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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • [5th December 2025] Hindu OpED New Delhi’s relative isolation, India’s tryst with terror

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Terrorism has become a significant threat to global peace and security. Evaluate the effectiveness of the UNSC’s CTC in mitigating this threat. 

    Linkage: Terror networks operating across borders and using encrypted systems highlight the need for stronger global counter-terror efforts. India’s experience shows why an effective UNSC-CTC is essential to address these evolving threats.

    Mentor’s comment

    India’s security environment is undergoing an unusual and worrying shift. New Delhi, historically a central diplomatic player, now appears relatively isolated even as terror networks expand and geopolitical churn intensifies across South Asia. This note analyses India’s current strategic dilemma, rising hostility from neighbours, deepening terror modules, and a rapidly shifting regional balance.

    Introduction

    India is witnessing a rare strategic moment where its diplomatic influence seems diminished, regional hostility is rising, and terrorism is resurfacing in sophisticated forms. Unlike earlier periods, the current situation combines India’s geopolitical isolation with escalating threats from Pakistan-linked terror networks and a volatile South Asian neighbourhood undergoing political, military, and institutional upheaval. This combination makes the moment distinct and consequential for India’s national security.

    Why in the news

    New Delhi is facing unusual diplomatic isolation, with key regions, West Asia, Europe, and the Indo-Pacific, witnessing shifting power equations that keep India on the sidelines. Simultaneously, South Asia is in deep turmoil: Pakistan’s military changes, Bangladesh’s political shifts, and regional instability are narrowing India’s manoeuvring space. The article highlights a renewed and more complex terror threat, including revived urban terror modules linked to Pakistan and new radicalised networks across Jammu, Kashmir, Delhi, and other regions. This combination of isolation and intensified terror activity marks a serious departure from past patterns, making the situation alarming.

    Why is India facing relative diplomatic isolation today?

    1. ‘Outlier’ perception: India appears more as an outsider than a major power in shaping global order; its role in West Asia, Europe, and the Indo-Pacific remains limited.
    2. Virtual onlooker status: Despite rising global stakes, India is seen as “virtually sitting on the sidelines” in key geopolitical developments.
    3. Contrast with earlier influence: India had never faced such a situation before, making the marginalisation stark.
    4. Limited support system: Even the “entire South Asian region” around India is unstable, reducing India’s traditional influence.

    How is regional hostility from West to East complicating India’s position?

    1. Hostile neighbours: Pakistan and Bangladesh are identified as increasingly unfriendly, particularly Pakistan with rising anti-India rhetoric.
    2. Escalating threat levels: Voices within Pakistan calling India a “proper lesson” intensify cross-border hostility.
    3. Pakistan’s internal changes:
      1. New Defence Services hierarchy: Pakistan created a Chief of Defence Forces and elevated a new army leadership.
      2. Field Marshal-like powers: New structure gives sweeping control over Pakistan’s nuclear assets.
      3. Civil-military power shift: 27th Constitutional Amendment Bill risks undermining democracy further.
    4. Bangladesh’s shift: Tilting towards Pakistan: Recent signals of re-engagement with Pakistan, including naval visits and discussions, create new regional anxieties.
      1. Unfriendly posture: Perceived as acting “unfriendly, if not openly hostile”.

    Why is India’s counter-terror environment becoming more dangerous?

    1. Urban terror revival: After years of decline, urban terrorism is making a comeback across India’s metropolitan centres.
    2. Linkages with Pakistan:
      1. State-backed groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed re-emerging.
      2. Collusion with Pakistani military establishments revived.
    3. Radical infiltration: 
      1. Jammu & Kashmir to Delhi corridor has seen sporadic attacks.
      2. Encrypted channels used to coordinate indoctrination, logistics, and training.
    4. Professionalisation of terror: Doctors, academics, and professionals are increasingly being used for indoctrination and planning.
    5. Reappearance of modules similar to 1993 & 2008: Terror patterns show similarities to the Bombay blasts (1993) and Mumbai attacks (2008).

    What makes the renewed terror threat structurally different from before?

    1. Shift from ideological to professional networks: Radicalisation now mixes religion with professional/academic legitimacy to attract youth.
    2. Use of encrypted technologies: New modules use digital secrecy to avoid detection.
    3. Global linkages: Channels from Pakistan extend to the UAE, Saudi Arabia, UK, and Jordan.
    4. Diverse recruitment base: Includes medical professionals, engineers, and skilled individuals.
    5. Local sleeper cells: Groups with strong roots in Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, and other cities enable quicker mobilisation.

    Why does India’s situation today require careful diplomatic and security manoeuvring?

    1. Volatile neighbourhood: Afghanistan, Nepal, Maldives, Myanmar, Pakistan, Bangladesh all face varying turmoil.
    2. Civil-military imbalance in Pakistan: Enhances unpredictability and increases risk of miscalculation.
    3. Potential spillover of instability: Especially from Pakistan and Bangladesh into India’s border regions.
    4. Need for vigilance and caution: High levels of external-internal linkage in terror require sensitive handling.

    Conclusion

    India faces a dual challenge: growing diplomatic isolation and a renewed, sophisticated terror threat emerging from both state-linked and radical networks. The changing regional landscape, marked by political instability, shifting alliances, and Pakistan-Bangladesh recalibrations, makes India’s environment more unpredictable than before. Adapting to this moment requires calibrated diplomacy, heightened security vigilance, and strategic patience to navigate an exceptionally complex geopolitical phase.

     

  • Do we need to change how cities are governed in India?

    Introduction

    The decline of urban civic leadership, seen recently through public debates on mayoral ineffectiveness, has renewed scrutiny of India’s urban governance model. Despite rapid urbanisation, cities continue to be governed through State-controlled mechanisms, with weak municipal autonomy. 

    Why in the news

    The rise of Zohra Mamdani as the youngest City Council Member in New York triggered public debate in India on why similar civic leadership is missing in Indian cities. Against this backdrop, India’s major municipalities, including BMC and Greater Hyderabad, face elections, restructuring, and fragmentation (e.g., BBMP split into five corporations). This moment is significant because it exposes a deeper structural failure: Indian cities lack empowered, democratically elected urban leadership. Despite massive urban populations and complex service demands, Mayors remain invisible, State governments dominate municipal functioning, and the 74th Constitutional Amendment has not delivered genuine decentralisation.

    Article 243-R of the Constitution of India (Composition of Municipalities):

    1. Provides for directly elected members of the municipality.
    2. Leaves it to the State Legislature to decide:
      1. Whether the Chairperson/Mayor is elected directly or indirectly.
      2. Their tenure and mode of election.
    3. Result: States freely choose indirect Mayor elections, leading to weak, ceremonial Mayors and domination of municipal commissioners and State governments

    Why is the Mayor’s position structurally weak in Indian cities?

    1. Centralisation under Chief Minister: The most powerful person in a major city is not the Mayor but the Chief Minister, who controls policing, planning, and key civic institutions.
    2. State-level political dominance: The political system is organised around State Assemblies; municipal issues become secondary to State-level party priorities.
    3. Weak empowerment under the 74th Amendment: Although intended to decentralise authority, the Amendment has delivered limited administrative or fiscal autonomy to municipalities.
    4. Lack of local accountability: Executive authority has not shifted below the State level, leaving Mayors with ceremonial or fragmented powers.

    Why do Mayors remain invisible?

    1. Historical legacy of weak local government: India’s local governance structure developed differently from Western models; constitutional legitimacy for municipalities arrived only with the 74th Amendment.
    2. Incomplete reforms: The 73rd and 74th Amendments created a framework but were not implemented with political sincerity. State governments continue to control finance, planning, and cadre positions.
    3. Political competition between State and cities: State leaders view strong cities as political threats, leading to deliberate dilution of mayoral authority.

    Can greater electoral demands make Mayors more responsive?

    1. Low public demand: Local civic issues do not receive strong public mobilisation. Citizens rarely demand empowered local governance.
    2. State-level political capture: Politicians are adept at mobilising emotions on national or state narratives, overshadowing urban-service concerns.
    3. Limited technocratic leadership space: Bureaucrats and technocrats dominate city administrations; elected Mayors have little room to innovate.

    Why has the 74th Constitutional Amendment failed to transform governance?

    1. Bypassing decentralisation: Key State Acts diluted the Amendment’s intent by retaining control over finances, land, cadres, and statutory bodies.
    2. Lack of political will: States neither formed nor empowered State Finance Commissions adequately. Devolution remains discretionary.
    3. Absence of clear functional domain: Urban functions overlap between parastatals, municipalities, State departments, and centrally sponsored missions, weakening accountability.

    Is financial autonomy necessary for effective urban governance?

    1. Critical need for municipal fiscal strength: Cities handle mobility, sanitation, and climate adaptation, but lack adequate revenue sources.
    2. Low dependence on local taxation: Property tax yields remain low; grants depend on State discretion.
    3. Fragmented budgeting: Legislatures debate budgets but do not integrate municipal priorities into broader fiscal planning.
    4. Need for predictable devolution: Empowered, autonomous municipal finance could drive infrastructure improvement and better urban outcomes.

    Should India rethink its urban political architecture?

    1. Yes, fragmentation and dilution undermine governance: The example of Delhi, where the Chief Minister’s powers overlap with the Union government and the municipal system, shows the complications of a divided mandate.
    2. Need for clear lines of authority: Cities require unified command structures to handle complex, interlinked systems like mobility, land, water, and waste.
    3. Strengthening mayoral authority: Without strong, visible leadership, city administrations remain unaccountable and inefficient.

    Conclusion

    India’s urban governance framework continues to concentrate power at the State level, marginalising the Mayor and weakening municipal accountability. The 74th Amendment promised decentralisation but remained half-implemented, leading to fragmented authority and weak fiscal capacity. For cities to manage growth, climate risks, and service delivery, India must structurally empower municipal institutions, ensure financial autonomy, and create visible, accountable urban leadership.
    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023] “The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially.” Comment.

    Linkage: This PYQ directly addresses the core issue of the article, why Mayors remain powerless, why States dominate municipalities, and why the 74th Amendment failed to decentralise effectively.

  • Indian Statistical Institute (ISI) Revamp Bill 

    Why in the News?

    Over 1,500 academics have protested against the Central government’s proposal to repeal the Indian Statistical Institute Act, 1959 and replace it with a new ISI Revamp Bill (Draft ISI Bill 2025). Critics argue that the Bill will erode academic autonomy, alter governance structures, and change the historic character of the ISI.

    About Indian Statistical Institute (ISI)

    • Founded: 1931 by Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis.
    • Legal Status: Institution of National Importance under ISI Act, 1959.
    • Headquarters: Kolkata (historic location linked to PC Mahalanobis).
    • Centres: Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, Tezpur, Giridih, Hyderabad.
    • Academic Strength: ~1,200 students.
    • Fields: Statistics, Mathematics, Quantitative Economics, Computer Science, Cryptology, Library Science, Quality Management, Operations Research.
    • Contributions:
      • Pioneer in sample survey methodology (NSS lineage).
      • Advanced statistical research and public-good-oriented academic model.
      • Free education + stipends ensuring inclusivity.

    Key Features of the Draft ISI Bill 2025

    • Repeals ISI Act, 1959 replaces existing governance and institutional safeguards.
    • Board of Governors gets overriding powers over the Academic Council, reducing the latter to an advisory status.
    • Government-controlled appointment of the Director replaces existing search-cum-selection process.
    • Allows relocation of headquarters from Kolkata raising concerns over institutional heritage.
    • Higher emphasis on revenue generation:
      • Increased student fees.
      • Commercialisation of research outputs.
    • Restructuring of regional centres possible realignment of federal structure.
    Consider the following organizations/bodies in India: 

    1. The National Commission for Backward Classes 

    2. The National Human Rights Commission 

    3. The National Law Commission 

    4. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 

    How many of the above are constitutional bodies? 

    (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four

     

  • Putin’s visit: The long arc of India’s ties with Russia, the road ahead

    Introduction

    India-Russia relations have historically been marked by defence cooperation, political trust, and strategic convergence. However, the global context surrounding President Putin’s December 2024 visit, his first after the Ukraine conflict, has introduced new complexities. India now navigates sanctions pressure, energy dependencies, defence shortfalls, and the need to sustain balanced relations with both the West and Russia.

    Why in the News? 

    President Vladimir Putin’s visit to India on 4-5 December for the 23rd Annual Summit is significant as it is his first visit since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This is a period marked by sanctions, slowed defence supplies, and shifting global alignments. India-Russia bilateral trade crossed $63.8 billion, but sanctions on Russian energy and secondary sanctions on Indian companies now threaten the $100-billion trade target.

    The Evolution of India-Russia Strategic Ties

    1. Historical Convergence: New Delhi and Moscow shared close ties since the Soviet era, with Russia supporting India post-1998 sanctions.
    2. Defence Legacy: 60% of India’s defence inventory remains of Russian origin; legacy platforms need regular servicing and spares.
    3. Diversification Effort: India expanded its partnerships with the US, Europe, and others for technology, security, and economic needs.
    4. Stable Political Understanding: Leadership-level engagement remained consistent, even during geopolitical disruptions.

    Why Defence Remains the Core Pillar

    1. Legacy Equipment: India still requires servicing and spares for Russian-origin systems; replacement is slow.
    2. S-400 Delivery Issues: Russia was expected to deliver five S-400 units, but deliveries slowed due to the Ukraine war.
    3. Sanctions Impact: Sanctions on Russia impaired its ability to manufacture cutting-edge defence systems, reducing India’s supply reliability.
    4. Strategic Risk: The disruption compelled India to diversify procurement to Western partners.

    How Have Economic and Energy Ties Changed?

    1. Discounted Oil Purchases: Post-Ukraine, India bought discounted Russian crude, helping control domestic fuel prices.
    2. Trade Surge: Bilateral trade increased from $6.87 billion (FY24) to $63.8 billion last year, driven by oil imports.
    3. Trade Imbalance: India’s imports massively exceed exports; Russia aims to boost Indian exports to reach $100 billion bilateral trade.
    4. Secondary Sanctions Risk: US sanctions forced Indian companies to exit Russian shipping and oil-related operations.

    What is Expected During the Upcoming Visit?

    1. Controlled Optics: No large-scale pageantry; Modi-Putin meeting likely private and focused.
    2. Limited Public Events: No public address or mass interactions expected.
    3. West’s Scrutiny: US and Europe closely monitor the visit given ongoing tensions over Ukraine.
    4. Agenda Items: Defence delivery timelines, energy cooperation, and trade balance to dominate.

    How is India Balancing Russia and the West?

    1. Eastern Partnership: Russia remains key for defence hardware and strategic autonomy.
    2. Western Engagement: India deepened cooperation with the US and Europe in technology, capital, and mobility corridors.
    3. Strategic Autonomy: India maintains multi-alignment, ensuring no relationship becomes exclusive.
    4. Domestic Aspiration: India seeks high-technology and economic opportunities for a modernising population.

    Conclusion

    India-Russia relations enter a phase of recalibration shaped by sanctions, defence supply constraints, and India’s deepening Western partnerships. Yet, the historical trust, defence legacy, and energy complementarity ensure that Russia remains relevant for India. The challenge lies in sustaining a realistic, interest-driven relationship while managing Western scrutiny and domestic strategic needs.

    PYQ Relevance

    [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 question reflects India’s growing shift from Russian to US defence partnerships discussed in the article. It connects these defence ties to India’s role in ensuring stability in the Indo-Pacific region.

  • [3rd December 2025] The Hindu OpED: A template for security cooperation in the Indian Ocean

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Discuss the geopolitical and geostrategic importance of Maldives for India with a focus on global trade and energy flows. Further also discuss how this relationship affects India’s maritime security and regional stability amidst international competition?

    Linkage: This PYQ is directly linked to India’s strategic engagement with the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC), where Maldives is a core maritime partner. The question becomes relevant as Maldives’ political shifts, China’s growing presence, and competition over Indian Ocean trade and energy routes directly shape India’s maritime security priorities.

    Mentor’s Comment

    This article breaks down the evolving relevance of the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC) for India and the wider Indian Ocean region in 2025. China’s growing presence in the region is reshaping the geopolitical environment. In this setting, the CSC becomes an important platform for India to strengthen maritime security cooperation.

    Introduction

    The CSC has emerged as a critical framework for regional security cooperation in the Indian Ocean. It initially focused on issues such as maritime security, counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, and human trafficking. Now it is attempting to institutionalise itself and broaden its mandate to address the increasingly complex geopolitical and maritime challenges in the region. India’s leadership in reviving and expanding the grouping has placed CSC at the centre of its Indian Ocean strategy.

    How is the evolving Indian Ocean environment reshaping CSC’s relevance?

    1. Strategic Shifts: The Indian Ocean region is witnessing significant changes in the broader Indo-Pacific, making cooperative security frameworks more urgent.
    2. Economic Interdependence: Littoral states depend heavily on ocean-based economies; maritime disruptions create widespread developmental challenges.
    3. Non-traditional Threats: Issues such as organised crime, cyberattacks, and trafficking continue to expand, requiring coordinated regional responses.

    What has shaped the CSC’s institutional trajectory so far?

    1. Initial Trilateral Framework: Established between India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives; momentum slowed due to political transitions in Sri Lanka and Maldives.
    2. Revival in 2020: India reinstated its engagement, establishing structured cooperation across four pillars, maritime security, counter-terrorism, trafficking, and cybersecurity.
    3. Progressive Expansion: Mauritius joined as full member (2022); Bangladesh added in 2024; Malaysia joined as observer in 2025.
    4. Growing Synergies: NSA-level coordination has strengthened common frameworks across member states.

    Why does China’s growing presence create strategic dilemmas for CSC?

    1. Contrasting Perceptions:
      1. India: Views China’s activities as a major security challenge.
      2. Other Members: Depend on China economically and see it as a developmental partner rather than a threat.
    2. Need for Balance: India must carefully manage CSC’s agenda such that the grouping does not fracture over divergent China-related security views.
    3. Anchoring India’s Priorities: CSC allows India to place maritime security and regional stability at the centre of cooperative action.

    What institutional challenges does the CSC currently face?

    1. Fragmented Frameworks: Lack of integrated institutional structures limits effective coordination.
    2. Need for Policy Consistency: Member states’ domestic disturbances (e.g., in Bangladesh) can affect the group’s resilience.
    3. Operational Limitations: Without an institutionalised Secretariat or joint mechanisms, coordination remains NSA-driven and episodic.

    What opportunities does CSC expansion create for regional security?

    1. Wider Membership: Growing membership allows for more inclusive maritime-security cooperation in the Indian Ocean.
    2. Enhanced Information-Sharing: Expanding partnerships help create common threat-perception frameworks.
    3. Forward Momentum: Malaysia’s possible future membership indicates sustained interest in CSC’s work
    4. Aligning Actionable Pathways: Collective policies on maritime issues can strengthen resilience across the region.

    Conclusion

    The CSC stands at a defining moment in 2025. Its expansion, renewed momentum, and India’s leadership provide a framework to address the growing complexity of maritime security in the Indian Ocean. However, institutional strengthening, policy coherence, and careful handling of China-related sensitivities will determine how successfully the CSC evolves into a reliable, long-term regional security architecture.

  • Why is there no peace in Ukraine

    Introduction

    Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, several attempts at negotiations, from Belarus to Turkey, have collapsed. With Russia consolidating control over Ukrainian territories and Ukraine facing military constraints, the conflict shows signs of becoming a prolonged war. The Trump plan, recent Russian advances, and fatigue in Western capitals have complicated the strategic landscape, placing Ukraine at a turning point.

    Why in the news

    The Ukraine-Russia war has again entered headlines as Russia captured Pokrovske, marking the first major territorial gain after a year of stalled frontlines. Simultaneously, a 28-point U.S. peace proposal surfaced, offering recognition of Russian control over key territories. Ukraine is facing troop shortages, battlefield pressure, and delays in Western aid, making negotiations both urgent and politically difficult. Recent territorial losses, a disputed peace plan, and growing pressure on President Zelensky have reopened global debate on whether a ceasefire is achievable.

    Battlefield Dynamics and Stalled Negotiations

    1. Russian Consolidation: Russia captured Pokrovske after holding back Ukrainian forces for nearly a year; repositioned units in Kharkiv and Kherson and intensified attacks on Avdiivka and Kupiansk.
    2. Ukrainian Strain: Ukraine faces troop shortages, heavy attrition, and reduced Western ammunition deliveries; unable to meet battlefield demands.
    3. Failed Negotiations History: Talks in Belarus (Feb 28, 2022), Turkey (March 2022), and subsequent engagements collapsed due to disagreements over territory, NATO membership, and security guarantees.
    4. Renewed Russian Push: Russia resumed rotated forces, strengthened defensive lines, and maintained pressure across the east and south.

    Why Have Earlier Peace Efforts Failed?

    1. Maximalist Positions:
      1. Ukraine demanded withdrawal to 1991 borders and refusal of territorial concessions.
      2. Russia insisted on recognition of annexed territories and long-term security guarantees.
    2. NATO Membership Dispute: Ukraine’s insistence on future NATO membership remained unacceptable to Russia.
    3. Shifting War Outcomes: Early battlefield gains for Ukraine pushed negotiations aside; later Russian consolidation hardened Moscow’s stance.
    4. Domestic Political Costs: Zelensky faced internal political risk if he conceded territory or NATO flexibility.
    5. Western Signalling: Changes in Western messaging during 2022, especially from UK PM Boris Johnson’s Kyiv visit, reinforced Ukraine’s resolve to fight rather than negotiate.

    What Does the New Trump Peace Plan Propose?

    1. Territorial Recognition: Recognizes Russian control of current occupied territories (Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson).
    2. Ceasefire Framework: Calls for an initial ceasefire based on “current positions”.
    3. Security Guarantees: Ukraine would receive “reliable security guarantees”, though details remain unspecified.
    4. NATO Question: Prohibits Ukraine from joining NATO but proposes alternative security arrangements.
    5. Referendum Clause: Suggests that Ukraine may hold referendums under international supervision in disputed areas.
    6. Western Package: Encourages Washington to commit additional security assurances if Ukraine accepts concessions.
    7. Controversy: Critics argue it endorses annexation and weakens Ukrainian sovereignty.

    How Is Ukraine Responding to the Proposal?

      1. Zelensky’s Dilemma:
    • Fear of Loss of U.S. Support if he rejects the plan outright.
    • Domestic Resistance to territorial concessions or NATO withdrawal.
    1. Political Stakes: Any acceptance of the Trump plan risks severe political backlash within Ukraine and among its security elite.
    2. Military Reality Check: With Russia advancing and Western aid reduced, Ukraine risks losing more territory if negotiations are delayed.
    3. Unclear U.S. Position: The White House has neither endorsed nor dismissed the plan; Washington sends mixed signals.

    What Is Russia’s Current Strategy?

    1. Gradual Territorial Expansion: Small but steady advances across Donetsk and Kharkiv fronts.
    2. Exhaustion Approach: Prolonging the war to drain Ukrainian manpower and Western support.
    3. Diplomatic Pressure: Leveraging the Trump plan to portray Ukraine as unwilling to negotiate.
    4. Military Reconfiguration: Rotations, reorganized brigades, and fortified defensive lines to prepare for prolonged combat.

    Conclusion

    The Ukraine war remains locked between military stalemate and political impossibility. With Russia consolidating gains and Western support fluctuating, the window for meaningful negotiations narrows. The Trump plan introduces a new, but highly contentious, framework. For now, peace remains elusive due to incompatible security demands, shifting battlefield realities, and the political constraints of both Kyiv and Moscow.

    PYQ Relevance

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

    Linkage: This PYQ aligns with the article’s focus on NATO’s revived strength and US-Europe unity shaped by the Ukraine war. It directly links to how these shifts hardened positions, prolonged conflict, and reshaped global security dynamics.

  • India calls for Stronger Global Biosecurity at 50 Years of the BWC

    Why in the news? 

    At the Conference on 50 Years of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) held in New Delhi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar warned that global biological threats—natural, accidental, or deliberate are growing due to rapid scientific advances. He emphasised the rising risks of bioterrorism and highlighted structural weaknesses in the BWC.

    About the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)

    • Came into force: 1975
    • Objective: Prohibits development, production, acquisition, stockpiling & use of biological and toxin weapons.
    • Depositaries: Russia, UK, USA
    • India: Founding State Party

    Structural Gaps Jaishankar Highlighted

    • No verification/compliance mechanism
    • No permanent technical secretariat
    • No system to monitor new scientific developments
    • Reliance on voluntary confidence-building measures (CBMs)

    Rising Biological Threat Landscape

    • Misuse of biological agents by non-state actors is a serious concern.
    • Emerging technologies increasing risks:
      • Synthetic biology
      • Genome editing (CRISPR)
      • AI-driven biological design

    India’s Strengths in Biosecurity

    • Produces 60% of global vaccines
    • Supplies 20% of world’s generic medicines (including 60% for Africa)
    • 11,000 biotech startups (3rd largest globally; 50 in 2014 → 11,000 now)
    • Advanced BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs under ICMR & DBT

    India’s Global Health Contributions

    • Vaccine Maitri: ~300 million vaccine doses, aid to 100+ countries
    • Stressed that biological crisis assistance must be “fast, practical and humanitarian”
    Which one of the following is associated with the issue of control and phasing out of the use of ozone-depleting substances? (2015)

    (a) Bretton Woods Conference 

    (b) Montreal Protocol 

    (c) Kyoto Protocol 

    (d) Nagoya Protocol

  • Coup in Guinea-Bissau (2025)

    Why in the news? 

    Guinea-Bissau, one of the world’s most coup-prone nations, witnessed yet another military takeover on 26 November 2025, overthrowing President Umaro Sissoco Embaló. The coup was led by members of the Presidential Guard, marking the latest in a long line of disruptions to democratic governance in West Africa.

    Geography & Country Profile

    • Location: West Africa, bordered by
      • Senegal (North)
      • Guinea (East & South)
      • Atlantic Ocean (West)
    • Language: Portuguese (Lusophone Africa).
    • Population: Approx. 2.25 million.
    • HDI Rank: 174 / 193 (UNDP).
    • Economy: Dominated by agriculture, especially cashew nuts
      • Cashew = 80%+ of export earnings (World Bank).
    • Known as a hub for drug trafficking (Latin America → Europe).

    Political Background

    • Independence from Portugal in 1974.
    • One of the most unstable countries globally:
      • Has had more successful coups than peaceful transfers of power.
    • Termed the “Coup Trap” country – chronic cycle where military becomes the dominant political actor.
    In the recent years Chad, Guinea, Mali and Sudan caught the international attention for which one of the following reasons common to all of them? (2023)

    (a) Discovery of rich deposits of rare earth elements 

    (b) Establishement of Chinese military bases 

    (c) Southward expansion of Sahara Desert 

    (d) Successful coups

  • Khiamniungan Tribe

    Why in the News?

    • The Prime Minister of India recently mentioned the Khiamniungan tribe of Nagaland in his Mann Ki Baat episode, highlighting their traditional practice of cliff-honey hunting and rich cultural heritage.

    About the Khiamniungan Tribe

    • One of the major Naga tribes inhabiting both:
      • Eastern Nagaland (India)
      • North-Western Myanmar
    • Their homeland lies along the Indo-Myanmar border.
    • The term “Khiamniungan” means “source of great water/river”.
    • Language: Khiamniugan, a Sino-Tibetan Naga language.
    • Social Structure: Traditionally based on a clan system.

    Festivals

    • Tsokum Sumai: Celebrated in September–early October.
      • Purpose: Invoke blessings for a rich harvest.
    • Khaotzao Sey Hok-ah Sumai: Marks the end of agricultural activities for the year.

    Economy & Livelihood

    • Agriculture is the primary occupation.
    • Traditionally practiced jhum cultivation.
    • Renowned for cliff-honey hunting, practiced for centuries.
    Consider the following pairs: Tribe State (2013)

    (1). Limboo (Limbu) : Sikkim 

    (2). Karbi : Himachal Pradesh 

    (3). Dongaria Kondh : Odisha 

    (4). Bonda : Tamil Nadu 

    Which of the above pairs are correctly matched? 

    (a) 1 and 3 only 

    (b) 2 and 4 only 

    (c) 1, 3 and 4 only 

    (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

  • [29th November 2025] The Hindu OpED: The impartiality of a nominated Governor

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.

    Linkage: The question is directly linked to ongoing concerns of Governors delaying assent and re-promulgating ordinances, reflecting fears of an overstepping “interfering authority.” It tests whether the Governor today adheres to the Constitution’s vision of a neutral head bound by ministerial advice.

    Mentor’s Comment

    This article examines the debate on the ‘impartiality of a nominated Governor’, revived after the recent Supreme Court judgment on the powers of Governors. The discussion draws heavily from the Constituent Assembly debates, views of B.R. Ambedkar, and the political context surrounding gubernatorial discretion. For UPSC aspirants, this topic is crucial for understanding Centre-State relations, federal tensions, constitutional morality, and ongoing administrative bottlenecks.

    Introduction

    The Supreme Court’s recent judgment on the role of Governors, along with its advisory opinion on the 16th Presidential reference, has reopened a foundational debate: What was the intended role of a Governor in an independent India? The Constituent Assembly deliberated deeply on the Governor’s impartiality, limited discretion, and non-interfering nature. Contemporary frictions between Governors and elected State governments have made these debates sharply relevant again. The article traces the evolution, constitutional position, and recurring controversies around the Governor’s office.

    Why in the News 

    The Supreme Court’s latest judgment on gubernatorial powers has revived a long-standing constitutional controversy over whether Governors have exceeded their intended role. The ruling sharply contrasts past practice, where Governors often withheld assent or delayed Bills, exercising broad and ambiguous discretion. This is significant because Constituent Assembly debates categorically rejected any idea of a powerful, interfering Governor and saw him as a neutral constitutional head bound by ministerial advice. The issue has resurfaced as a major federal friction point, affecting State governance and raising concerns about constitutional morality.

    What was the Constituent Assembly’s vision of a Governor?

    1. Limited discretion: Members clarified that the Governor’s discretion should be minimal and specifically enumerated; not a general discretionary authority.
    2. Non-interfering role: Dr. Ambedkar emphasised that the Governor must not act as an agent of the Centre nor interfere with the elected State government.
    3. Neutral constitutional head: The Governor was designed to be above suspicion and must not be “remote-controlled,” especially in a parliamentary system.
    4. No overriding authority: Ambedkar rejected giving Governors overriding powers (e.g., veto over Bills or control over ministries).

    Why were doubts raised about the impartiality of a nominated Governor?

    1. Remote-control concerns: Members felt a nominated Governor could be influenced by the central government, undermining State autonomy.
    2. Fear of political bias: The Governor’s lack of electoral accountability created apprehensions regarding neutrality.
    3. Past colonial experience: Residual memories of Governors under the Government of India Act, 1935, who wielded significant discretionary powers, fuelled suspicion.

    How did the framers restrict discretionary powers?

    1. Specific limitation: Discretion only for narrow, enumerated matters such as selecting a Chief Minister when no clear majority exists.
    2. Bound by Cabinet advice: Governor must act on ministerial advice in all matters except those explicitly labelled as discretionary.
    3. No independent executive authority: Ambedkar insisted the Governor is not a parallel power centre.
    4. Rejection of 1935 model: The Assembly refused to revive the 1935 system that gave Governors sweeping independent powers.

    Why is the Bill-assent controversy central to this debate?

    1. Revival of 1935 practice: Members feared that powers like reserving Bills or withholding assent could allow Governors to obstruct State legislatures.
    2. Ambedkar’s key statement: “If you give him this power, he becomes exactly that”, a reminder that excessive discretion recreates colonial-style interference.
    3. Judicial scrutiny: Recent court rulings criticised Governors for delaying Bills, stating this undermines democratic functioning.
    4. Legislative consequences: When Governors withhold or delay assent, elected governments face administrative paralysis.

    What makes the present dispute constitutionally serious?

    1. Misinterpretation risk: Courts observed that vague phrases like “as soon as possible” allow Governors to delay decisions indefinitely.
    2. Threat to federal balance: Unchecked gubernatorial discretion shifts power from elected representatives to a nominated authority.
    3. Growing political tensions: Several States report prolonged delays in Bill assent, appointments, and emergency decisions.
    4. Return of the ‘interfering authority’: The trend contradicts the original constitutional vision and Ambedkar’s categorical warnings.

    Conclusion

    The ongoing friction between State governments and Governors signals a deeper constitutional challenge involving federalism, democratic accountability, and the limits of nominated authority. The Constituent Assembly clearly intended the Governor to be a neutral head bound by Cabinet advice, not an autonomous decision-maker. Reviving this original spirit is essential to restore the balance between the Centre and the States and uphold constitutional morality.