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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • International Narcotics Control Board (INCB)

    Why in the news?

    Mrs. Jagjit Pavadia (IRS) India’s nominee has been re-elected for a third term to the INCB for the period of 2025-2030.

    About International Narcotics Control Board (INCB)

    Description
    Establishment Established in 1968 by the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961.
    Headquarters Based in Vienna, Austria, with a Secretariat supporting its activities.
    Membership Consists of 13 members elected by ECOSOC, experts in drug control and related fields.
    Role and Mandate Independent body monitoring compliance with UN drug control conventions.
    Functions Assess global drug situation, evaluate licit drug production, and publish annual reports.
    Collaboration Works with governments and international organizations on drug control issues.
    Control Measures Monitors and evaluates national drug control measures for treaty compliance.
    Advocacy and Awareness Promotes adherence to drug treaties and raises awareness on global drug issues.
    Cooperation Collaborates with UN agencies like WHO and UNODC to address drug-related challenges.

     

    India’s Election to Key UN Bodies

    India’s proactive engagement at the United Nations resulted in its election to several pivotal bodies:

    1.    Commission on the Status of Women (2025-2029)

    2.    Executive Board of UNICEF (2025-2027)

    3.    Executive Board of UNDP and UNFPA (2025-2027)

    4.    UN Office for Project Services (2025-2027)

    5.    Executive Board of UN Women (2025-2027)

    6.    Executive Board of the World Food Programme (2025-2027)

     

    PYQ:

    [2019] Consider the following statements:

    1. The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) has a ‘Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air’.

    2. The UNCAC is the ever-first legally binding global anti-corruption instrument.

    3. A highlight of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) is the inclusion of a specific chapter aimed at returning assets to their rightful owners from whom they had been taken illicitly.

    4. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) is mandated by its member States to assist in the implementation of both UNCAC and UNTOC.

    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    (a) 1 and 3 only

    (b) 2, 3 and 4 only

    (c) 2 and 4 only

    (d) 1, 2, 3, and 4

  • What’s behind the latest US-China trade fight?

    Why in the news? 

    China’s burgeoning production of electric cars and other green technologies has become a flashpoint in a new US-China trade fight, highlighted by US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during her five-day visit to China.

    Context:  

    • According to the Paris-based International Energy Agency, China has built a substantial car industry that accounts for 60% of global electric vehicle sales. Similar dynamics exist in other industries, such as solar panels, batteries, and steel.
    • China is now the world’s largest producer of solar cells.
    • Now the main concern is that the Chinese are building up a lot of capacity in many industries across the board, including these new technology sectors, and if domestic demand does not pick up, they are going to be looking for markets outside the country.

    US-China Trade Dispute:

    • The US and China have been slugging it out since Trump slapped heavy tariffs on imported steel and aluminum items from China in March last year, and China responded by imposing tit-for-tat tariffs on billions of dollars worth of American imports.
    • The IMF noted that the US-China trade tension was one factor that contributed to a “significantly weakened global expansion” late last year, as it cut its global growth forecast for 2019.

    US-China Trade and Investment Facts:

    • US GOODS & SERVICES trade with China totalled an estimated $737.1 billion in 2018. Exports: $179.3 billion; imports: $557.9 billion; deficit: $378.6 billion
    • CHINA IS CURRENTLY the US’s largest goods trading partner with $659.8 billion in total (two-way) goods trade in 2018. Exports: $120.3 billion; imports: $539.5 billion; US goods trade deficit: $419.2 billion
    • US FDI IN CHINA (stock) was $107.6 billion in 2017, a 10.6% increase from 2016. US direct investment in China is led by manufacturing, wholesale trade, finance and insurance
    • CHINA FDI IN THE US (stock) was $39.5 billion in 2017, down 2.3% from 2016. China’s direct investment in the US is led by manufacturing, real estate, depository institutions

    How does China’s Auto Industry pose an external threat to Indian Market?

    • Market Dominance: China is dominating the local market and threatening to dominate India’s traditional export markets, which could cause concern for the ‘Make in India‘ program.
    • Quality Concerns: The quality of auto parts coming from China is a major concern for the safety of vehicles in India. With increasing stakes by Chinese vendors, the situation is expected to become more challenging.
    • Cost Advantage: Chinese automakers have a cost advantage over North American and European brands, allowing them to undercut rivals. This cost advantage is due to Chinese manufacturers’ ability to produce EVs more efficiently and profitably than their Western counterparts.
    • Security concerns: Chinese automakers flooding foreign markets with their autos and the potential for these vehicles to be used for espionage, data collection, or sabotage.

    How India can benefit from the ongoing US-China trade war?

    • Export Opportunities: India can tap export opportunities in both the US and China, particularly in areas such as garments, agriculture, automobile, machinery, apparel, and readymade garments
    • Export Growth: India’s exports to the US increased by 11.2% in 2018, and to China by 31.4% in the same year, indicating the potential for further growth
    • Product Opportunities: India can boost exports of around 350 products to the US and China, including items like copper ores, rubber, paper/paperboard, industrial valves, vulcanised rubber, carbon or graphite electrodes, and natural honey
    • Trade Deficit Reduction: Increasing exports would help India narrow the widening trade deficit with China, which stood at USD 50.12 billion during April-February 2018-19

    Conclusion: The US-China trade fight intensifies over China’s dominance in green technology sectors like electric vehicles. India stands to benefit from increased exports to both nations, potentially narrowing its trade deficit with China while tapping into new markets.

  • [pib] IPEF Clean Economy Investor Forum

    Why in the news?

    The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) Clean Economy Investor Forum is set to be held in Singapore.

    About IPEF Clean Economy Investor Forum

    • The IPEF Clean Economy Investor Forum brings together the region’s top investors, philanthropies, financial institutions, innovative companies, start-ups and entrepreneurs.
    • The Forum aims to mobilize investments into sustainable infrastructure, climate technology and renewable energy projects.
    • It is managed by Invest India (www.investindia.gov.in), India’s National Investment Promotion Agency.
    • The Department of Commerce is the nodal agency for the IPEF engagements.

    The Forum will have opportunity for the Indian industry in the two following tracks:

    1. Climate Tech Track: Under this track, IPEF Clean Economy Investor Forum is holding an open call that aims to recognise the top climate tech companies and start-ups among the member countries and present them to global investors.
    2. Infrastructure Track: Under this track, India will showcase selected investible sustainable infrastructure projects at the 2024 Forum. The sectors of focus are-energy transition (e.g electric gird; renewable energy, including solar, and onshore wind; sustainable aviation fuel; battery storage; hydrogen; green data centers), transport and logistics (e.g. Electric Vehicle, EV charging points), waste management/waste to energy.

    About Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF)

    • It is a US-led initiative that aims to strengthen economic partnerships among participating countries to enhance resilience, sustainability, inclusiveness, economic growth, fairness, and competitiveness in the Indo-Pacific region.
    • The IPEF was launched in 2021 with 12 initial partners who together represent 40% of the world GDP.
    • The IPEF is NOT a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) but allows members to negotiate the parts they want to.

     Four main “Pillars” of IPEF:

     

    Trade that will include digital economy and emerging technology, labor commitments, the environment, trade facilitation, transparency and good regulatory practices, and corporate accountability, standards on cross-border data flow and data localisations;

    Supply chain resilience to develop “a first-of-its-kind supply chain agreement” that would anticipate and prevent disruptions;

    Clean energy and decarbonization that will include agreements on “high-ambition commitments” such as renewable energy targets, carbon removal purchasing commitments, energy efficiency standards, and new measures to combat methane emissions; and

    Fair Economy Agreement, with commitments to enact and enforce “effective tax, anti-money laundering, anti-bribery schemes in line with [American] values”.

     Members Countries include:

    • Currently, India and 13 countries other located in the Pacific Ocean are its members: Australia, Brunei, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, United States, and Vietnam.

    How is IPEF different from other trade deals?

    • No market access or tariff reductions have been outlined in the IPEF, although experts say it can pave the way to trade deals.
    • It’s not a take-it-or-leave-it arrangement, like most multilateral trade deals are.
    • Since the IPEF is not a regular trade pact, the members so far are not obligated by all four pillars despite being signatories.

  • India secures Rights to operate Sittwe Port in Myanmar

    Why in the news?

    • After Chabahar, India has gained the rights to operate a second overseas port, Sittwe, in Myanmar.
    • This development is part of the Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport project, which aims to provide alternate connectivity from the eastern coast of India to the northeastern states through the Sittwe port.

    About India Ports Global (IPGL)

    • The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has approved a proposal for India Ports Global (IPGL) to take over the operations of the entire port located on the Kaladan River.
    • IPGL is a company 100% owned by the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways.
    • It is a joint venture between Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) and Deendayal Port Trust (Erstwhile Kandla Port Trust).
    • It was created and incorporated in January 2015 under the Companies Act, 2013, as per directions of Ministry of Shipping (MoS), for development of ports overseas.
    • The MoS has presently assigned IPGL the task of equipping and operation of container/multi-purpose terminals at Chabahar Port in Iran.

     

    About Sittwe Port

    • The Sittwe Port, located in the Rakhine State of Myanmar, is a crucial component of the Kaladan multi-modal transit transport project.
    • It has been developed under a framework agreement between India and Myanmar for the construction and operation of a multimodal transit transport facility on the Kaladan River.
    • It is a deep-water port serving as a maritime gateway, enhancing trade and connectivity between India and Myanmar.

    Significance of Sittwe Port

    • The Sittwe Port is part of the Kaladan multi-modal transit transport project.
    • The project aims to connect the eastern Indian seaport of Kolkata with Sittwe seaport in Myanmar by sea.
    • It further link Sittwe Port to Paletwa in Myanmar via Kaladan river waterway, and connect Paletwa to Zorinpui in Mizoram through a road component.
    • This link will not only offer an alternative route for shipping goods to the northeastern states, but will significantly reduce the cost and distance from Kolkata to Mizoram and beyond.
    • It will also reduce dependency on the Siliguri Corridor, known as the chicken’s neck, which is squeezed between Bhutan and Bangladesh.

    Also read about China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC)

    Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project

    • It connects the seaport of Kolkata in India to Sittwe seaport in Rakhine State, Myanmar, by sea.
    • In Myanmar, the project links Sittwe seaport to Paletwa in Chin State via the Kaladan river boat route and then from Paletwa by road to Mizoram state in Northeast India.
    • The project is being funded by the Indian government and is aimed at reducing the distance from Kolkata to Sittwe by approximately 1,328 km.
    • It was initially scheduled to be completed by 2014.
    • The project is affected by Chin conflict, Rohingya conflict, and militant groups such as Arakan Army and Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA).
    • There are different sections of the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, which combines multi-modes of transport, including sea, river, and road routes.
    1. Sea Route: It includes- Kolkata-Sittwe shipping route, Sittwe seaport to Paletwa inland jetty river boat route, Sittwe Special Economic Zone at Ponnagyun town, Paletwa inland jetty to Zorinpui road route in Myanmar, and the Zorinpui to Aizawl road route in India.
    2. Road: This project will complement the river-road route of the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project in Myanmar-Mizoram.
    3. Railway: It has the Sittwe-Kyaukhtu railway in Myanmar, Kyaukhtu-Zorinpui in Myanmar, and the Zochawchhuah (Zorinpui)-Sairang railway in India.

     

    PYQ:

    [2015] In the Mekong-Ganga Cooperation, an initiative of six countries, which of the following is/are not a participant/ participants?

    1.    Bangladesh

    2.    Cambodia

    3.    China

    4.    Myanmar

    5.    Thailand

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2, 3 and 4

    (c) 1 and 3

    (d) 1, 2 and 5

  • At 75, NATO sees reasons to rejoice, facts suggest otherwise

    Why in the News? 

    NATO grandly commemorates its 75th anniversary on April 4, 2024.

    Present Concerns about NATO:

    • Changed Objective: NATO was established to defend its member states from aggression but has engaged in offensive military actions.
    • Cause of Military conflicts worldwide: Over the last seven decades, NATO has initiated or participated in more than 200 military conflicts worldwide, including major ones. Examples of NATO’s military interventions include the bombing of Yugoslavia, invasion of Iraq, disruption of statehood in Libya, military interference in Syria, and combating terrorism in Afghanistan.
    • Role in the creation of ISIS: Critics argue that instead of bringing peace and stability, NATO’s actions have led to damage, casualties, destruction, and alienation. There is a perception that the US, NATO’s leader, played a role in the creation of ISIS.
    • Provoking Russia-Ukraine War: Its expansion since 1991, despite assurances to the contrary, and its actions in Ukraine are seen as provocative moves against Russia. Russia has shown restraint in response to NATO’s actions, but NATO’s behavior remains unchanged.
    • Maintaining Western Hegemony: In stark contrast to its professed peaceful ideals, NATO engages in warfare or issues threats of attack against any state that rejects the established liberal “rules-based order.” for example invasion of Iraq and execution of Saddam Hussein
    • Increase presence in  Indo-Pacific: The US has been actively establishing smaller multilateral arrangements, like AUKUS, the US-Japan-South Korea trio, and the Tokyo-Seoul-Canberra-Wellington quartet, to involve them in practical collaboration with NATO.

    BACK2BASICS

    What is NATO?

    NATO, founded in 1949, is an intergovernmental military alliance initially aimed at collective defense against potential aggression, notably from the Soviet Union during the Cold War. However, its role has expanded over time to address various security challenges beyond its original purpose.

    Membership:

    • Starting Members: In starting only 12 founding members of NATO were Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
    • Expansion: NATO has expanded since its founding, with new member countries joining in multiple rounds. The alliance currently consists of 32 member countries.

    Objectives:

    • Core mission: NATO’s core mission is collective defense, as articulated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. This article specifies that an attack on any member nation will be regarded as an attack on all, triggering a collective response from the members.
    • Role in crisis management: Besides its core function of collective defense, NATO also participates in crisis management activities. These include conflict prevention, peacekeeping, and stabilization efforts in diverse regions globally.

     

    Conclusion: NATO, founded in 1949 for collective defense, faces criticisms for engaging in offensive actions, causing global conflicts, and perceived roles in creating ISIS and provoking tensions with Russia. It has expanded and diversified its roles beyond its original purpose.

    Mains Question for practice 

    Q Examine the key concerns raised about NATO’s actions and their implications for global security. 

  • [3 April 2024] The Hindu Op-ed: The Gaza war needs a smart exit strategy

    [3 April 2024] The Hindu Op-ed: The Gaza war needs a smart exit strategy

    PYQ Relevance:
    Mains: 
    Q) Too little cash, too much politics, leaves UNESCO fighting for life.’ Discuss the statement in the light of US withdrawal and its accusation of the cultural body as being ‘anti-Israel bias’. (UPSC CSE 2019) 
    Q) How will the I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE, and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics? (UPSC CSE 2022)

    Note4Students: 

    Prelims: UNSC;

    Mains: UNSC; Recent Global challenges;

    Mentor comments: “History always repeats itself”. We all know that it is always easy to start a war but very difficult to decide when and how to call it off. If we see our Global past, the U.S. war in Afghanistan is a classical example. It was launched in October 2001 with the aim of ‘finishing off Al-Qaeda’, later it became a war that dragged on till the U.S. finally made a messy exit in August 2021. Secondly, think about the U.S. war in Iraq in 2003 is another example of a military offensive without a clearly defined exit strategy. The same history applies to the present context of the Middle East (Gaza Issue). Although the UNSC passed the Resolution, still the stand of major powers like the US remains questionable and it eventually leads the situation ‘back to square one’ in the context of Israel.

    Let’s learn. 

    —

    Why in the News?

    The Gaza Issue has become a more unwinnable conflict even after the UNSC resolution in March 2024.

    The Story behind the war concerning Israel and Hamas:

    • Israel had two major aims:
      • To Flatten Gaza: By eliminating Hamas, and getting back all its hostages. With the war well into its sixth month, it is important to review each of these aims. In short, Israel has flattened Gaza, in such a way that Gaza will be virtually uninhabitable (created a Buffer Zone) for years.
      • Destruction of Hamas: Israel has succeeded in eliminating only 30% of an estimated 30,000 Hamas fighters. Except for the exchange of a few hostages during a brief ‘humanitarian pause’ last November, Israel has not been able to rescue its hostages.
    • Hamas had two objectives:
      • Reminding Palestinian cause: To remind the world that while talks of normalization and reconciliation between Israel and the Arab world could go on; the cause for a Palestinian state could not be lost sight of.
      • Creating Support base: To expose to the world, and especially its support base, the false sense of the invincibility of the Israeli military and its intelligence services. For Hamas, it was not about winning the war militarily but making its voice heard.

    Major Challenges that are arising throughout the immediate region:

    • Neighboring countries in the region, Egypt and Qatar have been separately negotiating for an early ceasefire. Still, Israel had launched an attack on Gaza for the second time, again resulting in heavy civilian casualties.
    • Meanwhile, Hezbollah has also intensified its missile strikes, inflicting damage to key military assets and loss of lives.
    • Houthi rebels in the southern part continue to disrupt and block Israeli, U.S., and British ships in the Red Sea, causing heavy economic losses for Israel and its allies. 
    The passing of UNSC Resolution:

    On March 25, 2024, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted a resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza calling for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.

    Previously, all four resolutions in the UNSC had failed due to veto, thrice exercised by the US. Although the US has historically protected Israel from censure, this time it abstained from voting. The resolution this time drew mixed reactions.

    Israel was the first to react, as it canceled the visit of its ministerial delegation to the US. Under Israeli pressure, the U.S. came out with a statement that the UN Resolution is ‘non-binding’ and that Israel can continue what it is doing in Gaza, making a mockery of the whole process in the UNSC.

    Hamas, on the other hand, initially welcomed the ceasefire resolution, but later, reiterated its position on a permanent ceasefire accompanied by a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. This turned the whole situation into a ‘back to square one’.

    Is the UNSC resolution binding?
    UNGA resolutions are like recommendations, while UNSC resolutions are normally seen as somewhat more prescriptive. However, there is a difference between UNSC votes under Chapter 6 and Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, with the latter considered as binding.

    How can it be enforced?
    If the UNSC wants to enforce its decision, it can decide to authorize travel bans, sanctions, or the sending of troops.

    What are the Impacts on Israel?

    • Military Impact: The Israeli Army has suffered losses and injuries to its personnel. Militarily, Gaza has been defeated, but Hamas, as an organization, is unlikely to be eliminated.
    • Economic Impact: Its economy is shrinking rapidly, with some estimates showing a decline of almost 20%.
    • Political Impact: Currently, it is becoming difficult for Mr. Netanyahu to hold on to his position, domestically and internationally. The U.S., Israel’s staunchest ally, has, in the past few weeks, made it clear that Israel has to restrain itself and cannot bank upon blanket support for any Israeli action in Gaza.

    What is the most viable option then for Israel?

    • Adapting to Ceasefire: To prevent a recurrence of ‘another 07th October’, there is an urgent need for an early ceasefire and withdrawal of forces from the Gaza Strip.
    • Two-state solution: Stakeholder countries will have to go back to the drawing board and search for a time-bound and acceptable solution. 

    Conclusion: Israel and Palestine are bound by geography and destiny and the solution for a peaceful future will have to include major compromises and climb-downs from previously stated positions. 

    https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-gaza-war-needs-a-smart-exit-strategy/article68020974.ece

  •  Katchatheevu | What is the controversy all about?

    Why in the news? 

    Katchatheevu Island, a disputed stretch in the Palk Strait, was ceded to Sri Lanka during late PM Indira Gandhi, through an agreement.

    • Fifty years later, PM Modi, has mounted an attack on the Congress and DMK for ‘callously’ giving it away to Sri Lanka.

    About the Katchatheevu  Island:

    • Katchatheevu is an uninhabited area in the Palk Strait, between India and Sri Lanka.  It was created due to volcanic eruption in the 14th century and is comparatively youthful in the realm of geological chronology.
    • Historically, it was controlled by the Jaffna kingdom of Sri Lanka in the medieval period.
    • However, in the 17th century, control passed to the Ramnad zamindari based out of Ramanathapuram, about 55 km northwest of Rameswaram.
    • The Island became part of the Madras Presidency during the British Raj. But in 1921, both India and Sri Lanka, at the time were British colonies and claimed Katchatheevu to determine fishing boundaries.
    • A British delegation from India challenged this, citing ownership of the island by the Ramnad kingdom. This dispute was not settled until 1974.

    Indo-Sri Lankan Maritime Agreement of 1974:

    • In 1974, the Indian government, led by Indira Gandhi at the time, endeavored to definitively resolve the maritime border between India and Sri Lanka.
    • As a component of this arrangement, termed the ‘Indo-Sri Lankan Maritime agreement’, Katchatheevu was relinquished to Sri Lanka.
    • During this period, it was perceived that the island held minimal strategic significance, and relinquishing India’s claim over it was anticipated to foster stronger relations with its southern neighbor.
    • Limitations of the Agreement of 1974:
      • Issue of fishing rights: The 1974 agreement failed to address the issue of fishing rights. Sri Lanka interpreted the access of Indian fishermen to Katchatheevu as being restricted solely to activities such as resting, drying nets, and visiting the Catholic shrine, without the requirement of a visa.
      • The issue concerning EEZ: Further agreement was reached between the two countries, prohibiting fishing within each other’s Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs).
      • However, the proximity of Katchatheevu to the edges of both countries’ EEZs left unresolved questions regarding fishing rights, contributing to ongoing uncertainty.

     

    India’s stand on the Kachchatheevu issue:

    • August 2013: The Union government informed the Supreme Court that the question of reclaiming Kachchatheevu from Sri Lanka did not arise because no Indian territory was ceded to Sri Lanka. Moreover, it was historically disputed territory between British India and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), and the matter was settled through agreements in 1974 and 1976.
    • December 2022: The Union government reiterated the stance, emphasizing that Katchatheevu lies on the Sri Lankan side of the India-Sri Lanka International Maritime Boundary Line as per the agreements. Additionally, it mentioned that the matter was under judicial consideration in the Supreme Court.

    Conclusion: The recent mention of Katchatheevu by Prime Minister Modi ahead of elections in Tamil Nadu highlights its contentious nature. To address fishermen’s issues, diplomatic dialogue and legal clarity are crucial.

    Mains PYQ

    Q What are the maritime security challenges in India? Discuss the organizational, technical, and procedural initiatives taken to improve maritime security. (UPSC IAS/2022)

  • Katchatheevu Island Conundrum

    Why in the news?

    Prime Minister recently claimed that the then PM Indira Gandhi had given away the island of Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka for no reason.

    About Katchatheevu Island

    • Katchatheevu is a small, uninhabited island measuring merely 285 acres, lying between India and Sri Lanka.
    • It is situated in the Palk Strait.
    • It was originally owned by the king of Ramnad (present-day Ramanathapuram, Tamil Nadu).
    • The island is used by fishermen to dry their nets.
    • Despite its modest size, the island holds significant religious significance, housing Anthony’s church, a centuries-old Catholic shrine revered by devotees from both nations.
    • Beyond its religious connotations, Katchatheevu is a vital ecosystem, supporting diverse flora and fauna endemic to the region’s maritime environment.

    A Quick Recap of its History

    • During the British rule, it was administered jointly by India and Sri Lanka.
    • In the early 20th century, Sri Lanka claimed territorial ownership over the islet.
    • India ceded the island to Sri Lanka, through a joint agreement in 1974; India further gave up its fishing rights in the region in 1976.

    Present Issue

    • In 1974 and 1976 treaties were signed between the two countries to demarcate the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL).
    • However, the agreement could not stop the fishermen from fishing in these waters, as fishermen know no boundary.

    Culmination of the Political Dispute

    • Unresolved Issue: While Indian fishermen retained certain access rights to the island, the agreements failed to address key concerns regarding fishing rights, leading to simmering discontent among fishing communities.
    • Sri Lankan Atrocities: The civil war in Sri Lanka overshadowed the Katchatheevu issue, with Indian fishermen facing arrests and allegations of mistreatment by the Sri Lankan navy.
    • Renewed Demands: Instances of fishermen’s rights violations reignited calls for the retrieval of Katchatheevu by Tamil Nadu politicians, who highlighted the plight of affected fishing communities.
    • Present Backlash: The agreement sparked widespread protests and political backlash in Tamil Nadu, with regional parties and activists condemning the perceived abandonment of Indian sovereignty over Katchatheevu.

    PYQ:

    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)

    (a) 1 and 2 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) 2 only

    (d) 3 only

     

    Practice MCQ:

    With reference to the Katchatheevu Island recently seen in news, consider the following statements:

    1.    During the British rule, it was administered by India.

    2.    India ceded the island to Sri Lanka, through a joint agreement in 1974 but holds fishing rights in the region.

    Which of the given statements is/are correct?

    (a) Only 1

    (b) Only 2

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

  • Tech giants facing EU scrutiny

    Why in the news? 

    The European Commission has initiated investigations into major tech companies like Apple, Meta, Google’s parent Alphabet, and Amazon to enforce fair and competitive markets in the digital industry, following the regulations of the Digital Markets Act (DMA).

     

    What is the European Commission? 

    The European Commission is the executive arm of the European Union responsible for proposing and enforcing legislation, managing EU policies and spending programs, ensuring the proper application of EU laws, and representing the EU internationally.

    About Gatekeepers: It refers to significant market players in the digital sector who hold considerable market power and provide core platform services. In September 2023, several tech companies, including Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, ByteDance (TikTok’s parent company), and Microsoft, were designated as ‘gatekeepers,’ expected to comply fully with DMA obligations by March 7 of the following year.

    DMA’s Objective: The investigations align with the Digital Markets Act’s (DMA) goal to regulate ‘gatekeepers’ in the digital market and ensure fair competition and consumer access.

     

    Where is the context of these non-compliance investigations?

    • Investigations into Tech Giants: Alphabet (Google), Apple, and Meta (formerly Facebook) are facing investigations over alleged violations related to unfair competitive practices.
    • Specific Allegations: Alphabet is being investigated for steering customers towards its in-house services, Apple for similar practices in its App Store and Safari browser, Meta for its “pay or consent model.”

    Steering rules are Non-Compliant:

    • DMA Provisions: The Digital Markets Act (DMA) allows app developers to direct consumers to offers and services outside the gatekeeper’s app store without any charge.
    • Commission’s Concerns: The European Commission expressed concerns about Alphabet (Google) and Apple’s noncompliance with DMA provisions, citing various restrictions and limitations imposed by these companies.
    • Apple’s Defense: Apple defended its tight integration with the App Store, claiming it’s necessary for a secure and seamless user experience 

    Present Challenges with Tech-giants:

    • Alphabet engaging in self-preferencing:
      • Investigation on Google search: The Commission is investigating whether Google’s search results are discriminatory, particularly whether Google favors its own verticals over rival services, a practice known as self-preferencing 
      • U.S. Department of Justice’s Accusation: In October 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) accused Google of unlawfully maintaining monopolies in the search and search advertising markets through anti-competitive and exclusionary practices. 
    • Apple enabling choice:
      • European Commission’s Investigation on IOS: The Commission is assessing whether Apple allows users to uninstall pre-installed or default software applications on iOS easily.  
      • Concerns Over User Choice: The investigation stems from concerns that Apple’s measures may prevent users from effectively exercising their choice of services within the Apple ecosystem.  
    • Concerns about Meta’s model:
      • Meta’s Subscription Model: Meta (formerly Facebook) introduced a subscription model in the European Union (EU), European Economic Area (EEA), and Switzerland. This model offered users the choice to use Facebook and Instagram without ads by subscribing to a paid service.
      • Commission’s Concerns:  It expressed concerns that the binary choice offered by the model may not provide a real alternative for users who do not consent to personalized advertising. Consequently, the Commission doubted whether the model effectively prevented the accumulation of personal data by gatekeepers, as intended.

    How will non-compliant companies be penalized?

    • Potential Penalties: The companies under investigation face significant fines of up to 10% of their global turnover or 20% in the case of repeated infringements.
    • Consequences of Systematic Infringement: If the investigation uncovers systematic infringement, the companies may be required to divest certain business units or sell parts of their business. Additionally, they could face a ban from acquiring related additional services.

    Conclusion 

    EU investigates tech giants like Apple, Meta, Alphabet, and Amazon for unfair practices under the Digital Markets Act. Concerns arise over violations, including self-preferencing and restricting user choice. Penalties may include hefty fines and divestments for non-compliance.

    Mains PYQ

    Q Elucidate the relationship between globalization and new technology in a world of scarce resources, with special reference to India. (UPSC IAS/2022)

    Q  Examine the impact of liberalization on companies owned by Indians. Are they competing with the MNCs satisfactorily? Discuss. (UPSC IAS/2013)

  • The countdown to a pandemic treaty

    Why in the news?

    In March 2021, a call for a pandemic treaty by 25 heads of government and international agencies marked a pivotal moment. The WHO Pandemic Agreement’s final negotiations began last week. With approval pending in May, its fate remains uncertain amid debates.

    Key features of Pandemic Agreement

    • Aim of the Pandemic Agreement: Address systemic failures revealed by COVID-19 crisis, strengthen global defenses, and prevent future pandemics from escalating into catastrophic human crises. Focus on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response with equity as the goal.
    • Coverage of Issues: Includes pathogen surveillance, healthcare workforce capacity, supply chain and logistics, technology transfer for vaccine production, and waivers of intellectual property rights. Aims to strengthen surveillance for pathogens with pandemic potential and manage antimicrobial resistance.
    • Equitable Access: Emphasis on equitable access to medical products across provisions, including language on principles, preparedness, production, technology transfer, access, benefit-sharing, supply, and procurement.
    • Establishment of Conference of Parties (COP): Proposed establishment to oversee the implementation of the Pandemic Agreement 

    Disagreements between Developing countries and Developed countries 

    • Developing vs. Developed Countries’ Perspectives: Developing countries largely embrace the revised negotiating text, emphasizing equity and clarity on obligations vs. responsibilities. Developed countries criticize the text, particularly regarding financing and intellectual property issues, considering them ‘redlines’.
    • Disagreements: Major substantive disagreements exist alongside general disagreement on negotiation modalities. Developing countries, represented by India among others, stress the importance of clarity on obligations to operationalize equity within the Agreement.

    Concerns related Pandemic Agreement

    • Equity Concerns:  Dissatisfaction among developed countries and the pharmaceutical industry regarding access and benefit-sharing provisions.
    • Global Governance and Enforcement Challenges: Lack of adequate enforcement mechanisms poses a significant challenge. Without robust enforcement, the Agreement risks being symbolic. Enforcement capabilities are vital for coordination efforts, stockpile management, medical response teams, and data sharing.
    • Issues related to technology transfer: Even with consensus on key issues like technology transfer and intellectual property waivers, the Agreement may be ineffective without robust enforcement mechanisms.
    • International Health Regulations (IHR): Existing IHR are legally binding but failed to prevent unjust travel restrictions, vaccine hoarding during COVID-19. Proposals for a decision-making body and a secretariat within the Agreement aim to address these shortcomings.

    Way Forward:

    • Negotiations Conclusion: The current round of negotiations in Geneva is set to conclude this week, to achieve a consensus decision by the World Health Assembly by the end of May.
    • Diluted Agreement: The possibility of a diluted Agreement looms large as there is pressure to achieve consensus. Contentious issues like intellectual property (IP) waivers may have diluted language, referring to national circumstances and using non-binding terms like “best endeavor.”
    • Collective Effort: The Agreement acknowledges that no single government or institution can tackle the threat of future pandemics alone, emphasizing the importance of international collaboration and cooperation.

    Conclusion: The Pandemic Agreement aims to address COVID-19 failures, emphasizing equity and preparedness. Disagreements persist, especially on access and enforcement. Negotiations aim for consensus, but risks of dilution remain amid pressure for agreement.

    Mains PYQ

    Q  COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented devastation worldwide. However, technological advancements are being availed readily to win over the crisis. Give an account of how technology was sought to aid management of the pandemic. (UPSC IAS/2020)

    Q  Critically examine the role of WHOin providing global health security during the Covid-19 pandemic. (UPSC IAS/2020)