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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Relations

  • [19th March 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: What is happening in Balochistan?

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q How far are India’s internal security challenges linked with border management particularly in view of the long porous borders with most countries of South Asia and Myanmar?” (2013)

    Reason: The movement of non-state actors, the potential for cross-border terrorism, and the involvement of external actors in Balochistan could link to India’s internal security challenges and the complexities of managing its own borders.

     

    Mentor’s Comment:  Balochistan’s ongoing insurgency isn’t just a Pakistan issue—it’s a case study in how internal unrest, resource conflicts, and external interventions shape regional security. For UPSC aspirants, this article is crucial for understanding India’s border security challenges (GS3) and the broader geopolitical game involving China and Pakistan (GS2). The mention of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), the hijacking incident, and Pakistan’s military response highlights patterns of insurgency and counterinsurgency—offering insights into how states manage separatist movements, a key aspect of internal security answers. Additionally, CPEC’s impact on local communities echoes concerns about economic imperialism and sovereignty, making this a relevant talking point in India’s foreign policy discourse.

    Today’s editorial discusses the challenges in Pakistan’s Balochistan province and how India can strategically respond. This analysis is relevant for GS Paper 2 (International Relations) and GS Paper 3 (Internal Security).

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Pakistan’s internal politics will shape the unrest in Balochistan. However, due to low trust in the military and government, meaningful talks between insurgents and the leadership seem unlikely.

    What are the key reasons behind the ongoing insurgency in Balochistan?

    • Historical Grievances and Forced Integration (1948): Many Baloch nationalists argue that Balochistan was forcefully incorporated into Pakistan in 1948 without the consent of its people. Example: Multiple insurgencies have occurred over the decades (1950s, 1960s, 1970s, mid-2000s) due to political and economic marginalization.
    • Political and Socio-Economic Marginalization: The region remains underdeveloped despite its vast natural resources (coal, copper, gold, gas). The Baloch people feel excluded from governance and decision-making. Example: Even with rich gas reserves, local communities face power shortages while other provinces benefit from Balochistan’s resources.
    • Military Suppression and Human Rights Violations: Pakistan’s military and intelligence agencies have employed heavy-handed tactics such as enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and crackdowns on dissent. Example: The mass protests led by Baloch women against custodial killings and forced disappearances highlight the ongoing repression.
    • China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and Resource Exploitation: Large-scale infrastructure projects, like Gwadar Port, were developed without consulting local communities, causing displacement and demographic changes. Example: Chinese fishing trawlers have disrupted local fishermen’s livelihoods, leading to economic hardships and resentment.
    • Growing Insurgent Coordination and External Factors: Various Baloch insurgent groups (BLA, BLF, BRG) have improved their coordination, launching high-profile attacks on security forces and infrastructure. Example: The Baloch Raji Aajoi Sangar (BRAS) alliance has intensified attacks, including the March 2024 train hijacking and past assaults on Chinese workers and security installations.

    What is China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)? 

    The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a $62 billion infrastructure project linking China’s Xinjiang to Pakistan’s Gwadar Port, enhancing trade, energy, and connectivity but facing security, debt, and geopolitical concerns.

    cpec, balochistan

    How has the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) impacted the socio-political landscape of Balochistan?

    • Economic Disparities and Local Alienation: Despite promises of economic growth, local Baloch communities have seen minimal benefits from CPEC projects, leading to resentment. Example: Gwadar Port’s development has largely benefited Chinese and Pakistani investors, while local fishermen face economic hardships due to Chinese deep-sea fishing trawlers.
    • Increased Security Presence and Military Crackdown: To safeguard CPEC projects, Pakistan has intensified military operations in Balochistan, leading to human rights abuses and forced displacements. Example: The establishment of the Special Security Division (SSD) for CPEC has led to increased military checkpoints and reports of enforced disappearances.
    • Rise in Insurgency and Targeted Attacks: Baloch insurgent groups view CPEC as a form of exploitation, leading to increased attacks on Chinese nationals and Pakistani security forces. Example: The Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) has carried out multiple attacks, including the 2022 suicide bombing in Karachi targeting Chinese teachers associated with CPEC projects.
    • Demographic Changes and Marginalization of Locals: Large-scale infrastructure projects have led to an influx of outsiders, creating fears among Baloch communities about losing their cultural and economic dominance. Example: The settlement of non-Baloch workers in Gwadar has fueled protests, with locals demanding control over job opportunities and land rights.
    • Environmental Degradation and Livelihood Losses: Industrialization and large-scale construction under CPEC have led to pollution, water shortages, and destruction of marine ecosystems, affecting local livelihoods. Example: Gwadar’s water crisis has worsened due to excessive resource extraction for CPEC-related industries, forcing residents to rely on water tankers.

    How can India leverage this situation to its advantage?

    • Diplomatic Advocacy for Human Rights: India can raise concerns over human rights violations in Balochistan at international forums like the UN and human rights organizations, building pressure on Pakistan. Example: Indian Prime Minister’s 2016 Independence Day speech highlighted Balochistan’s struggles, signaling diplomatic support.
    • Strategic Engagement with Baloch Leadership: Engaging with Baloch exiled leaders and activists can strengthen India’s regional influence and counter Pakistan’s narrative on Kashmir. Example: India has provided a platform to Baloch leaders like Brahumdagh Bugti, who has sought asylum in India.
    • Intelligence and Strategic Operations: India can enhance intelligence-sharing and non-conventional tactics to counter threats emanating from Pakistan, especially along its western borders. Example: Reports suggest Indian agencies have been monitoring CPEC activities and Pakistan’s military actions in Balochistan.
    • Economic and Cultural Soft Power: India can support Baloch diaspora communities through scholarships, cultural exchanges, and humanitarian assistance to build goodwill. Example: Media outlets in India have amplified Baloch issues, increasing global awareness of Pakistan’s suppression.
    • Countering CPEC’s Strategic Influence: By highlighting the environmental and economic concerns of Balochistan, India can strengthen its ties with countries skeptical of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Example: India’s opposition to CPEC, citing sovereignty concerns over PoK, aligns with global criticisms of China’s debt-trap diplomacy, helping form strategic alliances.

    Way forward: 

    • International Advocacy and Strategic Alliances: India should continue raising the Balochistan issue in global forums while strengthening diplomatic ties with nations wary of CPEC and China’s growing influence. Example: Collaborating with the Quad (US, Japan, Australia) and EU on human rights and regional security concerns.
    • Balanced Engagement with Baloch Leadership: India can discreetly support Baloch nationalist movements through political dialogue, humanitarian aid, and economic initiatives, ensuring a calibrated approach without direct intervention. Example: Facilitating educational opportunities and cultural exchanges for Baloch youth to build long-term goodwill.

    Back to Basics: Importance of Balochistan

    • Strategic Location – Balochistan provides Pakistan access to the Arabian Sea, hosting Gwadar Port, a key part of CPEC, enhancing regional trade and connectivity.
    • Natural Resources – It holds rich mineral reserves, including natural gas, coal, gold, and copper (e.g., Reko Diq gold-copper project).
    • Energy Hub – Balochistan is crucial for Pakistan’s energy security, with major gas fields like Sui Gas Field, supplying the country since 1952.
    • Defense and Security – The province borders Iran and Afghanistan, making it vital for border security and counterinsurgency operations.
    • Fisheries and Maritime Importance – Its 1,000 km coastline supports Pakistan’s fishing industry, with Gwadar’s deep-sea port boosting maritime trade potential.

     

  • 30th Session of International Seabed Authority (ISA)

    Why in the News?

    The 30th Session of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) has officially commenced in Kingston, Jamaica, on March 17, 2025.

    About the International Seabed Authority (ISA)

    • ISA is an autonomous international organization created under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 1994 Agreement relating to Part XI of the UNCLOS.
    • It regulates and manages mineral-resource activities in the “Area”—the seabed and ocean floor beyond national jurisdictions.
    • It is headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica
    • It has 168 Member States, including India, and the European Union
    • Mandate:
      • Regulate exploration and exploitation of deep-sea minerals.
      • Protect the marine environment from harmful effects of seabed activities.
      • Encourage marine scientific research and promote the sustainable use of oceans.
    • The ISA manages about 54% of the world’s oceans, ensuring activities are carried out for the benefit of all humankind and to protect the marine environment.

    Role in Regulating Deep-Sea Mining

    The ISA is responsible for enforcing the Mining Code, which governs all mineral activities in the International Seabed Area. It includes:

    • Regulation of Exploration: Grants exploration licenses for assessing mineral deposits in deep-sea areas, ensuring scientifically responsible activities.
    • Environmental Protection: Sets environmental standards and ensures impact assessments before mining starts.
    • Development of Mining Code: Continuously updates the Mining Code to address scientific, technological, and environmental concerns.
    • Oversight and Compliance: Monitors activities of contractors and member states, ensuring regulatory compliance and environmental safeguards.

    India and ISA

    • In January 2024, India submitted two exploration applications in the Indian Ocean for:
      • Polymetallic sulphides in the Carlsberg Ridge.
      • Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts in the Afanasy-Nikitin Seamount.
    • India holds two active exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules and sulphides in the Central Indian Ocean Basin and Ridge.
    • India seeks access to critical minerals for energy transition and technological growth, balancing economic needs with sustainable practices.
    • India actively participates in Mining Code negotiations, aligning its actions with international legal standards and environmental protocols.

    PYQ:

    [UPSC 2021] Consider the following statements:
    1. The Global Ocean Commission grants licences for seabed exploration and mining in international waters.
    2. India has received licences for seabed mineral exploration in international waters
    3. ‘Rare earth minerals’ are present on the seafloor in international waters.
    Which of the statements given above are correct?
    (a) 1 and 2 only
    (b) 2 and 3 only
    (c) 1 and 3 only
    (d) 1, 2 and 3

     

  • New Delhi’s perilous recalibration with the Taliban

    Why in the News?

    The Prime Minister of India may allow the Taliban regime to appoint a new envoy for its embassy in New Delhi.

    What are the key reasons behind India’s increasing engagement with the Taliban despite international concerns?

    • Strategic Influence in Afghanistan: India aims to maintain a presence in Afghanistan to safeguard its long-term geopolitical interests.Example: India reopened its embassy in Kabul in June 2022, ensuring diplomatic engagement.
    • Countering Pakistan’s Diminishing Influence: As Taliban-Pakistan relations sour, India sees an opportunity to reduce Islamabad’s sway over Kabul. Example: The Taliban’s refusal to act against Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has strained ties with Pakistan, creating space for India.
    • Competing with China’s Expanding Role: China has accepted a Taliban envoy and is integrating Afghanistan into the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Example: China became the first country to accept a Taliban-appointed ambassador in 2023, prompting India to reconsider its approach.
    • Ensuring Regional Security and Counterterrorism: A stable Afghanistan is crucial to preventing it from becoming a hub for anti-India terror groups. Example: India seeks Taliban cooperation in curbing ISIS-K and groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) that threaten Indian interests.
    • Economic and Humanitarian Interests: Engaging with the Taliban allows India to continue developmental projects and provide humanitarian aid. Example: India has sent multiple consignments of wheat and medical supplies to Afghanistan under humanitarian assistance programs.

    Why is the recognition of a Taliban envoy in India considered a significant shift in diplomatic policy?

    • De Facto Recognition of the Taliban Regime: Accepting a Taliban-appointed envoy would signal India’s indirect recognition of the regime, despite its lack of international legitimacy. Example: Most countries, including the U.S. and EU members, have refused to recognize the Taliban due to human rights violations.
    • Departure from India’s Traditional Stand on Terrorism: India has consistently opposed regimes that support terrorism. Engaging with the Taliban contradicts its long-standing stance. Example: India had previously refused to engage with the Taliban, citing its ties to groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM).
    • Contradiction with India’s Human Rights Advocacy: The Taliban’s treatment of women and minorities has been widely condemned, and recognizing its envoy could weaken India’s credibility as a human rights advocate. Example: The UN has termed the Taliban’s policies as “gender apartheid,” which contradicts India’s global image as a democratic and inclusive nation.
    • Impact on Relations with Western Allies: Closer engagement with the Taliban may strain India’s relations with countries that have imposed sanctions on the Taliban. Example: The U.S. and European nations continue to restrict diplomatic ties and financial transactions with Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.
    • Risk of Setting a Precedent for Other Unrecognized Regimes: Accepting a Taliban envoy might encourage other unrecognized regimes to seek similar diplomatic treatment, complicating India’s foreign policy. Example: It could open debates on whether India should engage similarly with other disputed governments, such as Myanmar’s military junta.

    What are the major risks for India in engaging with the Taliban?

    • Security Threats and Terrorism: The Taliban’s ties with terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) pose a direct threat to India’s national security. Example: The 2001 Indian Parliament attack was linked to JeM, which has operated from Taliban-controlled areas in the past.
    • Growing Influence of the Islamic State (IS): The Islamic State-Khorasan Province (IS-K) has been expanding in Afghanistan, carrying out attacks even against the Taliban and its allies. Example: IS-K’s attack on the Moscow Crocus City Hall in 2024 and the bombing of a Kabul hotel housing Chinese nationals show Afghanistan’s instability.
    • Potential Diplomatic Backlash: Engaging with the Taliban could harm India’s relations with key allies like the U.S. and the EU, which refuse to recognize the Taliban due to human rights violations. Example: The U.S. and European nations maintain economic sanctions on Afghanistan, and aligning too closely with the Taliban could attract criticism.
    • Destabilization of India’s Western Borders: The Taliban’s alleged support for Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has worsened Pakistan’s security situation, and any spillover could affect India. Example: TTP claimed 147 attacks in Pakistan in February 2024 alone, and instability in the region could have consequences for India’s border security.
    • Economic and Infrastructure Investment Risks: Any investments India makes in Afghanistan may not be secure due to the Taliban’s unstable governance and lack of financial transparency. Example: India’s $3 billion investments in Afghan infrastructure, including the Salma Dam and the Afghan Parliament, remain uncertain under Taliban rule.

    Way forward: 

    • Strategic, Conditional Engagement: India should engage with the Taliban on a case-by-case basis, ensuring its security interests are safeguarded while avoiding full diplomatic recognition. Example: Continuing humanitarian aid and infrastructure projects without legitimizing Taliban rule.
    • Regional and Multilateral Cooperation: India should collaborate with regional partners like Iran, Russia, and Central Asian states to ensure stability in Afghanistan while maintaining ties with Western allies. Example: Strengthening mechanisms like the Moscow Format Talks and UN-led initiatives to balance engagement and counter-terrorism efforts.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Critically analyse India’s evolving diplomatic, economic and strategic relations with the Central Asian Republics (CARs) highlighting their increasing significance in regional and global geopolitics.(UPSC IAS/2024)

    Reason: India’s engagement with CARs is influenced by the situation in Afghanistan and the wider regional security scenario involving the Taliban.

  • Five Eyes Alliance (FVEY)

    Why in the News?

    Recently a White House official has proposed expelling Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance. This comes as Donald Trump pressures Canada, even suggesting it could be transformed into the 51st U.S. state.

    About the Five Eyes Alliance (FVEY):

    • The FVEY is a global intelligence-sharing network comprising 5 Anglosphere countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the United States.
    • Established in 1946 following the UKUSA Agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom, it is one of the most secretive and influential alliances in global intelligence and security.
    • The alliance primarily focuses on sharing intelligence, especially signals intelligence (SIGINT), and collaborates on security matters like counterterrorism, cybersecurity, and geopolitical monitoring.
    • It plays a pivotal role in global surveillance programs, such as ECHELON, and is a key player in shaping international intelligence policy.
    • Members of the FVEY:
      1. Australia: Plays a key role in monitoring the Asia-Pacific region and contributes to SIGINT and cybersecurity efforts.
      2. Canada: Contributes significantly to global communications intelligence, focusing on networks and signals intelligence.
      3. New Zealand: Has a relatively reserved role but provides valuable intelligence, particularly in the Pacific region.
      4. United Kingdom: Works closely with the United States and is instrumental in intelligence gathering across Europe and the Middle East.
      5. United States: The largest contributor of intelligence, particularly in global SIGINT, and leads the alliance in intelligence operations.
    • Mandate:
      • The Five Eyes primarily focuses on intelligence sharing, especially signals intelligence (intercepted communications, satellite data, etc.), but has expanded to include human intelligence (HUMINT), geospatial intelligence (GEOINT), and cybersecurity.
      • The alliance works on global surveillance programs, collecting data on adversarial governments, counterterrorism efforts, and counterintelligence operations.
      • A key principle of the alliance is the “no third-party rule,” meaning intelligence shared among member countries is not passed on to non-member states without permission.

    PYQ:

    [2020] “Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) is transforming itself into a trade bloc from a military alliance, in present times Discuss.”

     

  • India, New Zealand resume trade deal talks after decade

    Why in the News?

    After nearly 10 years, India and New Zealand have resumed talks on a free trade agreement (FTA) to strengthen economic relations.

    What is the main objective of resuming India-New Zealand FTA negotiations?

    • Enhancing Market Access & Trade Growth: The FTA aims to expand trade opportunities by reducing tariffs and trade barriers. Example: Bilateral trade surpassed USD 1 billion (April-January 2025), highlighting the potential for further growth.
    • Strengthening Supply Chain Integration: The agreement seeks to improve logistics and supply chain efficiency between the two countries. Example: New Zealand’s dairy and agricultural products could find structured entry into India, while India’s IT and pharmaceutical sectors could benefit from easier access to the New Zealand market.
    • Boosting Investment & Business Opportunities: The FTA will help attract investments and foster job creation in sectors like IT, services, and agriculture. Example: India seeks better mobility for skilled professionals, benefiting industries like software services and engineering.

    Why did the India-New Zealand trade talks stall in 2015?

    • Disagreements Over Dairy Market Access: New Zealand demanded greater access to India’s dairy market, but India resisted to protect its millions of dairy farmers. Example: India’s dairy imports from New Zealand were minimal (~$0.57 million), and India remained firm against allowing raw dairy imports.
    • Tariff Reduction Challenges: New Zealand had a low average tariff of 2.3%, while India had a higher average tariff of 17.8%, making tariff reductions challenging. Example: India was reluctant to lower tariffs on New Zealand’s dairy, meat, and wine exports, fearing a negative impact on domestic industries.
    • Limited Gains for India in Goods Trade: Since New Zealand already had low tariffs and duty-free access for many goods, India saw fewer advantages in an FTA. Example: Indian exports such as textiles, apparel, and pharmaceuticals already had significant access to the New Zealand market.
    • Concerns Over Skilled Labor Mobility: India wanted easier movement of skilled professionals in IT and services, but New Zealand was hesitant. Example: India sought better visa provisions for IT and engineering professionals, which faced resistance.
    • External Trade Pressures: India faced pressure from other countries like the U.S. to open its dairy and agricultural sectors, complicating negotiations. Example: Allowing New Zealand’s dairy products could have set a precedent for other trade partners demanding similar concessions.

    How does the tariff disparity between India and New Zealand pose a challenge to the negotiations?

    • Significant Difference in Average Tariff Rates: New Zealand’s average import tariff is only 2.3%, with over half of its tariff lines duty-free, while India’s average tariff stands at 17.8%. Example: Indian goods already have substantial access to the New Zealand market, making a traditional FTA less beneficial for India.
    • Limited Market Access Gains for India: Since New Zealand already imposes low or no tariffs on many products, India’s exporters may not gain significant new access. Example: Sectors like textiles, pharmaceuticals, and auto components already enter New Zealand with minimal restrictions, reducing the FTA’s potential benefits for India.
    • Pressure on India to Lower Tariffs on Sensitive Sectors: New Zealand is pushing for tariff reductions on dairy, meat, and wine exports, but India is reluctant to protect domestic farmers and industries. Example: India’s dairy sector supports millions of small farmers, making it difficult to allow imports that could undercut local production.
    • Imbalance in Reciprocal Concessions: If India significantly lowers its tariffs, New Zealand would gain more than India, creating an imbalance in trade benefits. Example: India would have to make greater tariff cuts, while New Zealand’s market access would remain largely unchanged.
    • Potential Precedent for Other Trade Partners: If India agrees to major tariff cuts for New Zealand, other countries in future FTAs may demand similar concessions, complicating trade policy. Example: Countries like Australia, the EU, and the U.S. could push India to open up its agriculture and dairy sectors, which India has traditionally protected.

    Way forward: 

    • Balanced Trade Concessions & Sectoral Safeguards: India and New Zealand should explore sector-specific agreements rather than blanket tariff reductions. Example: India can allow limited access to value-added dairy products while ensuring safeguards for domestic farmers. Similarly, New Zealand can offer better terms for India’s IT and services sector.
    • Enhanced Collaboration in Non-Tariff Areas: Both nations should focus on investment facilitation, technology exchange, and regulatory cooperation to maximize mutual benefits beyond tariff cuts. Example: Joint ventures in agritech, renewable energy, and pharmaceuticals can create new trade opportunities without tariff-related conflicts.

    Mains PYQ:

    Q Critically analyse India’s evolving diplomatic, economic and strategic relations with the Central Asian Republics (CARs) highlighting their increasing significance in regional and global geopolitics. (2024)

    Reason:  It highlights the importance of analyzing India’s evolving economic relations with other regions, which is similar to the context of resuming talks with New Zealand.

  • International Criminal Court (ICC)

    Why in the News?

    The International Criminal Court (ICC) has taken into custody former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte on charges of crimes against humanity, linked to his infamous “war on drugs”.

    About the International Criminal Court (ICC)

    • The ICC is the world’s first permanent international court established to prosecute individuals responsible for the gravest crimes of global concern.
    • Founded under the Rome Statute in 1998, it became operational in 2002 and is headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands.
    • The ICC has jurisdiction over 4 core international crimes:
    1. War crimes
    2. Crimes against humanity
    3. Genocide
    4. Crimes of aggression
    • It has 125 member states, signatories to the Rome Statute, though major powers like India, the US, China, Russia, Israel, and Ukraine are NOT members due to concerns over sovereignty and political misuse.
    • The ICC’s budget, primarily funded by member states with additional voluntary contributions, for 2025 is approximately €195 million.
    • The ICC structure includes 18 judges elected for 9-year terms and an independent Office of the Prosecutor responsible for investigations and prosecutions.
    • Key bodies include the Trust Fund for Victims, a Detention Centre, and the Assembly of States Parties, which oversees its administrative functions.
    • The ICC lacks an enforcement mechanism and depends on member states’ cooperation for executing arrest warrants, gathering evidence, and enforcing sentences.

    Reach of an ICC Warrant:

    • Applicability:
      • Applies to crimes committed by nationals of member states or on member state territories.
      • Maintains jurisdiction over crimes committed before a state withdraws from membership.
    • State Obligations:
      • Member states must execute ICC arrest warrants under the Rome Statute.
      • Non-compliance can lead to reporting to the Assembly of States Parties and potential escalation to the UN Security Council (UNSC).
      • This applies particularly in cases involving UNSC-mandated probes, like Darfur and Libya.
    • Challenges to Enforcement:
      • Non-member states (e.g. US, Russia, China) are not bound by ICC warrants.
      • Political considerations lead to inconsistent compliance.
    • Special Mechanisms:
      • In 2016, the ICC formed an Arrest Working Group to improve intelligence-sharing and warrant execution.
    • Duterte Case Implications:
      • Even after Philippines’ withdrawal in 2019, the ICC retains jurisdiction for crimes committed from 2011-2019.
      • Duterte’s arrest highlights how domestic politics, such as the collapse of the Duterte-Marcos alliance, can influence warrant execution.

    PYQ:

    [2019] Consider the following statements:

    1.The International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction to prosecute nationals of even those States that have not ratified the Rome Statute.

    2. The International Criminal Court is a ‘court of last resort’ intended to complement national judicial systems.

    3. The United Nations Security Council can refer a situation to the Prosecutor of the ICC even if the State concerned is not a party to the Statute.

    Which of the statements given above are correct?

    (a) 1 and 3 only

    (b) 2, 3 and 4 only

    (c) 2 and 4 only

    (d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

     

  • [15th March 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Modern day summitry, its perils and its prospects

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q)  The West is fostering India as an alternative to reduce dependence on China’s supply chain and as a strategic ally to counter China’s political and economic dominance.’ Explain this statement with examples. (2023)

    Mentor’s Comment: This question focused on India’s strategic positioning and alliances with the West, relates to the broader context of high-level summit diplomacy and strategic interactions between nations

    A strong leader is often seen as someone who holds significant power, shaping both government policies and their political party. This leadership style is debated, but many agree it can be useful in politics and diplomacy. Leaders like Donald Trump and Narendra Modi are considered strong leaders. Both actively engage in summit diplomacy, which has both advantages and risks. While decisive leadership can bring benefits, relying too much on personal judgment can lead to problems. Despite these challenges, summit diplomacy has become a key tool for powerful leaders in handling major global issues like war and peace.

    Today’s editorial highlights the importance of summit diplomacy and the key traits of a strong leader. This topic is useful for GS Paper 2 in the UPSC Mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Despite unplanned meetings like Trump’s, summit diplomacy will remain important in global relations.

    What are the key characteristics of a “strong leader” in the context of modern politics and diplomacy?

    • Centralization of Power: A strong leader often consolidates power, making key policy and political decisions with minimal consultation. Example: Vladimir Putin’s centralized control over Russian politics and military decisions.
    • Assertive Foreign Policy and Summit Diplomacy: They engage directly in high-profile diplomatic negotiations, often prioritizing personal rapport over traditional diplomatic channels. Example: Donald Trump’s direct summits with Kim Jong-un to negotiate North Korea’s nuclear program.
    • Image Building and Popular Appeal: They craft a strong public persona through rhetoric, social media, and large-scale events to project authority and national pride. Example: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s use of mass rallies and media control to consolidate power in Turkey.
    • Decisive but Controversial Decision-Making: They make bold decisions, sometimes bypassing institutional checks, which can lead to both positive reforms and authoritarian tendencies. Example: Xi Jinping’s removal of term limits in China, allowing him to rule indefinitely.
    Why is summit diplomacy considered both beneficial and problematic in resolving international conflicts?

    Benefits of summit diplomacy: 

    • Direct and Efficient Decision-Making: Summits allow leaders to bypass bureaucratic delays and make high-stakes decisions quickly. Example: The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) saw U.S. President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev negotiate directly, preventing nuclear war.
    • Confidence-Building and Diplomatic Trust: Face-to-face interactions help build mutual trust and diplomatic relationships between nations. Example: The Reagan-Gorbachev Summits (1985-1988) played a key role in reducing Cold War tensions and leading to nuclear arms reduction.
    • Breakthroughs in Long-Standing Disputes: Summit diplomacy has resolved historical disputes that traditional diplomacy failed to address. Example: The Camp David Accords (1978) led to peace between Egypt and Israel after decades of hostility.
    • Symbolic and Strategic Value: High-profile summits reinforce a country’s global leadership and strategic partnerships. Example: The Singapore Summit (2018) between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un, which temporarily reduced tensions on the Korean Peninsula.
    • Crisis Management and De-escalation: Summits provide a platform for crisis diplomacy, helping to prevent conflicts from escalating into full-scale wars. Example: The Dayton Accords (1995) ended the Bosnian War by bringing together leaders of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia for direct negotiations.

    Problems of summit diplomacy: 

    • Risk of Superficial Agreements: Leaders often prioritize political optics over substantive solutions, leading to vague or unenforceable agreements. Example: The Minsk Agreements (2014-2015) aimed at resolving the Ukraine conflict but lacked effective implementation mechanisms.
    • Personal Egos and Power Imbalances: Strong-willed leaders may focus more on personal victories rather than genuine conflict resolution. Example: The Trump-Zelenskyy Summit (2025), where public confrontations and political grandstanding overshadowed meaningful negotiations on Ukraine.

    How did the Trump-Zelenskyy exchanges highlight the complexities and risks of pseudo-summit diplomacy?

    • Blurred Lines Between Diplomacy and Personal Interests: Instead of focusing purely on state interests, pseudo-summit diplomacy can be influenced by personal or political gains. Example: The Trump-Zelenskyy phone call (2019) became controversial when Trump allegedly pressured Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden’s son, intertwining diplomacy with U.S. domestic politics.
    • Lack of Institutional Safeguards: Informal or direct leader-to-leader diplomacy can bypass traditional diplomatic channels, reducing oversight and accountability. Example: The absence of career diplomats in the Trump-Zelenskyy exchanges led to concerns over improper diplomatic conduct and potential abuse of power.
    • Vulnerability to Misinformation and Manipulation: Without structured diplomatic engagement, such interactions can be misused for propaganda or misinterpreted in ways that escalate tensions. Example: The impeachment inquiry against Trump was fueled by the whistleblower complaint alleging that the U.S. was leveraging military aid for political favors.

    What should India learn from this? (Way forward)

    • Institutionalize Diplomatic Processes: Informal leader-to-leader diplomacy should not replace structured diplomatic engagement involving foreign service professionals.
      • India should prioritize institutional mechanisms (e.g., MEA-led negotiations) to ensure consistency and avoid undue political influence in international relations.
    • Avoid Mixing Domestic Politics with Foreign Policy: Diplomatic engagements must remain separate from electoral or partisan interests to maintain credibility.
      • India must ensure that foreign policy decisions are not dictated by short-term political gains and avoid using international diplomacy for domestic political narratives.
    • Strengthen Transparency and Accountability: Diplomatic engagements should be conducted with oversight to prevent misuse or misinterpretation.
      • India should continue using parliamentary committees and professional diplomats to maintain transparency and avoid secretive deals that could lead to unintended consequences.

  • Resolving the vexatious Fishing dispute

    Why in the News?

    Last week, Bimal Rathnayake, the Leader of the House in Sri Lanka’s Parliament and the country’s Transport and Highways Minister, urged the Indian and Tamil Nadu governments to take strong action against illegal fishing in Sri Lankan waters.

    How do domestic factors in both India and Sri Lanka influence their respective foreign policies concerning the fishing dispute?

    For India: 

    • Livelihood Dependency and Economic Pressure: Thousands of fishermen in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry rely on fishing in the Palk Bay for their livelihoods. Limited fishing zones and declining fish stocks in Indian waters push them into Sri Lankan territory.
      • Example: Fishermen from districts like Ramanathapuram and Nagapattinam regularly cross the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) due to insufficient catch within Indian waters.
    • Political and Electoral Pressures: Tamil Nadu’s regional parties, such as the DMK and AIADMK, often raise the fishing dispute to secure voter support, pressuring the central government to prioritize the issue in foreign policy.
      • Example: Before elections, Tamil Nadu politicians routinely demand stronger diplomatic efforts to release Indian fishermen detained by the Sri Lankan Navy.
    • Legal and Regulatory Constraints: Indian regulations, like the Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Act (1983), restrict the use of mechanized boats close to the shore, limiting fishing areas and driving fishermen toward Sri Lankan waters.
      • Example: The 1983 Act bans trawling within three nautical miles of the Indian coastline, making deeper Sri Lankan waters more attractive despite the legal risks.

    For Srilanka: 

    • Protection of Northern Province Fishermen’s Livelihoods: Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen in the Northern Province rely on traditional fishing methods and face competition from Indian trawlers, which threatens their livelihoods.
    • Post-Civil War Economic Recovery: The Northern Province, which was heavily affected by the civil war, is still recovering economically. Safeguarding local fishing areas is seen as vital for the region’s rehabilitation and economic stability.
      • Example: The Sri Lankan government prioritizes protecting fishing zones to support the economic revival of communities affected by the civil war.
    • Political and Nationalist Sentiments: There is domestic pressure on the Sri Lankan government to take a strong stance against perceived violations of territorial waters, especially from nationalist groups and local political parties.
      • Example: In 2015, then-Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe defended the Sri Lankan Navy’s actions against Indian fishermen, reflecting nationalist sentiments on protecting maritime boundaries.

    Why is resolving the “festering Palk Bay sheries dispute” considered crucial for the Tamil-speaking fishermen of Sri Lanka’s Northern Province?

    • Protection of Livelihoods: Tamil-speaking fishermen in Sri Lanka’s Northern Province depend on local marine resources for their survival. Illegal fishing by Indian trawlers reduces fish stocks, threatening their primary source of income.
      • Example: Frequent incursions by Indian fishermen using bottom trawling disrupt the local fishing economy, making it difficult for Sri Lankan fishermen to sustain their livelihoods.
    • Environmental Sustainability: Bottom trawling by Indian fishermen causes severe damage to marine ecosystems, affecting fish breeding and long-term marine biodiversity.
      • Example: The destruction of fish habitats due to bottom trawling reduces future fish yields, directly impacting the sustainability of fishing communities in the Northern Province.
    • Socio-Economic Recovery Post-Civil War: The Northern Province is still recovering from the socio-economic impacts of Sri Lanka’s civil war. Protecting their fishing waters is vital for long-term economic stability and community rebuilding.
      • Example: Ensuring exclusive access to local waters helps these communities rebuild their economy and strengthens their post-war rehabilitation efforts.

    What role can India play in resolving the Palk Bay fishing dispute? (Way forward)

    • Promoting Sustainable Fishing Practices: India can encourage and support its fishermen to adopt sustainable fishing methods, reducing the harmful impact of bottom trawling in Sri Lankan waters.
      • Example: Expanding the Palk Bay deep-sea fishing scheme and integrating it with the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana can help Indian fishermen transition to deep-sea fishing, reducing pressure on the Palk Bay region.
    • Facilitating Bilateral Talks: India can work with Sri Lanka to resume and mediate talks between fishermen from both countries, fostering dialogue and finding mutually beneficial solutions.
      • Example: India previously supported fishermen-level talks in 2016, which allowed both sides to voice concerns and seek collaborative solutions. Restarting such discussions can ease tensions.
    • Strengthening Legal and Diplomatic Cooperation: India can strengthen legal frameworks and diplomatic channels to enforce maritime boundaries while ensuring the protection of its fishermen’s rights.
      • Example: The Joint Working Group on Fisheries (established in 2016) provides a platform for both governments to discuss and implement measures to prevent illegal fishing and resolve disputes amicably.

    Mains PYQ: 

    Q In respect of India-Sri Lanka relations, discuss how do mestic factors influence foreign policy. (2013)

  • ‘MAHASAGAR’ vision for Global South

    Why in the News?

    PM Modi has unveiled ‘MAHASAGAR’ (Mutual and Holistic Advancement for Security and Growth Across Regions) during his March 2025 visit to Mauritius, outlining India’s expanded vision for security and development across the Global South.

    What is MAHASAGAR?

    • Mahasagar is India’s expanded strategic vision aimed at enhancing security, trade, and development cooperation across the Global South.
    • It builds on India’s SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region) policy, which focused on the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).
    • Three Core Pillars:
    1. Trade for Development: Enhancing economic ties through technology-sharing and trade facilitation.
    2. Capacity Building for Sustainable Growth: Supporting nations with infrastructure, education, and economic partnerships.
    3. Mutual Security for a Shared Future: Strengthening regional security, maritime cooperation, and defense ties.
    • It seeks to address China’s expanding presence in the Indo-Pacific and Indian Ocean by promoting India-led cooperation models.
    • It aims to position India as a champion of the Global South, amplifying their voice in global policymaking (e.g., G20, IORA, BRICS).

    How Mahasagar builds on SAGAR (2015)?

    • India’s SAGAR policy (2015) was a regional framework focused on maritime security and economic cooperation in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).
    • Mahasagar broadens this vision to global engagement with the Global South.
    SAGAR (2015) Mahasagar (2025)
    Geographic Scope Indian Ocean Region (IOR) Global South, Indo-Pacific, Africa, Latin America
    Focus Areas Maritime security, economic ties, blue economy, regional stability Trade-driven development, technology-sharing, capacity building, global security
    Strategic Partnerships Mauritius, Seychelles, Maldives, Sri Lanka, IOR countries Expands to Africa, ASEAN, Latin America, Pacific Island Nations
    Security & Defense Cooperation Anti-piracy, maritime domain awareness, EEZ protection Joint naval exercises, cyber security, defense partnerships
    Economic & Developmental Focus Blue economy, infrastructure, trade corridors in IOR Technology transfer, concessional loans, trade in local currencies
    Diplomatic Strategy Regional cooperation through IORA, BIMSTEC Voice of the Global South in G20, BRICS, UN initiatives

     

    PYQ:

    [2017] Consider the following in respect of Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS):

    1. Inaugural IONS was held in India in 2015 under the chairmanship of the Indian Navy.

    2. IONS is a voluntary initiative that seeks to increase maritime co-operation among navies of the littoral states of the Indian Ocean Region.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

     

  • [11th March 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: An India-U.S. trade agreement and the test of WTO laws

    PYQ Relevance:

    Q)  Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) is transforming itself into a trade bloc from a military alliance, in present times Discuss. (UPSC CSE 2020)

     

    Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) is transforming itself into a trade bloc  (2020) and WTO has to survive in the present context of ‘Trade War’ (2018).

    During Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s U.S. visit on February 13, 2025, India and the U.S. agreed to begin talks on a multi-sector Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) by fall 2025. As both countries are WTO members, the agreement must follow WTO rules. While details remain unclear, the agreement’s content matters more than its label.

    Today’s editorial discusses how the ongoing Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) negotiations may affect both countries. This information is useful for GS Paper 3 in the UPSC Mains exam.

    _

    Let’s learn!

    Why in the News?

    Since both the U.S. and India are members of the World Trade Organization, their trade agreements must follow WTO rules.

    What are the key legal challenges India and the U.S. may face while negotiating a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) under WTO law?

    • Violation of the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) Principle: WTO law mandates that any trade advantage granted to one member must be extended to all members (Article I of GATT). A BTA providing preferential tariffs only to India or the U.S. may violate this principle.
      • Example: If the U.S. lowers tariffs on Indian textiles under the BTA without extending the same benefit to other WTO members like China, it breaches the MFN principle.
    • Meeting the “Substantially All Trade” Requirement: Article XXIV.8(b) of GATT requires that Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) must cover “substantially all trade.” A limited-scope BTA focusing only on select sectors (e.g., pharmaceuticals or agriculture) may not satisfy this condition.
      • Example: If the India-U.S. BTA only includes technology and defense products while excluding key areas like agriculture, it may not qualify as a valid FTA under WTO law.
    • Notification and Transparency Obligations: WTO members must notify the organization of any new regional trade agreements (RTAs) or BTAs and demonstrate compliance with Article XXIV of GATT. Failure to provide transparent schedules may lead to legal disputes.
      • Example: If India and the U.S. do not submit a clear implementation timeline for tariff reductions under an interim BTA, other WTO members could challenge the agreement.
    • Bound Tariff Commitments: Both countries have pre-committed to maximum tariff limits (bound tariffs) under WTO rules. Any preferential treatment exceeding these limits may violate their commitments.
      • Example: If India agrees to reduce tariffs on American agricultural imports below its bound tariff rates, it could be accused of breaching its WTO commitments.
    • Misuse of the “Interim Agreement” Clause: Article XXIV.5 allows “interim agreements” only if they lead to a full FTA within a reasonable period (usually 10 years). Using an interim BTA to delay full liberalization may face legal scrutiny.
      • Example: If the India-U.S. BTA remains a partial agreement for an extended period without progressing toward an FTA, it could be deemed a violation of WTO norms.

    Why is the “most favoured nation” (MFN) principle significant in evaluating the legality of the proposed India-U.S. BTA?

    • Prevents Discrimination Between Trading Partners: The MFN principle under Article I of GATT ensures that any trade advantage (e.g., lower tariffs) given to one WTO member must be extended to all members. A BTA offering exclusive benefits violates this core principle.
      • Example: If the U.S. reduces tariffs on Indian pharmaceuticals but does not extend the same reduction to other countries like Vietnam, it breaches the MFN rule.
    • Limits Preferential Bilateral Deals: WTO law only allows exceptions to the MFN rule through comprehensive trade agreements covering “substantially all trade” under Article XXIV of GATT. A narrowly focused BTA risks legal challenges.
      • Example: If India and the U.S. sign a BTA that only includes high-tech products while excluding major sectors like agriculture, it may not qualify for an MFN exemption.
    • Ensures Transparency and Fair Competition: The MFN principle promotes a transparent, rule-based trading system where no country receives hidden advantages, ensuring fair market access for all WTO members.
      • Example: If India provides exclusive tariff cuts on American dairy products without offering similar terms to New Zealand, it would violate WTO transparency obligations.
    • Prevents Trade Fragmentation: Upholding the MFN principle avoids trade fragmentation by ensuring consistent rules for all members. Bilateral deals that bypass MFN could undermine the multilateral trade system.
      • Example: If the U.S. grants Indian textiles preferential access through a BTA but not to countries like Bangladesh, it could distort global supply chains.
    • Requires WTO Notification and Review: Any departure from the MFN principle through a BTA must be notified to the WTO and subjected to legal scrutiny under Article XXIV to confirm its compliance.
      • Example: If the India-U.S. BTA is not notified to the WTO or lacks a clear transition plan toward an FTA, it may be legally contested by other members like China or the EU.

    How can the proposed BTA be structured as an “interim agreement” under Article XXIV of the GATT without violating WTO norms?

    • Commitment to Full Free Trade Area (FTA) or Customs Union: The BTA must outline a clear plan to eventually form a Free Trade Area (FTA) or Customs Union within a reasonable time frame (generally within 10 years).
      • Example: The India-Mauritius Comprehensive Economic Cooperation and Partnership Agreement (CECPA) started as an interim agreement with the goal of expanding into a broader trade framework.
    • Transparency and Notification to WTO: The parties must notify the WTO of the interim agreement and submit detailed information on trade coverage, timelines, and implementation steps for review by the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA).
      • Example: The European Union (EU)-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement was notified to the WTO during the Brexit transition, ensuring compliance with Article XXIV.
    • Non-Discriminatory Transition: The interim agreement must not create unjustifiable discrimination against other WTO members, and the removal of trade barriers should cover substantially all trade between the parties.
      • Example: The US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) complies with this by covering a broad range of goods and services, ensuring that trade barriers are progressively reduced.

    Way forward: 

    • Ensure Comprehensive Coverage and Timely Transition: Design the BTA to cover substantially all trade sectors with a clear roadmap toward a full Free Trade Area (FTA) within the 10-year WTO guideline to comply with Article XXIV.
    • Enhance Transparency and Legal Compliance: Notify the WTO promptly, providing detailed schedules on tariff reductions and implementation timelines, ensuring non-discrimination and regular compliance reviews by the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA).