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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • India raises Continental Shelf claim in Arabian Sea Region

    Why in the News?

    India has recently expanded its claim in the Central Arabian Sea by nearly 10,000 square kilometers as part of its ‘extended continental shelf,’ modifying an earlier claim to resolve a dispute with Pakistan.

    India raises Continental-Shelf claim in Arabian Sea Region

    About Extended Continental Shelf (ECS):

    • ECS refers to the area beyond 200 nautical miles that countries can claim by submitting geological and geophysical evidence to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS).
    • These claims allow countries to explore resources like oil, gas, and minerals on and beneath the seabed.
    • Coastal states have rights to an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) up to 200 nautical miles from their coastline.
    • However, such States can claim additional seabed area beyond this limit if they prove scientifically that the continental shelf extends naturally from their landmass.

    Back2Basics: Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS)

    • The CLCS estd. In 1997, is a UN body under the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) that helps states determine the outer limits of their continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles.
    • The CLCS reviews the scientific data provided by states and makes binding recommendations on the extent of the outer shelf limits.
    • The commission comprises 21 experts from geology, geophysics, and hydrography, ensuring legal compliance and peaceful boundary resolution.

    India’s Modified Claims and Pakistan:

    • India first submitted a claim in 2009 for an extended shelf in the Bay of Bengal, Indian Ocean, and Arabian Sea, claiming an additional 1.2 million square kilometers.
    • After Pakistan’s objections, India modified its claim, splitting it into two parts to resolve disputes and ensure uncontroversial areas in the Central Arabian Sea.
    • India also increased its claim by 10,000 square kilometers using new scientific data.
    • The Sir Creek area, a disputed waterway between India and Pakistan, remains a point of contention, but India’s modification aims for peaceful resolution.
    • India’s claim overlaps with Oman’s shelf, but the two countries have an agreement to keep the delimitation open without conflict.
    [UPSC 2022] With reference to the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea, consider the following statements:

    1. A coastal state has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baseline determined in accordance with the convention.

    2. Ships of all states, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea.

    3. The Exclusive Economic Zone shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

    Which of the statements given above are correct?

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

     

  • Indus Waters Treaty, Simla Agreement ‘in abeyance’: What this means

    Why in the News?

    After the Pahalgam terror attack, India responded by putting the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) on hold and announced several other diplomatic steps. In return, Pakistan said it would also consider suspending all bilateral agreements with India, including the Simla Agreement.

    What are the key reasons cited by India for holding the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) “in abeyance”?

    • Fundamental Change in Circumstances: India argues that since the treaty’s signing in 1960, there has been a drastic shift in population demographics and developmental needs, especially the urgent requirement for clean energy. Eg: India’s push for hydropower projects on western rivers like Kishanganga and Ratle reflects its clean energy goals.
    • Violation of Good Faith Principle: India claims that Pakistan has not acted in good faith, as evidenced by its continuous sponsorship of cross-border terrorism, which undermines mutual trust required under international treaties. Eg: The recent Pahalgam terror attack is cited as part of a pattern of hostile actions.
    • Obstruction in Treaty Implementation: India points to Pakistan’s resistance and obstructionist approach in dispute resolution and infrastructure development under the treaty framework. Eg: In 2016, Pakistan bypassed the Neutral Expert process and approached the Permanent Court of Arbitration directly, delaying dam projects.

    Why is the term “hold in abeyance” not considered valid under international law, especially in the context of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT)?

    • “Abeyance” Not Recognised in VCLT Terminology: The VCLT only recognises terms like “termination” and “suspension” of treaties—not “abeyance.” Hence, “holding a treaty in abeyance” has no formal legal status or procedural clarity under international law. Eg: Article 62 of the VCLT provides for treaty termination due to fundamental change in circumstances, but does not mention or define “abeyance.”
    • High Threshold for Fundamental Change: Even under Article 62, “fundamental change in circumstances” must directly relate to the core purpose of the treaty, and meet strict criteria set by international jurisprudence, particularly the ICJ. Eg: In the 1984 Nicaragua v. United States case, the ICJ rejected the US claim that a political shift in Nicaragua was a fundamental change justifying treaty exit.

    How does the dispute resolution mechanism under the Indus Waters Treaty function? & What are its three tiers?

    • Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) – First Tier: Both India and Pakistan appoint Commissioners who meet regularly to resolve technical and implementation issues bilaterally. This is the first step in resolving disputes. Eg: Disagreements over annual data sharing or small projects are often addressed at this level.
    • Neutral Expert – Second Tier: If the issue remains unresolved, either country can request the World Bank to appoint a Neutral Expert for technical matters such as design parameters of projects. Eg: In 2005, a Neutral Expert was appointed to resolve the Baglihar Dam dispute between India and Pakistan.
    • Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) – Third Tier: If the issue is legal or political, or if technical resolution fails, the matter can be escalated to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, facilitated by the World Bank. Eg: In 2016, Pakistan skipped the Neutral Expert stage and approached the PCA over the Kishanganga and Ratle projects, which India opposed.

    When did Pakistan previously bypass the neutral expert stage under the IWT?

    • Bypassing in 2016 Over Indian Hydropower Projects: In 2016, Pakistan directly approached the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) over India’s construction of the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, skipping the Neutral Expert stage meant for resolving technical disputes. Eg: Pakistan alleged that India’s designs violated the IWT’s specifications regarding spillway structures and pondage levels.
    • India’s Objection to Parallel Proceedings: India strongly opposed this move, stating that the IWT does not allow parallel proceedings at both the Neutral Expert and PCA stages for the same issue. India refused to participate in the PCA process and called for dispute resolution through the Neutral Expert instead. Eg: India maintained that allowing parallel processes undermines the treaty’s dispute resolution structure.

    Which Simla Agreement clauses are “best endeavour clauses” and why are they non-binding?

    • Nature of Language – Non-Mandatory Phrasing: Clauses in the Simla Agreement use soft language such as “shall prevent” or “pending final settlement” rather than definitive legal commands. This implies a diplomatic intention rather than enforceable obligations. Eg: “Pending the final settlement… both sides shall prevent… acts detrimental to peaceful relations” is advisory, not obligatory.
    • Absence of Enforcement or Penalty Mechanism: The agreement does not specify consequences for violations, nor does it include a dispute resolution framework. This makes compliance a matter of political will rather than legal duty. Eg: Despite ceasefire violations and the 1999 Kargil conflict, no legal action could be taken under the Simla Agreement.
    • Meant to Guide, Not Compel: These clauses are seen as guiding principles or diplomatic assurances, commonly called “best endeavour clauses” in international law, which reflect a commitment to try but not an obligation to achieve. Eg: The agreement promotes bilateralism, but repeated internationalization of Kashmir by Pakistan hasn’t attracted treaty penalties.

    Way forward: 

    • Treaty Modernisation Through Bilateral Dialogue: India and Pakistan should initiate structured negotiations to update the Indus Waters Treaty, aligning it with present-day challenges like climate change, clean energy needs, and population growth.
    • Strengthen Dispute Resolution with Third-Party Mediation Rules: Introduce clear procedural timelines and limitations on bypassing dispute tiers (e.g., Neutral Expert stage) to ensure consistency, transparency, and mutual trust in treaty enforcement.

    Mains PYQ:

    [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 Indus Water Treaty is very important in the current situation where it’s being “put on hold.” It directly relates to the changing relationship between India and Pakistan, which is the main reason behind this move.

  • [25th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Is the World Trade Organisation still relevant?

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2016] The broader aims and objectives of the WTO are to manage and promote international trade in the era of globalisation. But the Doha round of negotiations seems doomed due to differences between the developed and the developing countries. Discuss from the Indian perspective.

    Linkage: WTO’s aims and the failure of the Doha Round, a key point made in the article to illustrate the WTO’s declining negotiating function and its diminished relevance. The question also asks for a discussion from the Indian perspective, which connects to the article’s reference to India’s stance on certain WTO issues.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:   Donald Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs” have been compared to the Smoot-Hawley tariffs of the 1930s, which are believed to have worsened the Great Depression. The key difference today is that we have the World Trade Organization (WTO) to manage and enforce global trade rules. However, some believe that over time, the WTO has lost its direction and needs significant reforms.

    Today’s editorial examines the relevance of the WTO in the current global context. This content will be useful for GS Paper 2 (International Institutions) and GS Paper 3 (Economy).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Over time, the WTO has become less effective and lacks clear direction, with many believing it requires major reforms to better manage and enforce global trade rules in the current world.

    What are the main functions of the WTO?

    • Negotiating Trade Agreements: The WTO provides a platform for member countries to negotiate and revise global trade rules aimed at reducing trade barriers (tariffs, quotas, etc.). Eg: The Doha Development Round was launched in 2001 to negotiate issues like agricultural subsidies and market access for developing countries.
    • Settling Trade Disputes: The WTO’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM) resolves trade conflicts between countries based on agreed rules. Eg: The U.S.–EU Banana Dispute, where the U.S. challenged the EU’s import regime for bananas, was resolved through the WTO dispute system.
    • Monitoring and Reviewing National Trade Policies: The WTO monitors trade policies of member nations to ensure transparency and consistency with WTO rules. Eg: The Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) allows regular scrutiny of each member’s trade practices — for instance, India’s trade policy is reviewed every 4-5 years under this mechanism.

    Why is it struggling to fulfil them?

    • Stalemate in Trade Negotiations: Consensus-based decision-making often leads to deadlocks, especially between developed and developing countries. Eg: The Doha Round has been stalled for years due to disagreements on agricultural subsidies and market access.
    • Crisis in the Dispute Settlement System: The Appellate Body (WTO’s top court) has been non-functional since 2019 because the U.S. blocked the appointment of new judges, citing bias and overreach. Eg: Over 20 trade disputes remain unresolved, weakening trust in WTO’s ability to enforce rules.
    • Rise of Protectionism and Plurilateralism: Countries increasingly prefer regional or bilateral agreements, bypassing WTO rules. Also, rising protectionism (e.g. tariffs, export bans) undermines multilateral trade. Eg: The U.S.–China trade war and RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) are signs of countries drifting away from WTO-centered trade governance.

    Why has the WTO’s Appellate Body become dysfunctional?

    • U.S. Block on Judge Appointments: The United States has repeatedly blocked the appointment of new judges, alleging judicial overreach and bias against U.S. interests. Eg: As of 2019, the Appellate Body lacked the minimum three judges required to hear appeals, halting its operations.
    • Allegations of Judicial Overreach: Critics, especially the U.S., claim the Body has exceeded its mandate by creating new obligations not agreed upon by member states. Eg: In disputes like U.S.–Antidumping Measures, the Appellate Body was accused of “interpreting” rules rather than just applying them.
    • Delays in Rulings and Case Backlog: The Appellate Body has been criticized for delays in delivering rulings, often exceeding the 90-day deadline, leading to a growing backlog. Eg: In cases like the EU–Airbus dispute, delayed rulings undermined timely dispute resolution.

    How has the MFN principle weakened?

    • Rise of Bilateral and Regional Trade Agreements: Countries increasingly prefer bilateral or regional trade agreements (FTAs) over WTO multilateral negotiations, which often bypass the MFN principle. Eg: RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) and USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement) offer preferential treatment to members, sidelining MFN principles.
    • Protectionist Measures by Major Economies: The U.S. and other major economies have imposed unilateral tariffs and trade measures, undermining the non-discriminatory nature of the MFN principle. Eg: The U.S. Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum were applied globally, but countries like the EU and Canada were exempted, contradicting MFN rules.
    • China’s Trade Practices: China’s practices in trade, such as subsidizing domestic industries and restricting foreign market access, have raised concerns about compliance with MFN, as they distort fair trade. Eg: The U.S.–China trade war involved tariffs on Chinese goods despite China’s MFN status at the WTO.
    • Decreasing Role of the WTO in Enforcing MFN: The WTO’s inability to enforce the MFN principle effectively, particularly with its dysfunctional dispute settlement mechanism, has weakened its role in global trade governance. Eg: In the India–U.S. solar panel dispute, the U.S. imposed tariffs on Indian solar panels despite the MFN rule, and the dispute resolution was delayed.
    • FTAs and Evasion of MFN Obligations: Many countries have opted for free trade agreements (FTAs), which offer preferential trade treatment to signatories, making it easier to bypass MFN obligations for non-signatories. Eg: India has entered into FTAs with several countries, such as ASEAN, which offer preferential tariffs and benefits not extended to other WTO members, violating MFN principles.

    How did the launch of the Doha Round contribute to this decline?

    • Overly Ambitious Mandate: The Doha Round, launched in 2001, aimed to address a wide range of issues, including agricultural subsidies, tariffs, and market access. This broad agenda led to mismatched expectations and difficulties in reaching agreements, causing the talks to stagnate. Eg, despite extensive negotiations, no consensus was reached on key issues like agricultural subsidies, which frustrated many member countries.
    • Challenges with China’s Accession: When China joined the WTO in 2001, there was insufficient foresight regarding the challenges its integration would pose. China’s growing dominance in global exports, especially in sectors like steel and cement, created trade imbalances and undermined the WTO’s ability to manage its impact. Eg, the WTO rules were not equipped to handle such issues, leading to frustration, particularly from the U.S.
    • Failure to Lower Tariffs: The Doha Round aimed to reduce tariffs on a multilateral basis, but negotiations failed to gain traction. Eg, the U.S. had already lowered its tariffs significantly, but other countries, particularly India, were unwilling to reciprocate. This lack of progress on tariff liberalization further highlighted the WTO’s inability to deliver on its promises, contributing to its declining relevance.

    Who is responsible for the collapse of key trade negotiations ? 

    • Developed Countries’ Reluctance to Reduce Agricultural Subsidies: Developed nations, especially the U.S. and EU, were unwilling to significantly cut their domestic farm subsidies, which distorted global prices and affected developing countries’ exports. Eg: In the Doha Development Round, talks stalled because the U.S. refused to reduce subsidies that gave an unfair advantage to its farmers.
    • Developing Countries’ Demand for Greater Policy Space: Countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa demanded flexibilities to protect their poor farmers and industries, which was resisted by developed nations. Eg: India’s push for a permanent solution on public stockholding for food security clashed with U.S. and EU positions, contributing to the deadlock.
    • Consensus-Based Decision-Making Slowing Progress: The WTO follows a consensus model, requiring all 164 members to agree, making it difficult to conclude negotiations when interests diverge widely. Eg: In the Nairobi Ministerial Conference (2015), the failure to achieve consensus on the future of the Doha Round led to its effective collapse.

    What role has India played?

    • Advocating for Food Security and Agricultural Subsidies: India has strongly opposed any restrictions on agricultural subsidies and public stockholding for food security, fearing it would hurt its poor farmers. Eg: India led the opposition to a proposed agreement on agricultural subsidies during the Doha Round and sought a permanent solution for public stockholding, which stalled the negotiations.
    • Pushing for Development Concerns of Poorer Countries: India has consistently championed the interests of developing nations at the WTO, advocating for greater policy flexibility in trade-related matters such as industrialization and agriculture. Eg: India was vocal in demanding special and differential treatment for developing countries and resisted any trade reforms that might harm their domestic industries, such as the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).
    • Defending Sovereignty in Trade and Investment: India has often resisted foreign investment liberalization measures and binding international rules on labor standards and environmental regulations that it believes could undermine national sovereignty. Eg: India rejected proposals in the Doha Development Agenda that could have led to binding agreements on labor standards and environmental protections, fearing they could impose undue burdens on its developing economy.

    Way forward: 

    • Reform Dispute Settlement Mechanism (DSM): The WTO needs to revive and strengthen the Appellate Body by addressing issues such as judge appointments and allegations of judicial overreach, ensuring its effectiveness in resolving disputes and maintaining trust in the multilateral system. Eg: A compromise on U.S. concerns could be explored to restart the Appellate Body’s functioning.
    • Enhance Flexibility for Developing Nations: The WTO should allow more policy flexibility for developing countries in areas like agriculture and food security, while balancing global trade interests. This could encourage inclusive negotiations and help prevent deadlocks, addressing concerns such as those raised by India in the Doha Round. Eg: Promoting a permanent solution for public stockholding in agriculture could lead to greater participation from developing nations.

  • Amidst regional ferment, Kurds’ quest for statehood

    Why in the News?

    The chances of Kurds achieving statehood have improved, but they are still divided by national, tribal, and internal ethnic differences.

    What is the current geopolitical situation in West Asia?

    • Rising Tensions Between Israel and Arab States: The Israeli government’s hardline stance on the Palestinian issue is at odds with Arab nations’ insistence on a two-state solution. The expansion of the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and certain Arab countries, is now being challenged by this conflict. Eg, the Israeli government’s policies have led to a strained relationship with countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, who continue to push for Palestinian statehood.
    • Weakened Iran and Resumption of U.S. Pressure: Iran’s geopolitical influence is diminishing due to both internal instability and external pressure from the U.S., including sanctions and military threats. Iran has agreed to negotiate its nuclear program as part of this dynamic. Eg, the U.S. has imposed “maximum pressure” tactics, leading to renewed discussions on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, showing a shift in regional power balances.
    • Economic Instability Due to Declining Oil Prices: The decline in oil prices by 20% in 2025 has raised concerns about the economic stability of the region, which heavily depends on oil exports. This has already caused volatility in the economies of Gulf countries, impacting countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, where the oil sector is a significant source of revenue.

    How is it impacting the Kurdish quest for statehood?

    • Weakened Regional Powers Create Opportunities for Kurdish Autonomy: The instability and weakening of central authorities in Iraq, Syria, and Iran have created opportunities for Kurdish groups to assert autonomy and establish a foothold in the region. Eg, the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq has gained considerable autonomy since the 1990s, and the Kurdish Self Defense Forces (SDF) control significant portions of northern Syria, both reflecting a push for Kurdish statehood amidst regional chaos.
    • Absence of a Unifying Kurdish National Movement: Despite these opportunities, the Kurds lack a unifying ideology or transnational political entity to consolidate their ambitions for statehood. Eg, while some Kurdish factions in Iraq and Syria have made strides towards self-governance, the absence of a coordinated regional Kurdish political structure has hindered their ability to form a fully recognized Kurdish state.

    Why did the Kurds fail to achieve statehood after the 1920 Treaty of Sevres?

    • Opposition from the Turkish Nationalists: The Treaty of Sevres in 1920 promised the Kurds an autonomous state in eastern Turkey, but it was thwarted by the rise of Turkish nationalism under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Eg, the Turkish nationalist movement rejected the idea of a Kurdish state, and Atatürk’s forces succeeded in establishing the Republic of Turkey, which vehemently opposed Kurdish autonomy.
    • Geopolitical Interests of Western Powers: The Western powers, who supported the Treaty of Sevres, were more focused on dismantling the Ottoman Empire and securing their own geopolitical interests in the region, rather than prioritizing Kurdish self-determination. Eg, the Treaty was eventually replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which ignored Kurdish aspirations and reinforced the territorial integrity of Turkey, sidelining the Kurds.

    How has Turkish repression of Kurds led to the formation of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party)?

    • Suppression of Kurdish Identity: Turkish repression of Kurdish culture, language, and political rights led to widespread resentment among the Kurdish population. Eg, in the 1980s, the Turkish government officially classified Kurds as “mountain Turks” and banned the use of the Kurdish language, which prompted a reaction from Kurdish activists.
    • Formation of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party): In 1978, Abdullah Öcalan founded the PKK to demand Kurdish independence through armed struggle, responding to decades of discrimination and oppression. Eg, the PKK launched an insurgency in 1984, which led to a prolonged conflict with the Turkish state, causing tens of thousands of deaths.

    What role has the Kurdish Self-Defence Force (SDF) played in Syria? 

    • Fighting Against Terrorist Groups: The Kurdish Self Defence Force (SDF) played a crucial role in fighting against ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria, particularly in the northern regions. Eg, the SDF, with support from the U.S., was instrumental in the liberation of Raqqa, the de facto capital of ISIS, in 2017.
    • Control Over Syrian Territories: The SDF currently controls nearly 40% of Syria, establishing significant political and military influence. Eg, the SDF’s control over areas like Kobani and Manbij has been a source of tension with Turkey, which accuses the SDF of having links to the PKK.

    How is the potential reduction of American military presence affecting their future?

    • Loss of Strategic Support for Kurdish Forces: The reduction of American military presence in Syria could undermine the Kurdish Self-Defense Forces (SDF), who have heavily relied on U.S. military support in their fight against groups like ISIS. Without this backing, the SDF may face greater vulnerability to Turkish military operations, which view the Kurdish forces as aligned with the PKK. Eg: The SDF’s influence in Syria could diminish, particularly in regions where they have fought hard to establish autonomy, such as in the northeast of the country.
    • Increased Regional Instability: The pullback of U.S. forces could embolden regional powers like Turkey, Iran, and Syria to exert more control over Kurdish regions, weakening their position in any future negotiations for statehood or autonomy. It could lead to more internal conflict and repression within Kurdish-majority areas. Eg: Turkey, already critical of the SDF’s alignment with PKK, could launch more aggressive military operations, further displacing Kurdish communities in Syria.

    How can India take advantage of it? (Way Forward)

    • Strategic Partnerships and Influence in West Asia: India can leverage the evolving geopolitical dynamics in West Asia to strengthen its strategic ties with Kurdish regions, particularly in Iraq and Syria. India can increase its diplomatic and economic engagement with Kurdish political entities to gain influence in the region. Eg: India can build stronger relations with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, offering support in areas like education, healthcare, and infrastructure, which may enhance India’s influence in the region.
    • Energy and Trade Opportunities: As Kurdish regions, especially in Iraq, are rich in oil resources, India can increase its energy imports from Kurdish-controlled areas. Securing energy deals with the KRG could help India diversify its energy supply sources and reduce reliance on traditional suppliers. Eg: India could expand its participation in oil exploration and infrastructure projects in the Kurdish region, similar to its involvement in the development of oil fields in Iraq.

    Mains PYQ:

    [UPSC 2019] Explain how the foundations of the modern world were laid by the American and French revolution.

    Linkage: Both the American and French Revolutions championed the ideals of self-determination and nationalism, which have been significant drivers for various ethnic groups, including the Kurds, seeking statehood. Understanding the impact of these revolutions on the formation of the modern nation-state system provides a broader context for the Kurdish quest.

  • Pakistan suspends 1972 Simla Agreement

    Why in the News?

    Pakistan has announced its decision to suspend the Simla Agreement with India, a landmark peace accord signed in 1972 following the India-Pakistan war.

    Simla Agreement

    About the Simla Agreement

    • The Simla Agreement was signed on July 2, 1972, between Indira Gandhi (India) and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (Pakistan) following the 1971 India-Pakistan war and the creation of Bangladesh.
    • The agreement aimed to establish lasting peace, address issues arising from the war, and reaffirm respect for the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir.

    Key Terms of the Agreement:

    1. Respect for Territorial Integrity: Both countries agreed to respect sovereignty and internal affairs, with the LoC as the de facto boundary in Kashmir.
    2. Line of Control (LoC): Both parties agreed not to alter the LoC unilaterally, maintaining its status established after the 1971 ceasefire.
    3. Promotion of Durable Peace: A commitment to resolve disputes peacefully and normalize relations, including transportation, postal services, and trade.
    4. Dispute Resolution: The agreement emphasized bilateral dialogue for resolving issues, particularly the Kashmir dispute, without third-party intervention.
    5. Non-interference & No Use of Force: Both nations pledged to refrain from interfering in internal matters and from using force or threats of force.

    Line of Control (LoC) and the 1949 Karachi Agreement:

    • Following the 1947-48 India-Pakistan war, a UN-brokered ceasefire led to the establishment of the LoC.
    • The 1949 Karachi Agreement demarcated the ceasefire line, running from Manawar (south) to the glaciers (north), forming the basis for the LoC.
    • Despite the Simla Agreement, there have been multiple conflicts, such as Siachen (1984) and Kargil War (1999), where Pakistan attempted to alter the LoC, leading to military responses from India.

    Challenges in Implementing the Agreement

    • Kargil War (1999): Pakistan’s violation of the LoC during the Kargil War highlighted ongoing tensions.
    • Siachen Glacier: Pakistan’s actions in the Siachen Glacier conflict violated the agreement, leading to military action (Operation Meghdoot, 1984) by India.
    [UPSC 2003] Consider the following statements regarding the relations between India and Pakistan:

    1. During Shimla Agreement, Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Bhutto agreed to maintain the sanctity of LOC.

    2. Lahore Summit took place in the year 1997.

    3. Islamabad Summit was held between Rajiv Gandhi and Nawaz Sharif.

    Which of these statements is/are correct?

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

     

  • What is SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme?

    Why in the News?

    In response to the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India has announced the suspension of the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) for Pakistani nationals.

    Note: The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was founded in 1985, consisting of eight member states: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

    About the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES):

    • The SVES was launched in 1992 following the Fourth SAARC Summit (1988).
    • It aims to promote regional cooperation and people-to-people contact among 8 SAARC member states by allowing certain categories of individuals to travel without a visa.
    • Eligible Categories: SVES covers 24 categories, including dignitaries, judges, parliamentarians, senior officials, businessmen, journalists, and sportspersons.
    • Special visa stickers are issued (by each SAARC member), typically valid for one year, allowing visa-free travel within SAARC countries.

    India’s Provisions under the SVES:

    • Nepal & Bhutan: Citizens do not require a visa to enter India.
    • Pakistani Nationals: Initially allowed for one-year multiple-entry business visas, revised in 2015 for special-category businessmen with three-year visas.
    • Other Nationals: Sri Lankan nationals are eligible for an e-Tourist visa, while Indian citizens do not need a visa for Nepal and Bhutan.
    [UPSC 2016] Increasing cross-border terrorist attacks in India and growing interference in the internal affairs of several member-states by Pakistan are not conducive for the future of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation).” Explain with suitable examples.

    [UPSC 2007] Consider the following statements:

    1. China has the observer’s status at the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.

    2. India has the observer’s status at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

    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

     

  • India suspends Indus Water Treaty

    Why in the News?

    In response to the Pahalgam Terror Attack, India has officially announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) with Pakistan.

    About the Indus Water Treaty (IWT)

    • IWT was signed between India and Pakistan on September 19, 1960, with mediation from the World Bank.
    • The treaty allocates the Western rivers (Indus, Chenab, and Jhelum) to Pakistan, and the Eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) to India.
    • Approximately 80% of the water is allocated to Pakistan, with 20% to India.
    • The Permanent Indus Commission was established to facilitate communication and dispute resolution.
    • The treaty includes a three-step process for resolving disputes, which involves the Permanent Indus Commission, Neutral Experts (appointed by World Bank), and a Court of Arbitration if needed.

    Implications of Suspension:

    • India’s Opportunities:
      • Though not immediately, but India can now control the water flow from the Indus River system, allowing it to divert, stop, or alter the flow of water.
      • India can expand hydroelectric projects on the Western rivers, such as the Kishanganga and Ratle Hydroelectric Projects, with more projects under scrutiny.
    • Impact on Pakistan:
      • Agriculture: Pakistan’s agricultural sector heavily depends on the Indus River, and any disruption could cause food insecurity and economic distress for millions of farmers.
      • Power Supply: Pakistan’s hydroelectric power generation depends on the water flow, with Tarbela Dam (on the Indus River) and Mangla Dam (on the Jhelum River) facing reduced water supplies, leading to electricity shortages.

    Alternatives for Pakistan:

    • No Legal Exit: No legal exit clause in the treaty; also, India cannot unilaterally suspend it.
    • Dispute Resolution: Pakistan can approach the Permanent Indus Commission, request Neutral Experts, or escalate to the World Bank’s Court of Arbitration.
    • International Diplomacy: Pakistan may seek diplomatic solutions through international forums, including leveraging support from other nations.
    [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.

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

    [UPSC 2021] With reference to the Indus River system, among the following four rivers, one of them joins the Indus directly:

    Options: (a) Chenab (b) Jhelum (c) Ravi (d) Sutlej

     

  • [23rd April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Exploring India’s potential in the Arctic region

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2018] Why is India taking keen interest in resources of Arctic Region?

    Linakge: India’s interest in the Arctic’s resources, which is a central theme in the Article. This article highlights the Arctic as a “critical energy source for the Global South” and mentions India’s potential stake in the “massive resources” of the region.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  Global trade is shifting due to U.S. pressures and climate change, prompting countries to explore new supply chains and routes. The Arctic, while warning of a climate crisis, offers major geopolitical and economic potential. As new trade paths open, India must ensure it has a role in future Arctic opportunities without harming the fragile environment.

    Today’s editorial highlights why the Arctic region matters for the world and India. This topic is useful for GS Paper 2 (international relations) and GS Paper 3 (environment and economy) in the mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    India should have a voice in the future economic opportunities of the Arctic, without rushing to exploit its resources recklessly.

     [ 23rd April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Exploring India’s potential in the Arctic region

    What is the Northern Sea Route (NSR)? 

    • The Northern Sea Route (NSR) is a new Arctic sea route connecting the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, running along the northern coast of Russia.
    • It provides the shortest maritime route between Europe and Asia, significantly reducing shipping distances. Eg: Shipping from Rotterdam to Shanghai via the NSR cuts the journey by around 30%, reducing travel time by approximately 10 days.

    How could it transform global trade?

    • Reduced Freight Costs: By providing a more direct and shorter route, the NSR can substantially lower shipping costs, as vessels spend less time on the water and consume less fuel. Eg: The cost savings from the reduced travel time and fuel consumption can incentivize global shipping companies to shift their operations to the NSR, especially for bulk goods and high-value cargo.
    • Expedited Global Trade: The NSR could drastically speed up the flow of goods, particularly for time-sensitive cargo like electronics, automotive parts, and perishable goods, thus improving global trade efficiency. Eg: In 2018, a Chinese cargo ship made a successful voyage through the NSR, delivering goods from China to Europe in a record time of 18 days, compared to the traditional 40+ days via the Suez Canal.
    • Opening New Markets: The NSR could lead to the development of new ports and shipping routes in the Arctic, creating economic opportunities for the countries surrounding the region. It can also open up access to new markets that were previously difficult to reach. Eg: As traffic on the NSR increases, ports like Murmansk in Russia and Pevek in the Arctic will see growth, transforming them into significant maritime hubs.

    Why is the Arctic region becoming geopolitically and economically important for India?

    • New Trade Routes: The Northern Sea Route (NSR) opens shorter, more efficient shipping lanes between Europe and Asia, benefiting India’s trade by reducing shipping times and costs. Eg: The NSR offers India quicker access to European markets, enhancing trade competitiveness.
    • Energy Resources: The Arctic region holds vast untapped oil and natural gas reserves, offering India potential access to energy resources vital for its growing needs. Eg: Arctic exploration could help diversify India’s energy sources, ensuring a more secure supply.
    • Climate Research: The Arctic’s rapid changes influence global climate patterns, impacting India’s monsoon and agricultural productivity. Eg: Research on the Arctic’s climate helps India prepare for shifts in its monsoon patterns and protect food security.
    • Geopolitical Influence: India’s involvement in Arctic governance could strengthen its global position and foster partnerships with key nations like Russia and the U.S. Eg: By engaging in Arctic policy, India enhances its diplomatic and strategic ties with major global players.
    • Maritime Security: India’s access to the Arctic region can improve its maritime security and help protect vital trade routes. Eg: Strengthening Arctic partnerships can ensure India’s strategic interests in the region are safeguarded.

    When did India formalise its Arctic policy, and what are its key goals?

    Focus Area Key Objectives
    Scientific Research and Climate Understanding Enhance scientific knowledge about the Arctic’s effect on global climate, especially the Indian monsoon and agriculture. Strengthen research stations like Himadri and use space technology for Arctic studies.
    Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development Promote protection of the Arctic environment and support sustainable development. Encourage responsible use of resources and partner with Arctic nations on green energy.
    Enhanced International Cooperation and Capacity Building Actively participate in Arctic governance (e.g., Arctic Council), improve India’s expertise in Arctic studies, and collaborate on digital connectivity and indigenous knowledge exchange.

    Who are India’s potential strategic partners in the Arctic region?

    • Russia: India sees Russia as a key partner in the Arctic due to its extensive Arctic coastline and expertise in Arctic navigation. The two countries have established a working group under the bilateral intergovernmental commission to explore opportunities in Arctic trade routes like the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and potential joint ventures. Eg, the Chennai-Vladivostok Maritime Corridor is seen as a bridge to the NSR.
    • Japan and South Korea: Japan and South Korea are also critical partners due to shared concerns over China’s increasing influence in the Arctic. These nations and India aim to promote a more inclusive Arctic Council and ensure equitable access to Arctic resources, countering Chinese dominance in the region.

    What are the challenges involved? 

    • Harsh Environmental Conditions: The Arctic’s extreme weather and icy waters present significant challenges for navigation and shipping. India will need to invest heavily in specialised ice-breaking fleets and infrastructure to ensure safe and efficient passage along the Northern Sea Route (NSR). Eg, the need for shipbuilding suited to Arctic conditions was highlighted in India’s 2025-26 Budget.
    • Geopolitical Tensions: The Arctic region is becoming a battleground for global powers, with competing interests between the U.S., Russia, and China. India faces the dilemma of balancing relations with both Russia and the Western bloc while ensuring its interests in Arctic trade routes and resources. Eg, supporting Russia’s Arctic ambitions could align India with China’s Polar Silk Road, creating a potential conflict with U.S. interests.
    • Environmental Impact and Climate Change: Exploiting Arctic resources poses risks to the fragile ecosystem, and climate change further exacerbates these concerns. India must balance its commercial interests with environmental responsibility, ensuring that Arctic exploration does not contribute to further ecological degradation. Eg, global temperatures breaching 1.5°C in 2024 highlight the urgency of sustainable development in the Arctic.

    How should India balance environmental concerns with commercial interests in the Arctic? (Way forward) 

    • Sustainable Resource Management: India should advocate for responsible exploration and use of Arctic resources, ensuring that commercial activities do not harm the fragile environment. This includes supporting international regulations on sustainable practices and climate-resilient policies. Eg, India’s engagement in the Arctic Council can help influence global guidelines for Arctic resource extraction, focusing on minimal environmental disruption.
    • Collaborative Efforts with Like-minded Nations: India should collaborate with countries that share its concerns about environmental protection, such as Japan and South Korea, to promote sustainable Arctic governance. By forging partnerships focused on environmental preservation and responsible trade, India can secure both economic opportunities and environmental integrity. Eg, India, Japan, and South Korea have common interests in mitigating Chinese influence in Arctic policies, emphasising eco-friendly development.

  • [22th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: India, China at 75 — a time for strategy, not sentiment

    PYQ Relevance:

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

    Linkage: The strategic dimension of India’s position in relation to China and the West. This article also touches upon this aspect, noting the potential pressure on India to align more closely with the U.S. to counter China.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  China is now the biggest external influence on India’s foreign policy. From border issues to trade and defence, every move is shaped by the “China lens.” Tensions remain high at the LAC since the 2020 Galwan clash. While India stays alert militarily, trade ties continue, showing a paradox—India deters China at the border but relies on it economically.

    Today’s editorial explains how China affects India’s foreign policy, especially in areas like trade and border tensions. It highlights how India is trying to manage both security concerns and economic ties with China. This topic is useful for GS Paper 2 (Mains) under International Relations.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    As India and China mark 75 years of ties, their relationship faces border tensions and rivalry, yet offers chances for cooperation, economic links, and shared responsibility in ensuring regional peace.

    What are the key challenges in India-China relations, especially regarding borders and strategic rivalry?

    • Contested Borders and Military Tensions: The Line of Actual Control (LAC) remains heavily militarized, with both countries having stationed thousands of troops in sensitive regions like Eastern Ladakh. Eg: The 2020 Galwan Valley clash resulted in casualties on both sides and highlighted the vulnerability of the LAC to conflict and miscalculation.
    • Historical Border Disputes: The unresolved boundary dispute, particularly over regions like Aksai Chin (claimed by India) and Arunachal Pradesh (claimed by China), continues to strain relations. Eg: The 1962 Sino-Indian War remains a traumatic event in India-China relations, and its legacy still influences border security strategies.
    • Strategic Rivalry in South Asia: China’s growing presence in South Asia through infrastructure projects and loans has directly challenged India’s regional influence. Eg: China’s involvement in Sri Lanka’s Hambantota Port and infrastructure projects in Nepal and the Maldives are seen as part of China’s strategic push into India’s traditional sphere of influence.
    • Economic Interdependence vs. National Security: Despite military tensions, India remains economically tied to China, particularly in trade, electronics, and pharmaceuticals, creating a paradox between economic cooperation and security concerns. Eg: China is India’s largest trading partner, but India faces a trade imbalance of around $100 billion in favor of China, raising concerns over economic over-dependence.
    • China’s Regional Ambitions and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI): China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and growing influence in neighboring countries challenge India’s leadership role in the region.Eg: China’s infrastructure investments in Pakistan through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) pass through contested regions like Gilgit-Baltistan, which India claims as part of Jammu and Kashmir.

    Why does the “China lens shape India’s foreign policy”?

    • Security and Border Infrastructure Concerns: China poses the most significant military threat to India, especially along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), necessitating constant vigilance and preparedness. Eg: The permanent deployment of over 60,000 Indian troops in Eastern Ladakh after the 2020 Galwan clash reflects how China shapes India’s defense planning.
    • Economic Dependencies and Trade Imbalance: India relies heavily on Chinese imports for critical sectors such as electronics, pharmaceuticals, and machinery, creating a dilemma between strategic autonomy and economic needs. Eg: In 2024-25, India’s trade deficit with China approached $100 billion, despite efforts to diversify supply chains and ban certain Chinese apps.
    • Geopolitical and Strategic Competition in the Region: China’s growing influence in South Asia and its partnerships with India’s neighbors challenge India’s regional leadership and influence. Eg: China’s funding of Pokhara Airport in Nepal and strategic ties with countries like Bangladesh and Maldives push India to recalibrate its diplomacy and regional engagement strategies.

    How has India’s approach to China evolved since the 1962 war and the 2020 Galwan clash?

    • From Idealism to Realism in Diplomacy: The early vision of Asian solidarity post-1947 has given way to a more cautious and pragmatic approach, shaped by hard security realities. Eg: After the 1962 war, India abandoned Nehruvian idealism and began strengthening its military and forging new alliances.
    • Shift from Engagement to Strategic Deterrence: Post-Galwan, India has moved away from soft engagement to a policy of firm deterrence and military preparedness. Eg: Permanent deployment of troops and infrastructure upgrades in Eastern Ladakh reflect a proactive defense posture.
    • Emergence of “Competitive Coexistence”: India now balances economic engagement with strategic competition, avoiding full decoupling while safeguarding national interests. Eg: Despite border tensions, India continues trade with China, participates in platforms like SCO and BRICS, and simultaneously deepens ties with the Quad.

    What does “competitive coexistence” mean? 

    “Competitive coexistence” refers to India’s strategy of managing its complex relationship with China by simultaneously competing in strategic and regional influence while maintaining economic and diplomatic engagement. It balances military vigilance with dialogue, allowing India to protect its interests without complete decoupling, fostering stability amid rivalry and interdependence.

    How does it balance India’s strategy with economic ties to China?

    • Selective Economic Engagement: India continues trade in non-strategic sectors (like consumer goods, raw materials) while restricting Chinese influence in critical infrastructure and tech. Eg: India imports electronics and machinery from China, but bans Chinese apps like TikTok and restricts Huawei from 5G rollout.
    • Investment Scrutiny with Trade Continuity:India tightens FDI rules from neighboring countries (especially China) post-Galwan (2020), while not blocking trade outright. Eg: Chinese firms need government approval to invest in Indian startups, but bilateral trade crossed $135 billion in 2023.
    • Self-Reliance Push (Atmanirbhar Bharat): India reduces dependence on Chinese imports by incentivizing local manufacturing and diversifying suppliers. Eg: Through the PLI Scheme, India promotes domestic production of electronics, APIs (for pharma), and solar panels.
    • Strategic Dialogue + Border Vigilance: India engages diplomatically with China (e.g., 19th Corps Commander-level talks) while reinforcing military presence at LAC. Eg: Border patrol protocols resumed in Jan 2025 in Eastern Ladakh, showing balance between dialogue and deterrence.
    • Multilateral Cooperation Without Alignment: India cooperates with China in BRICS and SCO, while counterbalancing through Quad and Indo-Pacific strategies. Eg: India joins China-led New Development Bank, yet also conducts Malabar naval exercises with the U.S., Japan, and Australia.

    Way forward: 

    • Enhanced Diplomatic Engagement with Strategic Boundaries: India should continue to strengthen diplomatic channels while ensuring border security through regular high-level talks, establishing confidence-building measures to reduce tensions along the LAC.
    • Diversification of Economic Partnerships and Technological Independence: India should further reduce economic dependency on China by promoting indigenous industries and exploring alternative trade routes and partnerships with other countries to balance economic growth with national security concerns.

  • Landmark agreement: On the draft WHO Pandemic Agreement 

    Why in the news?

    After over three years and 13 rounds of meetings, countries that are part of the World Health Organization (WHO) have agreed on steps to help stop, get ready for, and deal with future pandemics.

    What are the key provisions of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, and how do they aim to prevent future pandemics?

    • Protection of Healthcare Workers: Countries have committed to better protection and support for healthcare workers during pandemics. Eg: Ensuring adequate PPE, mental health support, and fair compensation during crisis response.
    • Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS): A system is established to ensure that countries sharing pathogen samples or genome sequences are guaranteed access to diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines developed from them. Eg: If an African country shares a new virus strain, it will receive vaccines developed using that strain.
    • Equitable Distribution Commitments by Pharma Companies: Pharmaceutical companies have agreed to donate 10% of pandemic-related products to WHO and provide another 10% at affordable prices. Eg: During a future pandemic, WHO can allocate donated vaccine doses to low-income countries.
    • Technology Transfer Under Mutually Agreed Terms: Countries must promote and facilitate vaccine technology and know-how transfer under fair conditions (not just voluntary). Eg: mRNA vaccine technology being transferred to a developing country to scale up local production.
    • Promotion of Local Manufacturing Capacity: The treaty encourages countries to build domestic capabilities to manufacture diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments. Eg: WHO supporting the setup of vaccine production hubs in South America and Africa.

    Why did developed and developing countries have differing priorities during the negotiations?

     

    Key Issue Developing Countries’ Perspective Developed Countries’ Perspective Example
    Access vs. Control Over Resources Sought equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics, and treatments developed from shared pathogen data. Focused on retaining control over innovations and resources. India sought vaccine access in return for sharing virus data; EU hesitated on binding terms.
    Technology Transfer vs. IP Rights Demanded mandatory tech transfer to build local manufacturing capacity. Preferred voluntary sharing; feared loss of profit and intellectual property rights. African nations pushed for mRNA tech; pharma firms resisted to protect patents.
    Historical Inequities & Trust Deficit Skeptical due to past incidents like vaccine hoarding; demanded enforceable commitments. Reluctant to agree to binding mechanisms fearing risks to their own supply chains. U.S. and EU pre-booked vaccines during COVID-19, delaying access for African countries.

     

    How does the pathogen access and benefit-sharing system ensure equitable access to vaccines and treatments for developing countries?

    • Guaranteed Access to Medical Countermeasures: Countries that share pathogen samples and genome data are guaranteed access to the diagnostics, vaccines, or treatments developed from them. Eg: If Nigeria shares Ebola virus samples, it will receive vaccines or treatments developed from those samples.
    • Donation and Affordable Pricing Commitments: Pharmaceutical companies have agreed to donate 10% of their production to WHO and offer another 10% at affordable prices to low- and middle-income countries. Eg: During a future pandemic, India or Kenya would receive a share of vaccines even if they can’t pay market rates.
    • Legally Binding Mechanism for Fair Distribution: The system is designed to move beyond goodwill by creating structured and fair distribution frameworks, preventing vaccine hoarding. Eg: Unlike COVID-19, where Africa was left behind, the new system mandates early and fair distribution.

    What commitments have pharma companies made on vaccine sharing, and how does it address COVID-19 inequities?

    • Production-Based Donation Quota: Pharma companies have committed to donate 10% of their total vaccine production to WHO. Eg: If a company like Pfizer produces 1 billion doses during a future pandemic, 100 million doses must be donated for global distribution.
    • Affordable Pricing for Developing Countries: Companies will offer an additional 10% of vaccines at affordable prices to ensure access for low- and middle-income countries. Eg: Countries like Bangladesh or Ethiopia could buy vaccines at reduced prices instead of being priced out like during early COVID-19 waves.
    • Prevents Vaccine Hoarding by Rich Nations: By ensuring early and guaranteed supply to WHO, this system prevents stockpiling by high-income countries as seen in COVID-19. Eg: Unlike the situation where Europe secured vaccines ahead of Africa, all regions will get equitable shares based on need.

    Who facilitates the technology transfer for vaccine production, and under what terms will it occur?

    • Facilitated by Countries Under WHO Framework: Technology transfer will be facilitated by countries through the WHO, promoting collaboration and capacity building in developing nations. Eg: India can partner with African nations to help build local vaccine production units using WHO-coordinated support.
    • Occurs on Mutually Agreed Terms (Not Voluntary): Technology sharing will happen on “mutually agreed terms”, not just voluntary basis, ensuring fair negotiations between parties. Eg: A pharma firm like Moderna will negotiate terms with countries like Indonesia to share mRNA vaccine tech under WHO oversight.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthen Global Compliance and Monitoring: Establish an independent WHO-led mechanism to ensure countries and pharma companies adhere to commitments on access, donations, and tech transfer.
    • Invest in Regional Manufacturing Hubs: Support the creation of regional facilities for vaccine and diagnostic production in developing countries to reduce dependency and enhance preparedness.

    Mains PYQ: 

    [UPSC 2020] Critically examine the role of WHO in providing global health security during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Linkage: The role of the World Health Organization in global health security, which is the very organization that finalized the Pandemic Agreement encompassing the pathogen access and benefit-sharing system. The experiences and lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly regarding equitable access to vaccines, heavily influenced the negotiations for this agreement.