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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • Civil War in Sudan

    Why in the News?

    The United Nations Secretary-General has warned that the civil war in Sudan is “spiralling out of control” after the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) seized the strategic Darfur city of El-Fasher.

    Civil War in Sudan

    About the Civil War in Sudan:

    • Outbreak: Began in April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) led by Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) led by Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti).
    • Causes: Rooted in Sudan’s failed democratic transition after the 2019 overthrow of Omar al-Bashir and the October 2021 military coup.
    • Immediate Trigger: Power struggle over RSF integration into the national army under the proposed political framework agreement.
    • Conflict Spread: Fighting engulfed Khartoum, Omdurman, and Darfur, causing massive civilian casualties and infrastructure collapse.
    • Humanitarian Toll: Over 8.5 million displaced, famine conditions emerging, and public health systems near total breakdown.
    • Atrocities: Both sides accused of war crimes, ethnic killings, and looting, particularly in Darfur.
    • Territorial Shift: RSF’s capture of El-Fasher (2025) consolidated its control over western Sudan.
    • Foreign Actors: Egypt supports SAF; UAE and Russia’s Wagner Group back RSF, fuelling proxy dynamics.

    What Lies Ahead?

    • Risk of Partition: Sudan may split RSF holding the west, SAF dominating the northeast, leading to de-facto fragmentation.
    • Regional Destabilisation: Prolonged conflict could spill into the Horn of Africa and Red Sea corridor, worsening insecurity.
    • Political Outlook: Civilian transition appears remote; both factions remain focused on military dominance.
    • Economic Collapse: Inflation above 250%, agricultural failure deepening food insecurity.
    • Regional Impact: Refugee influx threatens Chad, South Sudan, and Ethiopia with cross-border instability.
    [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 Turkey Rescinded its membership of NATO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?
    Options: (a) Only one pair (b) Only two pairs* (c) All three pairs (d) None of the pairs

     

  • BRICS Pay and the Push to De-dollarize Global Finance

    Why in the News?

    Since 2014, BRICS nations have worked to cut dependence on the U.S. dollar, launching the New Development Bank (NDB), Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), and now BRICS Pay to promote local currency trade and rival the SWIFT system.

    BRICS Pay and the Push to De-dollarize Global Finance

    About BRICS Pay Initiative:

    • Overview: BRICS Pay is a proposed cross-border digital payment and settlement platform developed by the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) to facilitate trade in local currencies and reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar and the SWIFT network.
    • Origins: The idea emerged after the 2014 Fortaleza Summit, where BRICS established its own financial architecture, the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA).
    • Purpose: To enable direct financial transactions among member nations using local currencies, minimizing the role of Western-controlled financial systems and avoiding U.S.-led sanctions.
    • Development Path:
      • 2017: BRICS agreed to enhance currency cooperation via swaps, local currency settlements, and direct investments.
      • Early 2020s: The BRICS Payments Task Force (BPTF) was created to design interoperable systems.
      • 2024 Kazan Summit: Leaders highlighted strengthening of correspondent banking networks and settlements in local currencies under the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative.
    • Prototype: A demo of BRICS Pay was unveiled in Moscow (October 2024), marking a concrete step toward implementation.
    • Supporting National Systems:
      • India: Unified Payments Interface (UPI)
      • China: Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS)
      • Russia: System for Transfer of Financial Messages (SPFS)
      • Brazil: Pix instant payment system
    • Strategic Importance: The initiative seeks to establish a self-reliant financial network, bypass SWIFT, and enhance monetary sovereignty among emerging economies.

    Back2Basics: Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) System

    • Establishment: Founded in 1973 by 239 banks from 15 countries to standardize and secure cross-border financial communications.
    • Headquarters: La Hulpe, Belgium.
    • Nature: A messaging network, not a bank, it does not hold or transfer funds but enables secure interbank communication for financial transactions.
    • Coverage: Connects over 11,000 financial institutions across 200+ countries, making it the largest international payment messaging system.
    • Operation:
      • Assigns each member a Bank Identifier Code (BIC) of 8–11 characters.
      • Standardizes message formats to ensure seamless global financial communication.
      • Facilitates fund transfer instructions, trade settlements, and foreign exchange operations.
    • Governance:
      • Supervised by G10 central banks, the European Central Bank (ECB), and the National Bank of Belgium.
      • Managed by a 25-member board of directors, representing about 3,500 member institutions.
    • Strategic Role:
      • Forms the backbone of global finance, allowing efficient movement of capital.
      • Exclusion from SWIFT acts as a powerful economic sanction tool, isolating nations (e.g., Russia and Iran) from the international financial system.
    • Significance: SWIFT’s dominance reflects Western control over global finance, making it a central target for alternative networks like BRICS Pay, China’s CIPS, and Russia’s SPFS that seek a multipolar monetary order.

     

    [UPSC 2023] With reference to the Central Bank digital currencies, consider the following statements:

    1. It is possible to make payments in a digital currency without using US dollar or SWIFT system.

    2. A digital currency can be distributed with a condition programmed into it such as time-frame for spending it.

    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

     

  • What are the challenges with the High Seas Treaty

    Introduction

    The High Seas Treaty, formally known as the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) agreement, establishes a legal framework to conserve and sustainably use marine biodiversity in areas outside national control. It covers nearly two-thirds of the ocean’s surface. Adopted under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982, it aims to address threats from climate change, overfishing, and pollution through tools like Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). Ratified by over 60 nations in 2024, it will come into effect in January 2026. This makes it one of the most comprehensive global conservation instruments after the Paris Agreement.

    Why in the News? 

    The High Seas Treaty being ratified by 60+ nations represents a historic step in ocean governance, a domain previously beyond formal protection. For the first time, the international community has agreed on a legally binding mechanism to preserve marine life that exists outside any country’s jurisdiction. This is strikingly different from the earlier regime under UNCLOS, which lacked clear provisions for protecting biodiversity.

    What is the High Seas Treaty About?

    1. Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ): Creates an all-inclusive framework to conserve and manage marine biodiversity beyond national boundaries.
    2. Marine Genetic Resources (MGRs): Recognised as a common heritage of humankind, ensuring equitable benefit-sharing between nations.
    3. Area-Based Management Tools (ABMTs): Establishes Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to safeguard biodiversity and improve climate resilience and food security.
    4. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs): Mandates prior assessment of projects with potential cross-border or cumulative ecological impact.
    5. Capacity Building and Technology Transfer: Facilitates scientific collaboration, especially for developing nations, combining modern science and indigenous knowledge.

    Major Challenges with the High Seas Treaty

    1. Uncertainty over Core Principles
      1. Common Heritage vs. Freedom of High Seas: The “common heritage” principle promotes equitable access and benefit-sharing, while “freedom of the high seas” allows unrestricted navigation and resource use.
      2. Partial Application: The treaty applies the “common heritage” principle only partially, especially for MGRs, reflecting a compromise rather than resolution.
      3. Result: Creates ambiguity in rights and responsibilities of states in exploration, research, and benefit distribution.
    2. Ambiguity in Marine Genetic Resources (MGRs) Governance
      1. Undefined Governance Mechanism: Earlier, no clear framework existed for using or sharing MGRs.
      2. Biopiracy Concerns: Developing nations fear exploitation by developed countries, who could monopolize genetic discoveries and profits.
      3. Equity Gap: The lack of clarity risks excluding Global South nations from scientific and commercial benefits.
    3. Implementation and Enforcement Gaps
      1. Jurisdictional Complexity: The high seas lie beyond national boundaries, making monitoring and enforcement difficult.
      2. Institutional Limitations: While UNCLOS provides a broad legal foundation, there’s no dedicated global enforcement body to ensure compliance.
      3. Dependence on Voluntary Reporting: Could weaken accountability, especially in regulating corporate activities.
    4. Financial and Technological Inequities
      1. Unequal Capabilities: Developing countries lack access to marine technologies for monitoring and sustainable use.
      2. Technology Transfer Gap: The treaty mandates capacity-building, but without specific funding mechanisms, commitments may remain rhetorical.
      3. Risk: Could widen the North-South divide in ocean research and benefit sharing.
    5. Balancing Conservation and Development
      1. Sustainable Use vs. Conservation: Striking a balance between environmental protection and economic opportunities (like deep-sea mining or biotechnology) remains contentious.
      2. Unclear Prioritization: Without clear hierarchy between ecological and developmental objectives, policy conflicts may persist.

    Conclusion

    The High Seas Treaty represents a landmark effort to bring order and justice to the global commons. Yet, the true test lies in resolving philosophical ambiguities and ensuring equitable implementation. Without robust funding, technology sharing, and accountability mechanisms, it risks becoming another well-intentioned but weak global accord. For India, aligning its Blue Economy strategy with the treaty’s framework will be key to ensuring both ecological and economic dividends.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2022] Discuss global warming and mention its effects on the global climate. Explain the control measures to bring down the level of greenhouse gases which cause global warming, in the light of the Kyoto Protocol, 1997.

    Linkage: Both Kyoto Protocol and High Seas Treaty are UN-backed frameworks aimed at addressing global commons issues, air and ocean respectively.

  • India’s exit from the Ayni Airbase in Tajikistan

    Why in the News?

    ​India’s complete pullout from the Ayni Airbase in Tajikistan (in 2022), its sole foreign military post, drew sharp opposition’s criticism.

    India’s exit from the Ayni Airbase in Tajikistan

    About Ayni Airbase:

    • Location: Situated 10 km west of Dushanbe, Tajikistan, near the Afghanistan border via the Wakhan Corridor, and about 20 km from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).
    • Also known as: Known as Gissar Air Base or Gissar Military Aerodrome; originally a Soviet-era base later modernised by India.
    • Development by India: Upgraded by India in the early 2000s under a bilateral agreement with Tajikistan; India invested ~USD 100 million to extend the runway (3,200 m), build hangars, depots, and control systems.
    • Operational Role: Hosted IAF helicopters and Su-30MKI fighters, with ~200 Indian personnel managing repair and training operations; also supported humanitarian and evacuation missions, notably during the 2021 Taliban takeover.
    • Predecessor: Replaced Farkhor Airbase (1998–2008), India’s earlier base used for supporting the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

    Strategic Significance of the Airbase:

    • Forward Presence: Gave India surveillance and strike reach over Afghanistan and Pakistan’s western front.
    • Regional Leverage: Enhanced India’s defence footprint in Central Asia, countering China’s BRI and Russian influence.
    • Operational Hub: Supported the then anti-Taliban Northern Alliance and India’s broader Connect Central Asia Policy (2012).
    • Evacuation & Logistics Node: Enabled rapid crisis evacuation and regional logistical operations.
    • Geopolitical Symbolism: Marked India’s aspiration for a continental strategic presence; its closure reflects shrinking influence west of the Himalayas amid Russia–China consolidation.

    Reasons for India’s Exit:

    • Lease Expiry: The bilateral lease expired in 2022 and was not renewed by Tajikistan.
    • External Pressures: Russia and China discouraged Tajikistan from extending India’s presence.
    • Strategic Shift: Diminished relevance post-Taliban’s return (2021) and collapse of India’s Afghan network.
    • Operational Constraints: High costs, limited autonomy, and dependence on Russian logistics reduced viability.
    • Reorientation: Strategic focus moved toward the Indo-Pacific and maritime partnerships.
    [UPSC 2022] Consider the following countries :

    1. Azerbaijan 2. Kyrgyzstan 3. Tajikistan 4. Turkmenistan 5. Uzbekistan

    Which of the above have borders with Afghanistan?

    Options: (a) 1, 2 and 5 only (b) 1, 2, 3 and 4 only (c) 3, 4 and 5 only* (d) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5

     

  • [1st November 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The case for a board of peace and sustainable security

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Terrorism has become a significant threat to global peace and security. Evaluate the effectiveness of the United Nations Security Council’s Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) and its associated bodies in addressing and mitigating this threat at the international level.

    Linkage: The BPSS proposal aligns with the recurring UPSC theme of UN reform and institutional effectiveness. It can serve as an additional point in answers evaluating the effectiveness of the UNSC and its bodies like the CTC.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The United Nations, despite its founding vision to preserve peace, faces a persistent structural crisis, peace agreements fail, transitions stall, and conflicts reignite. In this context, former Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao’s proposal for a “Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS)” marks a profound call for institutional reform. This article dissects the argument, structure, and implications of this proposed board through a UPSC-relevant analytical framework.

    Introduction

    The UN Security Council (UNSC), envisioned to prevent conflict and sustain global peace, continues to struggle with institutional paralysis and outdated structures. Across continents, peace efforts collapse because international systems abandon political engagement too early.
    A new institutional vision, a Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS), is proposed to infuse continuity, coordination, and political strategy into global peace efforts.

    Why in the news?

    As the UN marks its 80th anniversary, its credibility is under intense scrutiny. While conflicts proliferate, peace agreements remain fragile and transitional mechanisms fail. The UNSC’s structural limitations, lack of political continuity, and inability to sustain long-term engagement make reform urgent. The proposed Board of Peace and Sustainable Security aims to fill this vacuum by institutionalising sustained political engagement before, during, and after conflict. This is significant because it represents one of the first major reform ideas that seeks to integrate peacekeeping with political strategy and regional cooperation, without challenging UNSC authority.

    A clearly defined institutional purpose

    1. Institutional void: The UNSC lacks sustained political engagement capacity. The BPSS would institutionalize political accompaniment beyond peace agreements.
    2. Complementary role: It would not replace or challenge the UNSC or Secretary-General but reinforce implementation and coordination.
    3. Mandate: Ensures continuity in peace efforts by reinforcing national and regional ownership of peace processes and reducing relapse into conflict.
    4. Scope: Works on reinforcing national capacities, coordinating peacekeeping with regional organizations, and ensuring peace agreements translate into durable political outcomes.

    Why is reform of the UN system urgent?

    1. Loss of continuity: Peacebuilding institutions within the UN lose momentum due to ad-hoc missions. BPSS seeks to sustain political engagement beyond immediate crises.
    2. Structural inertia: Waiting for comprehensive UNSC reform delays urgent action; thus, pragmatic institutional innovation is required within existing frameworks.
    3. Authority for change: Under Article 22, the UN General Assembly already holds power to create subsidiary bodies like BPSS without requiring Charter amendments.
    4. Reform from within: Instead of replacing the UNSC, BPSS enhances coordination, ensuring peace agreements transition into stable governance systems.

    What will make the Board credible and representative

    1. Rotational membership: Around two dozen member states, elected for fixed terms, representing all regions (Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, Caribbean, West Asia).
    2. Avoiding elite capture: The body should represent inclusivity, not hierarchy, ensuring small and middle powers have a say.
    3. Regional linkages: Works with regional hubs (Addis Ababa, Jakarta, Brasilia, New York) to ensure peace processes reflect local ownership.
    4. Consultative participation: Civil society and regional organizations will have a structured role in deliberations, enhancing legitimacy and field coordination.

    How will the BPSS function in practice?

    1. Style of functioning: Not another bureaucratic forum, but a continuing engagement body ensuring follow-through once UN missions end.
    2. Operational continuity: Prevents premature withdrawal of peacekeeping efforts; sustains political engagement through periodic review and coordination.
    3. Integration: Works in coordination with the Secretary-General, Peacebuilding Commission, and UNSC to align peacekeeping with political strategies.
    4. Focus on youth and fragile states: Ensures peace presence remains where political institutions are nascent.
    5. Conflict prevention: Reduces relapse risk by merging early-warning with long-term political strategies and governance support.

    How will the BPSS strengthen sustainable security?

    1. Beyond short-term peacekeeping: Moves from reactive missions to proactive stability frameworks.
    2. Sustainable security concept: Integrates security, governance, and development rather than treating them in silos.
    3. Inclusive approach: Aligns local, regional, and global stakeholders, reflecting the interconnected nature of modern conflicts.
    4. Institutional learning: Retains experience from past missions to inform future interventions.
    5. Principled reform: Sustains political momentum, not episodic intervention, ensuring peace is treated as an ongoing political project.

    Conclusion

    The proposed Board of Peace and Sustainable Security reimagines peace not as an event but as a process requiring sustained political accompaniment. It seeks to anchor peacekeeping within a strategy of governance, development, and institutional resilience. This reform is not just administrative, it represents a return to the original ideals of the UN Charter, adapting them for a multipolar and conflict-prone world. Sustainable peace demands political continuity, inclusivity, and long-term commitment, principles the BPSS embodies.

  • India-US seal 10 year defense partnership framework

    Introduction

    India and the United States have signed a 10-year defence partnership framework (2025-2035), signaling a new phase in their strategic collaboration. The pact provides a unified vision and policy direction for deepening cooperation across logistics, supply chains, joint production, and technology sharing. It underscores the commitment to a free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific, amid growing regional tensions and China’s assertive rise.

    Why in the News

    This is a landmark development in India-US relations, marking the first-ever decade-long institutionalized defence framework between the two nations. It reflects a qualitative shift from transactional defence cooperation to a strategic partnership architecture. By formalizing continuity in defence ties, the framework aims to sustain policy alignment, interoperability, and deterrence capabilities in the Indo-Pacific, making it a cornerstone for regional stability.

    Deepening Defence Convergence

    1. Framework Vision: Provides unified strategic direction to strengthen defence cooperation and stability across all military domains (land, air, sea, cyber, and space).
    2. Interoperability Focus: Prioritizes joint logistics, training, and maintenance mechanisms between forces, ensuring mission readiness and operational synergy.
    3. Symbolic Continuity: Extends beyond annual dialogues or ad hoc exercises, ensuring defence engagement remains insulated from political transitions.
    4. Technology Integration: Encourages co-production and co-development of high-end defence platforms such as Super Hercules, Globemaster, Chinooks, Apaches, and M777 howitzers.

    Evolution of India-US Defence Partnership

    1. Early Frameworks: The 2015 framework initiated by PM Modi and President Obama laid the foundation for institutional defence cooperation.
    2. Key Milestones:
      • LEMOA (2016): Enabled reciprocal logistics access.
      • COMCASA (2018): Facilitated secure communications interoperability.
      • BECA (2020): Enabled real-time geospatial intelligence sharing.
    3. 2025 Framework Significance: Builds upon these foundational agreements, institutionalizing long-term coordination on strategy, logistics, and supply chain resilience.

    Strategic Significance for the Indo-Pacific

    1. Regional Stability: Anchors both nations’ commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific, countering coercive or unilateral actions.
    2. Maritime Domain Awareness: Supports enhanced naval cooperation and situational awareness across key maritime chokepoints.
    3. Military Exercises: Expands the scope of Yudh Abhyas and Malabar exercises for joint readiness.
    4. Quad Convergence: Aligns with broader QUAD objectives in maintaining rules-based order and crisis response architecture.
    5. Geoeconomic Angle: Bolsters defence supply chains and manufacturing cooperation amid China-centric dependencies.

    Institutional and Industrial Collaboration

    1. Defence Production: Boosts joint manufacturing of key platforms, LCA Tejas engines, MQ-9B drones, and advanced radar systems.
    2. Private Sector Linkages: Encourages collaboration between Indian and US defence industries, including Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and General Electric (GE).
    3. R&D Synergy: Promotes innovation under the India-US Defence Acceleration Ecosystem (INDUS-X) to co-develop futuristic technologies.
    4. Skill Transfer: Enhances training, skill-building, and exchange programs for defence personnel.

    Diplomatic and Strategic Implications

    1. Policy Continuity: Reinforces long-term strategic trust and shared security outlook.
    2. Strategic Deterrence: Strengthens collective deterrence against regional instability in the Indo-Pacific.
    3. Bilateral Reliability: Demonstrates resilience of India-US defence ties beyond short-term political cycles.
    4. Global Relevance: Projects both nations as key stakeholders in shaping Indo-Pacific architecture for the 21st century.

    Conclusion

    The 10-year India-US Defence Partnership represents a strategic deepening and institutional maturity of bilateral defence relations. It embodies both nations’ shared vision of collective security, deterrence, and technological partnership in the Indo-Pacific. By ensuring interoperability and policy continuity, it not only strengthens defence preparedness but also cements India’s emergence as a regional security anchor and a global strategic partner of the United States.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2020] What is the significance of Indo-US defence deals over Indo-Russian defence deals? Discuss with reference to stability in the Indo-Pacific region.

    Linkage: The question is important as it reflects India’s shifting defence axis from Russia to the US amid Indo-Pacific power realignments. It continues UPSC’s recurring theme of India’s strategic autonomy and evolving role in global security architecture.

  • After ASEAN Summit: Group’s importance for India, amid US-China tussle

    Introduction

    ASEAN, established in 1967, comprises 11 countries, forming one of the world’s most successful regional organizations. With over 40-50% of global trade transiting through the region, ASEAN represents both an economic hub and a strategic pivot in the Indo-Pacific. The 2025 Summit reinforced ASEAN’s centrality amid a shifting balance of power between the US and China, while India emphasized trade cooperation and connectivity.

    ASEAN’s Strategic Importance for India

    1. Geopolitical Significance: ASEAN lies at the heart of the Indo-Pacific, acting as a bridge between the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
    2. Economic Weight: ASEAN is India’s fourth-largest trading partner after the EU, US, and China.
    3. Strategic Leverage: Provides India a platform to balance China’s regional assertiveness and engage in multilateral security frameworks.
    4. Connectivity Corridor: India’s projects such as the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway and Kaladan Multimodal Project enhance physical and economic connectivity.
    5. Regional Integration: Strengthens India’s participation in regional supply chains, energy cooperation, and maritime trade.

    How the US-China Rivalry Shapes ASEAN’s Role

    1. Regional Polarization: ASEAN faces pressure between the US-led security framework and China’s economic dominance.
    2. Maritime Disputes: The South China Sea remains a flashpoint due to overlapping territorial claims, especially involving the Philippines, Vietnam, and China.
    3. Security Realignment: The Philippines has taken an increasingly muscular stand, rejecting China’s claims under the 2016 Hague ruling.
    4. Economic Competition: While China drives trade and infrastructure investment, the US advances Indo-Pacific partnerships emphasizing rule-based order and open seas.
    5. Strategic Autonomy: ASEAN states attempt to maintain neutrality and avoid direct alignment with either power bloc.

    India’s Engagement in the ASEAN Framework

    1. Act East Policy: Deepens trade, connectivity, and strategic cooperation in Southeast Asia.
    2. Trade Liberalization: India signed the India-ASEAN FTA in 2009, expanding goods trade and tariff concessions.
    3. Economic Challenges: India exited the RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) over market access concerns but remains committed to ASEAN-based trade.
    4. High-Level Diplomacy: Prime Minister Narendra Modi reaffirmed ASEAN centrality in the Indo-Pacific vision and proposed renewed cooperation on connectivity and digital economy.
    5. Institutional Dialogue: India participates in ASEAN-led forums like EAS, ARF, and ADMM+, ensuring consistent engagement.

    Lessons from ASEAN for Other Regional Grouping

    1. Institutional Continuity: ASEAN demonstrates sustained dialogue and incremental cooperation since 1967.
    2. Economic Integration: The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and upcoming ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand FTA reflect progressive liberalization.
    3. Replicable Model: Regional blocs like SAARC, BIMSTEC, and BBIN can emulate ASEAN’s approach to consensus-building and functional cooperation.
    4. ASEAN Centrality Principle: Encourages issue-based cooperation despite internal diversity, offering lessons for South Asian regionalism.
    5. Leadership in Transition: Malaysia and Thailand’s evolving chairmanship roles underscore ASEAN’s adaptability in managing complex geopolitics.

    Trade and Connectivity Imperative

    1. Physical Infrastructure: Projects such as Kaladan and Trilateral Highway facilitate India’s access to Southeast Asian markets.
    2. Digital and Maritime Corridors: Enhance India’s trade routes and logistical resilience against Chinese dominance.
    3. Supply Chain Diversification: Reduces dependence on China while integrating India with East Asian production networks.
    4. Economic Opportunities: ASEAN’s collective GDP of over $3 trillion presents scope for India’s pharmaceutical, IT, and engineering exports.
    5. Strategic Balancing: Economic linkages act as a counterweight to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

    Conclusion

    ASEAN remains a cornerstone of India’s Indo-Pacific engagement, offering both strategic depth and economic opportunity. As the US-China competition intensifies, India’s sustained engagement, anchored in connectivity, trade, and institutional cooperation, can ensure regional stability, multipolar balance, and long-term strategic autonomy.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] The West is fostering India as an alternative to reduce dependence on China’s supply chain and as a strategic ally to counter China’s political and economic dominance.

    Linkage: The article aligns with this PYQ as it highlights ASEAN’s centrality in India’s Indo-Pacific outreach, where Delhi’s engagement acts as a counterbalance to China’s dominance. It reinforces the West’s strategy of integrating India within regional supply chains and strategic coalitions to diversify away from Chinese dependence.

  • Various Initiatives under International Solar Alliance (ISA)

    Why in the News?

    At the 8th International Solar Alliance (ISA) Assembly, India has launched four global initiatives viz. Solar Upcycling Network for Recycling, Innovation and Stakeholder Engagement (SUNRISE), One Sun One World One Grid (OSOWOG), Global Capability Centre, and the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Procurement Platform.

    [1] SUNRISE:

    • Overview: Launched by the International Solar Alliance (ISA) to promote a circular economy in solar energy, focusing on recycling and sustainable resource use.
    • Objective: Aims to recover nickel, cobalt, and lithium from retired solar panels, batteries, and components, reducing e-waste and enhancing material efficiency.
    • Global Collaboration: Connects governments, industries, innovators, and recyclers to formulate international standards and best practices for solar waste management.
    • Sustainability Focus: Seeks to make solar power deployment resource-efficient, low-carbon, and environmentally responsible.
    • Economic Impact: Promotes green job creation, industrial diversification, and innovation in clean-energy recycling technologies.

    [2] OSOWOG (One Sun One World One Grid):

    • Overview: A flagship ISA initiative for transnational solar power connectivity, enabling global energy interdependence through solar grid linkages.
    • Goal: Integrate regional grids across Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe to ensure continuous, 24-hour renewable power supply.
    • Benefits: Promotes clean energy trade, enhances grid stability, and lowers renewable power costs through shared transmission infrastructure.
    • Implementation Strategy: Focuses on regulatory harmonisation, cross-border coordination, and interregional feasibility studies for integrated grid operations.
    • Strategic Role: Strengthens India’s leadership in global renewable energy diplomacy and sustainable development cooperation.

    [3] Global Capability Centre (GCC) and ISA Academy:

    • Vision: Conceived as a “Silicon Valley for Solar”, integrating research, innovation, digital learning, and global capacity-building.
    • Operational Model: Functions through STAR-C centres (Solar Technology Application Resource Centres) established across ISA member countries.
    • Training and Learning: The ISA Academy delivers AI-enabled courses in solar finance, engineering, policy, and project management.
    • Capacity Building: Strengthens human capital, fosters technological excellence, and promotes industrial collaboration for scalable solar growth.

    [4] SIDS Procurement Platform

    • Partnership: A joint mechanism between the ISA and World Bank designed for Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
    • Coverage: Involves 16 island nations across the Caribbean, Pacific, and Indian Ocean regions.
    • Mechanism: Facilitates bulk procurement, shared financing, and aggregated demand to lower solar technology deployment costs.
    • Resilience Building: Enhances technical and financial capacity, reducing dependency on imported fossil fuels.
    • Climate and Energy Impact: Supports climate adaptation, strengthens energy security, and promotes sustainable island economies through clean energy access.

    Back2Basics: International Solar Alliance (ISA)

    • Objective: To facilitate affordable solar technology, finance mobilization, and policy support to achieve global energy access and climate goals.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    [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

     

  • The complicated history of U.S-Pakistan relations

    Introduction

    The U.S.-Pakistan relationship has oscillated between strategic intimacy and mutual distrust. Built on Cold War exigencies, it evolved through shared military interests, geopolitical bargains, and recurring disappointments. As new global alignments emerge, Pakistan’s dual engagement with China and the U.S. once again tests the durability and intent of its foreign policy choices.

    Evolution of the U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Partnership

    1. Cold War Origins: Pakistan aligned with the U.S. through SEATO (1954) and CENTO (1955), positioning itself as a frontline ally against communism.
    2. Military and Economic Aid: U.S. assistance included arms, technology, and infrastructure funding, strengthening Pakistan’s military elite.
    3. Transactional Nature: The partnership thrived on mutual utility rather than shared values; Pakistan sought defense support; the U.S. sought regional leverage.

    Impact of Shifting U.S. Priorities during and after the Cold War

    1. Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan (1979): The U.S. re-engaged Pakistan as a base for arming Mujahideen fighters. Aid and weapon transfers surged.
    2. Post-Withdrawal Abandonment: After Soviet withdrawal, Washington invoked sanctions under the Pressler Amendment (1990) over Pakistan’s nuclear program, halting delivery of F-16 aircraft.
    3. Cycle of Engagement and Sanctions: Every phase of cooperation was followed by punitive measures, reflecting deep distrust.

    9/11 and the Recasting of the U.S.-Pakistan Ties

    1. Post-9/11 Alignment: Pakistan became a major non-NATO ally in the U.S.-led “War on Terror,” receiving over $30 billion in aid.
    2. Military Dependence: U.S. logistics for operations in Afghanistan relied heavily on Pakistani routes and intelligence.
    3. Strategic Mistrust: U.S. accused Pakistan of harboring militants while receiving counter-terrorism aid, the Osama bin Laden incident (2011) deepened suspicion.

    Trump’s Policy Reversal and Conditional Engagement

    1. Harsh Rhetoric: In 2018, Donald Trump accused Pakistan of “lies and deceit”, suspending over $300 million in military aid.
    2. Focus on “Double Game”: The U.S. alleged Islamabad’s duplicity, fighting terrorism publicly while sheltering terror networks privately.
    3. China Factor: Trump’s tilt towards India and containment of China indirectly alienated Pakistan, pushing it further into Beijing’s orbit.

    The China Variable and Strategic Realignment

    1. Deepening Sino-Pak Ties: The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and defense collaboration highlight Pakistan’s strategic drift eastward.
    2. U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan (2021): Reignited Pakistan’s regional leverage but also increased scrutiny of its Taliban links.
    3. Balancing Act: Pakistan now seeks to balance its Chinese dependence with limited U.S. engagement to avoid isolation.

    Sanctions, Contradictions and Mutual Suspicion

    1. Sanctions Regime: U.S. invoked multiple sanctions, Symington (1977), Pressler (1990), and Brown (1995) Amendments targeting nuclear proliferation.
    2. Contradictory Approach: Despite sanctions, Washington relied on Pakistan’s logistics during Afghan conflicts, exposing policy inconsistency.
    3. Enduring Distrust: Mutual dependence persisted but never matured into stable diplomacy, defined by suspicion rather than trust.

    India’s Dimension in the Context of U.S.-Pakistan Relations

    Positive Implications for India

    1. Strategic Leverage: Weakening U.S.-Pakistan ties strengthened India’s position as a reliable democratic partner in South Asia.
    2. Defence Cooperation: India gained access to advanced U.S. defence technology, joint exercises (like Malabar), and strategic dialogues (2+2 format).
    3. Global Standing: Partnership in QUAD and Indo-Pacific frameworks enhanced India’s geopolitical influence.
    4. Counterterrorism Support: U.S. alignment with India’s stance against cross-border terrorism increased diplomatic pressure on Pakistan.

    Negative Implications for India

    1. Regional Instability: Strained U.S.-Pakistan ties can destabilize Afghanistan, indirectly impacting India’s security interests.
    2. China-Pakistan Nexus: The gap left by U.S. withdrawal pushed Pakistan deeper into China’s orbit via CPEC and military cooperation.
    3. U.S. Policy Unpredictability: Frequent shifts in U.S. South Asia policy raises doubts about long-term reliability.
    4. Reduced Mediation Influence: India faces difficulty in balancing ties with both U.S. and Russia amid sanctions and defence dependencies.

    Way Forward

    1. Strategic Autonomy: Maintain balanced ties with all major powers while safeguarding national interests.
    2. Regional Dialogue: Promote multilateral frameworks including Afghanistan and Central Asia to counter instability.
    3. Deepened Indo-U.S. Cooperation: Expand collaboration in critical tech, energy, and intelligence without compromising sovereignty.
    4. Focus on Neighbourhood: Strengthen regional engagement to offset Pakistan’s external alignments and ensure South Asian stability.

    Conclusion

    The U.S.-Pakistan relationship remains an exemplar of “strategic utility without strategic trust.” Despite recurring phases of cooperation, both nations continue to perceive each other through transactional lenses. As Pakistan deepens ties with China and the U.S. recalibrates Indo-Pacific priorities, their future engagement will depend on how Islamabad reconciles its global ambitions with domestic constraints and regional realities.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2019] What introduces friction into the ties between India and the United States is that Washington is still unable to find for India a position in its global strategy, which would satisfy India’s national self-esteem and ambitions’. Explain with suitable examples.

    Linkage: U.S.-Pakistan ties were transactional and interest-driven, creating India’s distrust of U.S. intentions. This history causes friction in U.S.-India ties, as India seeks equality while the U.S. retains a hierarchical outlook.

  • Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)

    Why in the News?

    The 32nd APEC Economic Leaders’ Summit (2025) is being held in Gyeongju City, South Korea

    About Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC):

    • Establishment: Created in 1989 as a regional economic forum to enhance the growing interdependence of the Asia-Pacific region.
    • Objective: Promote balanced, inclusive, sustainable, innovative, and secure growth, and accelerate regional economic integration.
    • Membership: Comprises 21 member economies– Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, the United States, and Vietnam.
    • Secretariat: Headquartered in Singapore, coordinating policy dialogues, working groups, and capacity-building across member economies.
    • Decision-Making Principle: Functions on voluntary, non-binding, and consensus-based commitments rather than treaty obligations.
    • Economic Scale: Represents 2.9 billion people, accounting for ~60% of global GDP and ~48% of global trade.
    • Terminology: Refers to its members as “economies” (not countries) to accommodate non-sovereign entities like Hong Kong and Taiwan.
    • Major Frameworks:
      • Bogor Goals (1994) – Free and open trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific.
      • APEC Putrajaya Vision 2040 – Envisions an open, dynamic, resilient, and peaceful Asia-Pacific community by 2040.
    • Focus Areas: Trade liberalisation, digital economy, supply chain resilience, sustainable energy, and inclusive growth.

    India and APEC:

    • Membership: India is NOT a member but has shown consistent interest since the early 1990s, aligning with its Look East / Act East Policy.
    • Geographical Criterion: APEC’s membership is limited to Asia-Pacific economies, while India is categorised under South Asia, restricting eligibility.
    • Economic Context: India’s gradual liberalisation in the 1990s contrasted with APEC’s open market orientation, reducing its early appeal to members.
    • Political Resistance: China has reportedly opposed India’s entry to maintain regional influence and prevent rival power balancing.
    • Moratorium: A 1997 freeze on new memberships continues to block India’s formal inclusion.
    • Current Engagement: Participates in Track-II dialogues, observer consultations, and partner discussions with APEC economies.
    • Strategic Significance:
      • APEC economies drive 60% of world GDP and 48% of global trade.
      • Membership would improve market access, FDI inflows, and digital integration.
      • Enhances India’s engagement with U.S., Japan, China, and ASEAN through multilateral diplomacy.
    • Alternative Platforms: India engages APEC members via BRICS, QUAD, IPEF, and RCEP-linked forums, expanding Indo-Pacific economic influence.
    • Future Outlook: Once the moratorium is lifted, India’s robust economic scale, digital economy, and supply chain capacity make it a strong candidate for future APEC membership.

     

    [UPSC 2017] With reference to `Asia Pacific’ Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban Development (APMCHUD)’, consider the following statements:

    1. The first APMCHUD was held in India in 2006 on the theme `Emerging Urban Forms – Policy Responses and Governance Structure’.

    2. India hosts all the Annual Ministerial Conferences in partnership with ADB, APEC and ASEAN.

    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*