Posts

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 16 August 2025

Content PM calls for self-reliance, flags ‘demographic plot’ Major GST shake-up: 12% and 28% slabs to be axed India to build indigenous air defence system by 2035: PM Why Maharashtra’s small, marginal farmers are rejoicing over U.K. FTA Rain and Flash Floods in J&K Civil and criminal cases: what they are, how they differ PM calls for self-reliance, flags ‘demographic plot’ Self-Reliance (Aatmanirbharta) Traditional Meaning: Economic: Reducing dependence on imports, strengthening domestic manufacturing. Strategic: Defence indigenisation, food security, energy security. Civilisational: Linked to aatma samman (self-respect, dignity). Expanded Vision (PM’s framing): Not just import–export balance or currency reserves. About building intrinsic national strengths and capabilities (innovation, technology, resilience). Relevance : GS 2(Governance ) , GS 3(Growth and Development) Contextual Background Global Trade Tensions: US tariffs (50% on Indian goods under Trump) → India vulnerable to protectionism. China’s economic assertiveness → global “supply chain weaponisation”. Domestic Challenges: High unemployment. Dependence on fertilizer, electronics, semiconductors. MSMEs constrained by compliance costs. Security Dimension: Insurgencies (Naxalism). Border demographic shifts (illegal migration, cross-border influences). Rising cyber and AI-linked vulnerabilities. Key Announcements in the Speech Economic Reforms Second-Generation GST Reforms: Simplify tax compliance, reduce rates on essentials, address inverted duty structures. Expected → relief in household budgets + improved MSME viability. Next-Generation Economic Reforms Task Force: Broader structural reforms (labour, capital markets, digital economy). Employment Pradhan Mantri Viksit Bharat Rozgar Yojana (₹1 lakh crore corpus): ₹15,000 one-time grant for first-time employees. Incentives to private firms for new job creation. Goal: boost formal sector hiring. Technology & Innovation Semiconductor Mission: 6 units operational, 4 sanctioned. “Made-in-India” chips by 2025 → reduce import dependency, critical for electronics, defence, EVs. Innovation Push: AI, cybersecurity, deep-tech, operating systems → global competitiveness. Security & Demography Defence Self-Reliance: Indigenous weapons during Operation Sindoor. Green corridors replacing Naxal corridors in Chhattisgarh. Demographic Mission: To address “conspiracies” altering demographic character, esp. border areas. Linked to illegal migration, demographic imbalances → security concern. Farmers & Agriculture Protection against external tariff pressures (esp. US demands). Reduce fertilizer dependency on imports. Analytical Dimensions (A) Economic Significance Positive: GST 2.0 can correct flaws of first phase. Semiconductor production → reduce $16–20 bn annual import bill. Employment corpus → demand-side stimulus. Challenges: Semiconductor industry needs ecosystem (skilled manpower, water, power). Fiscal burden of new schemes. Job incentives risk being short-term unless tied to skill-building. (B) Strategic Significance Defence indigenisation: Moves India closer to Strategic Autonomy. Technology race: Without AI/OS development, India risks digital dependence on US/China. Demographic focus: National security lens applied to migration and border dynamics. (C) Political-Economic Messaging Links aatmanirbharta = aatma samman → emotional + cultural appeal. Longest ever speech → signals importance of message to domestic + global audience. Timing: Amid global trade wars + tech disruption → frames India as resilient power. Critical Evaluation Strengths: Holistic framing (economy, defence, technology, demography). Forward-looking → AI, semiconductors, deep-tech. Recognises MSMEs as job engines. Concerns: Repetition risk: Aatmanirbhar Bharat has been announced multiple times since 2020; execution gap persists. Employment incentives may not solve structural unemployment (automation, skills mismatch). Fertilizer import substitution requires R&D + investment in green ammonia, not just declarations. Broad Implications Economic Governance: Push for next-gen reforms → signal to markets + investors. Geopolitics: Subtle message to US/China → India won’t be squeezed by tariffs or supply chain coercion. Domestic Politics: Reinforces nationalist themes (self-respect, demographic security). Long-term Nation-Building: Semiconductor + AI + defence self-reliance can reshape India’s global standing. Major GST shake-up: 12% and 28% slabs to be axed Understanding GST and its Current Structure What is GST? Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a unified indirect tax system introduced in India in July 2017. It subsumed multiple indirect taxes (excise, service tax, VAT). GST is a destination-based tax collected where goods/services are consumed. Current GST Slabs (before proposed reform): 0% (Nil rate) – essential items. 5% – mass consumption items. 12% – processed foods, some industrial goods. 18% – most goods and services (major revenue generator). 28% – luxury items, white goods, sin items. Special rates: 0.25% (precious stones), 3% (gold, silver). Cess: Additional levy on luxury/sin goods (cars, tobacco). Relevance : GS 3(Taxation) Proposed Reforms New Structure: Retain 5% and 18% slabs. Eliminate 12% and 28% slabs. Introduce: Concessional rate <1% – gold, silver, semi-precious stones. High “sin rate” 40% – 5–7 items (tobacco, gutka, luxury items). Reallocation of items: 99% of items in 12% slab → 5%. 90% of items in 28% slab → 18%. Remaining 10% of 28% slab → “sin rate” (40%). No additional cess → only GST rates apply. Rationale for Reform Simplification: Reducing slabs → easier compliance, fewer disputes. Equity: Similar items to be taxed at same rate (e.g., all namkeen taxed equally). Consumption boost: Lower taxes on white goods, toiletries, processed food → increases demand. Curbing evasion: Lower rates discourage under-invoicing and tax avoidance. Correcting inverted duty structure: Prevents working capital lockups for firms. Ease of living: Pre-filled returns, faster refunds, tech-based registration. Revenue Implications Current Revenue Distribution: 28% slab → 11% of GST revenue. 12% slab → 5%. 5% slab → 7%. 18% slab → 67% (backbone of GST). Post-reform expectation: Revenue hit in short term. Long-term gain from: Higher consumption. Wider tax net. Reduced evasion. RBI’s estimate: Average GST rate currently ~11.6%; post-reform, will fall significantly → consumer-friendly, but requires trust in revenue buoyancy. Stakeholder Dynamics Centre’s Role: Can propose reforms but GST Council (states + Centre) has final say. States may resist if revenue loss feared. States’ Concerns: Dependence on GST compensation (ended in 2022). Fear of shrinking tax base. Political dynamics: Opposition-ruled states may demand higher compensation mechanisms. Industry Impact: Positive: White goods, consumer durables, daily-use items cheaper. Exporters/MSMEs: Relief from inverted duty structure. Negative: Luxury/sin goods industries face higher taxation (40%). Economic Implications Positive Effects: Demand push in FMCG, white goods → higher production, job creation. Reduced compliance burden → boosts MSME competitiveness. Correcting inverted duty → frees capital for investment. Challenges: Risk of revenue shortfall → fiscal deficit pressure. States’ buy-in critical → political bargaining may delay. Inflation risk in transition if items are reclassified improperly. Global Context India’s GST vs Other Countries: Most successful GST regimes have 2–3 rates (e.g., Singapore – single rate, Canada – 2 rates). India initially had 5+ rates due to political compromises. Proposed reform → brings India closer to global best practices. Critical Analysis Strengths: Consumer-friendly, pro-middle-class. Simplifies compliance architecture. Signals trust in consumption-led growth. Concerns: Reliance on buoyancy assumption risky (consumption may not rise enough to offset revenue loss). GST Council consensus often difficult (Centre vs States tussle). Exemptions list still large (health, education, petroleum products outside GST). 40% slab may encourage smuggling/black market in tobacco/gutka. India to build indigenous air defence system by 2035: PM Basics: Understanding Air Defence Systems What is Air Defence? A military system to detect, track, intercept, and destroy enemy aerial threats (aircraft, drones, missiles). Includes: Radar & Surveillance systems → early warning. Surface-to-Air Missiles (SAMs) → neutralising threats. Command & Control networks → decision-making. Why critical for India? Two-front challenge (China & Pakistan). Rising drone warfare (e.g., Pakistan-based terror networks). Protection of civilian and strategic infrastructure (airports, power plants, hospitals). Independence from foreign suppliers (S-400, Israeli systems). Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security, Defence)   The Sudarshan Chakra Mission Objective: By 2035, India will develop a fully indigenous multi-layered air defence shield. Coverage: Both strategic (military bases, nuclear facilities) and civilian assets (hospitals, railways, religious places). Features (envisioned): Intercept any aerial threat (drones, UAVs, cruise missiles, fighter jets, hypersonic weapons). Multi-platform technology (radar networks, AI-driven sensors, directed energy weapons, missile interceptors). Expandable shield → nationwide coverage. Symbolism: Named Sudarshan Chakra, invoking Lord Krishna’s mythological divine weapon of protection and retribution.  Current Capabilities and Gaps Present Systems: Russian S-400 (3 units inducted, 2 more pending). Effective, but dependence on Russia. Indigenous Projects: Akash (SAM), MR-SAM (with Israel), QRSAM, Astra (air-to-air missile). IACCS (Integrated Air Command & Control System): Successfully coordinated during Operation Sindoor vs Pakistan. Gaps: Reliance on foreign suppliers (Russia, Israel, US). No indigenous long-range interceptor (like THAAD). Emerging threats: Hypersonic glide vehicles, swarm drones. Strategic Significance Self-reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat): Reduces vulnerability to foreign sanctions/blackmail. Deterrence: Ability to neutralise Pakistan’s drones/missiles and counter China’s sophisticated arsenal. Symbol of Strategic Autonomy: Post-Operation Sindoor, reinforces India’s ability to act independently without fear of nuclear blackmail. Civilian Security: Extends beyond military → ordinary citizens, infrastructure, and “centres of faith”. Link to Defence Industrial Base Indigenous Jet Engines: PM’s call to scientists/youth → develop engines for fighter aircraft (critical gap today, still reliant on imports). Parallel with Past Successes: COVID-19 vaccine self-sufficiency. UPI revolution in digital finance. Tejas LCA, Chandrayaan-3, Gaganyaan. Defence PSU + Private Sector Role: HAL, BEL, DRDO, startups, and MSMEs. Other National Security Announcements Operation Sindoor: Showcased India’s use of Made-in-India weapons to destroy Pakistan’s terror infrastructure. Indus Waters Treaty Stand: “Blood and water cannot flow together” → strong message against Pakistan, signalling possible renegotiation. Strategic Philosophy: Self-reliance = strength and dignity. No compromise on national interests. National security ≠ foreign dependence. Economic & Political Dimensions Economic: Huge investment in R&D, defence industry → job creation, technology spin-offs. Reduces forex outgo on arms imports (~$10 bn annually). Political: 2035 target ties into Viksit Bharat @ 2047. Appeals to nationalism, youth, innovators. Enhances India’s stature in global defence market. Challenges Ahead Technological: Hypersonic missile defence is cutting-edge; only US, Russia, China experimenting. Financial: Defence R&D costs are massive; sustained budgetary support required. Institutional: Coordination among DRDO, armed forces, private sector often slow. Geopolitical: Foreign suppliers (Russia/US/Israel) may resist losing contracts. Implementation Risk: Past delays (Arjun tank, Tejas) show indigenous projects take decades. Why Maharashtra’s small, marginal farmers are rejoicing over U.K. FTA Basics Nashik = “Grape Capital of India” • Over 3 lakh metric tonnes of grapes exported in 2023–24, worth $400+ million. • Maharashtra is the largest producer. U.K. as a key market • One of India’s top importers of grapes. • Grapes earlier faced 8% tariff in the U.K. → now reduced to zero under FTA. Farmers’ profile • Most are small/marginal farmers (<2 acres). • Increasing shift from traditional domestic varieties (Sonaka) → export-quality varieties (Thompson, Ara). Collective farming • Farmers’ Producer Companies (FPCs) like Sahyadri Farms enable scale, bargaining power, and compliance with international standards. • Sahyadri alone exports 22,000 MT annually, 30% to the U.K., with ₹1,900 crore turnover. Relevance : GS 3(Indian Economy , Agriculture)   Economic Impact Higher incomes: • Tariff elimination makes Indian grapes more competitive against South Africa & Chile. • Farmers expect at least 15% better returns. Multiplier effect: • Improved standard of living, disposable income for rural households. • Encourages investment in land, technology, and allied businesses. Rural employment: • Increased demand for farm labour, logistics, packaging, and cold storage. Competitiveness & Standards Stringent norms in EU/U.K.: • Uniform berry size, colour, taste, and residue-free produce required. • Regular soil & petiole testing is now standard. Shift in farming practices: • Use of less chemicals, more sustainable techniques. • Push towards precision farming & global best practices. Role of Collective Farming Necessity for small farmers: • With average landholding <1 ha, individual farmers cannot compete globally. • FPCs ensure aggregation, quality control, certification, and export linkages. Sahyadri Model: • Over 14,000 farmers. • 30+ new grape varieties, 19 patented. • Enables end-to-end ecosystem → from cultivation to global retail shelves. Broader Implications Diversification: • Beyond grapes: pomegranate, mango, citrus fruits may also benefit under FTA. Food safety push: • Higher standards improve domestic market quality too. Global expansion: • Lessons from U.K. compliance can help entry into Japan, U.S., and premium markets. Challenges Weather risks: • Unseasonal rains threaten yield & quality. Cost of compliance: • Testing, certifications, and maintaining export standards are expensive. ‘Do or die’ competitiveness: • Farmers must continuously upgrade; otherwise, risk being outcompeted. Equity concern: • Benefits may concentrate in organised collectives like Sahyadri → marginal farmers outside FPCs risk exclusion. Conclusion The India–U.K. FTA is a game-changer for Indian grape farmers, especially in Nashik. It transforms the sector from fragmented, low-margin domestic sales to globally competitive, high-value exports. The success hinges on collective farming models, adherence to strict quality norms, and weather resilience. If replicated for other horticultural crops, the FTA could catalyze a structural shift in Indian agriculture, moving smallholders towards global value chains. Rain and Flash Floods in J&K Basics Scale of Impact (2010–2022) • 2,863 extreme weather events in J&K. • 552 deaths reported. • 1,942 instances of thunderstorms, heavy rain (≥65–115 mm in 24 hrs). • 186 flash floods, 110 cloudbursts, 111 landslides. Recent Example • August 2024: Flash flood at Kishtwar district (Chasoti village), >50 missing. Geographic Vulnerability • J&K: Mountainous terrain + fragile ecosystem. • Heavy dependence on glaciers, rivers, slopes. Drivers • Rising global temperatures. • Changing western disturbances. • Himalayan topography. Relevance : GS 1(Geography) ,GS 3(Disaster Managements) Climate Change & Rising Temperatures Warmer atmosphere = more water vapour • Each 1°C rise → atmosphere holds 7% more moisture. • Leads to more intense precipitation, sudden downpours, flash floods. Glacial melt • Rising temps shrinking Himalayan glaciers. • Formation of unstable glacial lakes → prone to sudden outburst floods (GLOFs). Changing Nature of Western Disturbances (WDs) Traditionally winter (Dec–March), now extending to summer. Global warming shifting intensity and frequency. Moisture-laden WDs from Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caspian, Arabian Sea → now stronger. Heavier rainfall + flash floods in J&K Himalayas. Topographical Factors Steep, fragile slopes in Himalayas intensify vulnerability. Narrow valleys funnel rainwater → higher flood intensity. Deforestation, unregulated construction, and loose soil increase landslides. Nature of Events (2010–2022 data) Cloudbursts: Sudden heavy rainfall (>100 mm/hour), 110 incidents. Flash floods: 186 incidents, high fatalities. Landslides: 111 incidents. Heavy snow: Only 42 events, but high risk when followed by rain. Human Impact 552 deaths in 12 years due to extreme weather. Loss of homes, farmland, infrastructure. Migration pressures, economic instability for locals. Expert Views “Do or die” situation: Need climate-adaptive planning. Rising Arabian Sea temperatures intensify western disturbances. Local vulnerability amplified by poor planning, haphazard construction, lack of preparedness. Conclusion Flash floods in J&K are no longer isolated events, but part of a larger climate change–driven pattern. Rising temperatures, glacial melt, and shifting western disturbances make the region acutely vulnerable. Mitigation requires: • Early warning systems. • Climate-resilient infrastructure. • Strict land-use regulation. • Regional cooperation on Himalayan glacial monitoring. Civil and criminal cases: what they are, how they differ Basics Civil Law • Deals with disputes between private individuals/organisations. • Goal: Compensation/rights enforcement, not punishment. • Filed by plaintiff against defendant. • Standard of proof: Preponderance of probabilities (more likely than not). • Examples: Contract breaches, family disputes, property cases, divorce. Criminal Law • Deals with offences against society/state. • Goal: Punish offender + deter crimes. • Prosecution initiated by state against accused. • Standard of proof: Beyond reasonable doubt. • Examples: Theft, murder, assault, fraud, cheating. Overlap • Some acts may give rise to both civil & criminal cases (e.g., breach of trust = civil wrong + cheating = criminal offence). Relevance : GS 2(Polity , Constitution ) Purpose and Objectives Civil Law: • Seeks redressal, compensation, restoration of rights. • Focus on remedy, not punishment. Criminal Law: • Seeks deterrence and justice for society. • Protects social order, punishes misconduct. Burden & Standard of Proof Civil: Lower threshold → Preponderance of probabilities. Criminal: Higher threshold → Beyond reasonable doubt. Reflects seriousness of criminal sanctions (imprisonment, execution, etc.). Proceedings & Role Civil case: Plaintiff vs. Defendant. Criminal case: State vs. Accused (prosecution vs. defence). Civil disputes → settled through negotiation, mediation, or compensation. Criminal disputes → involve police investigation, trial, sentencing. Length & Delays in Indian Context Civil suits: • Avg. 4.91 years for disposal. • Execution petitions to enforce decrees → ~3.97 years. Criminal cases: • Bail applications in Sessions Court → ~6.12 months. • Serious criminal offences → ~4.65 years. • Magisterial criminal cases (punishment <3 years) → ~2.45 years. Problem: Civil matters often dragged deliberately, as parties prefer litigation over out-of-court settlement. Criminal matters: Faster on paper, but still face adjournments and backlog. Judicial Observations (as per article) Supreme Court criticised misuse of criminal proceedings for civil disputes (e.g., breach of trust in commercial transactions). Warned against harassment by converting civil disputes into criminal cases. Larger Implications Misuse of Criminal Law: • Adds burden on judiciary, police, and prisons. • Harasses individuals in essentially private disputes. Civil Justice System: • Slow and cumbersome → discourages people from using civil remedies. • Pushes parties toward criminal litigation to exert pressure. Need for Reform: • Speedy dispute resolution mechanisms (e.g., mediation, Lok Adalats). • Strict judicial scrutiny before admitting criminal complaints in civil disputes. • Balance between individual rights and state’s role in justice. Conclusion Civil law ensures private justice, criminal law ensures public order. In India, blurred lines and judicial delays complicate their functioning. True justice requires speed, clarity in classification, and prevention of misuse of criminal law in purely civil disputes.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 14 August 2025

Content National Mission on Natural Farming India Achieves Historic Milestone of 100 GW Solar PV Module Manufacturing Capacity under ALMM National Mission on Natural Farming Genesis and Evolution Approval & Launch: Approved by Union Cabinet on 25 November 2024. Operational till 15th Finance Commission cycle (2025–26). Launched as a standalone Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS). Predecessor Scheme: Restructured from Bharatiya Prakritik Krishi Paddhati (BPKP), which was under Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY, 2020–23). Budgetary Outlay: ₹2,481 crore total (Centre ₹1,584 crore; States ₹897 crore). Policy Shift: From input-intensive agriculture (Green Revolution model) → to low-input, ecosystem-based farming. Emphasis on traditional knowledge validated by science. Relevance : GS 2(Governance) ,GS 3(Agriculture) Objectives of NMNF Promote chemical-free agriculture and reduce farmer dependence on costly chemical fertilizers & pesticides. Enhance soil health and biodiversity, making farms climate-resilient. Strengthen farmer incomes through cost reduction and better market branding of NF produce. Establish 7.5 lakh hectares across 15,000 clusters of Natural Farming. Train and mobilize 1 crore farmers nationwide. Ensure last-mile delivery of inputs and guidance through Krishi Sakhis/Community Resource Persons (CRPs). Build bio-input infrastructure via 10,000 Bio-input Resource Centres (BRCs). Introduce Participatory Guarantee System (PGS)-based certification for NF produce. Principles and Practices of Natural Farming Core Principle: Farming without synthetic chemicals, relying on livestock-based, bio-resource recycling systems. Key Components: Beejamrut (seed treatment formulation of cow dung, urine, soil, etc.). Jeevamrut (fermented microbial solution for soil fertility). Mulching & crop residue management to retain soil moisture. Diverse cropping systems for ecological balance. Ecosystem Approach: Integrates soil, water, plants, microbes, livestock, insects, and climate. Outcome Goals: Lower input costs, improved soil carbon, pest resistance through biodiversity, and resilience to climate shocks. Implementation Architecture Cluster Model: 15,000 clusters, each of ~50 ha, ~125 farmers. New farmers can join at the start of each crop season. Incentives: ₹4,000/acre/year for 2 years (max 1 acre per farmer). Training & Handholding: 806 training institutions (KVKs, agri universities, NGOs). Model farms (1,100 developed) serve as learning hubs. 70,000+ Krishi Sakhis trained for community support. Monitoring: Online NMNF portal for geo-tagged, real-time monitoring. Multi-tier monitoring (Centre, State, District, Block). Institutional Ecosystem NCONF (National Centre for Organic & Natural Farming, Ghaziabad): Standard setting, certification system. MANAGE (Hyderabad): Knowledge Partner for NF Extension. ICAR-KVKs: Research, demonstrations, curriculum development (UG/PG courses). Community Role: SHGs, FPOs, Panchayati Raj bodies actively engaged in awareness, input production, and marketing. State-Level Initiatives (Precursor Models) Andhra Pradesh (APCNF): Large-scale community-managed NF with ecological balance focus. Gujarat (SPKK/PNF): Direct subsidies for cow upkeep and NF kits. Himachal Pradesh (PK3 Yojana): Achieved large farmer participation, >50,000 farmers by 2020. Rajasthan (Pilot Scheme): Training + input subsidies for NF adoption. Karnataka, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh: Also emerging as NF adopters with state support. Progress till July 2025 Farmers: 10 lakh+ enrolled. Clusters: Targets being operationalised across states. Training: 3,900 scientists/trainers trained. 28,000 CRPs mobilized. BRCs: 7,934 identified, 2,045 established. Funds Released: ₹177.78 crore (FY 2024–25) to states as per AAPs. Model Farms: 1,100 demonstration farms functional. Certification: PGS-India system being rolled out for NF produce. Convergence and Integration Linked with multiple ministries for holistic outcomes: Agriculture & Farmers Welfare (input, training). Rural Development (MGNREGA convergence for farm labour). AYUSH (linkage of medicinal crops with NF). Food Processing (value addition, branding). Animal Husbandry (livestock integration). Market Linkages: Local haats, APMC mandis, FPO-driven value chains. Common national NF brand in progress. Educational Integration: RAWE (Rural Agricultural Work Experience) student participation. UG, PG & diploma courses on NF. Challenges Adoption Barriers: Behavioural resistance among farmers used to chemical inputs. Yield concerns during initial transition period. Market Ecosystem: Certification and branding are still evolving. Limited consumer awareness compared to organic farming. Infrastructure Gaps: Only ~25% of targeted BRCs established by mid-2025. Monitoring & Extension: Requires strong local handholding; scale-up may strain resources. Policy Coordination: Need seamless convergence between central, state, and local agencies. Strategic Significance Climate Change: NF promotes low-carbon farming, reduces chemical fertilizer dependence (aligned with India’s Net Zero 2070 goals). Economic: Cuts input costs, enhances small/marginal farmer viability. Health & Nutrition: Safer, chemical-free food for consumers. Global Positioning: Positions India as leader in regenerative & ecological farming, aligned with SDGs (2, 12, 13, 15). Conclusion NMNF is not just a scheme but a paradigm shift—from “input-intensive productivity” to “nature-aligned sustainability.” Strong policy design, training ecosystem, and digital monitoring make it robust. The success depends on farmer behaviour change, market support, and scaling infrastructure. If effectively implemented, NMNF can be India’s flagship contribution to global sustainable agriculture models. India Achieves Historic Milestone of 100 GW Solar PV Module Manufacturing Capacity under ALMM Genesis and Evolution Approval & Launch: Approved by Union Cabinet on 25 November 2024. Operational till 15th Finance Commission cycle (2025–26). Launched as a standalone Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS). Predecessor Scheme: Restructured from Bharatiya Prakritik Krishi Paddhati (BPKP), which was under Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY, 2020–23). Budgetary Outlay: ₹2,481 crore total (Centre ₹1,584 crore; States ₹897 crore). Policy Shift: From input-intensive agriculture (Green Revolution model) → to low-input, ecosystem-based farming. Emphasis on traditional knowledge validated by science. Relevance : GS 3(Energy Security ) Objectives of NMNF Promote chemical-free agriculture and reduce farmer dependence on costly chemical fertilizers & pesticides. Enhance soil health and biodiversity, making farms climate-resilient. Strengthen farmer incomes through cost reduction and better market branding of NF produce. Establish 7.5 lakh hectares across 15,000 clusters of Natural Farming. Train and mobilize 1 crore farmers nationwide. Ensure last-mile delivery of inputs and guidance through Krishi Sakhis/Community Resource Persons (CRPs). Build bio-input infrastructure via 10,000 Bio-input Resource Centres (BRCs). Introduce Participatory Guarantee System (PGS)-based certification for NF produce. Principles and Practices of Natural Farming Core Principle: Farming without synthetic chemicals, relying on livestock-based, bio-resource recycling systems. Key Components: Beejamrut (seed treatment formulation of cow dung, urine, soil, etc.). Jeevamrut (fermented microbial solution for soil fertility). Mulching & crop residue management to retain soil moisture. Diverse cropping systems for ecological balance. Ecosystem Approach: Integrates soil, water, plants, microbes, livestock, insects, and climate. Outcome Goals: Lower input costs, improved soil carbon, pest resistance through biodiversity, and resilience to climate shocks. Implementation Architecture Cluster Model: 15,000 clusters, each of ~50 ha, ~125 farmers. New farmers can join at the start of each crop season. Incentives: ₹4,000/acre/year for 2 years (max 1 acre per farmer). Training & Handholding: 806 training institutions (KVKs, agri universities, NGOs). Model farms (1,100 developed) serve as learning hubs. 70,000+ Krishi Sakhis trained for community support. Monitoring: Online NMNF portal for geo-tagged, real-time monitoring. Multi-tier monitoring (Centre, State, District, Block). Institutional Ecosystem NCONF (National Centre for Organic & Natural Farming, Ghaziabad): Standard setting, certification system. MANAGE (Hyderabad): Knowledge Partner for NF Extension. ICAR-KVKs: Research, demonstrations, curriculum development (UG/PG courses). Community Role: SHGs, FPOs, Panchayati Raj bodies actively engaged in awareness, input production, and marketing. State-Level Initiatives (Precursor Models) Andhra Pradesh (APCNF): Large-scale community-managed NF with ecological balance focus. Gujarat (SPKK/PNF): Direct subsidies for cow upkeep and NF kits. Himachal Pradesh (PK3 Yojana): Achieved large farmer participation, >50,000 farmers by 2020. Rajasthan (Pilot Scheme): Training + input subsidies for NF adoption. Karnataka, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh: Also emerging as NF adopters with state support. Progress till July 2025 Farmers: 10 lakh+ enrolled. Clusters: Targets being operationalised across states. Training: 3,900 scientists/trainers trained. 28,000 CRPs mobilized. BRCs: 7,934 identified, 2,045 established. Funds Released: ₹177.78 crore (FY 2024–25) to states as per AAPs. Model Farms: 1,100 demonstration farms functional. Certification: PGS-India system being rolled out for NF produce. Convergence and Integration Linked with multiple ministries for holistic outcomes: Agriculture & Farmers Welfare (input, training). Rural Development (MGNREGA convergence for farm labour). AYUSH (linkage of medicinal crops with NF). Food Processing (value addition, branding). Animal Husbandry (livestock integration). Market Linkages: Local haats, APMC mandis, FPO-driven value chains. Common national NF brand in progress. Educational Integration: RAWE (Rural Agricultural Work Experience) student participation. UG, PG & diploma courses on NF. Challenges Adoption Barriers: Behavioural resistance among farmers used to chemical inputs. Yield concerns during initial transition period. Market Ecosystem: Certification and branding are still evolving. Limited consumer awareness compared to organic farming. Infrastructure Gaps: Only ~25% of targeted BRCs established by mid-2025. Monitoring & Extension: Requires strong local handholding; scale-up may strain resources. Policy Coordination: Need seamless convergence between central, state, and local agencies. Strategic Significance Climate Change: NF promotes low-carbon farming, reduces chemical fertilizer dependence (aligned with India’s Net Zero 2070 goals). Economic: Cuts input costs, enhances small/marginal farmer viability. Health & Nutrition: Safer, chemical-free food for consumers. Global Positioning: Positions India as leader in regenerative & ecological farming, aligned with SDGs (2, 12, 13, 15). Conclusion NMNF is not just a scheme but a paradigm shift—from “input-intensive productivity” to “nature-aligned sustainability.” Strong policy design, training ecosystem, and digital monitoring make it robust. The success depends on farmer behaviour change, market support, and scaling infrastructure. If effectively implemented, NMNF can be India’s flagship contribution to global sustainable agriculture models.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 14 August 2025

Content A war game-changer in a battle for influence in Asia Africa is challenging China’s mining hegemony The Freedom We Need A war game-changer in a battle for influence in Asia Background: How Warfare is Changing Second Nagorno-Karabakh War (2020): Drones played a decisive role, shifting the nature of modern conflict. Operation Sindoor (India-Pakistan, 2024): Showcased UAVs/UCAVs moving beyond reconnaissance → to precision strike capability. Global trend: Drones are now central to warfare — cost-effective, precise, low-risk (no pilots in danger). Relevance : GS 3(Science and Technology) ,GS 2(International Relations) Practice Question : “Drone warfare has transformed from being a tactical tool to a strategic instrument in global geopolitics.” Discuss India’s preparedness and challenges in leveraging drones for its security and foreign policy.(250 Words)   India’s Current Drone Capabilities Imports in Use: Israeli drones: Heron (surveillance, medium-altitude long-range). Harop (loitering munition, i.e., “kamikaze drone”). U.S. deal: 31 MQ-9B Reapers (SkyGuardian & SeaGuardian models) ordered in 2024 — for maritime domain awareness & strike capacity. Indigenous efforts: Rustom-II / Tapas-BH (still developmental). Some small quadcopters and tactical drones, but mostly for surveillance. Problem: Limited high-altitude long endurance drones. Lack of domestic production ecosystems → dependence on imports. India’s Needs (Strategic Gaps) Geography-driven needs: High-altitude drones → for Himalayas (LAC with China, LoC with Pakistan). Long-range maritime drones → for Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Small, cheap drones → for precision strikes and swarm attacks. Operational needs: Reconnaissance + strike integration. Payload capacity (missiles, sensors). Resilience against electronic warfare & anti-drone systems. Global Drone Market Landscape U.S.: MQ-9B is advanced, but U.S. lags in drone exports (only 8% market share, 2023). Restricted by MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) in selling advanced drones. China: Export powerhouse, especially in Africa, Middle East, and Asia. Cheap, mass-produced drones. India cannot rely on Chinese drones (geopolitical adversary). Türkiye: Success with Bayraktar TB2, Akinci. Affordable, combat-proven, popular in Ukraine and Africa. But India-Türkiye relations are adversarial → risky supplier. Israel: Strong defence ties with India, but limited production capacity (distracted by West Asia conflicts). Europe: Potential partners (France, Italy, UK) but expensive systems. India’s Strategic Choices Short-term: Continue imports from U.S. & Israel. Ensure critical tech transfer in deals. Medium-term: Strengthen joint ventures with Israel, Europe, U.S. Focus on indigenous UAV ecosystem: sensors, propulsion, AI-based navigation. Long-term: Position India as a UAV supplier to the Indo-Pacific, leveraging common needs (maritime security, border surveillance). Compete with Türkiye & China in drone diplomacy. Indo-Pacific Angle (India-Centric Opportunity) Countries needing drones: Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea. Common problem: Countering China’s “grey-zone warfare” (coast guard, militia, fishing fleets). India’s opportunity: Develop UAVs suited for maritime domain awareness & high-altitude terrain. Export drones → strengthen Quad partners & Indo-Pacific allies. Block Türkiye from expanding influence in the region. Challenges for India Domestic bottlenecks: DRDO’s slow pace, delays in Rustom-II. Bureaucratic red tape & over-reliance on public sector. Private sector innovation underutilised. External dependence: Engines, sensors, AI software often imported. Tech transfer limitations from U.S. & Israel. Counter-drone warfare: Need to simultaneously develop anti-drone systems (radar, jammers, laser weapons). India’s Way Forward Policy: Treat UAVs/UCAVs as core to Atmanirbhar Bharat defence push. Fast-track clearances for private players (IdeaForge, NewSpace, etc.). Technology: Invest in indigenous engines, batteries, AI navigation, stealth coatings. Swarm drone R&D for asymmetric warfare. Diplomacy: Use drone exports as defence diplomacy tool in Indo-Pacific. Build tech-sharing networks with Quad & ASEAN nations. Strategy: Integrate drones into joint force doctrines (Army-Air Force-Navy). Balance offensive UAVs with counter-drone capabilities. India’s Big Picture Goal Move from import-dependent user → to net exporter and innovator in UAVs. Seize the Indo-Pacific drone vacuum created by U.S. limitations. Use UAV diplomacy to counter China & Türkiye while deepening India’s strategic footprint. Make drones the “INS Vikrant moment” of India’s airpower modernisation. Africa is challenging China’s mining hegemony Background: China’s rise in Africa’s mining sector Africa’s resource wealth: Holds vast reserves of cobalt, lithium, copper, iron ore, and rare earths — critical for EV batteries, electronics, and renewable energy infrastructure. China’s dominance over past 2 decades: Secured large-scale mining rights through resource-for-infrastructure deals (e.g., DRC’s Sicomines deal). Controlled ~80% of DRC’s cobalt output. Gained influence via concessional loans, tax exemptions, and tied investments. China’s strategy: Access cheap raw materials + ensure supply chain security for its industries → feed its global manufacturing power. Relevance : GS 2(International Relations) Practice Question : “The mineral wealth of Africa is emerging as both a theatre of geopolitical competition and a test of developmental sovereignty.” Examine this in light of China’s dominance and Africa’s new assertiveness.(250 Words)   Mounting Criticism Against China Broken promises: Limited skills transfer to locals. Lack of promised processing facilities. Benefits concentrated in elites, not wider population. Economic losses: In 2024, DRC lost $132 million in tax revenue due to exemptions for Chinese firms. Governance backlash: DRC renegotiating contracts → raised state ownership in joint ventures from 32% → 70%. Deals cancelled (e.g., Norin Mining’s takeover of Chemaf Resources). Corruption scandals: Xinfeng Investments accused of bribery in Namibia. Social & labour issues: Reports of poor working conditions and hazardous environments. Environmental damage: Zambia: toxic acid spill contaminating Kafue River. Zimbabwe: coal mining near Hwange National Park blocked. Cameroon: protests against Sinosteel’s Lobé-Kribi project (cultural & ecological risks). Emerging Resistance in Africa Civil society activism: Groups like Congo is Not for Sale pushing for contract reviews. Local NGOs mobilizing communities against exploitative practices. Policy push: Zimbabwe (2022): Banned export of unprocessed lithium. Namibia (2023): Similar ban on lithium & critical minerals. Aim: ensure local beneficiation and industrialisation. Reclaiming sovereignty: Governments demanding transparency, environmental safeguards, fairer revenue sharing. Global Geopolitical Implications China’s slipping dominance: Still the biggest player, but future no longer guaranteed. African countries asserting more bargaining power. Reshaping supply chains: Africa moving from raw material exporter → value-added participant in green economy. Impacts EV, battery, renewable energy industries worldwide. Space for new entrants: EU, US, India, and others exploring partnerships to diversify away from Chinese dependence. India-Centric Analysis India’s vulnerabilities: Huge dependence on imports for critical minerals (lithium, cobalt, rare earths). Currently imports lithium primarily from Australia, Argentina, Chile; cobalt largely from DRC (indirectly via China). This creates a strategic risk, as China dominates refining and supply chains. Opportunities for India: Leverage Africa’s resistance to China: Present itself as a credible alternative partner. India’s advantage: Democratic governance model → more acceptable to African civil societies. History of South-South cooperation → goodwill in Africa through developmental assistance, education, medicine, IT capacity-building. Less exploitative image compared to China. Can invest in: Joint ventures in mining & processing plants. Technology and skills transfer programs (Africa values local capacity building). Infrastructure projects with transparency, avoiding China’s opaque debt-trap model. Policy moves India can consider: Establish strategic mineral partnerships (like Japan’s JOGMEC model). Push for long-term supply contracts with DRC, Namibia, Zimbabwe, etc. Promote public-private partnerships between Indian firms and African governments. Set up Indian-led mineral processing hubs in Africa. Integrate Africa into India’s critical mineral strategy under National Electric Mobility Mission Plan and Battery Storage Roadmap. Risks for India Competition from West & China: Africa is becoming a new geopolitical battleground. African governance challenges: Corruption, political instability, elite capture of resource rents. India’s own capacity constraints: Limited financial muscle compared to China; Indian firms less experienced in large-scale resource extraction. Need for sustainable practices: If India follows exploitative models, it risks backlash similar to China’s. Way Forward for India Adopt a “Responsible Mining Diplomacy” approach: Emphasize fair contracts, transparency, community development, environmental safeguards. Align with Africa’s demand for local beneficiation (help set up processing & downstream industries). Use India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) to institutionalise cooperation in critical minerals. Encourage Indian PSUs and private players (Hindustan Copper, Vedanta, Adani, Reliance for EV batteries) to invest in Africa. Collaborate with Quad partners (US, Japan, Australia) for joint Africa mineral initiatives → reduce Chinese dominance. Conclusion Africa is shifting from being a passive supplier of raw materials to an assertive partner demanding value addition. China’s dominance is being challenged by local activism, governance reforms, and environmental concerns. For India: This is both a strategic risk (if China consolidates again) and a historic opportunity (to secure critical minerals). India must build equitable, transparent, and sustainable mineral partnerships with Africa → crucial for its EV revolution, renewable energy transition, and Atmanirbhar Bharat strategy. The Freedom We Need Context and Background Written on the 79th year of Indian Independence. Reflects on true meaning of freedom beyond political independence. Argument: India now needs freedom of enterprise, innovation, and thought, not just liberation from colonial rule. Relevance : GS 1(Society ) , GS 2(Social Justice) Practice Question : “India achieved political freedom in 1947, but true freedom in 2025 must mean liberation of enterprise, education, and thought.” Discuss.(250 Words) Central Thesis India has political freedom, but economic and social structures remain constrained. Real freedom today = free enterprise + independent thinking + decentralised opportunity. Time has come not just to “liberalise” but to liberate education, industry, and society from excessive state control. Key Challenges Identified Global and domestic turbulence: Fluctuating world economy. Political isolation risks. Internal issues of caste, faith, and regional identity. Rising mental health concerns among youth. Colonial hangover in governance: Over-dependence on government control. Suspicion of private enterprise. Over-regulation stifling innovation. Call for Free Enterprise Current time demands bold, confident, adventurous entrepreneurship. India must: Liberate education, industry, infrastructure from state stranglehold. Encourage private investment in public goods (roads, bridges, universities). Shed the colonial mindset of restricting initiative. Free enterprise isn’t just about profit—it is about human ingenuity breaking barriers. Redefining Governance & Regulation When people dream big, disruptions will occur → need for flexible rules. Current bureaucratic structures and taxation laws too rigid → need reform. Balance: Some basic ground rules must remain, but radical innovation should not be suffocated. Without this, India risks being trapped in mediocrity and red-tapism. Education and Human Capital Education must focus on: Mental agility and physical fitness (not rote learning or narrow specialization). Producing independent thinkers, not indoctrinated citizens. Critique: Current education system produces “more sectarian or indoctrinated children.” Vision: Education as a springboard for creativity, risk-taking, and problem-solving. Information & Technology as Core Strength India’s IT and digital economy are global strengths. To retain autonomy and competitive edge: Invest in computing hardware, storage, networking. Develop indigenous capacity (mini-nuclear stations, small modular reactors). Prevent over-reliance on imports (e.g., semiconductors, energy). Strategic self-reliance in tech = national security + innovation. Cultural and Philosophical Dimension India’s Unique Selling Proposition (USP): A culture of seekers, not believers. Focus on inner exploration and consciousness. Contribution to global human advancement is spiritual and intellectual, not just material. Warning: Do not reduce India’s culture to dogma or sectarianism → must stay open, inclusive, questioning. Social Contract & Freedom True freedom means: Raising children in a system of safeguards, not rigid control. Allowing youth to experiment, innovate, fail, and grow. India is at a transitional stage: No longer an infant democracy. Like an adolescent—restless, energetic, but needs right environment to channel energy. Strategic Message India’s future success = mix of three freedoms: Economic freedom → Free enterprise, private initiative. Intellectual freedom → Independent education system, critical thinking. Cultural freedom → Preserve spirit of seekers, not rigid believers. If embraced, India can lead in technology, economy, and human consciousness. If ignored, India risks being shackled by outdated systems, protectionism, and overregulation. Conclusion Independence in 1947 gave political sovereignty. Independence in 2025 must mean: economic, intellectual, and cultural sovereignty. India’s strength lies in being: Entrepreneurial. Technologically agile. Spiritually rich. True freedom = ability of individuals to innovate without fear, learn without indoctrination, and dream without constraints.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 14 August 2025

Content Thousands of forest rights titles ‘vanish’ in Chhattisgarh records Undocumented migrants leaving via eastern border tripled in 2025’ India’s First Private EO Satellite Constellation (PPP Model) Many reject plastics treaty draft that omits curbs on production 1950 quake that broke mountains is a portend of things to come Kenyan farmers use bees, sesame to keep pillaging elephants away Key features of Income-Tax Bill, 2025 Dhirio Thousands of forest rights titles ‘vanish’ in Chhattisgarh records Basics: Understanding Forest Rights Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006: Recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes (FDSTs) and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs) over forest land and resources. Types of Rights under FRA: Individual Forest Rights (IFR): Land rights to individual tribal/OTFD families for habitation or self-cultivation (up to 4 hectares). Community Forest Rights (CFR): Collective rights of a community over common forest resources for livelihood, grazing, fishing, NTFP (non-timber forest produce), etc. Community Forest Resource Rights (CFRR): Specific right of Gram Sabhas to manage, protect, and conserve traditional forest resources. Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology – Tribal Rights) The Issue Reported Thousands of forest rights titles (IFR + CFRR) have “disappeared” from official records in the State Tribal Welfare Department. This happened over the last 17 months (based on RTI findings). Earlier, higher distribution figures were revised downward, with officials citing “miscommunication and reporting errors”. Current official data (as of May, via RTI): 4.82 lakh IFR titles distributed. 4,396 CFRR titles distributed. Across 30 districts of the state. Possible Reasons for Data Discrepancy Administrative lapses: Poor record management or clerical mistakes. Political/Statistical adjustments: Inflated figures earlier for achievements; later “correction” to avoid audit issues. Weak monitoring: No centralized digital system to track title distribution. RTI revelations: Only citizen-led transparency has highlighted inconsistencies. Implications of Missing Titles For Tribals/OTFDs: Loss of secure land tenure and livelihoods. Threat of eviction without formal rights. Erosion of trust in government schemes. For Governance: Raises credibility concerns over FRA implementation. Shows weak coordination between Tribal Welfare Department, Revenue, and Forest Departments. For Conservation: Without CFRR recognition, Gram Sabhas cannot legally manage forests → weakening decentralized forest governance. Broader Context National FRA Status (as per MoTA data, 2023): ~46.35 lakh titles distributed across India. But less than 50% of total potential recognized. Common Problems in FRA implementation: High rejection rates of claims without proper reasons. Poor awareness among beneficiaries. Forest Department resistance to giving up control. Lack of updated land records and satellite mapping. Way Forward Digital record-keeping: Create a state-wide FRA dashboard with district-wise data. Independent audit: Verify missing/altered numbers through CAG or third-party agencies. Empower Gram Sabhas: Strengthen their role in claim verification and record maintenance. Capacity building: Train revenue and tribal welfare officials on FRA provisions. Transparency measures: Mandate periodic public disclosure of FRA implementation status. ‘Undocumented migrants leaving via eastern border tripled in 2025’ India–Bangladesh Border Context Length: 4,096 km (world’s fifth-longest international border). States covered: West Bengal, Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram. Guarded by: Border Security Force (BSF). Issues: Illegal migration, cattle smuggling, human trafficking, insurgency infiltration. Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security)   Latest Data (as of July 15, 2025) Exiting India voluntarily: 2024: 1,049 persons. 2025 (till July 15): 3,536 persons (over 3x increase). Entering India from Bangladesh: 2024: 2,425 persons. 2025 (till July 15): 1,372 persons (drop). Causes of Surge in Exits Regime change in Bangladesh (August 5, 2024) → Political uncertainty, crackdown on opponents. India’s internal drive after Pahalgam terror attack (April 22, 2025) → Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) ordered States to detect and deport illegal Bangladeshi migrants. Methods of Exit Voluntary Exits: People leaving without coercion, caught by BSF. “Pushback” operations: Police/BSF pushing migrants across the border without legal deportation (not defined under Indian law). Estimated ~2,500 people pushed back since August 2024. Controversy: Trinamool Congress alleged BSF illegally pushed West Bengal residents; BSF denies. Legal & Security Aspects Deportation vs Pushback: Deportation requires due process + coordination with Bangladesh authorities. Pushback is extra-legal, raises humanitarian and diplomatic concerns. Security concern: Fear of undocumented persons being used for terror logistics, sleeper cells. Human rights concern: Risk of wrongful pushbacks, lack of legal remedy. India’s First Private EO Satellite Constellation (PPP Model) Basics: Earth Observation (EO) Satellites EO satellites: Capture images/data of Earth for climate, agriculture, security, urban planning. Analysis Ready Data (ARD): Processed satellite data, easy for direct use. Value-Added Services (VAS): Customized products (maps, surveillance, analytics). Relevance : GS 3(Science and Technology) New Initiative Lead consortium: Pixxel Space India (Bengaluru-based startup). Partners: Piersight Space, Satsure Analytics, Dhruva Space. Investment: ₹1,200 crore over 5 years. Constellation: 12 indigenous EO satellites. Announced by: IN-SPACe (Indian National Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre). Applications Climate change monitoring. Disaster management (floods, cyclones, earthquakes). Agriculture (crop monitoring, yield prediction). Marine surveillance (illegal fishing, coastal security). National security (border vigilance, troop movements). Urban planning (land use, smart cities). Significance Data sovereignty: Reduces reliance on foreign satellite imagery. Private sector maturity: First large-scale, commercially viable satellite project by Indian startups. Global competitiveness: Positions India as a supplier of high-quality geospatial intelligence. Strategic: Boosts Atmanirbhar Bharat in space and supports defence needs. Broader Linkages Migration Issue: Security-heavy → highlights vulnerabilities in India’s border management and challenges of human rights in migration policy. Space Sector Growth: Technology-heavy → shows India’s push to become self-reliant and competitive globally. Common thread: Both developments reflect India’s balancing act between internal security challenges (illegal migration) and external technological rise (space leadership). Many reject plastics treaty draft that omits curbs on production Background of the Treaty Global Context: Plastic pollution has become one of the most pressing environmental crises — affecting oceans, biodiversity, human health, and climate. Mandate: UN Environment Assembly Resolution 5/14 (2022) called for a legally binding treaty on plastic pollution covering the full life cycle of plastics (production, design, consumption, and waste). Expectation: Countries were supposed to finalise the draft treaty text this week in Geneva. Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology) The Chair’s Draft Text (Controversial Version) Excludes Production Cuts: The draft does not mandate reduction in plastic production, which was a key demand from the majority of countries. Favours Minority Bloc: Text aligns with positions of India, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and several Arab states, which want focus only on downstream waste management, not production. No Binding Reuse/Refill Systems: Fails to promote circular economy mechanisms (reuse, refill, extended producer responsibility). Weak & Voluntary Provisions: Instead of legally binding commitments, the text pushes voluntary measures, heavily favouring petrochemical producers. Positions of Different Stakeholders Minority Bloc (India, Arab States, Petrochemical Economies) Oppose binding restrictions on production. Advocate tackling plastic waste through waste management, recycling, and innovation rather than capping supply. India supported Kuwait’s approving statement. Majority Bloc (~80 Countries, including Colombia, Panama, many Latin American, African, European nations) Strongly opposed the draft text. Called it unacceptable, as it “spat upon red lines” like mandatory production cuts. Demand a new draft text that genuinely addresses lifecycle of plastics. Independent Experts/NGOs (IEEFA, CIEL, WWF) Criticise the draft as a mockery of the consultative process. Argue that the text ensures business-as-usual, protects industry interests, and undermines human health & rights. Say it betrays the vision of a full life-cycle treaty. Key Arguments from Both Sides Pro-Production Cuts (Majority) Plastic waste is overwhelming — recycling cannot keep up (only ~9% globally recycled). Upstream solutions (reduce production, redesign products) are essential. Without capping production, waste management alone is ineffective. Anti-Production Cuts (Minority, incl. India) Plastic is vital for development — cheap, versatile, supports healthcare, food supply chains, industry. Production cuts may hurt economies still developing. Focus should be on better collection, recycling, innovation, alternative materials. Geopolitical & Economic Dimensions Petrochemical Lobby: Countries with oil/gas-based economies (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc.) see plastic demand as critical to future revenues (since fossil fuel use in energy is declining). India’s Position: Balances between development needs and environmental goals — reluctant to cap production but supports recycling/innovation. North-South Divide: Developed nations push stricter production controls, while some developing countries resist due to economic dependence on plastics. Reactions at Geneva Strong Opposition: 80 countries, led by Colombia & Panama, rejected the draft outright. Support: Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and India signaled approval (with room for improvements). Observers’ View: The Chair’s text is lopsided, undermines years of consultations, and does not meet UNEA’s mandate. Broader Implications If treaty finalised in current form → Status quo continues, plastic production keeps rising (~400 million tonnes annually, projected to double by 2040). Weak treaty risks being symbolic rather than transformative. Failure to agree on stronger terms may deepen divisions between petro-states and environmental advocates. Way Forward Negotiators must decide whether to: Reopen text negotiations → draft a stronger version addressing lifecycle. Or settle for weak treaty → risk losing credibility of multilateral environmental agreements. Likely outcome: Compromise framework treaty with voluntary measures now, stronger provisions phased in later (similar to Paris Climate Agreement model). 1950 quake that broke mountains is a portend of things to come Background & Event Date & Time: August 15, 1950, at ~7:30 PM IST. Magnitude: 8.6 on the Richter scale — largest recorded continental earthquake (on land). Duration of shaking: 4–8 minutes, extremely long for an earthquake. Epicentre: Near Rima (Zayu), ~40 km west of Mishmi Hills, at the India–Tibet border. Depth: 15 km (shallow-focus → higher surface damage). Area affected: ~3 million sq. km — India (especially Assam & Arunachal), Tibet, Myanmar, Bangladesh, South China. Relevance : GS 1(Geography) Immediate Impact Casualties: ~1,500 deaths in India. 4,000 deaths in Tibet (Yedong village submerged into Yarlung Zangbo).   Cattle deaths: ~50,000–1,00,000. Infrastructure: Rail tracks twisted into “snake-like” patterns. Bridges, utilities, farms destroyed. Severe damage in Sibsagar–Sadiya region (Upper Assam). Environmental impact: Hills sheared → landslides blocked rivers. After days, landslide-dammed rivers burst → flash floods, wiping out villages downstream. Nehru’s radio address (Sep 9, 1950) described Brahmaputra flood carrying remains of villages, animals, elephants, timber. Psychological impact: Felt as far as Lhasa, Sichuan, and Yunnan. Geological & Tectonic Setting Plate Tectonics: Location: Eastern Himalayan Syntaxis (EHS), where Indian Plate collides with Eurasian Plate. Plate convergence: 20 mm/year average across Himalayas; 10–38 mm/year in NE Himalayas (GPS data). Complexity: Collision not just India–Eurasia but also interaction with Sunda Plate. Unique mechanism: Most Himalayan quakes = thrust faulting (one block overrides another). 1950 Assam quake = strike-slip + thrust hybrid mechanism. Suggested activation of multiple faults, propagating westwards into thrust zones. Seismology significance: Occurred when global seismographic networks were expanding. Boosted earthquake monitoring, leading to development of Plate Tectonic Theory. India had its first seismic observatory at Alipore (1898). Historical Earthquakes in Northeast India Ahom chronicles mention quakes in 1548, 1596, 1697 AD. Geological studies confirm a major medieval earthquake 1262–1635 AD. Northeast is historically one of the most seismically active zones in the Himalayas. Lessons & Scientific Significance Demonstrated: Himalayan tectonic segments can produce magnitude ≥8.6 earthquakes. Fragility: Earthquake + landslide + flood linkage in Himalayan terrain. Contribution to Science: Strengthened global evidence for continental plate collision. Case study for strike-slip vs thrust interplay in collisional zones. Preparedness: 1950 → limited built environment, mostly rural. Today → urban expansion, hydropower dams, highways → much higher vulnerability. Future Risks & Implications Central Himalayas: Most seismically active today; capable of hosting an Assam-1950–like event. Development vs Risk: Large dams, hydropower projects, highways in NE Himalayas → amplified disaster potential. Fragile terrain + high seismicity = seismic risk hotspot. Geopolitical angle: Both India and China planning hydroelectric projects in EHS (seismically vulnerable). Potential risk to regional security, ecology, and populations. Seismic preparedness needed: Stronger building codes. Early warning & dam safety protocols. Cross-border disaster cooperation. Core Takeaways The 1950 Assam Earthquake remains the world’s largest continental quake (M 8.6). It showcased the tectonic complexity of the Eastern Himalayas. Triggered not just ground shaking but cascading disasters (landslides, floods). Underlined the future seismic risk in a now far more densely populated and infrastructurally developed Northeast India. A warning for sustainable planning in one of Earth’s most active seismic zones. Kenyan farmers use bees, sesame to keep pillaging elephants away Geographical & Ecological Context Location: Taita Hills, Southern Kenya, near Tsavo East & Tsavo West National Parks. National Parks: Tsavo East lies <10 km east of the farmlands. Tsavo West borders the north, west, and south. Landscape: Unfenced parks → elephants freely migrate across human settlements. Ecological Need: Elephants require ~150 kg vegetation daily, making crop fields an attractive food source. Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology , Agriculture, Man-Animal Conflict)   Nature of Human-Elephant Conflict Crop raiding: Elephants target maize, watermelons, and green grams. Threat to human life: Annual deaths: 30–35 people killed in elephant-related incidents across Kenya (Kenya Wildlife Service estimate). Example: A 3-year-old girl killed in Taita Taveta; mother injured. Retaliation by humans: Spearing, poisoning, and hostility toward elephants. Escalation factors: Expansion of human settlements and farms → blocked migratory routes. Scarcity of natural forage in parks. Intelligent elephants adapt quickly — testing fences and charging when not deterred. Community Experiences Richard Shika (68, farmer): Survived a charging elephant while defending maize fields. Local farmers: Risk life when chasing elephants; face constant crop loss. Gertrude Jackim (70, farmer): Switched from maize to sesame → safer and less attractive to elephants. Innovative Mitigation Strategies Beehive Fences (“Bees as Guards”): Farmers hang beehives from wires between poles around farms. When elephants brush against the wire → hives swing → bees disturbed → elephants flee. Supported by Save the Elephants NGO. About 50 farmers in Taita adopted this method. Bonus: Provides honey income in addition to crop protection. Crop Diversification (Sesame Cultivation): Elephants dislike sesame smell; acts as a natural repellent. Encouraged replacement of high-risk crops (maize, watermelon). Around 100 farmers supported to grow sesame. Benefits: Reduced raids + profitable cash crop. Conservation & Coexistence Outlook Conservationist View (Yuka Luvonga, Save The Elephants): Human development (roads, farms, infrastructure) restricts migratory routes, intensifying conflict. Long-term aim: Coexistence rather than confrontation. Impact of Solutions: Reduced hostility → fewer cases of elephants being speared/poisoned. Enhanced human safety and livelihood security. Builds community acceptance of wildlife conservation. Global Significance: A model for addressing human-wildlife conflict in biodiversity hotspots worldwide. Integrates local innovation + ecological knowledge → “win-win” for farmers and wildlife. Key Takeaways Conflict Drivers: Migration barriers, food scarcity, human expansion. Human Costs: Annual deaths, crop destruction, psychological stress. Solutions: Beehive fencing (biological deterrent). Crop choice (sesame vs maize). Broader Lesson: Sustainable coexistence requires community participation, ecological sensitivity, and alternative livelihood strategies. Key features of Income-Tax Bill, 2025 Background & Context Old regime: Income-Tax Act, 1961 has governed direct taxation in India for over 6 decades. Need for reform: Cumbersome provisions, multiple amendments, and interpretational ambiguities. Globalisation of economy and digitisation of financial systems require a modern tax code. Aim: Simplification, removal of anomalies, legal clarity, and alignment with present-day business realities. Process: First draft of I-T Bill tabled in February 2025 → Withdrawn after criticism. Select Committee headed by Baijayant Panda gave recommendations (July 21, 2025). Revised Bill (624 pages) introduced in August 2025, incorporating corrections and most recommendations. Passed by Lok Sabha (Aug 12, 2025) and Rajya Sabha (Aug 13, 2025). Effective date: April 1, 2026 (FY 2026–27 onwards). Relevance : GS 2(Governance ) ,GS 3(Taxation) Key Features of Income-Tax Bill, 2025 Clarity & Rationalisation Refunds: Earlier draft: Refund claim restricted to returns filed before due date. Final Bill: Restriction removed → Refund possible even for belated returns. Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) for LLPs: Earlier draft: Expanded scope would have taxed LLPs even without special benefits. Final Bill: Restriction deleted, aligning AMT provisions with existing law → Prevents undue hardship. TCS (Tax Collected at Source): Clarification: Nil TCS on LRS remittances for education & medical purposes financed by financial institutions. Fixing Errors & Removing Anomalies Inter-corporate dividends: Drafting errors corrected to align with actual intent. Donations to NGOs: Ambiguity in treatment resolved → Non-profits exempt up to 5% of total donations (not anomalous base). TDS exemption certificates: Companies at 18.5% MAT rate (vs 25% preferential) clarified → Can obtain nil-TDS certificate if no liability. Transfer pricing: Ambiguities in provisions removed. Carry forward & set-off of losses: Clarified to reduce litigation. Beneficial ownership reference (Sec 79): Omitted to simplify corporate restructuring compliance. House property income: Explicit clarification of 30% standard deduction (after municipal taxes) retained. Structural & Conceptual Changes “Tax Year”: Defined as 12 months starting April 1 → Brings certainty and consistency in terminology. Information-gathering powers: Tax authorities can collect data from email servers, social media, and online investment platforms → Tightens compliance net. Sovereign wealth fund exemptions: Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) granted full tax exemption, as already given to Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA). Incentives & Simplification NPS withdrawals: Amendment in Taxation Laws Bill, 2025: Tax-free withdrawal of 60% lump sum corpus at retirement under National Pension System (aligns with global best practices). Focus on simplicity: Consolidated drafting, removal of duplications, harmonised provisions with Finance Act amendments. Additional Measures via Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill Passed alongside I-T Bill. Extends market-linked NPS tax benefits. Aligns sovereign wealth fund exemptions for foreign investment inflows. Implications For taxpayers: Greater flexibility (refunds, belated returns). Reduced compliance burden for LLPs & NGOs. Certainty in property income, transfer pricing, and carry forward of losses. For corporates: Clearer dividend rules, removal of ambiguity in beneficial ownership, aligned AMT provisions. For government: Strengthened tax enforcement with digital surveillance tools. Boost to FDI inflows via sovereign fund exemptions. For economy: Long-awaited modernisation of tax law. Expected to reduce litigation, improve ease of doing business, and broaden tax compliance base. Comparison: February Draft vs August Bill Refund restricted → Refund liberalised. LLP AMT expanded → LLP AMT aligned with old regime. TCS omission on LRS → Explicit Nil TCS provided. Drafting anomalies (NGOs, dividends, losses, TP) → Corrected. Ambiguities in Sec 79 → Removed. Saudi PIF exemption newly added. Dhirio Origins & Cultural Context Definition: Dhirio (also called dhirvo) is Goa’s traditional bullfight, involving two bulls locked in combat until one retreats. Historical Roots: Dates back to Portuguese colonial times in Goa. Traditionally organised during harvest season as a form of rural entertainment. Became an integral part of church feasts and local festivals. Cultural Significance: Seen as a community bonding event where villagers gathered. Similar to derbies in Europe—social occasions where being present was part of prestige. Discussed and remembered in communities for days after the fight. Comparison with Spanish Bullfighting: Goa’s version is described as “less complicated” and “less colourful” than Spain’s. Focuses on bulls fighting each other, unlike Spain where matadors face bulls. Relevance : GS 1(Culture , Heritage)   Mechanics of Dhirio Process: Two bulls, trained and encouraged by owners, charge at each other. They lock horns, with the clash compared to “the fall of a gigantic tree”. The fight ends when one bull withdraws. Role of Owners/Trainers: Egg the bulls on, prepare them for contests. Audience: Large crowds gather, cheering for bulls like a sporting event. Betting Tradition: Goa diaspora in Europe also places bets on fights, showing its economic-cultural extension. Legal Ban Trigger Incident (1996): A man named Xavier Fernandes was killed during a bullfight in Ambaji-Pathar. Legal Challenge: NGO petitioned Bombay High Court at Goa citing violation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA). Court Verdict: In September 1996, the High Court banned all animal fights, including dhirio. The ban remains in effect under PCA provisions. Political & Social Debate Arguments for Legalisation: Cultural Preservation: MLAs argue dhirio is part of Goa’s identity and heritage. Economic Potential: Seen as a way to generate tourism and state revenue. Sporting Analogy: Compared to boxing or wrestling—testing strength without “cruelty”. Regulation Proposal: Suggestions like capping horns, proper supervision, and designated venues. Parallels with Jallikattu: Since Tamil Nadu secured exceptions for its bull-taming sport in 2017, Goa MLAs propose similar treatment. Arguments Against Legalisation: Animal Cruelty: Critics point out it violates PCA and promotes violence as entertainment. Human Safety: Risk of fatalities (e.g., 1996 incident). Ethical Concerns: Questioning normalisation of violence for cultural or economic reasons. Political Optics: Balancing tradition with India’s commitment to animal welfare laws. Legal & Constitutional Dimensions Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960: Section 11 prohibits causing unnecessary pain or suffering to animals. Used as legal basis for the ban. Supreme Court Judgments: Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014): Struck down jallikattu citing cruelty. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2017: Allowed jallikattu through state law, upheld as cultural right. Goa MLAs now seek similar constitutional-cultural exemption for dhirio. Potential Path: State legislative amendment + central approval, similar to Tamil Nadu’s route. Present Status & Way Forward Current Status: Dhirio remains illegal under the 1996 High Court ruling. Ongoing Demand: Strong cross-party MLA demand for revival and regulation. Seen as both cultural protection and tourism opportunity. Future Challenges: Balancing animal rights vs. cultural rights. Avoiding international criticism of animal cruelty. Need for legal clarity: whether Goa Assembly can carve out exceptions like Tamil Nadu.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 13 August 2025

Content: Documenting India’s Endangered Languages Response to Concerns on 20% Ethanol Blending in Petrol and Beyond Documenting India’s Endangered Languages Context and Importance of Endangered Languages India is home to immense linguistic diversity, with 2,843 mother tongues recorded in the 2011 Census. Languages with fewer than 10,000 speakers are considered endangered; SPPEL currently identifies 117 such languages. Endangered languages are not just linguistic assets—they carry culture, oral traditions, ecological knowledge, rituals, and identity of communities. Example: Toda language (proto-South-Dravidian, Nilgiri Hills) connects the Toda tribe to their sacred landscape and ancestral knowledge. Relevance : GS 1(Society ,Culture , Heritage) Historical Background First systematic survey: George Abraham Grierson’s Linguistic Survey of India (1894–1928). Documented 179 languages and 544 dialects across British India. Laid the groundwork for understanding India’s linguistic diversity. Subsequent censuses expanded language mapping: 1961 Census: 1,652 mother tongues. 2011 Census: 2,843 mother tongues, of which 1,369 recognized, 1,474 unclassified. SPPEL builds upon this historical foundation to preserve languages that are under-documented or critically endangered. Endangered Language Preservation in India SPPEL (Scheme for Protection and Preservation of Endangered Languages) Implemented by Central Institute of Indian Languages (CIIL), Mysuru, under the Ministry of Education. Objectives: Document grammar, vocabulary, oral traditions. Create audio-visual archives, pictorial glossaries, bi-/tri-lingual dictionaries. Digitally archive materials for worldwide access. Produce primers and educational material to promote early literacy in tribal languages. Current Status: 117 endangered languages documented. Target: Document ~500 lesser-known languages. Other Government Initiatives National Education Policy 2020: Promotes multilingual studies and the three-language formula. Ministry of Tribal Affairs: Funding AI-based language preservation (TRI-ECE scheme). Ministry of Culture & allied organizations: Promote tribal arts, oral traditions, manuscripts, festivals, and literature festivals (e.g., UNMESHA). Global Perspective UNESCO identifies ~50% of 7,000 global languages as endangered. 2022–2032 declared as the International Decade of Indigenous Languages. International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (August 9) highlights rights, culture, and preservation. AI and Indigenous Knowledge AI poses both opportunities and risks: Risks: Exploitation of indigenous knowledge without consent, perpetuating colonial patterns. Opportunities: Language revitalization, translation tools, ecological conservation. Examples: Polynesian communities using AI for reef conservation. Māori language revitalization in New Zealand. India: TRI-ECE scheme developing AI translation tools for tribal languages (Bhashini, BITS Pilani, IITs). Linguistic Diversity in India By Zone Northern: 25 languages (Spiti, Jad, Gahri) Northeast: 43 languages (Aimol, Tangam, Sherdukpen) East-Central: 15 languages (Bhunjia, Bondo, Toto) West-Central: 5 languages (Nihali, Baradi, Bhala) Southern: 20 languages (Toda, Soliga, JenuKurumba) Andaman & Nicobar: 9 languages (Sentinelese, Onge, Shompen) By Language Family Indo-European: 24 languages; 76.89% population Dravidian: 17 languages; 20.82% population Austro-Asiatic: 14 languages; 1.11% population Tibeto-Burmese: 66 languages; 1% population Semito-Hamitic: 1 language; 0.01% population Tribal languages distribution: Tibeto-Burman (North/Northeast), Austro-Asiatic (Central/East), Dravidian (South), Indo-European (Elsewhere) Multilingualism and Cultural Continuity India exhibits multilingualism: Monolinguals: 89.59 crore Bilinguals: 22.90 crore Trilinguals: 8.60 crore (2011 Census) Dominated by major languages: Hindi, Bengali, Marathi. Endangered tribal languages face pressure from dominant languages, making preservation efforts essential. SPPEL and Ministry of Tribal Affairs promote trilingual/bilingual primers to maintain heritage while enabling education in dominant languages. Documentation Process (SPPEL Model) Recording Phase: Capture words, sentences, songs, stories. Transcription & Analysis: Convert oral data to written form; analyze grammar and phonetics. Grammar Construction: Systematic documentation of syntax, sentence formation. Cultural Documentation: Rituals, festivals, livelihood practices, sacred traditions. Digital Archiving: Metadata creation, digital repositories for global access. Revitalization: Community-driven primers, educational materials for children. Technological Support: High-end audio/video recording, linguistic software, digital repositories (e.g., Sanchika portal launched July 2025). Example of cultural documentation: “Panuha Not: The Pig Festival Chowra” (Andaman & Nicobar Islands). Challenges in Language Preservation Declining number of native speakers, especially elders. Dominance of major languages in education and media reduces intergenerational transmission. Lack of native script (e.g., Toda language), requiring transliteration and creation of primers. Resource constraints in remote and tribal areas. Need for ethical AI deployment respecting consent and indigenous intellectual property. Socio-Cultural Implications Loss of language = loss of oral history, rituals, ecological knowledge, worldview. Preserving languages supports human rights, cultural identity, cognitive diversity, and sustainable practices. Language preservation strengthens intergenerational continuity and community engagement with modern education while retaining cultural roots. Key Takeaways India has a rich but fragile linguistic ecosystem, with urgent need for protection and revitalization. SPPEL provides a structured, technology-driven framework for documenting endangered languages. AI is a double-edged tool: can empower preservation but risks exploitation. Multilingualism initiatives, documentation, cultural mapping, and literacy programs are essential for sustainable preservation. Global and national efforts are converging to ensure that indigenous languages survive and thrive for future generations. Response to Concerns on 20% Ethanol Blending in Petrol and Beyond Context and Policy Background Ethanol Blending Programme (EBP): National initiative to blend ethanol with petrol to reduce dependency on crude oil and promote cleaner fuels. India’s energy transition aligns with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Net Zero by 2070 target. Biofuels and natural gas act as bridge fuels—non-disruptive transition options supporting climate and energy goals. Ethanol blending aims to: Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Promote energy security by reducing crude imports. Boost rural economy and farmer incomes. Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology) Environmental and Socio-Economic Benefits GHG Emission Reduction: Sugarcane-based ethanol: 65% lower emissions than petrol. Maize-based ethanol: 50% lower emissions than petrol (NITI Aayog study). CO₂ Reduction: E-20 adoption saves approx. 736 lakh tonnes CO₂, equivalent to planting 30 crore trees. Energy Security: Crude oil substitution of ~245 lakh metric tonnes since 2014-15. Foreign exchange savings: Rs. 1,44,087 crore (2014-15 to 2024-25). Expected 2025-26 savings at 20% blending: Rs. 43,000 crore. Farmer Welfare: Increased income for sugarcane and maize farmers. Contributed to reducing farmer distress and suicides (e.g., Vidarbha region). Farmers become “Urjadaatas” (energy contributors) in addition to “Annadatas” (food providers). Technical Advantages of E-20 Fuel Performance: Higher octane (~108.5 vs petrol 84.4) → improved anti-knocking, better acceleration. Higher heat of vaporization → reduces intake manifold temperature, increases air-fuel mixture density, boosting volumetric efficiency. Pollution Reduction: Carbon emissions reduced by ~30% compared to E-10. Fuel Standards: Regular petrol RON increased from 88 → 91 (BS-VI) → 95 with E-20. Vehicle Compatibility: Some vehicles manufactured post-2009 already E-20 compatible. Minimal efficiency drop in E-10 vehicles; negligible in E-20-compatible vehicles. Addressing Concerns Mileage and Performance: Influenced by multiple factors: driving habits, maintenance, tyre pressure, AC load. Claims of “drastic efficiency drop” are misplaced. Vehicle Life: Older vehicles may need occasional replacement of rubber parts/gaskets, inexpensive and routine during servicing. Insurance: E-20 use does not invalidate vehicle insurance; misinformation on social media clarified by insurers. Price Concerns: Ethanol price has risen over years: C-heavy molasses ethanol: Rs. 46.66 → Rs. 57.97 (ESY 2021-22 to 2024-25). Maize ethanol: Rs. 52.92 → Rs. 71.86 over same period. Blended fuel pricing reflects cost realities; programme maintained despite ethanol being costlier than petrol. Global Benchmarking Brazil: Successfully uses E27 for years without issues. Vehicle manufacturers like Toyota, Honda, Hyundai produce vehicles compatible in both countries. Standards: BIS and Automotive Industry Standards ensure drivability, startability, metal/plastic compatibility. Strategic and Policy Insights Gradual Implementation: E-20 roadmap laid out in 2021 IMC report, giving time for vehicle technology and supply chain adjustments. Government commitment to E-20 until 31 Oct 2026. Decisions beyond E-20 pending IMC recommendations and stakeholder consultations. Energy Transition Philosophy: Avoid reverting to E-0 petrol to prevent loss of pollution reduction and energy security gains. Integrated Stakeholder Engagement: Collaboration with vehicle manufacturers, OMCs, ethanol producers, R&D agencies ensures smooth transition. Economic Impact Direct benefit to farmers through procurement of ethanol. Reduction in foreign crude dependency translates into massive forex savings. Supports rural employment and maize/sugarcane cultivation viability. Reinforces India’s energy self-reliance and local value addition. Communication and Public Perception Government actively debunks misinformation: Efficiency, insurance, and cost concerns addressed with data. Social media fear-mongering corrected via official clarifications. OEMs engage with consumers to provide support for vehicle tuning or parts replacement. Summary: Key Takeaways E-20 is safe, environmentally beneficial, and economically advantageous. Supports climate targets, farmer incomes, and energy security. Performance and mileage concerns are largely unfounded; proper maintenance ensures optimal vehicle life. Global precedents and vehicle standards reinforce technical feasibility. Government maintains a carefully calibrated roadmap, engaging stakeholders before moving beyond E-20.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 13 August 2025

Content Clear the myths, recognise organ donation as a lifeline Dogs and laws Clear the myths, recognise organ donation as a lifeline Context and Importance Organ transplantation: One of modern medicine’s greatest achievements; gold standard for terminal and irreversible organ failure. Current gap in India: 500,000 lives lost annually due to lack of suitable donor organs.   Transplants performed: 4,990 in 2013 → 18,378 in 2023. Deceased donors: only 1,099 after brain death. Organ donation rate: 0.8 per million population vs >45 per million in Spain/USA. Significance: Each preventable death represents a social, ethical, and medical challenge; organ donation is a life-saving intervention. Relevance : GS 2(Health , Social Issues) Practice Question : India’s low organ donation rates are rooted more in myths, misinformation, and social barriers than in medical or technical limitations. Discuss the factors inhibiting organ donation and suggest policy, awareness, and system-level reforms to bridge the gap between demand and supply. (250 words, 15 marks) Barriers to Organ Donation Myths and Misconceptions Disfigurement of body Families fear organ retrieval affects funeral rites. Reality: Procedures preserve appearance; medical teams respect cultural practices. Religious concerns Misbelief: organ donation violates spiritual norms. Reality: Faith leaders endorse donation as a compassionate act compatible with all religions. Premature brain death fears Some fear hospitals declare death early for organ harvesting. Reality: Brain death determined under Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994: Strict clinical and legal framework. Multidisciplinary board confirmation. Repeated assessments and documentation. Age and Health Misconceptions Myth: Only young accident victims are eligible. Reality: Older donors and natural deaths can contribute. Organs/tissues like kidneys, liver segments, lungs, corneas, bone, skin, heart valves save or improve lives. Awareness and Education Strategies Mass media campaigns Audio-visual content on TV and social media targeting younger audiences. Human storytelling Real donor families and transplant recipients communicate impact. Community workshops Led by trained counsellors; safe space for questions about rites, protocols, and eligibility. Educational integration Curriculum inclusion in life sciences and ethics in schools/colleges. Peer-to-peer education empowers students to spread awareness. Health-care professional engagement Training for physicians, nurses, and staff to initiate compassionate discussions. Dedicated transplant coordination teams guide families through decision-making. Policy and System-Level Considerations National will and governance: Bridging demand-supply gap requires sustained political, administrative, and social commitment. Presumed consent model Successful in Spain, Croatia. Default donation unless adult opts out. Requires strong family support and grievance redress mechanisms. Robust legal and ethical oversight: Ensures transparency, public trust, and unbiased determination of brain death. Technical and Medical Framework Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994: Defines legal criteria for organ donation. Establishes procedures for brain death confirmation, documentation, and ethical retrieval. Multidisciplinary verification: Ensures ethical, legal, and clinical rigor. Protects against exploitation or malpractice. Ethical, Cultural, and Social Dimensions Organ donation is framed as a profound act of charity and legacy. Respect for religious beliefs and cultural norms is central to public acceptance. Fosters empathy, social responsibility, and community solidarity. Strategic Imperatives for India Sustained awareness campaigns targeting both general public and health professionals. Integration into education to build a culture of donation from young age. National and local governance mechanisms to ensure transparency, efficiency, and public confidence. Incremental adoption of policies like presumed consent, adapted to India’s socio-cultural context. Data-driven monitoring of donation rates, donor demographics, and transplantation outcomes to refine strategies. International Benchmarks Spain and USA: >45 donations per million population, demonstrating that high donation rates are achievable with policy, awareness, and infrastructure synergy. Global best practices emphasize presumed consent, donor registries, and robust coordination frameworks. Key Takeaways Organ donation is a life-saving, ethical, and socially responsible act. India faces a critical supply-demand gap; low donation rates are largely due to misconceptions, lack of awareness, and cultural barriers. Education, awareness, policy reforms, and professional engagement are central to bridging the gap. Every adult should be encouraged to register as a donor, and families must respect the decision. With collective societal commitment, preventable deaths due to organ shortage can be drastically reduced. Dogs and laws Context and Background Supreme Court order (August 11, 2025): Directs Delhi and surrounding areas to collect all street dogs within 8 weeks. Requires permanent confinement in pounds and rapid expansion of shelter capacity. Represents strong judicial intervention in response to urban public health and safety concerns. Public health context: Delhi records ~30,000 dog bite cases annually. Rabies remains a fatal risk, particularly for poor urban residents with limited access to post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Relevance : GS 1(Society),GS 2(Social Issues , Judiciary) Practice Question :The recent Supreme Court order on street dog confinement has brought to light deep conflicts between judicial directives, existing animal welfare laws, and urban public health needs. Analyse the legal, operational, and ethical dimensions of this issue and suggest a way forward.(250 words, 15 marks) Legal and Regulatory Framework Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules 2023: Mandate “capture, neuter, vaccinate, release” (CNVR) for street dogs. Prohibit permanent relocation or long-term impoundment of healthy dogs. Exceptions allowed only for: Rabid dogs Incurably ill dogs Dangerously aggressive dogs (veterinary assessment required) Conflict: Supreme Court order mandates permanent impoundment, contradicting ABC Rules 2023. Municipal officers face a legal dilemma: obey Court (risk ABC violation) or obey ABC Rules (risk contempt of Court). Operational and Practical Challenges Ineffectiveness of current ABC implementation: Sterilisation coverage remains below 70%, insufficient to control reproduction. Returning dogs to original territories sustains high-density packs in urban areas. Garbage accumulation and children’s play areas remain vulnerable to bites. Alternative strategies blocked: Long-term impoundment and structured sheltering are not legally permissible under current ABC Rules, limiting municipal flexibility. Human-Animal Ecology Urban density considerations: India’s modern cities have dense informal settlements, incompatible with large free-roaming dog populations. Romanticised “community dogs” ideology neglects public safety and health risks. Proposed categorisation of dogs: Sociable dogs: adoptable, can be rehomed. Aggressive/chronic illness: require euthanasia. Residual healthy dogs: should live in proper shelters, not on public roads. Policy and Governance Recommendations Modernisation of legal framework: Update Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 for contemporary urban realities. Clearly delineate duties of municipalities regarding dog population control. Municipal responsibilities: Specify minimum staffing and veterinary standards for pounds and shelters. Tie fiscal transfers and funding to measurable reductions in dog bites and rabies incidence. Financial and institutional support: National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) or similar bodies to fund shelters and sterilisation programs. Veterinary workforce development: Integrate shelter medicine into veterinary curricula to ensure adequate trained staff.  Public Health and Ethical Considerations Balancing cruelty and control: Avoid underfunded shelters that become hidden but cruel containment centres. Humane treatment must complement public health objectives. Community engagement: Programs should sensitize citizens to risks of dog bites and rabies while respecting animal welfare. Strategic Implications Court intervention highlights administrative lethargy in urban animal management. Opportunity for policy overhaul combining: Humane treatment Public safety Effective sterilisation and adoption programs Calls for integrated planning across urban governance, public health, veterinary education, and fiscal policy. Key Takeaways Supreme Court order creates urgent legal and operational conflict with ABC Rules 2023. Urban realities demand updated legal frameworks, resource-backed sheltering, and sterilisation strategies. Humane dog population management requires: Clear classification of dogs Adequate shelter infrastructure Funding and workforce support Public awareness and community participation Without strategic planning, Delhi risks replacing visible street dog problems with hidden, underfunded, and ethically problematic shelters.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 13 August 2025

Content Before tackling stray dogs issue, India must count them properly How does satellite internet work? IAF prioritises induction of long-range missiles after Operation Sindoor success For ‘Creamy Layer’ Exclusion, Govt Looks at Proposal on ‘Equivalence’ Before tackling stray dogs issue, India must count them properly Supreme Court Order – August 11, 2025 Directive: Delhi government & local bodies to immediately capture stray dogs and place them in shelters. Restriction: “Not a single dog picked up shall be released back on the streets/public spaces.” Case Type: Suo motu hearing on increasing stray dog attacks, including on infants. Public Reaction: Support: Given rising number of dog bites and fear of rabies. Criticism: Delhi lacks adequate shelter capacity. Practicality of housing tens of thousands of dogs questioned. Concerns over long-term viability without population control or vaccination. Relevance : GS 1(Indian Society) , GS 2(Social Issues ) Core Problem – Dog Counting & Data Gaps Policy Framing Issue: India’s most recent nationwide stray dog count – Livestock Census 2019. Delhi-specific dog census – 2016. 2025 policies are being framed using 6–9-year-old estimates. Implications: Population dynamics (birth rates, deaths, abandonment) change rapidly. Outdated data distorts vaccination targets, shelter capacity planning, and resource allocation. Leads to data-policy mismatch. State-wise Data Anomalies from 2019 Livestock Census Tamil Nadu: 4.4 lakh stray dogs recorded. 8.3 lakh dog bites in the same year – ~2 bites per stray dog. High bite rate raises suspicion of undercounted dog population. Manipur: Recorded 0 stray dogs in census (implausible). 5,500 dog bite cases recorded the same year. Odisha: 17.3 lakh dogs (2nd highest in India). 1.7 lakh bites – ~100 bites per 1,000 dogs, much lower than Tamil Nadu’s 1,900 per 1,000 dogs. Inference: Bite data (hospital-reported) is reliable because rabies fears compel victims to seek treatment. Therefore, discrepancy lies in dog population data, not bite data. Data-Driven Policy Potential Learning Opportunity: Tamil Nadu (high bite rate) could learn preventive measures from Odisha (low bite rate). But absence of accurate population data prevents targeted policy replication. Statistical Ratios: Tamil Nadu – ~1,900 bites per 1,000 dogs (extremely high). Odisha – ~100 bites per 1,000 dogs (low). Current Scenario: No inter-state knowledge sharing based on bite-per-dog ratios. Rabies Elimination Strategy WHO Findings: 99% of human rabies cases are due to bites from infected dogs. Strategic mass dog vaccination = most cost-effective prevention method. Target: Vaccinate 70% of dogs and maintain for 3 consecutive years to break transmission cycle. India’s National Action Plan (2018): Adopted WHO approach. Stressed on strategic, sustained vaccination over culling or mass sheltering. Goa Case Study (Nature Journal): Vaccinated 70% of dogs statewide. Outcome (2019): Human rabies cases eliminated. Monthly canine rabies cases reduced by 92%. Goa had highest dog bite rate per capita in 2019 (1,412 per 1 lakh people) but successfully cut rabies deaths to zero through vaccination, not mass confinement. Policy Challenges & Gaps Sheltering Constraints: Urban areas like Delhi lack capacity for mass capture and lifelong housing. Shelter maintenance cost per dog is significantly higher than vaccination costs. Data Reliability: Census undercounts lead to flawed vaccination drives & incorrect shelter capacity planning. Resource Allocation: Without accurate numbers, vaccination supply chains and medical preparedness are inefficient. Legal & Ethical Concerns: Mass confinement may violate animal welfare norms unless humane conditions are ensured. May lead to overcrowded shelters with disease outbreaks if infrastructure is inadequate. Way Forward – Evidence-Based Recommendations Immediate: Update dog population census (preferably via rapid digital survey methods, using GIS tagging). Simultaneously expand vaccination drives to at least 70% coverage. Medium-Term: Implement state-wise best-practice sharing (Odisha-type low bite rate strategies). Prioritise vaccination and sterilisation over mass sheltering. Establish rabies surveillance units linked to Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme. Long-Term: Institutionalise annual dog population monitoring. Create centralised database linking dog bite incidents, rabies cases, and vaccination records. Public awareness campaigns to promote responsible pet ownership and avoid abandonment. How does satellite internet work? Context and Relevance Digital Connectivity as a Necessity: Increasing dependence on internet across civilian, commercial, and military domains. Rising demand for high-reliability, high-coverage networks not limited by geography. India-Specific Trigger: Starlink’s imminent entry expected to transform internet infrastructure and policy frameworks. Potential to bridge digital divide in rural and remote India. Relevance : GS 3(Science and Technology) Why Satellite Internet? – Limitations of Ground Networks Ground-based networks (fibre/cellular): Economically viable only in dense urban areas; costly in sparsely populated terrain. Vulnerable to natural disasters (e.g., floods, earthquakes) disrupting physical infrastructure. Limited ability for on-the-move connectivity (aircraft, ships, temporary military bases). Satellite internet advantages: Global coverage, terrain-independent. Rapid deployment in emergencies and sudden demand surges. Operates in isolated environments (offshore rigs, polar stations, glaciers). Dual-use potential — both civilian and military applications. Technical Architecture Network Segments: Space Segment: Satellites carrying communication payloads. Ground Segment: User terminals, ground stations, control centres. Satellite Types by Orbit: GEO (35,786 km): Large coverage (~1/3 Earth) but high latency (signal delay). Suitable for TV broadcasting, not for real-time operations. Example: Viasat Global Xpress. MEO (2,000–35,786 km): Medium latency, moderate coverage. Example: O3b (20 satellites). Lower latency than GEO but still not optimal for high-speed gaming or trading. LEO (<2,000 km): Very low latency, smaller coverage footprint → requires mega-constellations. Example: Starlink (>7,000 satellites in orbit, plans for 42,000). Smaller, cheaper satellites with faster deployment cycles. Mega-Constellations – Starlink’s Model Features: Hundreds/thousands of small LEO satellites interconnected via optical inter-satellite links. On-board signal processing → reduces ground dependency and latency. Seamless hand-off between satellites ensures continuous coverage despite high orbital speeds (~27,000 km/h). User Terminals: Compact, self-installable, and becoming increasingly affordable. Operational Advantage: Enables “internet in the sky” routing data globally without touching national ground stations (strategic implications). Real-World Applications & Case Studies Disaster Response: Hurricane Harvey (2017) – Viasat provided emergency communications when 70% of cell towers failed. Military Operations: Ukraine war – Starlink used for troop coordination, drone ops, and anti-jamming communication. Indian Army – Used in Siachen Glacier for high-altitude operational readiness. Security Risks: Borderless nature allows illicit use — Indian agencies have seized smuggled Starlink devices from insurgents and smugglers. Sectoral Impact Civilian & Economic Uses: Rural broadband, telemedicine, e-learning, precision agriculture, smart cities, logistics. Integration with Internet of Everything (IoE) and autonomous transport. Strategic & Military Uses: Secure communications in remote theatres, rapid-deploy forces, unmanned systems (drones, naval vessels). Strategic intelligence networks independent of terrestrial vulnerability. Security & Regulatory Challenges Dual-Use Nature: Same infrastructure can serve humanitarian missions or hostile groups. Jurisdictional Complexity: Cross-border coverage bypasses national controls. Spectrum & Orbital Slot Management: Potential for space congestion and signal interference. Cybersecurity: Vulnerability to satellite hacking, spoofing, or jamming. Cost Considerations Current Pricing: User terminal ≈ $500 (~₹41,000). Monthly subscription ≈ $50 (~₹4,100). Market Implication: Higher than terrestrial broadband → niche for remote areas and mission-critical industries. Future direct-to-smartphone integration could drastically reduce barriers. Policy & Strategic Implications for India Opportunities: Bridge rural-urban connectivity gap. Boost national disaster resilience. Enhance military communication independence. Risks: Security misuse by insurgents or cross-border elements. Strategic dependency on foreign-operated constellations. Required Measures: Formulate a national satellite internet policy integrated into Digital India and defence doctrines. Encourage domestic satellite constellations (ISRO/privates) to reduce foreign dependency. Strengthen cyber and space law frameworks. Engage in international governance on orbital management and mega-constellation norms. Strategic Outlook Satellite internet is shifting from backup connectivity to strategic infrastructure. Control over satellite constellations is emerging as a geopolitical power lever. For India, the priority is a balanced approach: harness benefits for economic growth and defence, while safeguarding sovereignty and security. IAF prioritises induction of long-range missiles after Operation Sindoor success Context & Operational Lessons Operation Sindoor demonstrated the combat value of long-range stand-off weapons in neutralising strategic targets without exposing aircraft to hostile air defences. The IAF successfully bypassed Chinese HQ-9 air defence systems (range ~200 km) by engaging from 250–450 km distances. Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security , Defence) Weapons Used During the Operation BrahMos: Supersonic cruise missile; range ~290–450 km (newer versions exceed 450 km). SCALP: Air-launched cruise missile; range ~500 km. Rampage: Stand-off air-to-ground missile; range ~250 km. Crystal Maze: Precision-guided stand-off weapon; range ~100–250 km. Shift in Capability Development Priority: Induct air-to-ground and air-to-air missiles with strike ranges >200 km. Goal: Engage from beyond the envelope of adversary air defences, improving aircraft survivability. Indigenous Development Push Astra Missile: IAF requesting DRDO to accelerate longer-range variants: Astra Mk-1: ~110 km Astra Mk-2: ~160–200 km Astra Mk-3 (planned): ~350 km Project Kusha: Indigenous long-range air defence missile system (similar class to S-400), DRDO-led. Foreign Acquisitions R-37 (Russia): Air-to-air missile; range >200 km, Mach 6; designed for high-value airborne target destruction (AWACS, tankers). S-400 Triumf: Additional 2 squadrons planned; current systems already altering PAF flight patterns. Tactical & Strategic Impact Strategic Deterrence: Deployment of S-400 has pushed Pakistani Air Force to either: Fly deep inside its territory, or Operate at low altitudes (limiting operational flexibility). Combat Record: IAF downed a surveillance aircraft >300 km away — record engagement range for the service. Broader Implications Doctrine Shift: From close-in engagements to stand-off warfare in both offensive and defensive roles. Geopolitical Signalling: Capability to strike deep inside adversary territory without crossing borders. Self-Reliance Goal: Balancing indigenous missile programmes (Astra, Project Kusha) with critical foreign buys (R-37, S-400). For ‘Creamy Layer’ Exclusion, Govt Looks at Proposal on ‘Equivalence Background & Legal/Foundation Facts Origin of “creamy layer”: Concept crystallised by Indra Sawhney (1992) — welfare reservation for OBCs must exclude the socially/economically advanced among them (the “creamy layer”). Current central income ceiling: Government revised the creamy-layer income threshold to ₹8 lakh p.a. in 2017; this ceiling has been used since for income-based exclusion. Reservation quantum: OBCs enjoy 27% reservation in central government recruitment and central educational institutions (Mandal-era policy implementation). Administrative actors: Proposal prepared after consultations among ministries (Social Justice & Empowerment, Education, DoPT, Legal Affairs, Labour & Employment, Public Enterprises), NITI Aayog and NCBC. Relevance : GS 2(Governance , Social Justice) What the Proposal Seeks to Do (Key Elements) Apply an “equivalence” yardstick to classify posts/positions across Central/State governments, PSUs, universities and private sector for determining creamy-layer status. Extend the creamy-layer criteria beyond income to include post/grade/role equivalence (e.g., Group A/Class I officers, officers in PSUs, certain university faculty ranks). Specific proposals noted: Teaching posts (assistant profs, associate profs, profs) starting at Level-10 and above equated with Group-A — proposed categorisation as ‘creamy layer’. For PSUs: equivalence decided for some Central PSUs in 2017; proposal to extend uniformly. In private sector: board-level and below-board managerial executives to be treated under creamy-layer rules — but a caveat that private executives with income ≤ ₹8 lakh would not be categorised as creamy. For government-aided institutions: follow service/pay scales of parent govt; placement into creamy/non-creamy categories based on equivalence of post & pay. Rationale Driving the Proposal Equity objective: Ensure reservation benefits target genuinely backward OBCs by excluding those with high status/remuneration regardless of sector. Closing loopholes: Prevent upwardly mobile OBCs in PSUs/private sector/universities from continuing to access benefits intended for less-privileged OBCs. Uniformity: Remove arbitrariness where identical economic/social status across different employers produces unequal treatment. Technical & Administrative Challenges Defining equivalence across heterogeneous pay structures: Central pay levels (7th CPC Levels) are standard; state pay scales, PSU pay structures and private sector designations vary widely — mapping is complex. University pay structures (UGC/AICTE scales) differ across aided/unaided institutions. Data availability & verification: Reliable, auditable salary/income data for private sector employees is often absent or opaque (in-kind benefits, bonuses, offshore income). Need for integration with ITR/EPFO/payroll databases — raises privacy, compliance and logistical issues. Operational enforcement: Who will operationalise equivalence? NCBC? DoPT? State agencies? Requires central guidelines and state cooperation. Grievance handling and appeals mechanism will be necessary to mitigate wrongful exclusion. Sectoral legal limits: Reservation is constitutionally applicable to state employment and state-regulated educational admissions. Imposing creamy-layer rules on private employers may invite legal challenges unless tied to state-mandated reservation schemes. Legal & Constitutional Issues Indra Sawhney precedent: Courts accept exclusion of creamy-layer from reservation; they have also allowed use of multiple indicators (occupation, property, parental position) besides income. Judicial scrutiny likely: Any extension to private sector or atypical categories will draw litigation on: Scope and competence of government to classify posts in private entities; Equality principles (Article 14) and reservation jurisprudence (Article 16/15). Inter-state divergence risk: States may have different pay scales and different OBC lists → potential federal disputes and litigation. Equity & Social Justice Implications Targeting efficiency: Properly applied, equivalence can ensure benefits reach economically/socially backward OBCs rather than well-remunerated professionals. Risk of over-exclusion: Rigid post-based exclusion could remove access to reservation for OBCs who hold “higher” designations but are socially disadvantaged (e.g., first-generation degree holders in government roles). Gender and regional effects: If most high-pay posts are male-dominated or concentrated in certain states, exclusion could produce uneven intersectional impacts. Merit vs affirmative action trade-offs: Narrowing beneficiary pool intensifies competition and might reduce perceived legitimacy if not transparently implemented. Political and Institutional Risks Political sensitivity: Any change to creamy-layer rules triggers strong political reactions; OBC leader groups may oppose stricter exclusion or contest specific categories. Administrative capacity: States and employers may resist new compliance burdens; PSUs/universities may lack willingness or means to implement equivalence matrices. Gaming and avoidance: Employers/individuals could reclassify posts, split packages, or use contractual reshuffles to circumvent equivalence. Practical Implementation Design Elements (Recommended) National Equivalence Matrix: Central government should publish a national table mapping common pay scales/designations to standard levels (e.g., Level-10 = Group A equivalent). Use 7th CPC levels as anchor. Map state pay bands to central levels using transparent formulae (cost-of-living / median state pay multipliers). Hybrid test for creamy-layer: Combine income threshold (₹8 lakh baseline) + post/grade test + household wealth/parental occupation — avoid single-criterion exclusions. Sectoral carve-outs & transition rules: Private sector: apply equivalence only where statutory reservation obligations exist (e.g., state law mandates or aided institutions). For pure private recruitment, treat equivalence as advisory unless law changes. Grandfather existing employees for a limited period; phased rollout (2–3 years) to allow compliance. Verification & data flow: Use Aadhaar-PAN-ITR linkage (with legal safeguards) for income verification; require employers to submit certified payroll statements for equivalence checks. NCBC or an empowered central authority to manage a secure verification portal and redressal cell. Transparency & grievance redress: Publicly accessible criteria, sample equivalence charts, and an online appeal mechanism with time-bound resolution. Periodic review: Review equivalence matrix and income ceiling every 3–5 years to keep pace with inflation and labour market changes. Monitoring & Impact Evaluation Metrics Short-term (6–12 months): number of cases assessed under equivalence; appeals filed; sectoral distribution of exclusions. Medium-term (1–3 years): change in OBC representation by socio-economic decile in public recruitments and admissions; number of displaced beneficiaries re-classified. Long-term (3–5 years): measure socio-economic mobility among OBC cohorts (education, earnings), and whether benefits are reaching lower deciles. Data sources: DoPT/SSC recruitment data, university admission records, NCBC reports, EPFO/ITR aggregates (anonymised). Potential Unintended Consequences & Mitigation Unintended exclusion of deserving OBCs → mitigate via multi-factor test and appeals. Legal challenges delaying implementation → mitigate by early stakeholder consultations and robust legal vetting. Administrative burden on states/PSUs/universities → central funding/technical support and phased implementation. Private sector resistance → limit mandatory application to areas under state law; incentivise voluntary compliance (tax benefits/grants) for private employers to adopt transparent OBC hiring practices. Political Economy & Social Messaging Communication strategy required: Clear public explanation that equivalence seeks targeted social justice (not punishment of upward mobility). Use data, case studies, FAQs. Engage OBC representative bodies and state governments early to build consensus and preempt politicisation. Explain rationale to private sector: fairness, social licence, and potential CSR incentives. Conclusion — Net Assessment Conceptually sound: Expanding the creamy-layer exclusion to account for role/post equivalence addresses a real fairness concern: affluent OBCs capturing reservation meant for the disadvantaged. Execution risk is high: Heterogeneous pay systems, data gaps, privacy issues, legal limits on regulating private employers, and political sensitivity make implementation complex. Policy design must be hybrid and phased: Combine income + post equivalence + qualitative checks; publish a national equivalence matrix; phase rollout with legal backing, state cooperation, transparency, and grievance redress. Goal: Ensure reservation remains a tool to uplift genuinely backward groups — not a benefit captured by socio-economically advanced individuals — while protecting legitimate upward mobility and avoiding arbitrary exclusion.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 12 August 2025

Content Empowering Annadatas: Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana Comprehensive reforms taken up to instill credit discipline in PSBs Empowering Annadatas: Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana Background & Context Launched: 18 February 2016, replacing earlier schemes like NAIS & MNAIS. Objective: Provide affordable, comprehensive crop insurance to farmers for protection against non-preventable natural risks. Coverage: Pre-sowing to post-harvest stages, including damage during storage (if due to notified calamities). Principle: One Nation – One Crop – One Premium. Type: Area-based crop insurance scheme. Relevance : GS 2(Governance , Schemes) ,GS 3(Agriculture) Key Performance Statistics (2016–2025) Total applications insured: 78.41 crore. Claims paid: ₹1.83 lakh crore to 22.667 crore farmers. Enrolment growth: 3.17 crore farmers (2022–23) → 4.19 crore (2024–25) → 32% increase (highest since inception). Non-loanee farmer participation: 20 lakh (2014–15) → 522 lakh (2024–25). Farmer applications coverage: 371 lakh (2014–15) → 1510 lakh (2024–25). Largest crop insurance scheme in the world (in terms of farmer applications)   Financial Structure Premiums paid by farmers: Kharif food/oilseed crops – 2% of sum insured. Rabi food/oilseed crops – 1.5%. Annual commercial/horticultural crops – 5%. Government’s share: Remaining 95–98.5% borne by Centre & State. Sharing ratio: Normal States – 50:50. NE States (Kharif 2020 onwards) & Himalayan States (Kharif 2023 onwards) – 90:10. Risk Coverage under PMFBY Yield Losses: Drought, floods, pests, diseases, cyclones, hailstorms, landslides, etc. Prevented Sowing: Up to 25% of sum insured if sowing fails due to adverse weather. Post-harvest Losses: Up to 14 days from harvest for “cut & spread” crops damaged by cyclones/cyclonic rains. Localized Calamities: Hailstorms, landslides, inundation impacting individual farms. Implementation Reforms (2016–2025) Transparency & Accountability National Crop Insurance Portal (NCIP): Centralized online enrolment, data sharing, and direct transfer of claims. Digi-Claim Module: Operational since Kharif 2022. Linked to PFMS & insurer systems for real-time settlement. Automatic 12% penalty on delayed payments (from Kharif 2024). Premium Subsidy Reform: Central subsidy disbursed separately from State share to avoid delays. Mandatory ESCROW Accounts (from Kharif 2025): For timely State premium contribution. Farmer Awareness Initiatives ‘Meri Policy Mere Haath’: Physical distribution of insurance policies at village level. Fasal Bima Saptah (twice yearly) & Fasal Bima Pathshalas to educate farmers. KrishiRakshak Portal & Helpline (14447): Ticket-based grievance redressal within fixed timelines. Technology Integration YES-TECH: Remote sensing-based yield estimation. Launched for paddy & wheat (Kharif 2023), soybean added in Kharif 2024. Minimum 30% weightage given to YES-TECH data in yield calculation. WINDS: Expanded network of Automatic Weather Stations & Rain Gauges (5x increase). Supports hyper-local weather data for PMFBY, drought management, weather forecasting. Institutional & Policy Continuity January 2025 Cabinet Approval: Continuation of PMFBY & RWBCIS till 2025–26. Budget: ₹69,515.71 crore. RWBCIS (Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme): Weather-index based claim calculation (vs. yield-based in PMFBY). Farmer Profile in PMFBY (2024–25) Tenant farmers: 6.5% of applications. Marginal farmers: 17.6%. Loanee farmers: 48%. Remaining: Non-loanee small & medium farmers. Significance Reduces farmers’ vulnerability to climate risks and income shocks. Encourages investment in improved seeds, mechanization, and sustainable practices. Prevents debt traps by ensuring timely financial assistance. Promotes inclusive coverage (sharp rise in non-loanee participation). Challenges Delay in State premium share: Still a cause for delayed claim settlements despite reforms. Yield estimation disputes: Technology integration ongoing but not fully scaled. Awareness gaps: Many small/marginal farmers still lack complete understanding of claim procedures. Voluntary enrolment for loanee farmers: Risk of lower participation if not incentivized. Pointers Schemes Linkage: PMFBY aligns with Doubling Farmers’ Income, National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture. SDG Linkage: SDG 1 (No Poverty). SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). SDG 13 (Climate Action). Comprehensive reforms taken up to instill credit discipline in PSBs Background & Rationale for Reforms in PSBs Persistent NPA crisis in 2010s weakened credit growth and bank profitability. Poor credit discipline due to lax appraisal, political interference, and evergreening of loans. Governance gaps in PSBs, with weak accountability of top management. Technology gap and inefficiency compared to private sector banks. Low credit penetration to MSMEs and underserved sectors despite priority sector lending mandates. Relevance : GS 3(Banking and Economy) Comprehensive Reforms to Instill Credit Discipline a) Legal & Institutional Framework Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 – Time-bound resolution of corporate insolvency; deterrence against willful default. Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) – RBI database for monitoring loans >₹5 crore; enables early detection of stress. Early Warning Systems – Automated, data-driven triggers to flag potential NPAs using third-party data and transaction monitoring. Market-based Stressed Asset Transfer Framework – Allows eligible entities to acquire stressed loans; reduces PSB balance sheet risk. National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. (NARCL) – ‘Bad bank’ model for aggregating and resolving large stressed debts. b) Governance & Risk Management Arms-length appointment of top PSB executives through Financial Services Institutions Bureau (FSIB). Non-Executive Chairmen in nationalised banks for better board oversight. Performance-linked tenure extensions for MDs/CEOs. Enhanced Access & Service Excellence (EASE) Reforms – Benchmarking governance, risk management, HR, and technology adoption. Amalgamation of PSBs (2017–2020) – Consolidated 27 PSBs into 12 for scale economies and operational efficiency. c) Legislative Measures Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2020 – Extended RBI oversight to co-operative banks; improved depositor protection. Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 2025 – Higher governance standards, stronger audit norms, statutory reporting to RBI, simplified nomination processes. Technology Adoption & Financial Inclusion JAM Trinity (Jan Dhan–Aadhaar–Mobile) – Enabled mass DBT payments and reduced leakages. UPI, interoperable Bank Mitras, and DBTs – Brought millions into the formal payment ecosystem. Digital payment growth (FY 2017–18 → FY 2024–25): Volume: 2,071 crore → 22,831 crore (CAGR 41%) Value: ₹1,962 lakh cr → ₹3,509 lakh cr UPI growth: Volume: 92 crore → 18,587 crore (CAGR 114%) Value: ₹1.10 lakh cr → ₹261 lakh cr Milestone: July 2025 – 1,946.79 crore monthly transactions. Measures to Boost Credit Flow to MSMEs a) Credit Guarantee & Liquidity Support Mutual Credit Guarantee Scheme for MSMEs (MCGS-MSME, 2025) – Government-backed guarantee for term loans up to ₹100 crore for equipment/machinery purchase; total guarantee cap ₹7 lakh crore or 4 years. Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) – 100% guarantee to lenders; liquidity support of ₹3.68 lakh crore to 1.19 crore businesses, including ₹2.42 lakh crore to 1.13 crore MSMEs. b) Credit Appraisal Reforms New Credit Assessment Model for MSMEs (2025) – Uses digital, verifiable data and automated risk scoring; covers both Existing-to-Bank (ETB) and New-to-Bank (NTB) borrowers. c) Strengthening CGTMSE Guarantee cover up to 85% for loans ≤ ₹10 crore to MSEs. Reduced annual guarantee fee (0.37% – 1.20%). Cumulative guarantees as on 31 July 2025: 1.22 crore guarantees worth ₹10.50 lakh crore. Impact Assessment Credit discipline improved via IBC deterrence, CRILC monitoring, and early warning systems. NPA recovery & resolution efficiency enhanced through NARCL and market-based transfer frameworks. Governance quality in PSBs significantly upgraded via FSIB, EASE, and mergers. MSME credit penetration widened through targeted guarantees and digital credit appraisal. Digital payments ecosystem transformed, making India the global leader in real-time transactions. Co-operative bank stability improved via 2020 Banking Regulation amendments.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 12 August 2025

Content A Court ruling with no room for gender justice Reviving civic engagement in health governance Assuaging concerns A Court ruling with no room for gender justice Background of the Law Section 498-A, IPC (now Section 85, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) Enacted in 1983 to address cruelty by husband or relatives towards a wife. Punishment: Up to 3 years imprisonment + fine. Cruelty broadly defined to include: Dowry harassment. Driving the woman to suicide. Causing injury to life, limb, or health. Introduced after increasing dowry deaths and recognition that many cruelty cases end in suicide/murder. Works in conjunction with Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and other women-protection laws. Legislative intent: Rights-based protection in marriage, considering India’s socio-cultural context. Relevance : GS 1(Society ) , GS 2(Social Justice , Governance) Practice Question : The recent Supreme Court endorsement of a two-month “cool-off” period before arrest in Section 498-A IPC cases has reignited debates on judicial overreach, gender justice, and protection of victims of domestic violence. Critically analyse the judgment in light of constitutional principles, legislative intent, and the socio-legal realities of domestic violence in India.(250 Words) The Recent Supreme Court Judgment Origin: Allahabad HC directions in an individual matrimonial dispute: No arrest or coercive action for two months (“cool-off” period) from complaint. Creation of Family Welfare Committees at district level to examine cases before action. SC’s Role: Endorsed HC’s blanket protection from arrest for two months. Did so without detailed socio-political analysis or hearing State govt fully. Effect: Even with strong evidence, police cannot arrest for 2 months. Risk to complainant’s safety. Encourages police inaction in domestic violence cases. Creates a precedent overriding legislative intent in criminal law. Legal & Constitutional Concerns Separation of Powers: Parliament enacted law after social study & deliberation; SC effectively modifies operational enforcement. Judicial Overreach: Venturing into policy terrain without empirical basis. Goes against SC’s own principle (Sushil Kumar Sharma, 2005) that misuse is no ground to dilute a law. Equality Before Law: Selectively subjecting this criminal provision to more rigorous procedural barriers undermines uniformity of criminal law. The ‘Misuse’ Narrative Past SC Observations: Preeti Gupta (2010) – non-bona fide cases. Sushil Kumar Sharma (2005) – “legal terrorism” remark. Arnesh Kumar (2014) – strict guidelines before arrest under 498-A. Empirical Reality: NCRB (2022): Conviction rate ~18%—higher than many other IPC crimes. Low conviction ≠ misuse; can be due to: Investigative lapses. Social/familial pressure on women to withdraw. Difficulty proving crimes in private/domestic spaces. High burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt). NFHS-5: Massive under-reporting of violence against women. Rising case numbers linked to greater legal awareness, not necessarily false cases. Humsafar report: Misuse claims reflect institutional bias. Social & Gender Justice Dimensions Structural Inequalities: Patriarchal family structures make women dependent and vulnerable. Domestic violence is often hidden, with minimal outside witnesses. Impact of Blanket Protection: Chilling effect on filing complaints. Increases physical & emotional risk for victims. Sends a signal that domestic violence is a “private matter” rather than a serious criminal offence. Victim Vulnerability: Immediate police action is crucial in many cases for safety & evidence preservation. Delay enables intimidation, destruction of evidence, and coercion into compromise. Criminal Justice System Implications Operational Challenges: Police may deprioritise domestic cruelty cases. Creates confusion in enforcement due to differing treatment from other IPC offences. Uniformity Principle: Criminal law requires consistency; special procedural hurdles for one category may lead to fragmentation. Precedent Risk: Similar “cool-off” mechanisms may be sought in other crimes, weakening deterrence. Balancing Misuse vs. Protection Potential for misuse exists in all laws, but safeguards already exist: Arrest guidelines (Arnesh Kumar). Judicial scrutiny at bail stage. Quashing under Section 482 CrPC for false cases. Better Solutions: Improve investigation quality. Sensitise police & judiciary. Fast-track genuine cases. Penalise proven false complaints without diluting protection for victims. Key Takeaway This judgment, while perhaps well-intentioned to prevent misuse, risks weakening legal protection for victims of domestic violence, creates procedural inequality in criminal law, and intrudes into policy space reserved for Parliament. The challenge is not in the existence of Section 498-A, but in ensuring its fair, efficient, and sensitive implementation. Reviving civic engagement in health governance Scheme Context & Comparative Perspective Makkalai Thedi Maruthuvam (Tamil Nadu, Aug 2021): Focus: Doorstep healthcare for NCD patients. Achievements: Reached 1.5 crore people (as per TN govt data, 2024). Gruha Arogya (Karnataka, Oct 2024; expanded June 2025): Focus: Home-based care, NCD screening, and follow-up services. Coverage: All districts from June 2025. Similar Models: Mohalla Clinics (Delhi), Arogya Mithra (Andhra Pradesh), Mobile Medical Units (Assam, Odisha). Global Parallel: Brazil’s Family Health Strategy – community-based teams delivering preventive and primary care at households. Similar schemes across States reflect proactive healthcare delivery, but they raise questions on citizen participation in governance—a critical component for accountability and rights-based healthcare. Relevance : GS 2(Health , Governance) Practice Question : Doorstep healthcare delivery schemes such as Tamil Nadu’s Makkalai Thedi Maruthuvam and Karnataka’s Gruha Arogya represent a shift towards proactive service provision. However, without active citizen participation in health governance, such initiatives risk remaining top-down and exclusionary. Examine the structural and mindset barriers to meaningful public engagement in India’s health governance, and suggest measures to overcome them.(250 Words) Key Issues Identified Mindset Problem: Policymakers view people as beneficiaries rather than rights-holders or co-creators of health systems. Performance Metrics Bias: Success measured by targets met (beneficiaries reached) rather than process quality or community experience. Governance Capture: Decision spaces dominated by medical professionals trained in western biomedical models, with little exposure to public health administration. Structural Weakness in Engagement Platforms: Village Health Sanitation and Nutrition Committees (VHSNCs), Rogi Kalyan Samitis, Mahila Arogya Samitis often inactive or poorly functioning. Issues: infrequent meetings, poor fund utilisation, lack of inter-sectoral coordination, entrenched social hierarchies. Resistance Factors: Fear of increased workload, loss of elite control, and exposure to accountability pressures. Implications Democratic Deficit in Health Governance: Without inclusive participation, health policy risks becoming top-down, technocratic, and inequitable. Erosion of Trust: Treating citizens as passive recipients reduces community trust and service uptake. Perpetuation of Health Inequities: Ignoring structural determinants (poverty, discrimination) while blaming individuals for poor health-seeking behaviour worsens marginalisation. Citizen Engagement in Health Governance Why it matters: Strengthens accountability and transparency. Counters epistemic injustice (exclusion of lived experiences from policy). Enhances trust and uptake of services. Platforms in India: Rural: VHSNCs, Rogi Kalyan Samitis. Urban: Mahila Arogya Samitis, Ward Committees. Challenges: Non-functional or token committees in many areas. Ambiguous roles, poor intersectoral coordination, fund underutilisation. Social hierarchies excluding marginalised voices. Structural & Mindset Barriers Dominance of biomedical, doctor-led administration → limited public health perspective. Promotions based on seniority, not public health expertise. “Beneficiary” terminology reduces citizens to passive aid receivers instead of rights-holders. Policymakers often focus on targets (beneficiaries covered) rather than process quality (participatory planning, inclusivity). Lessons from Existing Frameworks NRHM (2005) & NHM: Institutionalised public engagement via VHSNCs and untied funds, but success uneven due to poor activation. Urban Civic Bodies: Ward Committees, NGO-led health committees show potential but face capacity and legitimacy gaps. Alternative Channels: Citizens resort to protests, media, and litigation when formal participation mechanisms fail—indicative of unmet demand for accountability. Key Constitutional & Legal Linkages Article 21 – Right to health as part of Right to Life (Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity vs State of West Bengal, 1996). Directive Principles – Article 38, 39(e), 41, 42, 47 mandate improving public health. 73rd & 74th Amendments – Empower local bodies for health and sanitation services. National Health Mission Framework – Mandates bottom-up planning with community participation. Way Forward – Two-Pronged Approach Empowering Communities: Disseminate health rights awareness. Early civic education on health governance. Ensure representation of marginalised groups. Provide tools/resources for meaningful participation. Sensitising Health System Actors: Shift from “poor awareness” blame to addressing structural determinants (poverty, access barriers). Promote collaborative governance between citizens & health professionals. Assuaging concerns Background: Ethanol Blending in India Ethanol blending = mixing ethanol (biofuel) with petrol to reduce fossil fuel use. Origins: Introduced globally after the 1970s oil shock to reduce import dependence. Global leaders: Brazil (E27+), U.S. (E10–E85 flex-fuel vehicles). India’s current target: 20% blending (E20) by 2025. Policy rationale in India: Import substitution: Save ~$10 billion annually in crude import bills. Price advantage: Ethanol is cheaper than petrol (though price benefits not always passed to consumers). Carbon footprint reduction: Ethanol is considered carbon-neutral as plant growth offsets emissions during combustion. Relevance : GS 2(Governance) ,GS 3(Science , Technology , Environment) Practice Question : Ethanol blending in petrol promises import substitution, carbon reduction, and rural economic benefits, but also raises concerns over vehicle compatibility, consumer protection, and food security. Discuss the key challenges in India’s ethanol blending policy implementation and suggest measures to ensure sustainable and consumer-friendly adoption.(250 Words) Economic & Agricultural Dimensions Feedstock sources in India: C-heavy molasses (by-product of sugar industry, not used for sugar production). Broken rice (often surplus, rots in FCI godowns). Maize (lower input crop; less water and fertiliser-intensive than sugarcane). Food security concern: If ethanol demand grows rapidly, crop allocation could shift from food to fuel. In shortage years, prioritising fuel production over PDS foodgrain supply may create conflict. Import substitution limitations: Fertiliser imports (~$10 billion/year) offset some forex savings from ethanol-related crude import cuts. Technical & Vehicle Compatibility Issues Efficiency penalty: Ethanol has lower energy density than petrol → reduced mileage. Material durability & corrosion: Ethanol can degrade fuel lines, tanks, seals. Global compatibility norms: Vehicles meeting Euro 2 / U.S. Tier 1 / India’s BS 2 (since 2001) can use up to E15 safely. BS 2 mandates closed-loop fuel control systems for optimal combustion & reduced emissions. Material upgrades in BS 2 vehicles reduce corrosion risk. India’s scenario: Vehicles since 2023 are designed for E20. Many older models (pre-2023) may be compatible only with E5 or E10. No consumer choice at pumps — same fuel for all vehicles. Price reduction promised earlier is not visible at retail level. Regulatory & Standardisation Efforts Two ethanol-specific fuel standards already adopted in India. Proposed E27 norm (drawing from Brazil’s model) in pipeline. Government stance: Internal research shows no significant harm to vehicles. Transparency gap: Automakers have not clearly disclosed ethanol compatibility of older models. Example: Models sold ~5 years ago accepted only E5. Policy & Consumer Concerns Older vehicle owners at risk: May face engine issues or reduced performance without mitigation. No voluntary opt-in: Unlike Brazil, India does not offer pure petrol option alongside ethanol blends. Insurance protection: Risk of claim rejection if engine/fuel system damage attributed to ethanol. Editorial urges government-backed insurance guarantees. Need for automaker disclosure: Public lists of past models and their ethanol tolerance. Recommended mitigation steps for incompatible models (e.g., part upgrades). Policy Recommendations (Editorial + Value Add) Transparency: Automakers to publish compatibility lists for older models. Mitigation Support: Govt to mandate and facilitate retrofit kits for older vehicles. Insurance Protection: Govt-backed claims for ethanol-related damage. Feedstock Planning: Dynamic policy to prioritise food over fuel in shortage years. Consumer Choice: Separate dispensing lines for E0, E10, E20. Global Comparisons Brazil: Flex-fuel vehicles run on 0–100% ethanol. E27 is standard at pumps. Price incentives for ethanol maintained consistently. USA: E10 widespread; E85 (85% ethanol) available for flex-fuel vehicles. EU: E10 is common; strict sustainability criteria for biofuels. Editorial’s Central Argument Ethanol blending is economically & environmentally beneficial but: Must be implemented with consumer protection, transparency, and choice. Full disclosure by manufacturers is necessary. Government must underwrite risks for vehicle owners, especially with older vehicles. Price benefits must reach the consumer at the pump.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 12 August 2025

Content U.S. Criticism of India for Trade with Russia is Factual but Illogical Impact of Google Antitrust Case Why Can’t Army Deploy Women to Fight Terror, Asks SC Supreme Court Order on Stray Dogs and Delhi’s Shelter Infrastructure 10-Foot Caste Wall U.S. criticism of India for trade with Russia is factual but illogical Core Development Policy Action: U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a 25% tariff on Indian goods (in addition to an earlier 25% tariff). Stated Reasons: India’s high dependence on Russian crude oil imports at discounted rates. India’s continued military equipment purchases from Russia. Timing: Tariff to take effect in a few weeks; announced August 2025. Relevance : GS 3(Economy ) , GS 2(International Relations) Factual Findings vs. Trump’s Claims Oil Imports: India’s Russian crude imports surged after 2022, doubling its share in overall oil imports (Chart 1 in source). This was encouraged indirectly by the U.S. to stabilize global energy markets after the Ukraine war price-cap mechanism. EU has imported more fossil fuels from Russia during the same period than India — contributing ~22% (€212B) of Russia’s fossil fuel export earnings (Feb 2022–Aug 2025). China’s imports of Russian crude also exceed India’s. Arms Imports: Over 50% of India’s arms imports since 2022 came from Russia. Long-term trend: steady decline in Russian share since 1990s, replaced partly by France, U.K., and U.S. U.S. itself is Israel’s largest arms supplier; Israel’s actions in Gaza have been labelled genocidal by some institutions — raising double-standard concerns. Hypocrisy & Double Standards Energy Trade: U.S. and EU continue certain Russian imports (fertilizers, critical minerals, steel) despite sanctions. U.S. imported over $800M worth of Russian fertilizers in 2025 (till Feb). Arms Trade: Criticizing India’s Russia arms trade while U.S. arms exports to Israel remain high undermines moral consistency. Indirect Energy Links: EU and U.S. import petroleum products refined in India from Russian crude — effectively circumventing direct crude sanctions. Strategic Context India’s Position: Maintains decades-old Russia ties for energy security & defence. Uses discounted crude for economic advantage (inflation control, energy stability). U.S. Position: Uses tariffs as pressure tool to reshape India’s Russia relationship. Likely aims to push India toward Western-aligned energy and arms supply chains. Global Ripple Effects: Tariffs may strain U.S.–India trade partnership (bilateral goods trade >$190B in 2024). Could push India to diversify export markets (ASEAN, Africa, Gulf). Economic Impact Projection For India: Targeted goods will face reduced competitiveness in U.S. market. Sectors at risk: textiles, gems & jewellery, certain auto components, pharma intermediates (depending on scope). For U.S.: Tariffs may marginally increase input costs in sectors relying on Indian imports. Could hurt U.S. consumers in price-sensitive goods. For Russia: Minimal direct impact; India likely to maintain some crude & arms trade due to cost-benefit calculus. Geopolitical Significance This is less about pure economics and more about geoeconomic coercion: Part of U.S. strategy to deter middle powers from deepening economic ties with sanctioned Russia. Tariffs signal linkage diplomacy — using unrelated trade levers to influence security and foreign policy decisions. India faces test of its strategic autonomy doctrine — balancing ties with U.S., EU, and Russia without conceding policy independence. What will be the impact of Google antitrust case? Background Parties Involved: Google / Alphabet Inc. – Dominant player in mobile OS (Android) and app distribution (Google Play Store). Competition Commission of India (CCI) – National competition regulator enforcing the Competition Act, 2002. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) – Appellate body reviewing CCI’s orders. Alliance Digital India Foundation (ADIF) – Industry coalition advocating for Indian startups against Big Tech dominance. Market Context: Android powers over 95% of smartphones in India. Google Play Store is the primary distribution platform for Android apps. Market dominance allows Google to shape both consumer experience and developer economics. Relevance : GS 3(Competition , Economy) CCI’s Findings (2022) Allegation: Abuse of Dominance under Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Key Anti-Competitive Practices Identified: Mandatory Google Play Billing System (GPBS): Developers forced to use Google’s billing for in-app purchases. Commission charged: 15–30%. Exemption for Google’s own services (e.g., YouTube) → unfair cost advantage. Pre-installation & Bundling of Google Apps: Search, Chrome, YouTube, etc., pre-installed as a condition for Play Store access. Restricted consumer choice and deterred competing services. Data Advantage: Access to transactional data from GPBS could be used to promote Google’s own apps/services. Penalties & Remedies: Financial penalty: ₹936.44 crore. Behavioural remedies: Decouple GPBS from Play Store access, stop data misuse, ensure transparency in billing policies. Google’s Defence Business Model Argument: Android is open-source; OEMs can license core Android without Google’s proprietary apps. Pre-installation seen as a convenience for users, not a barrier to competition. Security & Quality Justification: GPBS ensures secure transactions and reduces fraud/payment failures. Commission rates consistent with industry standards; funds global distribution and security infrastructure. Competition Evidence: Indian apps (PhonePe, Paytm, Hotstar) have grown successfully on Android → market still competitive. Service Exemption Logic: Different business models justify exemptions for certain Google apps. NCLAT Judgment (March 2024) Upholding of CCI’s Core Findings: Agreed: Mandatory GPBS & bundling of apps = abuse of dominance. Penalty Reduction: From ₹936.44 crore → ₹216.69 crore. Reason: Original fine disproportionate to specific conduct proven. Modification of Remedies: Struck down some CCI directives as over-broad or lacking sufficient evidence. Initially removed data-use restrictions; reinstated in May 2025 review. Final Binding Remedies (Post-Review): Google must be transparent about billing data policies. Google cannot use billing data to gain competitive advantage for its own services. Why Penalty Was Reduced Proportionality Principle: Penalty should correspond to gravity, duration, and impact of anti-competitive conduct. NCLAT found the ₹936 crore fine was excessive given: Limited scope of proven violations (mainly GPBS & bundling). Absence of conclusive harm metrics quantifying consumer loss. Some CCI remedies were unsupported by strong empirical evidence. Current Status (Aug 2025) Supreme Court: Admitted appeals from Google, CCI, and ADIF. Will examine: Legal definition and scope of “abuse of dominance” in platform markets. Balance between innovation, consumer protection, and market fairness. Final hearing scheduled for November 2025. Stakeholder Positions: Google: Wants full reversal of CCI’s findings and remedies. CCI: Wants original penalties and remedies reinstated. ADIF: Argues NCLAT was too lenient; seeks strong pro-CCI outcome. Implications For Consumers: If CCI prevails: More payment options, possibly lower app prices, more competition. If Google prevails: Status quo with tighter control over Android ecosystem. For Indian Startups: CCI win could increase bargaining power, reduce dependency on Google’s terms. For Global Regulation: India’s verdict may inspire similar antitrust actions globally (mirroring EU’s Digital Markets Act trends). For Google: Possible need to unbundle services, open billing systems, and adapt its global Android model. Why can’t Army deploy women to fight terror, asks SC Background & Context JAG Branch in the Army: The Judge Advocate General’s Department is the Army’s legal arm. Officers here deal with military law, court-martials, legal advice to commanders, and legal awareness in units. Despite being a legal service, it is considered a “combatant” branch because JAG officers are commissioned Army officers and can be mobilized in wartime. Pre-judgment Status: The Army had a policy restricting women officers in JAG and reserving a higher number of posts for men. Justification given: JAG officers are “combatant personnel” and a reserve for mobilisation; women were allegedly unsuitable for such mobilisation. Petitioners’ Stand: Represented by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan. Challenged the gender-based restriction as unconstitutional and discriminatory. Relevance : GS 2(Gender Equality) Supreme Court’s Key Findings Policy Unconstitutional: Discrimination based on gender in appointments violates Articles 14 (Equality before law) and 16 (Equality in public employment) of the Constitution. Mere “combatant” label does not justify excluding women without evidence-based reasoning. No Legal Basis for Exclusion: No legislation prevents women from serving in combat-support roles like JAG. Army’s reasoning that women are not deployed in counter-terror or counter-insurgency roles was unsupported in law. Comparative Services Reference: Indian Air Force: Women serve as fighter pilots, helicopter pilots, and in airborne missions. Indian Navy: Women deployed on warships and in combat-support roles. Army itself has women in operationally risky roles (e.g., elite airborne and parachute units in emergencies). Judicial Philosophy: Court emphasized it is not imposing its military views, but enforcing constitutional mandates. Quote: “No nation can be secure when half of its population is held back.” Directives Issued Publish a common merit list for all JAG candidates (men and women). Make marks public to ensure transparency. End gender-based reservation of posts in JAG. Constitutional & Legal Principles Article 14: Prohibits arbitrary classification; classification must be reasonable and have a rational nexus to the objective. Article 15(1): Prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex. Article 16(1) & (2): Equal opportunity in public employment; exceptions only for specific service-related conditions backed by law. Supreme Court Precedents: Babita Puniya vs Union of India (2020): Permanent commission for women in Army’s non-combat roles. Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (1982): Gender cannot be a bar unless justified by compelling necessity. Strategic & Operational Implications Talent Pool Expansion: More qualified officers (irrespective of gender) can serve in legal branches, strengthening military justice. Operational Flexibility: Women officers already handle high-risk operations; expanding their legal combat-support presence is operationally feasible. Cultural Shift: Encourages institutional acceptance of gender-neutral postings, aligning military norms with global practices. Broader Social & Policy Dimensions Gender Equality in Forces: Women’s participation in combat and combat-support roles reflects societal progress. Challenges outdated stereotypes about women’s operational capability. International Comparison: Many advanced militaries (US, UK, Israel, France) allow women in combat-support and combat roles. Civil-Military Relations: Court has reinforced that military policies must conform to constitutional principles unless backed by explicit legislative mandate. Supreme Court order on stray dogs and Delhi’s shelter infrastructure Context & Background Supreme Court Order (August 2025): Directed civic bodies and authorities in Delhi-NCR to relocate stray dogs from streets to shelters. Objective: Address rising dog bite incidents and improve public safety while adhering to animal welfare norms. Legal Background: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 – provides safeguards for animals, but also allows regulation to protect public health. Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023 – mandate sterilisation, vaccination, and relocation to shelters for unclaimed dogs. Previous SC & High Court observations have balanced animal rights with public safety. Relevance : GS 1(Society ) , GS 2(Social Justice)   Current Situation in Delhi Infrastructure Gap: No dedicated large-scale government shelters in the capital. Reliance on NGO-run ABC sterilisation centres, already overburdened. Data from MCD: Sterilisation/Immunisation: 2021–22: 91,326 2022–23: 59,076 2023–24: 79,959 2024–25: 1,31,137 2025 (Apr–Jul): 65,000 Dog Bite Cases: 2021: 6,691 2022: 17,874 2023: 25,210 Trend: Despite increased sterilisation, dog bite cases rising — points to inefficiency in controlling stray population or behavioural issues. Key Challenges Infrastructure Deficit: Capacity shortfall — shelters & sterilisation facilities cannot accommodate the estimated 4–5 lakh stray dogs in Delhi. NGOs report they can house only 100–400 dogs at a time. Financial Constraints: Shelter construction & operation requires substantial budget allocation. Dependence on NGOs without long-term government funding. Operational Barriers: ABC programs disrupted due to lack of space, legal hurdles, and delays in municipal decision-making. Public Health Concern: Rising dog bite incidents leading to rabies risk, increased healthcare burden. Legal & Ethical Balancing: Balancing Article 21 (Right to Life & Safety) for humans with animal welfare under the PCA Act and constitutional principles (Article 51A(g)). Stakeholder Perspectives NGOs: Concerned about feasibility — moving thousands of strays without shelter capacity may worsen conditions. Fear ABC programs may halt completely if shelters become overfilled. RWAs (Resident Welfare Associations): Welcome SC’s intent for safety but sceptical about timely execution. Demand accountability — “heads should roll” if order not implemented. Civic Authorities (MCD): Acknowledge constraints but lack clear roadmap for large-scale shelter setup. Public Sentiment: Divided — some advocate immediate removal for safety; others demand humane treatment and gradual relocation. Policy & Governance Issues Absence of Urban Animal Welfare Planning: No integrated Urban Animal Management Policy in Delhi. Data & Tracking Gaps: No real-time stray dog census; reliance on estimates. Coordination Failure: Poor coordination between MCD, NGOs, and Delhi Government. Judicial Overreach Debate: Experts question if courts should mandate operational timelines without ensuring feasibility. Comparative Perspective International Examples: Turkey: Large-scale municipal shelters, mandatory registration, microchipping. Romania: State-funded sterilisation & adoption drives. Singapore: Strict licensing, penalties for abandonment, high adoption rates. Learning for India: Need for sustained municipal funding, community adoption incentives, and strict abandonment laws. Way Forward Infrastructure Creation: Build regional shelters with modern facilities; integrate veterinary services and adoption centres. Strengthening ABC Programs: Increase sterilisation targets with mobile veterinary units. Public Participation: Incentivise adoption; promote responsible pet ownership. Legislative Strengthening: Amend PCA Act for stronger penalties on abandonment. Data-Driven Action: Conduct annual stray dog census for planning and monitoring. Balanced Approach: Phase-wise relocation, combining sterilisation, vaccination, and adoption — avoiding mass capture without capacity. 10-foot caste wall Background of the Incident Location: Muthulapatti village, Karur district, Tamil Nadu. Structure: 200 feet long, 10 feet high concrete wall, separating two communities — Thottia Naickers and Arunthathiyars. Duration: Wall existed for nearly 3 weeks before demolition on August 9, 2025. Key Trigger: Dispute over access to shared public facilities and discrimination claims. Relevance : GS 1(Society) , GS 2(Social Issues) Communities Involved Thottia Naickers: Traditionally an intermediate caste with warrior and leadership history. Politically influential, dominant in parts of western and central Tamil Nadu. Often in control of local power structures. Arunthathiyars: Scheduled Caste, historically at the bottom of the caste hierarchy. Socially and economically marginalized; victims of historical discrimination and segregation. Faced denial of access to public spaces and facilities. Nature of the Wall Claim by Builders: A barrier to prevent “outsiders” from loitering, drinking, and causing nuisance. Reality as Per Affected Side: A “wall of untouchability” aimed at physical segregation and denial of public rights. Impact: Restricted movement, exacerbated caste-based tensions, and denied symbolic equality. Legal and Administrative Context Land Ownership: Wall was on poramboke (public) land. Violation: No government permission or building plan approval obtained. Action Taken: Tamil Nadu Untouchability Eradication Front condemned wall; official meetings failed to resolve issue. On August 7, eviction notice issued citing encroachment on public property. August 9: Police, revenue officials, and heavy machinery removed the wall under protection. Constitutional & Legal Dimensions Fundamental Rights Violated: Article 14: Equality before law — discriminatory segregation violates this. Article 15(2): Prohibition of discrimination in access to public spaces. Article 17: Abolition of untouchability — wall represents a physical manifestation of untouchability. Article 21: Right to dignity and free movement. Statutory Provisions: Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 — criminalizes the practice of untouchability. SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — addresses intentional acts of social exclusion. Directive Principles: Article 46: Promotion of educational and economic interests of SC/STs and protection from social injustice. Governance & Administrative Challenges Delayed Action: Multiple failed meetings before enforcement, showing administrative reluctance to confront dominant caste groups. Police’s Balancing Act: Maintaining law and order while addressing deep-seated caste tensions. Symbolic Sensitivity: Demolition was advised not to be celebrated to avoid inflaming tensions. Broader Socio-Political Analysis Caste Segregation in Rural India: Not an isolated case; similar “caste walls” and physical barriers exist across India. Reflects spatial apartheid in rural settlements (Dalit hamlets physically separated). Power Imbalance: Intermediate castes, though not at the top of the hierarchy, exercise strong local control over land, resources, and institutions. Marginalized castes often dependent on them for livelihoods, deepening vulnerability. Cultural & Ritual Exclusion: Arunthathiyars’ requests to participate in village cultural events repeatedly denied, further entrenching symbolic inequality. Lessons & Policy Recommendations Proactive Enforcement: Quick administrative intervention in caste-based barriers to prevent escalation. Mandatory annual social audit of public spaces to ensure inclusivity. Awareness & Education: Social reform campaigns at grassroots level through schools, SHGs, and panchayats. Empowering Marginalized Castes: Strengthen SC/ST grievance redressal mechanisms at district level. Promote Dalit representation in local governance. Judicial Precedent: Courts should expedite hearings on physical segregation cases and impose exemplary costs on violators.

Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn TelegramGroup Website TelegramChat
Terms and Conditions Privacy Refund Policy Learning Management System by Testpress