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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • [18th October 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Better global governance led by China and India

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023] Virus of Conflict is affecting the functioning of the SCO.” In the light of the above statement, point out the role of India in mitigating problems.

    Linkage: This PYQ is important as it tests India’s diplomatic balance within the SCO, amid regional rivalries. The article connects by showing how the Xi–Modi meeting and Global Governance Initiative reflect India’s role in restoring trust and strengthening multilateralism within the SCO framework.

    Mentor’s Comment

    As the world enters a phase of geopolitical churn and institutional fatigue, the call for a reformed, people-centric global governance system grows louder. The 75th anniversary of India-China diplomatic ties and the 80th year of the UN offer a historical moment: two Asian giants, once colonised, now rising powers, can redefine global order. For UPSC aspirants, this theme bridges multilateral diplomacy, global reforms, and India’s evolving foreign policy—key areas across GS Paper 2 and IR essays.

    Introduction

    The year 2025 marks a milestone in both bilateral and global history. India and China, home to over 2.8 billion people, commemorate 75 years of diplomatic relations, even as the United Nations celebrates its 80th anniversary. Against the backdrop of unilateralism and weakening multilateralism, the Global Governance Initiative (GGI) proposed by China, with India’s cooperation, offers a blueprint for a more equitable international order. As Asia’s two leading powers move from rivalry to partnership, their convergence could transform the world’s governance architecture, symbolising a decisive shift toward multipolarity and shared prosperity.

    Why is the India-China cooperation in 2025 a landmark moment?

    1. Historical Context: The two leaders, Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, have met 18 times since 2014, an unprecedented frequency symbolising sustained engagement despite border tensions.
    2. Symbolic Restoration: The bilateral meeting at the 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan (2024) and now at the 25th SCO Summit in Tianjin (2025) reflects a conscious reset in relations.
    3. Global Expectation: Their 19th meeting during the Tianjin Summit is being seen globally as a moment to restore balance to multilateral decision-making, especially amid Western dominance fatigue.
    4. Public Diplomacy: Both sides emphasise “partners, not rivals,” signaling a shift from competition to cooperation.

    What is changing in the global governance discourse?

    1. Erosion of Trust: The early 21st century witnessed rising unilateralism, protectionism, and hegemonism, eroding faith in international institutions.
    2. UN at 80: The UN system, though foundational, now faces criticism for its limited representation of developing nations and sluggish response to global crises.
    3. Reform Imperative: The question before humanity is not just “who governs” but “how governance is shared.” The article highlights the need for reform without rupture, evolving existing systems rather than replacing them.
    4. Asia’s Moment: The decline of Western dominance and the rise of Asia and Eurasia are redefining the rules of the game, with India and China at the center.

    What is the Global Governance Initiative (GGI)?

    1. New Vision: The GGI, announced by President Xi at the Tianjin SCO Summit, aims to correct the deficit in global governance by promoting a fair, inclusive order.
    • Five Core Principles:
      1. Sovereign Equality: Respect for all nations’ independence and dignity; greater democracy in international relations.
      2. Rule of Law: Equal application of international law and rejection of double standards.
      3. Multilateralism: Strengthening the UN as the core platform for global decision-making.
      4. People-Centric Approach: Governance should prioritise well-being, safety, and fulfillment of citizens globally.
      5. Real Results Orientation: Developed nations must shoulder more responsibility, while developing nations must cooperate for shared solutions.
      6. Essence: The GGI is not about creating parallel institutions but reforming and improving existing ones to respond effectively to modern challenges.

    How can India-China cooperation strengthen multilateralism?

    1. Shared Responsibilities: Both countries, as major developing economies and SCO/BRICS members, bear the responsibility to defend international fairness and justice.
    2. Strategic Coordination: The leaders’ dialogue stresses communication on major international and regional issues to bridge divides in the Global South.

    Complementary Visions:

    1. China’s “community of shared future for mankind”
    2. India’s “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (One Earth, One Family, One Future)
    3. Together, they embody the moral and developmental leadership needed for a post-Western global order.
    4. Practical Gains: Resumption of direct flights, maintenance of border stability, and enhanced trade cooperation show concrete steps toward normalisation.

    What challenges lie ahead for India-China collaboration?

    1. Trust Deficit: Lingering border disputes and differing political models may slow strategic trust-building.
    2. Competing Ambitions: While both aspire to leadership in the Global South, perception management and narrative balance will be crucial.
    3. Western Reaction: The West may perceive India-China cooperation as a counterweight to transatlantic power, potentially complicating India’s strategic autonomy.
    4. Need for Institutionalisation: Long-term progress demands institutional mechanisms, track-II dialogues, multilateral coordination cells, and joint UN reform working groups.

    Conclusion

    The India-China partnership in 2025 signals more than a diplomatic milestone, it represents a potential rebalancing of world order. As the UN turns 80, the call for shared leadership between emerging powers grows urgent. If pursued with mutual trust and strategic maturity, the GGI-led collaboration can make the 21st century truly an Asian century rooted in equity, inclusivity, and sustainability. In a fractured world, cooperation, not competition, may be the only path to survival and progress.

  • UN Global Geospatial Information Management for Asia and the Pacific (UN-GGIM-AP)

    Why in the News?

    India has been elected as Co-Chair of the Regional Committee of the United Nations Global Geospatial Information Management for Asia and the Pacific (UN-GGIM-AP) for a three-year term till 2028.

    About UN-GGIM-Asia and the Pacific (UN-GGIM-AP):

    • Objective: Maximises social, economic, and environmental benefits of geospatial data through regional collaboration, innovation, and policy harmonisation.
    • Overview: It is one of the five regional committees under the UN Committee of Experts on Global Geospatial Information Management (UN-GGIM).
    • Function: Serves as the highest inter-governmental platform in the region for joint decision-making on geospatial data generation, governance, and utilisation.
    • Mandate: Coordinates geospatial policy, promotes data standardisation, and supports applications in sustainable development, disaster management, and environmental monitoring.
    • Establishment: Formed in 1995 as the Permanent Committee on GIS Infrastructure for Asia and the Pacific (PCGIAP); rebranded in 2012 following UN-GGIM’s global launch in 2011.
    • Membership: Comprises 56 national geospatial agencies from across the Asia-Pacific region.
    • Secretariat: Hosted by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN-ESCAP) since 2018, providing institutional and technical support.

    India’s Role and Significance:

    • Leadership Role: India elected Co-Chair (2025–2028), reflecting global recognition of its geospatial governance and digital mapping expertise.
    • Strategic Influence: Strengthens India’s position in regional policy formation, data ethics, and standardisation frameworks.
    • Policy Alignment: Complements India’s National Geospatial Policy 2022, Digital India, and PM GatiShakti National Master Plan initiatives.
    • Regional Contribution: India to lead capacity-building, data interoperability, and open-access frameworks for disaster management and climate resilience.
    • Institutional Integration: Links ISRO’s remote sensing and Survey of India’s ground mapping to regional development goals.
    • Global Impact: Positions India as a knowledge hub in geospatial innovation and ensures its active role in defining global spatial data standards for sustainable growth.
    [UPSC 2023]  Consider the following infrastructure sectors :

    1. Affordable housing 2. Mass rapid transport 3. Health care 4. Renewable energy

    On how many of the above does UNOPS Sustainable Investments in Infrastructure and Innovation (S3i) initiative focus for its investments?

    Options: (a) Only one (b) Only two (c) All three* (d) All four

     

  • Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)

    Why in the News?

    The 19th Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Mid-Term Ministerial Meeting was recently held in Kampala, Uganda.

    About the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)

    • Overview: A grouping of states not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc, established to uphold sovereignty, independence, and neutrality during the Cold War.
    • Formation: Founded in 1961 at Belgrade, Yugoslavia, emerging from the 1955 Bandung Conference (Indonesia) which laid down the Ten Principles of Bandung as its ideological foundation.
    • Founding Leaders:
      1. Jawaharlal Nehru (India)
      2. Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt)
      3. Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia)
      4. Ahmed Sukarno (Indonesia)
      5. Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana)
    • Membership:
      • 120 countries: 53 from Africa, 39 from Asia, 26 from Latin America & the Caribbean, and 2 from Europe.
      • Includes Palestine as a member and 17 observer nations with 10 observer organisations.
      • Represents nearly 60% of UN membership, making it the second-largest intergovernmental bloc after the UN.
    • Structure: NAM functions without a permanent secretariat, charter, or budget, relying on rotational leadership and consensus-driven decision-making.

    Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)

    India’s Contemporary Role in NAM:

    • India advocates for reinvigorating NAM as a platform for South-South cooperation in technology, trade, and climate resilience.
    • It seeks to make NAM relevant in a multipolar world, focusing on digital equity, global governance reforms, and sustainable development.
    • India views NAM not as an anti-West bloc but as a forum of balanced autonomy, promoting strategic non-alignment and global partnership in the 21st century.
    [UPSC 2009] Among the following Presidents of India, who was also the Secretary General of Non-Aligned Movement for some period ?

    Options: (a) Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (b) Varahairi Venkatagiri (c) Giani Zail Singh * (d) Dr. Shanker Dayal Sharma

     

  • The future of the IMEC

    Introduction

    In an era where connectivity defines power, the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) emerged as a visionary project connecting India’s western ports with Europe via the Arabian Peninsula. Envisaged as a multi-modal corridor encompassing maritime, rail, energy, and digital infrastructure, IMEC sought to integrate economies across continents while promoting peace and prosperity in a historically volatile region.

    However, the optimism that surrounded IMEC’s launch quickly met the harsh reality of geopolitics. The October 7 Hamas attacks and subsequent Israel–Gaza war exposed the fragility of West Asian stability, placing IMEC’s implementation in question. Yet, beyond the uncertainty lies an opportunity for India to reshape its connectivity vision, adapting routes and partnerships to new global dynamics.

    Why in the News

    The IMEC has resurfaced in policy discussions as its viability faces uncertainty amid the deteriorating West Asian security environment. The October 7 Hamas–Israel conflict disrupted regional optimism nurtured by the Abraham Accords and slowed progress on IMEC’s proposed transnational links. At the same time, climate-driven Arctic trade routes and Red Sea disruptions by the Houthis are redrawing global shipping patterns, forcing India and its partners to reconsider IMEC’s configuration. The issue is critical as the corridor represents both an economic and strategic counterweight to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

    The Strategic Vision Behind IMEC:

    1. Comprehensive Connectivity: IMEC aims to upgrade maritime routes between India and the Arabian Peninsula and establish high-speed rail links from UAE ports to Haifa, Israel, via Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
    2. Integration with Europe: From Haifa, goods would be shipped to Europe’s Mediterranean ports, ensuring faster, secure, and sustainable trade connectivity.
    3. Beyond Transport: The corridor also includes plans for a clean hydrogen pipeline, electricity cable, and high-speed undersea digital cable, linking energy and digital ecosystems across three continents.
    4. Strategic Objective: IMEC provides a non-Chinese, rules-based alternative to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), enhancing India’s strategic outreach and economic influence.

    The Geopolitical Context of 2023:

    1. Favourable Climate: The Abraham Accords (2020) created optimism for regional peace, bringing Israel and several Arab states closer. This atmosphere facilitated multilateral cooperation frameworks such as I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE, U.S.), paving the way for IMEC.
    2. India’s Upward Trajectory: India’s improving ties with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, coupled with strong U.S. relations, allowed it to play a central role in IMEC’s conception.
    3. Global Endorsement: The corridor was launched at the G-20 Summit in Delhi, with support from the EU, France, Germany, Italy, and Saudi Arabia, underscoring India’s emergence as a trusted global partner.

    The Security Setback and Regional Volatility

    1. Conflict Shock: Within weeks of IMEC’s announcement, the Hamas–Israel conflict erupted, reversing the post-Abraham optimism.
    2. Regional Fallout: Israel’s military operations strained ties with Arab countries, undermining cross-border infrastructure cooperation.
    3. Red Sea Disruptions: The Houthi attacks on cargo ships forced rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope, increasing transit time and cost.
    4. Lesson: The events underscore that geopolitical stability remains the cornerstone of connectivity, and corridors like IMEC must remain adaptable to shifting realities.

    Europe’s Changing Maritime Interests

    1. Arctic Openings: Climate change has opened new northern sea routes, shortening Asia–Europe shipping times. Beneficiaries include Russia, the U.S., China, and northern European nations.
    2. Mediterranean Anxiety: Countries like Italy, dependent solely on the Mediterranean, fear economic marginalisation if Arctic routes dominate trade.
    3. Strategic Importance of IMEC: Hence, Mediterranean states see IMEC as a means to sustain their maritime relevance and diversify trade partnerships.
    4. India’s Role: For India, the Mediterranean remains vital, as Arctic routes offer no immediate logistical advantage.

    Why IMEC Still Matters for India

    1. Economic Scale: With $136 billion in annual trade, the EU remains India’s largest trading partner, highlighting the need for resilient connectivity.
    2. Supply Chain Resilience: IMEC offers a secure, shorter route connecting India to Europe while reducing dependence on the Red Sea–Suez chokepoint.
    3. Strategic Leverage: Enhanced engagement with Arab economies can dilute Pakistan’s influence and integrate India deeper into West Asia’s economic architecture.
    4. Innovation Space: As a multi-member initiative, IMEC allows India to propose new routes via Saudi Arabia and Egypt, adapting to political flux.

    Challenges and the Way Forward

    1. Security Dependencies: Ongoing instability in Gaza and Israel poses a persistent threat.
    2. Financial and Political Coordination: Multi-country infrastructure projects face coordination delays, regulatory inconsistencies, and funding constraints.
    3. Need for Parallel Efforts: India must also upgrade domestic ports and logistics infrastructure, including Sagarmala and Dedicated Freight Corridors, to complement IMEC.
    4. Diplomatic Continuity: Sustaining dialogue through I2U2 and G-20 cooperation can help preserve IMEC’s spirit even if its routes evolve.

    Conclusion

    The IMEC’s future will depend not merely on the pacification of West Asia but on the political agility and diplomatic imagination of its members. While the corridor’s physical routes may shift, its strategic essence remains intact, to build resilient, diversified, and sustainable connectivity between India and Europe. For India, IMEC is more than an infrastructure project; it is a statement of intent, to be at the centre of global supply chains and a stabilising power in a fractured world.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2018] The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is viewed as a cardinal subset of China’s larger ‘One Belt One Road’ initiative. Give a brief description of CPEC and enumerate the reasons why India has distanced itself from the same.

    Linkage: While China’s CPEC runs through disputed territory, making India wary, the IMEC shows how India is building its own clean, safe, and cooperative route to connect with Europe. It’s India’s way of staying in the global connectivity game—on its own terms.

  • [15th October 2025 ] The Hindu Op-ed: Powering up the Australia-India clean energy partnership

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] Clean energy is the order of the day. Describe briefly India’s changing policy towards climate change in various international fora in the context of geopolitics.

    Linkage: The India–Australia Renewable Energy Partnership (REP) exemplifies India’s evolving climate diplomacy — shifting from being a climate “follower” to a global clean energy collaborator. It reflects how India aligns geopolitical strategy with green transition, using partnerships like REP to ensure both sustainability and supply chain autonomy.

    Mentor’s Comment

    At a time when the world is rethinking its clean energy priorities amidst climate vulnerabilities and geopolitical flux, the Australia–India Renewable Energy Partnership (REP) emerges as a beacon of cooperative strength. This article examines how two Indo-Pacific democracies can forge a resilient, balanced, and future-ready clean energy ecosystem — turning climate ambition into implementable strategy.

    Introduction

    In a decade defined by climate urgency and energy transition, India and Australia are deepening collaboration in renewable energy to reduce carbon footprints and diversify critical supply chains. With Australia’s Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen visiting New Delhi, both nations are poised to convert their shared climate vision into tangible outcomes under the India–Australia Renewable Energy Partnership (REP). The partnership arrives at a pivotal moment when the Indo-Pacific region is reeling under frequent climate disasters and when overdependence on China for clean energy inputs threatens energy security.

    Why This Is Big News

    The India–Australia clean energy partnership represents a strategic shift from bilateral intent to operational collaboration. It marks the first large-scale joint response by the two democracies to build resilient, China-independent supply chains for renewable technologies.

    This is significant because the Indo-Pacific averages nearly 10 climate disasters per month, and projections show up to 89 million climate refugees by 2050. Both countries now aim not merely for targets but for structural autonomy in critical minerals, hydrogen, and solar ecosystems — signalling a new phase of climate diplomacy.

    A Climate-Vulnerable Region

    1. Harshest impacts: The Indo-Pacific region witnesses some of the world’s most severe climate consequences, with recurring floods, cyclones, and droughts.
    2. Alarming projections: Between 1970–2022, it averaged 10 climate-related disasters monthly; by 2050, 89 million people may be displaced.
    3. India’s leadership: India targets 500 GW of non-fossil electricity by 2030 (with 280 GW solar) and has achieved 50% non-fossil capacity already — five years ahead of schedule.
    4. Australia’s climate push: It has raised its emission-reduction ambition to 62–70% below 2005 levels by 2035, aligning with its net-zero goal.

    The Supply Chain Challenge

    1. Dependence on China: China refines 90% of rare earth elements and manufactures 80% of global solar modules, giving it near-monopoly power.
    2. India’s dilemma: Faces import dependence for rare earth magnets and battery materials, affecting EV and wind sectors.
    3. Australia’s gap: Despite being rich in lithium, cobalt, and rare earths, it lacks refining and downstream industries.
    4. Pandemic exposure: The COVID-19 crisis exposed global supply fragility; China’s export restrictions further underlined the danger of single-country dependence.
    5. Industry impact: Example, an Indian EV manufacturer’s production halved in July due to component shortages.

    What the Renewable Energy Partnership (REP) Offers

    1. Comprehensive framework: REP spans eight key areas, solar PV, green hydrogen, energy storage, circular economy, solar supply chains, two-way investments, and capacity building.
    2. Collaborative platforms: Introduces a Track 1.5 Dialogue, connecting policy, industry, and academia to translate ideas into pilot projects.
    3. Focus areas: Promotes joint R&D, investment in refining, hydrogen economy, and cross-training of skilled personnel.
    4. Strategic significance: Seeks to create an Indo-Pacific clean energy hub resilient to geopolitical shocks.

    Complementary Strengths: Why Collaboration Works

    Australia’s edge:

    1. Critical mineral base — rich in lithium, rare earths.
    2. Stable regulations and a focus on green jobs under its Net Zero Jobs Plan.

    India’s advantage:

    1. Demographic dividend — 65% population below 35 years.
    2. PLI schemes and Skill India fostering clean-tech manufacturing.
    3. Expanding domestic demand for solar, hydrogen, and battery systems.

    Synergistic model: Together, they can integrate Australia’s minerals with India’s manufacturing and labour pool, creating a regional clean energy ecosystem that is both inclusive and secure.

    Why This Partnership Matters for the Indo-Pacific

    1. Climate resilience: Joint efforts show that democracies can lead energy transitions without autocratic dependencies.
    2. Geopolitical signalling: It strengthens Quad cooperation (India–Australia–Japan–US) by aligning clean energy goals.
    3. Economic dividends: Builds green value chains that can generate jobs and diversify trade beyond fossil fuels.

    Conclusion

    The Australia–India Renewable Energy Partnership is more than a bilateral initiative, it is a climate-security compact for the Indo-Pacific. By combining Australia’s resource advantage with India’s innovation and manpower, both nations can anchor a sustainable energy future independent of geopolitical coercion. In doing so, they not only contribute to global net-zero targets but also demonstrate how democratic collaboration can address shared vulnerabilities with foresight and resilience.

  • Complacity not diplomacy-India’s engagement with Taliban

    Introduction

    The exclusion of women journalists from Taliban press conferences in New Delhi was not an accident, it was symbolic of a deeper issue: legitimizing a regime whose ideology is built on the deliberate erasure of women’s existence. As Afghan women face persecution, violence, and disappearance from every public sphere, the silence of democratic nations like India risks validating gender apartheid.

    Why is this issue in the news?

    The controversy erupted when India hosted two Taliban press conferences in New Delhi, where female journalists were initially excluded. The event coincided with a People’s Tribunal on the Women of Afghanistan in Madrid, where survivors testified to the Taliban’s gender-based persecution, recognized as a crime against humanity. The contrast between India’s engagement and the global condemnation of Taliban policies underscores a moral and diplomatic crisis.

    How has the Taliban institutionalized the erasure of women?

    1. Systematic exclusion: Since their 2021 return, the Taliban banned women from most public-sector jobs, secondary schools, and universities.
    2. Legalized oppression: The 2024 Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice Law formally declared women’s voices “forbidden” in public.
    3. Economic silencing: A 2025 Afghanistan Media Support Organisation survey found that 93% of women journalists lost their jobs, with more than 42% leaving journalism altogether.
    4. Violence and fear: Women activists are detained, beaten, and their husbands tortured, part of a deliberate campaign to erase their visibility and livelihood.

    Why is India’s stance seen as complicit rather than diplomatic?

    1. Normalization of misogyny: Hosting Taliban officials while Afghan women pleaded for recognition signals tacit acceptance of their regime.
    2. Moral inconsistency: While democracies like Spain and Canada host tribunals condemning Taliban atrocities, India’s diplomatic outreach stands in stark contrast.
    3. Diplomatic short-sightedness: By engaging the Taliban without human rights conditionalities, India risks legitimizing gender apartheid as a form of governance.

    What does this reveal about the global response to women’s rights?

    1. Erosion of feminist diplomacy: Nations increasingly prioritize geopolitical pragmatism over gender justice.
    2. Media complicity: Even in New Delhi, the Taliban’s media interaction mirrored their exclusionary ethos, showing that patriarchal silencing transcends borders.
    3. Selective outrage: While Western nations condemn the Taliban, many still negotiate covertly for strategic or security reasons, diluting international accountability.

    What lessons does this hold for India’s foreign policy and democracy?

    1. Moral leadership deficit: India’s silence undermines its self-image as the voice of the Global South and defender of democratic rights.
    2. Gender and diplomacy linkage: True diplomacy must integrate gender-sensitive ethics, ensuring no engagement legitimizes systemic violence.
    3. Internal reflection: A democracy’s foreign policy mirrors its domestic respect for women’s agency. India’s global credibility depends on aligning words with action.

    Conclusion 

    India’s engagement with the Taliban marks a dangerous shift from moral diplomacy to moral compromise. As Afghan women’s rights are being erased, India’s silence echoes complicity, not neutrality. True diplomacy must speak truth to power, not share its platform. Democracies cannot afford to normalize gender apartheid; silence here is not strategy, it is surrender.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2013] The proposed withdrawal of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from Afghanistan in 2014 is fraught with major security implications for the countries of the region. Examine in light of the fact that India is faced with a plethora of challenges and needs to safeguard its own strategic interests.

    Linkage: India’s current engagement with the Taliban reflects the security vacuum created after the ISAF withdrawal, forcing New Delhi to balance strategic interests with moral responsibility. As the article shows, this has turned India’s Afghan policy from cautious realism into a test of its ethical diplomacy and regional credibility.

  • With new Great Game, India must engage with the Taliban and Kabul

    Introduction

    Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi arrived in New Delhi on an official visit, his first since the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021.

    The visit represents a major recalibration in India’s Afghanistan policy, as New Delhi cautiously engages the Taliban regime without formal recognition. India’s approach blends strategic pragmatism and regional security concerns, focusing on maintaining influence in Afghanistan’s evolving geopolitical environment while avoiding premature diplomatic endorsement.

    India-Taliban Ties: A Quick Recap

    1. India never formally recognized the Taliban regime prior to or after 2021.
    2. Initial contacts date back to the late 1990s (e.g., during the IC-814 hijacking), but India’s engagement remained limited due to Pakistan’s dominance over the Taliban.
    3. Post-2021, India has maintained pragmatic engagement of humanitarian aid, infrastructure projects, and limited diplomatic outreach without providing de jure recognition.

    India’s Post-2021 Approach- Diplomatic Balancing and Western Response:

    1. India adopted a “cautious engagement” policy: restoring a technical mission in Kabul, resuming aid delivery, and holding diplomatic contacts.
    2. In 2025, India announced plans to reopen its embassy in Kabul, initially with a Chargé d’affaires, avoiding formal recognition.
    3. India’s silence on human rights and women’s issues during diplomatic talks reflects strategic restraint, balancing ideological concerns with geopolitical necessity.
    4. The Western response is ambivalent. India’s engagement is scrutinized to ensure it does not inadvertently legitimize the Taliban or dilute India’s democratic credentials.

    Taliban and Its Geopolitical Realignments (2024–2025):

    1. China: First major power to exchange ambassadors with the Taliban (2024); deepening economic, mining, and infrastructure ties.
    2. Russia: Moving to delist Taliban as a terrorist group; promoting counterterror cooperation.
    3. Iran: Accepts Taliban rule pragmatically, balancing internal crises with regional influence.
    4. Pakistan: Relations strained — Taliban criticism of Pakistani interference; cross-border tensions with TTP.
    5. United States: Under Trump 2.0, US policy is transactionally disengaged; leaves India more space to engage diplomatically.

    India’s Strategic Objectives in Engaging the Taliban:

    1. Maintain influence in Afghanistan to protect long-term investments (infrastructure, education, healthcare).
    2. Prevent Afghan territory from being used for anti-India terrorism.
    3. Counter Pakistan–China influence by remaining a relevant actor in Afghan affairs.
    4. Enable connectivity and trade, via Chabahar port and regional transit routes.
    5. Promote soft power through development cooperation, scholarships, and cultural engagement.

    Challenges and Diplomatic Constraints:

    1. Non-recognition dilemma: Engagement without recognition may be seen as de facto endorsement by critics.
    2. Human rights dissonance: Taliban’s restrictions on women’s rights conflict with India’s democratic values.
    3. Visa and mobility barriers: Lack of operational consular services hampers people-to-people ties and educational exchanges.
    4. Aid delivery limitations: Security, monitoring, and distribution bottlenecks constrain effective humanitarian impact.
    5. Geopolitical competition: Pakistan and China retain deeper leverage in Afghan affairs; India must navigate their influence.

    Way Forward:

    1. Engagement without endorsement: Maintain diplomatic contact while tying cooperation to counterterror assurances.
    2. Humanitarian focus: Channel aid for women and children through UN/trusted NGOs to avoid legitimizing Taliban governance.
    3. Regional coalition building: Leverage multilateral forums (SAARC, SCO, QUAD) to strengthen India’s Afghan policy.
    4. Expand economic roles: Prioritize mining, power, and infrastructure projects to anchor Indian presence.
    5. Broaden diplomatic contacts: Engage Afghan civil society, minorities, and regional stakeholders for balanced outreach.

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2013] The proposed withdrawal of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from Afghanistan in 2014 is fraught with major security implications for the countries of the region. Examine in light of the fact that India is faced with a plethora of challenges and needs to safeguard its own strategic interests.

    Linkage: The instability in Kabul, coupled with the influence of external state and non-state actors, directly impacts India’s internal security landscape, especially concerning terrorism, border security challenges, and the potential linkage between organized crime and drug trafficking. Therefore, questions may assess India’s strategic autonomy, humanitarian diplomacy, connectivity projects (like Chabahar), and counter-terrorism strategies, requiring candidates to demonstrate applied knowledge linking foreign policy decisions with internal stability.

     

  • UN to cut 25% of its global Peacekeeping Force   

    Why in the News?

    The UN will cut peacekeeping personnel by 25% across nine missions after U.S. funding dropped from $1 billion to $680 million under President Trump’s “America First” policy.

    US and Peacekeeping Funding Dynamics:

    • The US and China together contribute nearly 50% of the UN’s peacekeeping budget.
    • The U.S. outlined its new commitment of $680 million, marking a 32% decrease from last year’s payment.
    • A senior UN official confirmed that China has pledged to pay its full contribution by the end of 2025, offsetting some of the financial shortfall.

    Implications of Funding Cut:

    • The withdrawal of peacekeepers will leave several fragile regions exposed to renewed instability, especially in Africa and the Middle East.
    • The cuts signal a shift toward selective, donor-driven peacekeeping, prioritising geopolitical interests over collective international responsibility.
    • For the UN, the challenge lies in maintaining operational credibility and protecting civilian populations amid reduced resources.

    About the United Nations Peacekeeping Mission:

    • Overview: UN Peacekeeping is a collective international mechanism established to maintain peace and security in conflict-affected regions under the leadership of the United Nations.
    • Personnel: Peacekeepers, known as Blue Berets or Blue Helmets, include military, police, and civilian members from contributing nations.
    • Origin: The idea arose after World War II with the formation of the UN in 1945, marking a new era in global conflict resolution.
    • First Mission (1948): The United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation (UNTSO) was deployed after the Arab–Israeli War to monitor ceasefires, setting the template for future operations.
    • Evolution: Over time, missions expanded to cover civil wars, humanitarian crises, and post-conflict reconstruction across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East.
    • Core Principles:
      1. Consent of the Parties
      2. Impartiality
      3. Non-use of Force (except in self-defence or mandate defence)
    • Deployment: Missions require the consent of key conflict parties and are authorised by the UN Security Council.
    • Functions: Include monitoring ceasefires, disarmament, protection of civilians, humanitarian assistance, promotion of human rights, and support for democratic governance.
    • Finance: United States (26.95%)> China (18.69%)> Japan (8.03%) > Germany (6.11%) > United Kingdom (5.36%) > France (5.29%).
    • India’s Contribution:
      • Major Contributor: India ranks among the largest troop contributors since the inception of UN peacekeeping.
      • Participation Record: Contributed over 1.95 lakh troops, served in 49 missions, and made 168 supreme sacrifices in service.
    [UPSC 2024] Consider the following pairs:
    Country Reason for being in the news
    1. Argentina: Worst economic crisis
    2. Sudan: War between the country’s regular army and
    paramilitary forces
    3. Turkey: Rescinded its membership of NATO
    How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched?
    (a) Only one pair (b) Only two pairs* (c) All three pairs (d) None of the pairs

     

  • [9th October 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: An anchor for India-U.K. ties, their economic partnership

    Introduction:

    1. The signing of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) in July 2025 marks a major milestone in India–UK relations, cementing their partnership in trade, technology, defence, and climate cooperation.
    2. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s visit to Mumbai further signals mutual intent to deepen collaboration under the evolving Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) framework of Roadmap 2030 (2021).
    3. The agreement reflects a broader trend i.e. India’s calibrated engagement with post-Brexit Britain and the European continent, aligning trade liberalisation with strategic convergence.

    India–UK Relations: A Quick Recap

    • Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (2021): Anchored in Roadmap 2030, covering trade, climate, defence, technology, and health.
    • Economic Ties: The UK contributes nearly 5% of India’s total FDI; bilateral trade exceeded USD 20 billion in FY 2024–25.
    • Defence Cooperation: Exercises such as Ajeya Warrior and Konkan Shakti, and collaboration in aerospace and propulsion systems strengthen military interoperability.
    • Technology Partnership: The Technology Security Initiative (TSI) focuses on AI, semiconductors, quantum technology, and critical minerals.
    • People-to-People Linkages: Over 1.7 million Indian-origin residents and 150,000 students in the UK reinforce socio-economic ties.
    • Global Convergence: Shared democratic values underpin cooperation on climate action, maritime security, and UN Security Council reform.
    • Trajectory: The relationship is transitioning from historical ties to a modern, technology-driven alliance, embedded in the emerging multipolar global order.

    India–UK Economic Partnership under CETA:

    1. Framework: The CETA (2025) combines tariff reduction, regulatory alignment, and investment facilitation, aiming to double bilateral trade by 2030.
    2. Benefits for India:
      • Tariff cuts on pharmaceuticals, textiles, and agricultural exports.
      • Enhanced access for IT, green tech, and digital services.
    3. Implications for the UK:
      • Lower duties on automobiles, Scotch whisky, and high-end machinery.
      • Post-Brexit diversification into South Asian markets.
    4. Double Contributions Convention (DCC): Exempts Indian professionals in the UK from dual social security payments for up to three years.
    5. Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT): Ensures investor protection and promotes sustainable FDI in manufacturing, renewables, and infrastructure.
    6. Defence Industrial Partnership (2025): Facilitates joint R&D, co-production, and defence manufacturing, aligned with Atmanirbhar Bharat.
    7. Technology Security Initiative (TSI, 2024): Coordinates semiconductors, quantum computing, AI, and critical minerals cooperation at the national security adviser level.

    Parallel European Engagements:

    1. India’s UK outreach complements its broader European diversification strategy:
      • EFTA Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA): In effect from October 2025, ensuring USD 100 billion investment over 15 years.
      • EU Negotiations: Trade with the European Union reached USD 136.5 billion (FY 2024–25) with sustained dialogue on an FTA.
    2. This multi-vector diplomacy balances India’s engagement between continental Europe and post-Brexit Britain.
    3. Europe’s emphasis on technological sovereignty, climate neutrality, and Indo-Pacific cooperation aligns with India’s maritime and sustainability interests.
    4. The combined outreach enhances India’s access to capital, innovation, and strategic technologies, consolidating its role as a balancing power in global governance.

    Economic and Strategic Significance:

    1. Complementarity: India offers scale and skilled labour, while the UK contributes technology, capital, and innovation ecosystems.
    2. Co-Development: Collaboration in green energy, fintech, advanced manufacturing, higher education, and sustainable finance.
    3. Geostrategic Convergence:
      • UK’s support for India’s UNSC seat and NSG membership.
      • Joint naval and maritime initiatives under the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI).
      • Partnership on Electric Propulsion Capability Initiative in naval systems.
    4. Diaspora Role: The Indian diaspora serves as a connective economic and cultural bridge, amplifying trade and investment flows.
    5. The relationship now transcends transactional trade, emerging as a multi-domain strategic alliance integrating security, sustainability, and innovation.

    Challenges and Negotiation Frictions:

    1. Political Sensitivities: Colonial legacy and diaspora-linked protests periodically affect diplomatic optics.
    2. Negotiation Hurdles: Differences on tariff schedules, rules of origin, and intellectual property.
    3. TRIPS-Plus Provisions: India’s resistance to stronger IP norms preserves its pharmaceutical flexibility.
    4. Immigration and Data Divergences: Require harmonised frameworks for professional mobility and digital governance.
    5. FTA Ratification Delays: Absence of fixed timelines for CETA and BIT create investor uncertainty.

    Despite frictions, both sides perceive these accords as long-term strategic enablers, not mere commercial instruments.

    Conclusion:

    The next phase of engagement should focus on joint innovation, co-production, and sustainability-based partnerships, moving beyond conventional tariff-based frameworks.  Strengthening defence R&D and technology transfer mechanisms will foster greater self-reliance and industrial growth in both nations.

  • India to boost solar pumps scheme in Africa, Island nations

    Why in the News?

    The Union Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) plans to showcase India’s PM-KUSUM and PM Surya Ghar schemes to several African and island nations through the International Solar Alliance (ISA) platform.

    India’s Global Outreach via International Solar Alliance (ISA):

    • Founded: 2015, jointly by India and France, headquartered in Gurugram (Haryana, India).
    • Membership (2025): 98 countries, focused on promoting solar energy deployment in developing and tropical nations.
    • Mandate: Facilitate affordable solar technology, finance mobilization, and policy support to achieve global energy access and climate goals.
    • Strategic Focus Areas (2025):
      • Catalytic Finance Hub: Mobilising global investments in solar infrastructure.
      • Global Capability Centre: Providing technical training, digital tools, and policy frameworks.
      • Technology Roadmap: Driving innovation in floating solar, AI-based grid management, green hydrogen, and One Sun, One World, One Grid (OSOWOG) connectivity.
      • Country Engagement: Strengthening regional partnerships for implementation and capacity-building.
    • Global Showcasing of Indian Models:
      • India plans to export the PM-KUSUM and PM Surya Ghar models to Africa and island nations facing low electrification and irrigation coverage.
      • Only 4% of Africa’s arable land is irrigated, creating a vast opportunity for solar-powered irrigation and energy access.
    • Significance: ISA serves as the primary vehicle for India’s renewable diplomacy, promoting clean energy cooperation, technology transfer, and South–South collaboration for sustainable development.

    Back2Basics:

    [1] PM-KUSUM Scheme:

    • Full Name: Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthaan Mahabhiyan (PM-KUSUM) launched in 2019 by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE).
    • Objective: To promote solar energy use in agriculture, enabling farmers to generate clean electricity, replace diesel pumps, and earn additional income through sale of surplus solar power.
    • Targets:
      • Add 34,800 MW of decentralized solar capacity by March 2026.
      • Total outlay of ₹34,422 crore in Central financial assistance.
    • Structure: Three key components –
      1. Component A: 10,000 MW of decentralized grid-connected solar/renewable plants on barren land.
      2. Component B: 14 lakh standalone solar pumps for irrigation.
      3. Component C: Solarization of 35 lakh existing grid-connected pumps (including feeder-level solarisation).
    • Financial Support: Farmers receive 60% subsidy, 30% institutional loan, and contribute 10% cost.
    • Achievements (as of 2025):
      • 70% completion in standalone solar pumps.
      • Limited progress in grid-connected plants (6%) and pump solarization (16–25%).
      • Scheme likely to be extended beyond 2026 due to delayed infrastructure readiness.
    • Benefits: Reduces input costs, ensures energy self-reliance, lowers carbon emissions, and generates sustainable farmer income through surplus power sales.

    [2] PM Surya Ghar Scheme:

    • Full Name: PM Surya Ghar: Muft Bijli Yojana launched in 2025 as a flagship rooftop solar initiative for residential households.
    • Implementing Agency: Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE).
    • Objective: To promote rooftop solar installations for one crore households, especially middle-class and economically weaker sections, providing affordable or free electricity.
    • Budget: ₹75,021 crore for implementation till FY 2026–27.
    • Features:
      • Subsidy up to 40% of total installation cost.
      • Annual household savings of up to ₹18,000 through self-generation.
      • Net metering enables sale of surplus power to the grid.
      • Simplified application via national portal; eligibility limited to one household per residence.
    • Impact: Reduces power bills, promotes decentralized renewable energy generation, and contributes to India’s target of 500 GW non-fossil energy capacity by 2030.
    [UPSC 2016] Consider the following statements:

    1. The International Solar Alliance was launched at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in 2015.

    2. The Alliance includes all the member countries of the United Nations.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    Options: (a) 1 only* (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2