roots. The SAMADHAN Doctrine—Smart leadership, Aggressive strategy, Motivation, Intelligence, Technology use, Local action plans, and choking finances—has guided the campaign.

    India’s Approach vs U.S. ‘War on Terror’

    1. Ideological vs non-ideological targets: U.S. campaigns focused on jihadists abroad; India’s on militants embedded in local communities.
    2. Checks and balances: India traditionally limited brute force, using it selectively.
    3. Community linkage: Naxalites often lived among villagers, complicating security responses.

    Original Naxalites vs. “Urban Naxals”

    1. Original movement: The 1960s “Spring Thunder Over India” drew inspiration from Mao and Che Guevara, but degenerated into fragmented violence.
    2. Contemporary misuse: Today’s “urban naxals” are loosely-knit intellectual critics of government policy, lacking the ideological foundation of the original movement. Misclassification of the two risks policy errors.

    The ‘Urban Naxal’ Misclassification Problem

    1. Original movement’s structure: Marxist-Leninist framework with defined goals and ideology.
    2. Today’s ‘urban naxals’: Loosely connected intellectuals critical of government policies, lacking direct insurgent links.
    3. Policy risk: Mislabeling can distort understanding, leading to inappropriate responses and latent security risks.

    Conclusion

    The decline of Naxalism marks an inflection point in India’s internal security narrative. Yet, premature declarations of victory must be avoided, as history shows insurgencies can mutate or re-emerge. Accurate threat classification, addressing root grievances, and avoiding cognitive blind spots will be key to ensuring that the “end of Naxalism” is indeed a lasting reality.

    Value Addition 

    1. Decline of the “Red Corridor”: Once widespread, Naxal influence is now confined to limited forest belts.
    2. Development & Governance: Infrastructure, education, healthcare, and tribal rights reforms have severed the Naxal-village link.
    3. Internal Security Gains: Security forces are freed for other challenges; development projects can now expand into previously inaccessible regions.

    Practice Mains Question

    Discuss the factors contributing to the decline of Naxalism in India and examine the implications for the country’s internal security architecture.

  • [26th July 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Kargil, Pahalgam and a revamp of the security strategy

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2016] The terms ‘Hot Pursuit’ and ‘Surgical Strikes’ are often used in connection with armed action against terrorist attacks. Discuss the strategic impact of such actions.

    Linkage: The article explicitly talks about the India’s shift in counter-terrorism strategy, mentioning the surgical strikes after the Uri attack (2016) and the Balakot strikes (2019) following Pulwama as “a strong reply” and “statement of intent”. The article culminates in discussing Operation Sindoor after the Pahalgam attack (2025), which involved striking terror bases and military air-bases deep in Pakistan, setting a “new threshold” for India’s response to terror.

     

    Mentor’s Comment: This year, in light of the recent Operation Sindoor (May 7–10, 2025), launched by India in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. The operation demonstrated India’s enhanced conventional military strength and shift in counter-terrorism doctrine, drawing parallels with the Kargil War’s legacy of structural reforms, military modernisation, and strategic assertiveness.

    Today’s editorial analyses the Indian Military strength. This topic is important for GS Paper III (Internal Security) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    July 26, 2025, marks the 26th anniversary of the Kargil War, a key moment in India’s military history.

    What key shortcomings did Kargil expose?

    • Intelligence Failure: There was a complete lack of actionable intelligence about Pakistani infiltration. Eg: Neither RAW nor military intelligence anticipated the large-scale intrusion in the Kargil sector, resulting in delayed response.
    • Lack of Real-time Surveillance and Reconnaissance: India lacked advanced aerial and satellite surveillance capabilities. Eg: Absence of drone surveillance led to Pakistani troops occupying key heights undetected.
    • Operational Unpreparedness in High-altitude Warfare: Indian troops were not fully equipped or trained for fighting in extreme mountain conditions. Eg: Soldiers lacked snow boots, high-altitude tents, and artillery support during initial engagements.
    • Inadequate Military Modernisation and Logistics: Outdated weaponry and logistical weaknesses slowed the military’s response. Eg: Lack of precision-guided munitions and night-vision equipment hampered operations in the early phase of the conflict.

    How did they influence India’s military reforms?

    • Revamp of the Intelligence Infrastructure: The intelligence failure in Kargil led to the creation of dedicated and tech-enabled intelligence agencies. Eg: Establishment of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2002 and the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) in 2004 improved surveillance and early warning systems.
    • Modernisation and Capability Building: Recognising operational gaps, India focused on military modernisation and indigenous defence production. Eg: Induction of Rafale fighters, Apache helicopters, and BrahMos missiles, along with enhanced focus on ‘Make in India’ defence projects.
    • Structural and Doctrinal Reforms: The need for faster, joint response led to organisational restructuring and new doctrines. Eg: Appointment of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) in 2019 and development of the Cold Start Doctrineenabled swift, coordinated operations across services.

    How has India’s counter-terror strategy evolved from Kargil to Operation Sindoor?

    • Shift from Strategic Restraint to Active Retaliation: Initially, India responded passively to terror attacks, but now adopts swift and punitive action. Eg: In Operation Sindoor (2025), India launched precision strikes on nine terror bases and eleven military airbases inside Pakistan within 96 hours of the Pahalgam attack.
    • Use of Air Power and Missile Strikes: India has moved beyond surgical ground raids to deep-strike capabilities using air and missile assets. Eg: The BrahMos missile strike on Nur Khan Base in Pakistan reportedly crippled a nuclear weapons storage facility, sending a strong strategic signal.
    • Preemptive and Coordinated Operations: Focus has shifted to pre-empting terror threats through real-time intelligence and coordinated special operations. Eg: In 2023, India conducted a pre-emptive operation in Kashmir’s Gurez sector, dismantling a terror launchpad before infiltration.
    • Internationalising the Terror Narrative: India increasingly leverages diplomacy and global platforms to isolate Pakistan as a state sponsor of terror. Eg: Following the Pulwama attack (2019), India worked with global powers to get Masood Azhar designated as a global terrorist by the UN Security Council.
    • Integration of Technology and Intelligence Networks: There is now enhanced use of surveillance drones, cyber intelligence, and inter-agency coordination. Eg: Operation Black Thunder II (2024) used real-time intelligence sharing between NTRO, RAW, and special forces to eliminate a high-value terrorist in less than two days.

    What are the challenges for India? 

    • Persistent Cross-border Terrorism: Despite reforms, Pakistan-based terror groups continue to pose a threat, using proxy warfare and non-state actors to destabilize regions like Jammu & Kashmir.
    • Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities: India is increasingly vulnerable to cyberattacks on its military, energy, and communication infrastructure by hostile state and non-state actors. Eg: In 2023, a suspected Chinese-origin cyberattack targeted the power grid in Ladakh, exposing gaps in cyber defence preparedness.
    • Delays in Defence Modernisation: The slow pace of procurement, bureaucratic hurdles, and over-dependence on imports affect India’s combat readiness. Eg: Delays in acquiring high-altitude drones and next-generation tanks have impacted operational planning in sensitive border areas like Eastern Ladakh.

    Way forward: 

    • Promote Jointness and Modernisation: Implement integrated theatre commands and upgrade military technology to ensure faster, coordinated responses.
    • Strengthen Border and Cyber Security: Deploy smart surveillance systems and enhance cyber defence to counter both conventional and hybrid threats.

  • The reality of the changing dimensions of warfare

    Why in the News?

    India needs to urgently revamp its defence modernisation plans in the face of emerging challenges from China and Pakistan, especially after the India-Pakistan conflict of May 2025, which revealed gaps in India’s preparedness.

    How has warfare changed since the Cold War?

    • Shift from Large-Scale Wars to Regional Conflicts: After the Cold War, global tensions gave way to smaller, localized wars rather than global showdowns. Eg: The Gulf War (1991) marked the start of precision-based, limited military operations instead of prolonged world wars.
    • Rise of Technology-Driven Warfare: Modern conflicts rely heavily on AI, drones, cyber tools, and precision weapons instead of traditional manpower-heavy combat. Eg: The Russia-Ukraine war has prominently used drones, cyberattacks, and satellite-guided missile systems.
    • Multi-Domain and Asymmetric Warfare: Warfare now involves land, air, sea, cyber, and space, blending conventional and irregular tactics. Eg: The use of cyberattacks alongside physical strikes in Israel-Hamas and India-Pakistan skirmishes reflects this evolution.

    Why is traditional military power becoming outdated?

    • Emergence of Asymmetric Threats: Traditional armies are less effective against non-state actors, insurgents, and cyber warriors who don’t follow conventional battle rules. Eg: The Taliban’s return in Afghanistan despite 20 years of U.S. military presence shows the limits of conventional power.
    • Dominance of Cyber and Information Warfare: Modern conflicts are increasingly fought in the digital space through disinformation, cyberattacks, and AI tools. Eg: The Russia-Ukraine war witnessed widespread cyber sabotage, showing that keyboard warriors can now cripple systems without firing a bullet.
    • Cost-Effectiveness of Smart Technologies: Drones, automated systems, and AI-based surveillance offer greater impact at lower cost than tanks or large troop deployments. Eg: The use of Turkish Bayraktar drones in Ukraine showed how low-cost tech can neutralize expensive military hardware.

    What challenges does India face in countering China’s military rise?

    • Infrastructure Gap along the Border: China has superior military infrastructure in Tibet and Xinjiang, including roads, airstrips, and logistics networks, giving it faster mobilization capability. Eg: The LAC standoff in Eastern Ladakh (2020) exposed India’s slower troop movement due to underdeveloped border infrastructure.
    • Defence Budget and Modernisation Lag: India’s defence spending is lower in proportion to GDP compared to China, limiting rapid modernisation and procurement of high-end military tech. Eg: China’s 2024 defence budget is over 3 times larger than India’s, enabling faster upgrades in hypersonic weaponsand naval expansion.
    • Two-Front Security Challenge: India faces the risk of simultaneous conflicts with China and Pakistan, straining its military resources and strategic planning. Eg: Joint China-Pakistan military exercises and China’s presence in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) increase pressure on India’s western and northern fronts.

    How should India update its defence strategy? (Way forward)

    • Focus on Cyber and Space Capabilities: India must strengthen its cyber defence, space surveillance, and satellite-based warfare tools to deal with non-traditional threats. Eg: The formation of Defence Cyber Agency and Defence Space Agency is a step towards tackling emerging cyber and space-based challenges.
    • Promote Indigenous Defence Innovation: Shifting from imports to Make in India and Aatmanirbhar Bharat in defence production is vital for self-reliance and strategic autonomy. Eg: Development of Tejas fighter jets and DRDO’s missile systems shows India’s move toward building its own defence ecosystem.
    • Modernise Armed Forces with Smart Technology: Upgrading with AI-enabled systems, drones, and robotics will enhance operational efficiency in both border and hybrid warfare. Eg: Indian Army’s deployment of drones for surveillance in the LAC region demonstrates the use of tech-driven force multipliers.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] What are the different elements of cyber security? Keeping in view the challenges in cyber security, examine the extent to which India has successfully developed a comprehensive National Cyber Security Strategy.

    Linkage: The article highlights that “The advent of cyber and Artificial Intelligence (AI) has seen battle elds morph into complex multi-domain conflict zones, involving advanced technologies, AI and cyber warfare methodologies”. It further emphasizes that “digital strategies and autonomous systems are tending to make traditional concepts of how battles are won… outdated” and that “Future warfare is increasingly set to become digitally autonomous and interconnected.

  • Arms deals: India moves away from Russia; Pakistan from the U.S

    Why in the News?

    Recently, India’s Operation Sindoor has put the spotlight on the evolving nature of India and Pakistan’s defence procurement strategies.

    What is the situation of India’s defence import pattern?

    • Russia’s share in Indian defence imports has decreased from 96.5% in the 1990s to 75% in the 2020s.
    • India now imports over 9% from France, 5.5% from the UK, nearly 5% from Israel, and 3% from the US. Over 55% of India’s air-power weapons in the 2020s have come from France, the UK, and Israel, indicating greater reliance on Western technology in a critical combat domain.

    Why is India moving away from Russia?

    • Strategic Diversification: To avoid overdependence on a single supplier, India is diversifying defence partnerships. Eg: India’s growing defence ties with France (e.g., Rafale jets) and the U.S. (e.g., Apache helicopters, Predator drones).
    • Technological Advancement and Reliability: Western nations and Israel offer more advanced, precise, and reliable weapon systems. Eg: Israeli-origin SkyStriker drone used in Operation Sindoor reflects a shift toward high-tech partners.
    • Geopolitical and Logistical Concerns: Sanctions on Russia post-Ukraine war have raised concerns about timely deliveries and spare parts. Eg: India faces delays in Russian S-400 missile system deliveries due to global sanctions and supply chain disruptions.

    What types of foreign weapons did India and Pakistan use during Operation Sindoor?

    • India’s Use of Israeli and Russian Weapons: India deployed Israeli-origin weapons like the SkyStriker drone and Russian-made systems such as the Pechoraand OSA-AK missiles. Eg: The SkyStriker was used for precision strikes, while Pechora missiles were used for air defence.
    • Pakistan’s Use of Chinese and Turkish Systems: Pakistan used Chinese-origin PL-15 missiles and Turkish-origin Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Eg: PL-15, a long-range air-to-air missile, reflects Pakistan’s military dependence on China.

    Why is China now the dominant arms supplier for Pakistan?

    • Strategic Partnership and Regional Alignment: China and Pakistan share a strong geopolitical alliance, rooted in regional rivalry with India. Eg: The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has strengthened military and economic ties.
    • Decline of U.S. Defence Cooperation: Pakistan’s ties with the United States have weakened, especially due to shifting U.S. strategic priorities and concerns over terrorism. Eg: The U.S. share in Pakistan’s arms imports dropped from 67% in the 2000s to 0.85% in the 2020s.
    • Cost-Effective and Tailored Equipment: China offers affordable, adaptable military technology suited to Pakistan’s needs. Eg: Weapons like the JF-17 fighter jet and HQ-9 air defence systems are co-developed or exported specifically for Pakistan.

    Who leads the global arms export market?

    • United States – Global Leader: The United States dominates global arms exports, accounting for over 65% of the world’s exports in the 2020s. Eg: U.S. exports advanced systems like F-35 fighter jets, Patriot missile systems, and drones to allies worldwide.
    • Russia – Declining Influence: Russia’s share has significantly dropped to around 5% due to factors like the Ukraine war, sanctions, and reduced trust. Eg: Former major buyers like India have reduced reliance on Russian defence supplies.
    • China – Minimal Global Share but Focused Exports: China holds less than 2% of global exports but plays a critical regional role, especially with Pakistan. Eg: Nearly 33% of China’s limited arms exports go to Pakistan, highlighting strategic alignment rather than market dominance.

    What is the situation of Indian arms exports? 

    • Emerging Exporter with Limited Share: India is still a minor player in the global arms export market, contributing less than 1% of total global arms exports. Eg: India exports light arms and defence equipment to countries like Vietnam, Myanmar, and African nations.
    • Focus on Indigenous Defence Systems: India is boosting domestic production under initiatives like ‘Make in India’ and Defence Export Policy 2020, aiming to become an exporter. Eg: Systems like Akash missile, Pinaka rocket launcher, and BrahMos (jointly developed with Russia) are promoted for export.

    Way forward: 

    • Accelerate Indigenous Defence Manufacturing: Expand R&D investment and incentivize private sector participation to develop cutting-edge technologies and reduce reliance on imports. Eg: Fast-tracking indigenous programs like AMCA fighter jet and integrating startups under iDEX (Innovations for Defence Excellence).
    • Forge Strategic Export Alliances: Target defence exports through strategic partnerships and defence diplomacy, focusing on friendly nations in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Eg: Boost exports of systems like BrahMos and Akash missiles through government-to-government deals and defence expos.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2020] What is the significance of Indo-US defence deals over Indo-Russian defence deals? Discuss with reference to stability in the Indo-Pacific region.

    Linkage:  The article talks about the “India and Pakistan Arms Procurement Trends” explicitly notes that India has been gradually reducing its dependence on Russia and increasingly turning to Western countries such as the U.S., France, and the U.K., as well as Israel, for its arms imports.

  • [15th May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Operation Sindoor — a reshaping of confrontation

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2021] How is S-400 air defence missile system different from any other system presently available in the world?

    Linkage: Air defence systems are vital in modern warfare like Operation Sindoor for controlling the skies and protecting against enemy air strikes, including missiles.  

     

    Mentor’s Comment: Operation Sindoor is no longer just a conflict between two countries. It shows how wars are now fought around the world, with new technology, smart strategies, and control of information changing the way military battles happen.

    Today’s editorial explains how Operation Sindoor has changed the way military conflicts happen. This information is useful for preparing GS Paper II (International Relations) and GS Paper III (Defence).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The recent India-Pakistan standoff shows an important change in how wars are fought in today’s world.

    How has Operation Sindoor reshaped the nature of military confrontation?

    • Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)/Drones: India used SkyStriker Kamikaze drones for precision strikes, while Pakistan deployed 300–400 Turkish-made Songar drones across 36 locations, marking a shift to unmanned, low-risk, and high-impact warfare.
    • Swarm Drone Technology: The large-scale use of drone swarms by Pakistan showcased how mass deployment of inexpensive, expendable drones can overwhelm enemy defences and replace traditional air force formations.
    • Layered Air Defence Systems: India’s defence relied on a combination of Akash, QRSAM, S-400 (Russia), and Barak-8 (India-Israel) systems, reflecting a transition from fixed missile platforms to multi-layered, dynamic defence networks.
    • Real-time Digital Integration Systems: The Akashteer system allowed India to digitally integrate radar inputs for real-time threat assessment and response, enabling smarter and quicker decision-making in combat.
    • Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS): IACCS enabled seamless coordination between the Army, Navy, and Air Force, turning joint operations from theory into an operational reality and enhancing battlefield synchronization.

    How have drones transformed India’s aerial warfare strategy?

    • Unmanned Combat: India has shifted from relying on costly manned fighter jets to using drones, enabling precision strikes with minimal risk to personnel. Eg: Deployment of SkyStriker Kamikaze drones for targeted attacks during Operation Sindoor.
    • Swarm Warfare: The ability to deploy large numbers of inexpensive drones allows India to overwhelm enemy defences through swarm tactics, increasing operational effectiveness. Eg: Use of multiple expendable drones to saturate Pakistan’s air defence systems.
    • Intelligence and Precision: Drones provide real-time reconnaissance and intelligence gathering, improving accuracy and reducing collateral damage in strikes. Eg: SkyStriker drones probing Pakistan’s air defence and conducting precise strikes with minimal human risk.

    Why is information warfare crucial in the India-Pakistan standoff?

    • Strategic Weapon Beyond Propaganda: Information warfare has evolved from mere propaganda to a powerful strategic tool that can influence perceptions and morale. Eg: Pakistan circulated doctored videos and fabricated claims to manipulate international and domestic opinions.
    • Psychological Impact on Morale: It aims to weaken the enemy’s resolve by creating confusion, fear, and doubt among both military personnel and civilians. Eg: Disinformation campaigns targeting India’s morale during the standoff.
    • Control of Narratives: Controlling information flow helps shape global and domestic narratives, influencing diplomatic support and international response. Eg: Both India and Pakistan using social media to project their respective versions of events.
    • Creation of Strategic Ambiguity: Manipulating information can create uncertainty and complicate the opponent’s decision-making process. Eg: Use of conflicting reports and misinformation to keep adversaries guessing about actual military capabilities and intentions.

    What are the three key doctrines outlined by the Prime Minister in his first speech on Operation Sindoor?

    1. Decisive Retaliation on India’s Terms: India will respond firmly and appropriately to any terrorist attack, delivering a befitting response strictly on its terms and taking action against all sources of terrorism.
    2. No Tolerance for Nuclear Blackmail: India will not tolerate nuclear blackmail and will strike precisely and decisively at terrorist hideouts operating under the shield of nuclear threats.
    3. No Distinction Between Terrorists and their Sponsors: India will treat the government sponsoring terrorism and the terrorist masterminds as the same, continuing decisive steps to counter state-sponsored terrorism and protect the nation.

    Way forward: 

    • Enhance Indigenous Innovation: Accelerate the development and deployment of homegrown advanced technologies like AI-enabled drone swarms, next-gen air defence, and electronic warfare to maintain a strategic edge over Chinese-origin systems.
    • Strengthen Joint Operations & Intelligence Sharing: Improve seamless integration among armed forces and boost real-time intelligence to swiftly counter emerging threats from adversaries using sophisticated foreign defence platforms.