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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: International Stories of Key Importance

  • [5th December 2025] Hindu OpED New Delhi’s relative isolation, India’s tryst with terror

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Terrorism has become a significant threat to global peace and security. Evaluate the effectiveness of the UNSC’s CTC in mitigating this threat. 

    Linkage: Terror networks operating across borders and using encrypted systems highlight the need for stronger global counter-terror efforts. India’s experience shows why an effective UNSC-CTC is essential to address these evolving threats.

    Mentor’s comment

    India’s security environment is undergoing an unusual and worrying shift. New Delhi, historically a central diplomatic player, now appears relatively isolated even as terror networks expand and geopolitical churn intensifies across South Asia. This note analyses India’s current strategic dilemma, rising hostility from neighbours, deepening terror modules, and a rapidly shifting regional balance.

    Introduction

    India is witnessing a rare strategic moment where its diplomatic influence seems diminished, regional hostility is rising, and terrorism is resurfacing in sophisticated forms. Unlike earlier periods, the current situation combines India’s geopolitical isolation with escalating threats from Pakistan-linked terror networks and a volatile South Asian neighbourhood undergoing political, military, and institutional upheaval. This combination makes the moment distinct and consequential for India’s national security.

    Why in the news

    New Delhi is facing unusual diplomatic isolation, with key regions, West Asia, Europe, and the Indo-Pacific, witnessing shifting power equations that keep India on the sidelines. Simultaneously, South Asia is in deep turmoil: Pakistan’s military changes, Bangladesh’s political shifts, and regional instability are narrowing India’s manoeuvring space. The article highlights a renewed and more complex terror threat, including revived urban terror modules linked to Pakistan and new radicalised networks across Jammu, Kashmir, Delhi, and other regions. This combination of isolation and intensified terror activity marks a serious departure from past patterns, making the situation alarming.

    Why is India facing relative diplomatic isolation today?

    1. ‘Outlier’ perception: India appears more as an outsider than a major power in shaping global order; its role in West Asia, Europe, and the Indo-Pacific remains limited.
    2. Virtual onlooker status: Despite rising global stakes, India is seen as “virtually sitting on the sidelines” in key geopolitical developments.
    3. Contrast with earlier influence: India had never faced such a situation before, making the marginalisation stark.
    4. Limited support system: Even the “entire South Asian region” around India is unstable, reducing India’s traditional influence.

    How is regional hostility from West to East complicating India’s position?

    1. Hostile neighbours: Pakistan and Bangladesh are identified as increasingly unfriendly, particularly Pakistan with rising anti-India rhetoric.
    2. Escalating threat levels: Voices within Pakistan calling India a “proper lesson” intensify cross-border hostility.
    3. Pakistan’s internal changes:
      1. New Defence Services hierarchy: Pakistan created a Chief of Defence Forces and elevated a new army leadership.
      2. Field Marshal-like powers: New structure gives sweeping control over Pakistan’s nuclear assets.
      3. Civil-military power shift: 27th Constitutional Amendment Bill risks undermining democracy further.
    4. Bangladesh’s shift: Tilting towards Pakistan: Recent signals of re-engagement with Pakistan, including naval visits and discussions, create new regional anxieties.
      1. Unfriendly posture: Perceived as acting “unfriendly, if not openly hostile”.

    Why is India’s counter-terror environment becoming more dangerous?

    1. Urban terror revival: After years of decline, urban terrorism is making a comeback across India’s metropolitan centres.
    2. Linkages with Pakistan:
      1. State-backed groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed re-emerging.
      2. Collusion with Pakistani military establishments revived.
    3. Radical infiltration: 
      1. Jammu & Kashmir to Delhi corridor has seen sporadic attacks.
      2. Encrypted channels used to coordinate indoctrination, logistics, and training.
    4. Professionalisation of terror: Doctors, academics, and professionals are increasingly being used for indoctrination and planning.
    5. Reappearance of modules similar to 1993 & 2008: Terror patterns show similarities to the Bombay blasts (1993) and Mumbai attacks (2008).

    What makes the renewed terror threat structurally different from before?

    1. Shift from ideological to professional networks: Radicalisation now mixes religion with professional/academic legitimacy to attract youth.
    2. Use of encrypted technologies: New modules use digital secrecy to avoid detection.
    3. Global linkages: Channels from Pakistan extend to the UAE, Saudi Arabia, UK, and Jordan.
    4. Diverse recruitment base: Includes medical professionals, engineers, and skilled individuals.
    5. Local sleeper cells: Groups with strong roots in Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, and other cities enable quicker mobilisation.

    Why does India’s situation today require careful diplomatic and security manoeuvring?

    1. Volatile neighbourhood: Afghanistan, Nepal, Maldives, Myanmar, Pakistan, Bangladesh all face varying turmoil.
    2. Civil-military imbalance in Pakistan: Enhances unpredictability and increases risk of miscalculation.
    3. Potential spillover of instability: Especially from Pakistan and Bangladesh into India’s border regions.
    4. Need for vigilance and caution: High levels of external-internal linkage in terror require sensitive handling.

    Conclusion

    India faces a dual challenge: growing diplomatic isolation and a renewed, sophisticated terror threat emerging from both state-linked and radical networks. The changing regional landscape, marked by political instability, shifting alliances, and Pakistan-Bangladesh recalibrations, makes India’s environment more unpredictable than before. Adapting to this moment requires calibrated diplomacy, heightened security vigilance, and strategic patience to navigate an exceptionally complex geopolitical phase.

     

  • Do we need to change how cities are governed in India?

    Introduction

    The decline of urban civic leadership, seen recently through public debates on mayoral ineffectiveness, has renewed scrutiny of India’s urban governance model. Despite rapid urbanisation, cities continue to be governed through State-controlled mechanisms, with weak municipal autonomy. 

    Why in the news

    The rise of Zohra Mamdani as the youngest City Council Member in New York triggered public debate in India on why similar civic leadership is missing in Indian cities. Against this backdrop, India’s major municipalities, including BMC and Greater Hyderabad, face elections, restructuring, and fragmentation (e.g., BBMP split into five corporations). This moment is significant because it exposes a deeper structural failure: Indian cities lack empowered, democratically elected urban leadership. Despite massive urban populations and complex service demands, Mayors remain invisible, State governments dominate municipal functioning, and the 74th Constitutional Amendment has not delivered genuine decentralisation.

    Article 243-R of the Constitution of India (Composition of Municipalities):

    1. Provides for directly elected members of the municipality.
    2. Leaves it to the State Legislature to decide:
      1. Whether the Chairperson/Mayor is elected directly or indirectly.
      2. Their tenure and mode of election.
    3. Result: States freely choose indirect Mayor elections, leading to weak, ceremonial Mayors and domination of municipal commissioners and State governments

    Why is the Mayor’s position structurally weak in Indian cities?

    1. Centralisation under Chief Minister: The most powerful person in a major city is not the Mayor but the Chief Minister, who controls policing, planning, and key civic institutions.
    2. State-level political dominance: The political system is organised around State Assemblies; municipal issues become secondary to State-level party priorities.
    3. Weak empowerment under the 74th Amendment: Although intended to decentralise authority, the Amendment has delivered limited administrative or fiscal autonomy to municipalities.
    4. Lack of local accountability: Executive authority has not shifted below the State level, leaving Mayors with ceremonial or fragmented powers.

    Why do Mayors remain invisible?

    1. Historical legacy of weak local government: India’s local governance structure developed differently from Western models; constitutional legitimacy for municipalities arrived only with the 74th Amendment.
    2. Incomplete reforms: The 73rd and 74th Amendments created a framework but were not implemented with political sincerity. State governments continue to control finance, planning, and cadre positions.
    3. Political competition between State and cities: State leaders view strong cities as political threats, leading to deliberate dilution of mayoral authority.

    Can greater electoral demands make Mayors more responsive?

    1. Low public demand: Local civic issues do not receive strong public mobilisation. Citizens rarely demand empowered local governance.
    2. State-level political capture: Politicians are adept at mobilising emotions on national or state narratives, overshadowing urban-service concerns.
    3. Limited technocratic leadership space: Bureaucrats and technocrats dominate city administrations; elected Mayors have little room to innovate.

    Why has the 74th Constitutional Amendment failed to transform governance?

    1. Bypassing decentralisation: Key State Acts diluted the Amendment’s intent by retaining control over finances, land, cadres, and statutory bodies.
    2. Lack of political will: States neither formed nor empowered State Finance Commissions adequately. Devolution remains discretionary.
    3. Absence of clear functional domain: Urban functions overlap between parastatals, municipalities, State departments, and centrally sponsored missions, weakening accountability.

    Is financial autonomy necessary for effective urban governance?

    1. Critical need for municipal fiscal strength: Cities handle mobility, sanitation, and climate adaptation, but lack adequate revenue sources.
    2. Low dependence on local taxation: Property tax yields remain low; grants depend on State discretion.
    3. Fragmented budgeting: Legislatures debate budgets but do not integrate municipal priorities into broader fiscal planning.
    4. Need for predictable devolution: Empowered, autonomous municipal finance could drive infrastructure improvement and better urban outcomes.

    Should India rethink its urban political architecture?

    1. Yes, fragmentation and dilution undermine governance: The example of Delhi, where the Chief Minister’s powers overlap with the Union government and the municipal system, shows the complications of a divided mandate.
    2. Need for clear lines of authority: Cities require unified command structures to handle complex, interlinked systems like mobility, land, water, and waste.
    3. Strengthening mayoral authority: Without strong, visible leadership, city administrations remain unaccountable and inefficient.

    Conclusion

    India’s urban governance framework continues to concentrate power at the State level, marginalising the Mayor and weakening municipal accountability. The 74th Amendment promised decentralisation but remained half-implemented, leading to fragmented authority and weak fiscal capacity. For cities to manage growth, climate risks, and service delivery, India must structurally empower municipal institutions, ensure financial autonomy, and create visible, accountable urban leadership.
    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023] “The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially.” Comment.

    Linkage: This PYQ directly addresses the core issue of the article, why Mayors remain powerless, why States dominate municipalities, and why the 74th Amendment failed to decentralise effectively.

  • [3rd December 2025] The Hindu OpED: A template for security cooperation in the Indian Ocean

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Discuss the geopolitical and geostrategic importance of Maldives for India with a focus on global trade and energy flows. Further also discuss how this relationship affects India’s maritime security and regional stability amidst international competition?

    Linkage: This PYQ is directly linked to India’s strategic engagement with the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC), where Maldives is a core maritime partner. The question becomes relevant as Maldives’ political shifts, China’s growing presence, and competition over Indian Ocean trade and energy routes directly shape India’s maritime security priorities.

    Mentor’s Comment

    This article breaks down the evolving relevance of the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC) for India and the wider Indian Ocean region in 2025. China’s growing presence in the region is reshaping the geopolitical environment. In this setting, the CSC becomes an important platform for India to strengthen maritime security cooperation.

    Introduction

    The CSC has emerged as a critical framework for regional security cooperation in the Indian Ocean. It initially focused on issues such as maritime security, counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, and human trafficking. Now it is attempting to institutionalise itself and broaden its mandate to address the increasingly complex geopolitical and maritime challenges in the region. India’s leadership in reviving and expanding the grouping has placed CSC at the centre of its Indian Ocean strategy.

    How is the evolving Indian Ocean environment reshaping CSC’s relevance?

    1. Strategic Shifts: The Indian Ocean region is witnessing significant changes in the broader Indo-Pacific, making cooperative security frameworks more urgent.
    2. Economic Interdependence: Littoral states depend heavily on ocean-based economies; maritime disruptions create widespread developmental challenges.
    3. Non-traditional Threats: Issues such as organised crime, cyberattacks, and trafficking continue to expand, requiring coordinated regional responses.

    What has shaped the CSC’s institutional trajectory so far?

    1. Initial Trilateral Framework: Established between India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives; momentum slowed due to political transitions in Sri Lanka and Maldives.
    2. Revival in 2020: India reinstated its engagement, establishing structured cooperation across four pillars, maritime security, counter-terrorism, trafficking, and cybersecurity.
    3. Progressive Expansion: Mauritius joined as full member (2022); Bangladesh added in 2024; Malaysia joined as observer in 2025.
    4. Growing Synergies: NSA-level coordination has strengthened common frameworks across member states.

    Why does China’s growing presence create strategic dilemmas for CSC?

    1. Contrasting Perceptions:
      1. India: Views China’s activities as a major security challenge.
      2. Other Members: Depend on China economically and see it as a developmental partner rather than a threat.
    2. Need for Balance: India must carefully manage CSC’s agenda such that the grouping does not fracture over divergent China-related security views.
    3. Anchoring India’s Priorities: CSC allows India to place maritime security and regional stability at the centre of cooperative action.

    What institutional challenges does the CSC currently face?

    1. Fragmented Frameworks: Lack of integrated institutional structures limits effective coordination.
    2. Need for Policy Consistency: Member states’ domestic disturbances (e.g., in Bangladesh) can affect the group’s resilience.
    3. Operational Limitations: Without an institutionalised Secretariat or joint mechanisms, coordination remains NSA-driven and episodic.

    What opportunities does CSC expansion create for regional security?

    1. Wider Membership: Growing membership allows for more inclusive maritime-security cooperation in the Indian Ocean.
    2. Enhanced Information-Sharing: Expanding partnerships help create common threat-perception frameworks.
    3. Forward Momentum: Malaysia’s possible future membership indicates sustained interest in CSC’s work
    4. Aligning Actionable Pathways: Collective policies on maritime issues can strengthen resilience across the region.

    Conclusion

    The CSC stands at a defining moment in 2025. Its expansion, renewed momentum, and India’s leadership provide a framework to address the growing complexity of maritime security in the Indian Ocean. However, institutional strengthening, policy coherence, and careful handling of China-related sensitivities will determine how successfully the CSC evolves into a reliable, long-term regional security architecture.

  • Why is there no peace in Ukraine

    Introduction

    Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, several attempts at negotiations, from Belarus to Turkey, have collapsed. With Russia consolidating control over Ukrainian territories and Ukraine facing military constraints, the conflict shows signs of becoming a prolonged war. The Trump plan, recent Russian advances, and fatigue in Western capitals have complicated the strategic landscape, placing Ukraine at a turning point.

    Why in the news

    The Ukraine-Russia war has again entered headlines as Russia captured Pokrovske, marking the first major territorial gain after a year of stalled frontlines. Simultaneously, a 28-point U.S. peace proposal surfaced, offering recognition of Russian control over key territories. Ukraine is facing troop shortages, battlefield pressure, and delays in Western aid, making negotiations both urgent and politically difficult. Recent territorial losses, a disputed peace plan, and growing pressure on President Zelensky have reopened global debate on whether a ceasefire is achievable.

    Battlefield Dynamics and Stalled Negotiations

    1. Russian Consolidation: Russia captured Pokrovske after holding back Ukrainian forces for nearly a year; repositioned units in Kharkiv and Kherson and intensified attacks on Avdiivka and Kupiansk.
    2. Ukrainian Strain: Ukraine faces troop shortages, heavy attrition, and reduced Western ammunition deliveries; unable to meet battlefield demands.
    3. Failed Negotiations History: Talks in Belarus (Feb 28, 2022), Turkey (March 2022), and subsequent engagements collapsed due to disagreements over territory, NATO membership, and security guarantees.
    4. Renewed Russian Push: Russia resumed rotated forces, strengthened defensive lines, and maintained pressure across the east and south.

    Why Have Earlier Peace Efforts Failed?

    1. Maximalist Positions:
      1. Ukraine demanded withdrawal to 1991 borders and refusal of territorial concessions.
      2. Russia insisted on recognition of annexed territories and long-term security guarantees.
    2. NATO Membership Dispute: Ukraine’s insistence on future NATO membership remained unacceptable to Russia.
    3. Shifting War Outcomes: Early battlefield gains for Ukraine pushed negotiations aside; later Russian consolidation hardened Moscow’s stance.
    4. Domestic Political Costs: Zelensky faced internal political risk if he conceded territory or NATO flexibility.
    5. Western Signalling: Changes in Western messaging during 2022, especially from UK PM Boris Johnson’s Kyiv visit, reinforced Ukraine’s resolve to fight rather than negotiate.

    What Does the New Trump Peace Plan Propose?

    1. Territorial Recognition: Recognizes Russian control of current occupied territories (Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson).
    2. Ceasefire Framework: Calls for an initial ceasefire based on “current positions”.
    3. Security Guarantees: Ukraine would receive “reliable security guarantees”, though details remain unspecified.
    4. NATO Question: Prohibits Ukraine from joining NATO but proposes alternative security arrangements.
    5. Referendum Clause: Suggests that Ukraine may hold referendums under international supervision in disputed areas.
    6. Western Package: Encourages Washington to commit additional security assurances if Ukraine accepts concessions.
    7. Controversy: Critics argue it endorses annexation and weakens Ukrainian sovereignty.

    How Is Ukraine Responding to the Proposal?

      1. Zelensky’s Dilemma:
    • Fear of Loss of U.S. Support if he rejects the plan outright.
    • Domestic Resistance to territorial concessions or NATO withdrawal.
    1. Political Stakes: Any acceptance of the Trump plan risks severe political backlash within Ukraine and among its security elite.
    2. Military Reality Check: With Russia advancing and Western aid reduced, Ukraine risks losing more territory if negotiations are delayed.
    3. Unclear U.S. Position: The White House has neither endorsed nor dismissed the plan; Washington sends mixed signals.

    What Is Russia’s Current Strategy?

    1. Gradual Territorial Expansion: Small but steady advances across Donetsk and Kharkiv fronts.
    2. Exhaustion Approach: Prolonging the war to drain Ukrainian manpower and Western support.
    3. Diplomatic Pressure: Leveraging the Trump plan to portray Ukraine as unwilling to negotiate.
    4. Military Reconfiguration: Rotations, reorganized brigades, and fortified defensive lines to prepare for prolonged combat.

    Conclusion

    The Ukraine war remains locked between military stalemate and political impossibility. With Russia consolidating gains and Western support fluctuating, the window for meaningful negotiations narrows. The Trump plan introduces a new, but highly contentious, framework. For now, peace remains elusive due to incompatible security demands, shifting battlefield realities, and the political constraints of both Kyiv and Moscow.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023] The expansion and strengthening of NATO and a stronger US-Europe strategic partnership works well for India. What is your opinion about this statement? Give reasons and examples to support your answer.

    Linkage: This PYQ aligns with the article’s focus on NATO’s revived strength and US-Europe unity shaped by the Ukraine war. It directly links to how these shifts hardened positions, prolonged conflict, and reshaped global security dynamics.

  • India calls for Stronger Global Biosecurity at 50 Years of the BWC

    Why in the news? 

    At the Conference on 50 Years of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) held in New Delhi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar warned that global biological threats—natural, accidental, or deliberate are growing due to rapid scientific advances. He emphasised the rising risks of bioterrorism and highlighted structural weaknesses in the BWC.

    About the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)

    • Came into force: 1975
    • Objective: Prohibits development, production, acquisition, stockpiling & use of biological and toxin weapons.
    • Depositaries: Russia, UK, USA
    • India: Founding State Party

    Structural Gaps Jaishankar Highlighted

    • No verification/compliance mechanism
    • No permanent technical secretariat
    • No system to monitor new scientific developments
    • Reliance on voluntary confidence-building measures (CBMs)

    Rising Biological Threat Landscape

    • Misuse of biological agents by non-state actors is a serious concern.
    • Emerging technologies increasing risks:
      • Synthetic biology
      • Genome editing (CRISPR)
      • AI-driven biological design

    India’s Strengths in Biosecurity

    • Produces 60% of global vaccines
    • Supplies 20% of world’s generic medicines (including 60% for Africa)
    • 11,000 biotech startups (3rd largest globally; 50 in 2014 → 11,000 now)
    • Advanced BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs under ICMR & DBT

    India’s Global Health Contributions

    • Vaccine Maitri: ~300 million vaccine doses, aid to 100+ countries
    • Stressed that biological crisis assistance must be “fast, practical and humanitarian”
    Which one of the following is associated with the issue of control and phasing out of the use of ozone-depleting substances? (2015)

    (a) Bretton Woods Conference 

    (b) Montreal Protocol 

    (c) Kyoto Protocol 

    (d) Nagoya Protocol

  • Coup in Guinea-Bissau (2025)

    Why in the news? 

    Guinea-Bissau, one of the world’s most coup-prone nations, witnessed yet another military takeover on 26 November 2025, overthrowing President Umaro Sissoco Embaló. The coup was led by members of the Presidential Guard, marking the latest in a long line of disruptions to democratic governance in West Africa.

    Geography & Country Profile

    • Location: West Africa, bordered by
      • Senegal (North)
      • Guinea (East & South)
      • Atlantic Ocean (West)
    • Language: Portuguese (Lusophone Africa).
    • Population: Approx. 2.25 million.
    • HDI Rank: 174 / 193 (UNDP).
    • Economy: Dominated by agriculture, especially cashew nuts
      • Cashew = 80%+ of export earnings (World Bank).
    • Known as a hub for drug trafficking (Latin America → Europe).

    Political Background

    • Independence from Portugal in 1974.
    • One of the most unstable countries globally:
      • Has had more successful coups than peaceful transfers of power.
    • Termed the “Coup Trap” country – chronic cycle where military becomes the dominant political actor.
    In the recent years Chad, Guinea, Mali and Sudan caught the international attention for which one of the following reasons common to all of them? (2023)

    (a) Discovery of rich deposits of rare earth elements 

    (b) Establishement of Chinese military bases 

    (c) Southward expansion of Sahara Desert 

    (d) Successful coups

  • Return of the G2: Trump, China and the mirage of a bipolar world

    INTRODUCTION

    The reference to a “G2” resurfaced when US President Trump publicly announced that “The G2 will be convening shortly,” signalling a possible US-China duopoly in global decision-making. The Trump-Xi Busan meeting revived an older idea first articulated by economist C. Fred Bergsten in 2005. However, despite dramatic optics, the summit lacked institutional depth and showcased a transactional, spectacle-driven diplomatic approach. The renewed G2 talk generated global unease, especially among allies and emerging economies, given the risks of marginalisation and disruption of regional balances in the Indo-Pacific.

    WHY IN THE NEWS 

    Trump’s declaration that the US and China would meet as a “G2” revived the idea of a US-China duopoly at a moment of systemic geopolitical flux. The Busan meeting created significant global debate because, despite high-profile optics and selective trade concessions (soybean purchases, tariff relief, fentanyl cooperation), there were no structural commitments or conflict-management mechanisms. The sudden bypassing of broader multilateral processes unsettled allies and intensified concerns of shrinking strategic space for countries like India, especially amid shifting economic projections that show a long-term move toward a tripolar world rather than a bipolar G2.

    G2 Revival: What Does the Busan Moment Signify?

    1. Performative Diplomacy: Trump framed the meeting as a G2 encounter, signalling a claim to architect a new global order driven by bilateral spectacle rather than institutional negotiations.
    2. Transactional Bargains: China resumed US soybean imports; the US eased select tariffs and technology restrictions; cooperation was pledged on fentanyl precursors and rare-earth supply chains.
    3. Absence of Structure: No new institutions, principles, or crisis-management mechanisms were created, making the meeting high on optics but low on structural impact.

    China’s Strategic Calculus Behind the G2 Optics

    1. Symbolic Parity: Great-power parity aligns with China’s long-term ambition for equal status with the US, enhancing its global narrative.
    2. Economic Off-ramp: Tariff relief and tech flexibility help stabilise China’s domestic economy amid headwinds such as overcapacity and slowing productivity.
    3. Controlled Ambiguity: China avoided endorsing a formal duopoly, using strategic ambiguity to retain flexibility while cultivating Global South networks.

    Structural Fragility of a US-China Duopoly

    1. Deep Bilateral Contradictions: Taiwan, technology dependence, and military rivalry create structural barriers to stable cooperation.
    2. Lack of Institutional Grounding: No formal mechanisms exist to manage disputes or align long-term strategic objectives.
    3. Risk to Alliances: The G2 idea signals that alliances are expendable, undermining confidence among US partners in Asia and Europe.

    Global Implications of the G2 Notion

    1. Destabilising for Allies: Japan, South Korea, Australia fear erosion of regional balance if the US deprioritises alliances.
    2. Institutional Marginalisation: G2 bypasses multilateral institutions, weakening global governance frameworks.
    3. Supply-Chain Reconfiguration: A US-China bilateral alignment could redirect global supply chains, adversely affecting Indo-Pacific economies.

    Why the G2 Idea Alarms India

    1. Risk of Strategic Sidelining: A bilateral shortcut between the US and China may marginalise India despite its rising economic weight.
    2. Supply Chain Dependence: India’s dependence on Chinese imports (electronics, APIs, critical minerals) becomes more vulnerable.
    3. Quad Uncertainty: A possible thaw between the US and China creates ambiguity around the Indo-Pacific strategy and Quad commitments.
    4. Manufacturing Disadvantage: Reduced US pressure on China undercuts India’s ambition to position itself as a credible alternative manufacturing hub.

    Long-term Trend: A Tripolar, Not Bipolar, World

    1. Economic Projections: PwC and Goldman Sachs project by 2050 a tripolar structure: China (1st), India (2nd), US (3rd) in PPP terms.
    2. Limits on China’s Rise: Demographic contraction and industrial overcapacity constrain China’s long-term dominance.
    3. India’s Structural Advantages: Young workforce, expanding market, tech ambitions support India’s rise as a major economic pole.
    4. US Position: Innovation strength persists, but political polarisation and ageing demographics slow future growth.

    CONCLUSION

    Trump’s revival of the G2 is more spectacle than substance, reflecting a transitional phase rather than a durable geopolitical redesign. Structural contradictions, alliance concerns, and global economic shifts limit the feasibility of a US-China duopoly. The long-term trajectory points to broader multipolarity, with India emerging as a critical pole in global politics. The Busan moment thus underscores the instability of great-power bargains that bypass wider global participation and institutional frameworks.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2021] “The USA is facing an existential threat in the form of China, that is much more challenging than the erstwhile Soviet Union.” Explain.

    Linkage: The PYQ statement directly connects to intensifying US-China strategic rivalry, which shapes the global balance of power, technology races, and Indo-Pacific security dynamics. It is highly relevant for GS-II (IR) as it influences India’s strategic space, Quad calculus, supply-chain realignments, and the emerging multipolar world order.

  • Operation Pawan  

    Why in the News?

    • For the first time, the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Upendra Dwivedi paid homage at the National War Memorial to soldiers who died during Operation Pawan (1987–1990).
    • Event held on 25 November 2025.

    What was Operation Pawan?

    • A major military operation launched by the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in Sri Lanka.
    • Objective: Disarm the LTTE under the Indo–Sri Lanka Accord (1987).
    • Duration: October 1987 – 1990.

    Background

    • Under the Indo–Sri Lanka Peace Accord (July 1987):
      • India agreed to deploy IPKF to enforce peace in Northern & Eastern Sri Lanka.
      • The LTTE initially agreed to surrender weapons but soon reneged.

    Casualties in Operation

    • Hundreds of Indian soldiers killed, and over 1,000 injured.
    • One of India’s largest overseas military operations.

    National War Memorial

    • Location: New Delhi, near India Gate.
    • Dedicated to soldiers of post-Independence operations including:
      • 1947–48, 1962, 1965, 1971 wars
      • Kargil 1999
      • IPKF operations, and counter-insurgency missions.

    Importance of the IPKF Mission 

    • First large-scale out-of-country deployment of Indian forces.
    • Political and military complexities:
      • Fighting LTTE, once seen sympathetically by India.
      • Hostile terrain and guerrilla warfare challenges.
    Operations undertaken by the Army towards upliftment of the local population in remote areas to include addressing of their basic needs is called:  (2024)

    (a) Operation Sankalp 

    (b) Operation Maitri 

    (c) Operation Sadbhavana 

    (d) Operation Madad

    This question is highly relevant as it tests the specific format of knowledge required for Operation Pawan (the name and mission of a defence action).

  • [26th November 2025] Hindu OpED Trump-MbS summit- $1 trillion among friends

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2021] The USA is facing an existential threat in the form of China, that is much more challenging than the erstwhile Soviet Union. Explain.

    Linkage: The Trump-MbS summit reflects the U.S. strategy of rebuilding alliances to counter China’s growing influence in West Asia, where Beijing has expanded economically and diplomatically. The revived U.S.-Saudi partnership strengthens America’s geopolitical position in a region where China had begun to outpace it.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The Trump-Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) summit marks a major inflection in West Asia’s geopolitical landscape. The article examines the renewed U.S.-Saudi alignment, its military-economic scale, its contrast with earlier strains, and its strategic implications for India. This simplified yet UPSC-rich analysis helps aspirants understand the evolving balance of power in West Asia and its global consequences.

    WHY IN THE NEWS 

    The article is significant because the U.S.-Saudi bilateral relationship has revived after years of drift, culminating in Trump’s first West Asia visit where both sides advanced $242 billion defence deals and $270 billion investment commitments, a scale unseen since the 1945 FDR-Saudi pact. The summit signals the return of transactional, high-value U.S.-Saudi cooperation, a sharp contrast to the Biden years of friction, Khashoggi tensions, and Saudi diversification toward China and Russia. This reset represents one of the largest bilateral economic-military consolidations globally, reshaping energy, security, and global power equations.

    INTRODUCTION

    The U.S.-Saudi partnership has historically shaped post-Second World War geopolitics, especially in energy and security. The Trump-MbS summit renews this legacy by combining massive defence sales, investment promises, and realignment on regional issues such as Iran, sanctions, and energy security. The revived partnership represents both strategic opportunity and geopolitical recalibration.

    What drives the renewed U.S.-Saudi strategic alignment?

    1. Historic continuity: Reconnects with the 1945 FDR-Ibn Saud “oil-for-security” pact revived in 2005 and 2025.
    2. Exceptional summit chemistry: Trump and MbS elevated bilateral commitments during Trump’s first regional visit.
    3. High-value agreements: $242 billion military commitments and $270 billion investment forum deals signal unprecedented scale.
    4. Shared interests: Addresses U.S. need for Gulf stability and Saudi need for defence, investment, and autonomy.

    How has the bilateral relationship evolved from past highs and lows?

    1. Historical tensions: 1973 oil embargo, 1980s missile purchases from China, Yemen war tensions, and the Khashoggi killing strained ties.
    2. Biden-era rifts: Public criticism of Saudi human rights issues pushed Riyadh closer to China and Russia.
    3. Saudi diversification: Riyadh’s engagement with Xi Jinping and Middle Eastern summits signal multipolar diplomacy.
    4. Return to U.S. orbit: Trump’s visit and renewed defence-economic convergence restore traditional alignment.

    What are the key outcomes of the Trump-MbS summit?

    1. Massive defence deals: Commitment to supply $242 billion in U.S. military equipment.
    2. Investment surge: MbS aims to raise Saudi investments in the U.S. economy from $600 billion to $1 trillion.
    3. Energy cooperation: Coordination on oil production to maintain a moderate, sustainable price.
    4. AI & tech collaboration: U.S. and Saudi firms advance “future-ready AI projects,” including AI chips.
    5. Regional stabilisation agenda: Coordination on Iran, Yemen ceasefire, and navigation security.

    What are the emerging regional geopolitical implications?

    1. U.S.-Saudi-Russia triangle: Saudi alignment tempers Russian oil revenue by stabilising global oil prices.
    2. Sanctions dynamics: U.S.-Saudi cooperation supports enforcement of sanctions on Iran and Venezuela.
    3. Security architecture: Signals continuity of U.S. commitment to Gulf security despite regional volatility.
    4. NATO+ narrative: U.S. sees Saudi as a “major non-NATO ally,” pushing deeper defence integration.

    What does this recalibration mean for India?

    1. Energy stability: Coordinated U.S.-Saudi oil policy keeps prices moderate, critical for India’s energy security.
    2. Defence + tech prospects: Saudi Vision 2030 and U.S. tech investments open new opportunities for Indian firms.
    3. Strategic partnership: India needs to accelerate the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with Saudi Arabia.
    4. Geopolitical balancing: India must navigate U.S.-Saudi rapprochement while maintaining ties with Iran and Russia.

    CONCLUSION

    The Trump-MbS summit revives a historic partnership at a scale unmatched in recent years. By combining large defence contracts, investment flows, and re-alignment on energy security, the U.S.-Saudi partnership is again central to West Asian geopolitics. For India, this moment offers both opportunity and the need for strategic agility.

     

  • Senkaku-Diaoyu Islands Issue

    Why in the News?

    A China Coast Guard formation patrolled the Senkaku waters as Beijing escalated tensions with Japan over recent remarks on Taiwan.

    Senkaku-Diaoyu Islands Issue

    About the Senkaku–Diaoyu Islands Issue:

    • Location & Status: A small uninhabited island group in the East China Sea, claimed by Japan, China, and Taiwan.
    • Names: Japan calls them Senkaku, China Diaoyu, and Taiwan Diaoyutai.
    • Administration: Japan has administered the islands since 1972 after the Okinawa Reversion Agreement with the United States.
    • Geography: Consists of five islands and three rocks, covering ~7 sq km; the largest is Uotsuri.
    • Strategic Location: Situated near major shipping lanes linking East Asia to global trade routes.
    • Natural Resources: Surrounding waters believed to hold oil and natural gas deposits, highlighted in a 1969 UN report.
    • Fisheries: Rich fishing grounds add significant economic importance.
    • Geopolitical Value: Located at the junction of interests of Japan, China, Taiwan, and the United States, making it a strategic flashpoint.

    What is the Dispute?

    • Japanese Claim: Japan incorporated the islands in January 1895, asserting they were terra nullius based on surveys from 1885 that found no Chinese administration.
    • Chinese & Taiwanese Claim: Cite dynastic-era maps, navigation records, and Qing documents to argue sovereignty predates Japanese control.
    • Post–World War II Status: The US took control under the 1951 San Francisco Treaty, administering the islands as part of the Nansei Shoto region.
    • 1971 Shift: Transfer of Senkaku and Okinawa back to Japan under the Okinawa Reversion Agreement sparked protests from China and Taiwan.
    • Resource Trigger: China’s active claim strengthened after the 1969 UN report identified potential hydrocarbon reserves.
    • 2012 Escalation: Japan’s purchase of three privately owned islands led to widespread protests, attacks on Japanese businesses, and a surge in nationalist sentiment in China.
    • Current Tensions: Chinese Coast Guard vessels frequently enter surrounding waters to assert Beijing’s claim.
    • Broader Dynamics: Linked to nationalism, unresolved historical grievances, and strategic competition between China, Japan, and the United States across the Indo-Pacific.
    [UPSC 2022] Which one of the following statements best reflects the issue with Senkaku Islands, sometimes mentioned in the news?

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

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

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

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