A recent study (2025, Science) found young neurons in the adult brain, challenging the old belief that Neurogenesis (neurons formation) occur only in childhood.
What is Neurogenesis?
Overview: Formation of new neurons from stem or progenitor cells.
Established in Animals: Well-known in mice, rats, and monkeys; also active during human childhood development.
Debate in Humans: Longstanding question if it continues in adulthood, especially in the hippocampus (brain’s memory and learning hub).
Hippocampal Role: The dentate gyrus is believed to sustain lifelong neurogenesis, helping in memory formation, flexibility, and stress control.
Key findings of the Study:
Conducted by: Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, published in Science (2025).
Study: Analysed 400,000 neurons from post-mortem hippocampus samples of people aged from infants (<1 year) to 78 years.
Methodology: Used single nuclei RNA sequencing with machine learning to detect signs of new cells.
Outcome: Validated with RNAscope and Xenium imaging, which confirmed the presence of neural stem cells, progenitors, and young neurons (neuroblasts) even in adolescent and adult brains.
Why are the findings important?
Evidence in Adults: Strong proof that new neurons form in adult brains, not just in early years.
Evolutionary Insight: Suggests neurogenesis is a conserved feature across mammals, not unique to certain species.
Brain Functions: Explains memory flexibility, ability to overwrite memories, and resilience to stress.
Therapeutic Potential: Opens up scope for regenerative treatments in brain disorders like Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and dementia by stimulating local progenitor cells.
Lifestyle Link: Implies that exercise, social connections, and stress levels could influence how much neurogenesis happens in individuals.
[UPSC 2024] Which one of the following is synthesised in human body that dilates blood vessels and increases blood flow?
Semaglutide, a drug originally developed for type 2 diabetes but also highly effective for weight reduction has been added to the WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines (EML).
What is Semaglutide?
Overview: A GLP-1 receptor agonist drug developed for Type 2 Diabetes, also effective in weight reduction.
Mode of Action: Stimulates insulin secretion, lowers blood glucose, slows gastric emptying, and suppresses appetite.
WHO Recognition (2025): Added to the 24th EML, highlighting its dual role in diabetes and obesity management.
Significance: Its inclusion pressures health systems to expand access and make it more affordable worldwide.
Relevance for India: With 100+ million diabetics (2nd highest globally) and a rising obesity burden, Semaglutide could be a public health game-changer if affordability improves.
About WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines (EML):
What is it: A global reference by WHO listing the most effective, safe, and essential medicines for priority healthcare needs.
History: First introduced in 1977 to improve access in developing countries; updated every 2 years by a WHO Expert Committee.
Structure:
Core list: Basic medicines usable with limited infrastructure.
Complementary list: Need specialised training, facilities, or are costlier.
Global Impact: Over 150 countries use EML to build national lists for procurement, reimbursement, and universal health coverage (UHC).
Selection Criteria:
Public health relevance.
Proven efficacy and safety.
Cost-effectiveness compared to alternatives.
Quality, stability, and reliable formulations.
Preference for single-compound formulations unless combinations are better.
[UPSC 2024] In which of the following are hydrogels used?
1. Controlled drug delivery in patients 2. Mobile air-conditioning systems 3. Preparation of industrial lubricants
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Options: (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3*
The United States is preparing to reinterpret the 1987 Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) to expand exports of heavy attack drones, like the MQ-9 Reaper, to partner countries.
About Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR):
Formation: Established in 1987 by the G-7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, USA) to prevent the spread of missiles and UAVs capable of delivering nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.
Membership: Today, 35 countries are members; India joined in 2016.
Nature: Not a treaty but a voluntary political understanding where members implement export control guidelines.
Coverage:
Category I items: Complete missile/UAV systems with ≥500 kg payload and ≥300 km range, major subsystems, and production facilities (exports presumed denied).
Category II items: Less sensitive or dual-use components/technologies; exports subject to national discretion under strict licensing.
Purpose: To limit missile proliferation while allowing peaceful space and aviation cooperation.
About the Recent Policy Change on MTCR:
US Reinterpretation (2025):
Large unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the MQ-9 Reaper will be treated as “aircraft” instead of missile systems.
This removes the “strong presumption of denial” that earlier restricted their export under MTCR.
Objective: To make the US the leading drone supplier, countering competition from China, Israel, and Turkiye.
Implications:
Opens the door for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) of heavy attack drones to partners like Saudi Arabia, India, and Indo-Pacific allies.
Still subject to US reviews for regional stability, end-use monitoring, tech security, and human rights compliance.
Facilitates India–US space and defence cooperation, lowering barriers for joint ventures and technology partnerships.
[UPSC 2022] Consider the following:
1. Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank 2. Missile Technology Control Regime 3. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation
India is a member of which of the above?
Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 3 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3
These masterclasses are packed with value. They are conducted in private with a closed community. We rarely open these webinars for everyone for free. This time we are keeping it for 300 seats only.
[UPSC 2016] Justify the need for FDI for the development of the Indian economy. Why there is gap between MOUs signed and actual FDIS? Suggest remedial steps to be taken for increasing actual FDIs in India.
Linkage: The article highlights that although India records high gross inflows ($81 bn in FY 2024–25), massive repatriations and outward FDI reduce net retained capital, weakening industrial growth, directly reflecting the gap between headline FDI figures and actual developmental impact, just like the MOU–FDI gap in the question. Structural barriers such as regulatory opacity, policy unpredictability, and weak infrastructure explain why capital commitments don’t translate into long-term projects. The remedial steps suggested, simplified regulations, policy consistency, and infrastructure upgrades, align with the measures demanded in the UPSC 2016 question.
Mentor’s Comment
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has long been celebrated as one of the most powerful engines of India’s growth since the reforms of 1991. It brought in capital, technology, and global linkages. Yet, beneath the shining surface of record inflows lies a disquieting reality, unprecedented outflows, disinvestments, and a shift away from long-term industrial commitments. This article explores the nuanced challenges in India’s FDI ecosystem, the divergence between inflows and outflows, and the urgent need for reforms.
Introduction
FDI has been central to India’s growth story, particularly after liberalisation in 1991, modernising industries and integrating India into global markets. While e-commerce and IT saw transformative capital inflows, recent years mark a complex shift. Despite India recording $81 billion in gross FDI inflows in FY 2024–25, net retained capital fell drastically due to massive repatriations and rising outward investments by Indian firms. This has profound implications for industrial growth, job creation, and long-term economic resilience.
Divergence Between Inflows and Outflows
Gross inflows: $81 billion in FY 2024–25, up 13.7% from last year.
Sharp withdrawals: Disinvestments surged by 51% in FY 2023–24 to $44.4 billion and further to $51.4 billion in FY 2024–25.
Net retained capital: Fell to just $0.4 billion after accounting for outflows, a stark erosion of confidence.
Investor behaviour shift: From long-term commitments to short-term tax arbitrage and profit-seeking.
The Decline of Manufacturing in FDI Trends
Declining share: Manufacturing’s share in FDI dropped to a mere 12% of total inflows.
Short-term focus: Preference for rent-seeking sectors such as financial services, hospitality, and energy distribution.
Weak multiplier effects: Unlike manufacturing or infrastructure, these sectors do not create broad-based industrial or technological growth.
The Surge of Indian Capital Abroad
Outward FDI: Rose from $13 billion in FY 2011–12 to $29.2 billion in FY 2024–25.
Reasons cited: Regulatory inefficiencies, infrastructure gaps, and unpredictable policies.
Destinations: Nearly half of outflows directed toward developed economies with stable tax regimes and strategic resources.
Governance inconsistencies: Contrast between reforms on paper and actual execution.
Dominance of tax havens: Mauritius and Singapore continue to account for bulk inflows, driven by treaty-based tax strategies.
Why the Long Term Matters
FDI as stability cushion: Supports balance of payments, currency stability, and external accounts.
Declining net inflows: Curtails India’s monetary policy flexibility.
RBI’s concern: Outflows align with global emerging market trends but pose systemic risks if unchecked.
Need for committed capital: Advanced manufacturing, clean energy, and technology sectors require sustained inflows.
What Needs to Be Done
Simplify regulations: Reduce compliance burden and procedural delays.
Ensure policy consistency: Long-term clarity to build investor trust.
Upgrade infrastructure: Logistics, energy, and digital backbones to attract manufacturing FDI.
Strengthen institutions: Predictable legal frameworks and efficient governance.
Invest in human capital: Education and skilling to meet industry demands.
Conclusion
India’s FDI story is at a crossroads. Gross inflows remain high, but capital is no longer staying long enough to catalyse industrial growth. The rising tide of disinvestment by foreign firms and outward FDI by Indian companies reflects systemic inefficiencies, weak confidence, and policy unpredictability. If India aspires to be a global investment hub, reforms must focus on quality, durability, and alignment of capital with national developmental goals.
Value Addition
Official Definition of FDI
IMF/UNCTAD definition: A cross-border investment where a resident entity in one economy obtains a lasting interest and a significant degree of influence in the management of an enterprise in another economy.
India (RBI): “Investment by a person resident outside India in the capital of an Indian company under Schedule 1 of FEMA Regulations, 2000.”
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Routes in India
Automatic Route: No prior approval required; investor only informs RBI after investment.
Examples: 100% FDI in e-commerce marketplace model, renewable energy, and computer software.
Government Route: Prior approval of the Government of India required.
Examples: FDI in multi-brand retail, defence beyond 74%, and print media.
Regulation of FDI in India
Ministry of Commerce and Industry: Frames FDI policy, announced via Consolidated FDI Policy Circular.
Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT): Nodal body for policy formulation and coordination.
RBI: Governs reporting, inflows, and compliance under FEMA, 1999.
Sectoral Regulators: Defence, Insurance, Banking, Telecom, etc. may impose additional conditions.
Barriers to FDI in India
Regulatory opacity: Complex rules and compliance increase transaction costs.
Infrastructure gaps: Logistics bottlenecks, power shortages, and urban congestion raise costs.
Legal uncertainties: Contract enforcement and dispute resolution remain weak.
Governance challenges: Land acquisition, bureaucratic delays, and inconsistent state-level policies.
Global Comparative Analysis
China: Strong manufacturing-centric FDI policies, large SEZs, predictable incentives, and world-class infrastructure helped it emerge as the world’s largest FDI recipient.
Vietnam: Stable policy frameworks, competitive labour costs, and integration into global supply chains (electronics, textiles) made it a hub for relocated investments.
Singapore & Mauritius: Dominant sources of FDI into India, largely due to tax treaty advantages rather than productive investment.
India: Despite being among the top FDI destinations (UNCTAD report), outflows and repatriations remain high, reflecting weak long-term retention.
The Great Nicobar Island Project, with an estimated expenditure of ₹72,000 crore, has sparked unprecedented controversy. Instead of strengthening India’s ecological security and inclusive growth, the project threatens to uproot indigenous communities such as the Nicobarese and the Shompen, destroy one of the world’s richest biodiversity hotspots, and expose the island to severe natural disaster risks. By bypassing constitutional bodies, statutory protections, and scientific warnings, the project raises fundamental questions about governance, justice, and sustainability in India’s developmental trajectory.
Uprooting Tribal Communities
Nicobarese displacement: The project site overlaps with ancestral villages of the Nicobarese, already displaced once by the 2004 tsunami. Their hope of return will now be permanently extinguished.
Shompen threat: The Shompen, classified as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG), face cultural and ecological extinction as their reserve land is denotified and forests destroyed.
Violation of tribal safeguards: Article 338A mandates consultation with the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, which was bypassed. The Tribal Council’s objections were ignored after being “rushed” into signing a no-objection letter, later revoked.
Mockery of Legal and Regulatory Safeguards
Social Impact Assessment failure: The 2013 Act on Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation excluded Nicobarese and Shompen from consideration, denying them stakeholder status.
Forest Rights Act ignored: The Shompen’s authority to regulate and protect forests was bypassed.
Constitutional neglect: Bodies like NCST and local tribal councils were side-lined, undermining democratic accountability.
The Farce of Compensatory Afforestation
Massive tree felling: The Ministry projects 8.5 lakh trees may be cut, but independent estimates put the figure between 32–58 lakh.
Afforestation mismatch: Compensatory afforestation is planned in Haryana, thousands of kilometres away, with a completely different ecology.
Mining contradiction: A quarter of this afforestation land has been auctioned for mining, nullifying the mitigation strategy.
CRZ violation: Port site falls under CRZ 1A, which prohibits construction due to turtle nesting sites and coral reefs.
Ecological and Wildlife Concerns
Nicobar long-tailed macaque: Primatologists’ warnings on its survival risks were ignored.
Sea turtle nesting mis-assessed: Surveys were conducted off-season, compromising accuracy.
Dugong impact underestimated: Drone-based surveys only covered shallow waters.
Biased assessments: Reports were allegedly conducted under duress, undermining credibility.
A Disaster-Prone Location
Tsunami precedent: In 2004, the island subsided by 15 feet.
Seismic zone risk: A 6.2 magnitude earthquake in July 2025 reinforced its vulnerability.
Jeopardising investment: Infrastructure and lives face catastrophic risk from earthquakes and tsunamis.
Conclusion
The Great Nicobar Project symbolizes an ecological and humanitarian misadventure where short-term ambitions eclipse constitutional morality, environmental prudence, and tribal justice. The survival of the Nicobarese and Shompen, along with an irreplaceable ecosystem, hangs in the balance. True development must integrate ecological sustainability and social justice rather than sacrifice them at the altar of misplaced mega-infrastructure.
Value Addition
Way Forward
Inclusive Development with Tribal Consent
Ensure free, prior, and informed consent of Nicobarese and Shompen communities in line with the Niyamgiri judgment (2013).
Empower tribal councils in decision-making as mandated by the Forest Rights Act (2006).
Strengthening Legal and Institutional Safeguards
Consult the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) and respect constitutional provisions under Article 338A.
Strengthen Social Impact Assessments with participation of affected communities.
Rethinking Compensatory Afforestation
Undertake afforestation within island ecosystems, not in distant states like Haryana.
Promote ecosystem restoration rather than mere plantation drives.
Recognise Great Nicobar as an Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) under Environment Protection Act.
Disaster-Resilient Planning
Recognise that Great Nicobar lies in Seismic Zone V and redesign infrastructure accordingly.
Adopt a low-impact development model suited for fragile ecosystems (eco-tourism, research hubs, small-scale renewable energy).
Alternative Growth Models
Focus on sustainable livelihoods for locals (fisheries, forest produce, heritage tourism).
Leverage the island’s location for strategic security through minimal-impact naval installations, avoiding large-scale civilian displacement.
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2017] ‘Climate Change’ is a global problem. How India will be affected by climate change? How Himalayan and coastal states of India will be affected by climate change?
Linkage: The Great Nicobar Project directly links to this PYQ as it illustrates how climate change impacts combine with ill-planned development to heighten risks. Rising sea levels and intensifying cyclones threaten India’s coastal states, while Great Nicobar, lying in a seismically active and tsunami-prone zone, showcases the compounded vulnerability of fragile ecosystems and communities. Thus, it exemplifies how coastal regions face existential risks when climate change interacts with unsustainable projects.
India has long struggled with gender inequities in education. Despite government efforts like Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao and steady progress in enrolment, where girls now form 48% of the school population and even surpass men in gross enrolment ratios in higher education, financial investment by families continues to tilt in favor of boys. The 80th round of the National Sample Survey (Comprehensive Modular Survey on Education) reveals that boys consistently receive higher expenditure allocations across school stages and states, highlighting deep-rooted social biases in household decision-making.
Significance of the recent NSS report
New evidence: The 2024 survey covered 52,085 households and data for 57,742 students, making it one of the most comprehensive datasets on education expenditure.
Contradiction with enrolment success: Despite progress in closing gender enrolment gaps, the spending patterns show that financial priorities still favor boys.
Striking gap: In urban India, families spend ₹2,791 less per girl compared to boys, while in rural India, boys get 18% more spent on them.
Long-term concern: Such expenditure biases translate into inequities in learning outcomes, employability, and overall empowerment.
Gender patterns in household spending on education
All stages of schooling: Per-student expenditure on girls is consistently lower than boys from pre-primary to higher secondary.
Rural-urban divide: Rural families spend ₹1,373 more on boys; urban families spend 30% more on boys by higher secondary level.
Course fees: Families pay on average 21.5% more in fees for boys.
Private vs government schooling:
58.4% of girls are in government schools.
34% of boys access private unaided schools compared to 29.5% of girls.
Tuition classes: While enrollment in coaching is similar (26% girls vs 27.8% boys), expenditure differs, by higher secondary, families spend 22% more on tuition for boys.
State-level variations in educational expenditure
Delhi, MP, Rajasthan, Punjab: More than 10 percentage points gender gap in private school enrolment.
Tamil Nadu and Kerala: Gender parity—boys and girls access government and private schools almost equally.
Northeast States: Reverse trend—more girls enrolled in private schools.
Telangana, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal: Families spend vastly more on boys at higher secondary level.
Example: In Tamil Nadu, families spend ₹35,973 on boys vs ₹19,412 on girls.
Kerala, Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh: More spending on girls at higher secondary, partly due to safety-related transport costs.
Gender gap in private coaching expenditure
Himachal Pradesh: Families spend ₹9,813 per boy vs ₹1,550 per girl on higher secondary tuition.
Bihar, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu: Also show significant tuition expenditure gaps.
Implication: Coaching is seen as a gateway to competitive exams and better career prospects—girls being left out deepens structural disadvantages.
Broader implications for gender equality
Hidden inequality: Enrolment parity does not mean equity in quality or investment.
Future workforce impact: Lower spending on girls limits their human capital development and perpetuates the gender pay gap.
Policy blind spots: Subsidies and scholarships exist, but social norms continue to undervalue daughters’ education.
Way Forward
Bridging the gender gap in educational expenditure requires a multi-pronged approach that addresses not just affordability but also deep-rooted social norms.
Strengthening targeted subsidies: Expansion of schemes like Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao, free bicycles for girls, and conditional cash transfers for secondary and higher education can encourage families to invest equally in daughters.
Equalising access to quality education: Improving the quality of government schools and providing digital learning resources will reduce the need for costly private schooling and tuitions, thereby narrowing gendered disparities.
Awareness and behavioural change: Community-level campaigns must challenge patriarchal mindsets that undervalue girls’ education. Civil society and self-help groups can be leveraged to reshape family-level decision-making.
Transport and safety interventions: Ensuring safe and affordable transport for girls, particularly in higher secondary education, will address a key cost component that discourages investment.
Monitoring and accountability: Data from National Sample Survey and Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE+) should be used to regularly monitor gendered expenditure gaps and inform evidence-based policies.
Integrating ethics and social responsibility: Education policies must go hand in hand with fostering a sense of justice, fairness, and equal opportunity, so that families see daughters as equal bearers of human capital.
Conclusion
The NSS findings show that while India has moved forward in closing the gender gap in enrolment, it still struggles with a silent financial discrimination in household educational spending. Unless families start valuing daughters’ education equally, not just in words but also in investment, true gender equality in education will remain elusive. Corrective measures through policy nudges, financial incentives, and awareness campaigns are essential to bridge this invisible divide.
Value Addition
Key Concepts
Gender Parity Index (GPI): Ratio of female-to-male values in education indicators; India has achieved near-parity in enrolment but lags in investment equity.
Human Capital Theory: Education as an investment leading to productivity and growth; unequal spending weakens women’s contribution to the economy.
Intersectionality: Gender bias in expenditure intersects with class, caste, and rural-urban divides, amplifying inequalities.
Data and Reports
National Sample Survey (2024): Reveals consistent gaps in household expenditure on girls’ education across stages and regions.
World Economic Forum Gender Gap Report (2024): India slipped in rankings, with education a major drag despite enrolment progress.
ASER Report (Annual Status of Education Report): Points to quality issues in rural schools, often affecting girls disproportionately.
UNESCO (Global Education Monitoring Report, 2023): Highlights that globally, girls are more likely to be excluded from secondary and higher education due to cost factors.
Government Policies and Schemes
National Education Policy (NEP) 2020: Emphasises inclusive, equitable education and gender-sensitive curricula.
Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (2015): Social mobilisation for improving girls’ survival, protection, and education.
National Scheme of Incentives to Girls for Secondary Education (NSIGSE): Financial support to reduce dropouts.
Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV): Residential schooling for disadvantaged girls in Classes 6–12.
Comparative International Experience
Bangladesh: Successful in reducing gender disparity through stipend schemes for girls, free textbooks, and subsidies—leading to higher female enrolment in secondary education.
Nordic Countries(Sweden, Norway, Finland): Achieved near-complete gender equity in education by ensuring free schooling, universal childcare, and strong social security systems that reduce household bias.
Rwanda: Introduced Gender-Responsive Budgeting—allocating funds specifically to address gender gaps in education, which India can emulate.
Quotes (Useful for Essay/Ethics/GS answers)
“If you educate a man you educate an individual, but if you educate a woman you educate a family.” — Charles M. Cooper
“Investment in girls’ education is not charity, it is the smartest investment a country can make.” — UN Secretary-General António Guterres
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2022] The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 remains inadequate in promoting incentive-based system for children’s education without generating awareness about the importance of schooling. Analyse.
Linkage: The NSS 80th round shows families spend 18–30% more on boys than girls, privileging them in private schools and coaching despite RTE’s universal access. This proves that incentive-based provisions under the RTE Act remain inadequate without tackling deep-rooted gender norms. Hence, awareness generation, gender-responsive budgeting, and social mobilisation are essential complements to legal entitlements.
UPSC usually picks such topics when bilateral tensions affect the functioning of multilateral forums. The 2023 question on SCO shows how UPSC links current diplomatic flashpoints with deeper strategic issues. It doesn’t just ask “What happened?” but wants to know “What does it say about India’s foreign policy?” Aspirants often falter here in two ways. First, they focus only on the event (like India walking out of the SCO statement) but miss the bigger theme – India’s regional challenges and the limits of multilateralism. Second, they don’t connect India’s larger strategy (like multi-alignment or strategic autonomy) with daily diplomacy. This article helps bridge that gap. It doesn’t stop at headlines – it decodes why India acted the way it did and what that says about our broader regional approach. Sections like “Rethinking India’s Regional Policy” and “Impact of the Virus of Conflict” provide real insight into the limitations of consensus-based diplomacy and India’s tightrope walk between security concerns and diplomatic engagement.
PYQ ANCHORING
GS 2: ‘Virus of Conflict is affecting the functioning of the SCO’. In the light of the above statement point out the role of India in mitigating problems. [2023]
Microtheme: Groupings involving Immediate and Extended neighbours
During the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao, India refused to endorse the joint statement. It was due to the absence of references to cross-border terrorism and the recent Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu & Kashmir. This marked a rare moment of open disagreement within the SCO. India’s decision highlighted the persistent challenge of aligning national security priorities within multilateral forums. It also underscored the diplomatic tightrope it walks – balancing strategic autonomy with active participation in diverse geopolitical groupings.
In this context, important questions emerge: How do bilateral tensions affect the functioning of multilateral organizations like the SCO? Does India’s approach reflect a maturing strategic autonomy or a growing frustration with the limitations of consensus-based diplomacy?
Rethinking India’s Regional Policy
India’s refusal to sign the joint statement at the 2025 SCO Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao highlights a deeper dilemma in India’s regional engagement. China’s shielding of Pakistan, and Russia’s growing strategic dependence on Beijing, limits the space for India’s diplomatic manoeuvres in such forums. The core issues are as follows:
Issue
Description
Examples
1. Overdependence on Multilateral Forums
India expects multilateral forums (like SCO, SAARC) to support its core concerns, especially terrorism, but is often blocked by mutual conflicts China-Pak axis.
lack of consensus in SAARC due to India-Pak tensions.
2. Ineffective Isolation of Pakistan
India aims to isolate Pakistan diplomatically, but Pakistan retains leverage through China, OIC, and occasional US support.
China’s shielding of Pak at global forums.
3. Strained Ties with Bangladesh
Recent alienation of Dhaka, despite historical and cultural ties.
Recent tilt of Bangladesh towards China; reduced trust post CAA-NRC debates.
4. Neglect of Smaller Neighbours
A perception persists that India takes its smaller neighbours for granted, leading them to seek Chinese support as a counterbalance.
Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives increasingly engaging with China for infrastructure, aid.
5. Weak Economic Regional Integration
India has not led or facilitated strong economic integration in South Asia, unlike ASEAN or EU models.
SAFTA remains ineffective; low intra-SAARC trade.
6. Reactive, Not Strategic Approach
India often reacts to crises rather than proactively shaping the regional agenda or investing in long-term ties.
Delayed responses to political shifts in Maldives, Nepal, and Afghanistan.
7. China’s Expanding Influence
China’s growing strategic and economic footprint in South Asia and the Indian Ocean poses challenge in India’s backyard.
China’s BRI projects in India’s neighbourhood like Hambantota port in Sri Lanka.
Impact of ‘Virus of Conflict’ on SCO
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), envisioned as a platform for regional cooperation and security, is increasingly being undermined by internal divisions and unresolved conflicts among its member states. These tensions – whether bilateral, ideological, or geopolitical – act like a “virus of conflict,” slowing down consensus, weakening joint action, and diluting the organization’s core purpose.
Dimension
How Conflict Affects SCO
Examples
Bilateral Tensions
Bilateral conflicts between member states create roadblocks to consensus-based decision-making, weakening SCO’s unity and effectiveness.
Disagreements over defining and acknowledging terrorism reduce trust and hinder collective action on common threats.
India’s refusal to sign SCO joint statement (Qingdao 2025) due to absence of cross-border terrorism reference.
Economic & Connectivity Initiatives
Conflicting national interests and lack of trust affect integration projects like BRI and regional trade corridors.
India’s opposition to China’s BRI and CPEC through PoK; Lack of progress on SCO-wide Free Trade Area.
Internal Central Asian Disputes
Border and ethnic disputes between Central Asian states distract SCO from larger regional goals and risk internal fragmentation.
Repeated clashes between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan; Instability in Afghanistan impacting SCO agendas.
Consensus-Based Decision Making
Presence of rivalries slows down or paralyzes decision-making as every member must agree, giving conflicting parties veto-like power.
Delayed or watered-down statements on terrorism due to objections from Pakistan or China.
Perception and Global Image
SCO’s inability to act decisively on security issues despite being a ‘security bloc’ affects its credibility on the world stage.
Viewed as anti-Western or as a China-dominated bloc rather than a neutral problem-solving platform.
Way Forward
1. Voice for Accountability on Terrorism
India must continue to insist on clear, unambiguous condemnation of cross-border terrorism. By walking out of vague statements, like it did in Qingdao, India sends a strong message without disengaging from the platform. India’s firm stance serves as a moral compass within SCO, even if uncomfortable for some members.
2. Champion Strategic Autonomy
India’s presence in both the SCO and Quad reflects its multi-alignment strategy. It can bridge the East-West divide by being the voice of non-aligned yet assertive diplomacy, showing that one can work with China and Russia without compromising on core interests. This balance makes India an example of “issue-based alliances” in a fragmented world.
3. Promote Practical Cooperation
While political and security issues may hit roadblocks, India can lead in areas with common ground – such as: Disaster management, Cybersecurity, Counter-narcotics and Digital public infrastructure (e.g., UPI model).These issues bypass political red lines and offer scope for real cooperation.
4. Quiet Diplomacy to Defuse Tensions
India can use SCO sidelines for backchannel talks with adversaries like China and Pakistan, helping prevent escalation while avoiding media glare. SCO’s informal setting allows space for dialogue, even when formal ties are strained.
5. Push for Reform within SCO
India can advocate for institutional reforms, including a conflict resolution mechanism and greater transparency in decision-making—making the SCO more resilient to internal rifts.
In summary, India can’t control SCO dynamics, but it can shape them. By standing firm on its red lines while pushing practical cooperation, India can position itself as a responsible stakeholder, not a passive participant—one that engages without compromising.
#BACK2BASICS: About SCO
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a Eurasian political, economic, and security bloc formed in 2001, evolving from the 1996 “Shanghai Five” (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan). With Uzbekistan’s entry in 2001, it became the SCO. Current members include China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, India, Pakistan (joined in 2017), Iran (2023), and Belarus (2024).
Significance of SCO
Geopolitical Weight: SCO is the world’s largest regional bloc by area and population, covering 80% of Eurasia and 40% of global population. It includes major powers like China, Russia, India, and resource-rich Central Asian nations.
Economic & Energy Strength: Members account for about 30% of global GDP and hold 20% of oil and 44% of gas reserves. The SCO Energy Club fosters energy cooperation. It also supports connectivity projects, aligning with China’s BRI (though India has reservations).
Security & Counter-Terrorism: Through RATS (Tashkent), SCO facilitates joint action against terrorism, separatism, and extremism, making it Central Asia’s key security forum.
Regional Stability: SCO contributes to peace and cooperation in Eurasia, especially Central Asia, and offers a forum to discuss regional issues like Afghanistan.
Dialogue Among Rivals: It offers a rare space for dialogue between adversaries (e.g., India-China, India-Pakistan), promoting de-escalation and diplomacy.
Consensus-Based Process: All members have an equal say, despite China-Russia dominance – ensuring India’s voice is preserved.
Balancing Act for India: SCO membership allows India to balance its role in both Western (Quad) and non-Western blocs, maintaining strategic autonomy.
Challenges within SCO
Bilateral Conflicts
India-China tensions (e.g., Ladakh standoff) and India-Pakistan animosity (cross-border terrorism) often disrupt consensus.
Central Asian disputes (e.g., Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan) also affect regional stability.
No effective conflict resolution mechanism exists within SCO.
Power Imbalance: China and Russia dominate the bloc, raising concerns of unequal influence – e.g., SCO’s official languages are Chinese and Russian.
Weak Economic Integration: Absence of a free trade agreement limits SCO’s economic potential compared to blocs like ASEAN or the EU.
Perception Problem: Often viewed as anti-Western, affecting its global engagement and image as a neutral platform.
India’s BRI Concerns: India opposes the BRI, particularly CPEC through PoK, isolating it within SCO’s connectivity agenda.
Narrow Mandate: Strong focus on security sidelines other critical areas like economic and cultural cooperation.
SMASH MAINS MOCK DROP
In the light of growing internal contradictions within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), critically examine India’s role in balancing strategic autonomy with multilateral engagement. Can India reshape such groupings to serve its regional interests?
Sri Lankan President Dissanayake’s visit to Katchatheevu Island, the first ever visit by a head of state, revived debates on the island’s history and ownership.
About Katchatheevu Island:
Overview: Small uninhabited island of about 285 acres in the Palk Strait, ~33 nautical miles from Jaffna (Sri Lanka) and close to Ramanathapuram (Tamil Nadu).
History: Once under the Raja of Ramnad (TN), later became disputed during British rule.
Agreements: Under 1974 and 1976 pacts, India (under Indira Gandhi govt.) recognised Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and gave up traditional fishing rights.
Religious Site: Home to St. Anthony’s Catholic Shrine, visited annually by Indian and Sri Lankan fishermen during a joint festival with visa waiver.
Ecology: Though barren and unsettled, serves as a resting point for fishermen and supports marine biodiversity.
Disputes around Katchatheevu:
Fishing Conflicts: Tamil Nadu fishermen often cross into Sri Lankan waters due to declining catch in Indian waters, leading to frequent arrests by the Sri Lankan Navy.
Bottom-Trawling Issue: Indian trawlers use bottom-trawling, banned in Sri Lanka, which damages marine ecosystems and escalates tensions.
Political Demands: All TN political parties have demanded retrieval of the island.
National Politics: Issue often resurfaces during elections, with claims that earlier governments “easily gave away” Katchatheevu.
Official Position: India clarified in 2013–14 that no sovereign territory was ceded since the island was disputed, not fully under India’s control.
Core Problem: Lies not in sovereignty but in unsustainable bottom-trawling practices and the livelihood crisis faced by Tamil Nadu fishermen.
[UPSC 2020] Consider the following statements:
1. The value of Indo-Sri Lanka trade has consistently increased in the last decade.
2. “Textile and textile articles” constitute an important item of trade between India and Bangladesh.
3. In the last five years, Nepal has been the largest trading partner of India in South Asia.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (2020)
Options: (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 only* (c) 2 only (d) 3 only
