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

Talk to Mentor

Subject: International Relations

Understanding the Russia through Ukraine War
Context
- Russia marks two anniversaries the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Soviet Union and the 31st anniversary of its dissolution. Following the Bolshevik Revolution in November 1917, the Soviet Union was proclaimed on December 30, 1922. Until its dissolution on December 26, 1991.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

How India looks at Russia?
- Special Strategic Partner: Vladimir Putin’s Russia continues to be valued as the heir to the Soviet Union and as a special strategic partner.
- Ukraine war has not affected the ties: Putin’s aggression against Ukraine and his brutal bombing of its civilian population, which Moscow claims is an integral part of Russia, has hardly made a dent in the way the Indian political classes think about the crisis.
- Russia as anti-imperialist: On the left and centre of the Indian political spectrum, the Soviet Union has been viewed purely through the ideological lens of progressive politics nationalist, internationalist, communist and anti-imperialist. That lens, however, is detached from the history of Russia and the continuing struggles for its political soul.
- Russia as best friend forever: Within the strategic community, the conviction that Russia is India’s “best friend forever” leaves little room for a nuanced view of Russia’s domestic and international politics.
Understanding Russia’s behaviour through Russian History
- The Bolshevik Revolution: It is initially sought to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church, eventually leveraged it in the deification of the Soviet state and lent a religious colour to the claim of Russian exceptionalism.
- Alliance with orthodoxy: Putin has taken the alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church to a higher level. For the Russian nationalists today, the effort to take back Ukraine is a “holy war”.
- Limited sovereignty to other communist state: After the Second World War, Soviet Russia insisted that fellow communist states had only “limited sovereignty” and Moscow had the right to intervene to keep them on the straight and narrow path of socialism and prevent their destabilisation. The military invasions in Hungary (1956), Czechoslovakia (1968), and Afghanistan (1979) were motivated by this impulse.
- Russia has not given up Imperialist tradition: In claiming that Ukraine has no sovereignty of its own, Putin is merely following that imperial tradition as well as the conviction that Ukraine, Belarus and Russian-speaking people everywhere are part of the “Russkiy Mir” or the “Russian world”.
- Mao’s characterization of Russia: After he broke from the Russian communists, Mao began to characterise Russia as an “imperial power”. Mao had not forgotten the persistent tension between the Chinese and Russian empires.
Analyzing Russia’s internal politics
- Weak federalism by Lenin: The founder of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin warned against the dangers of “great Russian chauvinism”. He insisted on structuring a federal polity with the right of various nationalities to secede.
- Strong soviet by Stalin: Stalin, however, turned Russian federalism into a hollow shell and erased the difference between the “Soviet Union” and “Soviet Russia”.
- Putin refuse to recognize Ukraine: Putin denounced Lenin for giving a separate identity to Ukraine. “Modern Ukraine”, Putin said, “can with good reason be called ‘Vladimir Ilyich Lenin’s Ukraine’.”
- Stalling the democratic process: The enduring autocratic impulse in Moscow that is rooted in the stalled democratic revolution. Traditionally, the Russian fear of disorder has left the population to put great faith in strong leaders.
- Centralising tendency: The frequent but unsuccessful efforts at political liberalisation have left a fertile ground in Russia for centralising power under leaders like Putin and increasing the chances of grave miscalculation.
What should be the India’s approach towards Russia?
- Not directly criticize Russia: Although it has been reluctant to directly criticise Russian aggression, official India is not blind to the fact that Putin’s “special military operation” has gone horribly wrong.
- Taking note of changing world order: India will inevitably find ways to adjust to the tectonic shifts in the world order triggered by Putin’s misadventure.
- Learning from Putin’s mistake: The Indian political and strategic communities must come to terms with the many complex factors that have contributed to Putin’s egregious errors in Ukraine.
Conclusion
- To understand how the war in Ukraine might play out and its longer-term consequences for India, India’s discourse must pay greater attention to the turbulent history of Russia and its troubled relations with its Central European neighbours.
December 27, 2022
India-EU Free Trade Agreement
Context
- The third round of negotiations of the India-European Union (EU) free trade agreement concluded recently. The two sides are also negotiating an investment protection agreement (IPA), which will contain investment protection standards and an independent mechanism to settle disputes between investors and states under international law.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Why EU is seeking Investor Protection Agreement?
- Regulatory troubles in India: Notwithstanding the laudable intent of the government to welcome them, foreign investors in India have often got into numerous regulatory troubles with the state.
- Investors have sued India: Several foreign corporations like Vodafone, Cairn Energy, Nissan, White Industries, Telenor, Nokia, Vedanta have sued India to enforce the rights guaranteed to them in bilateral investment treaties (BITs). This is the main motivation behind the EU seeking an IPA with India.
- India’s past of unilaterally changing the laws: EU investors can rely on Indian law for protection. But Indian law can be unilaterally changed to the detriment of the investor.
- Slow Judicial process: The Indian judiciary is agonisingly slow in resolving disputes. Thus, the longing for protection under international law.
What are the hurdles finalization INDIA-EU treaty?
- Non-justiciable tax regulations: India wants to push taxation measures outside the scope of the treaty by making tax-related regulatory measures non-justiciable. The EU has difficulty accepting this proposition given the recent history of India’s tax-related investment disputes with Vodafone, Cairn Energy, and Nissan.
- Two tier court system: The EU’s investment proposal to India talks of creating a two-tier court-like system with an appellate mechanism and tenured judges to resolve treaty disputes between investors and the state.
- EU’s proposal of MIC: This proposal is connected to the EU’s stand internationally for creating a multilateral investment court (MIC), negotiations for which are going on at the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). The MIC is aimed at overcoming the weaknesses of the current arbitration-based system of settling investor-state disputes.
- Lack of clarity from India’s side: India’s position on creating an investment-court-like system is unknown. India hasn’t publicly contributed to the ongoing negotiations at UNCITRAL towards establishing a MIC.
What is the issue of MFN and FET?
- EU wants the MFN status: The EU’s investment proposal contains a most favoured nation (MFN) provision to ensure that EU investors do not face discrimination vis-à-vis other foreign investors.
- India don’t want to include MFN: On the other hand, India’s position is not to include the MFN provision in its investment treaties because of the apprehension that foreign investors will use the MFN clause to indulge in disruptive treaty shopping. The solution to such disruptive treaty shopping is to negotiate for a qualified MFN provision and not exclude it altogether.
- Fair equitable treatment: EU investment proposal contains what is known as a fair and equitable treatment (FET) provision, which is missing in the Indian 2016 Model BIT.
- Making the state liable: The FET provision protects foreign investors, for example, by making the states liable if it goes back on the specific assurances made to an investor to induce investments on which the investor relied while making the investment.
Why IPA is need of the hour?
- FDI is stagnant: Overall FDI to India has stagnated for the past decade at around 2 per cent of the GDP. In the case of the EU, while its share in foreign investment stock in India increased from €63.7 billion in 2017 to €87.3 billion in 2020, this is way below the EU foreign investment stocks in China (€201.2 billion) or Brazil (€263.4 billion).
- Negative Impact of BIT terminations: Recent research shows that India’s decision to unilaterally terminate BITs has negatively impacted FDI inflows to India.
- IPA needed to attract FDI: India needs the IPA with the EU to attract FDI for achieving the aspirational milestone of becoming a $10-trillion economy by 2030.
Conclusion
- India needs to put its own house in order. India should review the 2016 Model BIT, as has also been recommended by the Parliament’s standing committee on external affairs.
Mains Question

Q. What is the investor protection scheme and why EU wants to include IPA in Free Trade Agreement with India? what are the hurdles in FTA between EU and India?

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 26, 2022
Global Minimum Tax on big businesses
Members of the EU last week agreed in principle to implement a global minimum tax of 15% on big businesses.

Global Minimum Corporate Tax
- Major economies are aiming to discourage multinational companies from shifting profits – and tax revenues – to low-tax countries regardless of where their sales are made.
- Increasingly, income from intangible sources such as drug patents, software, and royalties on intellectual property has migrated to these jurisdictions.
- This has allowed companies to avoid paying higher taxes in their traditional home countries.
What is the recent EU agreement?
- EU members have agreed to implement a minimum tax rate of 15% on big businesses in accordance with Pillar 2 of the global tax agreement framed by the OECD last year.
- Under the OECD’s plan, governments will be equipped to impose additional taxes in case companies are found to be paying taxes that are considered too low.
- This is to ensure that big businesses with global operations do not benefit by domiciling themselves in tax havens in order to save on taxes.
Need for a global minimum tax
- Corporate tax rates across the world have been dropping over the last few decades as a result of competition between governments to spur economic growth through greater private investments.
- Large multinational companies have traditionally paid taxes in their home countries even though they did most of their business in foreign countries.
- The OECD plan tries to give more taxing rights to the governments of countries where large businesses conduct a substantial amount of their business.
- As a result, large US tech companies may have to pay more taxes to the governments of developing countries.
History of such taxes
- Global corporate tax rates have fallen from over 40% in the 1980s to under 25% in 2020.
- The global tax competition was kick-started by former US President Ronald Reagan and former British PM Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s.
- The OECD’s tax plan tries to put an end to this “race to the bottom” which has made it harder for governments to shore up the revenues required to fund their rising spending budgets.
- The minimum tax proposal is particularly relevant at a time when the fiscal state of governments across the world has deteriorated as seen in the worsening of public debt metrics.
Response to the EU move
- Some governments, particularly those of traditional tax havens, are likely to disagree and stall the implementation of the OECD’s tax plan.
- High tax jurisdictions like the EU are more likely to fully adopt the minimum tax plan as it saves them from having to compete against low tax jurisdictions.
- Low tax jurisdictions, on the other hand, are likely to resist the OECD’s plan unless they are compensated sufficiently in other ways.
Way forward
- Supporters of the OECD’s tax plan believe that it will end the global “race to the bottom” and help governments collect the revenues required for social spending.
- The plan will also help counter rising global inequality by making it tougher for large businesses to pay low taxes by availing the services of tax havens.
- Critics of the OECD’s proposal, however, see the global minimum tax as a threat.
- They argue that without tax competition between governments, the world would be taxed a lot more than it is today, thus adversely affecting global economic growth.
- In other words, these critics believe that it is the threat of tax competition that keeps a check on governments that would otherwise tax their citizens heavily to fund profligate spending programs.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 20, 2022
UK’s Rwanda asylum seeker deportation plan is lawful, court rules
Britain’s plan to send migrants to Rwanda is lawful, London’s High Court ruled, in a victory for PM Rishi Sunak who has made a high-stakes political promise to tackle the record number of migrant arrivals.

Immigrant’s crisis in UK
- Since 2018, there has been a marked rise in the number of refugees and asylum seekers that undertake dangerous crossings between Calais in France and Dover in England.
- Most such migrants and asylum seekers hail from war-torn countries like Sudan, Afghanistan, and Yemen, or developing countries like Iran and Iraq.
- The Britain that has adopted a hardline stance on illegal immigration, these crossings constitute an immigration crisis.
- The Nationality and Borders Bill, 2021, which is still under consideration in the UK, allows the British government to strip anyone’s citizenship without notice under “exceptional circumstances”.
- The Rwanda deal is the operationalization of one objective in the Bill which is to deter illegal entry into the United Kingdom.
What is the Rwanda Deal?
- The UK and Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership or the Rwanda Deal is a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the two governments.
- Under this deal, Rwanda will commit to taking in asylum seekers who arrive in the UK on or after January 1, 2022, using illegally facilitated and unlawful cross border migration.
- Rwanda will function as the holding centre where asylum applicants will wait while the Rwandan government makes decisions about their asylum and resettlement petitions in Rwanda.
- Rwanda will, on its part, accommodate anyone who is not a minor and does not have a criminal record.
Rationale of the deal
- The deal aims to combat “people smugglers”, who often charge exorbitant prices from vulnerable migrants to put them on unseaworthy boats from France to England that often lead to mass drownings.
- The UK contends that this solution to the migrant issue is humane and meant to target the gangs that run these illegal crossings.
What will the scheme cost the UK?
- The UK will pay Rwanda £120 million as part of an “economic transformation and integration fund” and will also bear the operational costs along with an, as yet undetermined, amount for each migrant.
- Currently, the UK pays £4.7 million per day to accommodate approximately 25,000 asylum seekers.
- At the end of 2021, this amounted to £430 million annually with a projected increase of £100 million in 2022.
- The Rwanda Deal is predicted to reduce these costs by outsourcing the hosting of such migrants to a third country.
Will the Rwanda Deal solve the problem of illegal immigration?
- This deal will be implemented in a matter of weeks unless it is challenged and stayed by British courts.
- While Boris Johnson’s government is undoubtedly bracing for such legal challenges, it remains unclear if the Rwanda Deal will solve the problem of unlawful crossings.
- Evidence from similar experiences indicates that such policies do not fully combat “people smuggling”.
Criticisms of the deal
- There are dangers of transferring refugees and asylum seekers to third countries without sufficient safeguards.
- The refugees are traded like commodities and transferred abroad for processing.
- Such arrangements simply shift asylum responsibilities, evade international obligations, and are contrary to the letter and spirit of the Refugee Convention.
- Rwanda also has a known track record of extrajudicial killings, suspicious deaths in custody, unlawful or arbitrary detention, torture, and abusive prosecutions, particularly targeting critics and dissidents.
Do any other countries send asylum seekers overseas?
- Yes, several other countries — including Australia, Israel and Denmark — have been sending asylum seekers overseas.
- Australia has been making full use of offshore detention centres since 2001.
- Israel, too, chose to deal with a growing influx of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants from places like Sudan and Eritrea by striking deals with third countries.
- Those rejected for asylum were given the choice of returning to their home country or accepting $3,500 and a plane ticket to one of the third countries.
- They faced the threat of arrest if they chose to remain in Israel.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 20, 2022
The Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in IOR
Context
- The Indian Ocean Region (IOR) serves as a connecting hub for global energy and commodity trade and comprises important Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) and major choke points. The IOR has become central to the geostrategic aspirations of large powers with vested interests in the region. Small Island Developing States (SIDS) located in the Western Indian Ocean such as Maldives, Madagascar, Comoros, Mauritius, and Seychelles, are being dragged into the great power rivalry as a result.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
- Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are a distinct group of 38 UN Member States and 20 Non-UN Members/Associate Members of United Nations regional commissions that face unique social, economic and environmental vulnerabilities.
- The three geographical regions in which SIDS are located are: the Caribbean, the Pacific, and the Atlantic, Indian Ocean and South China Sea (AIS)
- SIDS were recognized as a special case both for their environment and development at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Significance of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) of IOR
- SIDS are strategically important: The geographical location of SIDS islands is of strategic importance, ever since the Indo-Pacific architecture materialised.
- Provides easy access and a base for replenishment: The islands provide easy access to the choke points, are located close to important SLOCs, and can serve as a base for the replenishment of resources for maritime powers conducting surveillance in the region.
- Engagements boosts maritime expanse: The bigger powers have been engaging with the islands on a larger scale to boost their presence in this maritime expanse.
Challenges faced by SIDS
- Multiple challenges: The SIDS, by nature, face multiple challenges due to their remote locations, size, fragile ecosystems, small population, and limited resources and capabilities. Most of the SIDS are classified as middle-income states, but SIDS like Comoros are among the Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
- Economies are not diversified: The economies of these states are not diversified and are highly dependent on a few sectors like tourism and fisheries.
- Climate change and losses due to natural disasters: Climate change exacerbates their challenges, adding an extra burden on their frail economies. The SIDS account for two-thirds of states that suffer the highest relative losses (1 percent to 9 percent of GDP per year) due to natural disasters.
- Rising sea levels and impact on various economic sectors: Apart from the threat of the low-lying islands going underwater in the future, rising sea levels directly impact the economic sectors of the SIDS. For instance, saltwater intrusion affects freshwater resources and diminishes the quality of agricultural land.
- Largely dependent on food imports: The SIDS are already largely dependent on food imports as 50 percent of the SIDS import more than 80 percent of their food. A further reduction in food production will increase their dependence on food imports. Self-sufficiency is a distant dream for SIDS in this aspect.
- Fishery industry a major contributor of economy facing challenges of loss of EEZ: Fish exports account for a large share of the revenue for these states. The fishery industry faces challenges of loss of Exclusive Economic Zones due to shifting baselines, and Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing.
- Rising sea temperature: Additionally, rising sea temperatures also negatively affect marine biomass in the resource-rich zones of SIDS.
- Tourism industry hampered by Pandemic: Almost 50 percent of the GDP of SIDS like the Maldives and Seychelles, depends on the tourism industry which was hampered by the pandemic. T
Powerplay and China’s maritime development strategy in SIDS of IOR
- Concerns about increasing influence China: Powers such as the US, Japan, Australia, and India are largely concerned with the increasing influence of China in the region.
- China’s island development strategy: Islands play a major role in China’s maritime security policy, as is evident by its island development strategies in the contested South China Sea and cooperation initiatives with island states in various geographies.
- Vulnerable SIDS welcomed Support initiatives from China: The SIDS have welcomed the development and support initiatives from China owing to their vulnerabilities. From a port development project in Madagascar and major infrastructure development projects in the Comoros islands to a Free Trade Agreement with Mauritius and development assistance to Maldives; China has firmly embedded its roots in the region.
- Maldives in debt trap seeks India’s assistance: When Maldives owed a debt of nearly US$1.5 billion to China in 2018, it had to turn to its traditional partner, India, for assistance to prevent an economic crisis.
- Madagascar worries about Chinese debt trap: Madagascar is also heavily surrounded by Chinese presence and involvement in its economy and is worried about being trapped in debt. Chinese-funded enterprises comprise 90 percent of the island’s economy. Chinese migrants left very few job opportunities for the locals, disrupted trade and commerce, and established a monopoly of Chinese products in the market. Such a heavy involvement of China in Madagascar puts it at a high risk of instability and political upheaval. This is a clear example of how the strategic interests of large powers can bring the SIDS to the brink of collapse.
Opportunity to discuss and maintain stability through various forums
- SAMOA pathway: SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (SAMOA) Pathway which is an international framework under the UN umbrella that has initiated a stronger action from the international community to support the vulnerable islands. It guides national, regional, and international development efforts to help these states achieve their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
- Alliance of small Island states: Similarly, the Alliance of Small Island States is a representative body of 39 small island states that provides a platform to voice their grievances.
- Indian ocean commission: The Indian Ocean Commission is yet another intergovernmental body that consists of the islands; Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles and Réunion (French overseas region).
What SIDS must do?
- The SIDS of IOR must strengthen their collaboration with each other.
- They must make a collective effort to make their challenges and issues known to the other actors.
- The SIDS should make use of the opportunity to ensure that the larger powers understand their security interests and include it in the larger security architecture
Way ahead
- In most cases, decisions regarding security in the region have been taken by the influential, and larger powers without the SIDS.
- The SIDS of the IOR can leverage their strategic position and use it to their advantage to make the larger powers acknowledge their security interests and issues.
- The need of the hour is for stronger alliances and regional groupings to emerge, with significant participation of the SIDS, so that other actors do not downplay or overlook their issues and interests.
Conclusion
- The SIDS have been advocating at various international forums for support and assistance to combat their challenges associated with resources, development, climate change, and most of all, survival. Rather than being viewed as pawns in the geopolitical competition, the SIDS must be viewed as important stakeholders in the region. This is the main change in the mindset, policies and approaches that are needed for secure and stable region.
Mains Question

Q. What is SIDS (Small Island Developing States). What is the significance of SIDS in IOR? Discuss the challenges faced by SIDS in the region and suggest a way ahead.

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 19, 2022
Back in news: Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)
India strongly condemned the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation chief’s visit to Line of Control (LoC) from the Pakistani side.

What is OIC?
- The OIC — formerly Organisation of the Islamic Conference — is the world’s second-largest inter-governmental organization after the UN, with a membership of 57 states.
- The OIC’s stated objective is “to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony among various people of the world”.
- OIC has reserved membership for Muslim-majority countries. Russia, Thailand, and a couple of other small countries have Observer status.
India and OIC
- At the 45th session of the Foreign Ministers’ Summit in 2018, Bangladesh suggested that India, where more than 10% of the world’s Muslims live, should be given Observer status.
- In 1969, India was dis-invited from the Conference of Islamic Countries in Rabat, Morocco at Pakistan’s behest.
- Then Agriculture Minister Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed was dis-invited upon arrival in Morocco after Pakistan President Yahya Khan lobbied against Indian participation.
Recent developments
- In 2019, India made its maiden appearance at the OIC Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Abu Dhabi, as a “guest of honor”.
- This first-time invitation was seen as a diplomatic victory for New Delhi, especially at a time of heightened tensions with Pakistan following the Pulwama attack.
- Pakistan had opposed the invitation to Swaraj and it boycotted the plenary after the UAE turned down its demand to rescind the invitation.
- Earlier this year, the ousted Pakistani PM called a OIC summit which ended up without any remarks.
What is the OIC’s stand on Kashmir?
- It has been generally supportive of Pakistan’s stand on Kashmir and has issued statements criticizing India.
- Last year, after India revoked Article 370 in Kashmir, Pakistan lobbied with the OIC for their condemnation of the move.
- To Pakistan’s surprise, Saudi Arabia and the UAE — both top leaders among the Muslim countries — issued nuanced statements, and were not as harshly critical of New Delhi as Islamabad had hoped.
- Since then, Islamabad has tried to rouse sentiments among the Islamic countries, but only a handful of them — Turkey and Malaysia — publicly criticized India.
How has India been responding?
- India has consistently underlined that J&K is an integral part of India and is a matter strictly internal to India.
- The strength with which India has made this assertion has varied slightly at times, but never the core message.
- It has maintained its “consistent and well known” stand that the OIC had no locus standi.
- India asserts that- OIC has become a “mouthpiece” of Pakistan and that the organisation has been taking “blatantly communal, partisan and factually incorrect approach to issues”.
OIC members and India
- Individually, India has good relations with almost all member nations. Ties with the UAE and Saudi Arabia, especially, have looked up significantly in recent years.
- The OIC includes two of India’s close neighbors, Bangladesh and Maldives.
- Indian diplomats say both countries privately admit they do not want to complicate their bilateral ties with India on Kashmir but play along with OIC.
Way ahead
- India now sees the duality of the OIC as untenable, since many of these countries have good bilateral ties and convey to India to ignore OIC statements.
- But these countries sign off on the joint statements which are largely drafted by Pakistan.
- India feels it important to challenge the double-speak since Pakistan’s campaign and currency on the Kashmir issue have hardly any takers in the international community.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 14, 2022
India-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is good for both countries
Context
- The ties between India and the UK are often described as a Living Bridge, a dynamic economic force of people, businesses and ideas. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi drives forward plans to make India a developed nation within the next 25 years and the UK forges deeper trade relationships around the globe, our connections are growing stronger every day.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Background: How India-UK trade relationship taking shape in recent time?
- Enhanced trade relationship: India and the UK are two of the largest economies on the planet. Economic relationship between the two is reaching new heights with an enhanced trade partnership.
- Minimised trade barriers: Both have lowered several trade barriers, pledged to bring down many more and set an ambitious target to double the value of India-UK trade by 2030.
- Opening up opportunities in UK: Since then, Indian firms, including established businesses and recent startups, have been finding opportunities in the UK.
- Business and investment in India: British businesses in fields ranging from food to financial services are expanding and investing in India. The car manufacturer, McLaren, which has just opened a showroom in Mumbai, is one example.
- FTA’s beneficial for future and mutual growth: An India-UK free trade agreement is a natural next step for both, bringing two nations with extraordinary plans for their futures closer still.
What are Free trade agreements (FTA)?
- Free trade agreements are agreements between the two or more countries or trading blocks that primarily agrees to eliminate or reduce customer tariff and non-tariff barriers on substantial trade between them.
Importance of Free Trade Agreements
- 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.
How a Free trade agreement with UK will benefit India?
- Greater market access works both ways: Prime Minister Modi has urged Indian businesses to export their products to the world with “zero-effect, zero-defect”. In other words, high-quality goods with no environmental impact. A free trade agreement between our nations could further help achieve this target. It would help Indian firms to sell to a market that imported almost £820 billion of goods and services from around the world in the last 12 months on record.
- UK will aid in the ongoing India’s economic progress: The Indian economy’s future is an exciting one, with the prospect of new technologies, growing businesses and better jobs for its citizens. The UK has the skills and experience to aid this progress. A deal that’s right for both could make it cheaper and easier for ambitious Indian businesses to tap into this expertise. It is also only right that the millions of SMEs that power India’s economy benefit from a deal.
- Investment in one another’s economy will multiply the opportunities: The British cybersecurity solutions firm, Telesoft Technologies, has just said it will pump £10 million into its India subsidiary over the next five years supporting a growing telecoms sector. A free trade agreement that smooths British and Indian firms’ path to invest in one another’s economy would mean such opportunities multiply.
- FTA can be a force of primary economic growth in uncertain times: A free trade agreement’s value cannot be measured entirely in rupees and pounds. Covid-19’s impact on supply chains, slow global economic growth and volatile markets mean we are living in uncertain times, where free trade could be the primary force of prosperity throughout history. It will help to build the long-term security that people around the world need right now.
Conclusion
- In the economic uncertainty, free trade can be considered as answer to building the long-term security that people around the world need right now. In this, the year of its 75th anniversary since Independence and its G20 Presidency, India is on a path to a new economic future. It would be great to have UK alongside on this journey, as we together can use trade to benefit our citizens and the world.
Mains question

Q. Trade between India and UK is on upward trend. Free trade agreement between the two will surely benefit both the countries. How India can take advantage of the FTA between the two?

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 13, 2022
Indian Army and PLA clash near Arunachal Border
The Indian troops deployed in the area of face-off in Tawang sector gave a befitting response to the Chinese troops and the number of Chinese soldiers injured in the clash is more than the Indian soldiers.

Increased clashes at LAC
- In January 2021, Indian and Chinese troops were involved in a face-off in a disputed stretch in Nakula area of North Sikkim.
- In 2017, troops of India and China were engaged in a 73-day stand-off in Doklam tri-junction area which even triggered fears of a war between the two neighbours.
What is LAC- the Line of Actual Control?
- The LAC is the demarcation that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory.
- India considers the LAC to be 3,488 km long, while the Chinese consider it to be only around 2,000 km.
- It is divided into three sectors: the eastern sector which spans Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim, the middle sector in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh, and the western sector in Ladakh.
- The LAC is only a concept – it is not agreed upon by the two countries, neither delineated on a map nor demarcated on the ground.
When did India accept the LAC?
- The LAC was discussed during Chinese Premier Li Peng’s 1991 visit to India, where PM P V Narasimha Rao and Li reached an understanding to maintain peace and tranquillity at the LAC.
- India formally accepted the concept of the LAC when Rao paid a return visit to Beijing in 1993 and the two sides signed the Agreement to Maintain Peace and Tranquillity at the LAC.
- The reference to the LAC was unqualified to make it clear that it was not referring to the LAC of 1959 or 1962 but to the ‘LAC’ at the time when the agreement was signed.
- To reconcile the differences about some areas, the two countries agreed that the Joint Working Group on the border issue would take up the task of clarifying the alignment of the LAC.
Issues with LAC
- India’s claim line is the line seen in the official boundary marked on the maps as released by the Survey of India, including both Aksai Chin and Gilgit-Baltistan.
- In China’s case, it corresponds mostly to its claim line, but in the eastern sector, it claims entire Arunachal Pradesh as South Tibet.
- However, the claim lines come into question when a discussion on the final international boundaries takes place, and not when the conversation is about a working border, say the LAC.
Why is LAC so disputed?
- The delineation of the LAC has also not been done based on the accepted norms of control.
- This has resulted in the existence of a number of areas of differing perceptions all across the LAC which is the primary cause of conflict.
- China has changed its documented stance and has been looking for justifications for the conflict escalation.
Worry for India
- China is developing infrastructure in the Indian-claimed areas.
- Moreover, it is being developed at an unprecedented pace by China in these areas.
- These are potential sovereignty markers which will be a restricting factor for future negotiations.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 13, 2022
Understanding the principal contradiction, keeping China at the Centre
Context
- If principal contradictions must determine strategic priorities, New Delhi should decide what its principal contradiction is. China is contemporary India’s principal strategic contradiction. Every other challenge, be it Pakistan, internal insurgencies, and difficulties in relations with its neighbours, fall in the category of secondary contradictions.
What is principal contradiction?
- The concept of a principal contradiction is one that poses the most intense challenge to an individual/organisation, and has the power to shape its future choices and consequent outcomes useful method of optimising and prioritising strategic decision-making.
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

Principal contradiction with China
- Straightforward question over the decisions taken by the policymakers: Major decisions in New Delhi’s strategic decision matrix should pass the China test, which amounts to asking and answering a rather straightforward question: “does x or y decision/development/relationship help deal with the China challenge, or not?”
- China test a tool for policy making: A perspicacious ‘China test’ can help prioritise strategic decision making in the longer run, at least as an analytical tool with potential policy utility.
Elements of ‘China test’
- From an operational point of view, the ‘China test’ consists of three distinct elements.
- Assessment of Indian decisions: an assessment of how a certain Indian decision or a specific regional development square with Chinese regional strategy or interests.
- Assessment if the decisions need Modifications: An assessment of whether India’s decision or a certain regional development would require India to make modifications at the level of secondary contradictions.
- Assessment if it requires a major policy change: An assessment of whether this would require any major policy changes internally. Let me highlight the utility of the ‘China test’ using a few examples.
Analysis of India-U.S. relations applying the China test
- Relations are more of Interest driven: New Delhi has had a complicated relationship with Washington which is increasingly getting normalised and interests-driven. Despite its withdrawal from the region, Washington is seeking to re-engage southern Asia (Pakistan, South Asia in general, the Indo-Pacific, and perhaps even the Taliban).
- India’s growing proximity to the U.S: It appears that one of the lessons New Delhi learnt from the standoff with China along the Line of Actual Control in 2020 was that it was perhaps a consequence of India’s growing proximity to the U.S.
- lack of/lukewarm India-U.S. strategic engagement in the region may help China: Given that Beijing seeks to dominate the region, it is clearly not in its interest to see an American reengagement of the region or growing India-U.S. proximity. If so, the lack of/lukewarm India-U.S. strategic engagement in the region is precisely what would help Beijing’s long-term objectives.
Analysis of India-Russia relations applying the China test
- Relations in the wake of Ukraine war: India-Russia relations in the wake of the Ukraine war are among the most debated bilateral relationships in the world today.
- Question arises by applying the China test: India-Russia relations in the face of western pressure on India to decouple from Moscow. “Does continuing its relationship with Moscow help New Delhi better deal with the China challenge?”
- What the U.S. and its allies offer India to condemn Russia: The U.S. and its allies would like India to stop engaging with Moscow and condemn its aggression against Ukraine which India has refused to do so far. In return, there is on offer greater accommodation of Indian interests including perhaps diplomatic and political support against Chinese aggression.
- The challenge of growing proximity between Moscow and Beijing: There is also the growing proximity between Moscow and Beijing which reduces the robustness of India-Russia relations. So, does the China test require New Delhi to continue to engage with Moscow against all these odds?
What could be the consequences If India chooses to accept the US offer and deviate from strong India-Russia ties?
- Sino-Russian cooperation is likely to strengthen: In the absence of an India-Russia relationship, the extent of Sino-Russian cooperation is likely to strengthen, and India will be cut out of the continental space to its north and west.
- China may replace India as a Natural beneficiary of energy at discounted price and thereby support to Pakistan: New Delhi continues to get discounted energy, cheaper defence equipment If India decides to break away from Russia, many of these could come to a grinding halt, and the natural beneficiary of such an eventuality will, undoubtedly, be China. This could also push Moscow towards Pakistan with or without some nudging from Beijing.
- India a trusted partner for Russia: It is also important to note that Moscow is not keen to have China dominate the strategic space around it and has been keen to balance the growing influence of China in Central Asia with partners such as New Delhi. New Delhi’s turn away from Moscow will ensure that China gets a free hand in Central Asia too. In one sense, therefore, the China piece best explains the enigma called India-Russia relations.
What the China test suggests?
- Avoiding the short-term temptation and look a bigger picture: New Delhi should not give into the short-term temptation of not being on the wrong side of China given its long-term implications. While the fears of such a relationship irking China may not be entirely unjustified, they invariably play into the Chinese strategy of boxing India in the region.
- Break away from Russia may likely to play in Chinese strategy for Boxing India: If indeed New Delhi was to completely break away from Russia (as India’s U.S. and western partners have asked India to), Such a decision is most likely to play into China’s hands. India-Russia relations are on the wane, there is a strong rationale for New Delhi to continue its relationship with Moscow which is China.
- China test require India to pacify its relationship with Pakistan: The question to ask here is “does making (relative) peace with Pakistan help India better deal with China?”. For China, the best-case scenario is an India vigorously preoccupied with Pakistan which ensures that India is not focused on the growing threat from China, thereby providing Beijing with the opportunity to displace traditional Indian primacy in South Asia. So, for India, a course-correction on Pakistan, even if it is only post facto, is a strategically sensible one.
- Focus should on China, more than the Pakistan: What India should actively seek is not a balance of power in South Asia with Pakistan but balancing Chinese power in Southern Asia. Hence, India’s objective in South Asia should be to seek a pacification of conflicts with Pakistan, so that it can focus on China.
Conclusion
- For New Delhi, the message from the China test is a rather straightforward one that the smart balancing China in Southern Asia and beyond must form a key element in India’s grand strategic planning and decision making.
Mains question

Q. What do you understand by the concept of principal contradiction? Explain it shortly keeping China at the Centre of India’s strategic planning and decision making.

(Click) FREE1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 12, 2022
Singapore Declaration of ILO
CONTEXT: The 17th Asia-Pacific Regional Meeting of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) set ten-point priorities of national action under the Singapore Declaration.

Singapore Declaration
- It seeks to draw attention for the member countries to deal with the issue of dwindling wages of workers, inflation and unemployment.
- It was adopted by the delegates representing governments, employers and workers’ governments, employers and workers in the regions.
- Members agreed that social dialogue is essential to address labour market challenges and finding solutions in crisis situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic, natural disasters, and economic uncertainty.
Key point priorities
1. Ensure labour protection for all through the promotion of freedom of association
2. Recognition of the right to collective bargaining, including for workers in vulnerable situations and workers in the informal economy, as enabling rights for decent work
3. Closing gender gaps, increase women’s labour force participation, promote equal pay for work of equal value, balance work and responsibilities, and promoting women’s leadership.
4. Develop and implement inclusive labour market programmes and policies that support life transitions and demographic shifts.
5. Pursue collective and determined efforts to promote and accelerate a smooth and sustained transition from the informal to formal economy
6. Strengthen governance frameworks and respect for freedom of association for migrant workers
7. Strengthen the foundation for social and employment protection and resilience
8. Expanding social protection to all workers, guaranteeing universal access to comprehensive, adequate and sustainable social protection for all
Click and get your FREE Copy of CURRENT AFFAIRS Micro Notes

(Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more
December 10, 2022