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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  •  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.

  • 50th Anniversary of Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)

    Why in the News?

    March 26, 2025, marked the 50th anniversary of the entry into force of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), the first multilateral disarmament treaty to ban an entire category of weapons of mass destruction.

    About the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)

    • The BWC also known as the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), is a disarmament treaty aimed at banning biological and toxin weapons.
    • It prohibits activities related to the development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling, and use of biological and toxin weapons.

    Negotiation and Adoption of BWC: 

    • Negotiated in Geneva, Switzerland, from 1969 to 1971.
    • Draft versions were tabled by the USA and USSR in August 1971.
    • The treaty was opened for signature on April 10, 1972, in London, Moscow, and Washington, D.C.
    • It entered into force on March 26, 1975, after the required ratifications.

    Key Provisions of BWC:

    • Article I: Prohibits development, production, stockpiling, and use of biological weapons.
    • Article II: Requires destruction or conversion of biological agents, toxins, and weapons to peaceful purposes before joining.
    • Article III: Prohibits transfer or assistance in acquiring biological weapons.
    • Article VI: Allows states to file complaints with the UN Security Council about treaty violations.
    • Article X: Promotes the exchange of materials and information for peaceful purposes.

    Structure and Membership of BWC:

    • Depositaries: United States, United Kingdom, and Russian Federation are the depositary governments.
    • Membership: As of February 2025, 188 states are parties to the treaty, with 4 states having signed but not ratified, and 9 states have neither signed nor ratified.
    • Review Conferences: Held every 5 years to assess the treaty’s implementation and strengthen confidence-building measures.

    India and the BWC:

    • India is a party to the BWC.
    • India has implemented national measures and established legal frameworks to comply with the provisions of the BWC, preventing the development or use of biological weapons.
    [UPSC 2017] With reference to the Biological Weapons Convention, consider the following statements:

    1.It prohibits the development, production, stockpiling or use of biological and toxin weapons.

    2. It has a verification mechanism to check compliance by member States.

    3. It is an umbrella treaty under the aegis of the United Nations.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

     

  • China-India ties across the past and into the future

    Why in the News?

    On April 1, China and India celebrated 75 years of diplomatic relations. Despite some challenges, their bond has kept growing, just like the Yangtze and Ganges rivers.

    What are the key factors that have influenced China-India relations over the past 75 years?

    • Strategic Leadership & Diplomatic Initiatives: Leaders have played a pivotal role in shaping ties at critical junctures. Example: In 1950, Nehru and Mao established diplomatic relations, and in 1988, Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to China helped normalize relations after the 1962 war.
    • Border Disputes & Security Concerns: The unresolved boundary issue has been a major friction point. Example: The 1962 India-China War and recent tensions in Ladakh (Galwan clash, 2020) highlight ongoing territorial disputes.
    • Economic Engagement & Trade Relations: Bilateral trade has expanded significantly, despite political tensions. Example: Trade increased from under $3 billion in 2000 to $138.5 billion in 2024, making China India’s largest trading partner.
    • Multilateral Cooperation & Global Governance: Both nations collaborate in international forums but also compete for regional influence. Example: India and China work together in BRICS, SCO, and G-20 but differ in strategies for regional dominance (e.g., Indo-Pacific and BRI).
    • Cultural & People-to-People Ties: Historical and civilizational ties continue to foster mutual understanding. Example: The influence of scholars like Rabindranath Tagore and the contribution of Dr. Kotnis in China during WWII symbolize enduring cultural bonds.

    How have the leaders of China and India guided their bilateral relations during critical historical junctures?

    • Establishment of Diplomatic Ties (1950): Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Chairman Mao Zedong formalized relations, making India the first non-socialist country to recognize the People’s Republic of China.
    • Normalization Post-1962 War (1988): Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to China marked a turning point, leading to agreements on peace and cooperation, setting the stage for improved ties.
    • Economic & Strategic Engagement (2003-2013): Under Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Hu Jintao, India recognized Tibet as part of China, and China acknowledged Sikkim as part of India, fostering trade and diplomatic ties.
    • Informal Summits for Stability (2018-2019): Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping held informal summits in Wuhan (2018) and Mamallapuram (2019) to ease tensions and enhance strategic trust.
    • Crisis Management & Recent Diplomatic Talks (2023-2024): Amid border tensions, diplomatic channels, such as the Special Representatives’ talks and Foreign Minister-level dialogues helped maintain stability and explore solutions.

    How can China and India promote a multipolar world and protect developing countries’ interests?

    • Strengthening Multilateral Organizations: Both nations actively contribute to BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), and the G-20 to ensure developing countries have a greater voice in global governance.
    • Advocating for Fair Trade and Economic Policies: They push for reforms in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) to make global trade and financial systems more inclusive and equitable.
    • Enhancing South-South Cooperation: Initiatives like China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and India’s Development Partnership Administration (DPA) can support infrastructure, healthcare, and education in Africa, Latin America, and Asia.
    • Promoting an Inclusive Global Order: China and India have called for United Nations (UN) Security Council reforms to give more representation to emerging economies, ensuring a balanced global power structure.
    • Joint Climate and Sustainable Development InitiativesThey collaborate in forums like the International Solar Alliance (ISA) and advocate for climate justice, ensuring fair access to green technology and funding for developing nations.

    What steps can China and India take to strengthen their bilateral economic and trade cooperation? (Way forward)

    • Enhancing Trade Facilitation and Reducing Barriers: Both nations can work towards reducing tariffs and non-tariff barriers to improve market access. Example: Streamlining customs procedures and regulatory harmonization can facilitate smoother trade in key sectors like pharmaceuticals, electronics, and textiles.
    • Boosting Investments and Joint Ventures: Encouraging mutual investments in infrastructure, manufacturing, and technology sectors to foster economic interdependence. Example: China’s investment in India’s mobile phone sector (e.g., Xiaomi and Oppo factories in India) can be expanded to other industries like renewable energy and automobile manufacturing.
    • Strengthening Supply Chain Resilience: Both countries can collaborate to create diversified supply chains and reduce overdependence on Western markets. Example: Joint production and R&D in semiconductor manufacturing to reduce dependency on third-party nations.
    • Promoting Digital and Financial Cooperation: Expanding digital economy collaboration, including fintech, e-commerce, and AI-driven solutions. Example: Enabling regulated entry of Indian fintech firms into China’s market and vice versa, similar to how Chinese tech firms like Alibaba and Tencent have invested in Indian startups.
    • Expanding Multilateral and Regional Cooperation: Strengthening collaboration in platforms like BRICS, SCO, and RCEP to enhance economic integration. Example: Coordinating policies on global trade issues like WTO reforms, climate finance, and digital trade governance to promote shared economic interests.

    Mains question for practice:

    Question: ‘Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad)’ is transforming itself into a trade bloc from a military alliance, in present times – Discuss. [UPSC 2020]

    Linkage: Quad, a strategic dialogue involving India, the US, Japan, and Australia, which is widely seen as a counter to China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific. Understanding the Quad’s evolving nature is crucial for analyzing India’s strategic choices in relation to China.

  • [1st April 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Why are tensions high in the Arctic?

    PYQ Relevance:

    Question: “If the last few decades were of Asia’s growth story, the next few are expected to be of Africa’s.” In the light of this statement, examine India’s influence in Africa in recent years. [UPSC 2021]

    Linkage: The broader context of competition for influence in the continent. 

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  The Arctic has been isolated for centuries, but climate change is melting ice, which leads to opening access to valuable resources like oil, gas, and rare earth metals. Melting ice is also creating new trade routes. Unlike Antarctica, the Arctic has no strong legal protections, leading to territorial claims and military activity, increasing global tensions.

    Today’s editorial discusses the geopolitical impact of climate change in the Arctic. This topic is relevant for GS Paper 2 (International Relations) and GS Paper 3 (Environment).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Global experts are concerned about increasing tensions in the Arctic, cautioning that if not controlled, they might cause conflict in the area.

    arctic

    What are the key factors driving increased geopolitical tensions in the Arctic?

    • Climate Change & Melting Ice: The Arctic ice cap is shrinking, making previously inaccessible natural resources and trade routes viable. Example: The opening of the Northeast Passage along Russia’s coast could significantly reduce shipping times between Asia and Europe.
    • Competition for Natural Resources: The region holds an estimated 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30% of untapped natural gas, along with rare earth minerals. Example: Greenland has significant deposits of rare earth elements, attracting interest from China and the U.S.
    • Territorial Disputes & Overlapping Claims: Countries are extending their maritime boundaries under UNCLOS to claim more of the Arctic seabed. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark have overlapping claims to the Lomonosov Ridge, a key Arctic seabed area.
    • Military Posturing & Strategic Control: Nations are increasing their military presence to assert dominance and protect interests. Example: Russia has expanded its Arctic military bases and deployed nuclear-powered icebreakers, while NATO has increased Arctic exercises.
    • New Maritime Trade Routes & Geopolitical Rivalry: The melting ice is opening faster, alternative shipping lanes, bypassing traditional routes like the Suez Canal. Example: China is promoting the Polar Silk Road via the Northeast Passage, while Russia maintains strict control over Arctic navigation.

    Who are the primary stakeholders controlling different regions of the Arctic?

    • Arctic Coastal Nations (Arctic Council Members): Eight countries control Arctic land and territorial waters: Canada, Denmark (via Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the U.S. Example: Russia has the largest Arctic coastline and controls key ports, while Canada claims sovereignty over the Northwest Passage.
    • International Governance & UNCLOS: The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regulates maritime claims, allowing nations to extend seabed claims if proven as a continental shelf extension. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark have all submitted overlapping claims to the Arctic seabed under UNCLOS.
    • Non-Arctic Global Powers & Observers: Non-Arctic nations like China, India, the UK, and the EU monitor Arctic developments due to strategic interests in trade routes and resources. Example: China declared itself a “Near-Arctic State” in 2018 and is investing in icebreaker ships to influence Arctic shipping lanes.

    Where do territorial disputes and conflicting claims arise among Arctic nations?

    • Competing Seabed Claims under UNCLOS: Arctic nations claim extended seabed areas beyond their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) by proving geological extensions of their continental shelves. Example: Russia, Canada, and Denmark (via Greenland) have overlapping claims to the Lomonosov Ridge in the central Arctic Ocean.
    • Northwest Passage Dispute (Canada vs. U.S.): Canada considers the Northwest Passage part of its internal waters, granting it control over navigation. The U.S. and other nations claim it is an international strait, allowing free passage. Example: The U.S. has conducted “freedom of navigation” operations in the passage, challenging Canada’s sovereignty.
    • Svalbard Archipelago (Norway vs. Russia): Norway administers Svalbard under the Svalbard Treaty (1920), granting access to signatory nations for commercial activities. However, Russia argues for broader rights. Example: Russia continues to expand mining operations in Svalbard and has politically challenged Norway’s restrictions on military activity there.
    • Greenland Sovereignty & U.S. Interest (Denmark vs. U.S.): The U.S. has questioned Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland and previously attempted to purchase the island due to its strategic location and rare earth minerals. Example: In 2019, then-U.S. President Donald Trump expressed interest in buying Greenland, leading to diplomatic tensions with Denmark.
    • Barents Sea & Arctic Borders (Norway vs. Russia): Russia and Norway have had disputes over their maritime boundary in the Barents Sea, an area rich in oil, gas, and fisheries. Example: A 2010 agreement settled much of the dispute, but tensions persist, especially with increasing Russian military activity near Norwegian waters.

    Why is the Arctic considered strategically important for global powers?

    • Rich Natural Resources: The Arctic is estimated to hold 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30% of its untapped natural gas, along with rare earth elements, phosphates, and fisheries. Example: Russia has significantly invested in Yamal LNG projects, while Greenland has attracted interest from China and the U.S. for its rare earth deposits.
    • New Trade Routes Due to Melting Ice: The Northeast Passage (along Russia’s coast) and the Northwest Passage (through Canada) could drastically reduce global shipping distances, saving billions in transportation costs. Example: China’s “Polar Silk Road” seeks to use the Northeast Passage for trade, reducing travel time between East Asia and Europe by 40% compared to the Suez Canal route.
    • Military & Geopolitical Significance: The Arctic provides strategic military advantages, including submarine deployment zones, early warning radar systems, and missile defense capabilities. Example: Russia has established new Arctic military bases, the U.S. has expanded its Thule Air Base in Greenland, and NATO has increased military exercises in the region.

    How are nations like Russia, China, and NATO asserting their influence in the Arctic region?

    • Russia: Militarization and Territorial Claims: Russia has the largest Arctic military presence, including nuclear-powered icebreakers, air bases, and missile defense systems. It has also made territorial claims under UNCLOS to extend its control over the Arctic seabed. Example: In 2007, Russia planted its flag on the Arctic seabed at the North Pole and continues to expand its Arctic military bases, such as in Franz Josef Land and the Kola Peninsula.
    • China: Economic Investments and Strategic Partnerships: China, though not an Arctic nation, calls itself a “Near-Arctic State” and is expanding its influence through investments in Arctic infrastructure, scientific research, and trade routes (Polar Silk Road). Example: China has invested in Arctic mining projects in Greenland and collaborated with Russia on LNG projects, like the Yamal LNG plant. It is also building nuclear-powered icebreakers.
    • NATO: Strengthening Military Presence and Alliances: NATO has intensified military exercises and surveillance in the Arctic, especially after Finland and Sweden joined the alliance following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Example: In 2024, NATO conducted large-scale Arctic military drills near the Russian border in Finland and strengthened defense ties with Canada and Norway.

    Way forward: 

    • Strengthening Arctic Governance & Diplomacy: Enhance international cooperation through the Arctic Council and UNCLOS to manage territorial disputes, resource exploration, and environmental challenges. Example: Establish legally binding agreements for sustainable Arctic resource extraction and conflict resolution mechanisms to prevent geopolitical tensions.
    • Balancing Economic Development with Environmental Protection: Promote responsible Arctic development by enforcing strict environmental regulations while ensuring indigenous rights and sustainable economic activities. Example: Encourage renewable energy projects, scientific research, and eco-friendly shipping practices to mitigate the impact of Arctic exploitation.