💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open

Type: IOCR

  • What is OPEC+?

    Oil prices rose about 1%, as OPEC+ members agreed to its deepest cuts to output since the 2020 COVID pandemic, despite a tight market and opposition to cuts from the United States and others.

    What is OPEC+?

    • The non-OPEC countries which export crude oil along with the 14 OPECs are termed as OPEC plus countries.
    • OPEC plus countries include Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Brunei, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mexico, Oman, Russia, South Sudan, and Sudan.
    • Saudi and Russia, both have been at the heart of a three-year alliance of oil producers known as OPEC Plus — which now includes 11 OPEC members and 10 non-OPEC nations — that aims to shore up oil prices with production cuts.

    Why is OPEC+ slashing production?

    • Oil prices skyrocketed after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
    • The cut made recently is the biggest of its kind since 2020 when OPEC+ members slashed outputs by 10 million bpd during the Covid-19 pandemic.
    • The reductions would boost prices and be extremely beneficial for the Middle Eastern member states, to whom Europe has turned for oil after levelling sanctions against Russia since it invaded Ukraine.
    • OPEC+ members are concerned that a faltering global economy would reduce the demand for oil, and the cuts are seen as a way to protect profits.

    Concerns for India

    • Even after importing cheap Russian oil, India has not seen any cut in fuel prices.
    • Rising oil prices are posing fiscal challenges for India, where heavily-taxed retail fuel prices have touched record highs, threatening the demand-driven recovery.
    • India imports about 84% of its oil and relies on West Asian supplies to meet over three-fifths of its demand.
    • As one of the largest crude-consuming countries, India is concerned that such actions by producing countries have the potential to undermine consumption-led recovery.
    • This would hurt consumers, especially in our price-sensitive market.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • International Day of Non-Violence event at UN

    International

    The International Day of Non-Violence event, held at the UN headquarters in New York, saw a life-size hologram of Gandhi displayed.

    International Day of Non-Violence

    • Every year, since 2007, the day is observed on October 2, the birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi.
    • Iranian Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi, in January 2004, first proposed the idea of dedicating a day to non-violence, around the world.
    • In 2007, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) passed a resolution to commemorate October 2 as the International Day of Non-Violence, with the core objective to “disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness.”

    What does the term “non-violence” stand for?

    • The UN defines the term as a rejection of the use of physical violence in order to achieve social or political change.
    • The UNGA resolution reaffirms the universal relevance of the principle of non-violence and establishes a desire to secure a culture of peace, tolerance, understanding and non-violence.
    • The theory emphasises that the power of rulers depends on the consent of the populations, and non-violence therefore seeks to undermine such power through withdrawal of the consent and cooperation of the populace.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • PM Modi pitches for ‘Full Transit Right’ among SCO members

    With Pakistan PM listening, Prime Minister Modi urged Shanghai Cooperation Organisation member states to “give each other full right to transit”.

    Why in news?

    • PM Modi framed the right to transit in the context of connectivity and how it could help establish reliable and resilient supply chains in the region.

    Why did PM pitch this?

    • Lack of transit across Pakistan’s territory has been a challenge for India to access Central Asian markets.
    • Iran’s President also said that despite the impressive potential, infrastructural connections in the field of transit between members of the SCO are not so extensive.
    • Iran already provides special priority to the development of the North-South Corridor and has made huge investments.

    What is International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC)?

    • The INSTC is a 7,200 km-long multimodal transportation network encompassing sea, road, and rail routes to offer the shortest route of connectivity.
    • It was established on 12th September 2000 in St. Petersburg, by Iran, Russia and India for the purpose of promoting transportation cooperation among the Member States.
    • It links the Indian Ocean to the Caspian Sea via the Persian Gulf onwards into Russia and Northern Europe.
    • It will move freight between India, Iran, Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia, Central Asia and Europe.

    Significance of INSTC

    • Trade facilitation: INSTC is aimed at reducing the carriage cost between India and Russia by about 30 percent and bringing down the transit time by more than half.
    • New corridor in making: It has the potential to transform the economies of countries along the corridor into specialized manufacturing, logistics, and transit hubs by facilitating access to newer markets.
    • Multimodal transit: The recent Suez Canal blockade, which cost the global economy hefty damage amounting to US$9 billion, has amplified the optimistic outlook towards the INSTC as a cheaper and faster alternative multimodal transit corridor.

    Benefits offered to India

    • Export promotion: The INSTC connects India with Central Asia, and Russia, and has the potential to expand up to the Baltic, Nordic, and Arctic regions, increasing the scope of trade multifold.
    • Ease of trade: For India, it provides a shorter trade route with Iran, Russia, and beyond to Europe, creating scope for increased economic engagement.
    • Alternative Route to Central Asia: It opens up a permanent alternative route for India to trade with Afghanistan and Central Asia, given the hurdles in the direct route through Pakistan.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Asian Palm Oil Alliance (APOA) formed by 5 South Asian Countries

    Edible oil trade associations from five palm oil importing countries in South Asia – India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal – on Thursday announced the setting up of Asian Palm Oil Alliance (APOA).

    What is Oil Palm?

    • Palm oil is an edible vegetable oil derived from the mesocarp of the fruit of the oil palms.
    • The oil is used in food manufacturing, in beauty products, and as biofuel.

    What is APOA?

    • Through APOA, the countries aim at safeguarding the economic and business interests of the palm oil consuming countries and will work towards increasing the consumption of palm oil in member countries.
    • The idea is to gain collecting bargaining power and make imports sustainable.
    • APOA held its first general body meeting on the side-lines of the Globoil Summit.
    • The industry associations of Asian palm oil importing countries, unlike their counterparts in Europe, are not involved in shaping the global discourse on sustainable palm oil in a collective way.
    • The alliance would work towards ensuring that palm oil is recognised as a high-quality, economical, and healthy vegetable oil and to change the negative image of palm oil.

    Why such move?

    • India’s annual imports of edible oil is around 13-14 million tonne (MT).
    • Around 8 MT of palm oil is imported from Indonesia and Malaysia, while other oils, such as soya and sunflower, come from Argentina, Brazil, Ukraine and Russia.
    • Asia accounts for around 40% of the global palm oil consumption while Europe accounts for 12% of palm oil trade.
    • Indonesia and Malaysia are the biggest palm oil exporters in the world.
    • India is the largest importer of palm oil in Asia, accounting for 15% of global imports, followed by China (9%), Pakistan (4%) and Bangladesh (2%).

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Among the agricultural commodities imported by India, which one of the following accounts for the highest imports in terms of value in the last five years?

    (a) Spices

    (b) Fresh fruits

    (c) Pulses

    (d) Vegetable oils

     

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”wt7ixarayz” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

     

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • G4 countries call for UNSC reforms

    g4

    The G4 nations have said that the Intergovernmental Negotiations on UN Security Council reform are constrained by a lack of openness and transparency.

    Who are the G4 Countries?

    • The G4 nations, comprising Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan are four countries which support each other’s bids for permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council.
    • Their primary aim is the permanent member seats on the Security Council.
    • Each of these four countries have figured among the elected non-permanent members of the council since the UN’s establishment.
    • Their economic and political influence has grown significantly in the last decades, reaching a scope comparable to the permanent members (P5).

    Deterrent in their cause

    • The UK and France have backed the G4’s bid for permanent seats.
    • All the permanent members of P5 have supported India’s bids for permanent seat.
    • However, China has previously implied that it is only ready to support India if it does not associate its bid with Japan.
    • The US has sent strong indications to Brazil that it is willing to support its membership; albeit, without a veto.

    What holds them back?

    • There has been discontent among the present permanent members regarding the inclusion of controversial nations or countries not supported by them.
    • For instance, Japan’s bid is heavily opposed by China, North Korea, Russia and South Korea who think that Japan needs to make sincere reparations for war crimes committed during World War II.
    • Under the leadership of Italy, countries that strongly oppose the G4 countries’ bids have formed the Uniting for Consensus movement, also called as Coffee Club.
    • In Asia, Pakistan opposes India’s bid.

    Why India deserves a permanent seat?

    • India has been part of UN since inception.
    • It has the world’s second-largest population and is the world’s largest democracy suited to represent South Asia.
    • It has contributed maximum peacekeepers to UN so far.

    Why reform UNSC?

    • Non-representative nature: UNSC in current form is not representative of developing world and global needs, with primacy of policy being political tool in hands of P5, is well recognised globally.
    • Contention over Veto and Technical Holds: Veto power with P5 enables any one of them to prevent the adoption of any “substantive” draft Council resolution, regardless of its level of international support.
    • Divided institution: UNSC has become an organisation, which can pass strong resolutions against weak countries, weak resolutions against strong countries and no resolution against P5 countries.

    Conclusion

    • There is a possibility that if UN doesn’t reform itself, it may lose relevance and alternate global and regional groupings may assume greater importance.
    • More global pressure from middle powers like G4 may force an expansion of UNSC as a possibility, but abolition of veto power in current set up is unlikely

    Back2Basics: United Nations Security Council (UNSC)

    • The UNSC is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security.
    • Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action through Security Council resolutions.
    • It is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions to member states.
    • The Security Council consists of fifteen members. Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States—serve as the body’s five permanent members.
    • These permanent members can veto any substantive Security Council resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or candidates for Secretary-General.
    • The Security Council also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body’s presidency rotates monthly among its members.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India stays out of ‘Trade Pillar’ of IPEF

    India stayed out of the joint declaration on the trade pillar of the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) ministerial meet in Los Angeles, with Union Commerce Minister citing concerns over possible discrimination against developing economies.

    Why did India opt out of the trade pillar?

    • One of the reasons for staying out of the trade pillar was that the contours of the framework had not emerged yet.
    • This is particularly about the kind of commitment each country would have to make on “environment, labour, digital trade and public procurement”.
    • India’s decision also mirrors the decision to walk out after seven years of negotiations from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

    What is IPEF?

    • It is a US-led framework for participating countries to solidify their relationships and engage in crucial economic and trade matters that concern the region, such as building resilient supply chains battered by the pandemic.
    • It is not a free trade agreement. No market access or tariff reductions have been outlined, although experts say it can pave the way to trade deals.

    Members of IPEF

    • The member nations include Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
    • It includes seven out of 10 members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), all four Quad countries, and New Zealand.
    • Together, these countries account for 40 per cent of the global GDP.

    Four pillars of IPEF

    1. Trade that will include digital economy and emerging technology, labor commitments, the environment, trade facilitation, transparency and good regulatory practices, and corporate accountability, standards on cross-border data flow and data localisations;
    2. Supply chain resilience to develop “a first-of-its-kind supply chain agreement” that would anticipate and prevent disruptions;
    3. Clean energy and decarbonization that will include agreements on “high-ambition commitments” such as renewable energy targets, carbon removal purchasing commitments, energy efficiency standards, and new measures to combat methane emissions; and
    4. Tax and anti-corruption, with commitments to enact and enforce “effective tax, anti-money laundering, anti-bribery schemes in line with [American] values”.

    How do members participate?  

    • Countries are free to join (or not join) initiatives under any of the stipulated pillars but are expected to adhere to all commitments once they enrol.
    • Negotiations are meant to determine and list the provisions under each pillar and open the floor for countries to choose their ‘commitments’.
    • The framework would be open to other countries willing to join in the future provided they are willing to adhere to the stipulated goals and other necessary obligations.

    Reasons for the creation of IPEF

    • US regaining lost credibility: IPEF is also seen as a means by which the US is trying to regain credibility in the region after Trump pulled out of the Trans Pacific Partnership TPP).
    • Rising Chinese influence: Since then, there has been concern over the absence of a credible US economic and trade strategy to counter China’s economic influence in the region.
    • Competing RCEP: It is also in the 14-member Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, of which the US is not a member (India withdrew from RCEP).
    • “Pivot to Asia” strategy: US has intensified its engagement with the wider Asia-Pacific region to advance its economic and geopolitical interests.

    India’s perception of IPEF

    • PM Modi described the grouping as born from a collective desire to make the Indo-Pacific region an engine of global economic growth.
    • India has called for common and creative solutions to tackle economic challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.

    What does it have to do with China?  

    • The US strategists believe the US lacks an economic and trade strategy to counter China’s increasing economic influence in the region since 2017.
    • US companies are looking to move away from manufacturing in China.
    • IPEF would therefore offer an advantage to participating countries, allowing them to bring those businesses into their territory.
    • However, it officially excluded Taiwan despite its willingness and economic merit to join.
    • This exhibits Washington’s geopolitical caution.

    Reactions from the opponents

    • Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi criticized the initiative as an attempt to further economic decoupling from China.
    • He argued that the initiative, and the US Indo-Pacific strategy as a whole, created divisions and incited confrontation. It is destined to be ultimately be a failure.
    • Taiwan was excluded in order to appease key “fence-sitter” countries such as Indonesia whose governments feared angering China.

    Issues with IPEF framework

    • IPEF would neither constitute a ‘free trade agreement,’ nor a forum to discuss tariff reductions or increasing market access.
    • Unlike a traditional trade agreement, the US administration will not need congressional approval to act under the IPEF. Hence its legal status is questionable.
    • This also raises doubts among potential participants about their reluctance to offer significant concessions under the agreement.
    • The volatility of US domestic politics has raised concerns about IPEF’s durability.
    • Unlike traditional FTAs, the IPEF does not subscribe to the single undertaking principle, where all items on the agenda are negotiated simultaneously.

    Given the divisive nature of American politics, it is unclear whether the IPEF will survive past the Biden administration.

    Way forward

    • The IPEF’s launch in Tokyo was symbolic in nature; bringing the IPEF to fruition will involve significant domestic and international challenges.
    • Without ratification by Congress, the IPEF’s fortunes will remain in limbo.
    • Going forward, the US and the founding partners need to develop the process and criteria by which other countries from the region will be invited to join the negotiations on the IPEF.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • India ranks 132 in HDI as score drops

    hdi
    hdi

    India ranks 132 out of 191 countries in the Human Development Index (HDI) 2021, after registering a decline in its score over two consecutive years for the first time in three decades.

    What is Human Development Index (HDI)?

    • The HDI combines indicators of life expectancy, education or access to knowledge and income or standard of living, and captures the level and changes to the quality of life.
    • The index initially launched as an alternative measure to the gross domestic product, is the making of two acclaimed economists from Pakistan and India, namely Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen.
    • It stresses the centrality of human deve­lop­ment in the growth process and was first rolled out by the United Nations Development Programme in 1990.

    Dimensions of the Human Development Index – HDI

    • The idea that progress should be conceived as a process of enlarging people’s choices and enhancing their capabilities is the central premise of the HDI.
    • Since its launch, the HDI has been an important marker of attempts to broaden measures of progress.
    • The HDI considers three main dimensions to evaluate the development of a country:
    1. Long and healthy life
    2. Education
    3. Standard of living

    Limitations of HDI

    HDR has been always disputable and has caught the public-eye, whenever it was published. It has many reasons.

    One of them is that the concept of human development is much deeper and richer than what can be caught in any index or set of indicators. Another argument is that its concept has not changed since 1990 when it was also defined in the first.

    (1) An incomplete indicator

    • Human development is incomplete without human freedom and that while the need for qualities judgement is clear; there is no simple quantitative measure available yet to capture the many aspects of human freedom.
    • HDI also does not specifically reflect quality of life factors, such as empowerment movements or overall feelings of security or happiness.

    (2) Limited idea of development

    • The HDI is not reflecting the human development idea accurately.
    • It is an index restricted to the socio-economic sphere of life; the political and civil spheres are in the most part kept separate.
    • Hence there is a sub-estimation of inequality among countries, which means that this dimension is not being taken into consideration appropriately.

    (3) A vague concept

    • Concerning data quality and the exact construction of the index HDI is conceptually weak and empirically unsound.
    • This strong critic comes from the idea that both components of HDI are problematic. The GNP in developing countries suffers from incomplete coverage, measurement errors and biases.
    • The definition and measurement of literacy are different among countries and also, this data has not been available since 1970 in a significant number of countries.

    (4) Data quality issues

    • The HDI, as a combination of only four relatively simple indicators, doesn’t only raise a questions what other indicators should be included, but also how to ensure quality and comparable input data.
    • It is logical that the UNDP try to collect their data from international organizations concentrating in collecting data in specific fields.
    • Quality and trustworthiness of those data is disputable, especially when we get the information from UN non-democratic members, as for example Cuba or China.

    (5) A tool for mere comparison

    • The concept of HDI was set up mainly for relative comparison of countries in one particular time.
    • HDI is much better when distinguishing between countries with low and middle human development, instead of countries at the top of the ranking.
    • Therefore, the original notion was not to set up an absolute ranking, but let’s quite free hands in comparison of the results.

    (6) Development has to be greener

    • The human development approach has not adequately incorporated environmental conditions which may threaten long-term achievements on human development. The most pervasive failure was on environmental sustainability.
    • However, for the first time in 2020, the UNDP introduced a new metric to reflect the impact caused by each country’s per-capita carbon emissions and its material footprint.
    • This is Planetary Pressures-adjusted HDI or PHDI. It measured the amount of fossil fuels, metals and other resources used to make the goods and services it consumes.

    (7) Wealth can never equate welfare

    • Higher national wealth does not indicate welfare. GNI may not necessarily increase economic welfare; it depends on how it is spent.
    • For example, if a country spends more on military spending – this is reflected in higher GNI, but welfare could actually be lower.

    Significance of HDI

    • It is one of the few multidimensional indices as it includes indicators such as literacy rate, enrollment ratio, life expectancy rate, infant mortality rate, etc.
    • It acts as a true yardstick to measure development in real sense.
    • Unlike per capital income, which only indicates that a rise in per capital income implies economic development; HDI considers many other vital social indicators and helps in measuring a nation’s well-being.
    • It helps as a differentiating factor to distinguish and classify different nations on the basis of their HDI ranks.

    Way forward

    • Both sustainable development and poverty eradication are both long-term and urgent endeavours, requiring not only the gradual and substantial redirection of country policies but a rapid response to pressing problems.
    • Ideally, sustainable development could provide an overarching framework within which all sub-goals (eg poverty eradication, social equality, ecosystem maintenance, climate compatibility) are framed.
    • It is not a subset of development; it is development (in a modern world of resource limits).
    • Environmental issues are not one factor among many but the meta-context within which poverty and other goals are sought.
    • Investing more in public research could lead to technological solutions to poverty and sustainability problems becoming more rapidly and openly available.

     

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • UN slams Sri Lanka’s human rights record

    Linking Sri Lanka’s past on human rights record to its current economic crisis, the UN Human Rights Chief on said “impunity” for human rights abuses, economic crimes, and corruption was the underlying reason for the country’s collapse.

    UNHRC report on Sri Lanka

    • The UNHRC report warned that Sri Lanka’s failure to address human rights violations and war crimes committed in the past had put the country on a “dangerous path”.
    • It rose that this could lead to a “recurrence” of policies and practices that gave rise to the earlier situation.
    • It flagged the accelerating militarization of civilian governmental functions, a reversal of important constitutional safeguards, political obstruction of accountability, intimidation of civil society, and the use of anti-terrorism laws.
    • The shrinking space for independent media and civil society and human rights organizations are also themes in the report.

    The Resolution 30/1

    • The resolution 30/1 launched in 2015 deals with promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka.
    • It extended an opportunity to make good on its promises for justice and offered extensive support to accomplish that objective.

    Sri Lanka’s intention

    • It is more than Sri Lanka has failed to – and doesn’t intend to — take the necessary, decisive, and sustainable steps necessary to achieve domestic justice and reconciliation.
    • Sri Lanka has officially sought India’s help to muster support against the resolution, which it has described as “unwanted interference by powerful countries”.

    Where India comes in

    • The UNHRC is scheduled to hold an “interactive” session on Sri Lanka where the report was to be discussed, and member countries were to make statements.
    • Country-specific resolutions against Sri Lanka have regularly come up at the UNHRC in the last decade.
    • New Delhi voted against Sri Lanka in 2012 and abstained in 2014. It was spared the dilemma in 2015 when Sri Lanka joined resolution 30/1.
    • With elections coming up in Tamil Nadu, and PM declaring on a recent visit that he was the first Indian leader to visit Jaffna, Sri Lanka has begun reading the tea leaves.
    • Whichever way it goes, the resolution is likely to resonate in India-Sri Lanka Relations and for India internally, in the run-up to the Assembly elections in Tamil Nadu.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • QUAD

    New Delhi will host an official-level meeting of the Quad grouping with the US, Japan and Australia next week, the first such “senior officers meeting” (SOM) to be held since the recent escalation of tensions over the Taiwan Strait.

    Quadrilateral Security Dialogue: A Backgrounder

    Quadrilateral Security Dialogue or the Quad is an informal strategic forum between the United States, Japan, India and Australia that is maintained by semi-regular summits, information exchanges and military drills between member countries.

    • The US, Japan, India and Australia came together in the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami to assist the devastated countries.
    • Later, officials of the four countries met in 2007 “to look at issues of common interest.” During an India visit, then Japanese PM Shinzo Abe unveiled the idea of “the Confluence of the Two Seas” that gave birth to the concept of the Indo-Pacific.
    • A decade later officials of the four countries met in the Philippines in 2017 to talk about an aggressively rising China.
    • In 2019, the foreign ministers of the Quad countries met in Washington for the first time.
    • In November, the Quad nations came together to participate in a two-phase joint military exercise, Malabar 2020, in the Bay of Bengal and in the Arabian Sea.

    Now it is increasingly viewed as ‘Asian NATO’.

    Focus on Indo-Pacific: For the China-wary world

    • The latest meeting of Quad comes at a time when all four countries have either trade or security disputes with China.
    • Despite not explicitly mentioning China, Quad has been openly supporting a “free and fair” Indo-Pacific which is seen as a clear message to Beijing that it needs to curb its assertive behaviour.
    • The optics were hard to miss when India, the US, Japan and Australia joined their navies for the mega Malabar military exercise late last year, an activity which raised alarm in Beijing.
    • This posturing by the Quad nations sent a strong signal to China.

    (1) US vs China

    • USA had followed a policy to contain China’s increasing influence in East Asia. Therefore, USA sees the coalition as an opportunity to regain its influence in the Indo-Pacific region.
    • The US has described China, along with Russia, as a strategic rival in its National Security Strategy, National Defence Strategy and the Pentagon’s report on Indo-Pacific Strategy.
    • Both are navigating intense disagreements over trade and human rights in Tibet, Hong Kong and the western Xinjiang region, as well as the coronavirus pandemic and increasing Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea.

    (2) Australia vs China

    • Australia is concerned about China’s growing interest in its land, infrastructure and politics, and influence on its universities.
    • Ties have been on a downward spiral since 2018 when Australia, accusing China of meddling in its domestic affairs, passed a new law against foreign interference and espionage.
    • It also barred Huawei from building the country’s 5G mobile network, among the first countries to do so, citing national security.
    •  The atmosphere worsened when  PM Scott Morrison’s government called for an international inquiry into the origins of the coronavirus that causes Covid-19.

    (3) Japan vs. China

    • Tensions between Japan and China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute have recently increased.
    • China has relentlessly continued attempts to unilaterally change the status quo by coercion in the sea area around the Senkaku Islands.
    • The more salient indicator is the number of Chinese patrols inside the territorial sea of the islands, which Japan sees as an explicit violation of its territorial sovereignty.

    (4) India vs. Quad

    • India’s strained relations with China needs no explanation. The year long border dispute is the testimony.
    • The Quad summit is taking place in the backdrop of an ongoing military disengagement between India and China following their months-long border standoff in eastern Ladakh.
    • China is increasing its footprint in our neighborhood through its Belt and Road policy and political coercion following the debt trap are some of the increasing concerns other than economic imbalance.

    Opportunities unveiled for India

    India’s engagement with the Quad goes back to China’s expanding footprint in South Asia and the Indian Ocean Region over the last few years. India can reap some benefits as discussed below:

     (1) Checkmating the Chinese

    • The maritime sphere is wide open to India to undertake coalition building, rule sets, and other forms of strategic exploration than compared to land borders.
    • The maritime space is more important to China than engaging in land grab attempts in the Himalayas. A huge chunk of Chinese trade happens via the Indian oceanic routes that pass through maritime chokepoints.

    (2) Channelizing geo-politics

    • There is a growing great power interest in the maritime sphere, especially with the arrival of the concept of ‘Indo-Pacific’. For instance, many European countries have recently released their Indo-Pacific strategies.
    • The most recent was for France to send its warship in the international waters of the South China Sea.

    (3) Maritime domain for India

    • Above is the backdrop against which one must see the progressive evolution of Exercise “Malabar”,
    • In the beginning, it was a bilateral event involving just the Indian and US navies. It became tri-lateral with the inclusion of Japan in 2015.
    • And now it has transformed into a four-cornered naval drill that will also include Australia.

    (4) Check on China’s India Ocean Ambitions

    • The Quad has a valuable role to play as a check on China’s Indian Ocean ambitions.
    • India must develop ingrained habits of interoperable cooperation with its Quad partners.
    • This interoperable cooperation could pre-emptively dissuade China from mounting a naval challenge in its backyard.

    (5) Eccentricity in South Asia

    • With India, located right at the centre of the Indo-Pacific geopolitical imagination can realize the vision of a ‘broader Asia’ that can extend its influence away from geographical boundaries.
    • Further, India with Quad countries can check the imperialist policies of China in the Indian Ocean region and ensure Security and growth for all in the region.

    Issues with Quad

    (1) Structural problems

    • The Quad has a core structural problem as its objective pivots around the U.S.
    • The Quad riles China as a hostile grouping, but hardly serves the security interests of its members.
    • Despite rhetoric relating to the promotion of a ‘rules-based’ world order, the Quad neither shares a strategic vision nor is it animated by a shared agenda.

     (2) Nature of alliance

    • Alliances involve written commitments to come to the defence of the other against a third party.
    • Despite the potential for cooperation, the Quad remains a mechanism without a defined strategic mission.

    (3) Economic alliance not feasible

    • Quad is neither a military alliance nor an economic partnership.
    • Its intention to counter China in the rare-earth sector is logical given the dominant role the country plays in supplying more than half of the world’s such key materials.
    • But, for a country like India, the lack of relevant technologies and talent pool could obstruct its progress in building up a supply chain from scratch.

     (4) Overt emphasis on Maritime domain

    • The entire focus on the Indo-Pacific makes the Quad a maritime, rather than a land-based grouping, raising questions whether the cooperation extends to the Asia-Pacific and Eurasian regions.
    • India’s core concerns with China are primarily undemarcated borders and trade deficit.

     (5) Lack of existence of Indo-Pacific system

    • There has never been Indo-Pacific system ever since the rise of the port-based kingdoms of Indochina in the first half of the second millennium.
    • There were two Asian systems — an Indian Ocean system and an East Asian system — with intricate sub-regional balances.
    • The effort by a U.S. to artificially manufacture to combine the Indo and the Pacific into a unitary system is unlikely to succeed.

    (6) Indian borders can go more vulnerable

    • A lesson for India is China’s long-held and strategic interest in parts of Jammu and Kashmir.
    • It is wrongly argued that it is Pakistan that is the issue in J&K.
    • China undoubtedly is as big an issue but has quietly hidden behind Pakistan’s cover.

    Challenges: China will retaliate

    (1) China’s assertiveness

    • China claims that it has historical ownership over nearly the entire region of South China Sea, which gives it the right to manufacture islands.
    • However, the International Court of Arbitration rejected the claim in 2016.
    • Since then, the incidences of Chinese transgression has only increased making China more assertive for its interest.

    (2) Preying small nations

    • The ASEAN countries have a well-knit relationship with China. So are other SAARC countries have fallen prey to Chinese debt traps.
    • The Regional Cooperation Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a recent example of China’s increasing influence over ASEAN nations to which Australia is even a forerunner.

    (3) Chinese monopoly

    • Considering the economic might of China and the dependence of Quad nations like Japan and Australia on China, the Quad nations cannot afford to have strained relations with it in the long run.
    • India too, is still very heavily dependent on Chinese exports.

    Way Forward

    • Need for a clearer vision: It is important for members of the Quad not to be reactive. It is also important to exhibit openness, and ensure that all talk of a ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ is more than just a mere slogan.
    • Consensus for a common objective: The Quad nations need to better explain the Indo-Pacific Vision in an overarching framework with the objective of advancing everyone’s economic and security interests.
    • Setting an agenda: This will reassure the littoral States that the Quad will be a factor for regional benefit, and a far cry from Chinese allegations that it is some sort of a military alliance. Future meetings can be an opportunity to define the idea and chart a future path.
    • Expanding Quad: India has many other partners in the Indo-Pacific; therefore India should pitch for countries like Indonesia, Singapore to be invited to join in the future. There is also a vital need to economically expand the Quad.

     

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Russia blocks agreement on Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT)

    Russia has blocked the agreement on the final document of a four-week review of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).

    Why in news?

    • The NPT review conference is supposed to be held every five years but was delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    • This marked the second failure of its 191 state parties to produce an outcome document.
    • The last review conference in 2015 ended without an agreement because of serious differences over establishing a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction.

    About Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT)

    • Between 1965 and 1968, the treaty was negotiated by the Eighteen Nation Committee on Disarmament, a United Nations-sponsored organization based in Geneva, Switzerland.
    • Opened for signature in 1968, the treaty entered into force in 1970.
    • The NPT is an international treaty whose objective is
    1. To prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology
    2. To promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and
    3. To further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament
    • The treaty defines nuclear-weapon states as those that have built and tested a nuclear explosive device before 1 January 1967; these are the United States (1945), Russia (1949), the United Kingdom (1952), France (1960), and China (1964).

    Non-members of the treaty

    • Four UN member states have never accepted the NPT, three of which possess or are thought to possess nuclear weapons: India, Israel, and Pakistan.
    • In addition, South Sudan, founded in 2011, has not joined.

    Issues in Nuclear Disarmament

    • Notion of Nuclear ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-Nots’: The proponents of disarmaments are themselves nuclear armed countries thus creating a nuclear monopoly.
    • Concept of Peaceful Nuclear Explosion (PNE): conducted for non-military purposes such as mining.

    Why didn’t India join NPT?

    • India is one of the only five countries that either did not sign the NPT or signed but withdrew, thus becoming part of a list that includes Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, and South Sudan.
    • India always considered the NPT as discriminatory and had refused to sign it.
    • India maintains that they are selectively applicable to the non-nuclear powers and legitimised the monopoly of the five nuclear weapons powers.

    India’s commitment for de-nuclearization

    India has always batted for a universal commitment and an agreed global and non-discriminatory multilateral framework.

    • It has outlined a working paper on Nuclear Disarmament submitted to the UN General Assembly in 2006.
    • India participated in the Nuclear Security Summit process and has regularly participated in the International Conferences on Nuclear Security organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
    • India is also a member of the Nuclear Security Contact Group (but has signed off the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)).
    • India has expressed its readiness to support the commencement of negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).
    • India couldn’t join the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) due to several concerns raised by India.
    • India has piloted an annual UNGA Resolution on “Measures to Prevent Terrorists from Acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction” since 2002, which is adopted by consensus.

    Way forward

    • India has actively supported and contributed to the strengthening of the global nuclear security architecture.
    • There is a need for the international community to pay closer attention to the illicit proliferation of networks of nuclear weapons, their delivery systems, components and relevant technologies.
    • India hopes that the international community will continue to work towards realising our collective aspiration for a nuclear weapon-free world.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)