💥UPSC 2026, 2027, 2028 UAP Mentorship (March Batch) + Access XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF

Archives: News

  • India’s Bid to a Permanent Seat at United Nations

    India launches campaign brochure for UNSC seat

    India has launched its campaign brochure ahead of elections for five non-permanent members of UNSC.

    Practice question for mains:

    Q. By any calculus, India will qualify for UNSC permanent seat. Analyse.

    India’s agenda for UNSC

    The normal process of international governance has been under increasing strain as frictions have increased. Traditional and non-traditional security challenges continue to grow unchecked. India will highlight:

    • International terrorism
    • UN reforms and Security Council expansion, and
    • Streamlining the world body’s peacekeeping operations
    • Various technological initiatives

    India and UNSC

    • India is guaranteed a place in the UNSC as it is the sole candidate for Asia-Pacific but needs two-thirds of the 193-member General Assembly to vote in its favour in a secret ballot scheduled this month in New York.
    • While India is expected to sail through with the 129 votes required for the seat, the government is setting its sights on much higher numbers than that ahead of the election.
    • In 2010, when India stood for the UNSC seat of 2011-2012, it won 187 of the 190 votes polled.

    Streamlining new NORMS

    • This will be the eighth time India will occupy a non-permanent UNSC seat, with its last stint in 2011-2012.
    • India’s overall objective during this tenure in the UN Security Council will be the achievement of N.O.R.M.S: a New Orientation for a Reformed Multilateral System.

    Non-permanent membership  isn’t a cup of tea

    • The government launched its plan for the UNSC seat as far back as 2013, officials said, with a keen eye on 2021, and the year that will mark its 75th year of Independence.
    • To our good fortune, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan agreed, in a gesture to our friendship, to step aside for the 2021-22 seats.
    • The next big challenge was to pursue the Asia-Pacific grouping nomination without any last-minute contenders being propped up against India.
    • While diplomacy between capitals certainly helps, the vote had to be tied down by negotiations on the ground.
    • India was able to win a unanimous endorsement from the 55-nation grouping that included both China and Pakistan, in June 2019.

    Back2Basics: United Nations Security Council

    • The UNSC is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security.
    • Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action through Security Council resolutions.
    • It is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions to member states.
    • The Security Council consists of fifteen members. Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States—serve as the body’s five permanent members.
    • These permanent members can veto any substantive Security Council resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or candidates for Secretary-General.
    • The Security Council also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body’s presidency rotates monthly among its members.

    Also read:

    India’s Bid to United Nations Permanent Seat

  • International Space Agencies – Missions and Discoveries

    Near-Earth Object (NEO) 163348

    NASA announced that a giant asteroid is expected to pass Earth at a safe distance, today.

    Do you remember Osiris-Rex spacecraft of NASA? It is the only spacecraft to touch an asteroid called ‘Bennu’. NASA has brought back comet dust and solar wind particles before, but never asteroid samples.

    This makes it a landmark feat and thus a hotspot for UPSC prelims.

    What are NEOs?

    • NASA defines NEOs as comets and asteroids nudged by the gravitational attraction of nearby planets into orbits which allows them to enter the Earth’s neighbourhood.
    • These objects are composed mostly of water ice with embedded dust particles.
    • NEOs occasionally approach close to the Earth as they orbit the Sun.
    • NASA’s Center for Near-Earth Object Study (CNEOS) determines the times and distances of these objects as and when their approach to the Earth is close.

    Significances of NEOs

    • The scientific interest in comets and asteroids is largely due to their status as relatively unchanged remnant debris from the solar system formation process over 4.6 billion years ago.
    • Therefore, these NEOs offer scientists clues about the chemical mixture from the planets formed.
    • Significantly, among all the causes that will eventually cause the extinction of life on Earth, an asteroid hit is widely acknowledged as one of the likeliest.
    • Over the years, scientists have suggested different ways to ward off such a hit, such as blowing up the asteroid before it reaches Earth, or deflecting it off its Earth-bound course by hitting it with a spacecraft.

    About 163348 (2002 NN4)

    • A Near-Earth Object (NEO), the asteroid is called 163348 (2002 NN4) and is classified as a Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA).
    • Asteroids with a minimum orbit intersection distance (MOID) of about 0.05 (AU is the distance between the Earth and the Sun and is roughly 150 million km) or less are considered PHAs.
    • This distance is about 7,480,000 km or less and an absolute magnitude (H) of 22 (smaller than about 150 m or 500 feet in diameter).
  • Climate Change Negotiations – UNFCCC, COP, Other Conventions and Protocols

    ‘Race to Zero’ campaign

    The UN has launched the “Race to Zero” campaign ahead of delayed COP 26 Climate Talks.

    Possible question for prelims:

    The ‘Race to Zero’ campaign often seen in news is related to zeroing: Global Hunger/Carbon Emission/HR violations/None of these.

     ‘Race to Zero’ campaign

    • The campaign aims to codify commitments made via the Climate Ambition Alliance (CAA), which launched ahead of last year’s COP25 in Madrid.
    • It encourages countries, companies, and other entities to deliver structured net-zero greenhouse-gas emission pledges by the time the talks begin.
    • This messaging for the campaign — carried out under the aegis of the UNFCCC— seeks to emphasise the potential for non-state actors to raise climate ambition.
    • The campaign refers to these as ‘real economy actors’, noting they “cover just over half the gross domestic product, a quarter of global CO2 emissions and over 2.6 billion people”.

    About the Climate Ambition Alliance

    • The CAA currently includes 120 nations and several other private players that have committed to achieving zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
    • Signatories are responsible for 23 per cent of current greenhouse-gas emissions worldwide and 53 per cent of global GDP.

    What Are the Criteria?

    • The minimum criteria for establishing a recognized pledge were developed through dialogues coordinated by Oxford University.
    • The pledges must include a clear net-zero target date no later than 2050, they must also begin immediately and include interim targets.
    • Much like the Paris Agreement itself, the criteria are designed to strengthen over time, but they begin at a level that reflects current best practices.

    Issue over offsetting

    • Offsets are emission-reductions generated outside a company’s own operations, and they are used in both compliance programs to meet mandated emission caps (“cap and trade”) and involuntary programs to reduce a company’s overall impact (voluntary carbon markets).
    • The Race to Zero criteria emphasizes that if offsets are ultimately recognized, they must only be used to neutralize residual emissions that can’t be eliminated internally – at least not immediately.
  • Foreign Policy Watch: India-China

    The China conundrum

    India-China border issue and the latest standoff in Ladakh has forced India to consider the lasting solution to the problem. This article explains China’s anti-India strategy. And options available with India in the face of aggression are also considered.

    LAC: the reason for frequent face-offs

    • The debate has persisted whether it was China’s National Highway 219 cutting across Aksai Chin or Nehru’s “forward policy” which constituted the actual reason for the Sino-Indian border-conflict of 1962.
    • After declaring a unilateral ceasefire on November 20, troops of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) withdrew 20 kms behind what China described as the “line of actual control” (LAC).
    • The LAC generally conformed to the British-negotiated McMahon Line.
    • In the west, the Chinese stuck to their 1959 claim-line in Ladakh, retaining physical control of the 14,700 sq km Aksai Chin.
    • The 1962 ceasefire line became the de facto Sino-Indian border.
    • But in a bizarre reality, both sides visualised their own version of the LAC, but neither marked it on the ground; nor were maps exchanged.
    • This has inevitably led to frequent face-offs.

    So, what were the steps taken the resolve the border issue after 1962?

    • Post-conflict, it is customary for belligerents to undertake early negotiations, in order to establish stable peace and eliminate the casus belli.
    • Strangely, in the Sino-Indian context, it took 25 years and a serious military confrontation in 1987 to trigger a dialogue.
    • The dialogue led the two countries to sign the first-ever Sino-Indian Border Peace and Tranquility Agreement (BPTA) in 1993.
    • Indian diplomats claim that this has helped maintain “mutual and equal security”, while the bilateral relationship has progressed in other spheres.
    • And yet, the failure to negotiate a boundary settlement after 22 meetings of special representatives of the two countries cannot be seen as anything but a failure of statesmanship and diplomacy.

    Now, let’s analyse China’s anti-India strategy and how LAC and Pakistan problem fits into it

    • China’s post-civil war leadership had conceived an early vision of the country’s future.
    • Ambitious and realist in scope, this strategy visualised China attaining, in the fullness of time, great-power status and acquiring a nuclear-arsenal.
    • Since the vision saw no room for an Asian rival, neutralising India became a priority.
    • It was for this specific purpose, that Pakistan was enlisted in 1963 as a partner.
    • In China’s anti-India strategy, Pakistan has played an invaluable role by sustaining a “hot” border and holding out the threat of a two-front war.
    • In China’s grand-strategy, an undefined LAC has become a vital instrumentality to embarrass and keep India off-balance through periodic transgressions.
    • These pre-meditated “land-grabs”, blunt messages of intimidation and dominance, also constitute a political “pressure-point” for New Delhi.

    Possibility of escalation into shooting war

    • While Indian troops have, so far, shown courage and restraint in these ridiculous brawls with the PLA.
    • But there is no guarantee that in a future melee, a punch on the nose will not invite a bullet in response.
    • In such circumstances, rapid escalation into a “shooting-war” cannot be ruled out.
    • Thereafter, should either side face a major military set-back, resort to nuclear “first-use” would pose a serious temptation.

    What are the options available with India?

    • For reasons of national security as well as self-respect, India cannot continue to remain in a “reactive mode” to Chinese provocations and it is time to respond in kind.
    • Since India’s choices vis-à-vis China are circumscribed by the asymmetry in comprehensive national power, resort must be sought in realpolitik.
    • According to theorist Kenneth Waltz, just as nature abhors a vacuum, international politics abhors an imbalance of power, and when faced with hegemonic threats, states must seek security in one of three options: 1) Increase their own strength, 2) ally with others to restore power-balance, 3) as a last resort, jump on the hegemon’s bandwagon.

    India’s decision-makers can start by posing this question to the military: “For how long do you have the wherewithal to sustain a combat against two adversaries simultaneously?” Depending on the response, they can consider the following 2 options.

    1. Alliance with the USA

    • Nehru, when faced with an aggressive China in 1962, asked support from the USA.
    •  Indira Gandhi in the run-up to the 1971 war with Pakistan asked support from the USSR.
    • Both had no qualms of jettisoning the shibboleth of “non-alignment” and seeking support from the USA and USSR respectively.
    • Today, India has greater freedom of action and many options to restore the balance of power vis-à-vis China.
    • Xi Jinping has opened multiple fronts — apart from the COVID-19 controversy — across the South China Sea, South East Asia, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Asia.
    • Donald Trump is burning his bridges with China.
    • In the world of realpolitik, self-interest trumps all and India must find friends where it can.
    • Given China’s vulnerabilities in the Indian Ocean and the real possibility of America losing its strategic foothold in Diego Garcia, India has a great deal to offer as a friend, partner or even an ally; with or without the Quad.

    2. Accommodation with China

    •  If ideological or other reasons preclude the building of a power-balancing alliance, coming to an honourable accommodation with China remains a pragmatic option.
    • Zhou Enlai’s proposal of 1960 — repeated by Deng Xiaoping in 1982 — is worth re-examining in the harsh light of reality.
    • The price of finding a modus vivendi [an arrangement or agreement allowing conflicting parties to coexist peacefully]for the Sino-Indian border dispute may be worth paying if it neutralises two adversaries at one stroke and buys lasting peace.

    Consider the question “In the harsh light of reality and faced with aggression from its neighbour, India has to ally with other powers to restore the balance of power. Examine.”

    Conclusion

    Neither option will be easy to “sell”. However, India cannot afford to continue with the current situation for long and must choose one of the options to end the to find the solution.

  • Innovations in Sciences, IT, Computers, Robotics and Nanotechnology

    Electrolytic splitting of Water

    Scientists from The Centre for Nano and Soft Matter Sciences (CeNS), an autonomous institute of the Department of Science and Technology (DST), have found out a low cost and efficient way to generate hydrogen from water using Molybdenum dioxide as a catalyst.

    Practice question for mains:

    Q. Hydrogen is the future of clean and sustainable energy. Discuss.

    Electrolytic splitting of water

    • Electrolysis of water is the decomposition of water into oxygen and hydrogen gas due to the passage of an electric current.
    • This technique can be used to make hydrogen gas, the main component of hydrogen fuel, and breathable oxygen gas, or can mix the two into oxyhydrogen, which is also usable as fuel, though more volatile and dangerous.
    • It is a promising method to generate hydrogen but requires energy input that can be brought down in the presence of a catalyst.

    Using Molybdenum Catalyst

    • The scientists have shown that Molybdenum dioxide (MoO2) nanomaterials annealed in hydrogen atmosphere can act as efficient catalysts to reduce the energy input to bring about water splitting into Hydrogen.
    • Molybdenum dioxide has the potential to replace the currently employed catalyst platinum, which is expensive and has limited resources.
    • MoO2 is a conducting metal oxide that is one of the low-cost catalysts with good efficiency and stability for hydrogen evolution.
    • The catalyst is highly stable for a longer duration of reaction with sustained hydrogen evolution from water.
    • About 80 % efficient conversion of electrical energy into hydrogen has been achieved using this catalyst.

    Significance

    • Hydrogen is considered as the future of clean and sustainable energy as it can be generated from water and produces water on energy generation without any carbon footprint.
    • Hydrogen can be directly used as a fuel similar to natural gas or as input for fuel cells to generate electricity.
    • It is the future energy for a clean environment and an alternative to fossil fuels, underlining the necessity of low-cost catalysts for its production.
  • Forest Conservation Efforts – NFP, Western Ghats, etc.

    Nagar Van (Urban Forest) Scheme

    On the occasion of World Environment Day (5th June), the union govt has announced the implementation of the Nagar Van Scheme to develop 200 Urban Forests across the country in the next five years.

    Do you know?

    India has 8 per cent of world’s biodiversity, despite having many constraints like only 2.5 % of the world’s landmass, has to carry 16% of human population and having only 4% of freshwater sources.

    Urban Forest Scheme

    • The scheme will be implemented with people’s participation and collaboration between the Forest Department, Municipal bodies, NGOs and corporates.
    • These forests will work as lungs of the cities and will primarily be on the forest land or any other vacant land offered by local urban local bodies.
    • This urban area rejuvenation scheme is based on the Smriti Van in the Warje area of Pune City
    • This forest now hosts rich biodiversity with 23 plant species, 29 bird species, 15 butterfly species, 10 reptiles and 3 mammal species.
    • This Urban Forest project is now helping maintain ecological balance, serving both environmental and social needs.
  • Foreign Policy Watch: India-China

    A chill in US-China relations and India as a collateral damage

    Even before the covid pandemic we could sense the rising tension between the U.S. and China. However, pandemic proved to be the tipping point. This article explains the role the U.S. played in China’s rise. And its recent acceptance under Donald Trump of not so peaceful rise of China.

    Let’s look into recent announcements on China by the US President

    •  On May 29, the Trump administration said it would revoke Hong Kong’s special trade status under U.S. law.
    • It passed an order limiting the entry of certain Chinese graduate students and researchers who may have ties to the People’s Liberation Army.
    • The U.S. President has also ordered financial regulators to closely examine Chinese firms listed in U.S. stock markets.
    • And warned those that do not comply with U.S. laws could be delisted.

    So, what all these measures indicate?

    • These announcements are a clear indication that the competition between the U.S. and China is likely to sharpen in the post-COVID world.

    U.S. is complicit in China’s rise, but how?

    •  After the Chinese communists seized power, the Americans hoped to cohabit with Mao Zedong in a world under U.S. hegemony.
    • The Chinese allowed them to believe this and extracted their price.
    • U.S. President Richard Nixon gave China the international acceptability it craved in return for being admitted to Mao’s presence in 1972.
    • President Jimmy Carter terminated diplomatic relations with Taiwan in order to normalise relations with China in 1978.
    • President George H.W. Bush washed away the sins of Tiananmen in 1989 for ephemeral geopolitical gain.
    • And Bill Clinton, who as a presidential candidate had criticised Bush for indulging the Chinese, proceeded as President to usher the country into the World Trade Organization at the expense of American business.
    • All American administrations since the 1960s have been complicit in China’s rise in the unrealised hope that it will become a ‘responsible stakeholder’ under Pax Americana.

    China is creating its own universe

    • The collapse of the Soviet Union reinforced the view that the U.S. wants to keep its order and change China’s system.
    • This strengthened China’s resolve to resist by creating its own parallel universe.
    • China is building an alternate trading system: the Belt and Road Initiative.
    • A multilateral banking system under its control-Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, New Development Bank.
    • Its own global positioning system BeiDou.
    • Digital payment platforms like WeChat Pay and Alipay.
    • A world-class digital network-Huawei 5G.
    • Cutting-edge technological processes in sunrise industries.
    • And a modern military force.
    • It is doing this under the noses of the Americans and some of it with the financial and technological resources of the West.

    U.S. accepting the uneasy fact that China’s rise has not been peaceful

    • It is only under Mr. Trump that the Americans are finally acknowledging the uneasy fact that the Chinese are not graven in their image.
    • He has called China out on trade practices.
    • He has called China out on 5G.
    • It was Mr. Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy document that, perhaps for the first time, clubbed China along with Russia as a challenge to American power, influence and interests.
    • His recent China-specific restrictions on trade and legal migration are, possibly, only the beginning of a serious re-adjustment.

    Decoupling of the economies and new cold war

    • A full-spectrum debate on China is now raging across the U.S.
    • Former White House Chief of Staff Steve Bannon declared that the U.S. is already at war with China.
    • Others like diplomat Richard Haass and former president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, warn that a new Cold War will be a mistake.
    • Scholar Julian Gewirtz, in his brilliant essay, ‘The Chinese Reassessment of Interdependence’, talks about a similar process underway in Beijing.
    • Both sides are acutely aware how closely their economies are tied together: from farm to factory, the U.S. is heavily dependent on supply chains in China and the Chinese have been unable to break free of the dollar.
    • If Mr. Trump’s wish is to disentangle China’s supply chains, Mr. Xi is equally determined to escape from the U.S. ‘chokehold’ on technology.
    • To what extent the de-coupling is possible is yet to be determined.
    • But one thing is inevitable, India will become part of the collateral damage.

    Hong Kong: Sign of U.S. China rivalry entering in ideological domain

    • Will Hong Kong become a game-changer in the post-COVID world?
    • China’s decision to enact the new national security law for Hong Kong has been condemned in unison by the U.S. and its Western allies as an assault on human freedoms.

    Why is this significant?

    • The points of divergence, even dispute, between them have so far been in the material realm.
    • With Hong Kong, the U.S.-China rivalry may, possibly, be entering the ideological domain.
    • For some time now there are reports about Chinese interference in the internal affairs of democracies.
    • Countries in the West have tackled this individually, always mindful of not jeopardising their trade with China.
    • Hong Kong may be different.
    • It is not only a bastion for Western capitalism in the East, but more importantly the torch-bearer of Western democratic ideals.
    • Think of it as a sort of Statue of Liberty; it holds aloft the torch of freedom and democracy for all those who pass through Hong Kong en route to China.
    • This is an assault on beliefs, so to speak.

    Issue of China’s role in Covid-19 pandemic

    • These is growing demands that China should come clean on its errors of omission in the early days of COVID-19.
    • In the months ahead, more information may become public, from sources inside China itself, about the shortcomings of the regime.
    • That will further fuel a debate on the superiority of the Chinese Model as an alternative to democracy.

    Will this form the ideological underpinning for the birth of a new Cold War?

    • That will depend on who wins in Washington in November.
    • It will also depend on whether profit will again trump politics in Europe.
    • Moreover, how skilfully the Wolf Warriors of China can manipulate global public opinion will also make the be an important factor.

    Consider the question-“Various recent measures by the U.S. on China and the debate on the role of China in Covid-19 makes it clear that the next Cold War is all but imminent. And India has to be careful to avoid being collateral damage in that war. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    The lines are beginning to be drawn between the Americans on the one side and China on the other. A binary choice is likely to test to the limit India’s capacity to maintain strategic and decisional autonomy.

  • Defence Sector – DPP, Missions, Schemes, Security Forces, etc.

    Defence reforms must ensure the alignment of its various domains

    This article draws on the model used for accident investigation but in a reverse manner. For proper functioning of the defence system of a country, proper alignment of various domains is essential. This article divides the defence system of the country into three layers and visualises them as a slice of cheese in the model. Each component is analysed and the issues associated with it are looked into.

    What is the Swiss Cheese Model?

    • The Swiss cheese model is associated with accident investigation in an organisation or a system.
    • A system consists of multiple domains or layers, each having some shortcomings.
    • These layers are visualised in the model as slices of Swiss cheese, with the holes in them being the imperfections.
    • Normally, weaknesses get nullified, other than when, at some point, the holes in every slice align to let a hazard pass through and cause an accident.

    Applying the Swiss Cheese Model for nations defence preparedness

    • When applied to a nation’s defence preparedness, the Swiss cheese model, in its simplest form, works the reverse way.
    • The slices represent the major constituents in a nation’s war-making potential, while the holes are pathways through which the domains interact.
    • At the macro level, there are only three slices with holes in each.
    • These must align to ensure that a nation’s defence posture is in tune with its political objectives.
    • Any mismatch may turn out to be detrimental to the nation’s aatma samman (self-respect) when the balloon goes up.
    • In these days of the Aatmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyan, a clinical analysis is necessary to obviate any missteps that may prove costly a few years or decades down the line.

    Let’s analyse the Indian defence set-up from three slice perspective

    • In the Indian defence set-up, the three slices are as described below-
    • 1)The policymaking apparatus comprising the Department of Military Affairs (DMA) and Ministry of Defence (MoD).
    • 2) The defence research and development (R&D) establishment and domestic manufacturing industry.
    • 3) The three services.
    • When the MoD alone existed, a certain relationship between the three layers saw India prosecute four major wars since independence.
    • The holes in the three slices were aligned to different degrees and hence the results were varied in each conflict.
    • That the system required an overhaul would be an understatement.

    So, let’s look at the three-slices of Indian defence

    1) Policymaking: How changes in technology forced militaries to be joint?

    • With technology progressing exponentially, a single service prosecution of war was no longer tenable.
    • Because the advent of smart munitions, computer processing, networking capabilities and the skyrocketing cost of equipment brought in the concept of parallel warfare.
    • Synergised application of tools of national power became an imperative.
    • Thus, it became essential for militaries to be joint to apply violence in an economical way.
    • Economical in terms of time, casualties, costs incurred, and political gains achieved.
    • The setting up of the DMA and the creation of the post of Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) to achieve synergy are the most fundamental changes.
    • As further modifications and tweaking take place in the way the services prepare to go to war, it is imperative that the transformation be thought through with clinical analysis, without any external, emotional, political or rhetorical pressure.

    Hostile security environment

    • India’s security managers have to factor in the increasingly belligerent posture of the country’s two adversaries.
    • Terrorist activities have not reduced in Jammu and Kashmir.
    • Ongoing incidents along the northern border with China do not foretell a peaceful future.
    • And the China-Pakistan nexus can only be expected to get stronger and portentous.
    • Such a security environment demands that capability accretion of the three services proceed unhindered.

    2) Indigenous R&D and manufacturing is still some years away

    • To elaborate, the Indian Air Force at a minimum requires 300 fighters to bolster its squadron strength.
    • The Army needs guns of all types; and the Navy wants ships, helicopters, etc.
    • The requirements are worth billions of dollars but with COVID-19-induced cuts in defence spending.
    • Enter the well-meaning government diktat for buying indigenous only, but for that, in-house R&D and manufacturing entities have to play ball.
    • Hindustan Aeronautics Limited can, at best, produce just eight Tejas fighters per year presently.
    • The Army has had to import rifles due to the failure of the Defence Research and Development Organisation to produce them.
    • And the Navy has earnest hopes that the hull designs that its internal R&D makes get the vital innards for going to war.
    • So, the Swiss cheese slice representing indigenous R&D and a manufacturing supply chain that ensures quality war-fighting equipment, at the right time and in required quantities, is still some years away.

    3) The three services and creation of theatre commands

    • The forthcoming reform of creating theatre commands is the most talked about result of jointness expected from the Swiss cheese slice in which lie the DMA and a restructured MoD.
    • Doing so would be a shake-up of huge proportions as it strikes at the very foundation of the war-fighting structure of the services.
    • The three-year deadline spoken about by the CDS must take into account the not-so-comfortable state of assets of each service which would need to be carved up for each theatre.
    • The Chinese announced their ‘theaterisation’ concept in 2015; it is still work in progress.
    • The U.S. had a bruising debate for decades before the Goldwater-Nichols Act came into force in 1986.
    • New relationships take time to smooth out, and in the arena of defence policymaking, which is where the DMA and MoD lie, the element of time has a value of its own.
    • Any ramming through, just to meet a publicly declared timeline, could result in creating a not-so-optimal war-fighting organisation to our detriment.
    • So, the three services that constitute the third Swiss cheese slice have to contend with the other two slices being in a state of flux for some time to come.

    Consider the question “Any defence system reforms must ensure the alignment and coordination of the various component of it which involves policymaking apparatus,  defence R&D and manufacturing and the three services. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    The political, civil and military leadership must have their feet firmly on ground to ensure that the holes in their Swiss cheese continue to stay aligned; impractical timelines and pressures of public pronouncements must not be the drivers in such a fundamental overhaul of our defence apparatus.

  • G20 : Economic Cooperation ahead

    Setting agenda for G-12

    Recently, there was a call for expansion of the membership of the G-7 by the U.S. President. But the expanded group should not be seen as an anti-China gang-up. Disciplining and not isolating China is what most of the members of the group would want. And to do so, this new group needs to have new agenda. This article discusses the items that must form the part of the new agenda.

    Evolution of the G-7

    • When it started in 1975—with six members, Canada joining a year later—it represented about 70% of the world economy.
    • And it was a cosy club for tackling issues such as the response to oil shocks.
    • Now it accounts for about 40% of global gdp.
    • Since the global financial crisis of 2007-09 it has sometimes been overshadowed by the broader g20.
    • The G-7 became the G-8 in 1997 when Russia was invited to join.
    • In 2014, Russia was debarred after it took over Crimea.

    Call for expansion of the membership

    • It was the French who first flew the kite of membership expansion.
    • France had invited heads of government of several “emerging economies” for a meeting of the group at Évian-les-Bains, France, in June 2003. 
    • After 2003, G-8 host countries began organising a meeting on the sidelines of their summits with a select group of five or six developing countries.
    • India and China were invited to all those summits.
    • Now, President Trump has, however, gone a step further.
    • Rather than invite “guests” to a G-7 summit, he has suggested expanding the G-7 to a G-10 or G-11.
    • Trump has come up with an interesting list of new members — Australia, India, South Korea and, possibly, Russia.
    • Inclusion of Russia: Trump’s pragmatism in including Russia should be welcomed.
    • The advantage of getting Russia in is that the group would not be viewed merely as an anti-China gang-up but, in fact, as a club of “free market democracies”.
    • The group could easily be made the G-12 with the inclusion of Indonesia — one of the few democratic nations in the Islamic world.

    Discipline China, not isolate it

    • Trump’s motivation in expanding the G-7 to include India and Russia while keeping China out is transparent.
    • If keeping China out was not the intention, the G-7 could easily have dissolved themselves and revitalised the presently inert G-20.
    • There are, of course, good reasons why Xi Jinping’s China requires to be put on notice for its various acts of omission and commission and disrespect for international law.
    • However, disciplining China is one thing, isolating it quite another.
    • If the new group is viewed as yet another arrow in the China containment quiver it would place India and most other members of the group in a spot.
    • Everyone wants China disciplined, few would like to be seen seeking its isolation.
    • Asia needs a law-abiding China, not a sullen China.
    • Japan and Australia, have serious concerns about China’s behaviour.
    • But they may not like the new group to be viewed purely as an anti-China gang-up.
    • That may well be the case with South Korea too.
    • Indeed, even India should tread cautiously.
    • India has more issues with China than most others in the group, spanning across economic and national security issues and yet it should seek a disciplined China, not an isolated one.

    So, what should be on the agenda of the new group?

    • The proposed new group should define its agenda in terms that would encourage China to return to the pre-Xi era of global good behaviour.
    • The G-7 came into being in the mid-1970s against the background of shocks to the global financial and energy markets.
    • The G-12 would come into being against the background of a global economic crisis and the disruption to global trade caused both by protectionism and a pandemic.
    • The two items on the next summit agenda would have to be the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the rising tide of protectionism and mercantilism and the global economic slowdown.
    • The summit will have to come forward with some international dos and don’ts to deal with the challenge posed by these disruptions.

    New rules should apply to both the US and China

    • These new rules of international conduct would have to apply to both China and the US.
    • The G-12— have a shared interest in ensuring that both China and the US respect international law and desist from unilateralism in dealing with neighbours and global challenges.

    Widening the agenda

    • To be able to alter China’s behaviour without isolating it, the G-12 will have to widen their agenda.
    • Widening involves going beyond the purely economic issues that the G-7 originally focused on, and include climate change, health care and human rights.

    What should the “free market democracies” mean

    • In identifying themselves as “free market democracies” the G-12 must issue a new charter of respect for human rights, adherence to international law and multilateralism in trade and security.
    • This is easier said than done.
    • President Trump will have to re-assure the group’s members that he has their combined interests at heart in proposing a new group.
    • And he also has to show that he has an imagination beyond just an “America First” policy.
    • Even as the world is increasingly wary of an assertive China and of Xi Jinping’s China Dream and his version of a “China First” policy, it is also wary of Trump’s unilateralism on many fronts.

    What should the invitee nations consider before joining the group?

    • Many countries share Trump’s displeasure with China for its manipulation of the World Health Organisation.
    • But many of them are equally unhappy with the manner in which the Trump administration has treated the World Trade Organisation.
    • A G-12 cannot ignore such partisan behaviour by either the US or China.
    • If Trump does issue an invitation to the three or four new members to join the new group, they should seek clarity on the terms of membership.
    • Russia’s experience, of being invited and then disinvited and now being considered for being re-invited should be a salutary message to all others invitees.

    Consider the question- “The expanded new G-12 with India as its member, should also needs new agenda with its focus beyond China. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    As the world’s largest free market democracy India deserves to be a member of not just a G-12 but of even a new G-7. India’s political and economic credentials are certainly stronger than those of Canada, Britain and Italy.

  • Contention over South China Sea

    What is the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)?

    Security issue in the disputed South China Sea has helped convince the Philippines to delay quitting a key U.S. military pact called the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).

    Practice question for mains:

    Q. What’s behind diplomatic tensions in the South China Sea? How it is set to become another flashpoint between the US and China?

    The Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)

    • A VFA is a version of a status of forces agreement that only applies to troops temporarily in a country.
    • The US military operates around the world thanks to Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA) in 100 or so countries.
    • Similarly, the VFA spells out the rules, guidelines and legal status of the US military when operating in the Philippines.
    • The VFA also affirms the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty as well as the 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement — agreements that enable the U.S. military to conduct joint exercises and operations in the Philippines.
    • It came into force on May 27, 1999, upon ratification by the Senate of the Philippines.
    • It also exempts U.S. military personnel from visa and passport regulations in the Philippines.

    Significance of VFA

    • Both the US and Philippines remain wary of Beijing’s actions in the South China Sea (SCS). The VFA, therefore, act as an insurance policy against Chinese threats.
    • Terminating the VFA would leave the U.S. military without any legal or operational standing in the Philippines — and that’s a problem for the alliance.
    • Without a VFA, the U.S. military would not be able to support either of these defence agreements.

    Philippines-China spat on SCS

    • The Philippines has had diplomatic spats with China over the Scarborough Shoal and Spratlys in particular.
    • It says China’s “nine-dash line”, which China uses to demarcate its territorial claims, is unlawful under the UNCLOS convention.
    • The SCS is also a major shipping route and home to fishing grounds that supply the livelihoods of people across the region.

    Back2Basics: South China Sea Row

    • It is a dispute over territory and sovereignty over ocean areas, and the Paracels and the Spratlys – two island chains claimed in whole or in part by a number of countries.
    • China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei all have competing claims.
    • Alongside the fully-fledged islands, there are dozens of rocky outcrops, atolls, sandbanks and reefs, such as the Scarborough Shoal.
    • China claims by far the largest portion of territory – an area defined by the “nine-dash line” which stretches hundreds of miles south and east from its most southerly province of Hainan.
    • Beijing says its right to the area goes back centuries to when the Paracel and Spratly island chains were regarded as integral parts of the Chinese nation, and in 1947 it issued a map detailing its claims.
    • It showed the two island groups falling entirely within its territory. Those claims are mirrored by Taiwan.

    Spat over Chinese claims

    • China has backed its expansive claims with island-building and naval patrols.
    • The US says it does not take sides in territorial disputes but has sent military ships and planes near disputed islands, calling them “freedom of navigation” operations to ensure access to key shipping and air routes.
    • Both sides have accused each other of “militarizing” the South China Sea.
    • There are fears that the area is becoming a flashpoint, with potentially serious global consequences.

    With inputs from Washington Post

Join the Community

Join us across Social Media platforms.