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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • SAARC Development Fund (SDF)

    Why in the News?

    With recent cuts in USAID funding the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Development Fund (SDF), with a capital base of $672 million and $1.5 billion in authorized funds, is gaining attention.

    About the SAARC Development Fund (SDF):

    • The SDF was established in 2010 by SAARC member countries: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.
    • It focuses on social, economic, and infrastructure development across SAARC countries.
    • It has evolved from SAARC Fund for Regional Projects (SFRP) and SAARC Regional Fund (SRF) proposed in 1990.
    • In 2005, the SDF was reconstituted as the umbrella financial mechanism for all SAARC projects.
    • Finally, it was endorsed in 2006; Charter signed in 2008 during the 15th SAARC Summit in Colombo.
    • Its permanent Secretariat opened in Thimphu, Bhutan, in 2010.

    Funding Mechanism:

    • The SDF has authorized funds of $1.5 billion, with a capital base of $672 million.
    • It aims to expand its credit portfolio to $300 million in the coming years.
    • Member countries contribute to the SDF’s capital, and the funds are allocated for regional projects based on proposals from member states.
    • It operates on a collaborative funding model, with contributions from both the government and development partners.
    [UPSC 2016] The term ‘Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership’ often appears in the news in the context of the affairs of a group of countries known as:

    (a) G20 (b) ASEAN (c) SCO (d) SAARC

     

  • 150th Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)

    Why in the News?

    On April 8, 2025, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla delivered the keynote address at the 150th Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

    About the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU):

    • The IPU is the global organization that connects national parliaments, promoting democracy and cooperation among countries.
    • Moto: “For democracy. For everyone.”
    • It is based in Geneva, Switzerland.
    • Establishment:
      • It was established in 1889 as the first multilateral political organization aimed at fostering international cooperation and dialogue.
      • It was founded by Englishman William Randal Cremer and Frenchman Frederic Passy, two visionaries who believed in resolving international disputes through peaceful arbitration.
      • Both went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize in 1901.
    • Structure and Mandate:
      • It comprises 181 national Member Parliaments and 15 Associate Members (mostly regional parliamentary bodies).
      • It is funded by its members out of public funds.
      • The Governing Council is made up of 3 MPs from each Member Parliament.
    • Core Functions:
      • It advocates for stronger, more inclusive, and diverse parliaments.
      • It defends the human rights of parliamentarians and organizes biennial assemblies to bring together parliamentary delegates and partners from around the world.
      • It works on issues like global governance, the United Nations, and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

    Key Milestones Achieved:

    • The first IPU conference was held in 1889 in Paris, with participation from MPs across Europe and beyond.
    • The IPU played a key role in establishing the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 1899.
    • It laid the groundwork for the creation of the League of Nations in 1919 and the United Nations in 1945.

    India’s Participation in the IPU:

    • India’s membership in the IPU is facilitated through the Indian Parliamentary Group, which serves as the National Group of the IPU.
    • The IPG was established in 1949 following a motion adopted by the Constituent Assembly of India.
    • The Speaker of the Lok Sabha serves as the ex-officio President of the IPG, while the Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha serve as Vice Presidents.
    [UPSC 2005] Consider the following statements:

    1. The Charter of the United Nations Organization was adopted at Geneva, Switzerland in June 1945; 2. India was admitted to the United Nations Organization in the year 1945; 3. The Trusteeship Council of the United Nations Organization was established to manage the affairs of territories detached from Japan and Italy after WWII.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 and 2 (b) 2 and 3 (c) 1 and 3 (d) 1, 2 and 3

     

  • Understanding India’s China conundrum

    Why in the News?

    Today’s China is clearly very different from the time of Deng Xiaoping. Since Xi Jinping took power in 2013, China has changed even more, and there’s little sign that it plans to go back to its earlier approach.

    Why is China’s reference to its past and civilisational wrongs worrying for neighbours like India?

    • Revival of Imperial Borders: China increasingly invokes the idea of restoring historical boundaries, particularly from the Qing Dynasty era, as part of its national rejuvenation narrative. This fuels aggressive territorial claims along its borders, including the Himalayas. Eg: Galwan Valley clash (2020) and Doklam standoff (2017) stemmed from China’s assertion of areas it considers historically part of its territory.
    • Narrative of Victimhood and Justification for Aggression: By portraying itself as a wronged civilisation that suffered during the “Century of Humiliation,” China seeks to justify its assertive and sometimes aggressive policies. This historical grievance can be weaponised to rationalise border incursions or political pressure. Eg: China’s repeated provocations in Ladakh are often accompanied by narratives about safeguarding sovereignty and correcting past “injustices”.
    • Undermining Trust and Stability in the Region: Civilisational rhetoric makes China appear unpredictable and ideologically rigid, reducing the room for compromise or pragmatic dialogue. Diplomatic efforts may be overshadowed by a deep-seated belief in historical entitlement, affecting long-term peace and confidence-building. Eg: Despite de-escalation talks, China maintains over a lakh soldiers with heavy weaponry in Ladakh, showing the mismatch between words and actions.

    What do incidents reveal about China’s border ambitions?

    • Assertion of Historical Claims: China seeks to enforce its version of historical borders, often disregarding settled agreements or established boundaries. Eg: In Doklam (2017), China attempted to build a road near the India-Bhutan-China tri-junction, claiming it as part of “historical Chinese territory”.
    • Testing India’s Military and Diplomatic Response: Provocations are used to gauge India’s preparedness, resolve, and red lines in high-altitude and remote border regions. Eg: The Galwan clash (2020) tested India’s military presence in Eastern Ladakh, where both sides suffered casualties.
    • Salami Slicing Strategy: China advances its territorial ambitions incrementally—occupying small patches of disputed land to gradually shift the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Eg: Reports of Chinese infrastructure buildup in Depsang Plains and Demchok indicate creeping occupation tactics.

    How does China’s military and tech build-up affect India’s defence readiness?

    • Late 2024 – Signs of De-escalation: A thaw began in late 2024, marked by steps to ease tensions at border friction points. Eg: De-escalation started just before the BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia (October 2024).
    • Border Patrolling Agreement Announced: An India-China Border Patrolling Agreement was informally referenced as a framework to manage patrolling in the Himalayas. Eg: Though details remained sketchy, the agreement was viewed as a tentative breakthrough in restoring order along the LAC.
    • Chinese Defence Ministry’s Statement (November 2024): China officially acknowledged progress in implementing the disengagement and patrolling settlement. Eg: A Chinese Defence Ministry spokesperson stated the hope for a “harmonious dance between the Chinese Dragon and the Indian Elephant.”
    • India’s PM Statement in the U.S. (February 2025): Indian PM, during a visit to the U.S., declared that normalcy had returned to the border. Eg: He emphasized cooperation with China as essential for global peace and prosperity.

    Which regional moves call for a foreign policy rethink by India?

    • China’s Outreach to Bangladesh: After the political transition in Bangladesh, China deepened ties with the new leadership. Eg: Visit of Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser Mohammed Yunus to China in March 2025, after Sheikh Hasina’s eclipse.
    • China’s Inroads in India’s Neighbourhood: China actively seeks new alliances in South Asia, undermining India’s traditional influence. Eg: Countries like Nepal, Sri Lanka, and now Bangladesh are being courted by China with investments and diplomatic engagement.
    • Neglect of West Asia and North Africa: India’s recent foreign focus has tilted towards the U.S., while West Asia and North Africa have seen less engagement. Example: China’s growing presence in energy partnerships and infrastructure in the Middle East and Africa poses strategic challenges.
    • China’s Advance in African Nuclear Sector: China is gaining access to nuclear energy resources in Africa, positioning itself as a key energy partner.Eg: China’s strategic energy investments in Africa give it leverage over future global energy security, where India lags behind.
    • Great Power Competition and China’s Strategic Penetration: China’s rapid expansion through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) creates a web of influence around India. Eg: Strategic infrastructure in Myanmar, Maldives, and the Indian Ocean region reshapes regional geopolitics in China’s favour.

    What are the steps taken by the Indian government?

    • Act East Policy Revamp: Strengthening ties with Southeast Asian nations like Vietnam, Philippines, and Indonesia. Eg: India’s maritime cooperation and defence agreements with ASEAN countries.
    • Neighbourhood First Policy: Renewed focus on diplomatic and developmental engagement with South Asian neighbours.Eg: Infrastructure and energy projects in Nepal, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka, including India-funded railways and power grids.
    • Deepening Quad and Indo-Pacific Strategy: Enhanced coordination with USA, Japan, and Australia under the Quad framework. Eg: Joint naval exercises like Malabar, and focus on free and open Indo-Pacific.
    • Strategic Infrastructure Development: Accelerated development of border infrastructure in sensitive regions to counter Chinese encroachments. Eg: Fast-tracking roads, tunnels, and airstrips in Arunachal Pradesh, Ladakh, and Sikkim.
    • Enhanced Defence Diplomacy: Upgrading military-to-military engagements and arms exports to friendly nations. Eg: Supplying Tejas fighter jets to Argentina and BrahMos missiles to the Philippines.

    Way forward: 

    • Build a Multi-Domain Deterrence Framework: India must develop coordinated military, cyber, space, and maritime capabilities to counter China’s growing influence across all strategic domains. Eg: Strengthening the Defence Cyber Agency, expanding India’s space surveillance, and enhancing undersea monitoring in the Indian Ocean to deter any surprise escalation.
    • Expand Strategic Partnerships Beyond the Quad: India should diversify its strategic alignments by engaging European powers (like France and Germany), Middle East partners (like UAE, Israel), and Africa through trade, defence, and technological cooperation. Eg: India-France Indo-Pacific cooperation and India-UAE-France trilateral initiatives can counterbalance China’s BRI-led influence.

    Mains PYQ:

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

    Linkage: India’s strategic partnerships play an important role in maintaining peace in the region, especially as China grows stronger militarily, acts aggressively like in Galwan, and expands its influence in the Indo-Pacific.

  •  A regional revival: On the BIMSTEC summit    

    Why in the news?

    The sixth BIMSTEC summit was held last week in Bangkok, where leaders from seven neighbouring countries came together. At a time when the world is facing many challenges, the summit gave a chance to restart and strengthen the BIMSTEC group, which had been inactive for a long time.

    What is the BIMSTEC?

    • BIMSTEC was established in the year 1997. It is a group of 7 countries around the Bay of Bengal that work together to boost regional cooperation in areas like trade, transport, energy, security, and disaster management.
    • It connects South Asia (like India, Bangladesh, Nepal) with Southeast Asia (like Myanmar, Thailand), helping in regional development and integration, especially where SAARC has been inactive.

    What was the significance of the sixth BIMSTEC summit held in Bangkok amidst global turbulence?

    • Revitalisation of BIMSTEC Platform: The summit marked a renewed push to activate BIMSTEC after years of stagnation. Eg: Despite challenges like the Myanmar-Thailand earthquake, the summit was successfully held.
    • Advancement in Connectivity Projects: It accelerated infrastructure and connectivity plans across the region. Eg: The India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway was highlighted as a key BIMSTEC initiative.
    • Strengthening Economic Cooperation: Economic integration was prioritised through trade and commerce mechanisms. Eg: A BIMSTEC Chamber of Commerce and plans for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) were discussed.
    • Focus on Disaster Management: The region’s vulnerability to natural disasters was acknowledged with steps toward collective preparedness. Eg: The summit called for a joint disaster management mechanism for BIMSTEC countries.
    • Platform for Crucial Bilateral Engagements: It provided leaders a forum to address bilateral tensions diplomatically. Eg: PM of India met Bangladesh and Nepal leaders to discuss border issues and political concerns.

    Why has BIMSTEC gained importance over SAARC and other regional groupings in recent years?

    • Exclusion of Pakistan: BIMSTEC avoids the India-Pakistan rivalry that has long paralyzed SAARC. Eg: The 19th SAARC summit (2016) was cancelled after India pulled out due to the Uri attack; BIMSTEC continues to function without such deadlocks.
    • Regional Connectivity: BIMSTEC focuses on tangible infrastructure and economic integration projects across member states. Eg: The India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway enhances trade and links India’s Northeast with Southeast Asia.
    • Act East Policy Alignment: BIMSTEC aligns with India’s strategic aim of connecting South Asia with Southeast Asia. Eg: Inclusion of Thailand and Myanmar allows India to implement its Act East Policy, which SAARC cannot facilitate.
    • Multi-sectoral Functional Cooperation: BIMSTEC has a broader and more practical agenda covering trade, security, energy, and disaster management. Eg: The 2024 BIMSTEC summit advanced plans for a joint disaster management mechanism and free trade agreements.
    • India’s Strategic Diplomatic Shift: India has redirected its focus from SAARC to BIMSTEC as a preferred platform for regional cooperation. Eg: India hosted the BIMSTEC outreach summit during BRICS 2016, signaling its priority shift away from SAARC.

    What is the importance of the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway? 

    • Enhances Regional Connectivity: The highway links India’s North-East with Southeast Asia, boosting physical and economic integration. Eg: It connects Moreh (India) to Mae Sot (Thailand) via Myanmar.
    • Promotes Trade and Commerce: It facilitates smoother movement of goods and services, reducing transport costs and time. Eg: Indian exporters can access new markets in Thailand and beyond with greater ease.
    • Boosts Tourism and Cultural Exchange: Improved road connectivity encourages people-to-people contact and tourism flows. Eg: Tourists from India can travel by road to explore Myanmar and Thailand’s heritage sites.
    • Strategic and Geopolitical Value: Strengthens India’s Act East Policy and counters the influence of China in the region. Eg: The highway gives India a direct land route to ASEAN, reducing dependence on maritime routes.
    • Development of India’s North-East: Integrates the North-Eastern states into regional value chains and boosts local economies. Eg: States like Manipur and Assam benefit from increased trade and infrastructure development.

    What was outlined in the ‘Vision 2030’ document?

    • Negotiation of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA): Plans to push forward a comprehensive BIMSTEC Free Trade Agreement to enhance regional economic integration and trade cooperation.
    • Customs Cooperation: Emphasis on Customs agreements to facilitate smoother and faster movement of goods across borders within the region.
    • Disaster Management Mechanism: Given the region’s vulnerability to natural disasters, the document stresses the importance of building a joint disaster management system.
    • Connectivity Infrastructure: Support for ongoing projects like the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway, aimed at improving physical connectivity, particularly with India’s North-East as a BIMSTEC “hub”.
    • Institutional Strengthening: Proposals to establish a BIMSTEC Chamber of Commerce to enhance business-to-business ties and private sector collaboration across the member states.

    What are the challenges of all regional groups with India?

    • Political Tensions: Regional groupings often get stalled due to bilateral political disputes involving India. Eg: SAARC remains non-functional due to India-Pakistan tensions, especially post-Uri attack (2016).
    • Asymmetry in Size and Power: India’s economic and geopolitical dominance leads to perceptions of hegemony by smaller neighbours. Eg: In BBIN, Bhutan’s Parliament rejected the Motor Vehicles Agreement over concerns of being overwhelmed by Indian traffic and influence.
    • Slow Implementation of Projects: Despite grand plans, execution of connectivity and trade projects is slow due to bureaucratic delays and lack of coordination. Eg: The India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway has faced repeated delays due to funding and infrastructure gaps.
    • Security and Border Issues: Unresolved border disputes and cross-border issues hinder trust-building and cooperation. Eg: India-Nepal tensions over the Kalapani-Limpiyadhura border issue affected ties and stalled broader regional engagement.
    • Divergent National Interests: Different domestic priorities and political transitions often reduce commitment to collective goals. Eg: In BIMSTEC, Myanmar’s internal conflict and military rule have made coordination on democratic and humanitarian issues more complex.

    Way forward: 

    • Institutional Strengthening and Timely Implementation: Regional groupings must develop stronger institutional frameworks to ensure accountability, faster execution of projects, and reduced dependence on political goodwill. Eg: Establishing a BIMSTEC Secretariat with enhanced powers and resources can streamline coordination, monitor progress, and push for timely completion of initiatives like the Trilateral Highway and FTA.
    • Mutual Trust and Inclusive Diplomacy: India should promote inclusive dialogue, address concerns of smaller neighbours, and adopt a consultative rather than prescriptive approach to regional leadership Eg: Reviving BBIN talks with Bhutan through confidence-building measures or sustained bilateral dialogues with Nepal and Bangladesh can reduce friction and enhance collaboration.

    Mains PYQ: 

    [UPSC 2022] Do you think that BIMSTEC is a parallel organisation like the SAARC? What are the similarities and dissimilarities between the two? How are Indian foreign policy objectives realized by forming this new organisation?

    Linkage: BIMSTEC and its relationship with SAARC, which is central to the context of article about BIMSTEC being conceived as a bridge and gaining importance due to SAARC’s inactivity.

  • Ottawa Convention

    Why in the News?

    NATO members including Poland, Finland, and the three Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) have recently expressed intentions to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention.

    About the Ottawa Convention

    • The Ottawa Convention is an international treaty adopted in 1997 aimed at banning the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of anti-personnel mines.
    • It is also known as the ‘Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Treaty.’
    • It specifically targets anti-personnel mines and EXCLUDES anti-vehicle mines, remote-controlled mines, and other types of munitions.
    • Signatories: 165 countries had joined by March 2025.
      • But major powers like the United States, China, Russia, India, and Israel have not signed.
    • Key Features: Signatories must destroy all stockpiled anti-personnel mines within 4 years of ratification, with some allowances for mines retained for training.

    Objectives of the Treaty

    • End Human Suffering: The primary goal is to end the human suffering caused by landmines.
    • Prevent Civilian Casualties: It seeks to prevent civilian casualties, especially long after conflicts have ended.
    • Rehabilitation and Restoration: The treaty also aims to assist in the rehabilitation of victims and the restoration of land previously mined for civilian use.

    Significance of the Convention

    • Victims’ Profile: According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), more than 80% of mine victims are civilians.
    • Convention Provisions: The convention includes provisions to assist victims, many of whom suffer permanent disabilities such as loss of limbs.
    [UPSC 2015] Which among the following are Nuclear Weapons States as recognized by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons, commonly known as Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)?

    1. China 2. France 3. India 4. Israel 5. Pakistan

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

     

  • [5th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: A case for the Global South in securing Ukraine peace

    PYQ Relevance:

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

    Linkage:  India’s historical role as a voice for the “Global South” and how its current global positioning might be perceived differently. This article argues for the Global South to take a leading role, which resonates with India’s past image.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  As the Ukraine war moves toward a fragile ceasefire, the big question is who will ensure lasting peace. Western countries suggest a European-led peacekeeping force, but Russia rejects NATO troops. Instead, nations from the Global South—Africa, Asia, and Latin America—could lead a neutral UN mission, showing they can help maintain global peace and stability.

    Today’s editorial looks at how countries from the Global South could lead a peacekeeping mission in the Ukraine war. This topic is useful for General Studies Paper 2 in the UPSC mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    The war in Ukraine gives the Global South a chance to show it can be a fair and trusted force in bringing peace and stability to the world.

    Why is a Global South-led peacekeeping mission preferred over a European-led one in Ukraine?

    • Neutrality and Trustworthiness: Global South countries are not directly involved in the Ukraine war and have largely remained neutral, making them more acceptable to both parties Example: India maintains diplomatic ties with both Russia and Ukraine — PM Modi met both leaders within weeks, signalling impartiality.
    • Avoiding NATO-Russia Tensions: European-led missions are viewed by Russia as NATO extensions, which could escalate rather than resolve the conflict. Example: Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov warned that European troops would “fuel the conflict,” not ease it.
    • Strong UN Peacekeeping Experience: Global South nations have a proven record in UN peacekeeping across various conflict zones. Example: The African Union has led missions in Somalia and Sudan; India has contributed over 2,90,000 peacekeepers to UN missions.
    • Public Opposition in Europe: European populations are reluctant to support troop deployments in Ukraine, limiting the viability of a European-led mission. Example: French citizens largely opposed Macron’s suggestion to send French troops for peacekeeping earlier this year.
    • Symbol of Multipolar Global Order: A Global South-led mission would demonstrate their growing role in global governance and diplomacy. Example: Countries like Brazil, Indonesia, and South Africa are part of BRICS and actively engage in UN initiatives, signalling rising influence.

    Why does Russia oppose European or NATO-led peacekeeping forces in Ukraine?

    • Perceived NATO Expansion: Russia sees any European-led force as a cover for NATO expansion, violating its red lines on NATO’s eastward movement. Example: Moscow described a European-led mission as a “NATO Trojan horse” — a disguised attempt to increase NATO’s footprint in Ukraine.
    • Threat to Russian Security: A European or NATO presence near Russian borders is seen as a direct security threat, escalating tensions. Example: Russia strongly reacted when NATO troops were deployed in Eastern Europe after 2014, citing encirclement fears.
    • Lack of Impartiality: Russia considers NATO countries partial and hostile, incapable of mediating fairly between Ukraine and Russia. Example: NATO nations have supplied Ukraine with weapons and intelligence, eroding their neutrality in Russia’s view.
    • Potential for Escalation: Deploying NATO-aligned forces could turn peacekeepers into targets, risking direct confrontation between Russia and NATO. Example: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that NATO troops in Ukraine would “further fuel the conflict.”
    • Undermining Diplomatic Efforts: Russia believes a NATO role in peacekeeping would delegitimize any ceasefire, making negotiations harder. Example: Russia has supported talks in neutral venues like Riyadh, avoiding NATO-influenced settings for peace discussions.

    Which Global South countries are suited for peacekeeping in Ukraine, and what proves their capability?

    • India has vast experience in UN peacekeeping, having contributed over 2,90,000 troops to 50+ UN missions. Example: In 2007, India deployed the first all-women peacekeeping contingent to Liberia, showcasing professionalism and inclusivity.
    •  Brazil has led several UN missions, especially in Latin America and Africa, and is known for diplomatic balance. Example: Brazil commanded the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) from 2004 to 2017, showing leadership in volatile environments.
    •  South Africa: With deep regional peacekeeping experience via the African Union and UN, South Africa balances diplomacy with force. Example: South Africa has contributed troops to peacekeeping missions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) under challenging conditions.
    • Indonesia has a consistent record of contributing troops and police to UN missions, emphasizing neutrality and professionalism. Example: It currently contributes forces to UN missions in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and the Central African Republic (MINUSCA).
    • Chile specializes in demining and post-conflict reconstruction, vital for Ukraine’s recovery. Example: Chilean experts have worked with UN missions on landmine removal in post-war zones, a skill urgently needed in Ukraine.

    How can India’s peacekeeping legacy support a UN mission in Ukraine?  

    • Reputation for Neutrality: India maintains balanced diplomatic relations with Russia, Ukraine, and the West, making it a credible and neutral peacekeeping leader. Example: PM Modi’s meetings with both President Putin and President Zelenskyy within weeks reflect India’s impartial diplomatic posture.
    • Extensive Peacekeeping Experience: India is one of the largest contributors to UN peacekeeping, with over 2,90,000 troops having served in 50+ missions worldwide. Example: India’s leadership in UN missions in South Sudan (UNMISS) and Congo (MONUSCO) shows operational effectiveness in complex conflict zones.
    • Pioneering Gender-Inclusive Peacekeeping: India was the first country to deploy an all-women police contingent in a UN mission. Example: In 2007, Indian women peacekeepers served in Liberia, enhancing community trust and addressing gender-based issues in post-conflict societies.

    Way forward:

    • Leverage India’s Neutral Diplomatic Standing: India can lead or coordinate a Global South-led mission due to its balanced ties with Russia, Ukraine, and the West — ensuring credibility and acceptance by all parties. e.g. India’s PM meetings with both Putin and Zelenskyy show diplomatic neutrality.
    • Utilize India’s Peacekeeping Expertise:
       India should offer experienced troops, including women contingents, to promote trust, inclusivity, and effectiveness in conflict zones. e.g. India’s success in UNMISS and the all-women unit in Liberia reflect its capability.

  • Heard and McDonald Islands

    Why in the News?

    Donald Trump imposed a 10% tariff on imports from the Heard and McDonald Islands, despite no human presence there for nearly a decade.

    About the Heard and McDonald Islands

    • The Heard and McDonald Islands are located in the Southern Ocean, approximately 4,100 km south-west of Perth, Australia, and 1,600 km to the north of the Antarctic coast.
    • The islands are unincorporated external territories of Australia, meaning they are not part of any Australian state but are directly administered by the Australian government.
    • The islands are home to seals, penguins, and albatrosses, and serve as crucial breeding grounds for these species.
    • The islands have been designated as UNESCO World Heritage Sites due to their ecological significance, particularly their rich biodiversity.
    • Heard Island:
      • Heard Island spans an area of approximately 368 square kilometers.
      • The island’s highest point is Mawson Peak, an active volcano standing 2,745 meters (9,006 feet) above sea level.
      • Mawson Peak is one of the most active volcanoes in the southern hemisphere, with eruptions as recent as 2016.
    • McDonald Islands:
      • It is much smaller, covering only 2.5 square kilometers.
      • Geological Nature: These islands are volcanic and part of the same volcanic chain as Heard Island.
      • Climate
      • Both islands experience an extremely cold subantarctic climate, with heavy winds, snow, and ice for much of the year.
      • Temperatures rarely exceed 5°C (41°F) even in summer.

    Strategic Significance

    • The islands are strategically located between Australia and Antarctica, important for monitoring the Southern Ocean, vital for global biodiversity and climate studies.
    • They play a key role in scientific research, particularly in volcanology, glaciology, and climate change, with Australia operating a research station on Heard Island.
    • The islands are protected under the Antarctic Treaty System, ensuring no military activity or commercial exploitation in the region.
    • Rich in marine resources, the surrounding waters are also safeguarded to prevent overfishing and environmental harm.
    • Their geopolitical importance grows as international competition and territorial claims around Antarctica and the Southern Ocean increase.

  • [4th April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: The other space race — the geopolitics of satellite net

    PYQ Relevance:

    [UPSC 2024] Can India become a space power by solely relying on its indigenous technology, or is it imperative to forge technological alliances and collaborations with other nations to stay competitive in the global space race? Elaborate your views. 

    Linkage:  India’s choice to partner with Starlink, a US-based network, over waiting for indigenous solutions or potentially partnering with China, illustrating the geopolitical considerations in space technology.

     

    Mentor’s Comment: Many parts of India still lack fiber and mobile networks. Starlink’s tie-up with Airtel and Jio helps bring fast Internet to remote areas without big infrastructure costs. While good for business, it raises concerns about U.S. digital control. Starlink’s dominance, with 7,000 satellites, risks creating a monopoly and giving private firms major control over key infrastructure.

    Today’s editorial analyzes  Starlink’s tie-up with Airtel and Jio and its impact. This will help in GS paper 2 and GS Paper 3.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    It’s still unclear whether satellite Internet will help everyone get connected or just make the digital gap worse in a new way from space.

    What are the economic and strategic benefits of India’s partnership with Starlink?

    • Bridging the Digital Divide: Enables high-speed internet access in rural, remote, and hilly areas where laying fiber-optic cables is difficult or expensive. Eg:  Remote villages in Ladakh or Northeast India can access e-learning, telemedicine, and government services through satellite internet.
    • Cost-effective Infrastructure Expansion: Reduces the capital and operational costs for Indian telecom companies like Airtel and Jio, as satellite internet bypasses the need for expensive terrestrial infrastructure. Eg : Instead of building hundreds of towers in sparsely populated areas, Airtel can provide service using Starlink’s satellite network.
    • Strategic Geopolitical Alignment: Aligns India with the U.S.-led democratic digital alliance, distancing itself from authoritarian tech ecosystems like China’s GuoWang. Eg: Choosing Starlink over Chinese alternatives reflects India’s broader Indo-Pacific strategy of cooperation with like-minded nations.
    • Boost to Domestic Capability via Partnership Model: Collaborating through Indian partners (Airtel, Jio) offers regulatory oversight, scope for technology transfer, and growth of India’s tech ecosystem. Eg: Local data routing, domestic satellite ground stations, and service operations can help build technical capacity and expertise in India.
    • Strategic Communication Redundancy Enhances national security by providing backup communication systems during disasters or network blackouts. Eg: During natural calamities like cyclones or earthquakes, satellite internet can keep remote regions connected when ground networks fail.

    Why is Starlink’s monopolistic control a concern, and how does it impact India?

    • Overdependence on a Foreign Private Entity: Reliance on Starlink gives a U.S.-based private firm significant control over India’s digital backbone in remote areas.
       Eg: If Starlink alters service terms or suspends access due to U.S. geopolitical interests, India’s connectivity in border or conflict zones could be compromised.
    • National Security Risks: Communication infrastructure operated from outside the country raises concerns over surveillance, data sovereignty, and wartime disruption. Eg: During the Russia-Ukraine war, Starlink restricted access to its services in conflict zones — India could face similar risks in sensitive areas like Jammu & Kashmir or Arunachal Pradesh.
    • Market Distortion and Limited Competition: Starlink’s first-mover advantage and satellite volume (~7,000 satellites) could outcompete smaller or local satellite internet ventures. Eg: Domestic players like ISRO’s satellite internet plans or private Indian firms may struggle to gain market share or scale up effectively.
    • Pricing Power and Affordability Issues: Monopoly allows Starlink to set high prices, making services unaffordable for large sections of rural and poor populations. Eg: Without competition or regulation, satellite internet packages may remain out of reach for rural schoolchildren or small farmers.
    • Reduced Technological Sovereignty: Long-term reliance may hinder India’s ability to develop indigenous alternatives, stalling progress toward digital self-reliance. Eg: Starlink dominance might delay ISRO’s or IN-SPACe’s efforts in launching Indian LEO satellite constellations.

    Who are the key global players in satellite internet?

    Player Country Project Name Key Features Example / Status
    SpaceX USA Starlink – Operates 7,000+ satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO)

    – Provides global broadband internet

    		 – Services available in 70+ countries

    – Partnerships with Airtel & Jio in India for rural access
    China Satellite Network Group China GuoWang – State-run project for national security & digital sovereignty

    – Aims to deploy 13,000+ satellites

    		 – Strategic focus on Indo-Pacific and Belt & Road countries
    Amazon USA Project Kuiper – Plans to deploy 3,000+ satellites

    – Emerging competitor in global internet services

    		 – FCC approved

    – Aims to launch by 2026

    – Focus on North America & developing markets

     

    How does India’s choice of Starlink over indigenous or Chinese alternatives reflect its Indo-Pacific strategy?

    • Strategic Alignment with Democratic Partners: India’s preference for Starlink (a U.S.-based company) indicates alignment with democratic nations in the Indo-Pacific region. Eg: By avoiding Chinese alternatives like GuoWang, India reinforces its commitment to frameworks like Quad (India, U.S., Japan, Australia) that promote a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific.
    • Countering China’s Digital Influence: India’s decision helps prevent Chinese technological dominance in Asia, especially in sensitive sectors like space and communication.Eg: Partnering with Starlink counters China’s Digital Silk Road ambitions and limits Beijing’s potential surveillance or control via GuoWang.
    • Enhancing Strategic Interoperability: Collaborating with U.S. technologies builds compatibility with partner nations’ digital and defense infrastructure. Eg: Starlink’s use in defense communication, as seen in Ukraine, could serve as a backup during emergencies in border regions like Ladakh or Arunachal Pradesh.
    • Economic Pragmatism and Speed: India needs fast, scalable connectivity. Starlink offers a quicker solution compared to long timelines for domestic capability development. Eg: Indigenous LEO satellite programs are still in nascent stages, while Starlink is already operational, helping bridge rural digital gaps.
    • Signal of Strategic Autonomy, Not Dependency: By routing Starlink through Indian firms like Jio and Airtel, India retains some control, showing a model of “managed dependency.” Eg: Unlike full foreign control, this hybrid model mirrors India’s “Act East” and “Neighbourhood First” policies that balance strategic autonomy with global partnerships.

    What steps can ensure digital sovereignty? (Way forward)

    • Develop Indigenous Satellite Infrastructure: Investing in homegrown satellite constellations enhances strategic independence and reduces reliance on foreign networks.Eg: ISRO and private players like IN-SPACe can develop India’s own LEO satellite systems to serve rural and border areas.
    • Enforce Strong Regulatory Frameworks: Mandating data localization, technology transfer, and operational oversight ensures control over foreign tech operations. Eg: India can require local data storage and security vetting for Starlink services, similar to norms for other digital services.
    • Strengthen Public Sector Participation: Involving state-owned enterprises like BSNL in satellite internet rollouts can provide public oversight and reduce strategic vulnerabilities.Eg: Partnering Starlink with BSNL could combine reach and regulation, giving the government more control over critical infrastructure.

  • India holds fire as Trump announces tariffs

    Why in the News?

    India faces lower U.S. tariffs than its rivals, making its exports more competitive. This can help expand market share and strengthen trade ties, possibly securing better terms through a future Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

    India faces lower U.S. tariffs than its rivals, making its exports more competitive. This can help expand market share and strengthen trade ties, possibly securing better terms through a future Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).

    Why did Trump impose “reciprocal tariffs” on countries like India?

    • Addressing Trade Deficits: Trump viewed large U.S. trade deficits as a national emergency and sought to correct them. Eg: India had a $30+ billion trade surplus with the U.S. in 2019, prompting higher tariffs.
    • High Tariffs by Trading Partners: Claimed that countries like India imposed higher tariffs on U.S. goods while enjoying low tariffs in return. Eg: India’s 52% tariff on U.S. goods (as per Trump’s claim) led to a 27% tariff on Indian exports.
    • Legal Justification Under IEEPA (1977): Used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify tariffs as a response to economic threats. Eg: Trump declared April 2 as “Liberation Day”, marking U.S. retaliation against trade imbalances.
    • Targeting Specific Sectors with Unfair Trade Practices: Accused India of protecting key industries with high tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Eg: India’s high tariffs on motorcycles (100% in 2017, later reduced to 30%) were cited as unfair.
    • Political Strategy for U.S. Domestic Industry: Aimed to protect American jobs and industries by reducing competition from low-cost imports. Eg: Tariffs targeted India’s gems, jewelry, and textiles sectors to favor U.S. producers.

    Why was India’s response to the U.S. tariffs muted compared to others?

    • Ongoing Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) Talks: India was engaged in negotiations with the U.S. for a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) and did not want to escalate tensions. Eg: The Commerce Ministry stated that India values its Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership with the U.S. and remained committed to BTA discussions.
    • Lower Tariff Impact Compared to Regional Competitors: India’s 27% tariff penalty was lower than those imposed on Vietnam (46%), Thailand (37%), Bangladesh (37%), and Sri Lanka (44%), offering a slight comparative advantage. Eg: Indian exports faced less severe tariffs than competitors, reducing the immediate urgency for a retaliatory response.
    • Focus on Exploring New Trade Opportunities: Instead of retaliation, India sought to leverage shifting global trade patterns and assess how the tariffs might create new export opportunities. Eg: The Commerce Ministry stated that it was studying “opportunities that may arise due to this new development.”
    • Avoiding Direct Confrontation with a Key Strategic Partner: India prioritized maintaining strong diplomatic and strategic ties with the U.S., especially given their defense, geopolitical, and economic partnerships. Eg: Unlike China or the EU, which threatened countermeasures, India’s official statement was measured and non-confrontational.
    • Selective Impact on Indian Industries: While some sectors like gems and jewelry were hit hard, others, such as automobiles and auto parts, were not significantly affected, reducing the immediate urgency for a strong reaction. Eg: The Gems & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) called for a quick resolution but did not demand aggressive retaliation.

    Which Indian sectors are most affected by the 27% U.S. tariff?

    • Gems & Jewelry Industry: The U.S. accounts for over 30% of India’s $32 billion annual gems and jewellery exports, making it the hardest-hit sector. Eg: The Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) warned that sustaining India’s $10 billion export volume to the U.S. would be challenging.
    • Textile & Apparel Sector: India is a major exporter of textiles and garments to the U.S., and higher tariffs could reduce price competitiveness against rivals like Vietnam and Bangladesh. Eg: The tariff increase could lead to order cancellations or a shift in sourcing to lower-tariff countries.
    • Processed Food & Agricultural Exports: India exports rice, tea, spices, and processed food to the U.S., which are now subject to higher tariffs, making them more expensive for American consumers. Eg: Indian basmati rice and processed mango products could face a drop in demand due to higher costs.

    How could India gain a comparative advantage? (Way forward) 

    • Lower Tariff Impact Compared to Competitors: India’s 27% tariff is lower than Vietnam (46%), Thailand (37%), Bangladesh (37%), and Sri Lanka (44%), making Indian goods relatively cheaper in the U.S. market. Eg: Indian textile and leather exports could remain more competitive than those from Bangladesh or Vietnam.
    • Potential Market Share Expansion: Higher tariffs on regional competitors may shift U.S. import preferences toward India, increasing Indian exports in affected sectors. Eg: If Bangladesh’s apparel exports become too costly, U.S. buyers may turn to Indian manufacturers for sourcing.
    • Strengthened Trade Relations with the U.S: By maintaining a measured diplomatic response and continuing trade negotiations, India can secure long-term benefits through a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA). Eg: A favorable BTA could lead to tariff reductions or exemptions for key Indian industries like pharmaceuticals and IT services.

    Mains PYQ:

    Question: How would the recent phenomena of protectionism and currency manipulations in world trade affect the macroeconomic stability of India? [UPSC 2022]

    Linkage: The potential impact of protectionist measures (like tariffs) on India’s economy.

  • Bangladesh events, a reflection of South Asia’s minorities

    Why in the News?

    The removal of Sheikh Hasina in August 2024 has raised concerns about violence against Hindus in Bangladesh. Religious minorities in South Asia, especially India and Pakistan, are facing increasing challenges that have worsened since Partition.

    What are the key factors contributing to the decline in the status of religious minorities in South Asia since Partition?

    • Majoritarian Nationalism & Religious Extremism: Rise of Hindutva politics in India, Islamization of laws in Pakistan, and political Islamization in Bangladesh have led to exclusionary policies and attacks on minorities. Eg:  Pakistan’s blasphemy laws disproportionately target Christians, Hindus, and Ahmadis, often leading to mob violence.
    • Communal Violence & Targeted Persecution: Repeated riots, lynchings, and attacks on places of worship have created fear and displacement among minorities. Eg: The 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War saw mass violence against Hindus; attacks on Hindus during Durga Puja 2021 in Bangladesh highlight continued persecution.
    • Legal & Institutional Discrimination: Laws and policies systematically disadvantage minorities, restricting their rights to education, property, and political participation. Eg: India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019, excludes Muslims from fast-track citizenship; Pakistan’s separate electorate system (before 2002) marginalized minorities.
    • Political Instability & State Apathy: Changing political dynamics often leave minorities vulnerable to state inaction or deliberate neglect.Eg: The deposition of Sheikh Hasina in 2024 has led to increased violence against Hindus in Bangladesh, reflecting the role of political shifts in minority safety.
    • Cross-Border Tensions & Geopolitical Factors: Tensions between India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh over religious issues fuel polarization and hostility towards minorities. Eg: 1992 Babri Masjid demolition in India led to retaliatory violence against Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh, worsening interfaith relations.

    How did the Nehru-Liaquat Ali Pact aim to address minority concerns?

    • Protection of Minority Rights: The pact, signed in 1950, aimed to safeguard the rights of religious minorities in India and Pakistan, ensuring security, freedom of movement, and non-discrimination. Eg: It assured that minorities in both countries could practice their religion freely without fear of persecution.
    • Creation of Minority Commissions & Legal Safeguards: Both nations agreed to set up Minority Commissions to address grievances and ensure the implementation of protective measures. Eg: The pact led to the establishment of a Branch Secretariat of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in Calcutta to monitor the situation.
    • Prevention of Forced Migration & Refugee Crisis Management: The pact sought to reduce communal tensions and prevent forced migration by ensuring the safety of minorities in both countries. Eg: It aimed to halt mass population exchanges, which were being considered by leaders like Sardar Patel in response to escalating refugee crises.

    What were its limitations?

    • Failure to Prevent Long-Term Religious Persecution: Despite assurances, violence against religious minorities continued in both India and Pakistan, undermining the pact’s effectiveness. Eg: Large-scale anti-Hindu riots in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) in 1950 and later events like the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War led to mass Hindu migration to India.
    • Lack of Strong Enforcement Mechanisms: The pact lacked binding enforcement mechanisms, relying on political goodwill rather than legal obligations, making it difficult to sustain over time. Eg: The Minority Commissions proposed under the pact had limited authority, leading to weak implementation and minimal impact on ground realities.

    What are the implications of political developments in Bangladesh on India-Bangladesh relations?

    • Increased Strain Due to Minority Persecution: Rising violence against Hindus in Bangladesh creates diplomatic tensions, as India sees itself as a protector of South Asian Hindus. Eg: Attacks on Hindu temples and communities after Sheikh Hasina’s deposition in 2024 have led to concerns in India about the safety of minorities.
    • Security Concerns & Border Management: Political instability in Bangladesh can lead to illegal migration, cross-border insurgency, and smuggling, affecting India’s internal security. Eg: India has strengthened border security along the India-Bangladesh border to curb illegal immigration and Rohingya refugee movements.

    How can South Asian nations develop a more inclusive framework to protect religious minorities and promote regional stability? (Way forward)

    • ​​Strengthen Legal & Institutional Safeguards: Implement strict anti-discrimination laws and establish independent minority rights commissions to monitor violations. Eg: India’s National Commission for Minorities (NCM) works to safeguard minority rights, but a regional body could ensure cross-border protection.
    • Promote Regional Cooperation & Crisis Response: Develop joint mechanisms for refugee protection, minority safety, and early conflict resolution. Eg: The SAARC framework could be expanded to include a South Asian Minority Rights Charter, ensuring accountability.
    • Ensure Socio-Economic Inclusion: Invest in education, employment, and political participation programs for minority communities. Eg: Bangladesh’s Ashrayan Project provides housing to marginalized groups, a model that can be scaled regionally.

    Mains PYQ:

    Question: The protests in Shahbag Square in Dhaka in Bangladesh reveal a fundamental split in society between the nationalists and Islamic forces. What is its significance for India? [UPSC 2013]

    Linkage: The significant socio-political event in Bangladesh and asks about its implications for India. The underlying tensions between nationalist and religious forces, are crucial for understanding the context of minority issues in Bangladesh.