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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • The building blocks of an India-U.S. energy future

    Why in the News?

    U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance recently mentioned that the U.S. is ready to work more closely with India on energy and defense.

    What are the main areas of India-U.S. cooperation?

    • Energy Security: Strengthening access to sustainable, reliable, and affordable energy resources is central to India-U.S. ties. Eg: In 2024, both countries signed an MoU to diversify supply chains for critical minerals like lithium and rare earths, crucial for clean energy and EV technologies.
    • Defence and Technology Cooperation: Enhancing strategic and technological collaboration helps address common security challenges and promote innovation. Eg: Under the iCET framework, India and the U.S. are collaborating on defence co-production and advanced systems, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) for civilian nuclear use.
    • Mobility and Innovation Exchange: Facilitating people-to-people ties and high-tech partnerships boosts economic growth and shared innovation ecosystems. Eg: India and the U.S. are working to ease skilled labor mobility and co-develop innovation corridors in areas like semiconductors and AI.

    Why is a minerals partnership vital for both countries?

    • Strategic Resource Security: Critical minerals are essential for clean energy, electronics, and defence, and current supply chains are overly dependent on China. Eg: China controls nearly 90% of global rare earth processing, creating a strategic vulnerability for both India and the U.S.
    • Economic and Technological Collaboration: Joint exploration and processing of minerals supports cross-sector innovation and economic resilience. Eg: India and the U.S. signed an MoU in 2024 to co-invest in third-country mineral projects in Africa and South America.
    • Supply Chain Diversification: A minerals partnership helps build resilient, transparent, and traceable supply chains to withstand geopolitical shocks. Eg: Proposal for an India-U.S. Mineral Exchange and blockchain-based traceability standards to ensure secure mineral sourcing.

    How can nuclear energy help India meet its energy goals?

    • Low-Carbon Energy Source: Nuclear energy provides a firm, low-emission alternative to fossil fuels, aiding in decarbonisation efforts. Eg: Nuclear power contributes just over 8 GW currently but is crucial for India’s net-zero by 2070 targets.
    • Base Load Power Stability: It ensures continuous electricity supply, complementing the intermittency of solar and wind sources. Eg: Nuclear plants provide uninterrupted power, stabilising the grid as renewable sources fluctuate.
    • High Energy Output with Small Land Use: Nuclear energy offers high output per unit of land, which is vital in land-scarce regions. Eg: Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) have lower land requirements and are suitable for water-scarce areas due to air-cooling.
    • Industrial Decarbonisation Support: Nuclear power can drive clean energy transitions in sectors like steel and AI-based data centres. Eg: SMRs can power green steel manufacturing and meet rising energy needs of AI infrastructure.
    • Strategic Energy Independence: Reducing reliance on fossil fuel imports enhances national energy security. Eg: With a 100 GW nuclear target by 2047, India aims to lower its dependence on imported oil and coal.

    Which reforms are key to expanding India’s nuclear capacity?

    • Faster Deployment and Standardisation: Accelerate construction timelines and adopt standardized reactor designs to lower costs and ensure quick scaling of nuclear energy capacity. Eg: Reducing construction time from 9 to 6 years could reduce electricity costs by 8%, helping India meet its 2047 nuclear capacity goal.
    • Private Sector Involvement: Facilitate private investments by providing clear incentives and long-term purchase commitments, especially for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). Eg: SMRs, with lower capital expenditure and land requirements, become financially viable when supported by private capital and stable offtake agreements.
    • Legislative and Policy Reforms: Amend existing laws to encourage private investment in nuclear energy and enhance the ease of doing business in this sector. Eg: Amending the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, would allow private companies to participate in nuclear projects, boosting investment and technological growth.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government? 

    • Expansion of Nuclear Power Infrastructure: The government has set a target to achieve 100 GW of nuclear power by 2047, and is working on commissioning new plants to achieve this, including collaborations with international partners. Eg: The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant and new reactors under construction are key initiatives to expand nuclear capacity.
    • Regulatory and Policy Reforms: India has been reforming nuclear energy laws, including the amendment of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, to attract private sector participation and investment in nuclear projects. Eg: The approval for the transfer of Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology by Holtec International to Indian companies.
    • International Collaborations and Technology Transfer: India is fostering strategic partnerships with global nuclear technology leaders to enable technology transfer, co-production, and joint ventures for nuclear power development. Eg: India’s collaboration with the U.S. on advanced nuclear technology and the approval of SMRs to meet energy goals.

    Way forward: 

    • Enhanced Public-Private Partnerships: Encourage greater private sector participation through incentives, policy clarity, and long-term contracts, especially for emerging technologies like Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). This will drive innovation, investment, and rapid scaling of nuclear energy.
    • Strengthen International Collaboration and Technology Transfer: Expand partnerships with global leaders in nuclear technology to accelerate the adoption of advanced reactors and improve operational efficiency, positioning India as a global leader in clean nuclear energy.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2013] With growing scarcity of fossil fuels, the atomic energy is gaining more and more significance in India. Discuss the availability of raw material required for the generation of atomic energy in India and in the world.

    Linkage: Nuclear energy as a “next frontier” for India-U.S. linkages and a reliable source complementing renewables. This question directly addresses the significance and resources for atomic/nuclear energy in India.

  • [7th May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The fragmentation in the global fight against terror

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2016] Present an account of the Indus Water Treaty and examine its ecological, economic and [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:  Terrorism as a global threat and asks about the effectiveness of an international institution (UNSC’s CTC) in addressing it. This directly relates to the article which discusses the lack of a collective fight against terror and highlights how actions within the UN Security Council (like China blocking proposals against Pakistan-based terrorists) demonstrate the challenges and fragmentation in international cooperation against terrorism.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 has once again revealed the lack of unity in the global fight against terrorism, as well as Pakistan’s tendency to use terrorism whenever there is a possibility of peace returning to Jammu and Kashmir. Although many countries have condemned the attack, they have also urged both India and Pakistan to show restraint. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio asked both nations to find a peaceful solution that ensures long-term peace and stability in South Asia. U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance expressed hope that India’s reaction would not lead to a larger conflict in the region. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that any issues between India and Pakistan should be resolved through political and diplomatic talks. Meanwhile, the EU’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, didn’t even describe the incident as a terror attack.

    Today’s editorial talks about how the world is not united in fighting terrorism and highlights how Pakistan often uses terrorism as a tool. This topic is useful for GS Paper II (International Relations) and GS Paper III (Internal Security).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    In the past, there was a strong global consensus and zero tolerance towards terrorism. However, in the case of India, which continues to be a victim of state-sponsored terrorism, the international response often seems to follow a different set of standards.

    What does the Pahalgam terror attack reveal about the global fight against terrorism?

    • Fragmentation and Hypocrisy in the Global Anti-Terror Stand: The unified global stance post-9/11 has weakened; countries now view terrorism through selective lenses based on their strategic interests. Eg: While the Pahalgam attack was clearly a terrorist act targeting Hindu pilgrims, the EU failed to call it a “terror attack” and instead used vague diplomatic language, showcasing diplomatic double standards.
    • “Your Terrorist vs My Terrorist” Mindset Prevails: Different regions prioritize different types of terrorism, undermining a collective global response. Eg: The U.S. focuses on REMVE (racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism), while Canada ignores pro-Khalistan threats against India, citing freedom of expression.
    • Global Inaction Against State-Sponsored Terrorism: Despite clear evidence of Pakistan’s role in cross-border terrorism, major powers avoid taking concrete action, fearing geopolitical consequences. Eg: China has blocked UN sanctions against terrorists operating from Pakistani soil, and the West emphasizes “regional stability” over punishing the perpetrator.

    Why are global powers urging restraint between India and Pakistan after the attack?

    • Fear of Nuclear Escalation in South Asia: Global powers are wary of any confrontation between two nuclear-armed nations, especially in a volatile region. Eg: Despite India’s position as the victim, the U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged both India and Pakistan to maintain “long-term peace and regional stability”, placing equal responsibility on both sides.
    • Geopolitical Fatigue Due to Multiple Ongoing Conflicts: With active wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and West Asia, there is a limited appetite among global powers for another escalation in Asia. Eg: U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance expressed hope that India’s response would not trigger a regional conflict, reflecting global fatigue and risk-aversion.
    • Pakistan’s Manipulative Use of the ‘Nuclear Threat’ Narrative: Pakistan has long used the “nuclear war” bogey to deter international support for strong Indian countermeasures. Eg: Even as Western powers support Ukraine in a war against nuclear-armed Russia, they urge Indian restraint to avoid a similar escalation with Pakistan.

    How has Pakistan’s role in terrorism affected its relations with India and the UN?

    • Strained Bilateral Relations with India: Terror attacks traced back to Pakistan-based groups have derailed peace processes and led to diplomatic isolation. Eg: After the Pulwama attack (2019), India withdrew the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status from Pakistan and suspended bilateral talks.
    • Global Censure and Blacklisting Threats by the UN and FATF: Pakistan has been repeatedly flagged by international watchdogs like the UN and FATF for harbouring terror networks. Eg: In 2018, the FATF grey-listed Pakistan due to insufficient action against terror financing, affecting its global financial credibility.
    • Reduced Legitimacy in Global Forums: Its credibility at the UN is undermined by its ambivalence towards terror groups, weakening its case on Kashmir and other issues. Eg: India has consistently blocked Pakistan’s attempts to internationalize the Kashmir issue at the UN by highlighting its support for cross-border terrorism.

    Why is there a double standard in addressing terror attacks on Hindus?

    • Global Narrative Often Selective Based on Identity Politics: Attacks on Hindus are sometimes downplayed in international media and forums due to fears of appearing biased or anti-minority. Eg: The 2023 Pakistan Hindu temple attacks received minimal global coverage compared to similar attacks on other communities.
    • Lack of Institutional Recognition for Hindu Persecution: Unlike other religious groups, Hindus often lack dedicated international forums or recognition as victims of targeted violence. Eg: The Kashmiri Hindu exodus in the 1990s remains largely absent from global human rights discussions, unlike similar ethnic cleansings.
    • Geopolitical Considerations Overshadow Justice: Nations avoid condemning attacks on Hindus in countries like Pakistan or Bangladesh to maintain strategic ties, even at the cost of justice. Eg: Western powers rarely impose sanctions or raise strong objections to sectarian violence against Hindus in South Asia.

    What actions should India take against state-sponsored terrorism from Pakistan? (Way forward)

    • Strengthen Diplomatic Pressure through Global Alliances: India should leverage platforms like the UN, G20, and Quad to diplomatically isolate Pakistan and expose its terror links. Eg: After the Uri and Pulwama attacks, India launched diplomatic campaigns leading to Pakistan’s continued presence on the FATF grey list.
    • Enhance Intelligence and Surgical Response Capabilities: India must invest in real-time intelligence and conduct targeted counter-terror operations across the Line of Control when credible evidence exists. Eg: The 2016 Surgical Strikes and 2019 Balakot air strikes demonstrated India’s shift to proactive defense strategies.
    • Cut Economic and Water Leverage: India can revisit the Indus Waters Treaty and limit trade relations to exert pressure without crossing into full-scale conflict. Eg: Post-Pulwama, India reviewed the Indus treaty and imposed 100% customs duty on Pakistani imports.

  • India up three spots to 130 in HDI

    Why in the News?

    India ranks 130th out of 193 countries in the 2025 Human Development Report (HDR), marking continued progress in human development according to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

    hdi

    About Human Development Index (HDI):

    • HDR has been published by UNDP since 1990, exploring various human development themes.
    • HDI is a composite index that measures the average achievement in human development based on 3 key indicators:
      1. Life expectancy at birth (SDG 3: Good Health and Well-Being).
      2. Expected years of schooling and Mean years of schooling (SDG 4: Quality Education).
      3. Gross National Income (GNI) per capita (SDG 8: Economic Growth).

    India’s Progress on HDI:

    • India ranks 130th, improving from 133rd in 2022.
    • India’s HDI value increased from 0.676 in 2022 to 0.685 in 2023, remaining in the medium human development category.
    • Life expectancy in India reached 72 years in 2023, the highest recorded since the inception of the index, reflecting recovery post-pandemic.
    • Children in India now stay in school for 13 years on average, up from 8.2 years in 1990, driven by initiatives like the Right to Education Act and National Education Policy (2020).
    • India’s Gross National Income (GNI) per capita is $2,230 in 2023, reflecting moderate economic growth.
    • Among BRICS members, India trailed Brazil (89th), Russia (59th), China (75th), and South Africa (110th).
    • Regionally, Sri Lanka led while Nepal and Bhutan lagged.
    [UPSC 2003] As per the Human Development Index given by UNDP, which one of the following sequences of South Asian countries is correct, in the order of higher to lower development?

    Options: (a) India-Sri Lanka-Pakistan-Maldives (b) Maldives-Sri Lanka-India-Pakistan (c) Sri Lanka-Maldives-India-Pakistan* (d) Maldives-India-Pakistan-Sri Lanka

     

  • [6th May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The messaging from putting the IWT in ‘abeyance’ 

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2016] Present an account of the Indus Water Treaty and examine its ecological, economic and political implications in the context of changing bilateral relations.

    Linkage: The decision to put the IWT in ‘abeyance’ is discussed in the article within the context of changing bilateral relations between India and Pakistan following a terror attack. The article highlights the political implications and the strategic considerations behind the decision, which aligns with examining the treaty’s implications in changing bilateral relations.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  On April 24, India declared that it would temporarily suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 until Pakistan stops supporting cross-border terrorism. The term “abeyance” means a temporary pause, with the possibility of restarting the treaty if Pakistan takes real actions to stop terrorism, especially following the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22.

    Today’s editorial discusses India’s temporary suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960. This topic is relevant for GS Paper II (International Relations).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Using water resources as a strategic tool may offer short-term gains, but it could ultimately harm India in the long run.

    Why has India placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance?

    • Response to Cross-Border Terrorism: India used the IWT as a strategic pressure tool following the Pahalgam terror attack (April 22, 2024), holding Pakistan accountable for supporting terrorism. Eg: Similar to the 2016 Uri attack response (surgical strikes), this move sends a message of zero tolerance.
    • Political Messaging and Public Sentiment: The decision caters to domestic outrage and shows a firm stance, particularly after recurring terror incidents. It helps the government project decisive action without immediate military escalation. Eg: After the Pulwama attack in 2019, India took firm actions like revoking Article 370 — a similar pattern of assertiveness is evident.
    • Leverage to Expedite Infrastructure Projects: India aims to use this pause to accelerate stalled or disputed hydropower and irrigation projects like Ratle and Tulbul Navigation on western rivers. Eg: Pakistan’s objections delayed the Kishenganga and Baglihar projects — abeyance reduces procedural hurdles temporarily.
    • Legal Dispute over Treaty Mechanism: India had already accused Pakistan of violating dispute resolution provisions of the IWT by unilaterally approaching the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2023. Eg: India considers this a material breach and is using “abeyance” as a middle path instead of outright termination.
    • Strategic Signalling Amid Regional Instability: Given Pakistan’s current political and economic instability, India sees an opportunity to reshape the narrative and strengthen its own water security posture. Eg: With Pakistan’s military losing public support and the government under pressure, India is testing diplomatic leverage.

    Can using water resources strategically bring short-term gains but harm India long-term?

    • Diplomatic Strain: Using water as a tool for leverage can strain diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries, potentially leading to prolonged conflicts. Eg: If India disrupts water-sharing agreements under the Indus Waters Treaty, it could escalate tensions with Pakistan, affecting regional stability.
    • International Reputation: Strategic manipulation of water resources may damage India’s global image as a responsible water-sharing partner, undermining trust in future agreements. Eg: India’s suspension of the IWT may invite international criticism for violating treaty obligations, harming its reputation in the international community.

    What are the legal limitations under the IWT and international law regarding unilateral suspension or abeyance of a treaty?

    • Principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda: Under international law, treaties must be honored in good faith. This principle (pacta sunt servanda) ensures that once a treaty is ratified, it cannot be unilaterally suspended or abrogated without serious justification. Eg: In the IWT, India and Pakistan are obligated to maintain water-sharing arrangements despite political tensions.
    • Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: A treaty can only be suspended or terminated unilaterally if there is a “material breach” or a fundamental change in circumstances (rebus sic stantibus), and this must be declared after due process. Eg: If one party to a treaty deliberately violates its terms, the other party might argue that the treaty is no longer binding.
    • Specific Treaty Provisions: Many treaties, including the IWT, include specific provisions about suspension, termination, or modification in certain circumstances. These provisions must be followed. Eg: In the IWT, disputes are to be resolved through a permanent commission rather than unilateral suspension of obligations.
    • Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Most treaties include mechanisms for resolving disputes rather than allowing unilateral suspension, reinforcing the need for cooperation and dialogue. Eg: The IWT mandates the use of a Permanent Indus Commission to address any disputes regarding the water-sharing arrangement.

    How might India use the term “abeyance” to affect procedural cooperation mechanisms under the Indus Waters Treaty?

    • Suspension of Dispute Resolution Mechanism: The term “abeyance” suggests temporarily putting something on hold rather than full termination, which could lead to the suspension of mechanisms like the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) for resolving water-sharing disputes. Eg: If India places certain provisions of the IWT in abeyance, it could halt the regular meetings and communication under the PIC, leading to delayed resolutions.
    • Impact on Technical Cooperation: The IWT relies on continuous technical cooperation to monitor water flows and manage the shared river systems. “Abeyance” may disrupt such technical collaboration, affecting data sharing and joint assessments. Eg: India’s use of “abeyance” could delay joint inspections or data exchange related to water quality or infrastructure projects, impacting the treaty’s smooth functioning.
    • Erosion of Trust: Using “abeyance” could signal a lack of commitment to the treaty, potentially undermining trust between India and Pakistan and hindering future cooperation under the IWT. Eg: If India temporarily halts cooperation on the IWT, Pakistan may view it as a breach of good faith, weakening the foundation of trust that is critical for long-term collaboration.
    • Escalation of Diplomatic Tensions: The term could be interpreted as a politically motivated pause, which may lead to diplomatic tensions between the two countries. This would make it harder to revive procedural cooperation when needed. Eg: India’s declaration of “abeyance” after the 2019 Pulwama attack could escalate tensions and make it more difficult to resume dialogue on water-related issues, as the diplomatic focus shifts to security concerns.

    Way forward: 

    • Engage in Diplomatic Dialogue: India and Pakistan should prioritize re-engaging through the Permanent Indus Commission to address grievances and resume cooperation on water-sharing, ensuring that the IWT remains intact while managing political tensions.
    • Strengthen Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Both countries should strengthen the dispute resolution mechanisms under the IWT, ensuring that any concerns over violations are addressed through legal channels rather than unilateral actions, preserving long-term stability and trust.

  • Indians earn the most among Asian Americans

    Why in the News?

    Indian Americans earn more than any other Asian group in the U.S., making about 40% more than Chinese and Japanese households.

    What is the median annual income of Indian American households?

    • Highest Median Income Among Asian Groups: Indian American households had a median annual income of $151,200 in 2023, the highest among all Asian ethnic groups in the U.S. Eg: Indian Americans earn about 40% more than both Chinese and Japanese households.
    • Income Reflects High Educational Attainment: The high income level is linked to strong educational achievements—77% of Indian Americans aged 25+ hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, second only to Taiwanese Americans. Eg: Despite similar education levels, Mongolian Americans earn far less, highlighting that factors beyond education (like job type, geography, or discrimination) may also impact income.

    How does it compare to other Asian groups?

    Asian Group Median Household Income (2023) Key Comparison Point Example
    Indian Americans $151,200 Highest income among all Asian groups 40% higher than Chinese or Japanese households
    Taiwanese Americans Slightly below Indians (~$140,000+) Second highest, due to even higher educational attainment (83%) Close to Indian income levels, driven by education
    Mongolian Americans $54,300 Despite high education (69% with degrees), lowest income Shows income isn’t always proportional to education

    Who are the largest Asian ethnic groups in the U.S. as of 2023?

    • Chinese Americans: Approximately 5.5 million individuals, making up 22% of the Asian American population. Example: Chinese Americans are the largest Asian ethnic group in the U.S.
    • Indian Americans: Around 5.2 million individuals, accounting for 21% of the Asian American population. Example: Indian Americans are the second-largest Asian ethnic group in the U.S.
    • Filipino Americans: Approximately 4.6 million individuals, representing 18% of the Asian American population. Example: Filipino Americans rank third among Asian ethnic groups in the U.S.

    What is the significance of the Indian diaspora? 

    • Economic Influence: Indian diaspora communities contribute significantly to the economies of their host countries through entrepreneurship, skilled labor, and remittances. Example: Indian-Americans contribute to the U.S. economy, particularly in the technology sector, with companies like Google and Microsoft having Indian-origin CEOs.
    • Cultural Exchange: The Indian diaspora has played a major role in promoting Indian culture globally, including its festivals, cuisine, music, and film. Example: Bollywood films and Indian cuisine have a large following across the world, especially in the UK, the U.S., and the Middle East.
    • Political Influence: The Indian diaspora has a growing presence in political leadership positions, influencing policies in their respective countries. Example: Kamala Harris, the Vice President of the United States, and Priti Patel, the Home Secretary of the UK, are of Indian origin and have shaped political discourse.
    • Educational Contributions: Indian diaspora members are highly skilled professionals and students, making notable contributions to global research and academic excellence.
      Example: Indian-origin scientists and engineers have made significant strides in fields like space exploration, medicine, and technology worldwide.

    What are the challenges? 

    • Caste-Based Discrimination: Despite migration, caste-based discrimination persists within diaspora communities. Marginalized groups, such as Dalits, often face exclusion and prejudice in educational institutions, workplaces, and social settings.
    • Racial and Religious Intolerance: Indian diaspora communities frequently encounter racism and xenophobia, particularly in countries with complex immigration histories. These discriminatory practices can hinder social integration and economic mobility.
    • Political Polarization and Identity Conflicts: Global political tensions, such as those related to the Kashmir issue, can lead to divisions within diaspora communities. Protests and calls for calm in response to international conflicts reflect how such issues can strain local community relations.

    Way forward: 

    • Promote Inclusivity and Social Integration: Efforts should be made to combat caste-based discrimination, racism, and xenophobia within diaspora communities by fostering inclusive policies and promoting intercultural dialogue. This can help create a more harmonious environment for integration and equal opportunities.
    • Encourage Political and Civic Engagement: To address political polarization, the Indian diaspora should engage in local politics and civic activities to bridge divides and advocate for constructive dialogue, ensuring their concerns are heard and their influence in the host country’s policies is constructive and united.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2023]  Indian diaspora has scaled new heights in the West. Describe its economic and political benefits for India.

    Linkage: The high earnings of Indian Americans, as indicated in the article, are a clear example of the Indian diaspora “scaling new heights” economically in the West. This economic strength directly contributes to the potential economic benefits (like remittances, investment, trade promotion) and political influence (lobbying, soft power) that the diaspora provides to India. This question requires discussing precisely these benefits stemming from the diaspora’s success, of which high income is a key metric.

  • [3rd May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A profound shift in the global order

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2019] ‘The long-sustained image of India as a leader of the oppressed and marginalised Nations has disappeared on account of its new found role in the emerging global order”. Elaborate.

    Linkage: India is at a turning point, and the world is becoming more equal, moving away from old colonial ways. As Asia becomes more important again, this change is also affecting how India is seen and positioned globally.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  India is at another turning point, similar to when Vasco da Gama arrived in Kozhikode in 1498 and the local ruler, the Zamorin, failed to act strategically. But this time, it’s not about sea trade routes—it’s about how global value chains are being reshaped through power and influence. This is a crucial moment for India, which is on track to become the world’s third-largest economy. For the past 75 years, the world has followed a post-colonial order known as globalisation. It was based on countries following common rules for the greater good, and divided the world into “donors” and “recipients.” But this idea no longer works, especially after China overtook the U.S. in foreign aid, manufacturing, and global trade share. As a result, institutions like the WTO, UN, and various treaties have become less useful to powerful countries, leading to U.S. pullouts.

    Today’s editorial analyses global value chains as being reshaped through power and influence. This content would help in the GS Paper II (International Relations).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    President Donald Trump is not acting randomly. He is reacting to a world where countries are becoming more equal and breaking free from old colonial ideas, while still trying to keep their fading advantages.

    What shift in global trade is compared to Vasco De Gama’s arrival?

    • Transition from Trade Routes to Value Chains: Vasco De Gama’s 1498 voyage opened sea-based trade routes connecting India to Europe. Today, the world is witnessing a shift from traditional trade to technology-driven global value chains (GVCs), reshaped by geopolitical forces rather than free markets. Eg: The semiconductor supply chain, where countries like Taiwan, South Korea, and the U.S. dominate chip design and fabrication, reflecting value chain complexity over simple trade.
    • Strategic Inertia vs Strategic Foresight: The Zamorin’s complacency during Vasco’s arrival represents a lack of strategic foresight in seizing global opportunities. India now faces a similar moment and must act strategically to capitalize on the global trade realignment and not miss out like in the colonial past. Eg: India’s PLI (Production Linked Incentive) schemes in electronics and pharmaceuticals are efforts to plug into global manufacturing chains proactively.
    • Geopolitically Driven Trade Structures: Earlier global trade was commercially motivated, but today it is increasingly geopolitically driven, with blocs forming and multilateralism weakening. Eg: The U.S.-China trade war and decoupling from Chinese supply chains are forcing countries like India to reposition themselves in new GVCs.

    Why is the post-colonial global order losing relevance?

    • Shift from Multilateralism to Bilateralism and Power Politics: The post-colonial world order was built on rule-based multilateral institutions (e.g., WTO, UN), promoting equal participation. Now, major powers prefer bilateral deals that prioritize national interest over global consensus. Eg: The U.S. withdrawing from multilateral agreements like the Paris Climate Accord and WTO dispute mechanisms.
    • Obsolescence of Donor-Recipient Hierarchy: The older order assumed a world divided into ‘donors’ (developed nations) and ‘recipients’ (developing nations). This has become irrelevant as emerging powers like China now surpass traditional Western powers in aid and trade influence. Eg: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has made it a larger global lender than the World Bank in many regions.
    • Erosion of Trust During Global Crises: Global institutions failed to uphold equitable principles during emergencies, revealing self-serving behavior by developed nations. Eg: During the COVID-19 pandemic, G-7 countries hoarded vaccines and medical supplies, sidelining poorer nations and weakening trust in global cooperation.

    Who should lead India’s push for new global governance principles?

    • India’s World-Class Diplomats: India should empower its skilled and experienced diplomatic corps to frame and advocate new governance principles suited to a multipolar world. Eg: Indian diplomats played a key role in shaping the International Solar Alliance, showing leadership in global climate governance.
    • Cooperation Between Political Leadership and Policy Experts: A coordinated approach involving political vision (e.g., Prime Minister’s “Asian Century” narrative) and strategic policy institutions can guide India’s global engagement. Eg: NITI Aayog and MEA’s policy think tanks can jointly shape proposals for reforms in multilateral institutions like the WTO and UN.
    • Engagement with Global South and Emerging Institutions: India must lead with inclusive principles by aligning with BRICS, ASEAN, and the African Union, promoting a fair and tech-driven global order. Eg: India’s BRICS presidency and advocacy for the Global South Voice at G-20 summits shows readiness for leadership beyond the West-dominated system.

    How can India become a global leader in AI and technology?

    • Leverage Human Capital and Digital Infrastructure: India must build on its skilled workforce, vast datasets, and proven digital stack (like Aadhaar, UPI) to drive AI innovation. Eg: IndiaStack enabled large-scale digital public goods, which can now serve as the foundation for developing large language models (LLMs) and AI applications.
    • Promote Open-Source and Indigenous Innovation: Focusing on open-source technologies and encouraging local R&D will allow India to innovate independently and at scale. Eg: India can emulate models like DeepSeek (an open-source AI rivaling U.S. models) to build affordable, accessible AI tools.
    • Create National Consensus and Industry-Academia Collaboration: A national policy consensus involving all stakeholders—governments, academia, and industry—must be built to focus on AI, chips, and deep tech. Eg: China’s rise in hardware was driven by state-industry coordination; India needs similar programs for semiconductors and AI research centers.

    Which regions should India partner with for a new economic framework?

    • ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations): India should collaborate with ASEAN to build an Asian Common Market and leverage regional complementarities in trade, manufacturing, and digital economy. Eg: India’s Act East Policy and its trade agreements with Singapore and Thailand provide a base for deeper economic integration.
    • African Union: Africa offers a growing consumer base and untapped potential for investment in infrastructure, technology, and education. Eg: India’s Pan-African e-Network Project and growing pharma exports make Africa a strategic partner in India’s south-south cooperation.
    • BRICS and Emerging Economies: Collaborating within BRICS helps India shape multipolar global governance and alternative trade norms. Eg: India’s proposal for a BRICS currency system and its role in the New Development Bank demonstrate long-term strategic engagement.
    • Middle East (West Asia): Strong energy ties and growing interest in tech cooperation make the Middle East a key partner in India’s economic future. Eg: The India-UAE CEPA and I2U2 group (India-Israel-UAE-USA) promote trade, food security, and innovation-led partnerships.
    • Latin America and Caribbean (LAC): This region provides opportunities for trade diversification, agricultural cooperation, and technology exchange. Eg: India’s investments in pharmaceuticals and IT sectors in Brazil and Mexico mark a growing footprint in the LAC region.

    Way forward: 

    • Institutionalise Strategic Partnerships: India should formalise economic and technology alliances through frameworks like FTAs, digital cooperation pacts, and regional value chains with emerging regions (ASEAN, Africa, LAC).
    • Champion Inclusive Global Norms: Lead the Global South in advocating reforms in global governance institutions, emphasising equity, sustainability, and tech sovereignty to shape a multipolar, resilient global order.

  • [2nd May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: China’s strategic push — Asia ties amid tariff tensions

    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: China’s economic relations to its strategic power status in Asia and asks about the impact on India, which aligns with the broader implications of China’s growing regional influence discussed in the source.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia from April 14-18, 2025, aimed to present China as the most reliable partner in the region. With a 145% tariff on Chinese goods imposed by the Trump administration, China is rethinking its foreign trade strategies, particularly with countries in Southeast Asia where it has strong ties and supportive partners. This visit is not just regular diplomacy but a strategic move by China to ease economic pressure, show stability, and strengthen its leadership role in the Indo-Pacific region.

    The editorial today analyzes Chinese President Xi Jinping’s recent visit to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia. This analysis can help in understanding the broader dynamics of China’s foreign policy and its impact on international relations, which is relevant for GS Paper 2 in the UPSC exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Beijing’s efforts to engage with Southeast Asia could make it harder for the U.S. to form a coalition aimed at isolating or limiting China economically.

    What was the aim of Xi Jinping’s Southeast Asia tour?

    • Counter U.S. Economic Pressure and Protectionism: In response to the 145% tariff on Chinese exports by the Trump administration, China used the tour to strengthen trade ties with receptive Southeast Asian partners like Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia.
    • Position China as a Stable and Reliable Partner in the Indo-Pacific: Xi signed 45 agreements with Vietnam and over 30 with Malaysia, showcasing China’s willingness to invest in digital economy, AI, agriculture, and infrastructure — directly contrasting U.S. policies perceived as protectionist or security-centric.
    • Promote China’s Regional Leadership and Soft Power: Xi emphasized non-interference, cultural ties, and the Belt and Road Initiative, including major projects like the Funan Techo Canal in Cambodia, to build a “community with a shared future” and present China as the regional leader.

    Why is Southeast Asia key to China’s trade strategy?

    • Buffer Against U.S. Trade Pressures: As the U.S. imposes tariffs (e.g., 145% on Chinese exports under Trump), China needs trade partners less influenced by Washington. Eg: Cambodia, Vietnam, and Malaysia are not aligned with U.S. protectionism and offer alternate trade routes.
    • Alternative Manufacturing Base: Rising labor costs and export restrictions push China to shift low-cost manufacturing to nearby countries. Eg: Many Chinese firms are investing in Vietnamese and Malaysian industrial parks as part of their “China Plus One” strategy.
    • Gateway to Regional Supply Chains: Southeast Asia is integrated into global value chains and is a key node in East Asian manufacturing. Eg: The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) links China with ASEAN, allowing tariff-free trade on many goods.
    • Diplomatic and Economic Receptiveness: ASEAN countries are generally open to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and infrastructure investment. Eg: The Funan Techo Canal in Cambodia, funded by China, improves logistics and deepens economic ties.
    • Market Expansion and Political Influence: Growing middle classes and urbanization offer long-term markets for Chinese goods and services. Eg: Digital economy and AI agreements with Malaysia expand Chinese tech firms’ reach while strengthening bilateral ties.

    Which agreements were signed with Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia?

    • Vietnam – Strategic and Economic Deepening: China and Vietnam signed 45 cooperation agreements covering infrastructure, trade, connectivity, and border management. Eg: Agreements included railway connectivity, digital economy initiatives, and boosting cross-border trade.
    • Malaysia – Tech and Economic Collaboration: Over 30 agreements were signed focusing on the digital economy, artificial intelligence, agriculture, and infrastructure. Eg: MoUs on AI cooperation, palm oil trade, and joint development of industrial parks were key highlights.
    • Cambodia – Investment and Infrastructure Expansion: China reaffirmed its role as Cambodia’s largest investor and trading partner, with a focus on large-scale infrastructure projects. Eg: The Funan Techo Canal project was a major outcome, seen as a symbol of deepened strategic and economic ties.

    How does China’s approach differ from the U.S. in the region?

    • Economic Diplomacy vs. Security-Centric Strategy: China emphasizes infrastructure, trade, and investment, while the U.S. often leads with security alliances and military cooperation. Eg: China’s Belt and Road projects (like the Funan Techo Canal in Cambodia) contrast with U.S.-led initiatives like AUKUS and the Quad.
    • Non-Interference vs. Value-Based Engagement: China promotes a policy of non-interference and economic cooperation without imposing political conditions. The U.S. ties engagement to democracy, human rights, and strategic alignment. Eg: China’s warm ties with Cambodia, despite its authoritarian governance, contrast with U.S. criticism of its human rights record.
    • Tangible Deliverables vs. Abstract Frameworks: China offers clear economic incentives (like market access and investments), while U.S. initiatives often lack concrete trade benefits. Eg: China signs dozens of bilateral agreements; the U.S.’s Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) has been criticized for lacking market access.

    What could be the impact on India? 

    • Strategic Space Shrinkage in Southeast Asia: As China deepens ties with ASEAN countries, India may find it harder to expand its influence in the region. Eg: Vietnam engaging with China despite maritime tensions may dilute India’s strategic partnership with Hanoi.
    • Competitive Pressure on Infrastructure and Trade Diplomacy: China’s aggressive investment through BRI challenges India’s outreach via initiatives like the Act East Policy or Mekong–Ganga Cooperation. Eg: China’s infrastructure push in Cambodia (e.g., Funan Techo Canal) may overshadow India’s developmental efforts in the region.
    • Risk of Regional Economic Isolation: Closer China-ASEAN integration may sideline India from key trade and supply chains unless it accelerates its economic engagement. Eg: India’s exit from RCEP and China’s expanding trade deals with ASEAN may reduce India’s leverage in setting regional economic norms.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Economic and Infrastructure Diplomacy: India should deepen its engagement with Southeast Asia through large-scale infrastructure projects, trade agreements, and digital economy initiatives to compete with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Eg: Focusing on improving connectivity, like the India-Myanmar-Thailand trilateral highway, and enhancing regional supply chains could help.
    • Foster Strategic Partnerships and Multilateral Cooperation: India should prioritize strengthening its strategic ties with ASEAN countries through multilateral platforms like the East Asia Summit (EAS) and the Quad, focusing on security and regional stability. Eg: India must increase its participation in economic partnerships to counter China’s growing influence.

  • [1st May 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The impact of suspending a water treaty

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2016]  Present an account of the Indus Water Treaty and examine its ecological, economic and political implications in the context of changing bilateral relations.

    Linkage:  India’s action regarding the IWT due to strained bilateral relations stemming from terrorism and outlines potential economic impacts on Pakistan and political/diplomatic implications for India.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  In response to the terrorist attack by The Resistance Front that killed 26 tourists in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, India’s Cabinet Committee on Security decided to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 immediately. This suspension will remain in place until Pakistan completely stops supporting cross-border terrorism. The decision essentially means ending the water treaty, which was signed in 1960, but there is no clause in the treaty that allows for it to be cancelled unilaterally.

    Today’s editorial looks at the recent halt of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) after a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. This topic is useful for GS Paper II (International Relations).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    India may defend its decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, but this could affect its relationships with neighbouring countries.

    Why did India suspend the Indus Waters Treaty?

    • Response to Cross-Border Terrorism: India suspended the IWT as a strong retaliatory measure after The Resistance Front, a Pakistan-backed terrorist group, killed 26 tourists in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. Eg: The Cabinet Committee on Security declared the suspension until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism.”
    • Strategic Leverage Against Pakistan: India views the IWT as a tool of strategic pressure, given that Pakistan’s agriculture and hydropower heavily rely on water from the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers. Eg: By suspending water-sharing obligations and planning to increase storage and diversion, India aims to weaken Pakistan’s water security.

    What legal challenges arise from this suspension under international law?

    • Lack of Exit Clause in the IWT: The IWT does not have a provision for unilateral termination or suspension by either party. Article XII (4) specifies that the treaty shall continue unless a duly ratified treaty for termination is concluded. Eg: India’s suspension of the treaty violates this provision, as there is no formal exit mechanism within the IWT itself.
    • Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) Challenges: India’s use of VCLT provisions, particularly Article 62 on treaty modification or termination due to a fundamental change in circumstances, is problematic. India is not a party to the VCLT, and Pakistan has signed but not ratified it, making its application complex. Eg: Using VCLT to justify the suspension may face legal challenges since it doesn’t apply directly in the context of the IWT.
    • Violation of International Legal Norms: Unilateral suspension of the IWT without mutual consent may be viewed as a violation of customary international law, which favors the continuation of treaties unless both parties agree to their termination. Eg: Legal experts argue that India’s actions undermine the principle of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept), which is a core tenet of international law.
    • Possible Retaliation and Legal Action by Pakistan: Pakistan has legal recourse to challenge India’s suspension, including bringing the issue to international forums such as the ICJ, UN Security Council, or the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Eg: Pakistan could argue that India’s suspension violates the VCLT or raises a dispute regarding the treaty’s interpretation, seeking a legal ruling on the matter.

    How could the move impact water disputes within Pakistan?

    • Intensification of Inter-Provincial Water Conflicts: Pakistan’s provinces, particularly Punjab and Sindh, already face longstanding water disputes. India’s suspension of the IWT could exacerbate these internal conflicts, especially as the western rivers are critical to both agriculture and hydroelectric power in Pakistan. Eg: Punjab and Sindh have previously clashed over water allocations, and a reduction in water flow from India could heighten tensions, particularly over the allocation of Indus river waters.
    • Increased Political Instability: A reduction in the water flow from India could lead to widespread agricultural damage and water shortages, particularly in Punjab, which is the country’s agricultural heartland. This could spark public protests and political instability within Pakistan. Eg: The ongoing disputes over projects like the Cholistan Canal between provinces may intensify if Pakistan faces reduced water availability, leading to political pressures on the federal government to resolve these disputes.

    Which infrastructure projects support India’s water strategy?

    • Hydroelectric Projects: Projects like Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project and Ratle Dam utilize water from the western rivers for power generation, in line with India’s share under the Indus Waters Treaty.
    • Run-of-the-River Dams: Baglihar Dam and Salal Dam regulate river flows for electricity generation, without significant water storage, supporting India’s strategy to manage water resources.
    • Irrigation and Flood Control: Infrastructure like the Srinagar flood control project and irrigation systems in Jammu and Kashmir helps manage water for agricultural use and regional stability.

    What are the regional diplomatic consequences of India’s decision?

    • Strained Relations with Pakistan: Suspending the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) may worsen India-Pakistan relations, particularly over water access, potentially leading to diplomatic protests. Eg: Pakistan could raise the issue at international platforms like the UN or the International Court of Justice.
    • Impact on India-China Relations: China, as an upper riparian of India’s rivers, may use India’s suspension to justify withholding hydro data on rivers like the Brahmaputra. Eg: During the 2017 Doklam crisis, China did not share hydro data with India but did with Bangladesh.
    • Influence on India-Bangladesh Ties: India’s suspension could affect the renewal of the Ganga Water Treaty with Bangladesh in 2026. Eg: Bangladesh could be concerned about water-sharing agreements, given the geopolitical tensions.

    Way forward:

    • Engage in Diplomatic Dialogue: India should initiate diplomatic discussions with Pakistan, China, and Bangladesh to mitigate tensions and seek mutually beneficial water-sharing agreements, ensuring regional stability.
    • Strengthen Water Infrastructure: India must invest in enhancing its water storage and management infrastructure to maximize its treaty entitlements and reduce reliance on fluctuating water flows.

  • From a rules-based world to shambolic disorder

    Why in the News?

    Even before Donald Trump’s time in office, there were clear signs that the world was becoming more uncertain in many areas. This was a warning of trouble in different parts of the world, and leaders in government, business, and strategy had already started getting ready for tougher times.

    What are the main global disruptions contributing to geopolitical and economic instability?

    • Leader-led Disruption and Geopolitical Tensions: Authoritarian leaders such as Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Donald Trump are reshaping global politics. Eg: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and U.S. trade wars under Trump have strained international alliances.
    • Rise of Protectionism and Trade Wars: Economic nationalism and tariff barriers have disrupted global trade. Eg: Trump’s tariff war with China reduced U.S. GDP growth and disrupted global supply chains.
    • Technological Disruption and Cyber Threats: Rapid tech changes and cyber warfare are causing instability in national security and job markets. Eg: Growing reliance on disruptive technologies without governance frameworks leads to digital vulnerabilities.
    • Regional Conflicts and Expanding Military Influence: Conflicts in West Asia, increasing military presence, and border tensions are destabilizing regions. Eg: Israel’s offensive in Gaza, tensions in Syria, and China’s naval expansion in the Indian Ocean.
    • Resurgence of Terrorism and Non-State Actors: Groups like ISIS are re-emerging in Africa and South Asia, causing fresh security challenges. Eg: Recent terror attacks in Kashmir and IS activity in Mozambique and Congo signal renewed threats.

    Why is the United States, once a model of democratic stability, now perceived as a deeply divided nation?

    • Deepening Political Polarization: Internal divisions between conservative and liberal ideologies have intensified, weakening national unity. Eg: Sharp divide over Trump’s policies and Capitol Hill riots in January 2021 reflect erosion of democratic consensus.
    • Transactional Foreign Policy Approach: U.S. foreign relations have become self-serving, leading to fractured alliances. Eg: Trump’s tariff wars and criticism of NATO allies strained transatlantic relations.
    • Targeting of Educational and Immigration Systems: Policies against foreign students and elite institutions hurt America’s soft power and economy. Eg: Restrictions on student visas under Trump threatened $40 billion in economic contribution.
    • Economic Protectionism and Declining Global Trade Role: Shift from free trade to protectionist policies reduced U.S. leadership in global economic governance. Eg: Imposition of tariffs led to decline in U.S. GDP growth and disrupted global supply chains.

    How is China capitalising on the shifting geopolitical landscape in Asia?

    • Expanding Influence through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): China is using infrastructure projects to create economic dependencies and increase political leverage across Asia. Eg: China’s investment in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) strengthens its hold in South Asia and secures a vital trade route.
    • Exploiting U.S. Retreat and Growing Global Uncertainty: As the U.S. retreats from global leadership, China has stepped in as a key player, especially in the Indo-Pacific. Eg: China’s leadership in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the world’s largest free trade bloc, contrasts with U.S. absence under Trump.
    • Enhancing Military and Naval Presence in Key Regions: China is expanding its military presence, particularly in maritime zones crucial for trade and regional security. Eg: China’s aggressive stance in the South China Sea, including artificial island building and military installations, asserts control over disputed waters.
    • Strengthening Bilateral and Multilateral Ties with Neighboring Countries: China is forging strategic alliances with neighboring countries to offset U.S. influence and enhance regional dominance. Eg: China’s growing ties with Southeast Asian countries like Cambodia and Laos, as well as influence in Sri Lanka through infrastructure projects like the Hambantota Port.
    • Leveraging the China-India Rivalry to Expand Influence: China is exploiting tensions between India and its neighbors to increase its regional influence. Eg: China’s increasing influence over Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, alongside tensions at the India-China border, shifts regional power dynamics in China’s favour

    What implications could this have for India?

    • Strategic Encirclement and Security Concerns: China’s increasing presence in India’s neighborhood (Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka) creates strategic pressure and challenges India’s regional dominance.Eg: The development of the Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka under China’s BRI is seen as part of a “String of Pearls” strategy encircling India.
    • Economic Competition and Trade Imbalance: China’s dominance in Asian trade frameworks like RCEP and its export power pose risks to Indian manufacturing and trade sovereignty. Eg: India opted out of RCEP over concerns that cheap Chinese imports would harm Indian MSMEs.
    • Border Tensions and Military Confrontation: Persistent border disputes, particularly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), escalate military spending and diplomatic tensions. Eg: The 2020 Galwan Valley clash led to casualties on both sides and worsened India-China relations..

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Strategic Partnerships: India should deepen ties with like-minded nations through forums like Quad and ASEAN to counterbalance China’s regional dominance. Eg: Enhanced defense and technology cooperation with Japan, Australia, and the U.S.
    • Boost Domestic Capabilities and Connectivity: Accelerate infrastructure development, self-reliant manufacturing (Atmanirbhar Bharat), and regional connectivity with neighbors to reduce Chinese influence. Eg: Development of the Chabahar Port to bypass China-influenced trade routes.

    Mains PYQ:

    [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: Major shift in the global power balance and a challenge to the established international order (historically dominated by the US post-Cold War).

  • [28th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The ‘political trilemma’ and the crisis in the West

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2019] Are we losing our local identity for the global identity? Discuss

    Linkage: The tension between globalising forces and national or local identities, which is at the heart of the debate surrounding the political trilemma, particularly the interplay between international economic integration and national sovereignty/popular democracy.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  Democracies in the West are facing a crisis marked by increasing polarization, mistrust in institutions, and rising populism, leading to more insular policies. Economist Dani Rodrik’s “political trilemma” suggests countries can only have two of three things: global economic integration, national sovereignty, and popular democracy. Despite globalization, nations have imposed trade barriers, limiting its benefits.

    Today’s editorial examines the growing polarization, distrust in institutions, and the rise of populism, which are driving countries towards more insular policies despite globalization. This topic is relevant for GS Paper 1 on Society and GS Paper 2 on Polity in the Mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    What was once just a concept in academic studies is now happening around the world, with its effects being more noticeable in Western countries than in others.

    How has globalization impacted sectors and populations in Western countries, fueling populism?

    • Job Losses in Manufacturing: Outsourcing of jobs to lower-cost countries has led to job losses in traditional sectors like steel and textiles, especially in regions like the U.S. Rust Belt, fueling populist sentiments. Eg: The U.S. steel industry decline and its role in Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.
    • Economic Inequality: Globalization has widened the gap between prosperous urban elites and struggling rural populations, contributing to resentment and populist support. Eg: The Brexit vote, with economically disadvantaged areas pushing for leave due to perceived inequality.
    • Cultural and Identity Concerns: The movement of people and ideas has raised fears of cultural dilution, driving anti-globalization and nationalist rhetoric. Eg: The rise of far-right parties in Europe, like the National Rally and AfD, focusing on immigration and national identity.

    What are the three choices in balancing democracy, sovereignty, and globalization, according to Rodrik’s trilemma?

    • Democracy + Globalization, but Ceding Sovereignty: Countries embrace democratic participation and global economic integration but surrender some national sovereignty. Eg: The European Union (EU), where countries gave up control over key areas like trade and migration for economic benefits, leading to nationalist backlash, such as Brexit.
    • Globalization + Sovereignty, but Restricting Democracy: Countries maintain sovereignty and integrate into the global economy but limit democratic influence on economic decisions, often relying on technocratic governance. Eg: IMF-imposed austerity measures in countries like Kenya, which prioritized fiscal stability over popular democracy, leading to public dissatisfaction.
    • Democracy + Sovereignty, but Limiting Globalization: Countries preserve both sovereignty and democracy but restrict the extent of globalization, often through protectionist policies. Eg: India’s approach of using protectionism and selective foreign investment to balance globalization with domestic control, ensuring political stability and sovereignty.

    How have China and India managed their economies through selective globalisation?

    • Controlled Foreign Investment: Both countries selectively allow foreign investments in specific sectors while restricting or limiting them in others to protect strategic industries. Eg: China has encouraged foreign investments in manufacturing but tightly controls foreign ownership in sectors like media, telecom, and finance. India has similarly promoted foreign direct investment (FDI) in industries like technology but has been cautious in sectors like retail and defense.
    • Export-Oriented Growth: Both nations have prioritized export-led growth, using globalization to access international markets while maintaining strong domestic industrial policies. Eg: China’s “Made in China” strategy focused on becoming the global manufacturing hub, while India’s “Make in India” initiative aims to boost domestic manufacturing for export.
    • Government Control Over Key Sectors: Both countries retain significant government control over critical sectors, such as banking, energy, and infrastructure, to safeguard national interests. Eg: China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs) dominate key industries like energy and finance, while India has state-run companies in sectors like oil, railways, and defense.
    • Selective Trade Agreements: China and India have negotiated trade agreements that protect domestic industries while opening up others for global competition. Eg: China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 but protected its agricultural sector with subsidies. India has been cautious in committing to trade agreements that might undermine its domestic sectors, like agriculture.
    • Managing Political and Economic Sovereignty: Both nations maintain tight political control, limiting the influence of external forces on domestic governance and policy-making. Eg: China tightly controls its political landscape and restricts foreign influence through measures like the “Great Firewall,” while India enforces its sovereignty by regulating foreign content in media and restricting foreign NGOs in sensitive areas.

    What consequences have Western democracies faced from balancing free trade, self-determination, and democracy?

    • Economic Inequality and Job Losses: Free trade has led to the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to lower-cost countries, resulting in job losses and economic insecurity for certain segments of the population. Eg: In the U.S. and the U.K., industrial regions like the Rust Belt have seen significant declines in manufacturing jobs due to globalization, contributing to growing economic disparities.
    • Rise of Populism and Nationalism: As global competition increased, many voters felt left behind by globalization, leading to the rise of populist and nationalist political movements that prioritize national sovereignty over international cooperation. Eg: Brexit in the U.K. and the election of populist leaders like Donald Trump in the U.S. were fueled by sentiments of reclaiming national sovereignty and resisting the perceived negative impacts of globalization.
    • Erosion of Trust in Democratic Institutions: The challenges of balancing democracy with the pressures of globalization have caused frustration among citizens, leading to diminished trust in democratic institutions and the political establishment. Eg: In France, protests like the “Yellow Vest” movement reflect public dissatisfaction with economic policies seen as favoring global markets over local welfare, questioning the legitimacy of institutions and their responsiveness to the people’s needs.

    Way forward: 

    • Balancing Globalization with Domestic Welfare: India must ensure that globalization benefits are equitably distributed, addressing economic insecurity and preventing resentment. Eg: Support local industries and vulnerable sectors through skill development and welfare programs.
    • Strengthening Democratic Institutions: India should make democratic institutions more responsive to public concerns, ensuring inclusivity and addressing inequality. Eg: Engage citizens in policymaking to ensure economic policies benefit all.