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

Civilsdaily

Login

Search results for: “”

  • India-UK Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Comes into Force

    Why in News?

    The India-UK Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Double Contribution Convention (DCC) came into force, marking one of India’s most comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (FTAs)

    Key Highlights

    • CETA: Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
    • DCC: Double Contribution Convention
    • The UK will eliminate tariffs on 96.8% of tariff lines (covering 97.7% of trade value) immediately.
    • India will remove tariffs on 30.3% of trade value immediately, with further reductions phased over time.
    • Covers 30 chapters, including: Digital Trade, Government Procurement, MSMEs, Labour, Environment, Gender, and Innovation
    • Addresses SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures) and TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) to reduce non-tariff barriers.
    • India has protected sensitive sectors such as dairy, cereals, pulses, vegetables, gold & jewellery, smartphones, and critical polymers.
    • Under the DCC, Indian professionals working in the UK for up to 5 years will be exempt from paying UK social security if they are already contributing in India, benefiting 75,000+ workers and 900+ employers.

    About CETA

    • A comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA) aimed at boosting trade, investment, services, and economic cooperation.
    • Enhances market access while reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers between India and the UK.

    [2017] ‘Broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA)’ is sometimes seen in the news in the context of negotiations held between India and

    [A] European Union

    [B] Gulf Cooperation Council

    [C] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

    [D] Shanghai Cooperation Organization

  • [15th July 2026] The Hindu OpED: India-U.S defence ties-big ambitions, little delivery

    PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2020]: What is the significance of Indo-US defence deals over Indo-Russian defence deals? Discuss with reference to stability in the Indo-Pacific region.
    Linkage: The PYQ examines India’s defence partnerships and their strategic significance in the Indo-Pacific. The article shows that despite stronger India-U.S. defence ties, technology transfer and co-development continue to face major hurdles.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The stalled negotiations over General Electric’s (GE) F414 fighter engine have once again exposed the gap between political promises and actual industrial cooperation in India-U.S. defence ties. The per-engine cost has nearly tripled, and GE is now seeking an $800 million investment from India. Although India has purchased over $22 billion worth of U.S. defence equipment since 2002, meaningful technology transfer and co-production remain limited. Institutional initiatives such as Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) and India-U.S. Defence Acceleration Ecosystem (INDUS-X) have also delivered only modest results.

    Why has the GE F414 engine impasse become a symbol of the gap between India-U.S. defence ambition and industrial delivery?

    1. Flagship status: The F414 programme was unveiled as the flagship achievement of iCET during Indian Prime Minister’s 2023 Washington visit. It was meant to symbolise a shift from a buyer-seller relationship to genuine defence-industrial collaboration.
    2. Cost escalation: The estimated cost of each F414 engine has reportedly nearly tripled. It has risen from around ₹70-80 crore to over ₹200 crore.
    3. Investment demand: GE has sought an Indian investment of around $800 million (₹7,576 crore). This is to establish a dedicated production line.
    4. Web of interlinked negotiations: Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is negotiating procurement and licensed manufacture of the F414 for the Tejas Mk-II. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Aeronautical Development Agency separately engage GE over the same engine for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft and the Navy’s Twin-Engine Deck-Based Fighter. This overlap complicates resolution.
    5. Underlying disputes: Disagreements over technology transfer, intellectual property and export controls lie at the core of the unresolved negotiations.

    Does the two-decade record of India-U.S. defence institutions show a pattern of stagnation rather than isolated setbacks?

    1. DTTI’s fade: The Defence Technology and Trade Initiative, launched in 2012 to promote co-development and co-production, generated years of meetings. It delivered no significant military capability before fading into irrelevance.
    2. iCET’s unresolved flagship: iCET (2022) expanded the agenda to semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies, telecommunications, space, biotechnology, drones and resilient supply chains. Its principal defence initiative, the F414 programme, remains unresolved.
    3. INDUS-X’s unmet promise: INDUS-X, launched in 2023 to link defence start-ups, academia and industry, has generated enthusiasm. It has yet to produce noteworthy co-development outcomes.
    4. Javelin missile stalled: Discussions on co-producing the Javelin anti-tank guided missile have remained unresolved for more than a decade.
    5. Stryker vehicle stalled: The proposed collaboration on the General Dynamics Stryker infantry combat vehicle has suffered a similar fate. Both now appear increasingly likely to be shelved quietly.
    6. MQ-9B as purchase, not partnership: India’s 2024 acquisition of 31 MQ-9B SkyGuardian and SeaGuardian remotely piloted aircraft, worth around $3.5 billion and routed through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales system, has resembled a purchase rather than the industrial collaboration originally envisaged. Its promised local assembly, partial manufacture and maintenance-repair-overhaul ecosystem have yet to materialise.

    Why does the India-U.S. defence relationship keep maturing as a procurement partnership rather than a technology-transfer partnership?

    1. India’s acquisition philosophy: India views defence partnerships as a means of acquiring advanced technologies, strengthening indigenous manufacturing and reducing dependence on imported matériel.
    2. U.S. strategic-asset philosophy: The U.S. regards advanced defence technologies as strategic assets governed by stringent export-control regulations, particularly the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Under this regime, release of technical data and manufacturing know-how stays subordinate to broader security considerations.
    3. India’s ask in the F414 talks: India has sought manufacturing expertise and intellectual property from GE to build long-term domestic capability.
    4. U.S. constraint in the same talks: The U.S. remains constrained by export-control regimes in these negotiations, regardless of Washington’s broader strategic objectives.
    5. Asymmetric outcome: The consequence is a relationship that has matured as a procurement partnership. It has developed far less as a mechanism for transferring capability and strengthening India’s atmanirbharta.
    6. Strategic expansion outpacing industrial delivery: Strategic ties have expanded through increasingly sophisticated military exercises, logistics agreements and enhanced interoperability. The industrial dimension of the relationship has failed to keep pace with this strategic expansion.

    What does the proposed Reciprocal Defence Procurement Agreement seek to change in India-U.S. defence trade?

    1. Next test of cooperation: DTTI, iCET and INDUS-X are seen as having largely disappointed. Officials in both countries are now looking to the proposed Reciprocal Defence Procurement Agreement (RDPA) as the next test of industrial cooperation.
    2. Reciprocal market access: The U.S. believes the RDPA could reshape bilateral defence trade by granting each country reciprocal access to the other’s procurement markets.
    3. Shift from one-way buying: The design moves away from India functioning solely as a buyer, proposing instead mutual entry into each other’s defence procurement systems.

    Would the Reciprocal Defence Procurement Agreement (RDPA) resolve the asymmetry in India-U.S. defence-industrial cooperation, or reproduce it?

    1. Competitive exposure risk: Reciprocity under the RDPA could expose India’s still-nascent defence manufacturers to direct competition with America’s larger, wealthier and technologically more advanced defence giants.
    2. Unequal starting positions: Whether reciprocal access creates genuine balance or simply institutionalises unequal competition remains unresolved. The size and technological gap between the two defence-industrial bases is the reason this question stays open.
    3. Track record of unmet promise: DTTI, iCET and INDUS-X have each fallen short of their announced ambitions. The RDPA carries the same risk of political framing outpacing industrial delivery.

    Conclusion

    The GE F414 impasse is the latest instance of a two-decade pattern in which India-U.S. defence initiatives are announced as historic breakthroughs but stall on one unresolved conflict: India’s demand for technology transfer against the U.S.’s export-control-driven approach to strategic technology. The relationship has matured as a procurement partnership, not a capability-transfer one. The proposed RDPA does not resolve this divide. It shifts the risk from stalled technology transfer to potential competitive exposure of India’s nascent defence industry, leaving the core imbalance between political ambition and industrial reality unaddressed.

  • What is meant by trial in Absentia? 

    Why in the News?

    A Special NIA Court in Jammu issued a non-bailable warrant against Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed in the Pahalgam terror attack case, days after the NIA filed a supplementary chargesheet charging him under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Since Saeed is unlikely to appear before an Indian court, the NIA is expected to seek a trial in absentia under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

    What is trial in absentia, and why did the CrPC regime fail to deliver it?

    1. Definition: A trial in absentia is a criminal trial conducted without the physical presence of the accused, with the court proceeding to inquiry, trial, and judgment as if the accused were present.
    2. Section 356 mechanism: BNSS Section 356 permits a court to treat the absence of a proclaimed offender as a waiver of the right to be present, after recording reasons in writing, once there is no immediate prospect of arrest.
    3. CrPC’s partial provisions: Section 82(4) CrPC allowed proclamation and attachment of an absconding accused’s property. Section 317 CrPC allowed trial in absence only in specific cases. Section 299 CrPC allowed recording of evidence in absence where early arrest was not expected.
    4. Discretion without completion: CrPC provisions permitted in-absentia proceedings only when the accused’s personal attendance was unnecessary for justice, or when the accused persistently disrupted court proceedings. None allowed a full trial to conclude in the accused’s absence.
    5. Resulting backlog: Without a mechanism for full trial completion, cases against absconding accused remained pending for years until arrest. Prosecutorial closure and deterrence were both weakened.

    Whom does Section 356 apply to?

    1. Restricted scope: The provision does not apply to every absconding accused. It applies only to a person declared a “proclaimed offender” under Section 84 of the BNSS.
    2. Offence severity threshold: Under Section 84(4), a person can be declared a proclaimed offender only for offences punishable with imprisonment of 10 years or more, life imprisonment, or death.
    3. Declaration process: The court declares a person a proclaimed offender after such inquiry as it considers necessary, once the accused fails to appear at the specified place and time despite proclamation.
    4. Application to Saeed: Charges relating to waging war against India and cross-border conspiracy meet this severity threshold, making Saeed eligible for trial in absentia once declared a proclaimed offender.

    What procedural safeguards protect the accused’s right to a fair trial?

    1. Dual warrants: Two consecutive arrest warrants must be issued at an interval of at least 30 days before proceedings can commence.
    2. Public notice: A notice must be published in a local or national newspaper, giving the accused 30 days to appear before the court.
    3. Notice at residence: The notice must also be displayed at the accused’s last known residence, and a relative or friend must be informed of the trial.
    4. Cooling-off period: The trial cannot commence until 90 days have elapsed from the framing of charges, giving the accused time to appear.
    5. State-funded defence: If the absconding accused has no legal representation, the court must appoint a defence lawyer at the State’s expense.

    What happens if the absconding accused later appears or is apprehended?

    1. Provisional use of evidence: Statements of prosecution witnesses recorded before the trial’s commencement can be used as evidence against the absconding accused.
    2. Right to cross-examine: If the accused later appears or is apprehended, the court may permit cross-examination of witnesses in the interest of justice.
    3. Audiovisual preservation: Depositions and examination of witnesses are, as far as practicable, recorded through audiovisual electronic means.
    4. Purpose of preservation: Recordings are preserved to ensure transparency, accuracy, and integrity of the trial, and to enable review if the accused is later apprehended.

    Does trial in absentia resolve the problem of absconding offenders, or does it merely shift it elsewhere?

    1. Verdict without custody: A conviction in absentia establishes legal guilt but does not itself secure physical custody of an accused based abroad, as in Saeed’s case in Pakistan.
    2. Enforcement gap persists: Extradition or handover of a convicted proclaimed offender still depends on bilateral treaties and the host state’s cooperation, which a trial in absentia cannot compel.
    3. Symbolic versus substantive closure: The mechanism ends prosecutorial limbo and enables sentencing, but substantive closure for victims requires enforcement of the sentence, an outcome outside the court’s control.
    4. Fair trial versus finality: Section 356’s safeguards balance the accused’s Article 21 rights against the State’s interest in finality. The accused’s inability to personally instruct defence counsel or contest evidence in real time remains an inherent limitation of any in-absentia trial.

    Conclusion

    Section 356 of the BNSS fills a long-standing gap in India’s criminal law by allowing a full trial in absentia for proclaimed offenders in serious offences. Unlike the CrPC, which allowed only limited in-absentia proceedings, it prevents cases from remaining pending indefinitely. The provision balances this expanded power with layered safeguards, dual warrants, public notice, a waiting period, state-funded defence, and post-apprehension cross-examination rights, to protect the accused’s fair trial rights. However, a conviction in absentia only delivers a judicial verdict; it does not solve the challenge of bringing back an accused protected by a non-cooperating foreign state.

  • How the Gaganyaan Crew Module is Built to Survive

    Why in the News?

    India’s Human-rated Launch Vehicle Mark-3 (HLVM3) will place the Gaganyaan Orbital Module, carrying Indian astronauts, into orbit for the country’s maiden crewed space mission. The astronauts’ survival on return depends on the crew module’s re-entry design, which must balance competing engineering demands that no single shape can satisfy at once.

    How is the Gaganyaan Orbital Module structured for the crew’s return journey?

    1. Two-module design: The Orbital Module (OM) has two sections, the crew module and the service module, connected by a joint.
    2. Division of function: The crew module serves as the crew habitat. The service module provides on-orbit support to the OM.
    3. De-orbit sequence: The service module’s propulsion system fires thrusters to de-orbit the OM. The service module then separates from the crew module through a redundant severing mechanism.
    4. Differential survival: The crew module is built to survive re-entry heat loads. It decelerates through aero-braking (Aero-braking: use of atmospheric drag to slow a spacecraft during descent) and splashes down in the sea. The service module burns up during descent.

    Why is there no single “ideal” shape for a re-entry crew module?

    1. Competing design objectives: A crew module must simultaneously maximise internal volume, manage aerodynamic lift and drag, stay easy to fabricate, maintain aerodynamic and hydrodynamic stability, and stabilise dynamically at low speeds.
    2. No configuration satisfies all objectives: No single shape meets every requirement at once. The final shape depends on which objectives are prioritised.
    3. Mass-minimisation strategy: Engineers strip the module to essential landing systems to minimise launch and re-entry mass. This directly reduces the size and mass of the heatshield and parachutes.
    4. The sphere’s trade-off: A sphere offers the maximum internal volume for the minimum structural mass, since a sphere has the smallest surface area for a given volume. A sphere also generates no aerodynamic lift, so it falls straight down and subjects the crew to high g-forces.
    5. The sphere-cone compromise: A sphere-cone configuration is preferred for re-entry. Its blunt base creates a detached shockwave that pushes frictional heat away from the spacecraft. Its conical body provides the lift and aerodynamic stability needed for a controlled descent. The Gaganyaan crew module uses this sphere-cone configuration.

    What do other crewed spacecraft designs show about configuration choices?

    1. Russia’s Soyuz and China’s Shenzhou: Both use a three-module configuration. This adds a dedicated third module for extra living and working space, unlike Gaganyaan’s two-module OM.
    2. Function of the third module: This module houses the docking mechanism, cargo, and basic life-support facilities, including the toilet. It separates and is destroyed during re-entry, like the service module.
    3. Soviet Union’s Vostok: The Vostok capsule, in which Yuri Gagarin made the first human spaceflight, used the design closest to a perfect sphere among crewed capsules.
    4. Design lesson: Vostok’s near-spherical shape shows the volume-versus-lift trade-off directly. It maximised internal volume but sacrificed aerodynamic lift, the same trade-off Gaganyaan’s engineers manage through the sphere-cone choice.

    Why does even an optimised sphere-cone shape fail to guarantee stability?

    1. Mono-stability defined: A module is aerodynamically mono-stable if it holds only one stable attitude while flying through the atmosphere, similar to a shuttlecock. Hydrodynamic mono-stability means the module self-rights into a single stable orientation after splashdown.
    2. What controls mono-stability: Mono-stability depends on the module’s aerodynamic shape and the location of its centre of gravity.
    3. The packaging constraint: The centre of gravity is fixed by how internal subsystems are packed. System engineers often cannot freely relocate it to the position mono-stability requires.
    4. Result-multiple stable orientations: Most modules end up with more than one stable orientation. The Gaganyaan crew module has two stable aerodynamic positions and two stable hydrodynamic positions.
    5. Active correction, not passive design: The undesired attitude is corrected using control thrusters during atmospheric flight and a gas-based up-righting system after splashdown, not through shape alone.

    What makes dynamic instability the most dangerous phase of re-entry?

    1. Dynamic instability defined: Dynamic instability is a condition in which a re-entry module develops rapidly growing, uncontrolled oscillations as it decelerates through the atmosphere.
    2. The kite analogy: A kite without a tail wobbles and spins out of control because it lacks stability. A crew module without correction can develop similar self-growing, tumbling swings.
    3. Peak danger zone: The module shakes and wobbles most as it approaches the speed of sound, where bouncing shockwaves and swirling air violently disturb it.
    4. Mitigation tools: Small control thrusters steady the module, or parachutes deploy, before the instability grows too large.

    Conclusion

    No re-entry module design can be geometrically stable and volume-efficient at once. Every shape choice trades one property for another. Gaganyaan’s sphere-cone crew module manages this trade-off rather than eliminating it, relying on control thrusters, a gas-based up-righting system, and parachutes to correct the multiple stable orientations and dynamic oscillations that the shape alone cannot resolve. Passive aerodynamic design sets the outer limits of what is survivable; active control systems close the remaining gap to a safe splashdown.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2017] India has achieved remarkable successes in unmanned space missions including the Chandrayaan and Mars Orbiter Mission, but has not ventured into manned space mission. What are the main obstacles to launching a manned space mission, both in terms of technology and logistics? Examine critically.

    Linkage: The PYQ examines the technological and logistical challenges of India’s human spaceflight programme. The article explains how Gaganyaan’s crew module addresses key re-entry, safety, and recovery challenges, showcasing India’s progress towards successful human spaceflight.

  • Indian Grey Hornbill Returns to Gir

    Why in News?

    The Indian Grey Hornbill has recorded four consecutive years of successful breeding in Gujarat’s Gir Forest after being reintroduced in 2021, marking the revival of a species that disappeared from the region over six decades ago.

    Key Highlights

    • The findings were published in the peer-reviewed journal Birds.
    • The species had disappeared from Gir during the 1950s-1960s.
    • 40 Indian Grey Hornbills were released in two phases: 28 birds (2021-22) and 12 birds (2023)
    • 11 males were fitted with satellite transmitters to monitor movement, habitat use, and breeding.
    • The project has achieved four consecutive years of successful breeding, indicating the population is becoming self-sustaining.
    • The Indian Grey Hornbill is an important long-distance seed disperser, aiding forest regeneration.

    About Indian Grey Hornbill

    • Scientific name: Ocyceros birostris
    • IUCN Status: Least Concern (LC)
    • Habitat: Open forests, wooded farmlands, and urban parks across the Indian subcontinent.
    • Feeds mainly on fruits, insects, and small reptiles.
    • Plays a vital ecological role in seed dispersal and maintaining forest biodiversity.

    [2020] With reference to India’s biodiversity, Ceylon frogmouth, Coppersmith barbet, Gray-chinned miniyet and White-throated redstart are

    a) Birds
    b) Primates
    c) Reptiles
    d) Amphibians

  • Future-Ready Workforce for India’s Creative Economy

    Why in News?

    The Press Information Bureau (PIB) organised a ‘Varta’ workshop on “Creating a Future-Ready Workforce for India’s Creative Economy” in Nagpur.

    Key Highlights

    • India currently contributes ~3% to the global Orange Economy and aims to increase it to 12 to 15% over the next decade.
    • IICT: Indian Institute of Creative Technology is the National Centre of Excellence for the AVGC-XR sector.
    • AVGC-XR: Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming, Comics and Extended Reality.
    • Kaushal Bodh curriculum, developed by IICT in collaboration with NCERT (National Council of Educational Research and Training), will promote creativity and skill development from an early stage.
    • Proposal to establish AVGC Content Creator Labs in 500 colleges and 15,000 schools.
    • IICT will offer industry-oriented courses through a Hub-and-Spoke model, extending training beyond Mumbai to regional and semi-urban centres.
    • Focus on leveraging India’s storytelling tradition and indigenous knowledge systems to strengthen the creative economy.

    About Orange Economy

    • Refers to the creative economy based on creativity, culture, intellectual property, and digital content.
    • Includes sectors such as animation, films, gaming, music, publishing, design, advertising, media, and digital arts.

    [2019] In the context of digital technologies for entertainment, consider the following statements:
    1. In Augmented Reality (AR), a simulated environment is created and the physical world is completely shut out.
    2. In Virtual Reality (VR), images generated from a computer are projected onto real-life objects or surroundings.
    3. AR allows individuals to be present in the world and improves the experience using the camera of smart-phones or PC.
    4. VR closes the world, and transposes an individual, providing complete immersion experience.
    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    [A] 1 and 2 only

    [B] 3 and 4

    [C] 1, 2 and 3

    [D] 4 only

  • NESAC Strengthens Space-Based Governance in Northeast

    Why in News?

    The Union Minister reviewed the initiatives of the North Eastern Space Applications Centre (NESAC), highlighting its role in border management, disaster resilience, and socio-economic development in the Northeast

    Key Highlights

    • NESAC: North Eastern Space Applications Centre, located at Umiam, Meghalaya.
    • Implementing ~130 space application projects, including 78 ongoing and 50 recently completed.
    • Supporting geospatial mapping of the India-Myanmar border and inter-state boundaries.
    • Key sectors covered: Agriculture, Disaster Management, Water Resources, Forestry, Urban & Regional Planning, Geoinformatics, Satellite Communication, UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) applications
    • Promoting bamboo resource mapping in collaboration with NECBDC (North East Cane and Bamboo Development Council).
    • Strengthening flood early warning systems and the GeoTourism ‘ManzilNE’ dashboard.
    • Encouraged partnerships with State Governments, academia, startups, and industry to expand space-based applications.

    About NESAC

    • Established in 2000 as a joint initiative of ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation) and the North Eastern Council (NEC).
    • Provides space technology, remote sensing, GIS (Geographic Information System), satellite communication, and disaster management support for the eight Northeastern States.

    [2024] The North Eastern Council (NEC) was established by the North Eastern Council Act, 1971. Subsequent to the amendment of NEC Act in 2002, the Council comprises which of the following members?
    1. Governor of the Constituent State
    2. Chief Minister of the Constituent State
    3. Three Members to be nominated by the President of India
    4. The Home Minister of India
    Select the correct answer using the code given below:

    [A] 1, 2 and 3 only

    [B] 3 and 4 only

    [C] 2 and 4 only

    [D] 1, 2, 3 and 4

  • Reform Express: Eight New Railway Reforms

    Why in News?

    The Ministry of Railways announced 8 new structural reforms under the Reform Express initiative, taking the total to 17 reforms as part of the target of52 reforms in 52 weeks.

    Key Highlights

    • Aim: Reduce logistics costs, improve freight efficiency, encourage private investment, and promote green transport.
    • Fly Ash Transport: Introduction of containerised transport using ISO containers for pollution-free movement.
    • Container Sector: Unified Pan-India Container Train Operator (CTO) licence replacing multiple categories.
    • Fertiliser Transport: Simplified freight tariff and permission for containerised movement.
    • Skilling Policy: QR code-enabled certification for railway artisans in critical trades.
    • Construction Reforms: Better contractor selection, mandatory insurance, and Rail Bhoomi digital platform for land acquisition.
    • Wagon Design: Industries can now design specialised freight wagons with RDSO (Research Designs and Standards Organisation) approval.
    • Petroleum Transport: Oil companies can own or lease specialised POL (Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants) tank wagons.
    • Foodgrain Transport: Simplified freight rates and containerised transport for foodgrains, flour, and pulses.

    Significance

    • Promotes ease of doing business and multimodal logistics.
    • Shifts freight from road to rail, reducing costs and carbon emissions.
    • Supports PM Gati Shakti and sustainable freight transportation.

    [2025] Consider the following statements:
    I. Indian Railways have prepared a National Rail Plan (NRP) to create a future ready railway system by 2028.
    II. Kavach’ is an Automatic Train Protection system, development in collaboration with Germany.
    III. ‘Kavach’ system consists of RFID tags fitted on track in station section.
    Which of the statements given above are not correct?

    [A] I and II only

    [B] II and III only

    [C] I and III only

    [D] I, II and III

  • [14th July 2026] The Hindu OpED: The Right Path for India’s Nuclear Power Development 

    PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2018] With growing energy needs should India keep on expanding its nuclear energy programme? Discuss the facts and fears associated with nuclear energy?
    Linkage: This PYQ directly tests the growth-versus-safety balance that is the article’s central tension.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The Government has opened India’s nuclear sector to public and private entrants, targeting 100 GW of nuclear capacity by 2047. This expansion has revived the debate on whether India should scale up using its own cost-competitive, indigenously developed reactor technology or turn to costlier foreign technology and untested small modular reactors (SMRs).

    Why did India’s nuclear programme become self-reliant instead of import-dependent?

    1. Sanctions after 1974: International sanctions followed India’s peaceful nuclear test of 1974, cutting off external technology and material supply.
    2. Partial opening in 2008: The India-United States civil nuclear deal ended restrictions on uranium and nuclear plant imports, but retained critical exceptions.
    3. Failed import route: Negotiations with major western nuclear plant suppliers were abandoned because their plants were far too expensive.
    4. AEC-industry partnership model: Every component of India’s nuclear plants was designed, developed, tested, and manufactured domestically through partnerships between the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Indian firms.
    5. Capacity growth: Unit size rose from 220 MW to 500 MW, and 700 MW units are now operational; four units are under construction and ten more are being developed.
    6. Cost leadership: India’s nuclear plants now cost approximately $1,700 per kW, the cheapest in the world.

    Does India’s technological self-reliance weaken the case for importing foreign nuclear technology?

    1. Import proposals reflect a knowledge gap: Reports of plans to import nuclear power plants and technology indicate insufficient awareness of India’s own capabilities and price competitiveness.
    2. Market size does not equal optimal choice: India’s large potential nuclear market gives foreign suppliers a strong incentive to compete for a share of it, but supplier interest is not the same as national interest.
    3. Cost risk of importing: Importing technology at costs far higher than India’s domestic $1,700 per kW benchmark would erode the existing cost advantage.
    4. Technological vulnerability risk: Reliance on imported technology could create a new stream of dependence on foreign suppliers, reversing decades of self-reliance built after 1974.

    What technological path can deepen India’s self-reliance further?

    1. Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR) milestone: India’s 500 MW commercial fast breeder reactor is nearing commissioning after overcoming significant technical challenges.
    2. Current mainstay technology: India presently builds Pressurised Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR), which use natural uranium as fuel.
    3. Global mainstream technology: Light Water Reactors (LWR) use enriched uranium and are based on uranium enrichment technology, which is more widely used internationally than the PHWR route.
    4. Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver constraint: NSG waiver was the 2008 exemption permitting India nuclear trade despite being outside the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This waiver permanently prohibits the transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technology to India.
    5. Case for indigenous LWR development: India should build its own LWR capability given adequate resources and a dedicated programme, rather than depend on a technology transfer route that is permanently closed.

    What is India’s institutional plan to scale nuclear capacity to 100 GW by 2047?

    1. 2047 target: The Government has decided that India will develop 100 GW of nuclear power capacity by 2047.
    2. Sector opened to new entrants: Both public and private sector players can now enter nuclear power generation.
    3. Enabling legislation: The Government has enacted legislation to open the sector that is described as well-crafted and investor-friendly.
    4. AEC technology-sharing for new entrants: The AEC has offered its 200 MW nuclear plant technology to new entrants.
    5. Smaller unit development: Smaller reactor unit sizes suited to emerging market needs can also be developed domestically through AEC-Indian firm partnerships.
    6. SMR market structure: Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): compact nuclear reactors, typically under 300 MW, designed for faster deployment than conventional plants. The Indian SMR market would function as a bilateral contractual matter between generator and buyer.

    Is scaling through domestic technology more feasible than importing small modular reactors?

    1. Price competitiveness achieved: Nuclear power in India is now price-competitive against thermal power.
    2. Scale economies favour domestic technology: A large domestic programme has scale effects that lower production costs further as it expands.
    3. Execution gains from new entrants: New entrants using proven domestic technology could reduce project execution costs and time.
    4. Imported technology raises costs: Bringing in foreign technology streams and equipment that produce far more expensive electricity does not merit serious consideration.
    5. SMRs remain unproven globally: Western SMR designs remain under development, with commercial deployment yet to begin, despite being proposed as a solution for the power demands of artificial intelligence data centres.
    6. Regulatory caution on foreign SMRs: A foreign-designed SMR should have operated satisfactorily for a few years elsewhere before deployment in India; there is little justification for deploying an untested SMR in India experimentally.

    What do international cost and safety examples show for India’s nuclear expansion?

    1. South Korea (cost benchmark): South Korean nuclear plants cost around $2,200 per kW, higher than India’s $1,700 per kW despite South Korea’s mature nuclear industry.
    2. France (mature-economy cost escalation): French nuclear plants cost over $5,500 per kW, reflecting higher costs even in a country with a long-established nuclear programme.
    3. United States (highest-cost comparator): US nuclear plants cost $15,000 per kW, the highest among the countries compared, underlining India’s relative cost advantage.
    4. Chernobyl, USSR (1986) (safety-incident precedent): A single nuclear accident at Chernobyl triggered strong public backlash across the West, bringing nuclear power development to a virtual standstill in many western countries for decades. This is the specific precedent cited as the safety risk India’s new entrants must guard against.

    Why must India’s nuclear expansion prioritise safety culture over speed?

    1. Exemplary record at stake: India’s record on nuclear plant safety has been exemplary till now, and this must be preserved as expansion proceeds.
    2. Industrial safety culture risk: Rapid expansion and the entry of new players is a major challenge given India’s prevailing industrial culture, where accidents at construction sites and operating industrial plants continue to occur.
    3. Backlash risk from a single mishap: A single nuclear mishap could trigger a strong public backlash similar to the post-Chernobyl reaction in the West, capable of stalling India’s nuclear programme.
    4. Recommended sequencing for new entrants: New entrants should initially develop only a few plants and establish a rigorous internal safety culture, subject to continuous external auditing, before scaling up.
    5. Gradual scaling preserves both goals: Scaling up can then take place gradually, without needlessly risking safety, while still working toward the 100 GW target by 2047.

    Conclusion

    India’s cost and technological self-reliance in nuclear power, built through decades of AEC-industry partnership after the 1974 sanctions, gives it little reason to import costlier foreign reactor technology or untested SMRs as it opens the sector to new entrants. The unresolved question is whether India’s weak general industrial safety culture can be reformed fast enough to match the pace of an expansion aiming for 100 GW by 2047; the article’s recommendation is that new entrants build a proven internal safety culture on a few plants first, scaling gradually rather than aggressively, so that self-reliance and safety are not sacrificed for speed.

  • What Is the India-Australia Uranium Supplies Agreement

    Why in the News?

    During the Indian Prime Minister’s visit to Australia, India and Australia finalised “administrative arrangements”, enabling private Australian mining entities to sign uranium supply contracts with private Indian companies under the 2015 Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. The announcement exposes a gap between India’s decade-old nuclear cooperation status with Australia and the still-limited commercial scale of actual uranium trade.

    What Does the Finalisation of the Administrative Arrangements Actually Change?

    1. Private Contract Access: Australian private mining entities involved in uranium extraction can now conclude commercial contracts directly with Indian private sector companies and joint ventures.
    2. Existing Legal Framework Unchanged: Exports remain governed by the Australia-India Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, 2015. All uranium supplied must be used exclusively for peaceful purposes under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) watch.
    3. Domestic Trigger: The SHANTI Act, passed in December 2025, opened India’s nuclear sector to private players. This created the domestic legal space for Indian private companies to enter uranium contracts.
    4. Nature of the Change: The arrangement is administrative, not diplomatic. It operationalises an existing treaty rather than creating new cooperation.

    Why Was India Able to Access Australian Uranium Despite Not Signing the NPT?

    1. NPT Non-Signatory Status: India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This places it among a small group of non-signatory states.
    2. 2008 IAEA Safeguards Agreement: India signed a safeguards agreement with the IAEA in 2008. This followed the India-U.S. civil nuclear deal negotiated under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush.
    3. NSG Waiver: The 48-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) subsequently exempted India from the list of countries barred from nuclear-energy-related trade. This opened the legal route for supplier countries to export uranium to India.
    4. Foundation for Later Agreements: This NSG exemption became the basis for the civil nuclear agreements India signed with multiple partner countries, including Australia in 2015.
    5. Mutual Non-Proliferation Commitment: A 2009 joint statement between India and Australia recorded a mutual commitment to oppose nuclear weapons. This non-proliferation commitment was carried forward into the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement.
    6. Track Record as Enabler: India’s unblemished nuclear supply chain record and its nuclear energy programme supported Australia’s decision to treat India as an exception to its NPT-linked export policy.

    Where Does India Stand Among Australia’s Uranium Export Partners?

    1. Global Reserve Share: Australia holds more than a quarter of global uranium reserves. This gives weight to its choice of export partners.
    2. Existing Export List: Australia has exported uranium to the United States, Japan, South Korea, France, Sweden, Belgium, Finland, the United Kingdom, and Germany. All of these countries are NPT signatories.
    3. Common Mechanism: Each of these countries holds a bilateral safeguards agreement with Australia. This is the general mechanism through which Australia permits uranium exports.
    4. India’s Exceptional Position: India is the only country on this export list that has not signed the NPT. Its inclusion is an exception grounded in the NSG waiver, not in NPT membership.
    5. Limits of the Comparison: The source material lists destination countries without detailing the specific safeguard terms negotiated with each. The extent to which India’s arrangement mirrors or diverges from these bilateral agreements cannot be assessed from this article alone.

    What Explains the Timing of an Arrangement Under Negotiation for Two Decades?

    1. Long Negotiation History: Bilateral discussions on nuclear and energy cooperation between India and Australia have continued for nearly two decades. The two issues were addressed as early as November 12, 2009, during Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s visit to India.
    2. Domestic Liberalisation Push: The SHANTI Act, passed in December 2025, created the private-sector opening on the Indian side that made commercial contracts under the arrangement meaningful.
    3. Energy Security Stress: India’s energy sector faces stress from the U.S.-Israel attack on Iran. This has forced India to diversify short-term hydrocarbon sourcing from Russia, the United States, and Venezuela.
    4. Long-Term Versus Short-Term Response: The Australia arrangement is positioned as a long-term energy planning measure. It is distinct from the short-term hydrocarbon diversification driven by the Iran-related disruption.
    5. Diplomatic Occasion: Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Australia provided the occasion for finalising the arrangement. The underlying treaty framework predates the visit by over a decade.

    Does the Arrangement Mark a New Opening or Formalise an Existing Trade?

    1. Trade Already Underway: At least 300 tonnes of uranium have been exported to India since 2018, under the 2015 agreement, before the current announcement.
    2. “Test Drive” Characterisation: The scale of exports since 2018 is understood as a “test drive.” This indicates that full-scale commercial trade had not begun despite the agreement being in force since 2015.
    3. Concerns About Indian Entities: Lingering concerns about Indian entities receiving Australian uranium contributed to the cautious, limited scale of exports before the current arrangement.
    4. What Is Actually New: The finalisation of administrative arrangements addresses the private-sector contracting gap. It does not change the underlying non-proliferation or safeguards architecture, which has been settled since 2008-2015.
    5. Unresolved Question: Whether private Australian and Indian entities will conclude contracts at commercial scale remains untested. The arrangement enables contracting; it does not guarantee it.

    Conclusion

    The finalisation of administrative arrangements does not create new nuclear cooperation between India and Australia. It unlocks private-sector participation within the government-to-government framework signed in 2015. Two structural preconditions made this possible: the 2008 NSG waiver that exempted India despite its non-NPT status, and the 2025 SHANTI Act that opened India’s nuclear sector to private companies. Exports since 2018 remained a limited “test drive”; the scale of future commercial deliveries now depends on Indian and Australian private entities actually concluding contracts, not on any further diplomatic breakthrough.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2013] With growing scarcity of fossil fuels, atomic energy is gaining more and more significance in India. Discuss the availability of raw material required for the generation of atomic energy in India and in the world.

    Linkage: The PYQ directly addresses India’s nuclear energy expansion debate.The Australia uranium supply directly feeds the raw material question underlying this expansion debate.

More posts