International Relations

France's Nuclear Sharing Proposal in Europe 

Context: Recently, the French President has stated that France is open to dialogue on potentially stationing its nuclear weapons in other European countries to strengthen deterrence. This development occurred amid security concerns in Europe due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about Nuclear Sharing Model; Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

Why is France offering a broader Nuclear Role in Europe?

  • France’s willingness to consider stationing its nuclear weapons in other European countries is rooted in its long-standing vision of European strategic autonomy- the idea that Europe should be able to defend itself independently of outside powers, especially the United States.
  • The US President earlier stated that the US might not always protect NATO allies unless they spend 2% of their GDP on defence. This made European countries look for other ways to ensure their security.

What is the Nuclear Sharing Model?

  • Nuclear sharing involves a nuclear-weapon state stationing nuclear weapons on allied non-nuclear-weapon states’ territory with specific arrangements for potential use. 
  • For example, within NATO, the US has maintained such arrangements for decades. Currently, B61 tactical nuclear gravity bombs (of the US) are deployed in five NATO states: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Under these arrangements, the US retains legal ownership and custody of the warheads. The US President also retains the power to make the decision to use these weapons, following NATO consultation. 
  • This Cold War-era posture aims to demonstrate alliance solidarity, and share nuclear risks. 

Is it legal under International Law? 

  • The 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is the primary legal instrument for regulating nuclear weapons. 
  • Article I of the treaty prohibits nuclear-weapon states (like France) from transferring nuclear weapons or control over them. 
  • Existing NATO nuclear sharing is justified by participants as being NPT-compliant because no transfer of legal ownership or control occurs in peacetime; the US maintains custody. 
  • However, the non-proliferation advocates and various research institutions have consistently challenged this legality. 

Security Implications of France’s decision: 

Deploying additional nuclear weapons in Europe has varied security implications: 

  • Proponents argue it could enhance deterrence against Russia by increasing NATO’s nuclear assets and demonstrating European resolve.
  • Russia would likely view such deployments as a significant escalation, potentially leading to military-technical measures in response as Russian officials have repeatedly warned against NATO’s eastward military expansion. Russia’s 2023 stationing of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus is cited by some as a preceding escalatory step. 

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): 

  • NPT is a multilateral treaty aimed at limiting the spread of nuclear weapons including three elements: (1) Non-proliferation, (2) Disarmament (3) Peaceful use of Nuclear Energy. 
  • It defines nuclear weapon states (NWS) as those that had manufactured and detonated a nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967. 
  • Five nuclear weapon states are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. All the other states are therefore considered non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS). 
  • The Treaty does not affect the right of state parties to develop, produce, and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. 
  • The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verifies NNWS compliance with commitments under the NPT not to acquire nuclear weapons.
  • Negotiations of such an agreement should begin immediately after the NNWS accession to the NPT and enter into force within 18 months.

Why did India not sign the NPT?

  • India, Israel, and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons but have never accepted the NPT. 
  • India did not sign the NPT, not because of its lack of commitment for non-proliferation, but because NPT creates a club of "nuclear haves" and a larger group of "nuclear have-nots" by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967.
  • India considers NPT as a flawed treaty and as it does not recognise the need for universal, non-discriminatory verification and treatment.

ADB’s $10-billion plan to transform Urban India

Context: Recently, the President of the Asian Development Bank was on a three-day visit to India. He announced a $10 billion investment plan to support India's urban transformation. This aims to help the country achieve its vision of Viksit Bharat (Developed India) by 2047.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: About Asian Development Bank; Urban Challenge Fund. 

Recognising that cities are engines of economic growth, the plan comes at a crucial time as India’s urban population is expected to exceed 40% by 2030.

Role of Asian Development Bank in India’s Urban Transformation: 

  • Over the past decade, ADB has invested $4 billion in metro and Regional Rapid Transit System (RRTS) projects across eight cities- including Delhi-Meerut, Mumbai, Nagpur, Chennai, and Bengaluru. This aims to reduce congestion, lower emissions, and improve mobility especially for persons with disabilities.
  • ADB’s active urban portfolio currently includes 27 loans worth $5.15 billion.

Key Highlights of ADB Urban Transformation Plan: 

  • Vision and Strategy: ADB will mobilise capital, accelerate delivery and scale solutions that keep India’s urban economy moving on the road to Viksit Bharat @2047.
  • The $10 billion investment plan includes sovereign loans, private sector financing, and third-party capital. 
  • The initiative is anchored by India’s flagship Urban Challenge Fund (UCF), which ADB is supporting to attract private investment in urban infrastructure.
  • ADB has completed analytical work on growth hubs, creative city redevelopment, and water and sanitation upgrades in 100 cities across India. ADB is also committing $3 million in technical assistance to design bankable projects and strengthen the capacity of States and urban local bodies.
  • ADB will also invest in skill development through the National Industrial Training Institute Upgradation Programme to boost the manufacturing sector, catalyse private sector growth and create quality jobs.

About Asian Development Bank: 

  • Established in 1996.
  • Leading multilateral development bank supporting sustainable, inclusive, and resilient growth across Asia and the Pacific. 
  • ADB supports its members and partners through the provision of loans, grants, and equity investments aimed at advancing social and economic development.
  • ADB provides its members with the knowledge and expertise to tackle challenges facing our world, such as climate change, water security, inequality and poverty. 
  • Members: ADB is owned by 69 members- 50 from the Asia region. India is one of the founding members of the ADB and and the bank’s fourth-largest shareholder.
  • Two largest shareholders of ADB are Japan and the United States, each holding approximately 15.6% of the total shares. Other significant shareholders include the People's Republic of China (6.4%), India (6.3%), and Australia (5.8%).
image 2

Headquarters: Manila, Philippines.

Also Read: Initiatives in Budget 2025 for Urban Development 

India’s Changing Counter-Terrorism Strategy

Context: Operation Sindoor marks a turning point in India’s counter-terrorism strategy and military posture towards Pakistan. It reflects India’s new assertive doctrine of swift, escalated retaliation against cross-border terrorism. 

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: India’s counter-terrorism strategy and military posture toward Pakistan.

Shifts in India’s Response post the Pahagam Terror Attack: 

  • Shift from strategic restraint to Proactive Retaliation: In the past, India often exercised strategic restraint. India's current posture on cross-border terrorism is proactive retaliation, strategic assertiveness, and zero tolerance.
  • Expanded Military Engagement: The Kargil conflict of 1999 was limited to a small area in Jammu and Kashmir. During Operation Sindoor, India hit targets up to 100 km inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK).
  • Zero Tolerance Doctrine: India’s new posture treats both terrorist groups and their state sponsors as equal threats. Military action now targets infrastructure, command centers, and even state-protected assets.
  • Establishment of a New Normal: The Indian Prime Minister clearly stated that military action was “suspended, not ended.” India has lowered its threshold for initiating military action in response to terror.
  • International Message and Narrative Control: By linking Pakistan-based groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed to major terrorist attacks in the US and UK, India framed Operation Sindoor as India’s war on terrorism, similar to what NATO launched in Afghanistan after 9/11. The multi-political party outreach by the Indian government, travelling the world and explaining Pakistan's links to terrorism and India's 'zero-tolerance policy towards such aggression. 

Escalation ladder- Controlled Response by India: 

The progression of Operation Sindoor can be understood through the framework of the 44-step "escalation ladder" proposed by American military strategist Herman Kahn. 

  • Kahn's step 1: Ostensible Crisis: The Pahalgam terror attack can be described as an ostensible crisis. 
  • Kahn's Step 2: Political, Economic and Diplomatic Gestures: India’s decisions to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, cancelling the visas of Pakistani nationals, stopping trade and postal services, closing India’s air space for Pakistan’s aircraft, etc.
  • Kahn’s Step 3: Solemn and Formal Declarations: India’s top leadership declared the intent to avenge the killings of the tourists at Pahalgam.
  • Kahn’s Step 4: Hardening of Positions Confrontation of Wills: India blamed Pakistan for not taking action against terrorist groups, while Islamabad asked for evidence of India’s accusation. It also said that India’s position on the IWT would be deemed as an “act of war”.
  • Kahn's Step 5: Show of Force: Indian Navy carried out multiple anti-ship missile firings, underlining its preparedness for long-range offensive strikes. Pakistan also test-fired Abdali, its surface-to-surface ballistic missile with a 450-km range.
  • Kahn's Step 6: Significant Mobilisation: Both sides moved military assets stealthily, preparing for confrontation.
  • The escalation quickly reached rungs 8 (Harassing Acts of Violence) and 9 (Dramatic Military Confrontations). 

Also Read: India needs National Security Doctrine 

India did strike at nine terror locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and successfully thwarted Pakistani drone attacks along the western border. The conflict de-escalated with a ceasefire on May 10, halting the confrontation at Step 9. 

25 Years of India-Germany Strategic Partnership

Context: India and Germany celebrate 25 years of strategic partnership rooted in peace, prosperity, people-to-people ties, and sustainable development.

Relevance of the Topic:  Mains: India-Germany Strategic Partnership.  

With the recent articulation of Germany’s- Focus on India strategy, new German Coalition Treaty, and reaffirmation through high-level political engagements, the partnership is poised to deepen further.

As the 3rd and 4th largest economies in the world respectively, Germany and India share robust economic and developmental partnership, essentially standing on four pillars- peace, prosperity, people and the future of our planet.

India-Germany Bilateral Relations: 

image 66

Multilateral Cooperation: 

  • Both countries exchange views in multilateral fora including G20 and in the UN on global issues such as Climate Change and Sustainable Development. 
  • Germany and India support each other on UNSC expansion within the framework of the G4. 
  • Germany is also a part of International Solar Alliance (ISA) and Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI).

Bilateral exchanges: Since 2000, India and Germany have had a 'Strategic Partnership' which has been further strengthened with the launch of Intergovernmental Consultations (IGC) in 2011 at the level of Heads of Government. 

Economic Partnership: 

  • Germany is India’s largest trading partner in the EU, with bilateral trade crossing $25 billion (2022-23), showing strong economic interdependence. 
  • Collaboration on Infrastructure projects like- Projects like the Delhi-Meerut RRTS, operated by Deutsche Bahn (German National Rail Company). Around 2,000 German companies are active in India, and they create more than 750,000 jobs for Indians.
  • In 2022, Under Indo-German Green and Sustainable Development Partnership (GSDP), Germany committed €10 billion in preferential loans and grants for India, over a span of 10 years. 
  • India-EU Free Trade Agreement could further amplify the economic integration between two major global economies.

Energy Partnership: German technology and investment are supporting large-scale solar and wind energy projects, particularly in states like Gujarat. German private companies are contributing to India’s green infrastructure. E.g., producing rotor blades for wind turbines deployed in India.

Emerging technologies: Joint research in areas such as green hydrogen, AI, biotechnology, and climate tech. Cooperation in the renewable energy sector, biodiversity and smart city projects.

Defence cooperation: Bilateral Defence Cooperation Agreement provides the framework for bilateral defence ties. Joint military exercises like Tarang Shakti Exercise (2024). Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between India and Germany ensures greater synergy in countering terror by sharing intelligence and coordinating joint operations. 

People-to-People Ties: Over 50,000 Indian students study Germany, the largest group of foreign students in German universities.

Enhanced cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, green technologies, and skilled workforce mobility, alongside progress on the India-EU Free Trade Agreement will be critical to advancing the full strategic potential of this bilateral partnership.  

Resurgence of Boko Haram in Nigeria

Context: Boko Haram insurgency is witnessing a resurgence in Nigeria, Africa in 2025 with repeated attacks on military outposts, civilian settlements, and local militia groups.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts related to Boko Haram; Location of Nigeria.

What is Boko Haram?

image 18
  • Boko Haram is a self proclaimed jihadist militant group mainly based in northeastern Nigeria.
  • Founded by Mohammed Yusuf in 2002, in Borno state, Nigeria. 
  • Boko Haram translates to ‘Western Education is forbidden’. 
  • They took up arms in 2009 to fight Western education, secular governance and modern institutions, and to impose a radical version of Islamic law. 
  • The group is also active in Chad, Niger, northern Cameroon and Mali. 
nigeria boko haram

Boko Haram has split into two factions over the years: 

  • Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP): Backed by the Islamic State group, it targets military positions and overrunning outposts across Nigeria’s northeast.
  • JAS (Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad): resorted to attacking civilians and perceived collaborators, and thrives on robberies and abductions for ransom. 

Boko Haram insurgency: 

  • Despite earlier gains, Nigeria’s armed forces are struggling to maintain control, particularly in the crisis-ridden Borno state.
  • Over 2 million people have been displaced and 35,000 civilian deaths have occurred due to the insurgency. 

Why is Nigeria losing ground again? 

  • Many military posts are located in isolated areas with limited personnel, making them easy targets. Reinforcements often arrive too late.
  • ISWAP group uses a decentralised structure to carry out coordinated night attacks with drones and light weapons, making them harder to predict and counter.
  • Some former militants, despite claiming to have surrendered, continue to aid extremist groups by sharing intelligence and managing logistics.

At the height of its terror in 2013-14, Boko Haram controlled an area nearly the size of Belgium. Though Nigeria’s military reclaimed much of this territory over the past decade, the new wave of attacks has raised fears about a possible return to the gloomy past.

Rise of AI Powered Autonomous Satellites

Context: Rise of AI-powered autonomous satellites has the potential to transform space operations, but at the same time it has created new legal, ethical, and geopolitical challenges. 

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: Outer Space Treaty (1967), Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972), UNCOPUOS. 

Mains: AI powered autonomous satellites - Applications & Challenges

Autonomous Satellites

  • Autonomous satellites are designed to perform their functions with minimal to no human intervention by utilising a suite of advanced technologies and algorithms.
  • Onboard intelligence in satellites is called satellite edge computing and allows satellites to analyse their environment, make decisions, and act autonomously like self-driving cars on the ground.

Applications of Autonomous Satellites

  • Automated space operations: Independent manoeuvring in space to perform tasks like docking, inspections, in-orbit refuelling, and debris removal. 
  • Self-diagnosis and repair: Monitoring their own health, identifying faults, and executing repairs without human intervention.
  • Route planning: Optimising orbital trajectories to avoid hazards and obstacles or to save fuel.
  • Targeted geospatial intelligence: Detecting disasters and other events of interest in real-time from orbit and coordinating with other satellites intelligently to prioritise areas of interest.
  • Combat support: Providing real-time threat identification and potentially enabling autonomous target tracking and engagement, directly from orbit.

Challenges associated with Autonomous Satellites: 

As satellites become more intelligent and autonomous, the stakes rise geometrically: 

  • AI Hallucinations and misidentification of threat: A satellite hallucinating can misclassify a harmless commercial satellite as hostile, and respond with defensive actions. This could potentially escalate tensions between nations.
  • Legal Vacuum and Liability Ambiguities: Existing treaties like the Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) are premised on human control. If an autonomous satellite causes damage or collision, it is unclear who bears legal responsibility- the state, private operator, software developer, or the AI itself. This creates a normative gap in international law complicating enforcement and redressal.
  • Geopolitical and Security Risks: AI’s dual-use capabilities (i.e., civilian + military) create misinterpretation risks in geopolitically sensitive contexts. 
  • Ethical Concerns: AI satellites collect enormous volumes of surveillance and environmental data. Without safeguards, this data can be misused for military, commercial, or surveillance purposes.

Outer Space Treaty (1967):

  • Also known as Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, is the foundational international treaty governing space exploration and use.
  • Opened for signature in 1967, it establishes several key principles including-
    • prohibition of weapons of mass destruction in space
    • commitment to peaceful uses of space
    • outer space is the province of all mankind. 
  • India ratified the Treaty in 1982.

Key Articles of the Treaty : 

  • Article I: Outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all states; access must be on the basis of equality.
  • Article II: No state can claim sovereignty over outer space or celestial bodies.
  • Article IV: Prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in outer space.
  • Article VI: States are responsible for national space activities, including those by non-governmental entities. Activities must be authorised and continually supervised by the state.
  • Article VII: States are internationally liable for any damage caused by their space objects to other states or their property.

Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972): 

  • It elaborates on liability provisions in Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty.
  • India is a signatory and has ratified the Liability Convention. 

Key Provisions:

  • Absolute Liability: Regardless of fault, launching states are strictly liable for damage caused by their space objects on Earth or to aircraft in flight. 
  • Fault-Based Liability: For damages occurring in outer space, liability is based on proving fault.
  • Joint Liability: If multiple states are involved in launching a space object, they are jointly and severally liable.

Claims Mechanism: Claims must be presented through diplomatic channels, and a claims commission may be established for disputes.

Way Forward

  • AI-driven satellite systems must be tested and certified by neutral international bodies to ensure safety and predictability. Bodies like United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) or International Standards Organisation could:
    • Test AI response to critical scenarios like collision risk, sensor malfunctions, or communication failures.
    • Conduct adversarial testing by feeding unexpected or manipulated data to check how AI responds under stress.
    • Mandate decision-logging mechanisms so that every autonomous action, especially manoeuvres, can be audited later for accountability.
  • Adopting pooled insurance and strict liability regimes similar to aviation and maritime sectors can ensure fair, predictable compensation mechanisms without lengthy legal disputes.
  • Formulation of clear international rules on how AI satellites collect, store, and share data, to protect privacy and prevent misuse.

With thousands of autonomous systems projected to operate in low-earth orbit by 2030, the probability of collisions, interference or geopolitical misinterpretation is rising. Autonomous satellites demand a new regulatory architecture that balances innovation with responsibility, and sovereignty with global cooperation. 

Practice MCQ: 

Q. Consider the following statements with reference to the Outer Space Treaty (1967):

1. It prohibits any nation from claiming sovereignty over outer space.

2. It requires that all space activities be authorised and continually supervised by the state.

3. It explicitly regulates the use of artificial intelligence in space missions.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only

(b) 1 and 3 only

(c) 2 and 3 only

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only

Mains Practice Question: 

Q. Explain how the increasing autonomy of satellites through AI poses new challenges to space safety and security. What regulatory and technical frameworks are needed to address them? 

India-Africa Digital Partnership

Context: India and Africa are entering a new phase of development partnership centered around digital innovation.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: India-Africa Digital Partnership

image 14

India’s development partnership with Africa is evolving into a digitally-driven collaboration, aligned with the African Union’s Digital Transformation Strategy (2020-2030) which places digital innovation at the core of socio-economic progress.

For decades, India’s engagement with Africa included:

  • Concessional Lines of Credit (LoCs) for infrastructure development.
  • Capacity-building programmes through the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC).
  • Pan-African e-Network (2009) which provided tele-medicine and tele-education through satellite and fibre-optic infrastructure, implemented by TCIL on behalf of the Indian government.
  • Grant-in-aid projects and humanitarian support. 

Shift Towards Digital Diplomacy: 

  • Expanding on traditional diplomacy, and building on the success of its Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) systems, such as Aadhaar, UPI, CoWIN, and DIKSHA, India is now focusing on sharing and co-creating digital solutions to tackle fundamental governance and service delivery challenges in Africa. 

For Example : 

  • In 2021, Togo’s National Agency for Identification signed an MoU with IIIT-B (India) to implement the Modular Open-Source Identification Platform as the foundation for its national digital ID system.
  • In 2023, Zambia signed an MoU with the Centre for Digital Public Infrastructure at IIIT-B to support the implementation and scaling up of the Smart Zambia Initiative, a national effort to advance digital transformation across government services.
  • In 2024, the Bank of Namibia signed a pact with the National Payments Corporation of India for developing a UPI-like instant payment system. 
  • Ghana is also linking its payment system with India’s UPI to enable faster transactions. 
  • The new IIT Madras campus in Zanzibar offers courses in Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, and works with Indian companies to provide scholarships. This helps build local skills and supports Africa’s digital growth.

These partnerships reflect a growing interest in India’s DPI model, which offers affordability, scalability, and a public-oriented design. 

However, these advances of India’s digital diplomacy in Africa are not occurring in a vacuum.

  • African nations prioritise digital partners based on their ability to meet national needs, with China often favoured for its low-cost, state-backed infrastructure support.
  • Apart from China, the European Union, the U.S., and India are competing for influence. 
  • What sets India apart is not just its technology, but its framing of DPI as a digital public good, open-source, and its adaptability. 

Opportunity for India

  • Deepening digital partnerships helps India strengthen diplomatic ties and build long-term goodwill with African nations, a region of growing strategic importance.
  • India’s DPI model offers a public-oriented alternative unlike some other countries that promote costly or surveillance-heavy systems. The real opportunity is not just in transferring technology but in working closely with African governments to build solutions that suit local needs.

Challenges:

  • Africa is home to the world’s largest digital divide.
  • High cost of data plans and devices hinder widespread digital adoption.
  • Stark rural-urban disparities in connectivity.
  • Persistent gender gap in digital access and literacy.
  • Many African states also face gaps in institutional capacity, regulatory frameworks, and digital literacy, which can hinder DPI adoption. 
  • Expansion of digital infrastructure requires reliable energy supply, a critical bottleneck in many African countries.

Despite challenges like limited access and energy constraints, Africa is progressing in digital governance, with widespread adoption of national ID and biometric systems. 

A scalable India-Africa Digital Compact rooted in mutual respect, co-development, and open-source innovation can build on this foundation to drive inclusive and sustainable digital transformation across the continent.

Also Read: Global Digital Compact: advancing digital innovation in a sustainable fashion

India-Oman FTA faces ‘Omanisation’ Policy Hurdle

Context: India and Oman are currently negotiating a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) aimed at deepening bilateral trade, investment, and strategic engagement. ‘Omanisation’ is the last key issue in conclusion of India-Oman FTA talks.

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: Key facts related to FTA, CEPA.

Mains: Significance of India-Oman FTA and challenges.

Major Highlights: 

image 13
  • Initiated in November 2023, the CEPA was expected to be concluded by mid-2024. However, progress has been impeded by Oman’s ‘Omanisation’ policy.
  • Omanisation policy implemented by Oman aims to boost the employment of its citizens in the private sector. The policy mandates companies to meet specific quotas for hiring Omani nationals. These quotas vary by sector and are periodically revised. 
  • India’s Response: India wants that the regulations on compulsory employment of Omanis in various sectors be frozen at the current level for India, and not increased after the India-Oman CEPA is signed. 

India-Oman Trade Relations

  • Oman is India’s third largest trading partner in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). The bilateral trade was ~$9 billion in FY2024.
  • India’s key imports from Oman: petroleum products and urea account for over 70% of imports. Other important items- propylene and ethylene polymers, pet coke, gypsum, chemicals and iron and steel. 
  • India’s main exports to Oman: petroleum products, iron and steel, rice (particularly basmati), processed minerals, ships, boats and floating structures, electrical machinery, machinery parts, tea, coffee, spices, fruits and meat products.
image 58

Potential Gains from CEPA

  • Boost to Indian Exports: Indian goods worth $3.7 billion like gasoline, iron & steel, electronics, machinery may benefit from removal of 5% import duty in Oman.
  • Services Sector Opportunity: India hopes to send more professionals to Oman, and hence does not want increased restrictions related to employment of expats.
  • Strategic Leverage in West Asia: India-Oman CEPA can widen India’s access to West Asia, fostering economic and strategic ties in a region of critical importance. Enhances India’s trade connectivity and access to critical maritime routes and markets in the Gulf.

India-Oman CEPA holds strategic and economic significance for India’s outreach to West Asia. Resolving the ‘Omanisation’ hurdle is key to unlocking trade potential, enhancing market access, and strengthening bilateral ties in a critical region.

India’s Lawfare Strategy to Combat Terrorism

Context: India should adopt a “lawfare strategy” - using international law and forums like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to hold Pakistan accountable for sponsoring cross-border terrorism.

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: SAARC Convention on Suppression of Terrorism, International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, Terrorist Bombing Convention, Jurisdiction of ICJ.

Mains: Lawfare Strategy as a strategic tool to combat Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

Apart from military actions like Operation Sindoor and diplomatic measures, India should also adopt a "lawfare" strategy to hold Pakistan accountable for sponsoring terrorism.

Lawfare Strategy

  • Lawfare strategy means utilising laws, especially international laws and judicial platforms like the International Court of Justice (ICJ), as a tool to take action against countries that support terrorism.

International Legal Instruments supporting Lawfare Strategy: 

India should identify specific provisions in international terrorism conventions that sanction terrorism, and highlight customary international laws that Pakistan is violating.

  • SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism: India and Pakistan are both parties to SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism (1987) and its Additional Protocol. Article 6 of the Additional Protocol mandates states to take all practical measures via domestic legislation to prevent, suppress and eradicate the financing of terrorism, and for effective international cooperation. 
  • International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT) is a United Nations treaty (1999) that defines terror financing as a criminal act. Article 2(1) of ICSFT states that any person by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and wilfully, provides or collects funds with the intention that they should be used to carry out terrorist acts, commits an offense. Both India and Pakistan are parties to the convention which obligates them to prevent terror financing. 
  • United Nations Security Council Resolutions: UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001) mandates the member states to undertake measures to deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist attacks.
  • Using International Court of Justice (ICJ) as Strategic Forum: India can use ICJ as a legal forum to expose Pakistan’s support for terrorism. Many international terrorism treaties allow state parties to bring disputes to be resolved by the ICJ. For example:
  • Article 20(1) of the Terrorist Bombing Convention
  • Article 24(1) of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT). 

Ukraine used this clause to sue Russia at the ICJ for allegedly financing terrorism in the Donbas region. India can also use the compromissory clauses in these terrorism treaties to take Pakistan to the ICJ, just as it did in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case. 

However, there are two significant Challenges: 

  • Pakistan’s Reservation under ICSFT: ICSFT allows disputes to be taken to the ICJ but Pakistan has made a reservation, it has declared that it does not accept the ICJ’s jurisdiction under this treaty. This weakens India’s ability to force Pakistan to face trial under ICSFT. Nevertheless, India can still file a case with the ICJ to draw global attention to the issue.
  • India’s Reservation under Terrorist Bombing Convention: India has opted out of ICJ jurisdiction under this treaty, while Pakistan has accepted it which prevents India from taking Pakistan to the ICJ using that treaty. This obstacle can be overcome if India withdraws its reservation, allowing it to initiate proceedings against Pakistan at the ICJ. 

India should utilise the legal proceedings in ICJ to assiduously promote a global narrative against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. India should have fool-proof evidence and devise its legal strategy accordingly.

India’s North East Region – Gateway to Southeast Asia

Context: Inaugurating the Rising Northeast Summit, the Prime Minister of India said that the northeastern region would emerge as a gateway for trade with Southeast Asia over the next decade. Pitching for investments in the eight States, he described Northeast as the powerhouse of energy and ‘Ashta Lakshmis’ or the eight forms of Goddess Lakshmi. 

It was a counter to recent remarks by Bangladeshi Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus who referred to the northeastern region as a “landlocked” territory that could be an “extension” of the Chinese market. 

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Importance of Northeast Region in India's foreign policy paradigm.

India’s Foreign Policy and the Northeast Region: 

image 54

India’s North-East Indian region borders five countries and plays a crucial role in India’s regional diplomacy. It is pivotal to several flagship foreign policy frameworks: 

  • Neighbourhood First Policy: Encourages deeper political and economic engagement with immediate neighbours like Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Myanmar — all of which share borders with the northeast.
  • Act East Policy: Envisions enhanced connectivity with ASEAN through the northeast, positioning it as a strategic interface. The trade volume between India and ASEAN is nearly $1.25 billion. This trade volume will cross $200 billion in the coming years.
  • BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) : The northeast connects key BIMSTEC countries, offering a corridor for sub-regional cooperation.

Infrastructure as a Strategic Tool:

  • Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport Project (KMTTP): Aims to connect Mizoram with Myanmar’s Sittwe Port via road, river, and sea.
  • India–Myanmar–Thailand Trilateral Highway: Seeks to provide seamless overland connectivity to ASEAN, bolstering economic and strategic integration.
  • Act East Roadmap & BBIN Corridor: Strengthen logistical links for trade and transit.

These projects are not only about physical connectivity but also about asserting India’s strategic autonomy and reducing dependency on routes vulnerable to China’s influence.

Key destination for two strategic sectors: Semiconductors and Energy: 

1. Semiconductor Sector 

  • 2024: Tata Group commenced construction of a semiconductor unit in Assam, with a total investment of Rs 27,000 crore. The semiconductor plant has opened doors of opportunity for the semiconductor sector and other cutting edge-technology in the region. 
  • The country will soon get the first ‘Made in India’ chip produced at the semiconductor plant in the Northeast region.

2. Energy Sector:

  • Beyond power generation, NE presents new avenues in the manufacturing of solar modules, cells, energy storage systems, and research and development.
  • The government is making large investments in areas of hydro or solar power in every state of Northeast, and projects worth crores have already been distributed.

Important Schemes for development of North-East India

Bio-economy, bamboo, tea production, petroleum, sports and eco-tourism as some of the areas where the region is an emerging hub. 

1. PM-DevINE Scheme: 

  • Prime Minister’s Development Initiative for North Eastern Region (PM-DevINE) is a Central Sector scheme (100% Central funding) announced in 2022.
  • Objectives of PM-DevINE scheme:
    • Fund infrastructure convergently in the spirit of PM GatiShakti.
    • Support social development projects based on felt needs of NER.
    • Enable livelihood activities for youth and women.
    • Fill the development gaps in various sectors.
  • Outlay: Rs. 6600 crore for 4 year period (FY23 to FY26)
  • Implemented by: Ministry of Development of North-East Region. 

2. 'Purvodaya': Vision for Eastern Development: 

  • The Government of India’s ‘Purvodaya’ initiative aims at unlocking the economic potential of eastern India, including the northeast. 
  • It involves large-scale investment in infrastructure, industry, and connectivity. This complements India's multi-vector diplomacy by fostering regional integration and inclusive development.

3. Uttar Poorva Transformative Industrialisation Scheme (UNNATI):

  • Launched in: 2024
  • It is aimed at extending support to the industries for enhancing regional infrastructure, creating employment opportunities, and promoting resilience and prosperity in the region. 
  • Under the UNNATI Scheme, the following specific incentives are provided to the industrial Units:
    • Capital Investment Incentive 
    • Capital Interest Subvention
    • Manufacturing & Services Linked Incentive
  • It is mandatory for all the non-exempt Union Ministries/Departments to earmark at least 10% of their annual Gross Budgetary Allocation towards the development of NER. 

Harnessing Soft Power Potential of North-East Region: 

  • India also seeks to harness the soft power potential of the northeast. During the 2023 G-20 meetings, several events were held in northeastern cities, showcasing local culture, biodiversity, and heritage. This aligns with India’s goal of building cultural diplomacy and regional identity.

India’s northeast is no longer a peripheral outpost but a fulcrum for regional connectivity, economic diplomacy, and strategic engagement. By promoting connectivity diplomacy, sub-regional integration, and transnational infrastructure, India is asserting its vision of a multipolar Asia rooted in cooperation, connectivity, and mutual growth.

As Mr. Jaishankar rightly put it, the northeast is not landlocked — it is land-linked.

Chagos Archipelago: Location and Dispute

Context: The United Kingdom has agreed to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, ending decades of British control over the Indian Ocean archipelago. Chagos was separated from Mauritius in 1965, when Mauritius was still a British colony.
The deal allows the UK and US to retain joint use of the Diego Garcia military base for 99 years.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Location Chagos Archipelago;  Diego Garcia; 2024 UK-Mauritius Agreement. 

Geography of Chagos Archipelago

image 59
  • Chagos Islands - officially known as the British Indian Ocean Territory - comprise seven atolls with about 60 individual islands. 
  • Location: Located in the Indian Ocean, about 1,600 km northeast of Mauritius.
  • Land Area: 56.1 sq km total, with Diego Garcia covering 32.5 sq km (which is comparable to Lakshadweep Island of India).
  • Largest Atoll: Great Chagos Bank (12,642 sq km), the world’s largest atoll structure.

About Chagos Islands dispute

  • Disputed Territory: Chagos Islands have been a point of contention between Mauritius and the UK since Mauritius gained independence in 1968.
  • Recognition by UK: In 2024, the UK recognised Mauritius' sovereignty over Chagos but retained control over Diego Garcia, the largest island.
  • Strategic Importance: Diego Garcia hosts a joint UK-US military base, crucial for military operations in Asia and the Indian Ocean.

British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) & Diego Garcia Base:

  • Formation of BIOT (1965): UK created BIOT, separating Chagos from Mauritius, and paid £3 million for it.
  • US-UK Secret Agreement (1966): Allowed the establishment of a US military base in Diego Garcia.

Strategic Importance of Diego Garcia

  • The base became fully operational in 1986.
  • Used in 1990-91 Gulf War, Iraq & Afghanistan wars and presently, it remains a key UK-US military outpost in the Indian Ocean.

Diplomatic developments: Mauritius has raised the issue of claim in international fora for decades.

  • 2017: UNGA sought an ICJ ruling on the archipelago’s status.
  • 2019 ICJ Ruling: Declared the UK must end its administration of Chagos “as rapidly as possible”.
  • UNGA Resolution (2019): Called for UK’s unconditional withdrawal within six months.

2024 UK-Mauritius Agreement

  • Terms of the Deal:
    • The UK recognised Mauritius’ sovereignty over Chagos.
    • Diego Garcia remains under UK control for 99 years for military operations.
    • Mauritius can resettle Chagossians on islands except Diego Garcia.

India has welcomed the treaty signed between Mauritius and the United Kingdom, which restores Mauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia.

The Chagos dispute has strategic implications for India amid growing China influence in the region. Since India has facilitated the agreement between Mauritius and the UK, it has strengthened India’s position as the leader of the developing world. 

CPEC set to be expanded to Afghanistan

Context: China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is set to be expanded to Afghanistan with the foreign ministers of the three countries agreeing on it as part of broader efforts to boost trilateral cooperation.

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: Key facts related to CPEC.

Mains: Strategic Challenges for India post CPEC extension to Afghanistan.

What is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor?

  • CPEC is a flagship project under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) launched in 2015.
  • It aims to connect China’s Xinjiang province to Pakistan’s Gwadar Port through a network of roads, railways, and energy projects in order to facilitate trade and economic integration.
  • The project has been touted to boost Pakistan's economy and provide China with direct access to the Arabian Sea.
  • The original $46 billion infrastructure project has now ballooned to over $62 billion in investments.
image 51

What does CPEC’s entry into Afghanistan mean?

  • The CPEC’s extension into Afghanistan involves connecting Pakistani infrastructure to Afghan roads, railways and mineral-rich provinces, potentially linking the entire region to China’s western logistics and trade networks. 
  • This move could include:
    • Expanding the ML-1 railway line to connect with Afghan freight corridors
    • Building highways through Torkham and Spin Boldak crossing points (key border crossing points between Pakistan and Afghanistan).
    • Chinese access to Afghanistan’s vast lithium and rare earth resources.
    • Energy pipelines connecting Iran and Central Asia through Afghan territory.
    • Potential military logistics disguised as trade infrastructure.

India’s concerns around CPEC: 

India has been severely critical of the CPEC as: 

  • Violate India’s Sovereignty: The project is a violation of India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as it passes through Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir, part of India’s territory. 
  • Strategic Encirclement: India perceives CPEC as part of China's strategy to encircle India through infrastructure and military partnerships with neighbouring countries, thereby increasing China's influence in South Asia. 
  • Security Concerns: The development of infrastructure in PoK and Balochistan under CPEC raises security concerns for India, as it could facilitate greater military mobility for Pakistan and China in the region.
  • Terror-nexus risk: Taliban regime, which once harboured Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba fighters, may once again serve as a launchpad for anti-India activities. With Chinese funds and Pakistani intelligence support, this triangle could fund, train, and export terrosim into Indian territory.
  • Undermines India's regional connectivity projects: India fears that CPEC could undermine its own regional connectivity projects, such as the Chabahar port in Iran, by providing alternative trade routes that bypass India.

Expansion of CPEC into Afghanistan represents a strategic challenge for India, as it could alter the regional balance of power and affect India's security and economic interests. 

Thus, India needs to reassess its regional strategies and strengthen its diplomatic engagements to safeguard its interests and maintain its influence in South Asia.

Trending now

State of India’s Environment 2026: Rising Climate Risks and the Need for Resilience
Karnataka Announces Ban on Social Media for Children Under-16
India–France “Special Global Strategic Partnership”: A New Indo-Pacific Anchor
Front-of-Package Labelling: A Preventive Strategy to Address India’s Rising Lifestyle Diseases