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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • ‘At Sea Observer’ Mission by QUAD

    Why in the News?

    The Coast Guards of India, Japan, the United States, and Australia have initiated the first-ever ‘QUAD At Sea Ship Observer Mission’.

    About “At Sea Ship Observer Mission”:

    • Overview: The ‘At Sea Ship Observer Mission’ is the first cross-embarkation initiative by the Coast Guards of India, Japan, the U.S., and Australia.
    • Origin and Vision: It was conceptualised under the Wilmington Declaration (2024) to boost interoperability and maritime domain awareness in the Indo-Pacific.
    • Participation: Officers from all QUAD countries, including women officers.
    • Joint Training Operations: The mission enables joint SOP drills, search and rescue (SAR), patrolling, and promotes gender inclusion in maritime diplomacy.
    • India’s Alignment: India’s role complements initiatives like SAGAR, the MAHASAGAR Doctrine, and the Indo-Pacific Oceans Initiative (IPOI).
    • QUAD Summit Linkage: It operationalises decisions from the 6th QUAD Leaders’ Summit held in Wilmington, USA.
    • Future Vision: Sets groundwork for a ‘QUAD Coast Guard Handshake’, enhancing trust, resilience, and standardised operations in the Indo-Pacific.
    • Regional Impact: Aims to improve emergency response, coordination, and domain awareness among QUAD Coast Guards.

    What is QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue)?

    • Members: QUAD is a strategic dialogue between India, Australia, Japan, and the United States, focused on Indo-Pacific peace and stability.
    • Nature of Alliance: Though not a formal alliance, it reflects a strong consensus on open sea lanes, supply chains, and tech partnerships.
    • Objectives: It promotes a Free and Rules-Based Order, countering coercive actions in the region.
    • Formation History: Originated post-2004 tsunami, formally proposed in 2007 by Japan’s PM Shinzo Abe.
    • Dormancy and Revival: Went dormant after Australia’s 2008 withdrawal but was revived in 2017 amid concerns over China’s assertiveness.
    • Expanded Focus Areas: Beyond security, QUAD now includes cooperation in health, infrastructure, cybersecurity, emerging tech, and climate change.
    • Joint Activities: The group holds military drills, high-level dialogues, and supports regional capacity-building.
    • QUAD-Plus Engagements: Also engages countries like South Korea, Vietnam, and New Zealand, signalling future expansion.

     

    [UPSC 2016] With reference to the ‘Trans-Pacific Partnership’, consider the following statements: (2016)  1. It is an agreement among all the Pacific Rim countries except China and Russia.  2.It is a strategic alliance for the purpose of maritime security only.

    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*

     

  • In a perilous world, India must read the tea leaves well 

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the world’s growing preference for military force over peaceful talks have made India’s old policy of staying neutral and keeping strategic independence no longer enough.

    Why is India’s neutrality no longer viable in the current global conflicts?

    • Erosion of Strategic Leverage in Multilateral Crises: Neutrality has diminished India’s influence during major global conflicts where clear moral or strategic stands are expected. Eg: During the Israel-Iran conflict, India’s equidistant stance failed to garner goodwill from Iran, while Israel saw no added strategic value either.
    • Increased Global Polarisation and Military Alignments:  The world is now split into rival power groups, and staying neutral is often seen as being unsure or unwilling to take a stand. Eg: The U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites with bunker buster bombs, along with the growing China-Russia-Iran partnership, shows that being neutral in such a situation can actually be a liability and hurt a country’s interests.
    • Loss of Support from Traditional Partners: India’s neutral approach during its own security crises has failed to rally international support. Eg: During the recent India-Pakistan conflict, most West Asian countries and even the U.S. remained non-committal, despite India’s outreach in the Global South.
    • Reduced Credibility of Non-Alignment in a Hard Power World: Global forums are increasingly emphasising military strength over moral positioning. Neutrality is no longer seen as leadership. Eg: At the Shangri-La Dialogue, the U.S. stressed hard power and Indo-Pacific dominance, sidelining softer, non-aligned narratives like India’s.

    What are the threats posed by the China-Pakistan military alliance?

    • Two-Front War Scenario: India faces the real risk of a coordinated military confrontation on both eastern and western borders. Eg: During the India-Pakistan conflict in May, intelligence revealed Pakistan’s preparedness using Chinese-supplied J-10C and JF-17 fighter jets, suggesting synchronised planning with China.
    • Enhanced Pakistani Military Capabilities: China’s transfer of advanced weaponry has significantly boosted Pakistan’s defence systems, improving its precision strike and surveillance capacity. Eg: Chinese radar, missile systems, and drone technology are now integrated into Pakistan’s command and control network, enhancing its offensive potential against India.
    • Asymmetric Nuclear Threat: The alliance magnifies the nuclear imbalance in the region, putting India at a strategic disadvantage. Eg: China and Pakistan together possess nearly a 5:1 advantage in nuclear warheads over India, escalating the deterrence challenge and increasing the risk of nuclear brinkmanship.

    How has India’s Israel-Iran policy impacted its West Asia standing?

    • Loss of Credibility as a Neutral Mediator: India’s attempt to balance ties between Israel and Iran has diluted its influence in the region, as it failed to take a principled stand when it was needed most. Eg: During the Israel-Iran conflict, India’s mere call for “restraint on all sides” disappointed Iran, which expected vocal support against targeted attacks by Israel and the U.S.
    • Strained Relations with Key Regional Powers: India’s visible tilt towards Israel in recent years has alienated several West Asian countries, undermining its strategic and energy interests. Eg: India’s growing defence and technology cooperation with Israel has made its Iran policy less credible, especially after Iran was diplomatically isolated in the recent conflict.

    What are the reforms needed to prepare India for a two-front war? (Way forward)

    • Strengthen Long-Duration War Capabilities: India must boost its ammunition reserves, logistics systems, and supply chain resilience to sustain prolonged conflicts on both fronts. Eg: The UK’s defence audit revealed critical gaps in its own war readiness—India too must conduct similar assessments to plug vulnerabilities.
    • Develop Advanced Technologies and AI Warfare: Investing in Artificial Intelligence (AI), drone warfare, loitering munitions, and electromagnetic systems is crucial to match modern battlefield requirements. Eg: Lessons from the Russia-Ukraine war show the growing role of AI-guided drones and precision weapons in shaping war outcomes.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2022] How will I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics?

    Linkage: India’s role in emerging strategic alliances, emphasizing the need to understand how new groupings can re-shape India’s influence and standing in global politics. The article underscores that India’s foreign policy is currently facing an “existential crisis” due to events like the India-Pakistan conflict, the China-Pakistan nexus, and the Israel-Iran conflict, where “neutrality is no longer an option.

  • [28th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed:  A China-led trilateral nexus as India’s new challenge

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2017] ‘China is using its economic relations and positive trade surplus as tools to develop potential military power status in Asia’, In the light of this statement, discuss its impact on India as her neighbor.

    Linkage: It focuses on how China uses its economic power to gain strategic and military advantages, and how this affects India, its neighbor. The article show that Pakistan heavily depends on China for money, support, and infrastructure. With China’s backing, Pakistan could pose new terrorism and security threats to India.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  China recently held a three-country meeting with Pakistan and Bangladesh in Kunming, soon after a similar one with Pakistan and Afghanistan. These talks show that China is trying to increase its influence in South Asia by bringing India’s neighbours closer, especially as India’s ties with Bangladesh are tense and India is becoming more active in Afghanistan. This reminds us of Cold War-style strategies, where countries tried to surround rivals. As India takes strong action against terrorism and defends its regional interests, China’s new meetings seem to show not just strategy, but also nervousness about India’s growing power.

    Today’s editorial talks about the recent meeting between China, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. This topic is important for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Last week, China, Pakistan, and Bangladesh met together for the first time in a three-country meeting held in Kunming, China.

    What are China’s goals behind trilateral talks with Pakistan and others?

    • Expand Regional Influence: China aims to increase its geopolitical footprint in South Asia by leading trilateral forums.
    • Contain India’s Rise: Trilateral talks help China keep India distracted by regional tensions, limiting its strategic outreach and diplomatic bandwidth. Eg: China’s coordination with Pakistan and Afghanistan shortly after India’s Operation Sindoor aimed to show Pakistan as a regional stakeholder and challenge India’s dominance.
    • Promote BRI and Economic Interests: By drawing countries like Afghanistan and Bangladesh closer, China seeks to push its Belt and Road Initiative and related infrastructure investments. Eg: Discussions with Afghanistan have included extending the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) through Afghan territory.

    Why is China increasing regional engagement amid India’s rise?

    • To Counter India’s Strategic Clout: As India grows economically and diplomatically, China seeks to undermine its influence in neighbouring countries. Eg: China’s trilateral with Pakistan and Bangladesh followed India’s strengthening ties with Afghanistan and regional powers.
    • To Exploit Shifting Political Landscapes: China is leveraging regime changes in countries like Afghanistan and Bangladesh to draw them closer into its orbit. Eg: After the regime change in Bangladesh (2024), China intensified efforts to engage Dhaka through trilaterals.
    • To Protect and Expand Economic Interests: Rising Indian assertiveness challenges China’s economic initiatives, especially BRI projects. Regional engagement helps safeguard these investments. Eg: China wants to extend the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) into Afghanistan to secure trade routes and regional access.

    How does the China-Pakistan nexus affect India’s security strategy?

    • Increased Two-Front Security Threat: The China-Pakistan partnership forces India to prepare for simultaneous threats on both western and northern borders, complicating military planning. Eg: During Operation Sindoor (2025), Pakistan used Chinese-made drones, radars, and fighter jets, requiring India to recalibrate its defence posture.
    • Diplomatic Isolation Attempts: China often backs Pakistan at global platforms, shielding it from international scrutiny, especially on terror-related matters. Eg: China blocked UN resolutions targeting Pakistan-sponsored terrorists, limiting India’s global counterterrorism diplomacy.
    • Regional Instability via Trilateral Engagements: China promotes trilateral meetings involving Pakistan and India’s neighbours to sideline New Delhi and create regional pressure points. Eg: The China-Pakistan-Bangladesh trilateral aims to undermine India’s influence in South Asia and divert attention from long-term strategic goals.

    What are the developments that show India countering China’s regional influence?

    • Assertive Military and Diplomatic Response: India has adopted a proactive approach to respond to security threats and Chinese intrusions. Eg: In response to the Pahalgam terror attack, India launched Operation Sindoor (2025) and suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, restricted port access, and took military action, signalling firm redlines.
    • Strengthening Ties with Neighbours: India is engaging constructively with its neighbours to limit Chinese outreach and reinforce strategic trust. Eg: Despite past tensions, India supported Nepal’s energy cooperation with Bangladesh and re-engaged with Maldives and Sri Lanka, reinforcing regional goodwill.
    • Coalition Building with Like-Minded Nations: India is enhancing cooperation with democratic allies to counterbalance China’s strategic footprint in South Asia. Eg: India has deepened ties through platforms like QUAD, and built defence and intelligence partnerships with countries like the U.S., Japan, and Australia, strengthening its regional deterrence.

    Who among the neighbours are shifting towards China?

    • Pakistan: Deeply aligned with China for military, economic, and diplomatic support. Eg: Over $29 billion in loans, and 80% of arms imports from China.
    • Bangladesh: After the 2024 regime change, it has shown increasing economic and political engagement with China. Eg: Joined trilateral talks with China and Pakistan, indicating a shift despite India’s past close ties.
    • Afghanistan: Shifted closer to China-Pakistan axis after the Taliban takeover (2021) and again after 2024 regime changes.

    Way forward: 

    • Enhance Strategic Partnerships in South Asia: India should build stronger bilateral ties with its neighbors through infrastructure support, trade cooperation, and regional connectivity projects. Strengthening initiatives like BIMSTEC and Act East Policy can counterbalance China’s influence.
    • Assert Regional Leadership Through Security and Diplomacy: India must continue to lead anti-terror cooperation, defend regional sovereignty, and set clear redlines for any hostile alignments. At the same time, it should promote inclusive regional forums that prioritize peace and mutual development.

  • India to alter Ganges Water Sharing Treaty with Bangladesh

    Why in the News?

    India is preparing to reassess and renegotiate the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty with Bangladesh, which is set to expire in 2026, completing its 30-year term.

    About the Ganga Water Agreement (1996):

    • Signing: It was signed on December 12, 1996, by PM H. D. Deve Gowda (India) and PM Sheikh Hasina (Bangladesh) to share the Ganga’s dry season flow.
    • Purpose: It aimed to ensure water availability for irrigation, ecology, and navigation in both countries, especially at the Farakka Barrage, which diverts water to sustain the Kolkata Port.
    • Duration: It replaced earlier short-term deals and set a 30-year framework (1996–2026), with a renewal clause by mutual consent.

    Key Terms of the Agreement:

    • Lean Season Period: The treaty applies from January 1 to May 31, with water sharing calculated in 10-day intervals.
    • Sharing Formula at Farakka:
      • ≤ 70,000 cusecs: 50% each
      • 70,000–75,000 cusecs: India gets the remainder after Bangladesh gets 35,000
      • ≥ 75,000 cusecs: India gets 40,000; Bangladesh gets the balance
    • Alternate Sharing: From March 11 to May 10, both countries receive 35,000 cusecs alternately every three 10-day blocks.
    • No Minimum Guarantee: If flow falls below 50,000 cusecs, Article II allows for consultations and emergency adjustments.
    • Monitoring Mechanism: The Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) ensures implementation and dispute resolution.
    • Project Provisions: Both countries may construct water projects for irrigation and navigation.

    Why must India reconsider it?  

    • Treaty Expiry: The treaty ends in 2026, and India wants a revised pact to reflect current demands.
    • Rising Needs: India seeks an additional 30,000–35,000 cusecs due to:
      • Increased irrigation in West Bengal and other states
      • Siltation issues at Kolkata Port
      • Urban and industrial growth
    • Flexibility Concerns: Officials argue the treaty lacks provisions for climate variability and seasonal shortages.
    • State Support: West Bengal supports changes, citing inadequate current allocations.
    • Proposed Change: India may pursue a shorter, more flexible treaty, like its move on the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan.

    Implications for Bangladesh:

    • Downstream Vulnerability: Bangladesh faces greater risk from reduced water flow.
    • Historical Shortfalls: Between 1997 and 2016, Bangladesh received less than its share 65% of the time.
    • Potential Consequences:
      • Increased salinity in rivers and farmland
      • Reduced water for fisheries, irrigation, and drinking
      • Navigation issues in the delta
    • Political Sensitivity: Many in Bangladesh already view the treaty as unfair, and further reduction may trigger domestic backlash.
    • Diplomatic Impact: A poorly negotiated outcome could strain India-Bangladesh ties, especially in water diplomacy and cross-border trust.
    [UPSC 2009] Consider the following statements:

    1. The Baglihar Power Project had been constructed within the parameters of the Indus Water Treaty.

    2. The project was completely built by the Union Government with loans from Japan and the World Bank. 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

     

  • International Day against Drug Abuse

    Why in the News?

    June 26 is observed globally as the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, also known as World Drug Day.

    About the International Day Against Drug Abuse:

    • It is observed annually on June 26, following a declaration by the UN General Assembly on December 7, 1987.
    • The theme for 2025, “Break the Cycle. #StopOrganizedCrime,” highlights the need for tackling organized crime networks linked to drug trafficking and calls for long-term investment in justice, education, health care, and alternative livelihoods.
    • Events are held worldwide to raise awareness about the social, health, and legal impacts of drug abuse, with active participation from governments, NGOs, and citizens.
    • In India, efforts like the Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan reflect the government’s zero-tolerance policy and people-centric approach to preventing drug addiction and trafficking.

    Key Highlights of the UNODC World Drug Report (2024-2025):

    • The latest World Drug Report by UNODC reveals that 292 million people globally were using drugs by 2022, marking a 20% increase in the last decade.
    • The report notes a worrying expansion of synthetic drug markets, especially methamphetamine and fentanyl-type opioids, and links them to organised crime groups.
    • It calls attention to youth vulnerability, mental health correlations, and gaps in treatment access, especially in low-income countries.

    Back2Basics: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)

    • Overview: It was established in 1997 through the merger of the United Nations Drug Control Programme and the Centre for International Crime Prevention.
    • UN agency: It helps in tackling illicit drugs, organised crime, corruption, and terrorism.
    • Headquarters: It is located in Vienna, Austria.
    • Its core functions include:
      • Educating global populations about the dangers of drug abuse.
      • Assisting countries in ratifying and implementing international drug control treaties.
      • Strengthening criminal justice systems to promote the rule of law.
      • Supporting crime prevention, anti-corruption efforts, and terrorism prevention through technical and legal assistance.
    • Funding Mechanism: UNODC is voluntarily funded, mainly by governments, and works with partners worldwide to promote stable, secure, and just societies.

     

    [UPSC 2024] Consider the following activities:

    1. Identification of narcotics on passengers at airports or in aircraft

    2. Monitoring of precipitation

    3. Tracking the migration of animals

    In how many of the above activities can the radars be used?

    Options: (a) Only one (b) Only two* (c) (c) All three (d) None

     

  • [27th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Fathoming America’s plan to manage AI proliferation

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2021] The USA is facing an existential threat in the form of a China, that is much more challenging than the erstwhile Soviet Union.” Explain.

    Linkage: The article explicitly state that the US views AI technology control as a means to “preserve its lead” against adversaries like China and Russia, seeing advanced AI capabilities as a determinant of national power, similar to nuclear weapons.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The United States’ decision to withdraw the AI Diffusion Framework marks a clear change in policy, but not in its overall strategy to control AI technology. The framework had treated AI like a nuclear threat, aiming to tightly control the export of AI chips, especially to China and Russia. Its removal is seen as positive news, especially for countries like India, which were not treated fairly. However, the U.S. is now trying to achieve the same goals through technology-based controls instead of direct trade rules. This shift from open policy to hidden enforcement could hurt global AI cooperation, cause strategic caution among allies, and lead to repeating the same problems in a new way.p

    Today’s editorial talks about the impact of the United States’ recent decision to cancel its AI Diffusion Framework. This topic is useful for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The United States recently cancelled its AI Diffusion Framework, a set of rules that controlled the export of AI technology. This decision is being seen as a positive move.

    What is the AI Diffusion Framework?

    The AI Diffusion Framework was a set of export control rules announced by the United States in early 2025. It aimed to regulate how advanced AI technology, such as AI chips and model weights, could be shared or sold to other countries.

    What were the key goals of the U.S. AI Diffusion Framework?

    • Restrict Access to Strategic Competitors: The framework aimed to block countries like China and Russia from obtaining advanced AI chips and model weightsto prevent them from enhancing their military and surveillance capabilities through powerful AI systems.
    • Preserve U.S. Technological Leadership: By limiting the global spread of high-performance computing resources, the U.S. sought to maintain its edge in AI development and ensure that cutting-edge innovations remained concentrated within the U.S. and trusted allies.
    • Create a Structured Export Control System: It introduced a clear set of rules combining export controls and licensing, aiming to simplify regulatory procedures and standardize how AI-related technology was shared or restricted across countries.

    Why was the U.S. AI Diffusion Framework seen as counterproductive?

    • Damaged trust among allies and partners: The broad restrictions impacted both rivals and friendly countries, causing diplomatic friction. Some nations that were not classified as preferred allies began investing in independent AI ecosystems to avoid overdependence on the U.S.
    • Accelerated innovation in restricted regions: By limiting access to advanced AI chips, the framework pushed affected countries to create more efficient algorithms that required less computing power. This led to the development of competitive AI models that challenged the dominance of those built with high-end hardware.

    Why is the framework’s withdrawal seen as beneficial for countries like India?

    • Improved Access to AI Hardware and Resources: With the framework withdrawn, countries like India now face fewer barriers in acquiring high-performance AI chips and related technologies. Eg: Indian startups and research institutions can more easily procure advanced GPUs necessary for developing large AI models.
    • Support for Strategic and Technological Autonomy: The removal of restrictions allows India to pursue its own AI development agenda without being constrained by another country’s policy. Eg: India can strengthen initiatives like the IndiaAI Mission and the Semiconductor Mission to build domestic capabilities.
    • Enhanced Global Collaboration Opportunities: The rollback encourages deeper cooperation between India and other nations, including the U.S., in AI research and innovation. Eg: Indian firms may now engage in joint ventures or technology partnerships with U.S. companies without facing restrictive export barriers.

    How do new U.S. AI chip controls reflect a continuation of earlier strategies?

    • Ongoing Restriction on Adversaries: The U.S. continues to block access to advanced AI chips for countries like China by expanding export controls and adding more firms to the Entity List, just as the earlier framework aimed to do.
    • Shift from Trade to Technological Enforcement: Instead of broad trade bans, the new approach focuses on hardware-level restrictions, such as embedding features in chips to monitor or limit usage, reflecting the same strategic intent in a new form.
    • Sustained Focus on Controlling AI Diffusion: The introduction of location tracking mandates and usage controls in AI chips shows the U.S. is still trying to control how and where AI technology spreads, continuing the goals of limiting proliferation and maintaining dominance.

    What are the global implications of U.S. AI export controls on innovation and technological sovereignty?

    • Push for Technological Self-Reliance: Countries affected by the controls are investing in domestic AI ecosystems and indigenous chip manufacturing to reduce dependence on U.S. technology, leading to the rise of multiple, parallel innovation hubs around the world.
    • Erosion of Trust and Collaboration: Export restrictions create privacy concerns, surveillance risks, and a sense of strategic vulnerability, prompting both allies and adversaries to hedge against U.S. influence, thereby weakening global scientific cooperation and technological integration.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government in AI chips?

    • IndiaAI Mission (2024): A ₹10,000 crore initiative focused on developing compute infrastructure, datasets, and talent.
    • Semiconductor Mission (ISM): Includes financial incentives and infrastructure support for AI chip manufacturing and design.
    • Collaborations with the private sector: Partnerships with companies like Micron, AMD, and Tata Group to build chip fabs and R&D centres in India.
    • Supercomputing initiatives: Under PARAM and National Supercomputing Mission, India is developing indigenous high-performance compute for AI workloads.
    • IndiaAI compute platform: Aimed at giving startups and researchers access to high-end GPU clusters.

    Way forward: 

    • Promote Inclusive and Transparent AI Governance: The U.S. and other major powers should work through multilateral platforms to create balanced AI export norms that protect security interests without stifling global innovation or alienating partners.
    • Strengthen Global AI Collaboration Frameworks: Countries like India should advocate for open-access research, joint AI development programs, and capacity-building initiatives to ensure equitable access to AI technology and reduce dependency on a single ecosystem.

  • India refuses to sign SCO draft statement

    Why in the News?

    At the SCO Defence Ministers’ meeting in Qingdao, China, Raksha Mantri Rajnath Singh refused to sign the draft joint statement after it excluded the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack.

    About SCO:

    • Overview: It is a regional intergovernmental body with 10 members—India, China, Russia, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Iran, and Belarus (joined in 2024).
    • Origin: It evolved from the “Shanghai Five” formed in 1996, aimed at resolving post-Soviet border and security issues in Central Asia and China.
    • Formation: Itwas formally established on June 15, 2001, in Shanghai to promote regional cooperation in security, economic development, and cultural exchange.
    • Security Arm: The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure- RATS of SCO focuses on counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, and drug trafficking.
    • Global Role: It is the world’s largest regional group by area and population, and is viewed as a counterweight to Western alliances.
    • India and SCO:
      • Membership Journey: India became an observer in 2005 and gained full membership in 2017, along with Pakistan.
      • Areas of Participation: India engages in SCO summits, joint military drills, and anti-terror cooperation, often using the forum to address cross-border terrorism

    Significance of Rajnath Singh’s Action:

    • Strong Message: In his recent SCO address, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh emphasized zero tolerance for terrorism, citing the Pahalgam attack as a case of religious targeting.
    • Foreign Policy Signal: His statement reflects India’s independent foreign policy stance, especially significant in a group where China wields influence and often backs Pakistan
    • Zero Tolerance Stand: The speech reinforced India’s message that peace and terrorism cannot coexist, and there can be no normal ties with terror-sponsoring nations.
    [UPSC 2022] Consider the following:

    1. Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank

    2. Missile Technology Control Regime

    3. Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

    India is a member of which of the above?

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

     

  • In news: International Olympic Committee (IOC)

    Why in the News?

    Kirsty Coventry, aged 41, has become the first African and the first woman to head the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

    Also in news:

    The IOC has paused the selection process for future Olympic Games hosts, impacting India’s bid for the 2036 Olympics.

    About the International Olympic Committee (IOC)

    • Overview: It is a non-governmental international organisation established in 1894, and is headquartered in Lausanne, Switzerland.
    • Functions: It sets the rules and framework for the Olympic Games, including deciding on host cities and event structures.
    • Membership: IOC members must be proficient in French or English and be citizens or residents of countries with a National Olympic Committee (NOC).
    • Jurisdiction: The IOC acts as the final authority on matters related to the Olympic Games and the Olympic movement.
    • Indian and the IOC:
      • The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) has been recognized by the IOC since 1927.
      • It is responsible for selecting and sending Indian athletes to the Olympics and other major international competitions.

  • [26th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The ‘Axis of Upheaval’ in the West Asia conflict 

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2022] How will I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics?

    Linkage: This question highlights a new grouping involving Israel and the USA, both central to the West Asia conflict described as the origin point for the “Axis of Upheaval”. The formation and impact of such new strategic groupings, particularly in the context of the Middle East, are directly relevant to the evolving power dynamics and strategic realignments that define the concept of the “Axis of Upheaval.”

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The recent U.S.-Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear sites and the weak ceasefire that followed have shown that today’s global alliances, often compared to Cold War groups, are not very strong or united. Even though Iran has close economic and political ties with Russia and China, neither country gave any military support. This clearly shows the limits of strategic partnerships when there is a real military threat. The so-called ‘Axis of Upheaval’ made up of Iran, Russia, and China is really just a loose group, without any formal military treaties like those in Western alliances such as NATO. This crisis breaks the idea of a bipolar world and highlights the unequal power dynamics in today’s global politics.

    Today’s editorial discusses global power alliances in the context of the Israel-Iran war. This topic is helpful for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The recent U.S.-Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, followed by a weak ceasefire, has shown that today’s global alliances, often compared to Cold War blocs, are not as strong or united as they appear.

    What are the new global power blocs?

    New global power blocs refer to emerging alliances among countries like China, Russia, and Iran that seek to challenge the dominance of the Western-led global order. These blocs focus on economic cooperation, strategic alignment, and institutional alternatives such as BRICS and SCO, but lack formal military treaties like NATO.

    Why has the Israel-Iran conflict weakened the idea of new global power blocs?

    • Lack of Military Support: Despite Iran’s close ties with Russia and China, neither provided military assistance during the conflict. Eg: Russia, engaged in the Ukraine war, offered only diplomatic mediation, while China limited itself to verbal condemnation.
    • Absence of Binding Alliances: The so-called ‘Axis of Upheaval’ lacks formal military treaties that require collective defense. Eg: Iran’s strategic partnerships with Russia (2025) and China (2021) are primarily economic, not military.
    • Diverging Strategic Interests: Russia and China used the conflict to advance their own interests, letting the U.S. get entangled in West Asia. Eg: The U.S. bombing of Iran may distract American focus from the Indo-Pacific and Europe, which suits Beijing and Moscow.

    What are the strategic limits of Iran’s ties with Russia and China?

    • No Binding Military Pact: Iran’s ties with Russia and China are largely economic and diplomatic, with no formal military alliance or commitment to joint defense.
    • Conflicting Strategic Priorities: Russia is deeply engaged in the Ukraine war, and China is focused on maintaining its economic growth and regional stability, limiting their readiness to back Iran militarily. Eg: Russia has turned to North Korea for troops, showing its own resource constraints.
    • Unequal Benefits: Iran is heavily dependent on these relationships, while Russia and China gain economic and geopolitical advantages without taking on direct strategic risks. For instance, China secures discounted Iranian oil under sanctions, while offering limited concrete support in return.

    How have Russia and China responded to Iran’s crisis post-ceasefire?

    • Diplomatic Support without Military Action: Russia offered to mediate the conflict through a call by President Putin, but this was ignored by the U.S., and no military support was extended.
      Putin’s involvement reflected symbolic backing, not a commitment to defend Iran.
    • Condemnation of Israeli Actions: China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi criticised Israeli airstrikes as violations of international law, showing support through official statements while avoiding direct intervention. This response aimed to maintain China’s global diplomatic posture without escalating tensions.
    • Strategic Caution for Self-Interest: Both countries used the conflict to their advantage by letting the U.S. get entangled in West Asia, potentially weakening its focus on the Indo-Pacific and Ukraine. The crisis served to advance Beijing and Moscow’s strategic space without direct involvement.

    Where does Iran stand diplomatically and militarily after the recent conflict?

    • Diplomatic Isolation and Limited Support: Despite having strategic partnerships with Russia and China, Iran received only verbal and symbolic backing, with no concrete military or institutional support.
      Its regional alliances failed to activate, reflecting a gap between rhetoric and action.
    • Military Weakening and Proxy Setback: Iran suffered a decapitation of leadership and capacity, while its key proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthiswere unable to respond effectively.
      This has weakened Iran’s role as a regional power and exposed its dependence on non-state actors.

    Way forward: 

    • Formalize Strategic Partnerships: Iran, Russia, and China should work toward institutionalising their ties through defense cooperation frameworks, joint military exercises, and security dialogues to build trust and operational coordination.
    • Align Long-term Strategic Interests: The three nations need to develop a shared geopolitical vision that goes beyond transactional ties, ensuring mutual support mechanisms during crises while balancing individual regional priorities.

  • [25th June 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: U.S.’s heavy duty attack on Iran’s nuke sites

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] In what ways would the ongoing US-Iran Nuclear Pact Controversy affect the national interest of India? How should India respond to this situation?

    Linkage: “Operation Midnight Hammer: B-2 Bombers Strike Iran’s Nuclear Facilities,” details a significant event where the “U.S. military carried out precision strikes on three key Iranian nuclear facilities, mainly Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan”. This PYQ is highly relevant as it requires an analysis of the broader implications for India arising from such direct military actions and controversies involving the US and Iran’s nuclear capabilities, which are central to the “Operation Midnight Hammer” narrative.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  On June 21, 2025, the U.S. officially entered the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict by launching “Operation Midnight Hammer”, a precision strike on Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. What makes this operation historic is the first-ever operational use of the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOP), dropped by B-2 Spirit stealth bombers. Fordow, an ultra-hardened site buried deep within a mountain, had long been considered impregnable — even to Israeli firepower. This high-stakes attack involving stealth bombers, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and elaborate deception tactics showcases the evolving nature of strategic warfare, stealth technology, and nuclear deterrence dynamics, with significant implications for global security and geopolitics.

    Today’s editorial discusses the effects of the recent U.S.A. Operation Midnight Hammer: B-2 Bombers Strike Iran’s Nuclear Facilities. This topic is important for GS Paper II (International Relations) in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the U.S. joined the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran by launching “Operation Midnight Hammer”, a targeted military strike on Iran’s main nuclear sites located at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

    What is the B-2 Stealth Bomber?

    The B-2 Stealth Bomber, also known as the B-2 Spirit, is an advanced long-range, heavy bomber used by the United States Air Force.

    What are the geopolitical impacts of the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites?

    • Undermining diplomatic efforts: The attack weakens ongoing negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, especially efforts to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which the U.S. exited in 2018.
    • Message of deterrence and alliance assurance: The operation signals U.S. commitment to Israel’s security and aims to deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, reaffirming strategic dominance in West Asia and setting a precedent like the 1981 Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor.

    How do technologies like B-2 bombers and bunker-busters shape modern warfare?

    • Enhanced penetration of fortified targets: Bunker-buster bombs like the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator can destroy deeply buried nuclear facilities, such as Iran’s Fordow site, which is located inside a mountain.
    • Stealth and survivability in hostile environments: The B-2 Spirit bomber, with its low radar signature and long-range capabilities, allows undetected strikes deep into enemy territory, demonstrated during Operation Midnight Hammerover Iran.
    • Precision and reduced collateral damage: The use of GPS-guided munitions enables targeted destruction of critical infrastructure while minimizing civilian harm. The Tomahawk cruise missiles used alongside the B-2s in the Iran strike are an example.

    What does U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict indicate about its West Asia strategy?

    • Reinforcement of strategic alliances: The U.S. action shows its continued military and political support for Israel, especially after Israel’s initial strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites. This underscores a long-standing alliance.
    • Deterrence against nuclear proliferation: By targeting Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities, the U.S. aims to send a strong message against the development of nuclear weapons by adversarial states in the region.
    • Projection of power and dominance: The deployment of B-2 bombers and Tomahawk missiles illustrates America’s intent to maintain military superiority and influence over regional conflicts, ensuring its leadership role in West Asia’s security architecture.

    What challenges arise in attacking underground nuclear sites like Fordow?

    • Depth and Fortification: The Fordow nuclear site is buried 80–90 meters underground and shielded by reinforced concrete, making it resilient to conventional strikes. Even the GBU-57 bunker-busters caused only partial damage, revealing the limits of aerial assaults.
    • Operational Complexity: Missions to strike such sites need advanced platforms like the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, supported by decoy tactics, mid-air refuelling, and long-duration flights. The limited number of B-2s and their high maintenance make repeated missions challenging.

    Does India have B-2 bomber capability?

    • Lack of Stealth Bomber Technology: India does not possess any stealth bombers like the U.S. B-2 Spirit, which is capable of penetrating heavily fortified targets with low radar visibility. The B-2 is a unique platform operated exclusively by the United States.
    • Current Indian Bomber Fleet: India relies on multirole fighter jets such as the Sukhoi Su-30MKI, Rafale, and Mirage-2000 for strike missions. These aircraft are effective but lack deep-strike stealth capabilities and the payload capacity of strategic bombers.E.g. The Sukhoi Su-30MKI can carry cruise missiles like BrahMos, but not bunker-busters like the GBU-57.
    • Strategic Focus and Alternatives: Instead of stealth bombers, India invests in missile-based deterrents such as the Agni series (ballistic missiles) and long-range cruise missiles. These provide strategic strike capability without the need for a dedicated stealth bomber. E.g. The Nirbhay cruise missile offers precision strike capability with a range of 1000+ km.

    What can India do? (Way forward)

    • Invest in Indigenous Stealth and Deep-Strike Platforms: India can accelerate development of indigenous stealth bombers or long-range unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) under future programs like AMCA (Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft) to enable penetration of heavily defended targets.
    • Enhance Precision Missile and Bunker-Buster Arsenal: India can develop or acquire heavy bunker-busting munitions and integrate them with existing platforms like the Su-30MKI or future drones, while also upgrading satellite-guided targeting systems for deeper and more accurate strikes.