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

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • 50th anniversary of Meghalaya’s Statehood

    The Meghalaya Assembly has given an indigenous touch to the National Anthem ahead of the 50th anniversary of Meghalaya’s Statehood in 2022.

    About Meghalaya

    • Meghalaya meaning “abode of clouds” was formed by carving out two districts from the state of Assam: the United Khasi Hills and Jaintia Hills, and the Garo Hills on 21 January 1972.
    • It was previously part of Assam, but on 21 January 1972, the districts of Khasi, Garo and Jaintia hills became the new state of Meghalaya.
    • It is the wettest region of India, with the wettest areas in the southern Khasi Hills recording an average of 12,000 mm (470 in) of rain a year.
    • About 70 percent of the state is forested.
    • The Meghalaya subtropical forests ecoregion encompasses the state; its mountain forests are distinct from the lowland tropical forests to the north and south.

    Note the chronology of reorganization states in India

    State Formation Year Status prior to the formation
    Andhra 1953 Part of the state of Madras
    Gujarat 1960 Part of the state of Bombay
    Maharashtra 1960 Part of the state of Bombay
    Kerala 1956 State of Travancore and Cochin
    Nagaland 1963 Union territory
    Haryana 1966 Part of Punjab
    Karnataka 1956 State of Mysore was formed in 1953, enlarged Mysore in 1956 which was renamed in 1973.
    Himachal Pradesh 1971 Union Territory
    Manipur, Tripura 1972 Union Territories
    Meghalaya 1972 Autonomous state within state of Assam
    Sikkim 1975 Associate state since 1974 and a protectorate of India before that.
    Mizoram 1987 District of Assam till 1972 and Union Territory from 1972 to 1987.
    Arunachal Pradesh 1987 Union Territory
    Goa 1987 Union Territory
    Uttarakhand 2000 Part of Uttar Pradesh
    Chhattisgarh 2000 Part of Madhya Pradesh
    Jharkhand 2000 Part of Bihar
    Telangana 2014 Part of Andhra Pradesh

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • State control over Temples

    Context

    On August 14, 2021, the Tamil Nadu government appointed 24 trained archakas (priests) in temples across the State. In the weeks since, a series of writ petitions have been filed before the Madras High Court assailing these appointments.

    Administration of  Hindu temples in Tamil Nadu by government and challenges to it

    • The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE), 1959, is the governing law on the administration of Hindu temples and religious institutions.
    • In 1971, Section 55 of the HR&CE Act was amended to abolish hereditary priesthood.
    • Removal of caste-based discrimination: In 2006, the amendment provided for the appointment of sufficiently trained Hindus irrespective of their caste as archakas to Hindu temples by the government.
    • Challenges in the Court: Challenges to both amendments were taken to the Supreme Court, which upheld the law, as amended.
    •  In Seshammal v. Union (1972), the Supreme Court observed that the amendment to the HR&CE Act abolishing hereditary priesthood did not mean that the government intended to bring about any “change in the rituals and ceremonies”.
    • Constitutional legitimacy: In Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal v. Govt. of Tamil Nadu (2015), the Supreme Court observed that “the constitutional legitimacy, naturally, must supersede all religious beliefs or practices”.
    • The Court further went on to state that appointments should be tested on a case-by-case basis and any appointment that is not in line with the Agamas will be against the constitutional freedoms enshrined under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

    Judicial balancing of the various rights by the Supreme Court

    • In Indian Young Lawyers’ Association v. State of Kerala (the Sabarimala case) and Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court reiterated the need to eliminate “historical discrimination which has pervaded certain identities”’, “systemic discrimination against disadvantaged groups”.
    • In these cases the Supreme Court rejected stereotypical notions used to justify such discrimination.
    • In all these cases, the Court prioritised judicial balancing of various constitutional rights.
    • The constitutional order of priority: In the Sabarimala case, it held that “in the constitutional order of priorities, the individual right to the freedom of religion was not intended to prevail over but was subject to the overriding constitutional postulates of equality, liberty and personal freedoms recognised in the other provisions of Part III”.

    Way forward

    • Building on the Sabrimala case: The constitutional courts will now be called upon to build on the gains of the Sabarimala case when it comes to administration of temples, insofar as it concerns matters that are not essentially religious.
    • Dealing with the gender bias: The Supreme Court, in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), interpreted Article 15 as being wide, progressive and intersectional.
    • Today, while most of the debate is around whether men from all caste groups can become archakas, we have failed to recognise the gender bias inherent in these discussions.

    Consider the question “We have been witnessing the evolution of rights-based jurisprudence in the various judgements of the Supreme Court. This will help to eliminate “systemic discrimination against disadvantaged groups”, and reject stereotypical notions used to justify such discrimination. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    At once, caste orthodoxy and patriarchy entrenched within the realm of the HR&CE Act can be eliminated and supplanted with a vision of a just, equal and dignified society.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • In Manipur, a case for asymmetric federalism

    As a normative idea and an institutional arrangement that supports the recognition and provision of an expansive ‘self-rule’ for territorially concentrated minority groups, asymmetric federalism has recently received bad press in India.

    India’s Federalism: A backgrounder

    • Nations are described as ‘federal’ or ‘unitary’, depending on the way in which governance is organised.
    • In a unitary set-up, the Centre has plenary powers of administration and legislation, with its constituent units having little autonomy.
    • In a federal arrangement, the constituent units are identified on the basis of region or ethnicity and conferred varying forms of autonomy or some level of administrative and legislative powers.
    • In India, the residuary powers of legislation, that is the power to make law in a field not specified in the Constitution, is vested in Parliament.
    • Hence India has a quasi-federal framework.

    Why is it said that India has asymmetric federalism?

    • The main forms of administrative units in India are the Centre and the States.
    • Just as the Centre and the States do not have matching powers in all matters, there are some differences in the way some States and other constituent units of the Indian Union relate to the Centre.
    • This creates a notable asymmetry in the way Indian federalism works.
    • But there are other forms, too, all set up to address specific local, historical and geographical contexts.

    The asymmetric structure

    • Besides the Centre and the States, the country has Union Territories with a legislature, and Union Territories without a legislature.
    • When the Constitution came into force, the various States and other administrative units were divided into Parts A, B, C and D.
    • Part A States were the erstwhile provinces, while Part B consisted of erstwhile princely states and principalities. Part C areas were the erstwhile ‘Chief Commissioner’s Provinces’.
    • They became Union Territories, and some of them initially got legislatures and were later upgraded into States.
    • Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh and Goa belong to this category.

    Power apparatus in these asymmetries: Sixth Schedule

    • The Sixth Schedule to the Constitution contains provisions for the administration of tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram.
    • These create autonomous districts and autonomous regions.
    • Any autonomous district with different Scheduled Tribes will be divided into autonomous regions.
    • These will be administered by District Councils and Regional Councils.
    • These Councils can make laws with respect to allotment, occupation and use of land, management of forests other than reserve forests and water courses.
    • Besides they can regulate social customs, marriage and divorce and property issues.

    An integrationist approach adopted by the Constituent Assembly

    • Post-independence, India was criticized for arguably becoming a ‘homogenous Hindu nation’ after Partition.
    • To counter this, the Gopinath Bordoloi Committee, a sub-committee of the Constituent Assembly sought to accommodate the distinctive identity, culture and way of life of tribal groups in the NE by envisioning ‘self-rule’.
    • This distinctive constitutional status to territorially concentrated minorities fosters centrifugal tendencies.
    • Asymmetric federalism fosters subversive institutions, political instability and breakup of States.

    Curious case of Manipur: Recent developments

    • Article 371 gives expansive constitutional powers to Manipur’s Hill Areas Committee (Article 371C) over tribal identity, culture, development and local administration, are exemplars.
    • The integrationist approach resonates powerfully in two recent attempts by Manipur’s government to
    1. stall the introduction and passage of the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council (Amendment) Bill, 2021, and
    2. induct nine Assembly members from the valley areas into the Hill Areas Committee.
    • This move is being perceived as a “malicious” and “direct assault” on the Hill Areas Committee and the constitutional protection accorded to the Hill Areas of Manipur under Article 371C.

    A determined move

    • These moves marks a calculated initiative to use this as a double-edged sword to simultaneously set apace electoral agenda for the upcoming Assembly elections in early 2022 and reclaim its agency to fortify state-level constitutional asymmetry.
    • The attempt to increase membership of the six district councils to 31 members each and secure more powers to the councils by giving more developmental mandate are welcome.

    Managing HAC: A difficult task

    • If history is any guide, the task of reclaiming the Hill Areas Committee’s agency is not going to be easy.
    • Its members often leverage tribe/party loyalty over-commitment to protect constitutional asymmetry and common tribals’ cause.
    • How the HAC and various tribal groups strategically navigate their politics to offset the majoritarian impulse to manipulate the legal and political process to dilute/dissolve extant constitutional asymmetry remains to be seen.

    Way forward

    • There should be sincere commitment to promote tribal development, identity and culture that Article 371C seeks to bridge.
    • Recognizing and institutionally accommodating tribal distinctiveness is not just as a matter of political convenience
    • This valuable and enduring good will be key to promote the State’s integrity, stability and peace in the long run.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Stand-off over North Korea reinforces the hollowness of the doctrine of deterrence

    Context

    The resumption of North Korea’s largest fissile material production reactor, has sparked speculation about its real and symbolic significance.

    Background of North Korea’s nuclear weapons development

    • In 1994, Pyongyang barred IAEA access to the Yongbyon complex amid suspicions that the country was generating plutonium from spent fuel.
    • 1994 Agreed Framework, an executive agreement signed by President Bill Clinton, required Pyongyang to freeze all nuclear activity and allow inspection of its military sites in return for the construction of two light water reactors.
    • The accord broke down in 2002.
    • In June 2008, in order to express its denuclearisation commitment to the U.S. and four other countries, Pyongyang blew up the cooling tower at the Yongbyon complex.
    • A few months in 2008, Pyongyang barred IAEA inspectors access to its reprocessing plant in the Yongbyon complex and eventually expelled them the following April.
    • In November 2010 American scientist Siegfried Hecker confirmed accounts that North Korea had rapidly built a uranium enrichment plant at Yongbyon.

    Why does resumption nuclear reactor matter?

    • The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has underlined that the restart of activity in Yongbyon constitutes a violation of UN Security Council resolutions.
    • Reprocessing of fuel: The reactor at the Yongbyon complex has been central to the North Korean reprocessing of spent fuel rods to generate plutonium.
    • Enrichment of fuel: Besides the production of highly enriched uranium for the development of atomic bombs.

    Way forward

    • Negotiations: The Biden administration has adopted a pragmatic path of declaring its readiness to resume negotiations with Pyongyang.
    • UN treaty on complete abolition of nuclear arms: The UN treaty on complete abolition of atomic arms, whose deliberations were boycotted by all nuclear weapons states, is the morally superior alternative.

    Conclusion

    The protracted stand-off over North Korea reinforces the hollowness of the doctrine of deterrence and begs the question whether proliferation can ever be prevented just because nuclear weapons states want to perpetuate their dominance.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

    Back2Basics: IAEA

    • The International Atomic Energy Agency is the world’s central intergovernmental forum for scientific and technical co-operation in the nuclear field.
    • It works for the safe, secure and peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology, contributing to international peace and security and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.
    • The IAEA was created in 1957 in response to the deep fears and expectations generated by the discoveries and diverse uses of nuclear technology.
    • The Agency’s genesis was U.S. President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” address to the General Assembly of the United Nations on 8 December 1953.

  • Allahabad HC verdict disqualifying then PM

    The 1975 verdict of Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha of the Allahabad high court, disqualifying then PM Indira Gandhi on charges of electoral malpractices was a judgment of “great courage” that “shook” the nation, said CJI in his speech.

    What was the case?

    • It all started with the 1971 Lok Sabha elections, where the Congress (R), which was the newly formed faction of the Congress party floated by Indira Gandhi after her expulsion from the party in 1969, won a landslide victory securing 352 out of the 518 seats in the lower house.
    • An election petition was filed directly before a High Court challenging the election of Indira Gandhi.

    What is an Election Petition?

    • Election Petition has to be filed within 45 days from the date of declaration of the election results.
    • The Representation of People (RP) Act of 1951 lists out the grounds on which the election of a candidate can be called into question.
    • Section 123 of the RP Act lists certain corrupt practices which, if proved successful, can be grounds to declare the election of a candidate void.
    • While hearing an election petition, the High Court being the court of first instance, exercises powers similar to a trial court.
    • Thus, there is cross-examination of witnesses and detailed examination of evidence which is normally employed in trial courts and not High Courts.

    Findings against Gandhi

    • Use of government machinery to set up stage, loudspeakers
    • Use of gazetted officer as an election agent

    A case that led to the promulgation of National Emergency

    The verdict is widely believed to have led to the imposition of Emergency on June 25, 1975.

    • A vacation bench of the Supreme Court allowed a partial stay of the judgment after Gandhi had appealed against the High Court verdict.
    • Then Justice VR Krishna Iyer, said that she could continue as Member of Parliament (MP) in the Lok Sabha and could attend the House, but could not participate in its proceedings or vote as MP.
    • She also could not draw any remuneration as an MP.
    • Importantly, the apex court allowed her to continue as Prime Minister and allowed her to speak and participate in the proceedings of the House and to draw salary in her capacity as Prime Minister.
    • The order by the apex court, while not completely against Gandhi, did not satisfy her.
    • She wanted a blanket stay on the Allahabad High Court judgment.
    • Since the Supreme Court did not grant her that, National Emergency was proclaimed the very next day, June 25.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

    Back2Basics: National Emergency

    • The Constitution employs the expression ‘proclamation of emergency’ to denote National Emergency under Article 352.
    • Under Article 352, the president can declare a national emergency when the security of India or a part of it is threatened by war or external aggression or armed rebellion.
    • The President can declare a national emergency even before the actual occurrence of war or armed rebellion or external aggression
    • When a national emergency is declared on the grounds of ‘war’ or ‘external aggression’, it is known as ‘External Emergency’.
    • On the other hand, when it is declared on the grounds of ‘armed rebellion’, it is known as ‘Internal Emergency’.
    • The term ‘armed rebellion is inserted from the 44th amendment. Before this term, it was known as an internal disturbance.

     

  • Iran to allow nuclear surveillance under IAEA

    Iran has agreed to allow international inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to install new memory cards into surveillance cameras at its sensitive nuclear sites and to continue filming there, potentially averting a diplomatic showdown this week.

    Try this question from CSP 2020:

    Q.In India, why are some nuclear reactors kept under “IAEA Safeguards” while others are not?

    (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.

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”dgifruxlj2″ question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

    What is IAEA?

    • The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is an international organization that seeks to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to inhibit its use for any military purpose, including nuclear weapons.
    • As the preeminent nuclear watchdog under the UN, the IAEA is entrusted with the task of upholding the principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970.
    • It was established as an autonomous organization on July 29, 1957, at the height of the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
    • Though established independently of the UN through its own international treaty, the agency reports to both the UN General Assembly and the UNSC.

    What are its safeguards?

    • Safeguards are activities by which the IAEA can verify that a State is living up to its international commitments not to use nuclear programs for nuclear weapons purposes.
    • Safeguards are based on assessments of the correctness and completeness of a State’s declared nuclear material and nuclear-related activities.
    • Verification measures include on-site inspections, visits, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation.

    Basically, two sets of measures are carried out in accordance with the type of safeguards agreements in force with a State.

    1. One set relates to verifying State reports of declared nuclear material and activities.
    2. Another set enables the IAEA not only to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material but also to provide assurances as to the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in a State.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Two decades of 9/11

    Twenty years later, the 9/11 terror attacks look a lot less epochal than they seemed in the heat of the moment.

    Why was 9-11 a major breakthrough?

    • One major inference in the wake of 9/11 was about the power of non-state actors — demonstrated by al Qaeda’s massive surprise attack on the world’s lone superpower at its zenith.
    • Al Qaeda’s rise seemed to fit in with the age of economic globalization and the internet, which heralded the weakening of the state system and the arrival of a borderless world.
    • Two decades later, though, the system of nation-states looks quite robust after enduring the challenge from international terrorism.

    Implications of the attack

    • The state system adapted quickly to the disruptions created by 9/11.
    • There was much anxiety about terror groups gaining access to weapons of mass destruction or leveraging new digital technologies to increase their power over states.
    • The state system has succeeded in keeping nuclear weapons and material away from terrorists.
    • It has also become adept at using digital tools to counter extremism.
    • If 9/11 made air travel risky, the states quickly developed protocols to de-risk it.

    Humiliating end for the US everywhere

    • Marking the 20th anniversary of 9/11 days after the humiliating US retreat from Kabul and domestic turmoil might suggest that Al-Qaeda and its associates did succeed in ending America’s unipolar moment.
    • The choice of targets in the 9/11 attacks — the World Trade Center and the Pentagon — was not accidental.
    • They were designed to strike at the very heart of American capitalism and its famed military power.
    • American capitalism met its greatest threat not in 2001 but in the 2008 financial crisis that was triggered by the reckless ideology of deregulation.
    • America lost in Afghanistan and the Middle East because it over-determined the terror threat and put security approaches above political common sense.

    Today’s agenda for terror

    • And the ambition of the jihadists — who organized the 9/11 attacks, to destroy America has risen to a higher extent:
    1. To overthrow the Arab regimes
    2. Unleash a war with Israel
    3. Pit the believers against the infidels
    • To be sure, terrorist organizations and the religious extremism that inspires them to continue to be of concern.

    Age of ideological warfare

    • Sectarian schisms, ideological cleavages, internecine warfare, and the messiness of the real world have cooled the revolutionary ardor that the world was so afraid of after 9/11.
    • In the battle between states and non-states, the former have accumulated extraordinary powers in the name of fighting the latter.
    • All nations, including liberal democracies, have curtailed individual liberty by offering greater security against terrorism.
    • Abuse of state power has inevitably followed.

    Security narratives by the US since then

    • After 9/11, President George W Bush turned his attention to confronting an imagined “global axis of evil” — Iran, Iraq, and North Korea.
    • None of the three countries was involved in 9/11.
    • And the US rewarded Pakistan with billions of dollars in military and economic assistance that actively nurtured the Taliban and succeeded in bleeding and defeating the US in Afghanistan.

    Threats earned by the US

    • This blinded the US to an emerging challenger — China — on the horizon. Washington’s obsession with the Middle East gave Beijing two valuable decades to consolidate its rise without any hindrance.
    • Although America’s unipolar moment may have ended, the US will continue to remain the most powerful nation in the world, with the greatest capacity to shape the international system.

    What about the jihadist agenda for the Middle East?

    • The Islamist effort to destroy the Gulf kingdoms spluttered quite quickly as the Arab monarchs cracked down hard on the jihadi groups.
    • Many Arab states do not see al Qaeda and its offshoots as existential threats.
    • They worry more about other Muslim states like Turkey, Qatar, and Iran that seek to leverage Islam for geopolitical purposes.
    • These fears have pushed smaller Gulf kingdoms towards Israel and shattered the jihadi hope to trigger the final Islamic assault on the Jewish state.
    • Developments in China and Pakistan reinforce the proposition that politics among nation-states is more significant than the power of the transcendental religious forces.

    How did India Respond?

    • India has been facing the problem of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism since 1989.  Unfortunately, the USA and the UK sided with Pakistan during this time.
    • However, this changed after India’s 2nd nuclear test and the 9/11 attack in the USA. Though the USA continued to rely on Pakistan, it considered Pakistan as an unreliable partner. This was further proved when Osama bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan.
    • Indian response to terror attacks had been that of “strategic restraint”.
    • It was limited to diplomatic actions. This was evident in attacks on the Indian Parliament (December 2001) and the Kaluchak massacre (May 2002).
    • However, now we witness that India has adopted a policy of imposing costs on Pakistan by striking across the border, e.g. Balalkot airstrikes.
    • This capacity of India has been built over its strong economy and strong global linkages. Despite the economic disaster of 1991, India emerged stronger after LPG reforms.

    Conclusion

    • The trans-national nature of the new terror groups is now countered by better border controls and greater international cooperation on law enforcement.
    • However, in the subcontinent, as elsewhere, violent religious extremism thrives only under state patronage.
    • The answers to the challenges presented by the return of the Taliban and the likely resurgence of jihadi terrorism are not in the religious domain but in changing the geopolitical calculus of Pakistan’s deep state.

    B2BASICS

    Violent Non-state actors

    • In international relations, violent non-state actors (VNSA), also known as non-state armed actors or non-state armed groups (NSAGs), are individuals and groups that are wholly or partly independent of governments and which threaten or use violence to achieve their goals.
    • VNSAs vary widely in their goals, size, and methods. They may include narcotics cartels, popular liberation movements, religious and ideological organizations, corporations (e.g. private military contractors), self-defence militia, and paramilitary groups established by state governments to further their interests.

  • The fall of Afghanistan, the fallout in West Asia

    Three weeks after they walked into Kabul without any resistance, the Taliban now has announced an interim Council of Ministers.

    Chord with Pakistan: Crowing of its puppets

    • Pakistan appears to have got its way. This government formation has tightly controlled the head of its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
    • Afghanistan’s acting PM is Mullah Hassan Akhund, a close associate of former Taliban founder Mullah Omar.
    • Abdul Ghani Baradar is his deputy, but again, this could be a token position.
    • Baradar had been arrested in 2010 by the Pakistanis for pursuing a dialogue with the Hamid Karzai government without Pakistani sanction and jailed for eight years.
    • Pakistan’s true proteges are Sirajuddin Haqqani, the acting interior minister, and Mohammed Yaqoob, the acting defence minister, a son of Mullah Omar, who is also close to Haqqani.

    The West Asian players

    Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Iran have been direct role-players in Afghan affairs for over 25 years.

    • Sheikhdom involvement: In the 1990s, the first two were supporters and sources of funding for the Taliban, while Iran was an antagonist. After 9/11, all three countries became deeply involved with the Taliban. Since 2005, the Gulf sheikhdoms have contributed millions of dollars to different Taliban leaders and factions.
    • Iran’s defiance of the US: Iran began a substantial engagement with various Taliban leaders from 2007 and provided funding, weapons, training and refuge when required. It wanted the Taliban to maintain pressure on the U.S. forces to ensure their speedy departure from the country.
    • Regional competition: In the 2010s, when the US began to engage with Iran on the nuclear issue, Saudi Arabia became more directly involved in Afghan matters to prevent Iran’s expanding influence among Taliban groups. Thus, besides Syria and Yemen, Iran and Saudi Arabia have also made Afghanistan an arena for their regional competitions.
    • Earliest acknowledgment of the Taliban: In 2012, Qatar, on U.S. request, allowed the Taliban to open an office in Doha as a venue for their dialogue with the Americans. This has made Qatar an influential player in Afghan affairs, with deep personal ties with several leaders, many of whom keep their families in Doha.

    Competitions for influence

    The low-key reactions of the Gulf countries to recent developments in Kabul reflect the uncertainties relating to the Taliban in power.

    Nature of the govt: Their ability to remain united, their policies relating to human rights, and, above all, whether the Taliban will again make their country a sanctuary for extremist groups.

    Fractionalization within terror groups: The country already has several thousand foreign fighters, whose ranks could swell with extremists coming in from Iraq and Syria, and threaten the security of all neighbouring states.

    Three sets of regional players are active in Afghanistan today:

    1. Pakistan-Saudi coalition: This has been the principal source of support for the Taliban-at-war. They would like to remain influential in the new order, but neither would like to see the Taliban revert to their practices of the 1990s that had justifiably appalled the global community.
    2. Turkey and Qatar: They represent the region’s Islamist coalition and, thus, share an ideological kinship with the Taliban. Both would like to see a moderate and inclusive administration.
    3. Iran: While many of its hardliners are overjoyed at the U.S. “defeat”, more reflective observers recall the earlier Taliban emirate which was viscerally hostile to Shias and Iran. Iran also sees itself as the guardian of the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara minorities in the country.

    Options Available: The outlook for security

    Linking with Israel-Palestine Conflict: The region now has two options: one, an Israel-centric security order in which the Arab Gulf states would link themselves with Israel to confront Iran. This is being actively promoted by Israeli hawks since it would tie Israel with neighbouring Arab states without having to concede anything to meet Palestinian aspirations.

    Comprehensive regional security arrangement: The other option is more ambitious: The facilitators and guarantors of this security arrangement are likely to be China and Russia: over the last few years, both have built close relations with the major states of the region. i.e., Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    Consensus to ward away the US

    • The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states led by Saudi Arabia lifted the over three-year blockade of Qatar.
    • The discussions between Iran and Saudi Arabia and plans are in place for the next meetings.
    • Turkey has initiated diplomatic overtures towards Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
    • None of these initiatives involves the Americans.

    Conclusion: A new order is in making

    • These developments suggest that the germ of a new regional security order in West Asia is already sown in fertile ground.

    Way forward for India

    • The Indian policies are at a crossroads. Continued bandwagoning with the US makes no sense.
    • Indian diplomacy should harmonize with the regional capitals, including Beijing, which can be a natural ally on issues of terrorism.
    • The bottom line is that India’s vital interests remain to be secured.
    • Demonizing the Taliban can only be counterproductive.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  •  How India and Germany can work together to tackle climate change?

    Both nations, India and Germany with innovative economies and many highly-trained people can tackle the climate challenge.

    India-Germany Relations: A backgrounder

    Freedom struggle: Subhas Chandra Bose, a prominent freedom fighter for Indian independence, made a determined effort to obtain India’s independence from Britain by seeking military assistance from the Axis powers. The Indische Legion was formed to serve as a liberation force for British-ruled India principally made up of Indian prisoners of war.

    Diplomacy: India maintained diplomatic relations with both West Germany and East Germany and supported their reunification in 1990. Contrary to France and the UK, Germany has no strategic footprint in Asia.

    Past contentions: Germany condemned India for liberating Goa from Portuguese rule in 1961 and supported Portugal’s dictatorial regime under Salazar against India. It was critical of India for intervening in the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War.  It rejected India’s 1998 nuclear tests.

    Quest for UNSC: India and Germany both seek to become permanent members of the UNSC and have joined with Japan and Brazil to coordinate their efforts via the G4 collective.

    Cultural ties: Germany has supported education and cultural programs in India. Germany helped establish the IIT Madras after both governments signed an agreement in 1956 and increased its cooperation and supply of technology and resources over the decades to help expand the institution

    Trade and investment: Germany is India’s largest trading partner in Europe. Germany is the 8th largest foreign direct investor (FDI) in India.

    Common concerns

    • In South Asia and Europe, we have become used to extremely hot weather, flooding, dramatic depletion of groundwater tables, and drought.
    • The EU has adopted an ambitious Green Deal to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and to decouple economic growth from the consumption of natural resources.

    Why the two?

    • India is one of few countries that looks set to deliver on the national goals it set itself as part of the Paris agreement.
    • Compared to other G20 countries, its per capita emissions are very low.
    • Germany recently adopted laws on reducing greenhouse gases more quickly, achieving climate neutrality by 2045 and stopping the use of coal for electricity production by 2038.

    Collaborated efforts to date

    • In 2015, India’s PM and Germany’s Federal Chancellor agreed to further strengthen the two countries’ strategic partnership.
    • On this basis, Germany and India have succeeded in building up a cooperation portfolio worth almost 12 billion euros.
    • Already, nine out of 10 measures support climate goals and SDGs together.

    Indo-German development cooperation focuses on three areas:

    1. Transition to renewable energies
    2. Sustainable urban development and
    3. Sustainable management of natural resources

    What does Germany have to offer?

    • As a pioneer of the energy transition, Germany is offering knowledge, technology transfer, and financial solutions.
    • The pandemic has shown global supply chains are vulnerable.
    • Yet, when it comes to agriculture and natural resources, there are smart solutions that are being tested in India and Germany for more self-reliance, including agroecological approaches and sustainable management of forests, soils, and water.
    • Experience in India has shown that these methods also boost incomes for the local population and make them less dependent on expensive fertilizers, pesticides and seeds.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Sri Lanka’s economic crisis poses challenges for India

    Context

    On 31 August 2021, Sri Lanka declared a state of economic emergency, as it is running out of foreign exchange reserves for essential imports like food.

    Economic cooperation with Sri Lanka

    • India is Sri Lanka’s third-largest export destination, after the US and UK.
    • More than 60% of Sri Lanka’s exports enjoy the benefits of the India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement, which came into effect in March 2000.
    •  India is also a major investor in Sri Lanka.
    •  Foreign direct investment (FDI) from India amounted to around $ 1.7 billion over the years from 2005 to 2019.
    • Concessional financing of about $ 2 billion has been provided to Sri Lanka through various Indian government-supported Lines of Credit across sectors like railways, infrastructure and security.
    • India’s development partnership with Sri Lanka has always been demand-driven, with projects covering social infrastructure like education, health, housing etc.
    • The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had signed a currency-swap agreement with the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) under the Saarc Currency Swap Framework 2019-22.

    Factors responsible for economic emergency in Sri Lanka

    • Tourism: Tourism, a big dollar earner for Sri Lanka, has suffered since the Easter Sunday terror attacks of 2019, followed by the pandemic.
    • Declining FDI: Earnings fell from $3.6 billion in 2019 to $0.7 billion in 2020, even as FDI inflows halved from $1.2 billion to $670 million over the same period.
    • Debt distress: Its public debt-to-GDP ratio was at 109.7% in 2020, and its gross financing needs remain high at 18% of GDP, higher than most of its emerging economy peers.
    •  The external debt-to-GDP ratio stood at 62% in 2020 and is predominantly owed by its public sector.
    • More than $2.7 billion of foreign currency debt will be due in the next two years.

    How economic crisis may push Sri Lanka to align its policies with China

    • Reliance on Chinese credit: Sri Lanka has increasingly relied on Chinese credit to address its foreign debt burden.
    • Unable to service its debt, in 2017, Sri Lanka lost the unviable Hambantota port to China for a 99-year lease.
    • Increasing bilateral trade: China’s exports to Sri Lanka surpassed those of India in 2020 and stood at $3.8 billion (India’s exports were $3.2 billion).
    • Strategic investment by China: Owing to Sri Lanka’s strategic location at the intersection of major shipping routes, China has heavily invested in its infrastructure (estimated at $12 billion between 2006 and 2019).
    • In May, Sri Lanka passed the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Act, which provides for establishing a special economic zone around the port and also a new economic commission, to be funded by China.

    Implications for India

    • Relations between India and Sri Lanka seem to have plummeted since the beginning of this year.
    • In February, Sri Lanka backed out from a tripartite partnership with India and Japan for its East Container Terminal Project at the Colombo Port, citing domestic issues.
    • Sri Lanka’s economic crisis may further push it to align its policies with Beijing’s interests.
    • India is already on a diplomatic tightrope with Afghanistan and Myanmar.
    • Other South Asian nations like Bangladesh, Nepal and the Maldives have also been turning to China to finance large-scale infrastructure projects.

    Way forward

    • Nurturing the Neighbourhood First policy with Sri Lanka will be important for India.
    • Explore possibility through regional platforms: The BIMSTEC and the Indian Ocean Rim Association could be leveraged to foster cooperation in common areas of interest like technology-driven agriculture and marine sector, IT, renewable energy, and transport and connectivity.
    • Cooperation on private sector investment: Both countries could also cooperate on enhancing private sector investments to create economic resilience.

    Consider the question “How economic troubles in Sri Lanka could impact India? Suggest the way forward.”

    Conclusion

    With its economy in deep trouble, Sri Lanka may get further pushed towards China, India has to deliver on its Neighbourhood First policy to protects itself from the adverse fallout.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)