💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • US revokes sanctions waiver on Chabahar Port

    Why in the News?

    The U.S. has ended the 2018 waiver that let India use Iran’s Chabahar Port for Afghanistan’s reconstruction, revoking it within 10 days.

    US revokes sanctions waiver on Chabahar Port

    About Chabahar Port:

    • Location: Deep-water port in Sistan-Baluchistan province of Iran, on the Gulf of Oman at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz.
    • Unique Feature: The only Iranian port with direct access to the Indian Ocean.
    • Distances: Kandla Port, Gujarat – 550 nautical miles, Mumbai – 786 nautical miles from Chabahar.
    • Structure: Comprises Shahid Beheshti and Shahid Kalantari terminals.
    • Connectivity Potential: Its proximity to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India and position on the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) gives it the ability to become a major commercial hub.
    • INSTC: A multi-modal route linking the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea via Iran, and onward to northern Europe via Russia.

    India’s Engagements for Chabahar Port:

    • Tripartite Agreement (2016): India, Iran, and Afghanistan agreed to develop the Shahid Beheshti terminal, marking India’s first foreign port project.
    • Infrastructure Goals: Develop the port and build a rail line to Zahedan, bypassing Pakistan to reach Afghanistan and Central Asia.
    • Recent Developments: In May 2024, India Ports Global Ltd (IPGL) signed a 10-year lease to operate Shahid Beheshti.
    • Commitments: India pledged $120 million in equipment and a $250 million credit line.
    • Operations: India supplied 6 harbour cranes; facilitated shipments of 2.5 million tonnes of wheat and 2,000 tonnes of pulses to Afghanistan.

    Implications of US Sanctions for India:

    • Economic Setback: Jeopardises India’s ₹200 crore investment and future projects.
    • Connectivity Loss: Cuts India’s only direct maritime gateway to Afghanistan, Central Asia, and INSTC.
    • Strategic Impact: Weakens India’s counter to China’s Gwadar Port in Pakistan under CPEC.
    • Diplomatic Strain: Risks tensions with Iran (strategic partner) and the United States (major trade partner).
    • Operational Challenges: Sanctions may deter shippers, insurers, and suppliers, slowing port activity.
    [UPSC 2017] What is the importance of developing Chabahar Port by India?

    Options: (a) India’s trade with African countries will enormously increase.

    (b) India’s relations with oil-producing Arab countries will be strengthened.

    (c) India will not depend on Pakistan for access to Afghanistan and Central Asia *

    (d) Pakistan will facilitate and protect the installation of a gas pipeline between Iraq and India

     

  • Highlights of the Global Innovation Index, 2025

    Why in the News?

    The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has released the Global Innovation Index (GII) 2025.

    About the Global Innovation Index (GII):

    • Overview: Annual ranking of 139 economies by their innovation capacity and success.
    • Publishers: Jointly by Cornell University, INSEAD, and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
    • Origin: First published in 2007.
    • Indicators: Uses 80+ metrics across 7 pillars.
    • Structure:
      • Innovation Input Sub-Index: Institutions, human capital and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, business sophistication.
      • Innovation Output Sub-Index: Knowledge and technology outputs, creative outputs.
    • Purpose: Helps governments evaluate how effectively R&D, education, and infrastructure are translated into innovation outcomes.

    Key Highlights of GII 2025:

    • Global R&D growth: Slowed to 2.9% (2024) and 2.3% (2025 projection), down from 4.4% earlier; lowest since the 2010 financial crisis.
    • Top Performers: Switzerland (1st), Sweden (2nd), United States (3rd), followed by Republic of Korea, Singapore, United Kingdom, Finland, Netherlands, Denmark, and China (10th).
    • China: Surpassed Switzerland in knowledge and technology outputs; 2nd highest in R&D expenditure; world leader in patent filings.
    • Regional Trends: Europe dominates with 15 of top 25 economies; Southeast, East Asia and Oceania (SEAO) region has 6 economies in top 25.
    • India: Ranked 38th globally with a score of ~40.5; top among lower-middle income countries and in Central & Southern Asia.
      • Strengths: Knowledge and technology outputs (22nd), market sophistication, and human capital and research.
      • Weaknesses: Business sophistication, infrastructure, and institutions remain lagging.
    [UPSC 2019] The Global Competitiveness Report is published by the:

    Options:

    (a) International Monetary Fund  (b) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development  (c) World Economic Forum * (d) World Bank

     

  • Let Griger counters, not guesses, shape Iran Actions

    Introduction

    The nuclear question has once again moved to the forefront of global geopolitics. Following the U.S. strikes on Iran’s underground nuclear site at Fordow in June 2025, the E3 (Britain, France, Germany) invoked the “snapback” clause of the 2015 nuclear deal, citing Iranian violations. If diplomacy falters, UN sanctions on enrichment, arms transfers, finance, and shipping will return, escalating global risks. The crisis is magnified by the absence of verified facts after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) staff withdrew from Iran. In this environment of speculation and heightened risks, verification, not guesswork, must anchor diplomacy.

    Why is this news significant?

    The crisis is not just another Middle Eastern standoff; it is unprecedented in multiple ways. For the first time since 2015, the snapback clause has been triggered, threatening the revival of stringent UN sanctions. The crisis has exposed the vacuum of verified facts, as IAEA inspectors have been expelled, leaving the world to act on rumors. The stakes are global from oil markets and shipping insurance to regional stability and nuclear proliferation. For India, the challenge is sharper: ensuring uninterrupted oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, stability in its extended neighborhood, and the safety of 8 million Indian citizens in West Asia.

    Why does the absence of IAEA verification matter?

    1. Verification as the hinge of diplomacy: IAEA access substitutes speculation with facts and provides baselines for negotiations.
    2. Market stability: Comparable IAEA presence in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia plant calmed global markets; similar oversight in Iran could reduce volatility.
    3. Iran’s sovereignty concerns: Iran argues that inspectors compromise sovereignty and risk enabling strikes — past Israeli and U.S. strikes followed IAEA disclosures.
    4. Parliamentary resistance: Such episodes have hardened Iranian domestic opposition to IAEA cooperation.

    What are the risks if Iran withdraws from the NPT?

    1. Legal vacuum: Withdrawal strips the IAEA of legal authority to inspect Iranian sites.
    2. Escalation to uncharted territory: Harder sanctions, further isolation, and the military option returning to the table.
    3. Global instability: From oil prices to nuclear proliferation, the fallout would be worldwide.

    How is India placed in this unfolding crisis?

    1. Bridge-builder role: As a long-standing IAEA Board member with ties across divides, India is well-positioned to facilitate consensus.
    2. SCO and BRICS engagement: India joined others in condemning U.S.-Israel strikes, supporting a multilateral call for technical IAEA access.
    3. Technical contribution: India’s IAEA-certified Tarapur facility could analyze samples under safeguards, providing credible support.
    4. Energy and diaspora stakes: Protecting oil supplies and ensuring the safety of Indians abroad makes stability in West Asia non-negotiable for New Delhi.

    What are the choices before the global community?

    1. Diplomatic opening: Iran’s recent agreement with the IAEA in Cairo (Sept 9, 2025) and allowing inspectors at Bushehr offer small openings.
    2. Snapback pause: If Iran extends verification to bombed sites, E3 may pause the snapback, shifting momentum back to diplomacy.
    3. Alternative — escalation: Failure of diplomacy risks sanctions, military standoffs, and cycles of strike and counterstrike.

    Conclusion

    The Iran nuclear standoff represents a defining moment for global non-proliferation and regional stability. What the world requires today is not speculation, but credible verification, structured dialogue, and sustained diplomacy. For India, the stakes go beyond principles of international order to immediate concerns of energy security, diaspora protection, and regional peace. By using its credibility in multilateral forums and offering technical expertise, India can position itself as a constructive stakeholder. Ultimately, the crisis will test whether global powers can rise above unilateralism and competing interests to uphold collective security and prevent a slide into escalation.

    PYQ Relevance

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

    Linkage: The ongoing U.S.-Iran nuclear pact controversy directly impacts India’s energy security, diaspora safety in West Asia, and regional stability. Escalation could disrupt oil supplies through the Strait of Hormuz and complicate India’s strategic balance between the U.S., Iran, and Gulf states. India must respond with measured diplomacy, supporting verification through the IAEA while safeguarding its vital national interests.

  • WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies

    Why in the News?

    The World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies has entered into force on 15 September 2025, three years after adoption in June 2022.

    What is the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies?

    • Nature: First WTO treaty centred on environmental sustainability, designed to reduce harmful subsidies that drive illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing.
    • Core Prohibitions:
      • Subsidies for IUU fishing vessels or operators.
      • Subsidies for fishing in overfished stocks, unless linked to recovery plans.
      • Subsidies for high-seas fishing in areas outside coastal state jurisdiction or Regional Fisheries Management Organizations.
    • Transparency: Members must provide detailed reports on fish stocks, fleets, catch volumes, and subsidies.
    • Transition Period: Two years allowed for developing countries and least developed countries before full implementation.
    • Phased Approach: Called “Fish One”, to be followed by “Fish Two” covering overcapacity and fleet subsidies.
    • Global Significance: Contributes to Sustainable Development Goal 14.6, which seeks elimination of harmful subsidies to protect global fish stocks.

    India and this Agreement: 

    • Position: India welcomed the treaty, noting it is one of the lowest fisheries subsidizers despite its large fishing community.
    • Equity Argument: Urged that historic subsidizers and industrial fishing nations take greater obligations, based on polluter pays principle and common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR).
    • Sector Context: India’s fisheries are dominated by millions of small-scale, traditional fishers dependent on coastal resources, requiring fair treatment.
    • Benefits for India:
      • Curbing IUU fishing by foreign industrial fleets, protecting coastal livelihoods.
      • Allowing space for stock-rebuilding subsidies tied to sustainability.
      • Ensuring fair competition for Indian traditional fishers in global trade.
    [UPSC 2015] The terms ‘Agreement on Agriculture’, ‘Agreement on the application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures’ and ‘Peace Clause’ appear in the news frequently in the context of the affairs of the

    Options: (a) Food and Agricultural Organization (b) United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change (c) World Trade Organization* (d) United Nations Environment Programme

     

  • India secures International Seabed Authority (ISA) exploration contract

    Why in the News?

    India has secured the world’s first International Seabed Authority (ISA) licence to explore polymetallic sulphur nodules in the Carlsberg Ridge, northwest Indian Ocean.

    India’s Engagement with ISA:

    • Exploration Contracts:
      1. 2002 – Polymetallic nodules, Central Indian Ocean Basin (valid till 2027).
      2. 2016 – Polymetallic sulphides, Indian Ocean Ridge (valid till 2031).
      3. 2025 – First global licence for polymetallic sulphides in Carlsberg Ridge.
    • Pending Application: Afanasy-Nikitin Seamount (ANS), Central Indian Ocean.
    • Strategic Goals:
      • Secure access to critical minerals (nickel, cobalt, manganese, copper).
      • Balance energy transition needs with environmental safeguards.
      • Counter competing claims (e.g., China in the Indian Ocean).
    • Role in ISA: Active participant in Mining Code negotiations; pushes for sustainable, equitable exploration.

    About International Seabed Authority (ISA):

    • Establishment: Created under UNCLOS (1982) and the 1994 Agreement on Part XI; Based in Kingston, Jamaica.
    • Membership: 168 States (including India) + EU; the US is NOT a member or party to UNCLOS.
    • Mandate:
      • Regulate exploration/exploitation of minerals in the Area (beyond national jurisdictions, ~54% of oceans).
      • Ensure benefits for all humankind.
      • Protect marine environment from mining impacts.
      • Promote marine scientific research.
    • Regulatory Framework: Guided by the Mining Code (licensing, EIA, sustainability standards).
    • Functions:
      • Grants 15-year exploration contracts (extendable).
      • Monitors compliance of contractors.
      • Balances resource use with environmental safeguards.

    About Carlsberg Ridge:

    • Location: A mid-ocean ridge in the northwest Indian Ocean (Arabian Sea region).
    • Extent: Covers ~3,00,000 sq. km, stretching from Rodrigues Island (SW Indian Ocean) to the Owen fracture zone.
    • Tectonic Setting: Boundary between the Indian Plate and the Arabian Plate.
    • Critical Minerals: Deposits contain manganese, cobalt, nickel, copper, vital for clean energy, electronics, and defence.

     

    [UPSC 2021] Consider the following statements:

    1. The Global Ocean Commission grants licenses for seabed exploration and mining in international waters.

    2. India has received licenses for seabed mineral exploration in international waters.

    3. ‘Rare earth minerals’ are present on the seafloor in international waters.

    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

     

  • In news: Bank for International Settlements (BIS)

    Why in the News?

    The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has cautioned that record-high global share prices appear detached from concerns over rising government debt.

    About the Bank for International Settlements (BIS):

    • Establishment: Formed in 1930, making it the world’s oldest international financial institution.
    • Role: Known as the “central bank for central banks”, serving only central banks & international organisations, not private entities or governments.
    • Headquarters: Basel, Switzerland; offices in Hong Kong & Mexico City.
    • Membership: Owned by 63 central banks, covering ~95% of global GDP.
    • Purpose: Promotes international monetary and financial cooperation and ensures global monetary stability.
    • Functions:
      • Platform for policy coordination & information sharing among central banks.
      • Provides banking services: reserve management, gold/forex transactions, liquidity support.
      • Acts as trustee/agent in global financial operations.
      • Conducts research, training, and seminars on financial stability.
      • Hosts Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), which frames Basel norms.

    India and the BIS:

    • Membership: Represented by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) as a full member.
    • Representation: RBI Governor participates in BIS Board of Governors meetings.
    • Participation:
      • Engages in BIS research & policy discussions.
      • RBI officials join working groups on supervision, stability, and fintech.
    • Basel Norms: India, via RBI, has adopted Basel standards on capital adequacy, liquidity & risk management.
    • Innovation Hub: Collaborates with BIS on digital payments, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and cross-border fintech solutions.
    [UPSC 2015] ‘Basel III Accord’ or simply ‘Basel III’ often seen in the news, seeks to

    Options: (a) develop national strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity

    (b) improve banking sector’s ability to deal with financial and economic stress and improve risk management*

    (c) reduce the greenhouse gas emissions but places a heavier burden on developed countries

    (d) transfer technology from developed countries to poor countries to enable them to replace the use of chlorofluorocarbons in refrigeration with harmless chemicals

     

  • Scarborough Shoal in South China Sea

    Why in the News?

    China’s State Council has approved the creation of a national nature reserve at Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Dao in Chinese, Bajo de Masinloc/Panatag Shoal in the Philippines).

    About Scarborough Shoal:

    • Geography: A triangle-shaped chain of reefs and rocks in the South China Sea, about 200 km from Luzon (Philippines) and 800+ km from Hainan (China).
    • Status: Uninhabited but strategic, located near shipping lanes carrying $3 trillion in trade annually.
    • Significance: The lagoon shelters boats, and surrounding waters hold rich fish stocks vital for Zambales and Pangasinan communities.

    Disputes about it:

    • Sovereignty Claims: Both China and the Philippines claim ownership.
    • 2016 Arbitration Ruling: Permanent Court of Arbitration (The Hague) held China’s nine-dash line claim invalid, declaring Scarborough a traditional fishing ground under UNCLOS; China rejected the verdict.
    • Philippines’ Grounds: Lies within Manila’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), making China’s reserve “illegitimate and unlawful.”
    • International Response: The US, Japan, Australia, and Canada conduct naval patrols/drills supporting the Philippines and freedom of navigation.
    [UPSC 2022] Which one of the following statements best reflects the issue with Senkaku Islands, sometimes mentioned in the news ?

    Options: (a) It is generally believed that they are artificial islands made by a country around South China Sea.

    (b) China and Japan engage in maritime disputes over these islands in East China Sea.*

    (c) A permanent American military base has been set up there to help Taiwan to increase its defence capabilities.

    (d) Though International Court of Justice declared them as no man’s land, some South-East Asian countries claim them.

     

  • Looking at India-Pak ties through prism of Indus Waters Treaty

    Introduction

    For 65 years, the Indus Waters Treaty ensured the uninterrupted sharing of river waters between India and Pakistan despite wars and conflicts. Signed in 1960, with the World Bank as broker, it granted Pakistan control over nearly 80% of the Indus system waters while India retained rights over the eastern rivers. Yet, this arrangement, hailed by Nehru as a “gesture of peace,” was also criticized as appeasement. Today, the Treaty faces an existential challenge, as India, for the first time, suspends its obligations in response to cross-border terrorism. A fresh evaluation of the IWT reveals that Pakistan’s real concern is not water scarcity but the control of flows, a factor deeply tied to its obsession with Kashmir.

    Why in the News

    India, after decades of restraint, has finally exercised its strategic upper riparian advantage by suspending the Indus Waters Treaty following the April Pahalgam terror attack. This is a watershed moment: for the first time in 65 years, the Treaty, which survived four wars, terror attacks, and political turmoil, has been placed in abeyance. The move underscores a shift from India’s earlier magnanimity to a more assertive posture. It is significant because it challenges one of the few stable frameworks of India–Pakistan relations and introduces water as a core strategic lever, alongside terrorism and Kashmir.

    Why was the Indus Waters Treaty so Significant?

    1. Historic endurance: The Treaty survived four wars, repeated terror attacks, and decades of hostility.
    2. Unique distribution: Pakistan received 80% of Indus waters (western rivers) despite being the lower riparian.
    3. Nehru’s vision: Seen as a stabilizing act of peace, prioritizing development over disputes.
    4. Pakistan’s insecurity: Never fully celebrated, fearing India’s control as upper riparian.

    How Do India and Pakistan Perceive the Treaty Differently?

    1. India’s approach: Saw the Treaty as magnanimity; Nehru called it a “purchase of peace.”
    2. Criticism of India: S Jaishankar terms it appeasement, not peace.
    3. Pakistan’s strategy: Used Article IX dispute mechanism to obstruct Indian projects in J&K.
    4. Silent dissatisfaction: Despite receiving 80% waters, Pakistan avoided declaring victory to maintain a narrative of victimhood.

    What Drives Pakistan’s Deep Insecurity?

    1. Not water, but control: Pakistan’s fear lies in disruption of flows, not absolute shortage.
    2. Kashmir link: To control rivers, Pakistan desires physical control of J&K.
    3. Historic evidence: Gen Ayub Khan soon after the Treaty linked water insecurity with demand for Kashmir.
    4. Perverse use of IWT: Constant attempts to delay Indian projects in J&K despite India’s limited use of western rivers.

    Why Did the Treaty Survive for So Long?

    1. India’s responsibility: As the upper riparian, India ensured minimum flows and shared data.
    2. Asymmetry of burden: Pakistan had little responsibility upstream but leveraged dispute clauses downstream.
    3. Counterfactual concern: Survival of Treaty is doubtful if Pakistan had been upper riparian.
    4. Symbol of stability: Often cited globally as a model of cooperative water-sharing.

    What Could the Future Hold for the IWT?

    1. Pakistan’s likely strategy: Stonewall renegotiations, fearing worse outcomes.
    2. India’s new stance: Seeks bilateral renegotiation without World Bank involvement.
    3. Regional dimension: Pakistan may attempt to involve China (8% basin) and Afghanistan (6% basin).
    4. Strategic uncertainty: India may not disrupt flows but could introduce uncertainty, forcing Pakistan to rethink its terror policy.
    5. J&K projects: India likely to push through delayed hydro and irrigation projects without Pakistani consent.

    Conclusion

    The IWT, once a symbol of cooperation, now mirrors the fault lines of India–Pakistan relations. For decades, India upheld its obligations even at strategic cost. But by suspending the Treaty, India has signaled that goodwill cannot be one-sided, especially in the face of relentless terrorism. Water, development, security, and Kashmir are now deeply intertwined. The Indus basin, instead of being a bridge, risks becoming another battlefield in South Asia’s fraught geopolitics.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2015] Terrorist activities and mutual distrust have clouded India–Pakistan relations. To what extent the use of soft power like sports and cultural exchanges could help generate goodwill between the two countries? Discuss with suitable examples.

    Linkage: The Indus Waters Treaty itself was long considered a form of institutionalized soft power, surviving wars and terror. However, its suspension after the Pahalgam attack highlights how terrorism erodes even cooperative mechanisms. Just as cultural exchanges aim to build goodwill, water-sharing too depended on mutual trust — and both reveal how soft power collapses when hostility dominates.

  • [11th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The Way Forward on Katchatheevu, Palk Strait disputes

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2013] In respect of India — Sri Lanka relations, discuss how domestic factors influence foreign policy.

    Linkage: The Katchatheevu and Palk Strait disputes show how domestic pressures from Tamil Nadu, fishing community demands, political rhetoric, and cultural ties with Sri Lankan Tamils, directly shape India’s diplomatic posture with Colombo. Balancing these domestic concerns with treaty obligations and ecological imperatives defines the contours of India’s foreign policy. This reflects how internal politics often intersect with external relations in South Asia.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The Katchatheevu and Palk Straits disputes highlight the fine balance India must strike between diplomacy, livelihood, and ecological sustainability. While political rhetoric often overshadows the nuanced reality, the recent revival of dialogue between India and Sri Lanka offers an opportunity to convert conflict into cooperation. This article unpacks the legal, ecological, and humanitarian dimensions of the issue and offers insights useful for UPSC Mains aspirants.

    Introduction

    India’s neighbourhood diplomacy has been historically guided by Panchsheel, the Non-Aligned Movement, SAARC, and now the Neighbourhood First Policy. Yet, challenges with Sri Lanka, notably the fisheries dispute in the Palk Straits and the sovereignty of Katchatheevu island, continue to test this vision. Prime Minister Modi’s April 2025 visit to Colombo revived discussions on these long-standing issues, calling for a “humane approach” that reconciles livelihoods and ecological imperatives. The stakes are high: peace in the Palk Straits is not just about maritime boundaries but about human security, sustainability, and regional goodwill.

    The Katchatheevu and Palk Strait Issue

    Katchatheevu Island Dispute

    • Katchatheevu island: A tiny, uninhabited islet (under 0.5 sq. miles) situated in the Palk Strait, legally ceded to Sri Lanka under the 1974 India-Sri Lanka Maritime Boundary Treaty.
      • Fishing rights vs sovereignty: While sovereignty is settled in Sri Lanka’s favour, Indian fishers, especially from Tamil Nadu, continue to demand access, leading to periodic clashes.
    • Palk Strait: A narrow stretch of sea separating Tamil Nadu from Sri Lanka’s Northern Province, rich in marine resources but ecologically fragile.
      • Conflict drivers: Indian bottom trawlers crossing the maritime boundary deplete fish stocks, harming both Indian artisanal fishers and Sri Lankan Tamil fishers.
      • Core issue: More than territory, it is a livelihood and ecological crisis, complicated by political rhetoric around Katchatheevu’s status.

    Livelihood and conservation at odds

    1. Shared history: Fishing communities of Tamil Nadu and Northern Sri Lanka have relied on the Palk Straits for centuries.
    2. Destructive practices: Indian mechanised bottom trawlers enter Sri Lankan waters, violating conservation norms.
    3. Legal framework: UNCLOS and FAO’s 1995 Code of Conduct prohibit destructive fishing; Sri Lanka banned bottom trawling in 2017.
    4. Ecological damage: Coral beds and shrimp habitats are destroyed; fish stocks are depleted.
    5. Internal conflict: Traditional Tamil Nadu artisanal fishers also lose out, creating intra-community livelihood clashes.

    Clearing the misconceptions around Katchatheevu

    1. Tiny territory: Katchatheevu is less than half a square mile, barren except for St. Anthony’s church.
    2. Treaty status: The 1974 India-Sri Lanka Maritime Boundary Treaty gave it to Sri Lanka; under international law, such treaties are binding.
    3. Legal precedents: Minquiers and Ecrehos (UK vs France, 1953) and Rann of Kutch (India-Pakistan, 1968) show administrative control outweighs historical claims.
    4. Clarification: Myths such as “Indira Gandhi gifting the island” are misleading; historical records supported Sri Lanka’s claim.
    5. Key point: Fishing rights are separate from sovereignty, and Katchatheevu is not the root of the dispute.

    Towards cooperative fisheries management

    1. Historic waters: Indian and Sri Lankan law recognise the Palk Straits as historic waters, giving stronger sovereign rights.
    2. UNCLOS Article 123: Mandates cooperation in semi-enclosed seas.
    3. Models for India-Sri Lanka:
      1. Baltic Sea Fisheries Convention (quota-sharing).
      2. Possible steps: Joint research station on Katchatheevu, regulated quotas, seasonal access, promotion of deep-sea fishing in India’s EEZ.

    Building empathy and fraternity

    1. Shared suffering: Sri Lankan Tamil fishers lost decades of livelihood during the civil war due to military restrictions.
    2. Goodwill memory: Tamil refugees were welcomed in Tamil Nadu during the conflict.
    3. Role of Tamil leaders: MPs and media in Sri Lanka can sensitise Tamil Nadu fishers to hardships across the strait.
    4. Narrative shift: Sri Lankan Tamils are not aggressors but fellow victims of history.

    India’s neighbourhood policy in action

    1. Diplomatic tradition: Panchsheel, NAM, SAARC, Neighbourhood First Policy.
    2. Way forward: Prioritise livelihood security, ecological sustainability, and treaty respect over populism.
    3. Multi-level engagement: Government-to-government, State/Provincial dialogue, community interaction.
    4. Larger vision: Transform Palk Straits from a zone of conflict to a symbol of cooperation.

    Conclusion

    The Katchatheevu issue is legally settled and should not distract from the real crisis, sustainable fisheries management in the Palk Straits. Balancing artisanal livelihoods, ecological imperatives, and regional goodwill requires cooperative frameworks and empathy. If pursued with prudence, India and Sri Lanka can convert disputes into opportunities, strengthening the Neighbourhood First Policy and ensuring that smaller conflicts do not overshadow South Asia’s collective future of peace and prosperity.

  • A joint and new journey along the SCO pathway

    Introduction

    The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), now the largest regional grouping after 24 years of evolution, witnessed its biggest summit in Tianjin with 23 countries and 10 international organisations participating. The presence of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping signalled a possible recalibration of bilateral ties amid a tense global order. This summit was not only about regional security but also about shaping global governance, fostering sustainable development, and exploring new pathways of cooperation.

    Why in the News

    The Tianjin SCO Summit is in the news because it marked the largest gathering in SCO’s history and produced high-yielding outcomes, such as the creation of security centres, a development bank, and long-term strategies in energy, green industry, and digital economy. Importantly, India and China engaged in dialogue during the diamond jubilee year of China-India diplomatic ties, projecting partnership rather than rivalry. This reflects a striking shift from the border tensions that have dominated headlines in recent years, positioning the summit as a turning point in regional cooperation and global governance.

    High-Yield Outcomes of the Tianjin Summit

    1. Tianjin Declaration: Announced creation of four security centres, including an Anti-drug Center and a Universal Countering Security Challenges Center.
    2. SCO Development Bank: Decision to set up a regional bank to finance cooperative projects.
    3. Fair Stance on Trade: SCO states collectively defended multilateral trading systems and WWII legacy.
    4. 10-Year Strategy: Leaders adopted a development strategy for the next decade.
    5. China’s Initiatives: Xi announced three platforms for energy, green industry, and digital economy; and three centres for innovation, higher education, and vocational training.

    How the Summit Shaped Global Governance

    1. Global Governance Initiative: Xi proposed principles such as sovereign equality, international rule of law, and multilateralism.
    2. People-Centered Approach: Emphasis on real actions for peace and justice.
    3. Leadership Platform: SCO positioned as a space to counter the “governance deficit” in world politics.

    India’s Role in the SCO

    1. Active Member since 2017: India has advanced SCO’s development agenda.
    2. Support for Presidency: India extended full support to China’s SCO presidency.
    3. Areas of Cooperation: Security, energy, green industry, and digital economy identified as convergence points.

    75 Years of India-China Ties

    1. Anniversary Diplomacy: Modi and Xi stressed partnership over rivalry.
    2. Dragon and Elephant Metaphor: Xi urged for “dragon and elephant to dance together.”
    3. Consensus vs Disagreement: Leaders agreed that consensus outweighs differences.

    Road Ahead for Bilateral Cooperation

    1. Strategic Mutual Trust: Resume dialogue mechanisms, embrace peaceful coexistence, and mutual respect.
    2. Expanding Exchanges: Focus on trade, investment, technology, culture, and people-to-people bonds.
    3. Good-Neighbourliness: Reinforce Panchsheel principles, keep border differences from overshadowing wider relations.
    4. Global South Leadership: India and China to lead BRICS presidencies, resist hegemony, and promote fairness in world order.

    Conclusion

    The Tianjin Summit reflects a recalibration of SCO’s role as a platform for regional stability and global governance. For India, it marks a moment of balancing rivalry with cooperation in ties with China. If trust and exchanges are consolidated, India-China relations can shape the future of Asia and the Global South. The challenge lies in ensuring border disputes do not overshadow wider opportunities.

    Value Addition

    Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) 

    • Establishment: Permanent intergovernmental organisation founded on 15 June 2001 in Shanghai by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan. Predecessor: Shanghai Five (1996).
    • Charter: Adopted in 2002 (St. Petersburg), in force since 2003, laying down goals, principles, and structure.
    • Goals:
      • Strengthen trust, friendship, good-neighbourliness.
      • Promote cooperation in politics, economy, science, culture, education, energy, environment, etc.
      • Maintain peace, security, stability in the region.
      • Promote a fair, democratic international order.
    • Principles (Shanghai Spirit): Mutual trust, benefit, equality, consultation, respect for civilizational diversity, common development; externally—non-alignment, openness, non-targeting others.
    • Structure:
      • Council of Heads of State (CHS) – supreme body (annual).
      • Council of Heads of Government (CHG) – economic strategy, budget (annual).
      • Numerous sectoral mechanisms.
    • Permanent Bodies: Secretariat (Beijing) & Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS, Tashkent).
    • Membership:
      • 10 Members – India, China, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan.
      • 2 Observers – Afghanistan, Mongolia.
      • 14 Dialogue Partners – incl. Nepal, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Qatar, Maldives, etc.

    Key Takeaways from SCO Summit 2025

    • 24 Documents Approved – including Tianjin Declaration and SCO Development Strategy till 2035.
    • Security Cooperation – agreement on SCO Anti-Drug Center and Universal Center for Countering Challenges & Threats.
    • Counter-Terrorism – joint declaration condemned Pahalgam (India), Jaffer Express & Khuzdar (Pakistan) terrorist attacks – significant as Pahalgam was earlier omitted.
    • Membership Expansion – Lao PDR granted Dialogue Partner status; CIS given Observer status.
    • Cultural Capital – Cholpon-Ata (Kyrgyzstan) designated SCO Tourist & Cultural Capital (2025–26).
    • Civilisation Dialogue Forum – proposed by PM Modi to strengthen people-to-people ties & civilizational exchange.
    • Global Governance Initiative – proposed by Xi Jinping for multilateralism, just & equitable order, Global South leadership.
    • SCO Chairmanship – passed to Kyrgyz Republic (2025–26) with theme: “25 years of SCO: together for a stable world, development, prosperity.”

    What SCO Means for India’s Global and Regional Interests

    1. Strategic Pillars – PM Modi outlined India’s SCO vision as S–Security, C–Connectivity, O–Opportunity.
    2. Central Asia Engagement – SCO provides a rare forum to deepen ties with resource-rich Central Asia and expand India’s role as a pan-Asian player beyond the South Asian paradigm.
    3. Counter-Terrorism – Access to the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure (RATS) helps India with intelligence-sharing against the “three evils” (terrorism, separatism, extremism), beyond Pakistan-centric frameworks.
    4. India–Russia Cooperation – SCO strengthens Delhi’s strategic proximity with Moscow, which backed India’s full membership in 2016.
    5. Balancing China – India’s presence acts as a countervailing force to Chinese dominance in Eurasia, supported by Russia.
    6. BRI Opposition – India continues to reject the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as it passes through Pakistan-occupied territory, asserting sovereignty concerns.
    7. Diplomatic Battlefield – While enabling multilateral engagement, SCO also reflects great-power rivalries, making it both an opportunity and a challenge for India.

    PYQ Relevance

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

    Linkage: The SCO faces internal strains due to rivalries among major members, including China-Pakistan ties and regional security tensions. India has sought to mitigate these by emphasizing its three-pillared approach of Security, Connectivity, and Opportunity, pushing for counter-terrorism cooperation through RATS, and resisting divisive projects like BRI while promoting dialogue, civilizational exchange, and balanced economic engagement. Thus, India positions itself as a stabilizing force to preserve SCO’s collective agenda despite conflicts.