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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

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

    PYQ Relevance:

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

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

     

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

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

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

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

    What is the AI Diffusion Framework?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Way forward: 

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

  • Vaccinating India: On Zero-Dose Children

    Why in the News?

    India has made significant progress in expanding vaccine coverage, with a dramatic drop in the percentage of zero-dose children from 33.4% in 1992 to 6.2% in 2023. But even though India is not affected by war or extreme poverty like some other countries, it still has the second-highest number of children without any vaccination in the world.

    What is the trend in global and Indian vaccine coverage?

    • Global Progress: Since 1980, coverage for six major diseases—including measles, polio, and tuberculosis—has doubled worldwide, and the proportion of zero-dose children has fallen to around 75% fewer globally.
    • India’s Improvement with Persistent Gaps: India has dramatically reduced zero-dose children from 33.4% in 1992 to 6.2% in 2023, yet still ranks second globally in absolute numbers, indicating significant strides amid ongoing challenges.

    What are zero-dose children?

    • Zero-dose children are those who have not received the first dose of the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine.
    • They are a crucial performance marker of a country’s immunisation system and indicate inequities in vaccine coverage.

    Why are they important for assessing vaccination?

    • Reflects health system coverage and equity: A high number of zero-dose children shows that vaccination programmes are not reaching all segments of the population. NFHS-5 (2019–21) Data also showed that full immunisation coverage among children aged 12–23 months was significantly lower in rural and tribal regions compared to urban areas (e.g., Nagaland: 57.8%, compared to Tamil Nadu: 89.8%).
    • Indicates social and economic exclusion: The presence of zero-dose children highlights barriers like poverty, low maternal education, and marginalisation. Eg: Urban slums with high migrant populations tend to have more zero-dose children due to lack of awareness and access.
    • Warns of vulnerability to disease outbreaks: Areas with many zero-dose children are more likely to face outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Eg: Measles outbreaks are more common in districts with poor immunisation coverage.

    Why does India still have a high number of zero-dose children despite adequate resources?

    • High birth rate increases absolute numbers: India has the highest number of annual births globally. In 2023, India had around 23 million births, making even a small percentage of zero-dose children translate into a large number.
    • Geographical and logistical challenges: Remote tribal areas, urban slums, and migrant populations are harder to reach due to terrain, mobility, and poor infrastructure. E.g., children in parts of Meghalaya or urban Delhi, slums often miss vaccinations due to lack of access and follow-up.
    • Socio-cultural barriers and vaccine hesitancy: Low maternal education, religious beliefs, and misinformation lead to vaccine hesitancy in certain communities. Eg: In some Muslim households or among Scheduled Tribes, distrust or misinformation about vaccines limits uptake.

    How has India’s zero-dose child rate changed over time, especially post-COVID?

    • Steady decline before the pandemic: Between 1992 and 2016, India reduced the percentage of zero-dose children from 33.4% to 10.1%, showing consistent improvement in immunisation outreach.
    • Sharp rise during the COVID-19 pandemic: Disruptions in health services led to a surge in zero-dose children, increasing from 1.4 million in 2019 to 2.7 million in 2021, reversing years of progress.
    • Partial recovery after the pandemic: The number dropped to 1.1 million in 2022 but rose again to 1.44 million in 2023, indicating ongoing challenges in sustaining immunisation coverage.

    Where are zero-dose children mainly located in India?

    • High-burden states in northern and central India: Large numbers of zero-dose children are concentrated in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat, which have large populations and gaps in last-mile immunisation delivery.
    • Northeastern and underserved regions: A relatively high proportion is also found in Meghalaya, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Arunachal Pradesh, where geographic inaccessibility, scattered populations, and weaker health infrastructure pose challenges.

    What actions are needed for India to meet the WHO’s 2030 immunisation target?

    • Expand and intensify targeted immunisation drives: Strengthen last-mile delivery through regular and focused vaccination campaigns in underserved regions. Eg: Mission Indradhanush and its intensified versions could increase immunisation coverage in low-performing districts.
    • Strengthen community-level engagement and awareness: Promote behavioural change and reduce vaccine hesitancy through culturally tailored IEC (Information, Education, and Communication) activities. Eg: Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) encourages institutional deliveries and postnatal care, which can be used to ensure timely vaccination of newborns.
    • Integrate immunisation with digital health monitoring systems: Use technology for real-time tracking of vaccine coverage and follow-up in high-birth and high-risk areas. Eg: eVIN (Electronic Vaccine Intelligence Network) monitors vaccine stocks and cold chain availability, improving efficiency and reducing wastage.

    Conclusion: India’s immunisation journey shows a mixed reality, while the country is a global leader in vaccine development, it still struggles to ensure all its children receive basic immunisation. Closing this gap is important not just for public health but also for social fairness and overall development. The need is even more urgent because India has the highest number of newborns in the world. The Immunisation Agenda 2030 should be treated as a national priority.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] How do vaccines work? What approaches were adopted by the Indian vaccine manufacturers to produce COVID-19 vaccines?

    Linkage: It explicitly deals with “vaccines” and “Indian vaccine manufacturers”. While it focuses on COVID-19 vaccines, the discussion around vaccine functionality and production capacity is fundamentally linked to the broader challenge of “Vaccinating India” and reaching “zero-dose children” for various preventable diseases.

  • Registered Unrecognized Political Parties

    Why in the News?

    The Election Commission of India (ECI) has initiated the process to delist some Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) that have not contested a single election since 2019 and whose offices are untraceable.

    About Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs):

    • Definition: RUPPs are political parties that are registered with the Election Commission of India (ECI) but have not yet qualified as State or National Parties.
    • Electoral Status: These parties may be newly registered, may have contested elections but underperformed, or may have never contested at all.
    • Privileges:
      • Eligibility for election symbols under specific conditions.
      • Tax exemptions for donations under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
      • The ability to participate in elections under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

    How are Political Parties Registered?

    • Legal Basis: Registration is governed by Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
    • Requirements: Parties must submit an application with their constitution or memorandum to the ECI.
    • Declarations: The party must affirm adherence to the Constitution and commit to socialism, secularism, democracy, and national unity.
    • Benefits: Once registered, the party can contest elections, seek a common symbol, and receive legal financial support.

    Criteria for Recognition as a Political Party:

    • For State Party Recognition: A party must:
      • Win 6% of valid votes and 2 Assembly seats, or
      • Win 3% of Assembly seats or at least 3 seats, or
      • Win 1 Lok Sabha seat and 6% of valid votes in a general election from the state.
    • For National Party Recognition: A party must:
      • Be recognized as a State Party in 4 states, or
      • Win 2% of Lok Sabha seats (11 seats) from at least 3 states, or
      • Poll 6% of valid votes in 4 states and win 4 Lok Sabha seats.
    • Advantages of Recognition: Recognized parties get reserved symbols, broadcast time, campaign benefits, and can appoint more star campaigners.
    [UPSC 2001] Consider the following statements regarding the political parties in India:

    1. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides for the registration of political parties.

    2. Registration of political parties is carried out by the Election Commission.

    3. A national level political party is one which is recognised in four or more States.

    4. During the 1999 general elections, there were six National and 48 State level parties recognised by the Election Commission.

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

     

  • India refuses to sign SCO draft statement

    Why in the News?

    At the SCO Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao, China, Raksha Mantri Rajnath Singh refused to sign the draft joint statement after it excluded the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack.

    About SCO:

    • Overview: It is a regional intergovernmental body with 10 members—India, China, Russia, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, and Belarus (joined in 2024).
    • Origin: It evolved from the “Shanghai Five” formed in 1996, aimed at resolving post-Soviet border and security issues in Central Asia and China.
    • Formation: Itwas formally established on June 15, 2001, in Shanghai to promote regional cooperation in security, economic development, and cultural exchange.
    • Security Arm: The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure- RATS of SCO focuses on counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, and drug trafficking.
    • Global Role: It is the world’s largest regional group by area and population, and is viewed as a counterweight to Western alliances.
    • India and SCO:
      • Membership Journey: India became an observer in 2005 and gained full membership in 2017, along with Pakistan.
      • Areas of Participation: India engages in SCO summits, joint military drills, and anti-terror cooperation, often using the forum to address cross-border terrorism

    Significance of Rajnath Singh’s Action:

    • Strong Message: In his recent SCO address, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh emphasized zero tolerance for terrorism, citing the Pahalgam attack as a case of religious targeting.
    • Foreign Policy Signal: His statement reflects India’s independent foreign policy stance, especially significant in a group where China wields influence and often backs Pakistan
    • Zero Tolerance Stand: The speech reinforced India’s message that peace and terrorism cannot coexist, and there can be no normal ties with terror-sponsoring nations.
    [UPSC 2022] Consider the following:

    1. Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank

    2. Missile Technology Control Regime

    3. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

    India is a member of which of the above?

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

     

  • In news: International Olympic Committee (IOC)

    Why in the News?

    Kirsty Coventry, aged 41, has become the first African and the first woman to head the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

    Also in news:

    The IOC has paused the selection process for future Olympic Games hosts, impacting India’s bid for the 2036 Olympics.

    About the International Olympic Committee (IOC)

    • Overview: It is a non-governmental international organisation established in 1894, and is headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland.
    • Functions: It sets the rules and framework for the Olympic Games, including deciding on host cities and event structures.
    • Membership: IOC members must be proficient in French or English and be citizens or residents of countries with a National Olympic Committee (NOC).
    • Jurisdiction: The IOC acts as the final authority on matters related to the Olympic Games and the Olympic movement.
    • Indian and the IOC:
      • The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) has been recognized by the IOC since 1927.
      • It is responsible for selecting and sending Indian athletes to the Olympics and other major international competitions.

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

    PYQ Relevance:

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

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

     

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

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

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

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

    What are the new global power blocs?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Way forward: 

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

  • A lofty concept, a Governor and unwanted controversy

    Why in the News?

    A big controversy has started in Kerala after the Governor put up a picture of ‘Bharat Mata’ in an official room at the Raj Bhavan, leading to a clash between the Governor and the elected state government.

    What is the origin and evolution of the Bharat Mata image?

    • Origin in literary and artistic nationalism: The concept of Bharat Mata originated in the late 19th century through Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay’s novel Anandamath, which introduced the idea of Banga Mata (Mother Bengal). Later, Abanindranath Tagore painted a four-armed woman resembling a Hindu goddess in 1905, which was popularised by Sister Nivedita as Bharat Mata.
    • Evolution into a political symbol: During the Indian freedom movement, Bharat Mata evolved into a powerful emotional symbol representing the nation’s collective identity. While the slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ became widespread, no specific image was officially adopted. Post-independence, the concept remained cultural but was not recognised in any constitutional or legal form.

    What is the Governor’s role in relation to decisions of the elected state government?

    • Constitutional Head: The Governor is the nominal head of the state and must act based on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, as per Article 163 of the Constitution. For instance, decisions on official functions, such as placing portraits or symbols, must follow government directions.
    • No Independent Decision-Making Power: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar clarified in the Constituent Assembly that the Governor has “no functions which he can discharge by himself.” In the Kerala case, the Governor unilaterally placing the Bharat Mata picture at state events goes against this principle.
    • Bound by Constitutional Protocols: The Supreme Court has held in multiple judgments (e.g., Nabam Rebia case, 2016) that the Governor cannot act at his discretion in routine matters. Thus, any deviation from official protocol, such as conducting ceremonies with unauthorised symbols, breaches constitutional norms.

    How does the Bharat Mata image controversy highlight tension between constitutional norms and cultural nationalism?

    • Lack of Constitutional Recognition: The image of Bharat Mata is not recognised by the Constitution like the national flag, emblem, or anthem. Including it in official state functions challenges the principle of secularism and constitutional symbolism, which mandates state neutrality in public symbolism.
    • Political and Ideological Association: The specific depiction used by the Governor—a woman in saffron with a lion—is commonly linked to“right-wing outfits”, making it a cultural nationalist representation rather than a universally accepted national symbol. Its use in state ceremonies risks the blurring of state and ideological lines.
    • Violation of Democratic Protocol: The elected state government objected to the image’s presence, arguing that no unilateral decision can override collective democratic authority. This reflects the friction between constitutional propriety and the personal or ideological preferences of a constitutional functionary.

    Can the Governor act independently in this case?

    • No. The Constitution does not permit the Governor to act unilaterally in official matters. Any display of symbols or portraits during official functions must have the State government’s approval. The Governor’s conduct must adhere to constitutional discipline, not personal or ideological preferences.

    How should officials balance personal beliefs with constitutional values? (Way forward)

    • Adhere to constitutional obligations over personal ideology – Public officials must act in line with constitutional principles like secularism, equality, and neutrality while performing official duties. For instance, a Governor should follow government protocol during official functions rather than promoting symbols not recognised by the Constitution.
    • Separate personal practices from public conduct – While officials are free to hold personal beliefs, they must not impose them in public institutions or state functions. Eg An officer may privately revere a religious symbol but should avoid displaying it in a government office to maintain inclusivity.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] Are tolerance, assimilation and pluralism the key elements in the making of an Indian form of secularism? Justify your answer.

    Linkage: The controversy surrounding the display of a specific picture of Bharat Mata highlights a tension with the “strong secular core” and “inclusive” nature of Indian nationalism. This question explores the principles of Indian secularism, which are central to understanding the debate over how such a concept should be represented and integrated into official functions in a diverse society.

  • State- and sex-wise liver disease data hint at underlying factors

    Why in the News?

    In 2022, liver disease rose to become the eighth leading cause of death in India, marking a serious public health issue that had not occurred in the previous five years.

    What do sex- and age-wise trends reveal about liver disease deaths in India?

    • Sex-wise trend: Male deaths due to digestive diseases (especially liver-related) were 3.5 times higher than female deaths in 2022.
    • Liver diseases accounted for 70–75% of digestive disease deaths in men, while in women it ranged between 52–57%.
    • Age-wise trend:
      – For women, liver-related deaths increased with age, especially in the 65+ age group.
      – For men, the highest death rates occurred in the 35–54 age group, pointing to middle-age vulnerability.

    Why are liver disease deaths significantly higher among men than women?

    • Higher Alcohol Consumption: A major reason is the wide gender gap in alcohol use—around 19% of men consume alcohol compared to just 1% of women. This significantly increases the risk of liver disease among men. In 2022, 75% of male deaths due to digestive diseases were liver-related, compared to 57.5% in women.
    • Middle-Age Vulnerability: Most male deaths from liver disease occur in the 35–54 age group, indicating that lifestyle-related liver damage starts early. In contrast, among women, liver disease deaths are more common in the 65+ age group, often linked to age-related complications rather than lifestyle.
    • Biological and Behavioural Differences: Men may be more prone to risk-prone behaviours, including excessive alcohol and meat consumption, both of which are linked to liver damage. Data also shows men consistently have 3 to 3.5 times higher death rates from digestive diseases than women over the last decade.

    How do regional differences affect liver and digestive disease mortality?

    • Higher Burden in North-Eastern States: Five North-Eastern states recorded over 10% of certified deaths due to digestive diseases in 2022, with Sikkim leading at nearly 20%. This indicates a regional concentration of liver and digestive health issues.
    • Lifestyle Factors in the Region: The North-East has the highest combined prevalence of alcohol and meat consumption in India. This overlap may be a key factor contributing to the elevated liver disease burden in the region.
    • State-Wise Variation Highlights Public Health Gaps: No other state outside the North-East showed a double-digit share of digestive disease deaths, pointing to geographic health disparities.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian Government?

    • National Programme for Prevention and Control of NCDs (NP-NCD): The government launched NP-NCD to tackle non-communicable diseases, including liver disorders, by promoting early diagnosis, screening, and health awareness at the primary healthcare level.
    • National Action Plan and Monitoring Framework (NAP-NCD): Aims to reduce harmful alcohol use, improve dietary habits, and promote healthy lifestyles through public campaigns and community outreach, aligning with WHO targets.
    • Ayushman Bharat – Health and Wellness Centres (AB-HWCs): These centres provide comprehensive primary healthcare, including counselling on nutrition, lifestyle modification, and screening for liver and digestive diseases, especially in rural and underserved areas.

    What measures can strengthen research on lifestyle-related liver diseases? (Way forward)

    • Enhance Data Collection and Surveillance: Develop region-specific health databases that track alcohol and meat consumption, age, and liver disease trends. States like Sikkim and others in the North-East could benefit from focused public health monitoring to identify at-risk populations.
    • Promote Longitudinal and Causal Research: Support long-term studies that move beyond correlation to establish causal links between lifestyle choices and liver disease.
    • Encourage Community-Based Health Studies: Launch grassroots-level research programs involving local communities to understand dietary habits, alcohol use, and health-seeking behaviour.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2024] In a crucial domain like the public healthcare system, the Indian State should play a vital role to contain the adverse impact of marketisation of the system. Suggest some measures through which the State can enhance the reach of public healthcare at the grassroots level.

    Linkage: The increasing deaths due to liver diseases in India, which accounted for a substantial share of digestive system diseases and became the eighth leading cause of death in 2022, highlight a significant public health challenge. This question directly addresses the role of the public healthcare system in containing adverse health impacts and enhancing its reach at the grassroots level.

  • Banakacherla Project Dispute

    Why in the News?

    A fresh political and inter-state water dispute has erupted between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh over the proposed Banakacherla Reservoir Project.

    Banakacherla Project Dispute

    About the Banakacherla Project:

    • About: Also known as the Godavari-Banakacherla or Polavaram-Banakacherla Link Project, it is an ambitious interlinking plan proposed by the Andhra Pradesh government.
    • Objective: It aims to divert surplus Godavari River water via the Polavaram Project, through the Krishna basin, to reach the Banakacherla regulator in Kurnool district.
    • Reservoirs: The project involves construction of a new Bollapalli reservoir in Guntur district, enhancement of canal capacities (e.g., Polavaram canal from 17,500 to 38,000 cusecs), and a network of lift stations and tunnels through the Nallamala forest.
    • Water Pathway: It begins at Polavaram dam, moves to Bollapalli, and ends at Banakacherla, integrating Godavari, Krishna, and Penna River basins.

    Tap to read more about the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956.

    Issues with the Project:

    • Violation of the AP Reorganisation Act (2014): Telangana claims that Andhra’s project infringes upon legal frameworks laid out during the bifurcation of the state.
    • Lack of Clearances: Telangana argues the project has not received mandatory approvals from:
      • Apex Council (Krishna River Management Board and Godavari River Management Board).
      • Central Water Commission (CWC).
    • Water Sharing: Telangana cites the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, which allocated 968 TMC to Telangana and 518 TMC to Andhra but did not quantify surplus water, making the legality of Andhra’s claim ambiguous.
    • Political Sensitivity: Water-sharing has historically been central to Telangana’s statehood movement; any diversion is seen as a betrayal of regional interests.
    • Ecological Concerns: The tunnel under the Nallamala forest may have environmental repercussions that have not been assessed or cleared.
    [UPSC 2012] Which of the following are included in the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? 1. A dispute between the Government of India and one or more States 2. A dispute regarding elections to either House of the Parliament or that of Legislature of a State 3. A dispute between the Government of India and a Union Territory 4. A dispute between two or more States

    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1 and 4 only* (d) 3 and 4 only

     

  • [25th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: U.S.’s heavy duty attack on Iran’s nuke sites

    PYQ Relevance:

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

    Linkage: “Operation Midnight Hammer: B-2 Bombers Strike Iran’s Nuclear Facilities,” details a significant event where the “U.S. military carried out precision strikes on three key Iranian nuclear facilities, mainly Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan”. This PYQ is highly relevant as it requires an analysis of the broader implications for India arising from such direct military actions and controversies involving the US and Iran’s nuclear capabilities, which are central to the “Operation Midnight Hammer” narrative.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  On June 21, 2025, the U.S. officially entered the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict by launching “Operation Midnight Hammer”, a precision strike on Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. What makes this operation historic is the first-ever operational use of the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOP), dropped by B-2 Spirit stealth bombers. Fordow, an ultra-hardened site buried deep within a mountain, had long been considered impregnable — even to Israeli firepower. This high-stakes attack involving stealth bombers, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and elaborate deception tactics showcases the evolving nature of strategic warfare, stealth technology, and nuclear deterrence dynamics, with significant implications for global security and geopolitics.

    Today’s editorial discusses the effects of the recent U.S.A. Operation Midnight Hammer: B-2 Bombers Strike Iran’s Nuclear Facilities. This topic is important for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the U.S. joined the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran by launching “Operation Midnight Hammer”, a targeted military strike on Iran’s main nuclear sites located at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

    What is the B-2 Stealth Bomber?

    The B-2 Stealth Bomber, also known as the B-2 Spirit, is an advanced long-range, heavy bomber used by the United States Air Force.

    What are the geopolitical impacts of the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites?

    • Undermining diplomatic efforts: The attack weakens ongoing negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, especially efforts to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which the U.S. exited in 2018.
    • Message of deterrence and alliance assurance: The operation signals U.S. commitment to Israel’s security and aims to deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, reaffirming strategic dominance in West Asia and setting a precedent like the 1981 Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor.

    How do technologies like B-2 bombers and bunker-busters shape modern warfare?

    • Enhanced penetration of fortified targets: Bunker-buster bombs like the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator can destroy deeply buried nuclear facilities, such as Iran’s Fordow site, which is located inside a mountain.
    • Stealth and survivability in hostile environments: The B-2 Spirit bomber, with its low radar signature and long-range capabilities, allows undetected strikes deep into enemy territory, demonstrated during Operation Midnight Hammerover Iran.
    • Precision and reduced collateral damage: The use of GPS-guided munitions enables targeted destruction of critical infrastructure while minimizing civilian harm. The Tomahawk cruise missiles used alongside the B-2s in the Iran strike are an example.

    What does U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict indicate about its West Asia strategy?

    • Reinforcement of strategic alliances: The U.S. action shows its continued military and political support for Israel, especially after Israel’s initial strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. This underscores a long-standing alliance.
    • Deterrence against nuclear proliferation: By targeting Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities, the U.S. aims to send a strong message against the development of nuclear weapons by adversarial states in the region.
    • Projection of power and dominance: The deployment of B-2 bombers and Tomahawk missiles illustrates America’s intent to maintain military superiority and influence over regional conflicts, ensuring its leadership role in West Asia’s security architecture.

    What challenges arise in attacking underground nuclear sites like Fordow?

    • Depth and Fortification: The Fordow nuclear site is buried 80–90 meters underground and shielded by reinforced concrete, making it resilient to conventional strikes. Even the GBU-57 bunker-busters caused only partial damage, revealing the limits of aerial assaults.
    • Operational Complexity: Missions to strike such sites need advanced platforms like the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, supported by decoy tactics, mid-air refuelling, and long-duration flights. The limited number of B-2s and their high maintenance make repeated missions challenging.

    Does India have B-2 bomber capability?

    • Lack of Stealth Bomber Technology: India does not possess any stealth bombers like the U.S. B-2 Spirit, which is capable of penetrating heavily fortified targets with low radar visibility. The B-2 is a unique platform operated exclusively by the United States.
    • Current Indian Bomber Fleet: India relies on multirole fighter jets such as the Sukhoi Su-30MKI, Rafale, and Mirage-2000 for strike missions. These aircraft are effective but lack deep-strike stealth capabilities and the payload capacity of strategic bombers.E.g. The Sukhoi Su-30MKI can carry cruise missiles like BrahMos, but not bunker-busters like the GBU-57.
    • Strategic Focus and Alternatives: Instead of stealth bombers, India invests in missile-based deterrents such as the Agni series (ballistic missiles) and long-range cruise missiles. These provide strategic strike capability without the need for a dedicated stealth bomber. E.g. The Nirbhay cruise missile offers precision strike capability with a range of 1000+ km.

    What can India do? (Way forward)

    • Invest in Indigenous Stealth and Deep-Strike Platforms: India can accelerate development of indigenous stealth bombers or long-range unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) under future programs like AMCA (Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft) to enable penetration of heavily defended targets.
    • Enhance Precision Missile and Bunker-Buster Arsenal: India can develop or acquire heavy bunker-busting munitions and integrate them with existing platforms like the Su-30MKI or future drones, while also upgrading satellite-guided targeting systems for deeper and more accurate strikes.