💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Global Groupings and Conventions

Important International institutions, agencies and fora- their structure, mandate.

  • AUKUS Partnership for Indo-Pacific

    The Biden administration has announced a new trilateral security partnership for the Indo-Pacific, between Australia, the U.K., and the U.S. (AUKUS).

    What is AUKUS?

    • AUKUS, as the partnership is being called, will strive over the next 18 months to equip Australia with nuclear propulsion technology.
    • As part of this, Australia will acquire nuclear-powered submarines with help from the UK and the US.
    • It will also involve a new architecture of meetings and engagements between the three countries, as well as cooperation across emerging technologies (applied AI, quantum technologies and undersea capabilities).
    • Australia’s nuclear-powered submarines, when they deploy, will be armed with conventional weapons only and not nuclear weapons.

    Why such an alliance?

    • Tensions have been high between Australia and an increasingly assertive China, its largest trade partner.
    • Australia banned Chinese telecom giant Huawei in 2108 and its PM called for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19 last year.
    • China retaliated by imposing tariffs on or capping Australian exports.

    Not to substitute Quad or others

    • This alliance does not and will not supersede or outrank existing arrangements in the Indo-Pacific region such as the Quad, which the US and Australia form with India and Japan, and ASEAN.
    • AUKUS will complement these groups and others.

    Significance

    • There has been only one other time that the US has shared as “extremely sensitive” submarine propulsion technology — more than 60 years ago, back in 1958, with Great Britain.
    • The US is working to move past the 20-year war in Afghanistan and the chaotic U.S. exit from Kabul.
    • The Biden Administration has put countering China at the center of his economic and national security efforts, describing it as the biggest challenge of this era.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India-Australia relations

    Context

    A few days ago, India’s Defence Minister and External Affairs Minister held the inaugural ‘2+2’ talks with their Australian counterparts.

    Transforming relations between India-Australia

    • Both are vibrant democracies which have respect for international laws and a belief in the equality of all nations irrespective of their size and strength.
    • Both draw their congruence from a rule-based international order, believe in inclusive economic integration in the Indo-Pacific region, and face challenges from a belligerent China.
    • Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison elevated their bilateral strategic partnership to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in June 2020.
    • Growing convergence on issues: There is a growing convergence of views on geo-strategic and geo-economic issues.
    • The convergence is backed by a robust people-to-people connection.
    • Both countries have stepped up collaborations through institutions and organisations on many issues in bilateral, trilateral, plurilateral and multilateral formats.
    • Bilateral security cooperation: Given their common security challenges and in order to enhance regional security architecture, both countries have intensified bilateral security cooperation.
    • Further, elevation of their ‘2+2’ Foreign and Defence Secretaries’ Dialogue to the ministerial level emphasises the positive trajectory of their transforming relations.
    • They have also stepped up security dialogue with key partner-countries to deepen coordination in areas where security interests are mutual.
    • The Malabar naval exercise by the Quad (Australia, India, Japan, the U.S.) is a step in this direction.
    • Partnership with like-minded countries:  Beyond bilateralism, both countries are also entering into partnerships with like-minded countries, including Indonesia, Japan and France, in a trilateral framework.
    • Trade ties: Trading between India and Australia has seen remarkable growth in recent years.
    • Two-way trade between them was valued at $24.4 billion in 2020. 
    • Trade is rapidly growing and encompasses agribusiness, infrastructure, healthcare, energy and mining, education, artificial intelligence, big data and fintech.
    • An early harvest agreement by December will pave the way for an early conclusion of a bilateral Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement between both countries.

    Issues in deeper economic integration

    • High tariff on agri products in India: India has a high tariff for agriculture and dairy products which makes it difficult for Australian exporters to export these items to India.
    • Non-tariff barrier in Australia: At the same time, India faces non-tariff barriers and its skilled professionals in the Australian labour market face discrimination.

    Consider the question “A growing convergence of views on geo-strategic and geo-economic issues between Indian and Australia makes it imperative to forge a partnership guided by principles with a humane approach. Comment.” 

    Conclusion

    The Quad has gained momentum in recent months. The time is ripe for these countries to deliberate on a ‘Quad+’ framework. The geo-political and geo-economic churning in international affairs makes it imperative for India and Australia to forge a partnership guided by principles with a humane approach.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Can the SCO be the regional body that stabilizes Afghanistan?

    On the face of it, the summit meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) this week in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, is well placed to lead the stabilization of Afghanistan after the American retreat.

    About SCO

    • After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the then security and economic architecture in the Eurasian region dissolved and new structures had to come up.
    • The original Shanghai Five were China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
    • The SCO was formed in 2001, with Uzbekistan included. It expanded in 2017 to include India and Pakistan.
    • Since its formation, the SCO has focused on regional non-traditional security, with counter-terrorism as a priority.
    • The fight against the “three evils” of terrorism, separatism and extremism has become its mantra. Today, areas of cooperation include themes such as economics and culture.

    India’s and the SCO

    • India and Pakistan both were observer countries.
    • While Central Asian countries and China were not in favor of expansion initially, the main supporter — of India’s entry in particular — was Russia.
    • A widely held view is that Russia’s growing unease about an increasingly powerful China prompted it to push for its expansion.
    • From 2009 onwards, Russia officially supported India’s ambition to join the SCO. China then asked for its all-weather friend Pakistan’s entry.

    Afghanistan and SCO

    • Afghanistan has been engaged with the SCO for over 15 years.
    • In 2012, Afghanistan became an observer in the SCO when then-Afghan president Hamid Karzai visited China.
    • In 2015, Kabul applied for full membership in the group.
    • Kabul sought to be a member of the SCO as it believes that it is a natural candidate.
    • Geographically, Afghanistan is a part of the SCO region.

    Limited (or No) progress made by SCO

    • For all the political hype, the SCO has not deepened regionalism in Central Asia.
    • Two decades after its formation — it was set up just weeks before the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington — the institutional promise of the SCO remains just that — a promise.
    • Seen from the subcontinent, the SCO certainly looks better than the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
    • That India and Pakistan, whose differences have prevented even regular meetings of SAARC, are actively participating in the SCO, would point to its attractiveness.
    • But then SAARC is such a low bar.

    Opportunities for role-play in Afghanistan

    The crisis in Afghanistan presents a major opportunity for the SCO to realize its regional ambitions.

    • Involvement of regional superpowers: The SCO’s importance for Afghanistan seems self-evident when you look at its sponsors and members. Its founding leaders are the two great powers of the east — Russia and China.
    • Neighborhood are members: Its other initial members were Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan to the north and northeast of Afghanistan.
    • Observers vested interest: Besides Afghanistan, Iran, Belarus and Mongolia are observers. Iran is said to be on track for full membership.
    • Many dialogue partners: The SCO has a number of “dialogue partners”. They include Armenia and Azerbaijan from the neighboring Caucasus region and Turkey a step further to the West. Nepal and Sri Lanka from the subcontinent and Cambodia from southeast Asia are also dialogue partners.

    Issues with SCO

    • China centrism: For an organization that bears the name of Shanghai, but is focused on Central Asia, its associates look disparate.
    • Lack of coherence: The Central Asian members of the SCO have quarrels of their own, and have struggled to develop collective approaches to their common regional security challenges.
    • Dint go beyond dialogues: As it broadened its membership, the SCO has, unsurprisingly, struggled to deepen institutional cooperation.
    • Not comprehensive: There is also one important country missing in the mix. It is Turkmenistan, which shares an 800 km border with Afghanistan and a 1,150 km border with Iran.
    • Neutrality of members: The organizing principle of Turkmenistan rulers is absolute “neutrality” — think of it as an extreme form of “non-alignment”. It refuses to join any regional institution, political or military.
    • Individual interests: Russia’s effort to build a regional institution in its Central Asian periphery ran parallel to its plans for the so-called “strategic triangle” with China and India. India and Pakistan, needless to say, are poles apart on the Taliban.

    No common interest in Afghan Peace

    • The US military retreat from Afghanistan has brought cheer to both Moscow and Beijing, although publicly they criticize President Joe Biden’s hasty retreat.
    • The US retreat might weaken the glue that binds Moscow and Beijing in Central Asia or tightens it.
    • Although Russia and China are closer to each other than ever before, their interests are not entirely the same in Central Asia.

    Russian alternatives to SCO

    (1) Central Security Treaty Organisation

    • While military confidence-building measures have grown under the SCO banner, Russia had its own security organisation for the region, called the Central Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO).
    • Three of the SCO members — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan — along with Armenia and Belarus are members of the CSTO.
    • Russia sees itself as the sole protector of the former Soviet Republics and may not be ready to share that role with China — “yes” to coordination, but “no” to a Sino-Russian security dyarchy.

    (2) Eurasian Economic Union

    • Moscow also appears reluctant to back Chinese proposals to promote trade integration under the SCO banner; it prefers the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) under its own leadership.
    • China is not a member of either CSTO or EAEU. This is one reason for the weakness of SCO regionalism.

    Other deterrents

    (1) Affinity with Taliban

    • China has openly admitted to cooperating with the Taliban by restoring all formal diplomatic ties. It is the first such country to acknowledge the Taliban.
    • Turkmenistan too, which is not part of SCO, has been quite open to engaging the Taliban in sync with its principles of neutrality.
    • Some Russian analysts see Turkmenistan as the potential weak link in the defense against the Taliban’s potential threats to the region.
    • Uzbekistan seems open to a cautious engagement with the Taliban.

    (2) Iranian aspirations for unwarranted interference (just like Turkey does regarding Kashmir)

    • Iran, which has ethnic and linguistic links with the Persian-speaking Tajiks, appears equally worried about the Taliban’s policies towards minorities.
    • As Moscow and Beijing, Tehran was happy to see the Americans leave in humiliation and appeared hopeful of a positive engagement with the Taliban.
    • Those hopes may have been suspended for now, if not discarded.

    What can the SCO do now?

    • The Afghanistan debacle presents an opportunity for the SCO to play a constructive role in meeting the region’s burgeoning security challenge.
    • Providing humanitarian relief, tending to refugees, facilitating an inclusive dialogue and national reconciliation constitute immediate and long-term goals in which the organization can fill a role.
    • The SCO can also pressure the Taliban to share power with other domestic actors and refrain from providing sanctuary to foreign terror organizations (through foreign funds from Saudi*).
    • It can suspend Afghanistan’s observer status, curtail border traffic or withhold recognition, investments, and aid, should Kabul be found wanting.

    Way forward

    • While the SCO is not an impressive regional institution, it remains an important diplomatic forum.
    • India has sought to make full use of the SCO’s diplomatic possibilities without any illusions about its effectiveness.
    • At the SCO summit this week, PM Modi would remind other leaders of the “three evils” that the SCO set out to defeat — terrorism, extremism, and separatism.
    • Few would disagree that the Taliban embodied all the three sins in the past. Today, the Taliban and its mentor Pakistan say the sinner wants to become a saint.
    • India must focus on finding common ground with those members of the SCO who do share India’s concerns about Afghanistan.

    Conclusion

    • Given this divergence, it is unlikely that the SCO can come up with a “regional solution” for the Afghan crisis.
    • The only real Afghan convergence today is between Pakistan and China.
    • Expect them to try and nudge the SCO towards a positive engagement with the Taliban.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India appoints Sherpa for G20 Summit

    The government has appointed a union minister as Sherpa for the G20 summit.

    Who is a Sherpa (in IR context)?

    • A sherpa is the personal representative of a head of state or government who prepares an international summit, particularly the annual G7 and G20 summits.
    • Between the G7 summits, there are multiple sherpa conferences where possible agreements are laid out.
    • This reduces the amount of time and resources required at the negotiations of the heads of state at the final summit.
    • The name sherpa—without further context—refers to sherpas for the G7 summit, but the designation can be extended to different regular conferences where the participation of the head of state is required.
    • The sherpa is generally quite influential, although they do not have the authority to make a final decision about any given agreement.
    • The name is derived from the Sherpa people, a Nepalese ethnic group, who serve as guides and porters in the Himalayas, a reference to the fact that the sherpa clears the way for a head of state at a major summit.

    About G20

    • Formed in 1999, the G20 is an international forum of the governments and central bank governors from 20 major economies.
    • Collectively, the G20 economies account for around 85 percent of the Gross World Product (GWP), 80 percent of world trade.
    • To tackle the problems or address issues that plague the world, the heads of governments of the G20 nations periodically participate in summits.
    • In addition to it, the group also hosts separate meetings of the finance ministers and foreign ministers.
    • The G20 has no permanent staff of its own and its chairmanship rotates annually between nations divided into regional groupings.

    Aims and objectives

    • The Group was formed with the aim of studying, reviewing, and promoting high-level discussion of policy issues pertaining to the promotion of international financial stability.
    • The forum aims to pre-empt the balance of payments problems and turmoil on financial markets by improved coordination of monetary, fiscal, and financial policies.
    • It seeks to address issues that go beyond the responsibilities of any one organization.

    Members of G20

    The members of the G20 consist of 19 individual countries plus the European Union (EU).

    • The 19 member countries of the forum are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.
    • The European Union is represented by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank.

    Its significance

    • G20 is a major international grouping that brings together 19 of the world’s major economies and the European Union.
    • Its members account for more than 80% of global GDP, 75% of trade and 60% of population.

    India and G20

    • India has been a member of the G20 since its inception in 1999.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Abraham Accords as India’s West Asia bridge

    The recent visit by the Indian Air Force chief to Israel offers a window to study how New Delhi is taking advantage of the Abraham Accords deal signed between Israel and a consortium of Arab States.

    Try this question:

    What are Abraham Accords? Discuss how the Israel-Gulf synergy could impact India’s relations with Israel.

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”bvxbuw1pzf” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″][/wpdiscuz-feedback]

    What are Abraham Accords?

    • The Israel–UAE normalization agreement is officially called the Abraham Accords Peace Agreement.
    • It was initially agreed to in a joint statement by the United States, Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on August 13, 2020.
    • The UAE thus became the third Arab country, after Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994, to agree to formally normalize its relationship with Israel as well as the first Persian Gulf country to do so.
    • Concurrently, Israel agreed to suspend plans for annexing parts of the West Bank. The agreement normalized what had long been informal but robust foreign relations between the two countries.

    Do you know?

    Abraham was the first of the Hebrew patriarchs and a figure revered by the three great monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

    New friendships

    • For common enemy: Externally, Israel, the UAE and Bahrain share the common threat perception of Iran.
    • Upholding modern values: They are relatively more modern societies that share the overarching and immediate priority of post-pandemic economic resuscitation.
    • Extended cooperation: They have lost no time to set up logistics such as Internet connectivity and direct flights to pave the way for more active economic engagement.

    India and the Gulf

    • Now India has stronger, multifaceted and growing socioeconomic engagements with Israel and the Gulf countries.
    • With over eight million Indian diasporas in the Gulf remitting annually nearly $50 billion, annual merchandise trade of over $150 billion.
    • It sources nearly two-thirds of India’s hydrocarbon imports, major investments, etc. Hence it is natural to ask how the new regional dynamic would affect India.
    • India has acquired a large and rewarding regional footprint, particularly as the preferred source of manpower, food products, pharmaceuticals, gem and jewellery, light engineering items, etc.
    • Indians are also the biggest stakeholders in Dubai’s real estate, tourism, and Free Economic Zones.
    • In the evolving scenario, there may be scope for a profitable trilateral synergy, but India cannot take its preponderance as a given.

    The Israel-GCC synergy

    • Culture: Even the Israeli Arabs may find career opportunities to bridge the cultural divide. Israel is known as the start-up nation and its stakeholders could easily fit in the various duty-free incubators in the UAE.
    • Tourism: Tourism, real estate and financial service sectors on both sides have suffered due to the pandemic and hope for a positive spin-off from the peer-to-peer interactions.
    • Defense: Israel has niche strengths in defence, security and surveillance equipment, arid farming, solar power, horticultural products, high-tech, gem and jewellery, and pharmaceuticals.
    • Technology: Further, Israel has the potential to supply skilled and semi-skilled manpower to the GCC states, particularly from the Sephardim and Mizrahim ethnicities, many of whom speak Arabic.

    The Iran link

    • Iran, as part of India’s ‘West Asia’ construct, will also play a significant part in India’s outreach in the months to come as the crisis in Afghanistan deepens.
    • The fact that New Delhi used Iranian airspace and facilities when evacuating its diplomatic staff from Kandahar in July showcases a level of strategic commonality.
    • Keeping this in mind, connectivity projects such as Chabahar Port and Chabahar-Zahedan rail project (project discussions are still on) amongst others remain critical.

    Conclusion

    • India’s strategic play in West Asia will be reflective of its economic growth, and by association, an increasingly important place in the global order.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • US puts Pakistan, Turkey on Child Soldier Recruiter List

    The US has added Pakistan and 14 other countries to a Child Soldier Recruiter List that identifies foreign governments having government-supported armed groups that recruit or use child soldiers.

    Who is a child soldier?

    • The recruitment or use of children below the age of 15 as soldiers is prohibited by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
    • Currently, 193 countries have ratified the CRC.
    • The CRC requires state parties to “take all feasible measures” to ensure that children under 18 are not engaged in direct hostilities.
    • It further prohibits the state parties from recruiting children under 15 into the armed forces.
    • It is considered a war crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
    • In addition, the Optional Protocol to the CRC further prohibits kids under the age 18 from being compulsorily recruited into state or non-state armed forces or directly engaging in hostilities.
    • The United States is a party to the Optional Protocol.

    What is US law?

    • The US adopted the Child Soldiers Prevention Act (CSPA) in 2008.
    • The CSPA prohibits the US government from providing military assistance, including money, military education and training, or direct sales of military equipment, to alleged countries.

    What is prohibited for countries on the list?

    The following types of security assistance are prohibited for countries that are on the list:

    • Licenses for direct commercial sales of military equipment
    • Foreign military financing for the purchase of defence articles and services, as well as design and construction services
    • International military education and training
    • Excess defence articles
    • Peacekeeping operations

    Criticism of the treaty

    • International treaties like CRS are valuable and necessary tools to establish international norms as they raise awareness regarding human rights abuses.
    • However, these treaties are limited in scope and nature, and they tend to be idealistic rather than practicable.
    • The UN’s mechanisms only bind state parties that ratify the treaties.
    • It, therefore, has no authority over countries that are not parties to the convention or are non-state entities, such as rebel militias recruiting child soldiers.
    • While the UN views its treaties and conventions as binding on state parties, it has no police power mechanism to enforce its decisions.
    • Therefore, the CRC and its Optional Protocol are limited by the signatories’ willingness to comply. Somalia, for example, is a signatory but it hasn’t ratified the convention.

  • OECD-G20 Inclusive Framework Tax Deal

    India has joining the OECD-G20 framework for a global minimum tax.

    Must read

    What is Global Minimum Corporate Tax?

    What is this tax deal?

    • The proposed solution consists of two components:
    1. Pillar One is about the reallocation of an additional share of profit to the market jurisdictions and
    2. Pillar Two consists of minimum tax and subject to tax rules
    • Some significant issues including share of profit allocation and scope of subject to tax rules, remain open and need to be addressed.
    • Further, the technical details of the proposal will be worked out in the coming months and a consensus agreement is expected by October.

    Why did India join?

    • The principles underlying the solution vindicates India’s stand for a greater share of profits for the markets, consideration of demand-side factors in profit allocation.
    • There is a need to seriously address the issue of cross border profit shifting and need for the subject to tax rules to stop treaty shopping.
    • India is in favour of a consensus solution that is simple to implement and simple to comply with.
    • At the same time, the solution should result in the allocation of meaningful and sustainable revenue to market jurisdictions, particularly for developing and emerging economies.

    What is Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS)?

    • BEPS refers to corporate tax planning strategies used by multinationals to “shift” profits from higher-tax jurisdictions to lower-tax jurisdictions.
    • It thus “erodes” the “tax base” of the higher-tax jurisdictions.
    • Corporate tax havens offer BEPS tools to “shift” profits to the haven, and additional BEPS tools to avoid paying taxes within the haven.
    • It is alleged that BEPS is associated mostly with American technology and life science multinationals.

  • 60 Years of Antarctic Treaty

    The 1959 Antarctic Treaty (wef 1961) recently celebrated its 60th anniversary.

    Antarctic Treaty

    • The Antarctic Treaty and related agreements are collectively known as the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS).
    • It regulates international relations with respect to Antarctica, Earth’s only continent without a native human population.
    • For the purposes of the treaty system, Antarctica is defined as all of the land and ice shelves south of 60°S latitude.
    • The treaty entered into force in 1961 and currently has 54 parties.
    • The treaty sets aside Antarctica as a scientific preserve, establishes freedom of scientific investigation, and bans military activity on the continent.
    • The treaty was the first arms control agreement established during the Cold War.
    • India is a signatory of this treaty since 1983.

    Why is it significant?

    • Negotiated during the middle of the Cold War by 12 countries with Antarctic interests, it remains the only example of a single treaty that governs a whole continent.
    • It is also the foundation of a rules-based international order for a continent without a permanent population.

    Key provisions

    • The treaty is remarkably short and contains only 14 articles.
    • Principal provisions include promoting the freedom of scientific research, the use of the continent only for peaceful purposes, and the prohibition of military activities, nuclear tests and the disposal of radioactive waste.

    What the treaty says about territorial claims

    • The most important provision of the treaty is Article IV, which effectively seeks to neutralise territorial sovereignty in Antarctica.
    • For the Antarctic territorial claimants, this meant a limit was placed on making any new claim or enlargement of an existing claim.
    • Likewise, no formal recognition was given to any of the seven territorial claims on the continent, by Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom.
    • Russia, the United States and China — signatories with significant Antarctic interests who have not formally made territorial claims — are also bound by the limitations of Article IV.
    • And one sector of Antarctica is not subject to the claim of any country, which effectively makes it the last unclaimed land on earth.
    • The treaty also put a freeze on any disputes between claimants over their territories on the continent.

    How the treaty has expanded

    • Though the compact has held for 60 years, there have been tensions from time to time.
    • Argentina and the UK, for instance, have overlapping claims to territory on the continent.
    • When combined with their ongoing dispute over the nearby Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, their Antarctic relationship remains frosty.
    • Membership of the treaty has grown in the intervening years, with 54 signatories today.

    Where to from here?

    • While the Antarctic Treaty has been able to successfully respond to a range of challenges, circumstances are radically different in the 2020s compared to the 1950s.
    • Antarctica is much more accessible, partly due to technology but also climate change.
    • More countries now have substantive interests in the continent than the original 12.
    • Some global resources are becoming scarce, especially oil.

    Answer this PYQ:

    Q.The term ‘IndARC’, sometimes seen in the news, is the name of:

    (a) An indigenously developed radar system inducted into Indian Defence

    (b) India’s satellite to provide services to the countries of Indian Ocean Rim

    (c) A scientific establishment set up by India in Antarctic region

    (d) India’s underwater observatory to scientifically study the Arctic region

    Back2Basics: Indian Antarctic Program

    • The Indian Antarctic Program is a multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional program under the control of the National Centre for Polar and Ocean Research, Ministry of Earth Sciences.
    • It was initiated in 1981 with the first Indian expedition to Antarctica.
    • The program gained global acceptance with India’s signing of the Antarctic Treaty and subsequent construction of the Dakshin Gangotri Antarctic research base in 1983 superseded by the Maitri base from 1989.
    • The newest base commissioned in 2012 is Bharati, constructed out of 134 shipping containers.

    Various missions

    In 1981 the Indian flag unfurled for the first time in Antarctica, marking the start of Southern Ocean expeditions under the environmental protocol of the Antarctic Treaty (1959).

    (1) Dakshin Gangotri

    The first permanent settlement was built in 1983 and named Dakshin Gangotri. In 1989 it was excavated and is being used again as supply base and transit camp. It was decommissioned in the year 1990 after half of it got buried under the ice.

    (2) Maitri

    The second permanent settlement, Maitri, was put up in 1989 on the Schirmacher Oasis and has been conducting experiments in geology, geography and medicine. India built this station close to a freshwater lake around Maitri known as Lake Priyadarshini.

    (3) Bharati

    Located beside Larsmann Hill at 69°S, 76°E, Bharati is established in 2015.  This newest research station for oceanographic research will collect evidence of continental breakup to reveal the 120-million-year-old ancient history of the Indian subcontinent.

    (4) India Post Office in Antarctica

    It was established in the year 1984 during the third Indian expedition to Antarctica. It was located at Dakshin Gangotri. This post office was indeed situated in a stunning location and it was more than just a post office. An interesting fact about this place is that as many as 10,000 letters were posted and canceled in this post office in total in the first year of its establishment.

  • What is Chicago Convention of 1944?

    A private commercial flight was forced to make an emergency landing in Minsk by a MiG-29 fighter jet of Belarus.  The incident received considerable global attention.

    How justified was Belarus in taking such a decision?

    • The answer lies at the junction of Belarus’s domestic laws as a sovereign country and international laws governing the action that states can legitimately take to deal with threats to security, real or perceived.
    • The issue of the use of military aircraft to neutralize potential threats posed by civilian aircraft acquired a different kind of urgency in the aftermath of terrorist attacks in the US on September 11, 2001.
    • Generally speaking, international law grants sovereignty to nations over their airspace as it does in territorial waters.

    The Chicago Convention of 1944

    • The Convention on International Civil Aviation, better known as the Chicago Convention of 1944, to which Belarus is a signatory state, prohibits any unlawful intervention against a civilian aircraft.
    • At the same time, it has various provisions under Article 9 which permit a sovereign state the right to impose restrictions.
    • This includes enforced landings at a designated airport in its territory, in “exceptional circumstances or during a period of emergency, or in the interest of public safety”.
    • Once a flight has landed, Article 16 provides the host country the right to board/search the aircraft.
    • This is probably the clause that provided cover for the local authorities to board Mr. Morales’s aircraft in Austria in 2013.
    • But the Chicago Convention applies only to civilian aircraft of the contracting parties.

    Other such laws

    • International law might also have to be examined in light of the International Air Services Transit Agreement (IASTA), also concluded in Chicago in 1944.
    • According to this agreement, contracting states grant to one another the freedom of air transit in respect of scheduled international air services, that is, the privilege to fly across territories without landing.
    • Belarus is not a signatory of IASTA.

  • G7 Open Societies Pact on Universal Rights

    India has signed off on a joint statement by G-7 and guest countries on “open societies” that reaffirm and encourage the values of “freedom of expression, both online and offline, as a freedom that safeguards democracy and helps people live free from fear and oppression”.

    What is the Open Societies Pact?

    • The ‘Open Societies Statement’ was adopted at the end of an outreach session titled ‘Building Back Together—Open Societies and Economies’, where PM Modi was invited as a lead speaker.
    • The joint statement was signed by the G-7 countries, and India, South Korea, Australia and South Africa, with host British Prime Minister Boris Johnson calling them “Democracies 11”.
    • It refers to “politically motivated internet shutdowns” as one of the threats to freedom and democracy.
    • It affirms “human rights for all, both online and offline, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other HR instruments, and opposition to any form of discrimination, so that everyone can participate fully and equally in society”.

    Why needs such a pact?

    • Democracy and freedom were a part of India’s civilizational ethos”.
    • However, the common concern is that open societies are particularly vulnerable to disinformation and cyber-attacks.

    Impact of the pact

    • While the statement is directed at China and Russia, India has been under scrutiny over Internet curbs in Jammu and Kashmir.
    • Moreover, the center is locked in a face-off over its new IT rules with tech giants such as Twitter, which described a police search at its offices in India last month as a “potential threat to freedom of expression”.