Ultimate Assessment Program 2027/28/29 || 1:1 Mentorship Batch Admissions Open

Talk to Mentor

Search results for: “”

Nvidia episode is a reminder: Technology is a battleground
Why in the News
Nvidia’s chief executive has admitted to an affair with an executive of Megaspeed, a Singapore based data centre firm that United States (US) officials suspect of routing restricted chips to China. The US government reportedly identified her as working for China’s Ministry of State Security. The episode shows every route to artificial intelligence (AI) technology, including an executive, is now a target.
Why has AI compute become a geopolitical battleground?
1. Contest over compute: AI is a lasting strategic shift, and powers now compete over compute, the advanced chips and data centres that run AI models.
2. Market sensitivity: One US election wiped $2.5 to $3 trillion off AI stocks in a day, on fears of tighter rules for data centres.
3. Weak end use checks: Checks on who actually uses exported chips have gaps. Eg. Some Chinese firms that Washington cleared to handle Nvidia’s H200 chips had offices that appeared unused.
4. The takeaway: Chip export rules achieve little if the people and firms around the chips can be compromised.
How have rivals obtained technology through people and networks?
1. Western assumption: For three decades Western democracies opened their markets and laboratories to China, expecting it to adopt their rules. China opened only selectively and exploited that openness.
2. Social espionage: Rivals, especially China, reach technology through people posing as investors, researchers and romantic partners, a practice called “social espionage”.
3. Cisco and Huawei: Cisco sued Huawei in 2003 over router code it said was copied. A court appointed expert found the code had been electronically copied, and the case settled confidentially.
4. Nortel: Hackers using stolen executive passwords had access to Nortel’s network from at least 2000, sending data to Shanghai. Nortel went bankrupt in 2009, and Beijing and Huawei denied involvement.
Why does this pattern threaten India directly?
1. Neighbourhood threat: China, Pakistan and North Korea each built their most dangerous capabilities partly by obtaining what the rules denied them. Two of the three are India’s neighbours.
2. A Q Khan network: A Q Khan left the Netherlands in 1975 with stolen centrifuge designs from a contractor to the enrichment consortium URENCO. He later sold centrifuges and know how to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
3. China’s record: The US Cox Committee concluded in 1999 that China obtained classified information on the US W88 warhead through espionage, a finding Beijing rejected.
Is a coalition of trusted partners enough?
1. Pax Silica: Launched in December 2025, Pax Silica brings trusted countries together to secure the supply chains for chips, AI and critical minerals.
2. India’s membership: India signed the Pax Silica declaration in February, alongside Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others.
3. Gap in the coalition: The alleged channel in the Nvidia case ran through a firm in Singapore, itself a member, so trust must be verified, not declared.
4. Openness retained: Open societies win by attracting talent and innovating faster than rivals, so the answer is openness to partners that can be verified.
Challenges
1. Opaque ownership: Data centre operators, resellers and chip buyers can hide their real owners behind intermediaries, which defeats end use checks.
2. Human channels: Approaches through investors, researchers and personal ties look like normal business, beyond the reach of export rules written for goods.
3. Weak penalties: Firms absorb fines as a cost of doing business, so fines do not deter chip diversion.
Way Forward
1. Shared counterintelligence: Brief executives, researchers and officials on approach tactics, and share findings on front companies across members.
2. Beneficial ownership of compute: Make the real owners of data centre operators, resellers and chip buyers visible to every member’s regulators.
3. Reciprocity: Offer openness to countries that reciprocate and scrutiny to those that do not.
4. Deterrent penalties: Set penalties large enough to deter chip diversion.
Conclusion
Control over AI now depends as much on trust as on export rules. Whether Pax Silica moves from declared to verified trust will decide if open technology coalitions can protect what they build.
What are Export Control Regimes?
1. About: Export control regimes are informal groups of supplier countries that agree lists of sensitive goods and technologies and coordinate their export licensing.
2. Nuclear and missile regimes: The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) covers nuclear items. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) covers missiles.
3. Arms and chemical regimes: The Wassenaar Arrangement covers conventional arms and dual use (civil and military) goods. The Australia Group covers chemical and biological items.
4. India’s status: India joined the MTCR, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group between 2016 and 2018, but not the NSG.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2011] Recently, the USA decided to support India’s membership in multilateral export control regimes called the “Australia Group” and the “Wassenaar Arrangement”. What is the difference between them? 1. The Australia Group is an informal arrangement which aims to allow exporting countries to minimize the risk of assisting chemical and biological weapons proliferation, whereas the Wassenaar- Arrangement is a formal group under the OECD holding identical objectives. 2. The Australia Group comprises predominantly of Asian, African, and North American countries, whereas the member countries of Wassenaar Arrangement are predominantly from the European Union and American continents. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 ANSWER: (d)”
November 13, 2026
First time in 2 yrs, retail inflation over 6%, RBI may hike rate again
Why in the News
Retail inflation has moved above the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) tolerance band, crossing the 6% upper limit for the first time since October 2024. Data from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) put inflation at 6.09% in October, up from 5.54% in September. A second successive rate hike next month now looks likely.
What is inflation targeting, and how does the RBI respond?
1. What it is: Retail inflation is measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the price of a fixed basket of household goods and services. It is like tracking the cost of one monthly shopping bag.
2. The target: The RBI’s target is 4% CPI inflation, with a tolerance of 2 percentage points either side.
3. The tool: The repo rate is the rate at which the RBI lends to banks. A higher repo rate leads banks to raise lending rates, so borrowing costs more and demand cools.
4. Who decides: The six member Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), headed by the Governor, sets the repo rate.
5. The takeaway: Once inflation breaks the band, the RBI is expected to keep raising rates even as growth slows.
What has changed in October?
1. Sustained rise: October was the 12th straight month of rising inflation. It was also the fifth month in a row above the target.
2. Food prices: Food inflation rose to 8.94% in October from 7.74% in September, led by vegetables such as onion and garlic.
3. Eating out: Dining in restaurants and cafes cost 10.09% more than a year earlier. It was under 3% in February, before the West Asia war and a commercial cooking gas price rise.
4. Wholesale prices: Wholesale inflation, measured at the producer and trader level, surged to 11.39% in September.
5. Monthly momentum: Overall prices in October were 0.5% higher than in September, a sign that price pressure is still building.
Why are prices rising?
1. Base effect: Prices grew slowly a year ago, so this year’s rise, measured against that low level, looks larger.
2. Cost pass through: Weak rains and the war in West Asia raised costs, and producers passed them on to consumers.
3. Crop risk: A deficient monsoon and poorly refilled reservoirs threaten the rabi (winter sown) crop. Lower sown area for rice, maize and oilseeds could lift food prices.
4. Milk and staples: Amul and Mother Dairy have raised milk prices by Rs 2 to 4 a litre. Higher milk, sugar and onion prices will keep food inflation high in November.
5. Broadening pressure: Seasonal clothing and cars cost more, and global shocks and festive demand add pressure, so inflation is spreading beyond food.
What will the RBI do next?
1. October hike: In October the RBI raised the repo rate by 25 basis points, a quarter of a percentage point, to 5.5%. It was the first hike in nearly four years.
2. RBI forecast: The RBI projects CPI inflation to average 6% in October to December, a figure economists expect to be revised higher at the MPC’s early December meeting.
3. Strong growth: Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew an unexpectedly high 7.8% in April to June, which adds pressure for hikes.
4. Further tightening: BofA Securities expects another 75 basis points of hikes over the next six to nine months.
Challenges
1. Supply driven inflation: Higher rates cool demand but cannot fix rain or war driven supply shortfalls.
2. Cost to growth: Costlier credit can soften consumer demand and slow growth.
3. External risks: Geopolitics, oil prices and El Nino threaten both prices and growth.
Way Forward
1. Food supply management: The Centre should use buffer stocks and imports to cool onion and pulse prices.
2. Rabi support: States should secure seed, fertiliser and irrigation for the rabi crop.
3. Calibrated rate path: The MPC should pace hikes to return inflation to the band without choking growth.
Conclusion
Inflation has broken the RBI’s band on supply shocks that interest rates cannot directly fix. The MPC’s next decision, and whether inflation peaks before the rabi harvest, is what to watch.
Key numbers
1. Highest item inflation, October: Onion 116%, garlic 61%, ginger 48%, lemon 47%.
2. Regional spread: Under 4% in only 5 of 36 States and Union Territories; above 6% in 11, led by Puducherry at 7.96%.
3. RBI CPI projections: 5.7% for January to March 2027 and 5.6% for April to June 2027.
4. CPI base year: The new CPI series uses 2024 as its base; earlier data is on the 2012 base.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2020] Consider the following statements: 1. The weightage of food in Consumer Price Index (CPI) is higher than that Wholesale Price Index (WPI). 2. The WPI does not capture changes in the prices of services, which CPI does. 3. Reserve Bank of India has now adopted WPI as its key measure of inflation and to decide on changing the key policy rates. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 only (c) 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 ANSWER: (a)”
November 13, 2026
Respect the river, don’t treat it like a quarry
Why in the News
The Central Empowered Committee (CEC), the Supreme Court‘s adviser on forest related matters, has proposed a three year road map to phase out sand extraction from active river channels and to desilt dams and reservoirs. Court orders against illegal sand mining remain largely unimplemented because legal supply cannot meet construction demand. The task is to meet the need for building material and still keep rivers alive.
Why is river sand mining a problem?
1. What it is: Sand mining is the extraction of sand from riverbeds, mainly for construction. Sand is the second most exploited natural resource after water in several parts of the world, including India.
2. Damage to rivers: Unregulated extraction harms a river in several ways:
  - it deepens and widens the riverbed;
  - it destabilises riverbanks and alters natural water flow;
  - it causes erosion downstream.
3. Court orders ignored: The Supreme Court has censured State governments at least three times since 2023 for failing to check illegal sand mining.
4. Supply gap: A nearly 40% gap in sand supply for India’s growing construction industry has kept those orders largely unimplemented.
5. The takeaway: Bans alone fail where legal supply falls short, so any lasting answer must also find other sources of sand.
What has the CEC proposed?
1. Report to the Court: The CEC submitted its report to the Supreme Court earlier this month.
2. Phase-out: It recommends a road map to phase out sand extraction from active river channels, the parts of a riverbed where water flows, over three years.
3. Alternative sources: It suggests alternatives that progressively reduce dependence on river sand.
4. Desilting: It calls for desilting of dams and reservoirs, meaning removal of the sediment that settles in them.
5. National framework: It has asked the Ministry of Jal Shakti to lead a national framework setting out how much sediment each reservoir holds, how removal is financed and what environmental safeguards apply.
Can desilting dams replace river sand?
1. Case for desilting: Sand and gravel settle on riverbeds, raising them and lowering how much water they can carry. Desilting clears these deposits, lets water flow freely in heavy rain and could restore reservoir capacity.
2. Sediments sustain rivers: Sediments do not always harm rivers. They sustain downstream river ecosystems, so removing them carries an ecological cost.
3. Mittal committee: In 2022, a committee headed by former Central Water Commission (CWC) chairperson B K Mittal found large scale desilting technologically and economically unviable.
4. Targeted dredging: Like the CEC, that committee backed dredging, digging sediment out from under water, only at specific reaches of rivers, when scientific studies support it.
5. Unknown stock: The CEC acknowledges it does not know how much sand the country’s dams hold, which is why it seeks a long term plan.
Challenges
1. State level enforcement: Sand is a minor mineral under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, so each State frames and enforces its own rules.
2. Short horizon: Phasing out river sand in three years needs alternative supply to grow fast enough to fill the gap.
3. Many agencies: Rivers, dams and mining sit with different Central and State bodies, so the national framework needs all of them to act together.
4. Unusable sediment: Much reservoir sediment is fine silt and clay rather than sand fit for construction.
Way Forward
1. Reservoir sediment survey: The Ministry of Jal Shakti should first measure each reservoir’s sediment and the share usable as sand.
2. Studies before dredging: Dredging should be allowed only at reaches cleared by scientific studies, as both committees advise.
3. Alternatives first: States should scale up alternative sources of sand before closing river channels to extraction.
4. Track sand movement: States should track the extraction, transport and end use of sand to curb illegal mining.
Conclusion
Rivers cannot keep serving as quarries for construction, yet demand for building material will not fall. Whether the Supreme Court adopts the CEC’s road map, and whether the Jal Shakti Ministry builds the sediment framework, will decide if that balance is struck.
Back2Basics: Central Empowered Committee
1. Origin: The Supreme Court set up the CEC in 2002 in the T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad forest case.
2. Permanent status: In 2023, the Union Environment Ministry made it a permanent body under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
3. Role: It examines forest and wildlife matters before the Court and reports back with recommendations.
4. Earlier coverage: The CEC’s sand mining report is compiled in “SC panel: Phase out ‘unsustainable’ river sand mining in 3 yrs, desilt dams” (11 November 2026).
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2019, GS3, 10 marks] Coastal sand mining, whether legal or illegal, poses one of the biggest threats to our environment. Analyse the impact of sand mining along the Indian coasts, citing specific examples.”
November 13, 2026
New deep-sea shark species identified in Indian Ocean
Why in the News
A deep-sea shark of the Indian Ocean, long believed identical to its Atlantic counterpart, is now recognised as a distinct species, the Indian Bramble Shark (*Echinorhinus roinee*). Researchers from the Zoological Survey of India (ZSI) and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)‘s Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) identified it from specimens landed at a fishing harbour in Kollam, Kerala.
What has been identified?
1. What it is: The Indian Bramble Shark is a deep-sea shark now named as a species of its own. Scientists had treated it as the same animal found in the Atlantic, like two lookalike cousins mistaken for twins.
2. Scientific name: It is named *Echinorhinus roinee*, which places it in the genus *Echinorhinus*, the bramble sharks.
3. The takeaway: A species thought to span two oceans can hide a separate Indian Ocean species that needs its own study and protection.
Who identified it, and how?
1. Research institutions: Scientists of the ZSI, the national animal taxonomy body under the Union Environment Ministry, and of CMFRI, an ICAR institute, did the work.
2. Publication: The findings have been published in a scientific journal.
Why do fishing harbours matter for such finds?
1. Catch as a sample: Deep-sea sharks are rarely studied alive, so specimens landed by fishing boats give scientists material to examine.
2. Earlier find: ZSI scientists earlier identified *Squalus hima*, a new deep-water dogfish shark, from the Sakthikulangara fishing harbour in Kerala. It had been misidentified as other species.
Challenges
1. No assessment yet: A newly separated species has no conservation assessment of its own, so its status in Indian waters is unknown.
2. Unknown living population: Little is known of the species’ living population.
3. Lumped species: Other Indian Ocean species treated as identical to distant counterparts may also be distinct and unrecorded.
Way Forward
1. Status assessment: ZSI and CMFRI should study the new species’ range and numbers so its conservation status can be set.
2. Landing site records: Fisheries departments should record deep-sea shark landings at harbours such as Kollam by species.
3. Taxonomic review: Researchers should re-examine other Indian Ocean sharks long treated as identical to their Atlantic or Pacific counterparts.
Conclusion
The Indian Bramble Shark is now recognised as distinct from its Atlantic counterpart. Its range, numbers and conservation status in Indian waters are what remain to be established.
Back2Basics: Bramble sharks (genus Echinorhinus)
1. Family: The genus *Echinorhinus* makes up the family Echinorhinidae.
2. Known species: It earlier held two recognised species, the bramble shark (*Echinorhinus brucus*) and the prickly shark (*Echinorhinus cookei*).
3. Name: They are named for the large thorn-like denticles, tooth-like scales, scattered over the skin.
4. Habitat: They are slow moving sharks of deep waters, usually found near the sea floor.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2025] Regarding Peacock tarantula (Gooty tarantula), consider the following statements: I. It is an omnivorous crustacean. II. Its natural habitat in India is only limited to some forest areas. III. In its natural habitat, it is an arboreal species. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) I only (b) I and III (c) II only (d) II and III ANSWER: (d)”
November 13, 2026
Adani slashes its Maharashtra power project cost by 99%, its forest dues plummet; Centre orders probe
Why in the News
A wildlife conservation deposit tied to project cost has fallen from Rs 227 crore to about Rs 2.27 crore, after the cost of Adani Green Energy‘s Tarali Pumped Storage Project in Satara, Maharashtra, was revised from Rs 5,675 crore to Rs 56.75 crore. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has directed the State forest department to investigate on priority. The case tests who checks a cost figure that sets conservation dues.
What is the project, and why does it owe a conservation deposit?
1. What it is: The 1,500 megawatt project is proposed on the Tarali dam reservoir in Patan taluka. Pumped storage moves the same water between two reservoirs, working like a rechargeable battery for the grid.
2. Land: It covers 150.74 hectares of non forest land in Nivade, Tondoshi, Kalambe and Jalu villages.
3. Deemed Eco-Sensitive Zone: The project lies in the deemed Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ), a protective buffer, around Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary in the Sahyadri Tiger Reserve (STR). Koyna’s ESZ is not notified, so Supreme Court directions treat a 10 km radius as one.
4. Why a deposit: Under existing norms, private companies setting up projects in an ESZ are asked to deposit up to 4% of project cost for forest conservation and protection.
5. The takeaway: The deposit moves with the stated project cost, so that one figure decides how much conservation money the tiger reserve gets.
How did the deposit shrink?
1. Environment Clearance: MoEFCC’s letter recommending prior Environment Clearance, the environmental approval needed before construction, put the project cost at Rs 5,675 crore in February 2025.
2. State Board for Wildlife: In February 2026, the Board laid down 15 conditions, including the conservation deposit into the STR’s bank account.
3. First demand: The State’s Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) then asked the company to deposit Rs 227 crore.
4. Revised cost: In a notarised affidavit on September 8, the company stated the cost as Rs 56.75 crore, saying it was “based on analogous estimation“, meaning a cost estimated from similar projects.
5. Acceptance: On October 12, the forest department accepted the affidavit. Part of the deposit is due now and the rest after the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) clears the project.
Who has objected, and what has the Centre done?
1. Complaint: The Honorary Wildlife Warden of Satara district complained on October 30 of an “incorrect cost of the project”, through the Prime Minister’s grievance portal and the State’s Aaple Sarkar portal.
2. Complainant’s case: The warden says the department accepted a cost 100 times lower than the actual estimate, an undue concession of about Rs 225 crore.
3. Centre’s direction: On November 6, MoEFCC called wildlife protection primarily the State’s responsibility and asked for an investigation on priority.
4. State inquiries: The State forest department has begun its own probe, and the Deputy Director of Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary has been asked to inquire.
5. Company’s stand: The Adani Group said the project is on private land with no forest land and does not harm downstream ecology. It did not address the revised cost.
Challenges
1. Unverified affidavits: The forest department accepted a stated cost without checking it against the Centre’s own Environment Clearance letter.
2. Unnotified ESZ: Koyna’s ESZ is only deemed, so the deposit rests on a court direction, not a notified boundary.
3. Split accountability: Central clearance and State wildlife checks run separately, so each can assume the other verified the cost.
Way Forward
1. Cost from clearance records: Forest departments should compute ESZ deposits from the cost recorded in the Environment Clearance, not from later affidavits.
2. Audited revisions: A large cut in stated cost should need an audited estimate before acceptance.
3. Koyna ESZ notification: MoEFCC and Maharashtra should finalise the ESZ notification for Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary.
Conclusion
The conservation deposit now rests on a revised cost that State inquiries, ordered at the Centre’s direction, are examining. The probe findings and the NBWL standing committee’s decision are the next milestones.
Key numbers
1. Paid into the STR’s account: Rs 56.75 lakh, 1% of the revised cost.
2. Balance due after NBWL clearance: Rs 1.7075 crore, 3% of the revised cost.
Back2Basics: Sahyadri Tiger Reserve
1. Location: It is spread over the Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and Ratnagiri districts of Maharashtra.
2. Protected areas: It covers Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary and Chandoli National Park, and includes the Shivsagar (Koyna) and Vasant Sagar (Warana) reservoirs.
3. Significance: It is the northernmost tiger habitat in the Western Ghats.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2024, GS3, 10 marks] What role do environmental NGOs and activists play in influencing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) outcomes for major projects in India? Cite four examples with all important details.”
November 13, 2026
Climate finance deadlock: why COP summits keep revisiting same dispute
Why in the News
Developed countries report climate finance above the $100 billion a year they once pledged, but developing countries say far less reaches them as money they can use. The dispute has returned at the annual United Nations climate summit, the 31st Conference of the Parties (COP31), in Antalya, Türkiye. The stake is whether new finance is additional, affordable and accessible.
Why do developed countries owe climate finance?
1. What it is: Climate finance is money that helps developing countries cut emissions (mitigation) and cope with climate impacts (adaptation). It works like a shared repair fund, where those who caused more damage pay more.
2. Origin of the duty: Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), developed countries accepted an obligation to finance developing countries, given their greater historical responsibility and capacity.
3. Paris Agreement: The 2015 treaty reaffirmed that wealthy countries should lead in providing climate finance, with public money and grants for the most vulnerable.
4. The takeaway: The quarrel is less about how much is pledged and more about whether the money is a real transfer of resources.
How far does finance fall short of need?
1. Adaptation need: Developing countries will need about $305 billion a year by 2035 for adaptation, estimates the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in its Adaptation Gap Report.
2. Adaptation supply: In 2024, developed countries provided only about a tenth of that need as public money for adaptation.
3. Tripling still short: Even a tripling of this finance, as agreed at the previous summit in Brazil, would cover only 20% to 29% of the need.
4. Copenhagen pledge: Wealthy nations pledged $100 billion a year at the 2009 Copenhagen summit, but first met it only two years after the deadline.
5. Baku goal: At the Baku summit in Azerbaijan, developed countries agreed to lead in providing at least $300 billion a year by 2035. This New Collective Quantified Goal left the grant and loan split open.
Why do the two sides count the same money differently?
1. OECD count: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a club of rich countries, puts 2024 climate finance at $136.7 billion. It includes export credits and private investment, and counts loans at full value, ignoring that they must be repaid.
2. Oxfam’s count: Oxfam, an international non-profit, puts the 2024 total at only $32.7 billion to $44.7 billion, because it counts loans at less than full value and excludes some sources.
3. No common method: The UN climate finance committee says there is no common accounting method for the $100 billion goal.
4. Loans dominate: Loans made up 67% of public climate finance and grants only 29%.
Why does the form of finance matter?
1. Grant versus loan: A grant need not be repaid. A low interest loan is cheaper than commercial borrowing but is still debt.
2. Limits of private capital: Investors back projects that earn money, such as solar and wind power. Coastal protection, urban drainage and early warning systems rarely earn a return, so public grants remain essential.
3. India’s position: India sought at least $1 trillion a year from developed countries, mainly as grants and low cost loans, so that support is affordable, predictable and accessible.
Challenges
1. Debt as support: With loans dominating public climate finance, poorer countries take on more debt to deal with climate impacts.
2. Access barriers: Complex applications, limited technical capacity and lengthy approvals keep countries from using funds that are nominally available.
3. Open grant share: The Baku goal fixes no share for grants, so the same dispute returns at every summit.
Way Forward
1. Common accounting method: UNFCCC Parties should agree on one method that counts only the grant value of loans, not their full value.
2. Grant share in the goal: Developed countries should state what share of the Baku goal will come as grants.
3. Simpler access: Climate funds should simplify applications and fund project preparation in low capacity countries.
Conclusion
Climate finance has crossed its old headline target, yet developing countries still question how much of it is additional, affordable and accessible. Until the grant share and the accounting method are settled, the dispute will return at every summit.
Key numbers
1. Public adaptation finance, 2024: $28.2 billion to $31.7 billion from developed countries (UNEP Adaptation Gap Report 2026).
2. Public climate finance by instrument, 2024: Loans $68.5 billion; grants $29.7 billion.
3. Wider Baku ambition: $1.3 trillion a year from all public and private sources.
4. Key years: Copenhagen goal deadline 2020, first met in 2022; Baku goal agreed in 2024.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2010] The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is and international treaty drawn at (a) United Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, 1972 (b) UN Conference on Environment and Development, Rio De Janerio, 1992 (c) World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, 2002 (d) UN Climate Change Conference, Copenhagen, 2009 ANSWER: (b)”
November 13, 2026
New deal
Why in the News
The 31st Conference of the Parties (COP31) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has opened in Antalya, Türkiye, with Türkiye as host and Australia presiding over the negotiations. Its main task is to deliver finance already promised, not to set new targets. Several prominent world leaders, including Europeans, have skipped the meeting.
What is COP31 expected to deliver?
1. What a COP is: A COP is the yearly meeting of UNFCCC member countries to negotiate cutting emissions and paying for climate action. It is like the annual general meeting of the climate treaty.
2. Island focus: Ministerial delegations visited Fiji and Tuvalu before the summit, since small island nations are most vulnerable to warming.
3. Finance goal: The main concern is delivering $300 billion a year by 2035, the climate finance goal decided at COP29 in Baku.
4. Adaptation finance: COP30 called for tripling adaptation finance, money that helps countries cope with climate impacts, over the same period. How the funds will actually flow has been deferred to COP32.
5. The takeaway: COP31 will be judged on whether money already promised reaches developing countries.
Why are the science and the fossil fuel agenda stalling?
1. Global stocktake: The second global stocktake, a periodic check on collective progress under the Paris Agreement, begins at COP31.
2. IPCC delay: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has not settled a timeline for its next reports. These reports give policymakers the scientific push to keep warming below 2°C, and ideally 1.5°C.
3. No formal fossil fuel roadmap: COP30 ended without a formal roadmap away from fossil fuels, a step back from the consensus reached at COP28 in Dubai.
4. Voluntary roadmap: A voluntary roadmap exists but sits outside the formal negotiating text, so it binds no country.
Why is climate money scarce?
1. Competing pressures: Three pressures have squeezed the funds available:
  - the West Asia war;
  - the withdrawal of the United States (US) from the Paris Agreement;
  - financial strain across Europe.
2. Loss and damage example: The Loss and Damage fund recently approved $21 million for Nepal, when the need runs into billions.
Why did India refuse the electrification pledge?
1. Electrification target: The COP31 President has set a target to raise electricity’s share of total energy consumption to 35% by 2035.
2. Starting point: Electricity now meets 23% of total energy consumption, so the target needs a fast shift from direct fuel use in industry, transport and homes to power.
3. India’s refusal: India has refused to sign the pledge. It insists on three conditions:
  - predictable climate finance, money developing countries can plan around;
  - technology transfer, clean technology shared by developed countries;
  - nationally determined approaches, each country choosing its own path to cut emissions.
4. Delivery before ambition: New targets without the promised finance shift the cost of transition onto developing countries.
Challenges
1. Unclear delivery channels: No agreed mechanism yet decides who pays and through which channel, so the finance goal remains a promise.
2. Leadership vacuum: The absence of top leaders and the US exit weaken political pressure on major emitters.
3. Science timeline: Without a fixed IPCC schedule, the stocktake lacks fresh science to push countries towards higher ambition.
4. Fossil fuel ambiguity: A roadmap outside the formal text lets countries expand fossil fuel use without breaching any commitment.
Way Forward
1. Finance delivery plan: Agree a delivery plan for the finance goal at COP31, with yearly milestones and a grant share.
2. Adaptation baseline: Set a baseline and annual reporting to track progress on tripling adaptation finance.
3. Replenished fund: Developed countries should replenish the Loss and Damage fund so that grants match the scale of disasters.
4. IPCC calendar: Fix the IPCC report calendar so that the second stocktake draws on current science.
5. Supported sectoral goals: Keep sectoral goals such as electrification voluntary, and back them with finance and technology for developing countries.
Conclusion
The credibility of COP31 rests on delivering money already promised, not on new targets that developing countries cannot fund. The test to watch is whether this meeting fixes how climate finance flows or postpones the question again.
Back2Basics: Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage
1. What it is: A dedicated fund that pays for climate damage that has already happened and can no longer be adapted to.
2. Distinct role: It is separate from mitigation funds, which cut emissions, and adaptation funds, which prepare for future impacts.
3. Origin: It was established at COP27 in 2022 and operationalised at COP28 a year later.
4. Host: It is temporarily hosted by the World Bank.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2021, GS3, 15 marks] Describe the major outcomes of the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). What are the commitments made by India in this conference?”
November 13, 2026
India and U.K. are turning climate ambition into action
Why in the News
India and the United Kingdom (U.K.) present their climate partnership as a move from targets to delivery. The largest ever Earthshot Prize edition is held in Mumbai next week, as the 31st Conference of the Parties (COP31) to the United Nations (UN) climate convention meets in Türkiye. The test is whether capital and policy certainty follow the ideas.
What is the Earthshot Prize, and why is it in India?
1. What it is: Founded by the Prince of Wales and launched in 2020, the Earthshot Prize rewards environmental solutions that can work at scale, like a global innovation contest.
2. Prize money: Five winners will each receive £1 million to accelerate their work.
3. India’s record: India has produced more finalists and winners than any other country: nine finalists, including four winners.
4. The takeaway: The Mumbai edition puts India’s role in clean growth and climate innovation on display.
Why is faster climate action urgent, and what shows it can work?
1. Montreal Protocol: Under the Montreal Protocol, a global treaty, governments, companies, scientists and non governmental organisations together phased out almost all ozone depleting substances. The ozone layer is on track to recover within decades.
2. Worsening crisis: El Niño, a periodic Pacific warming that disrupts weather worldwide, and conflict driven energy shocks have worsened the climate crisis this year.
Where do India and the U.K. stand on clean energy?
1. India’s capacity milestone: Non fossil sources now account for more than half of India’s installed power capacity, five years ahead of its 2030 target.
2. India’s global role: India aims for 500 gigawatts of non fossil capacity by 2030. It shapes the global response through the International Solar Alliance (ISA) and the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI).
3. U.K. record: The U.K. has cut its greenhouse gas emissions by more than half since 1990 and kept its economy growing.
How do the two countries cooperate on energy and finance?
1. Regulators and offshore wind: India’s Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and the U.K.’s Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) cooperate on electricity market reform. A joint taskforce supports offshore wind in India.
2. Shared learning: The U.K. was partner country at the Bharat Renewable Energy Summit and Expo 2026, and it is learning from India’s energy stack on how to share data.
3. Climate Finance Initiative: The two governments launched the India-U.K. Climate Finance Initiative last year to scale climate investment.
4. Capital portfolio: A £330 million U.K. portfolio, run with the Government of India, has drawn in more than £3.5 billion for green businesses and start ups.
5. British International Investment (BII): The U.K.’s development finance institution has backed more than 600 businesses and committed $1.1 billion to climate investments in India, its largest market.
Why is climate also treated as a security issue?
1. Climate as security: At the UN General Assembly in September, the U.K. Foreign Secretary jointly convened foreign ministers on climate and nature as national security challenges.
2. Disaster risk reduction: India and the U.K. jointly chaired the UN Disaster Risk Reduction Senior Officials’ Meeting in New Delhi in October.
3. Sovereign disaster risk pool: India’s National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) and the U.K.’s Centre for Disaster Protection are assessing a sovereign disaster risk pool, a shared insurance fund that pays governments quickly after a disaster.
Challenges
1. Scale of finance: Portfolios of hundreds of millions of pounds are small against the investment India’s non fossil target needs.
2. Capacity versus generation: Installed capacity overstates the transition, since coal still produces most of India’s electricity.
3. Policy certainty: Innovators scale only with predictable policy, so shifting rules deter long term investors.
Way Forward
1. Blended finance: Use public portfolios to draw larger private capital into grids, storage and electric transport.
2. Risk pool decision: Complete the feasibility study on the risk pool and settle its design and funding.
3. Route to scale: Link Earthshot finalists to investors and public procurement so their solutions reach scale.
Conclusion
India and the U.K. have built a working climate partnership across regulation, finance and disaster risk. Whether its finance and policy certainty grow to match their targets is the test COP31 will sharpen.
About India-U.K. Relations
1. Trade agreement: The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) came into force in July 2026, with zero duty access for 99% of Indian exports to the U.K.
2. U.K.-India Vision 2035: Adopted with the signing of the CETA in July 2025, this ten year agenda covers trade, technology, defence and education, with climate and clean energy central to it.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2022, GS3, 15 marks] Do you think India will meet 50 percent of its energy needs from renewable energy by 2030 ? Justify your answer. How will the shift of subsidies from fossil fuels to renewables help achieve the above objective? Explain.”
November 13, 2026
In a dilemma
Why in the News
Former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has applied for a new passport and national identity card and plans to return home in December. Dhaka has rejected the request. Her planned return has stalled India-Bangladesh ties and left India in a dilemma.
Who is Sheikh Hasina, and why does her return matter?
1. Exile in India: Sheikh Hasina led the Awami League government that a youth led uprising overthrew. She took refuge in India on 5 August 2024.
2. Death sentence: A tribunal in Bangladesh has convicted her of ordering a crackdown on thousands of students and sentenced her to death.
3. Earlier exile: She lived in exile in India from 1975 to 1981, after her father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and most of her family were assassinated.
4. Return plan: She plans to return to argue her case and rebuild the Awami League, which faces a bipartisan (cross party) push in Bangladesh to ban it from politics.
5. The takeaway: India’s honoured guest faces a death sentence at home, so her travel plan is now a foreign policy problem for New Delhi.
How has Dhaka responded to her passport request?
1. The application: A London based law firm acting for her wrote to the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi on 9 November.
2. Dhaka’s refusal: The Foreign Affairs Adviser to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman said Dhaka would not grant a passport to a “terrorist”.
3. Extradition route: Dhaka will instead seek her return under its extradition agreement with India, which provides for handing over wanted persons. It calls this a “prisoner transfer process”.
4. Government’s bind: The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) government is unlikely to want her back. It would then have to begin execution proceedings and face international opposition.
5. Pressure from the opposition: The government’s inaction strengthens the opposition Jamaat-e-Islami, which accuses the government of going soft on her.
How has the rift hurt India-Bangladesh ties?
1. Press conference fallout: India let Hasina hold a virtual press conference in Delhi on 5 August, where she criticised Prime Minister Rahman. His visit to India was then cancelled.
2. Consular dialogue postponed: The India-Bangladesh consular dialogue, due in Dhaka on 17 and 18 November, has been postponed over her announced return.
3. Lost agenda: It was to cover border management, visa procedures and the repatriation of detained citizens.
4. Water talks stalled: Talks on extending the Ganga Waters Treaty, 1996, which expires next month, have stalled because of the rift.
5. Visa recovery at risk: India cut visas for Bangladeshis sharply after August 2024 and has raised them since Rahman’s election in February. The rift puts this recovery at risk.
Why is India caught in a dilemma?
1. No power to restrain: India cannot physically stop its honoured guest from flying to Dhaka or crossing the land border at Petrapole, nor can it disown responsibility for her fate once she crosses.
2. Two goals in tension: India must rebuild ties with the government in Dhaka and also ensure Hasina’s welfare. The first needs distance from her, and the second needs continued protection.
Challenges
1. Extradition request: A formal extradition request would force India to choose between a treaty partner and a former leader it shelters.
2. Little room in Dhaka: Pressure from the Jamaat-e-Islami leaves the BNP government little political room to soften its stand on Hasina or ease ties with the country sheltering her.
3. Unrest on return: Her return carries a risk of protests and violence in Bangladesh, which would turn opinion further against India as her host.
Way Forward
1. Separate tracks: Keep water, border and visa talks apart from the Hasina question, starting with a fresh date for the consular dialogue.
2. Interim water deal: Use the Joint Rivers Commission (JRC), the two countries’ joint body on shared rivers, to agree an interim extension of the treaty before it lapses.
3. Assurances on due process: Seek Dhaka’s assurances on her safety and a fair legal process before she travels.
Conclusion
India’s protection of Hasina and its need for working ties with Dhaka’s new government now pull in opposite directions. Her planned return and the lapse of the water sharing treaty are the decision points to watch.
Back2Basics: Ganga Waters Treaty, 1996
1. Term: India and Bangladesh signed it in December 1996 for 30 years, with no automatic extension clause.
2. Lean season sharing: It divides the dry season flow of the Ganga at Farakka, from January to May, in ten day cycles.
3. No arbitration clause: Disputes go first to a Joint Committee, which records flows at Farakka and Hardinge Bridge. They then go to the JRC and the two governments, never to an external forum.
Matching Previous Year Question
“[2013, GS2, 10 marks] The protests in Shahbag Square in Dhaka in Bangladesh reveal a fundamental split in society between the nationalists and Islamic forces. What is its significance for India?”
November 13, 2026
India’s TB incidence missing from 2026 report of WHO
Why in the News
India carries nearly a quarter of the world’s tuberculosis (TB) cases, yet this year’s World Health Organization (WHO) Global TB Report carries no estimate of India’s TB incidence. WHO says India’s estimates await district level surveillance data and should be updated in early 2027. India has also not released its own annual TB report.
What is TB incidence, and why does the estimate matter?
1. What it is: TB incidence is the estimated number of new TB cases in a year, including those never diagnosed. Notified cases count only the patients the health system records.
2. Undiagnosed gap: The gap between estimated incidence and notified cases is treated as the number of undiagnosed, untreated patients, who keep spreading the infection.
3. Missing national report: India’s own annual TB report, usually released in March on World TB Day, carries detailed State level data.
4. The takeaway: Without an incidence estimate, India cannot show how many TB patients its programme is still missing.
Why is India’s estimate under review?
1. District survey: Instead of a national survey, the government measured TB prevalence in 50 randomly selected, representative districts in 2025.
2. Comparability check: WHO says the results must first be checked against the 2020-21 national prevalence survey, then adjusted and released.
3. Past surveys: India’s incidence estimates rested on two national surveys, in 1955-58 and 2020-21.
4. Repeatable method: A national survey is superior but costly, so even China has done only three. A district survey can be repeated more often.
5. Likely lower estimate: An expert expects the new method to lower India’s incidence, partly because the programme works.
What does the report show for India?
1. Diagnosed cases: The national programme diagnosed 25.3 lakh people in 2025, down from 26.18 lakh a year earlier.
2. Deaths: Reported TB deaths fell to 2.63 lakh in 2025 from just over 3 lakh a year earlier.
3. Programme measures: The National TB Elimination Programme (NTEP) credits Artificial Intelligence (AI) enabled X-rays, rapid diagnostics, differentiated care, and nutrition support through Ni-kshay Poshan Yojana and Ni-kshay Mitra donors.
4. Domestic funding: Domestic resources meet 96% of TB programme funding needs.
5. Treatment success: 94% for drug susceptible TB, the form that responds to standard drugs.
Is India on track to end TB?
1. Mortality fall: India’s TB mortality has fallen 38% since 2015, against a global decline of 35%.
2. Milestone five years late: India has now crossed WHO’s milestone, a 35% cut in deaths from the 2015 level, five years after its 2020 deadline.
3. 2025 target missed: The target for 2025 was a 75% cut in TB deaths.
4. Global picture: About 10.6 million people fell ill with TB worldwide in 2025, far from the goal of eliminating it.
Challenges
1. Hidden cases: Undiagnosed patients spread TB without entering notified data.
2. Drug resistant TB: Multidrug resistant TB, which does not respond to the main TB drugs, remains a crisis and a health security threat.
3. Catastrophic costs: About half of TB affected households worldwide spend over 20% of household income on the illness.
Way Forward
1. Publish revised estimates: Release the district survey based estimates on schedule, with the method explained.
2. Restore the annual report: The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare should resume the annual India TB report with State level data.
3. Regular district surveys: Repeat district prevalence surveys at fixed intervals to track trends.
Conclusion
India’s TB deaths have fallen faster than the global average, but without an incidence estimate the size of its hidden epidemic is unknown. Whether the revised estimate shows the programme reaching the patients it now misses is the thing to watch.
Key numbers
1. Global TB deaths: 1.13 million in 2025 (WHO).
2. Concentration: About 88% of new cases in 30 countries; India about a quarter, Indonesia 10%.
3. Regional shares, 2025: South-East Asia 35%, Western Pacific 27%, Africa 25% of new cases.
4. TB Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan: Over 25 crore people screened, 7 December 2024 to 8 November 2026.
Back2Basics: End TB Strategy
1. About: A WHO strategy adopted by the World Health Assembly in 2014 to end the global TB epidemic.
2. 2030 targets: A 90% cut in TB deaths and an 80% cut in incidence, compared with 2015.
3. Cost target: No TB affected family should face catastrophic costs from the disease.
4. India’s goal: India set itself the goal of ending TB by 2025, five years ahead of the Sustainable Development Goal deadline of 2030.
Matching Previous Year Question
“No direct PYQ traced in the provided files. Thematic PYQ: [2024, GS2, 15 marks] 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.”
November 13, 2026

More posts