Content

1. An alternative to Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill
2. Bolstering deterrence through submarine dominance

An alternative to Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill

Source : The Hindu

Why in News ?

• VBSA Bill under scrutiny of Joint Parliamentary Committee, inviting stakeholder inputs amid concerns of centralisation, autonomy erosion, and constitutional overreach.

Context & Basics

• VBSA Bill seeks to statutorily implement NEP 2020, restructuring governance of higher education institutions (HEIs) through centralised regulatory councils.
• Covers Central, State, and private universities, replacing existing frameworks like University Grants Commission (UGC) consultative mechanisms.

Relevance

GS II (Polity & Governance)

• Federalism vs centralisation in education governance.
• Role of University Grants Commission and proposed regulatory overhaul.
• Judicial precedents like T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka.

GS III (Economy)

• Human capital development and higher education financing.
• GER expansion (28.4%) vs quality and equity trade-offs.

Practice Question

Q1.“The VBSA Bill represents a shift from cooperative federalism to centralised control in higher education.”Critically examine and suggest an alternative governance framework. (250 words)

Constitutional & Legal Background

• Entry 66, Union List empowers Centre only for coordination and determination of standards, not full-scale regulatory control.
• Education in Concurrent List, requiring cooperative federalism between Centre and States.
• Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation case (2002) emphasised institutional autonomy and federal balance in education governance.

Key Provisions of VBSA Bill

• Creation of centralised councils for regulation (Viniyaman Parishad), accreditation (Gunvatta Parishad), and standards (Manak Parishad).
• The VBSA Bill explicitly separates regulation from funding. Unlike the current UGC (which does both), the VBSA Adhisthan will only regulate. Funding will be handled by the Ministry or a separate “Higher Education Grants Council.”
• Inspection powers without consultation, diluting UGC Act Section 13 safeguards.
• Introduction of output-based evaluation linked to global rankings, patents, publications.

Data & Evidence

• India has over 1,100 universities and 43,000+ colleges, with States funding majority of institutions.
• GER in higher education ~28.4% (AISHE 2023), requiring expansion with equity and quality balance.
• Public expenditure on education ~4.1% of GDP, below NEP target of 6%, raising concerns of privatisation push.

Overview

• Bill shifts from cooperative federalism to centralised governance, undermining State autonomy in education policy.
• Weakens institutional autonomy of IITs, IIMs, universities, contradicting global best practices of academic freedom.
• Moves towards bureaucratic control over academic decision-making, reducing role of faculty and academic bodies.
• Emphasis on global rankings and outputs risks neglecting local relevance, social justice, and national innovation priorities.
• Potential shift towards market-driven higher education, increasing dependence on loans and private funding.

Challenges

• Constitutional overreach risk, as Centre exceeds mandate under Entry 66, potentially inviting judicial challenges and federal conflicts.
• Erosion of institutional autonomy, with centralised inspection and regulation weakening academic freedom and innovation ecosystems.
• Marginalisation of States, despite their dominant role in funding and managing higher education institutions.
• Bureaucratisation of governance, where non-academic administrators dominate decision-making, undermining peer-driven academic processes.
• Neglect of social justice provisions, including absence of explicit safeguards for reservation policies (SC/ST/OBC).
• Over-reliance on output metrics, ignoring outcome-based goals like societal impact, regional development, and equity.
• Privatisation concerns, as reduced public funding emphasis may push institutions towards commercialisation and student loans.
• Weak role of SHGs, local institutions, and regional diversity, leading to cultural homogenisation under “Bhartiya Knowledge” narrative.

Way Forward

• Ensure constitutional alignment by limiting Centre’s role to coordination, while empowering States in regulation and governance.
• Introduce shared governance model with 50:50 representation of State Higher Education Councils (SHECs) and central bodies.
• Establish Higher Education Grants Council (HEGC) for equitable and need-based funding, especially for State universities.
• Mandate consultative decision-making involving faculty, students, and institutional bodies to preserve academic autonomy.
• Shift evaluation towards outcome- and impact-based metrics, including social justice, innovation, and regional development.
• Strengthen affirmative action provisions explicitly within regulatory framework.
• Promote regional councils to address linguistic, ecological, and socio-economic diversity.
• Ensure balanced regulation with academic leadership, reducing excessive bureaucratic control.

Prelims Pointers

• Entry 66, Union List – coordination and determination of standards in higher education.
• Education – Concurrent List subject.
• UGC Act Section 13 mandates consultation before inspection.
• NEP 2020 proposes National Research Foundation (NRF).

Bolstering deterrence through submarine dominance

Source : The Hindu

 Why in News ?

• Speculation over commissioning of INS Aridhaman following remarks by Rajnath Singh and confirmation of final trials by Navy leadership.
• Marks expansion of India’s SSBN programme and strengthening of nuclear triad capabilities amid rising Chinese presence in Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

Context & Basics

• INS Aridhaman is the third SSBN (nuclear ballistic missile submarine) after INS Arihant (2016) and INS Arighat (2024).
• SSBNs are core to credible minimum deterrence and second-strike capability under India’s No First Use (NFU) policy.
• Nuclear triad = land-based missiles + air-delivered weapons + sea-based nuclear systems.

Relevance

GS III (Internal Security / Defence)

• Nuclear doctrine and second-strike capability.
• Maritime security in Indo-Pacific.

GS II (IR)

• Strategic competition with China in IOR.
• Role in Indo-Pacific balance of power.

GS III (S&T)

• Indigenous defence tech: nuclear propulsion, missile systems.

Practice Question

Q1.“Sea-based nuclear deterrence is the most survivable leg of the nuclear triad.”Analyse in the context of India’s SSBN programme. (250 words)

Static Background

• India’s nuclear doctrine (2003) emphasises credible minimum deterrence and second-strike survivability.
• SSBNs provide stealth, survivability, and assured retaliation, unlike vulnerable land/air assets.
• Only P5 nations (US, Russia, China, France, UK) and India possess operational nuclear triad capability.

Key Features of INS Aridhaman

• ~7000-tonne submarine, larger than previous Arihant-class vessels, indicating technological progression.
• Can carry 24 K-15 Sagarika missiles or 8 K-4/K-5 nuclear missiles, doubling earlier payload capacity.
• Enhances range, firepower, and deterrence credibility in maritime domain.

Strategic Significance

• Strengthens second-strike capability, ensuring credible deterrence even after a nuclear first strike.
• Counters China’s expanding naval footprint and dual-use surveillance vessels in Indian Ocean Region.
• Provides continuous at-sea deterrence (CASD), critical for nuclear stability.
• Enhances India’s ability to respond in multi-domain warfare scenarios (land-air-sea integration).
• Reinforces India’s position as a major maritime power in Indo-Pacific.

Changing Nature of Warfare

• Modern conflicts increasingly multi-domain, as seen in West Asia conflicts and maritime choke points like Strait of Hormuz.
• Naval assets now central to power projection, deterrence, and escalation control.
• Possibility of spillover from land/air conflicts to maritime domain necessitates stronger naval deterrence.

Economic & Technological Aspects

• Boosts Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence, reducing reliance on foreign suppliers (notably Russia).
• Development of SSBNs strengthens indigenous shipbuilding, nuclear propulsion, and missile technology ecosystems.
• Future plans include indigenous SSN programme (2036 onwards), expanding underwater warfare capability.

Challenges

• High capital and operational costs of SSBN programme strain defence budget allocation priorities.
• Need to balance submarine expansion with emerging technologies like AI, autonomous systems, and cyber warfare integration.
• Technological gaps in propulsion, stealth, and detection avoidance compared to advanced navies like China and US.
• Ensuring continuous at-sea deterrence (CASD) requires multiple operational submarines and robust command-control systems.
• Vulnerability to anti-submarine warfare (ASW) advancements by adversaries.
• Strategic risk of arms race escalation in Indo-Pacific, especially with China’s rapid naval expansion.

Way Forward

• Accelerate indigenous SSBN and SSN programmes to ensure fleet redundancy and continuous deterrence.
• Invest in advanced stealth, sonar evasion, and underwater communication systems.
• Integrate AI and autonomous technologies in submarine operations and surveillance.
• Strengthen tri-service coordination for effective multi-domain deterrence strategy.
• Enhance maritime domain awareness (MDA) and anti-submarine warfare capabilities.
• Maintain strategic stability through adherence to NFU and credible minimum deterrence doctrine.

Prelims Pointers

• SSBN = nuclear-powered submarine carrying ballistic missiles.
• K-15 (Sagarika) range ~750 km; K-4 ~3500 km.
• Nuclear triad ensures second-strike capability.
• INS Arihant (2016) – India’s first SSBN.