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

Talk to Mentor

Subject: Bilateral Relations

1. Major World Events
2. India’s Interests in neighbourhood
3. Effects of our Policies

The case of India-UK Free Trade Agreement
Context
- To achieve the export target of $2 trillion by 2030, India is going the whole hog on free trade agreements (FTAs). India is negotiating FTAs with countries such as the European Union, Canada, the U.K., and Israel.
Importance of FTA
- FTA include multiple trade aspects: FTAs cover a wide array of topics such as tariff reduction impacting the entire manufacturing and the agricultural sector; rules on services trade; digital issues such as data localization; intellectual property rights that may have an impact on the accessibility of drugs; and investment promotion, facilitation, and protection.
- Great impact on economy and society: Consequently, an FTA has a far-reaching impact on the economy and society. Given this, one legitimately expects transparency and greater scrutiny of the FTA process both during and after the negotiations.
What are the problems with Indian FTA negotiations?
- Lack of transparency in negotiations: India negotiates most FTAs behind closed doors with very little information about the objectives and processes followed and negligible scrutiny.
- No robust framework for FTA negotiations: This is not the case in other countries with whom India is negotiating such an FTA. In the U.K., for example, there are several robust mechanisms that foster a certain degree of transparency in the FTA negotiations. Furthermore, there are institutional apparatuses that enable the scrutiny of the actions of the executive, during and after the signing of the FTA.
Case study of FTA framework in U.K
- Detailed information on FTA’s: Department of International Trade (DFIT), U.K., publishes a policy paper laying down the strategic objectives behind negotiating an FTA and why it is important for the U.K. to have an FTA with a particular country. This policy paper is fairly detailed listing the specific advantages of signing an FTA such as the economic gains expected, distributional impacts, the environmental impact, and the labour and human rights dimensions of the FTA.
- Inputs from stakeholders: The policy paper that the DFIT publishes also contains the inputs and responses received by various stakeholders such as businesses, non-governmental organizations, and others. Furthermore, the policy paper also explains the government view on specific suggestions
- FTA scrutiny by parliament: In the U.K., the strategic objectives identified by the government for signing an FTA are scrutinized by the U.K. Parliament. This job is performed by the International Agreements Committee (IAC) of the British Parliament. The IAC hears expert witnesses on the FTA, critically examines the government’s strategic objectives for each FTA under negotiation, and offers key recommendations wherever it finds gaps in the government’s approach. The U.K. government then responds to these recommendations.
- Parliament has to ratify the FTA: In the U.K, under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act, 2010, the executive has to lay down a treaty before the British Parliament for 21 sitting days with an explanatory memorandum before ratifying it. This allows Parliament to be apprised of the treaty the executive is going to ratify.
The contrast case of India’s FTA
- No publicly produced document in India: In India, no such document is produced publicly that makes a case for signing an FTA and assessing its impact on the environment and society at large. The Commerce Ministry the nodal body dealing with FTAs on its website provides the bare minimum information about FTA negotiations.
- No record of discussion with the stakeholders: Seemingly, the Commerce Ministry also undertakes stakeholder consultations and inter-ministerial meetings but there is no public record of these discussions and the government’s response to the concerns of stakeholders.
- No parliamentary scrutiny: In India, there is no mechanism for such parliamentary scrutiny of the executive’s actions during the FTA negotiations. India’s parliamentary system allows for department-related parliamentary committees that discuss various topics of importance and offer recommendations. However, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce (PSCC) rarely scrutinises the Indian government’s objectives behind negotiating and signing an FTA.
- No role for parliament to ratify the FTA: In India, there is no mechanism for any role of Parliament in the ratification of treaties including FTAs. Entering into treaties and matters incidental to it such as negotiations, signing and ratification are within the constitutional competence of Parliament. But, Parliament in the last seven-plus decades has not exercised its power on this issue, thus giving the executive unfettered freedom in negotiating, signing, and ratifying treaties including FTAs.
Recommendations for Improving the India’s FTA framework
- Publicise the objectives of FTA: India should take a leaf out of the U.K. book and develop a law on entering treaties including FTAs. This law should have the following parts. The executive should make a clear economic case outlining its strategic objectives publicly for entering into negotiations for a treaty such as an FTA.
- Mandatory consultation with all stakeholders: The executive should be under an obligation to consult all stakeholders, respond to their concerns and make this information publicly available.
- Dedicated parliamentary committee to scrutinize the FTA: The Indian Parliament should constitute a committee on the lines of the U.K.’s IAC that will scrutinise the strategic objectives behind entering into an FTA.
- Mechanism to ratify the FTA by parliament: The executive should place the FTA on the floor of Parliament for a certain duration, allowing Parliament to debate it, before ratifying it.
Conclusion
- While the executive’s constitutional prerogative of entering into an FTA or international treaties, in general, is indisputable, this power should be exercised in a manner that makes the executive answerable. After all, an integral facet of democracy is to hold the executive to account for its actions. It should be no different for negotiating international treaties including FTAs.
November 17, 2022
What is the East Asia Summit?
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar addressed the East Asia Summit on the last day of his visit to Cambodia, as the three-day Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit concluded.

East Asia Summit
- Simply, the EAS is an ASEAN initiative and refers to the annual Meeting of Heads of States/Governments of these countries, where they are able to discuss common concerns and interests.
- Beginning in 2005, 16 participating countries comprised EAS, with their first meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
- These members were the 10 ASEAN countries, Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea.
- ASEAN’s 10 member countries are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.
- The United States and the Russian Federation joined at the 6th East Asia Summit in 2011.
Why was it created?
- Its creation was based on the idea of enhancing cooperation among East Asian countries and those in the neighbouring regions.
- Six priority areas of cooperation were identified – environment and energy, education, finance, global health issues and pandemic diseases, natural disaster management, and ASEAN Connectivity.
Topics discussed

The following issues have been discussed by the countries
- Chinese claims over the South China Sea
- United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),
- Terrorism
- Actions of North Korea and
- Conflict situation in Myanmar
EAS’s links with India
- This year marks the 30th anniversary of ASEAN-India relations and is being celebrated as the ASEAN-India Friendship Year.
- In a joint statement, ASEAN-India acknowledged the deep civilizational linkages, maritime connectivity, and cross-cultural exchanges between Southeast Asia and India.
- All these have grown stronger over the last 30 years, providing a strong foundation for ASEAN-India relations.
New developments
- India has announced an additional contribution of USD 5 million to the ASEAN-India science and technology fund.
- It would enhance cooperation in sectors of public health, renewable energy and smart agriculture.
(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
November 15, 2022
Fateful Triangle China,USA and India and Changing World Order
Context
- America’s national security strategy issued by the Joe Biden Administration last week and the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Congress this week promise to reshape the geopolitics of Asia and the Indo-Pacific.
Historical background of USA-CHINA
- Context of World War II: Asia has seen multiple phases in the US-China relationship. In the second half of the 19th century, American missionaries began to arrive in China and began to generate empathy for the nation. During World War II, Washington backed Chinese nationalists in their fight against Japanese occupation.
- US efforts to isolation China: The US tried to isolate China from 1949 when the communists prevailed over the nationalists.
- Cooperation to counter Soviet: The 1970’s saw the US and communist China come together to counter the Soviet Union.
- Multiple Economic engagement: The 1980s saw the beginning of an economic engagement that turned into a huge commercial and technological partnership from the 1990s.
What is the USA’s assumption and China’s ambition?
- China as responsible stakeholder: The US establishment dismissed the idea of China as potential threat and bet that Beijing could become a “responsible stakeholder” in the world order.
- Democratization of Chinese society is inevitable: America also believed that China’s growing economic prosperity would inevitably lead to greater democratisation of its society.
- Visible decline of west: China, however, has steadily moved in the other direction, especially under Xi, who has convinced himself that the West is in terminal decline.
- China’s ambition to change the world order: Xi is determined to seize this moment to reshape the Asian as well as the global order to suit Chinese interests. At the same time, China has become increasingly repressive at home.
- Explicit expression of ambition: Xi made no effort to hide China’s new geopolitical ambition nor has he been defensive about his authoritarian rule. This, in turn, bestirred the US into rethinking its China policy in the second decade of the 21st century.
How China is asserting itself?
- Asserting own version of Global order: Beijing, argues that recent history points to the superiority of the Chinese system over the Western one. And it offers its own versions of a global order – economic, political and social. Since the end of the Cold War, ideological arguments had receded into the background but are now back in significant play.
- China offering model Economic Globalization: China continues to sing praises of the model of economic globalisation that has facilitated Beijing’s rise over the last four decades. But under Xi, China has emphasised the importance of self-reliance in the name of a “dual circulation strategy”.
- Leveraging world’s dependence for strategic gain: At the same time, Beijing has sought to enhance the world’s dependence on its economy and leverage it for strategic benefit. The profound political backlash against trade and economic cooperation with China in the US led to the questioning of economic globalisation in the Trump years.
- China building the powerful military: As China became a richer country, it also focused on building a powerful army. Using both the instruments of hard power, China under Xi has actively sought to undermine US alliances in Asia and mount pressure on American forward military presence in Asia.
How USA’s policy is changing towards China?
- Structured policy of rivalry: The traditional soft attitude to China yielded to a more confrontational approach during the Donald Trump presidency. Joe Biden has developed that into a more structured policy of competing with China.
- Combine challenge of China and Russia: The National Security Strategy of the Trump administration postulated the return of great power rivalry and the need to respond to the challenges presented by Russia and China. Biden’s NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY builds on that proposition and identifies China as the more demanding challenge than Russia, despite Moscow’s aggression against Ukraine.
- China is more capable than Russia: In his foreword to the National security strategy, Biden says “Russia poses an immediate threat to the free and open international system, recklessly flouting the basic laws of the international order today, as its brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has shown.” He names China, on the other hand, as “the only country with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to advance that objective”. While the European challenge is real, the Biden Administration now sees the Indo-Pacific as the principal strategic theatre.
- Projecting China as autocracy against the democracy: The US has sought to locate the conflict with China (and Russia) as a fundamental struggle between “democracies and autocracies”. Recognising the limited enthusiasm for the framing in Asia, the National security strategy now talks of broadening the coalition to include countries that may not be democratic. Beijing, on the other hand, argues that recent history points to the superiority of the Chinese system over the Western one.
- Building the bilateral alliances: The US is now pushing back. The principal instrument in the US response has been rebuilding the traditional bilateral alliances with Japan and Australia as well as constructing new partnerships with countries like India and developing new regional coalitions.
India’s role in shaping the world order
- Convergence of National interest wit USA: Today, Indian and American policies are converging. For both Delhi and Washington, Beijing presents the main national challenges.
- Reducing economic dependence on China: On the economic and technological front, both India and the US are trying to reduce their exposure to China.
- Keeping independent foreign policy: On the geopolitical front, a US plan to look beyond formal alliances suits Delhi, which is wedded to an independent foreign policy.
- Opportunity for cooperation: It is never easy to translate abstract convergence into concrete policies. The current churn in Asia provides Delhi and Washington with a historic opportunity to build on the new convergences in the areas of trade, technology, and geopolitics.
Conclusion
- changing world order will have short term repercussion on economic front for developing country like India. India has a great opportunity to be the rule maker of new global order rather than just a rule follower. World order of 21^st century will revolve around the fateful triangle of India, China and USA.
Mains Question

Q.Why the present world order is challenged by China? What role India can play as rule maker of new World order?

UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
October 19, 2022
What is China’s ‘Wolf Warrior’ Diplomacy?
Chinese President Xi Jinping will get an endorsement for a third term as President. His “wolf warrior” style of diplomacy has particularly attracted attention.

What does Wolf Warrior’ Diplomacy mean?
- A term that gained popularity, especially after Xi became President, “wolf warrior diplomacy” is a tactic for the Chinese government to extend its ideology beyond China and counter the West and defend itself.
- It is an unofficial term for the more aggressive and confrontational style of communication that Chinese diplomats have taken to in the last decade.
- A 2015 Chinese action film, titled ‘Wolf Warrior’, and its sequel have served as the inspiration for the term.
- The films, with their nationalist themes and dialogues, focus on Chinese fighters who frequently face off against Western mercenaries.
Do you know?

Panchasheel also called the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence was signed on 29p April 1954 and since then it has become a guiding principle of India’s bilateral relations with other countries.

Why China resorts to such diplomacy?

The change in strategy has been attributed to many reasons, such as:
1. Xi’s more authoritarian tendencies as compared to earlier leaders
2. Deteriorating US-China relations under former US President Donald Trump and
3. Coronavirus pandemic-related accusations on China, etc.
What does this look like in practice?
- Some examples can be seen in the form of messaging on social media too, where Chinese officials are quick to counter any allegations by the West and proactively launch attacks.
- For instance, in 2021 Chinese government spokesperson Lijian Zhao tweeted a digitally morphed photo of an Australian soldier killing a child, claiming the Australian army was killing children in Afghanistan.
- This led the Australian Prime Minister to announce he would seek an official apology, but China did not budge.
- But this is not limited to Western countries.
Indian experience
- The new ‘wolf warrior diplomacy’ confronts head-on any criticism of China in the public sphere.
- They lecture host governments and don’t always show up when ‘summoned’ by foreign offices.
- Delhi has been at the receiving end for a while — especially during the recent crises of Doklam and Ladakh.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
October 17, 2022
Pakistan to take part in SCO anti-terror exercise hosted by India
Pakistan has been invited to the closing ceremony of the ongoing Joint Anti-Terror Exercise (JATE) within the ambit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) being hosted by India.

What is the news?
- The National Security Guard (NSG) is hosting the multinational JATE “Manesar Anti-Terror 2022”, under the framework of the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS).
- Pakistan team would be participating in the event as a member of the SCO.
What is SCO RATS?
- Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) is a permanent organ of the SCO which serves to promote cooperation of member states against the three evils of terrorism, separatism and extremism.
- It is headquartered in Tashkent.
- Its head is elected to three-year term.
- Each member state of SCO sends permanent representative to RATS
About Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s (SCO)
- The SCO, in which China plays an influential role, is also comprised of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, India and Pakistan.
- India and Pakistan were admitted into the bloc in 2017.
- It is Eurasian economic, political and security organisation headquartered in Beijing, China.
- Its main objective is military cooperation between member states.
- It is primarily centred on security-related concerns of Central Asian members with main threats being terrorism, separatism and extremism.
- It was established in June 2001 as a successor of Shanghai Five mechanism which was established in 1996 with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan as members.
- Iran, Afghanistan, Belarus and Mongolia enjoy observer status of SCO.
- Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Cambodia, Sri Lanka and Nepal are dialogue partners of SCO.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
October 11, 2022
Places in news: Solomon Islands
Solomon Islands PM has assured Australia that his nation will not allow a Chinese military presence in its territory.

Where is the Solomon Islands located?
- The Solomon Islands is a sovereign country consisting of six major islands and over 900 smaller islands in Oceania, to the east of Papua New Guinea and northwest of Vanuatu.
- Its capital, Honiara, is located on the largest island, Guadalcanal.
- It is part of the ethnically Melanesian group of islands in the Pacific and lies between Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu.
- The country takes its name from the Solomon Islands archipelago, which is a collection of Melanesian islands that also includes the North Solomon Islands (a part of Papua New Guinea).
- It excludes outlying islands, such as the Santa Cruz Islands and Rennell and Bellona.
Quick recap of its past
- The islands, which were initially controlled by the British Empire during the colonial era, went through the hands of Germany and Japan.
- It then went back to the UK after the Americans took over the islands from the Japanese during World War II.
- The islands became independent in 1978 to become a constitutional monarchy under the British Crown, with a parliamentary system of government.
- Nevertheless, its inability to manage domestic ethnic conflicts led to close security relations with Australia, which is the traditional first responder to any crisis in the South Pacific.
How did China enter the picture?
- Earlier this year, the Solomon Islands established a security agreement with China, saying it needed Beijing’s assistance with its domestic security situation.
- But the announcement had rattled the west, esp. the US, Australia and others in the Indo-Pacific region.
- The concerns were that the agreement could potentially lead to a Chinese military base on the island nation and a gain in power-projection capabilities.
- At that time, following intense scrutiny, the Solomon Islands had denied that the agreement would allow China to establish a naval base.
- The Island insisted that the agreement was only to assist the Solomon Islands with what he called “hard internal threats”.
What is the Solomon Islands’ stance?
- The government has asked all partner countries with plans to conduct naval visits or patrols to put them on hold until a revised national mechanism is in place.
- The revised national mechanism applied to all foreign vessels seeking access to the country’s ports.
- The nation wanted to build up its own naval capacity.
- It has some unfortunate experiences of foreign naval vessels entering its waters without any diplomatic clearance.
What is behind China’s growing influence in the region?
- There is no dispute that China has been rapidly increasing its presence and influence in the region for over three decades, particularly in the South Pacific.
- Certainly Beijing views the Pacific Island region as an important component of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
- Specifically, it sees the region as a critical air freight hub in its so-called Air Silk Road, which connects Asia with Central and South America.
Concerns of the West
- The United States and its regional allies, such as Australia and New Zealand, are concerned that the China-Solomon Islands security pact allows Chinese naval vessels to replenish there.
- That could open the door to a Chinese naval base, which would significantly extend China’s military reach in the South Pacific.”
- It is likely that this security agreement between China and the Solomon Islands has been driven by, what the CFR calls, Beijing’s “sense of vulnerability” in the region.
What is the rationale for the Solomon Islands’ increasing proximity to China?
- The Solomon Islands had cultivated strong ties with Taiwan, which ended with the emergence of the current government in Honiara.
- In 2019, the regime change switched Taiwan for China.
- This was supposedly after Beijing offered half a billion US dollars in financial aid, roughly five times what Taiwan spent on the islands in the past two decades.
- It has been alleged by the pro-Taiwan Opposition that the incumbent government has been bribed by China.
Why is China interested in the Solomon Islands?
- Isolating Taiwan: The Solomon Islands was one among the six Pacific island states which had official bilateral relations with Taiwan.
- Supporter in UN: The small Pacific island states act as potential vote banks for mobilising support for the great powers in international fora like the United Nations.
- Larger EEZ: These states have disproportionately large maritime Exclusive Economic Zones when compared to their small sizes.
- Natural resources: Solomon Islands, in particular, have significant reserves of timber and mineral resources, along with fisheries.
- Countering US: But more importantly, they are strategically located for China to insert itself between America’s military bases in the Pacific islands and Australia.
What does this mean for the established geopolitical configuration in the region?
- Diminishing western influence: The Pacific islands, in the post-World War II scenario, were exclusively under the spheres of influence of the Western powers, in particular, the US, UK, France and Australia and New Zealand.
- Inserting into western hegemony: All of them have territorial possessions in the region, with the three nuclear powers among them having used the region as a nuclear weapons testing ground.
- Shifting of dependencies: The smaller island nations of the region are heavily dependent on them, especially Australia as it is a resident power.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
October 8, 2022
Why India has lashed out at the US over its F-16 package to Pakistan?
EAM S Jaishankar has lashed out at the US for its decision to provide Pakistan with a $450 million package for F-16 case fighter aircraft upgrade.

F-16 and Pakistan
- The F-16 is a single-engine multirole fighter aircraft originally developed by General Dynamics for the United States Air Force (USAF).
- Designed as an air superiority day fighter, it evolved into a successful all-weather multirole aircraft.
- The F-16 were inducted into Pakistan Air Force in 1983 during the Soviet-Afghan War.
Suspicion over US move
- This is the first American military assistance package to Pakistan after the Trump Administration.
- Mr Trump ended defence and security co-operation with Pakistan in 2018 after accusing it of giving only “lies and deceit” for the billions of dollars that the US had “foolishly” given it.
What specific reasons has the Biden Administration given for its decision?
- As per US version, the proposed sale does not include any new capabilities, weapons, or munitions.
- The upgrade package aimed to retain interoperability with US and partner forces in ongoing counter-terrorism efforts and in preparation for future contingency operations.
Why did US provide F-16 to the US?
- India has been concerned about the F-16s from the time the US first gave Pakistan F-16s as a reward for its assistance in the first Afghan war.
- The US then had supplied weapons and money to Pakistan to unleash armies of jihadists against the Soviet Army.
- When the US objective was achieved with the Soviet Union’s departure from Afghanistan, the US too resized its relations with Pakistan.
- The Pressler Amendment, aimed against Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions, froze it out of military assistance.
- A decade later, the Bush Administration not only approved the release of previously blocked F-16s, but also provided a refurbishment package, and sale of new F-16s.
India’s concerns
- As pointed out by EAM, how the F-16s help in counter-terrorism remains unclear.
- Jaishankar questioned the merits of the US-Pakistan partnership.
- He said that the relations had “not served” either country (but created more troubles for India).
- This move by the US will alter the basic military balance in the region.
- The decision to provide military aid to Pakistan incensed India as the F-16 was used against Indian warplanes following the 2019 Balakot air strikes.
Conclusion
- Washington’s $450 million package has only resurrected old prejudices centred on the US not being a dependable ally for ever.
- India needs to respond firmly and in no uncertain terms to the PAF’s F-16 upgrade programme to convey the message that India cannot be taken for granted.
- India will have to effectively enhance the conventional combat capability of the IAF to continue to meet the challenge of a resurgent PAF.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
September 28, 2022
Bangladesh favours early solution for Teesta Dispute
India and Bangladesh should resolve all bilateral issues, including the differences over the waters of the Teesta, at an early date, said Bangladesh PM on her visit to India.

What is the news?
- Bangladeshi PM is on a visit to India.
- Both ministers discussed the long-standing disputes over Teesta river water sharing.
- The two sides shared 54 rivers that required both nations to work together and share “environmental responsibility” in areas such as the Sundarbans.
About Teesta River
- Teesta River is a 315 km long river that rises in the eastern Himalayas, flows through the Indian states of Sikkim and West Bengal through Bangladesh and enters the Bay of Bengal.
- It is a tributary of the Brahmaputra (known as Jamuna in Bangladesh), flowing through India and Bangladesh.
- It originates in the Himalayas near Chunthang, Sikkim and flows to the south through West Bengal before entering Bangladesh.
- Originally, it continued southward to empty directly into the Padma River but around 1787 the river changed its course to flow eastward to join the Jamuna river.
- The Teesta Barrage dam helps to provide irrigation for the plains between the upper Padma and the Jamuna.
What is the dispute about?
- The point of contention between India and Bangladesh is mainly the lean season flow in the Teesta draining into Bangladesh.
- The river covers nearly the entire floodplains of Sikkim while draining 2,800 sq km of Bangladesh, governing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.
- For West Bengal, Teesta is equally important, considered the lifeline of half-a-dozen districts in North Bengal.
- Bangladesh has sought an “equitable” distribution of Teesta waters from India, on the lines of the Ganga Water Treaty of 1996, but to no avail.
- The failure to ink a deal had its fallout on the country’s politics, putting the ruling party of PM Sheikh Hasina in a spot.
Q.The hydrological linkages between India and Bangladesh are a product of geography and a matter of shared history. Discuss this statement in line with the Teesta water sharing dispute.

The deal
- Following a half-hearted deal in 1983, when a nearly equal division of water was proposed, the countries hit a roadblock. The transient agreement could not be implemented.
- Talks resumed after the Awami League returned to power in 2008 and the former Indian PM Manmohan Singh visited Dhaka in 2011.
- In 2015, PM Modi’s visit to Dhaka generated more ebullient lines: deliberations were underway involving all the stakeholders to conclude the agreement as soon as possible.
Issues from the Indian side
- It remains an unfinished project and one of the key stakeholders — West Bengal CM is yet to endorse the deal.
- Her objection is connected to “global warming. Many of the glaciers on the Teesta basin have retreated.
- The importance of the flow and the seasonal variation of this river is felt during the lean season (from October to April/May) as the average flow is about 500 million cubic metres (MCM) per month.
- The CM opposed an arrangement in 2011, by which India would get 42.5% and Bangladesh 37.5% of the water during the lean season, and the plan was shelved.
Why does this deal matters?
- India and Bangladesh have resolved border problems through the Land Boundary Agreement of 2015.
- However, both nations have locked horns over the sharing of multiple rivers that define the borders and impact lives and livelihoods on both sides.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
September 27, 2022
India raises Sri Lankan Tamil issue in UN
India voiced concern over the “lack of measurable progress” in Sri Lanka’s promised political solution to the long-pending Tamil national question.

Back in news: Tamil Issue
- India has made an unexpected (for SL) reference to the crisis-hit island nation’s “debt-driven” economy in the context of its current crisis.
- Indian delegation noted the lack of measurable progress by Government of Sri Lanka on their commitments of a political solution to the ethnic issue.
- It sought for full implementation of the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, delegation of powers to Provincial Councils and holding of Provincial Council elections at the earliest.
Has India retreated from supporting Sri Lanka?
- India’s statement comes ahead of a resolution on Sri Lanka that will likely face a vote at the Council.
- Since 2009, India has voted thrice in favour of the UN resolution on Sri Lanka — two were critical — and abstained twice, in 2014 and 2021.
- Irrespective of its vote, India has consistently underscored the need for a political settlement within the framework of a united Sri Lanka, ensuring justice, peace, equality and dignity for the Tamils of Sri Lanka.
Issues faced by Tamils in Sri Lanka
- According to Freedom House’s Freedom in the World 2016 report on Sri Lanka, Tamils report systematic discrimination in areas including government employment, university education, and access to justice.
- A large portion of the Tamil population still remains displaced.
What is the Tamil issue in Sri Lanka?
- Violent persecution against the Tamil population erupted in the form of the 1956, 1958, 1977, 1981 and 1983 anti-Tamil pogroms in Sri Lanka.
- Over 13 years since the end of Sri Lanka’s civil war, in which tens of thousands of civilians were killed and disappeared, survivors continue demanding justice and accountability for war-time crimes.
- In the post-war years, Sri Lanka’s human rights defenders have frequently flagged concerns over persisting militarisation, especially in the Tamil-majority north and east; repression, and the shrinking space for dissent.
What is the 13^th Amendment?
- It is an outcome of the Indo-Lanka Accord of July 1987, signed by the then PM Rajiv Gandhi and President J.R. Jayawardene, in an attempt to resolve the ethnic conflict and civil war.
- The 13th Amendment led to the creation of Provincial Councils and assured a power-sharing arrangement to enable all nine provinces in the country, including Sinhala majority areas, to self-govern.
- Subjects such as education, health, agriculture, housing, land and police are devolved to the provincial administrations.
Why is it contentious?
- The 13th Amendment carries considerable baggage from the country’s civil war years.
- It was opposed vociferously by both Sinhala nationalist parties and the LTTE.
- The opposition within Sri Lanka saw the Accord and the consequent legislation as an imprint of Indian intervention.
- It was widely perceived as an imposition by a neighbour wielding hegemonic influence.
- The Tamil polity, especially its dominant nationalist strain, does not find the 13th Amendment sufficient in its ambit or substance.
- However, some find it as an important starting point, something to build upon.
Why India objects over this?
- Because of restrictions on financial powers and overriding powers given to the President, the provincial administrations have not made much headway.
- In particular, the provisions relating to police and land have never been implemented.
Why is it significant?
- Till date, the Amendment represents the only constitutional provision on the settlement of the long-pending Tamil question.
- In addition to assuring a measure of devolution, it is considered part of the few significant gains since the 1980s, in the face of growing Sinhala-Buddhist majoritarianism.
UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)
September 26, 2022
Constitutional Breakdown in Nepal
Nepal is in a constitutional crisis with major organs of the state confronting each other as the Chief Justice is under undeclared house arrest and the PM openly criticizing the President.

Nepal polity in turmoil
- Prime Minister who is backed by the chiefs of four major coalition partners, is at loggerheads with President.
- The President might seek to rule as an extra-constitutional authority beyond the sanction and imagination of the Constitution that completed six years last week.
Genesis of the crisis: Row over Citizenship
- The current crisis began after President refused to ratify Nepal’s citizenship bill, which was sent to her twice after it was passed by both Houses of Parliament over the span of a month.
- The bill seeks to give citizenship by birth and by descent to an estimated 500,000 individuals.
- It was also sought to provide non-voting citizenship to non-resident Nepalis living in non-SAARC countries.
Constitutional crisis in Nepal: A backgrounder
- Nepal transitioned into a democracy beginning with the fall of the monarchy in 2006 and the subsequent election of the Maoist government in 2008.
- The emergence of the multiparty system was followed by the adoption of a constitution on September 20, 2015.
- All Nepalese citizens born before this date got naturalised citizenship.
- But their children remained without citizenship as that was to be guided by a federal law which has not yet been framed.
- This amendment Act was expected to pave the way to citizenship for many such stateless youth as well as their parents.
What are the issues with the Act?

Ans. Gender bias
- The main criticism against the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2006 is that it goes against established parameters of gender justice.
- According to Article 11(2b), a person born to a father or a mother with Nepalese citizenship can get citizenship by descent.
- Another article says a person who is born to a Nepalese mother (who has lived in the country) and an unidentified father will also get citizenship by descent.
- But this section appears humiliating for a mother as she has to declare that her husband is unidentified for the child to be eligible for citizenship.
- In case of a Nepalese father, such declarations are not required.
Why has the President refused to sign the Act?
- Bhandari is the first female President of Nepal.
- Her refusal to sign the Act has drawn attention to certain sections in the constitution that thrusts greater responsibility on women.
- For example, Article 11 (5) says that a person who is born to a Nepalese mother and an unidentified father can be granted citizenship by descent.
- Next, it says that in case the unidentified father turns out to be a foreigner, the citizenship by descent would be converted to naturalised citizenship.
- Furthermore, it supports punitive action against the mother if the father is found later.
Indian connection to the issue
- There is an unarticulated concern in the orthodox sections that Nepalese men, particularly from the Terai region, continue to marry women from northern India.
- These people feel that Nepalese identity would be undermined.
- Because of this “Beti-Roti” (Nepalese men marrying Indian women) issue, many women could not become citizens of Nepal.
- They were subjected to the infamous seven-year cooling off period before they could apply for citizenship in Nepal.
- As such women were stateless, children of such families were also often found to be without Nepalese citizenship.
- However, the new amendments have done away with the cooling off period for these stateless women.
September 24, 2022