Mains Exhaustive

UAE Introduces Sugar Tax to Promote Public Health

Context: The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has announced that it will implement a sugar tax on sweetened beverages starting January 1, 2026. The move aims to reduce high sugar consumption and associated health risks such as obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. This initiative aligns with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)’s regional framework for a tiered excise on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs).

About the Sugar Tax

A sugar tax is a fiscal measure that increases the retail price of sugary drinks through taxation to discourage excessive sugar intake and encourage healthier choices among consumers.
Globally, countries like the UK, Mexico, and South Africa have introduced similar taxes with measurable declines in sugary drink consumption.

Objectives:

Reduce sugar-related health issues.
Encourage product reformulation by beverage companies.
Generate revenue for public health and awareness programs.

In the UAE, this step forms part of a broader “Healthier UAE Vision”, which also targets smoking and trans-fat consumption.

India’s Approach

India already imposes one of the world’s highest tax burdens on sugary drinks, including:

28% GST,
40% Sin Tax, and
12% Compensation Cess.

Together, these aim to discourage consumption and offset healthcare costs linked to lifestyle diseases. India’s measures align with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendation to use fiscal tools for improving public health outcomes.

About the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

The GCC is a regional political and economic alliance formed in 1981 to strengthen political, financial, and security cooperation among its six members — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Security Arm: Peninsula Shield Force (established 1984).
Regional Policy: Increasingly focused on economic diversification, health, and sustainability.

India–GCC Relations

Trade: Reached $178.56 billion in FY2025, forming 15.4% of India’s global trade.
Energy Security: GCC supplies ~35% of India’s crude oil and ~70% of its imported natural gas.
Diaspora: Over 8.9 million Indians live in GCC nations, contributing 38% of India’s total remittances (FY2024).

Thus, UAE’s fiscal and health policies have indirect implications for India’s trade, employment, and economic engagement in the Gulf.

Significance

The UAE’s sugar tax reflects a growing global shift towards preventive healthcare through economic policy. For India and other developing nations, it underscores the importance of integrating fiscal instruments with public health strategies to curb non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and reduce healthcare costs.

Govt Raises MSP for Six Rabi Crops

Context: The Union Cabinet has approved significant hikes in the Minimum Support Prices (MSPs) for six rabi crops for the 2026–27 marketing season, aimed at ensuring remunerative prices to farmers and promoting crop diversification.

What is MSP?

MSP is the minimum guaranteed price at which the government procures crops from farmers, protecting them from distress sales.
It currently covers 23 crops: 7 cereals, 5 pulses, 7 oilseeds, and 4 commercial crops.
The policy serves as a tool for ensuring food security, farmer welfare, and market stability.

Key Highlights of the Hike

Crops Covered: Wheat, barley, jowar, gram, lentil, and safflower.
Wheat: MSP increased by ₹160 per quintal to ₹2,585/quintal (6.6% rise), offering the highest gain over cost of production (109%).
Safflower: Witnessed the highest absolute and percentage increase (₹600 per quintal), reflecting government emphasis on oilseed cultivation and crop diversification.
The hikes align with the government’s aim to double farmers’ income and reduce dependence on imported edible oils.

How MSP is Determined

Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP):
- A statutory body set up in 1965 under the Ministry of Agriculture.
- Recommends MSPs twice a year (for kharif and rabi crops).
- Recommendations are not binding; final approval rests with the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA).
Factors Considered:
- Cost of cultivation (A2, A2+FL, C2).
- Demand-supply situation.
- Price trends and inter-crop parity.
- Terms of trade for farmers.
- Global prices and food security concerns.
Cost Concepts:
- A2: Actual paid-out costs (seeds, fertilizers, etc.).
- A2+FL: A2 + imputed family labour.
- C2: Comprehensive cost (A2+FL + rental value of land + interest on capital).
MSPs are generally fixed at A2+FL + 50% margin, ensuring fair returns.

Significance

Enhances farmers’ income security and incentivizes crop production.
Encourages oilseed production, reducing edible oil import bills.
Balances inflation control with farmer welfare.
Strengthens food security by ensuring procurement at fair prices.

Challenges Ahead

Procurement is still concentrated in wheat and rice, limiting benefits for other crops.
Rising MSPs can strain the fiscal burden.
Market reforms and diversification efforts need to complement MSP to achieve sustainable outcomes.

Conclusion

The recent MSP hike reflects the government’s continued focus on farmer welfare, crop diversification, and self-reliance in agriculture. However, structural reforms in procurement, storage, and marketing remain crucial to ensure that the benefits of MSP reach all farmers equitably.

Health Ministry Advisory on Cough Syrups for Children

Context: The Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has issued a fresh advisory to all States and Union Territories on the rational use of cough syrups in children. The move comes after reports of child deaths in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, allegedly linked to syrups containing Dextromethorphan.

About Dextromethorphan

Dextromethorphan (DXM) is a cough suppressant used in many over-the-counter syrups.
It acts on the brain’s cough centre to reduce coughing but can cause serious side effects in children — such as drowsiness, breathing difficulty, and accidental overdose.
Long-term effects on the developing brain remain unclear, making it unsafe for paediatric use.

Key Guidelines Issued by DGHS

Avoid Routine Use: Most coughs in children are self-limiting and do not require medication.
Age Restriction: Cough syrups must not be prescribed for children below two years.
Clinical Evaluation: For older children, use only after proper medical evaluation — with accurate dosage and for the shortest possible duration.
Avoid Polypharmacy: Syrups containing multiple drug combinations should be avoided.
Non-Drug Remedies: Encourage hydration, steam inhalation, and rest as safer alternatives.
Pharma Compliance: Manufacturers must strictly follow Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and use pharmaceutical-grade excipients.

Contamination and Safety Investigations

The Health Ministry clarified that syrups linked to the incidents were free from diethylene glycol (DEG) and ethylene glycol (EG) — two highly toxic industrial chemicals responsible for several global poisoning incidents.
In Rajasthan, the formulation in question contained Dextromethorphan, which is not recommended for children under national and WHO safety standards.

Chemical Toxicity Explained

Diethylene Glycol (DEG): Used in antifreeze; causes kidney failure, neurological damage, and death.
Ethylene Glycol (EG): Another toxic antifreeze component that leads to acute kidney injury if ingested.

Significance

Reinforces paediatric drug safety and the need for rational prescription practices.
Aims to prevent avoidable child fatalities from inappropriate or contaminated medicines.
Strengthens pharmaceutical quality control and public health accountability.

Conclusion:

The DGHS advisory highlights India’s growing vigilance in paediatric pharmacovigilance. Rational use of medicines, strict enforcement of safety standards, and public awareness are key to protecting children from preventable drug-related tragedies.

Monument Conservation Opens to the Private Sector

Context: In a landmark move, the Government of India is opening the conservation of protected monuments to private participation for the first time, ending the Archaeological Survey of India’s (ASI) exclusive control. The initiative will work through a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) framework, inviting corporates, PSUs, and private organisations to contribute.

Implementation Framework

Funding Mechanism: All contributions will flow through the National Culture Fund (NCF), set up in 1996.
- NCF offers 100% tax exemption for donations.
- Till now, NCF has mobilised around ₹140 crore from corporates/PSUs.
Operational Model:
- Donors may select empanelled conservation architects (shortlisted by the Ministry of Culture).
- External implementing agencies can be hired for execution.
- Each project must follow the National Policy for Conservation of Ancient Monuments (2014).
- Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) require ASI’s approval.
Pilot Phase: A list of 250 monuments will be opened for donor participation.

Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) – At a Glance

Founded: 1861 by Alexander Cunningham.
Headquarters: New Delhi.
Parent Ministry: Ministry of Culture.
Mandate: Archaeological explorations, excavations, conservation, site museums, and epigraphical research.
Current Role: Manages conservation of ~3,700 protected monuments.

Significance of the Move

Resource Mobilisation: Expands conservation funding beyond limited government budgets.
Efficiency: Brings in professional expertise and corporate accountability.
Heritage Protection: Ensures faster preservation of monuments that face neglect due to resource crunch.
Public Engagement: Encourages wider participation in safeguarding cultural heritage.

Way Forward

Successful implementation will depend on robust regulatory oversight by ASI to maintain authenticity and prevent over-commercialisation of heritage sites.

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)

Context: India has been re-elected to Part II of the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). This reaffirms India’s growing role in shaping global civil aviation standards and policies.

About ICAO

Established: 1944 under the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention).
Type: Specialized agency of the United Nations.
Headquarters: Montreal, Canada.
Members: 193 States.
Mandate: To ensure safe, secure, efficient, and sustainable international civil aviation.

Governance of ICAO

Assembly:
- Sovereign body of ICAO.
- Meets once every 3 years.
- Comprises all 193 member states.
Council:
- Governing body, elected by the Assembly.
- 36 member states serve a three-year term.
- India elected under Part II (states making the largest contribution to international civil aviation).

Functions of ICAO

Standard-Setting: Develops global aviation standards for safety, security, efficiency, and environmental sustainability.
Policy Platform: Provides a forum for discussion and cooperation among states on civil aviation issues.
Legal Frameworks: Helps establish rules of international aviation law, ensuring peaceful and safe use of airspace.
Economic & Environmental Role: Promotes liberalization of air transport markets and reduction of aviation’s environmental footprint.

Significance for India

Reinforces India’s standing as a key aviation hub and market.
Provides India with greater influence in shaping global aviation policies.
Aligns with India’s domestic aviation growth, projected to become the third-largest aviation market by 2030.

PNGRB Proposes LPG Interoperability Framework

Context: The Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) has proposed an interoperable LPG delivery system to address the growing challenge of delayed cylinder deliveries. The move aims to enhance consumer convenience and strengthen India’s energy service delivery mechanism.

Key Features of the Proposal

24-Hour Delivery Mandate: If a distributor fails to deliver a refill within 24 hours of booking, the order will be rerouted to the nearest available distributor, irrespective of the oil marketing company (OMC).
Cross-OMC Flexibility: Customers of IOC, BPCL, or HPCL can receive a refill from any nearby distributor, effectively merging three separate delivery silos into a unified national LPG supply network.
Phased Rollout: The framework will begin with pilot projects in select urban and rural areas to test coordination and technology systems before nationwide implementation.

Rationale Behind the Proposal

Delivery Complaints: Around 1.7 million LPG-related grievances are filed annually, with nearly half linked to delayed refills.
Focus Shift: With 32 crore domestic LPG connections and near-universal coverage achieved, the challenge is no longer access but timely and reliable service.
Universal Service Obligation: As all three OMCs operate under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoPNG) and sell LPG at uniform subsidised prices, interoperability aligns with their common mandate to ensure uninterrupted household fuel access.

Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB)

Statutory Body: Established under the PNGRB Act, 2006, headquartered in New Delhi.
Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas.
Composition: Chairperson, one legal member, and three other members, appointed by the Centre for five years or until the age of 65.
Functions: Regulates refining, storage, transportation, distribution, marketing, and sale of petroleum products and natural gas (excluding crude oil and production).
Powers: Adjudicate disputes, levy fees, maintain databanks, conduct inquiries, and recommend policies.
Appeals: Decisions can be challenged before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity.

Significance of the Proposal

Consumer-Centric Reform: Ensures faster deliveries and reduces reliance on a single distributor.
Efficiency & Competition: Encourages better performance among distributors by eliminating monopolistic silos.
Digital Integration: Pushes for advanced IT systems to seamlessly transfer bookings across OMCs.
Strengthening Energy Security: Builds a more resilient and responsive LPG supply chain.

Challenges Ahead

Operational Coordination: Requires robust digital infrastructure and real-time inventory tracking across companies.
Accountability & Monitoring: Clear mechanisms must be in place to prevent mismanagement and ensure transparency.
Pilot to Scale: Lessons from pilot projects must be carefully integrated before nationwide rollout.

Denial of Land Inheritance Rights to Tribal Women

Context: The Supreme Court’s judgment in Ram Charan vs Sukhram (July 2025) held that excluding daughters from ancestral property violates the fundamental right to equality. This has brought tribal women’s inheritance rights into sharp focus.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Issues faced by Women: Land Inheritance Rights

Land Inheritance Rights of Tribal Women:

Tribals in Scheduled Areas are governed by their customary laws in matters of marriage, succession and adoption.
Despite women contributing more in farms than the men, none of the tribal customary laws prevalent in the Scheduled Five Area States give land inheritance rights to females in ancestral properties.
The consequence is stark landlessness among women. As per the Agriculture Census 2015-16, only 16.7% of Scheduled Tribe women possess land compared to 83.3% of men.

Reasons for Denial of Land Inheritance Rights to Tribal Women:

Fear of Land Alienation: The belief that if tribal women marry outside their community, inherited land may pass into non-tribal hands.
Communitarian Nature of Tribal Land: Tribal land is often perceived as communitarian property, where individual ownership is discouraged, and this argument is used to justify women’s exclusion.

The idea of codifying gender-equal inheritance laws for tribal communities has had a contentious history. The opposing argument is that replacing tribal customs with codified laws would undermine tribal identity. However, it perpetuates systemic gender discrimination and economic marginalisation of women.

Problems with Customary Exclusion:

Denial of land rights undermines women’s economic independence and entrenches cycles of poverty and dependence.
It perpetuates patriarchal control over resources and denies women equal status within families and communities.
The communitarian ownership argument fails in practice, as proceeds from land sales or acquisitions rarely benefit the village community, instead accruing to male members.
Violation of fundamental rights: Denial of inheritance rights violates fundamental rights.
- Article 14 guarantees equality before law.
- Article 15 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex.
- Article 21 guarantee of dignity is compromised when women are deprived of property and economic security.
It also contradicts constitutional morality, which demands that customs and traditions must conform to the principles of equality and justice.

Judicial Interventions:

Madhu Kishwar vs State of Bihar (1996), the SC refrained from striking down tribal succession customs, fearing disruption of settled traditions.
Prabha Minz vs Martha Ekka (2022): Jharkhand High Court ruled in favour of Oraon women, and upheld the right of females on inheritance, despite being barred by customary law.
Kamala Neti vs Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022): The SC held that a woman belonging to a Scheduled Tribe (ST) is entitled to an equal share in inherited tribal land. The SC urged the Central Government to amend Section 2(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which expressly exempts tribal women from the scope of the Act.
Ram Charan case (2025), the SC held that excluding daughters from ancestral property violates the fundamental right to equality.

Way Forward

Codify Tribal Succession Act that ensures equal inheritance rights for women while being sensitive to tribal socio-cultural contexts. Codification of succession laws on the lines of Hindu and Christian laws would harmonise customary autonomy with constitutional equality.
Greater awareness and sensitisation within tribal communities to counter fears of land alienation and to highlight the role of women as equal stakeholders.
Continued judicial scrutiny to ensure that customs failing the test of reasonableness and public policy are struck down.

Empowering tribal women through property rights is essential not only for gender justice but also for achieving inclusive tribal development and social justice.

Judicial Experimentalism versus the Right to Justice

Context: In Shivangi Bansal vs Sahib Bansal (2025), the Supreme Court endorsed the Allahabad High Court’s guidelines mandating a two-month cooling period and referral to Family Welfare Committees in Section 498A/85 BNS cases. This raises concerns of judicial experimentalism and delay in justice.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Basic idea of Judicial experimentalism and issues related to it.

Section 498A of the IPC

Section 498A (now Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) was inserted in the Indian Penal Code to punish cruelty by the husband or his relatives towards a married woman.
Cruelty includes physical or mental abuse, harassment for dowry, or conduct likely to drive the woman to suicide or harm her health.
The offence is cognisable, allowing the police to register a case and investigate without prior approval of a magistrate.
The offence is non-bailable, meaning bail is subject to judicial discretion and not a matter of right.
The offence is non-compoundable, which means once a complaint is filed, it cannot be withdrawn by compromise between the parties.
The punishment under Section 498A is imprisonment up to three years and a fine.

Safeguards to prevent misuse of Section 498A:

Over the years, courts have expressed concern about the increasing misuse of Section 498A, through false or exaggerated complaints, often leading to unnecessary arrests of husbands and their relatives. To address this, several measures were introduced:

In the Lalita Kumari (2013) case, the Supreme Court placed matrimonial disputes in the category of preliminary inquiry before registration of an FIR.
The recent criminal law reforms have also required that cases of cruelty by the husband undergo a preliminary inquiry before an FIR is registered.
To check misuse through arbitrary arrests, the CrPC amendment of 2008 introduced the principle of necessity, mandating that arrests should only be made when justified.
In the Arnesh Kumar (2014) case, the Supreme Court restricted unbridled police powers by mandating a checklist for arrest and introducing the practice of issuing a notice of appearance.
In the Satender Kumar Antil (2022) case, the Court strengthened safeguards further by directing that bail should be granted if an arrest was made in violation of the Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

Recently in Shivangi Bansal vs Sahib Bansal (2025), the Supreme Court endorsed the guidelines by the Allahabad High Court to prevent the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

The Allahabad High Court had introduced

A two-month ‘cooling period’ for any coercive action after the registration of a first information report (FIR) or complaint to the magistrate.
During the ‘cooling period’, the matter will be referred to a Family Welfare Committee (FWC).

Associated Concerns:

This ruling is a form of judicial experimentalism as it:

Creates a new dispute-resolution mechanism (FWCs) and procedural bar (cooling period) outside the statutory framework.
It interferes with the functional autonomy of police and magistrates.
Delays the victim’s right to timely justice, and introduces quasi-judicial bodies without legislative sanction.

What is Judicial Experimentalism?

Judicial experimentalism means the courts create rules or mechanisms not explicitly given in law, often to fill gaps or deal with pressing social concerns.
It can sometimes be helpful, as seen in Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan (1997) where the Court laid down guidelines on workplace sexual harassment in the absence of a law. These guidelines later became the POSH Act, 2013.
But it can also be problematic, as in the Shivangi Bansal case (2025) where such experiments weaken victims' access to justice and undermine statutory authorities.

Criticism of Judicial Experimentalism:

It breaches separation of powers by encroaching upon the legislative and executive domain.
It dilutes rule of law by introducing mechanisms beyond statutory mandate.
It delays justice and erodes institutional autonomy of police and magistrates.
It risks judicial overreach, where courts move from interpreting law to making policy, weakening democratic accountability.

The Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling on Section 498A reflects judicial experimentalism that goes beyond legislative intent. While misuse of the law has been addressed through existing safeguards, the introduction of cooling periods and Family Welfare Committees delays justice and undermines institutional autonomy.

Mental Health is a Fundamental Right: SC

Context: In July 2025, the Supreme Court of India in a landmark verdict ruled that mental health is an integral part of the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court also issued 15 strong guidelines for schools and coaching centres to protect student well-being.

Relevance of the Topic:Prelims: Key Provisions of Mental Healthcare Act 2017. Mains: Mental Healthcare in India: Challenges, Govt. Initiatives & Way Forward.

Mental health is more than the absence of mental illnesses. It is the foundation for the well-being and effective functioning of individuals. It includes mental well-being, prevention of mental disorders, treatment and rehabilitation.

Mental Health is a Fundamental Right:

The Supreme Court in the Sukdeb Saha vs the State of Andhra Pradesh (2025) judgement explicitly recognised mental health as an integral component of the constitutional Right to Life under Article 21.
This interpretation significantly broadens the scope of Article 21 to encompass psychological well-being, extending beyond mere physical survival.
The judgment laid down binding guidelines (Saha Guidelines) for educational institutions and coaching centers across India. They aim to establish a preventive, remedial, and supportive framework for mental health protection and prevention of suicides by students.

Saha Guidelines:

The SC has ordered a package of binding interim orders referred to as Saha Guidelines for educational institutions and coaching centers across India.

Schools, colleges, hostels and coaching institutes are required to proactively develop support systems to address the issue of mental health.
The SC has directed all States and Union Territories to notify rules within two months for registering private coaching centres and enforcing these guidelines.
District-level monitoring committees, chaired by District Magistrates, have been tasked to oversee compliance and handle complaints.
Until Parliament passes a full code, these guidelines will have legislative force.

Significance of the ruling:

Placing psychological integrity in Article 21 means that the Court has opened up room for these victims (suicide victims) to be heard and safeguarded.
It opens the door for restorative measures i.e., counselling, reform in institutions, mechanisms of accountability that go beyond retribution to prevention.
It will strengthen the implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. The Act enshrines the right to receive mental health care in India.

Key Provisions of Mental Healthcare Act 2017

The Act provides the legal framework for providing services to protect, promote and fulfil the rights of people with mental illnesses. The Act is in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

The Act guarantees mental health services for all. The government is responsible for creating opportunities to access less restrictive options for community living such as halfway homes, sheltered accommodations, rehab homes, and supported accommodations.
It decriminalised the attempt to suicide which hitherto was criminal offence under section 309 of Indian Penal Code, and mandates care instead of punishment.
It provided for the concept of ‘Advanced directive’, i.e. a person (suffering from mental illness) shall have the right to specify the manner in which he/she wishes to be treated or not to be treated. The person shall have the right to nominate representatives to take decisions on their behalf regarding treatment.
All States are required to establish a State Mental Health Authority and Mental Health Review Boards (MHRB) bodies that can further draft standards for mental healthcare institutes, oversee their functioning and ensure they comply with the Act.

WHO’s data on Mental Health

As per the recent data from the World Health Organisation:

More than 1 billion people globally are living with mental health disorders (including anxiety and depression).
Mental health conditions affect people of all ages and income levels, and are the second leading cause of long-term disability, contributing to loss of healthy life.
The prevalence of mental health disorders can vary by sex, and women are disproportionately impacted.
Depression and anxiety alone cost the global economy an estimated $1 trillion each year.
Progress made in reducing suicide mortality is quite low (only 12% reduction achieved) to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of a one -third reduction in suicide rates by 2030.

Challenges:

India has a significant shortfall of mental health professionals, with roughly 0.7 psychiatrists per 100,000 people, far below the WHO’s recommended ratio of 3 per 100,000 people.
Systemic neglect of mental health and stigma and reluctance to seek help.
Inadequate funding for community-based programmes and the effective utilisation of funds. E.g., India’s direct mental health budget has remained at roughly ₹1,000 crore in recent fiscal years.
Inconsistent implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act 2017.

Way Forward

Active policy interventions and resource allocation by the government.
Measures to train and sensitise the community/society to reduce the stigma around mental health.
Awareness to educate society about mental diseases as done by Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
Steps to connect the patients with each other by forming a peer network, so that they could listen and support each other.
People experiencing mental health problems should get the same access to safe and effective care as those with physical health problems.
Telemedicine and digital health platforms can extend the reach of mental health services, particularly in areas with a shortage of mental health professionals.

Also Read: Bridging Health Cover: Mental Healthcare in India

Transforming mental health services is one of the most pressing public health challenges. However, the national tele-mental health programme has expanded, educational development and awareness programmes are happening at an advanced pace.

Why has the United Nations Lost Relevance?

Context: The repeated failures of the United Nations in preventing conflicts such as Ukraine, Gaza, and Sudan along with veto paralysis in the UN Security Council have raised doubts about its effectiveness in the 21st century.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Declining Relevance of the United Nations.

About United Nations

The UN is a global intergovernmental organisation established by the signing of the UN Charter in 1945.
It was established with the articulated mission to:
- maintain international peace and security
- develop friendly relations among states
- promote international cooperation
- serve as a centre for harmonising the actions of states in achieving those goals.
It has increasingly come under criticism for its lack of effectiveness in addressing global challenges. Its decline stems from its structural flaws, financial dependence, and failure to act at the times of crises.

Reasons for Declining Relevance of the United Nations:

Veto Paralysis of the UN Security Council: The veto power of the five permanent members (P5) USA, UK, France, Russia, and China has crippled decision-making. E.g.,
- Russia blocked UN action during its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its 2022 Ukraine invasion, while the US has often vetoed resolutions on Palestine.
- Similar vetoes have prevented action in Syria, Sudan, Tibet, and Cold War conflicts, exposing the undemocratic nature of the system.
Failure to Prevent Conflicts and Protect Civilians:
- The UN has been ineffective in major crises such as Ukraine, Israel-Gaza, Syria, and Sudan often reduced to passing symbolic resolutions.
- Peacekeeping missions in Rwanda (1994) and Bosnia (1990s) failed to prevent genocide and ethnic cleansing.
- The Iraq War in 2003 showed how powerful states can bypass the UN altogether.
Selective Humanitarianism and Double Standards: The UN has intervened selectively, for instance authorising NATO in Libya (2011) but failing to rebuild the nation. Humanitarian disasters in Africa and Asia often receive inadequate global attention compared to crises in geopolitically strategic regions.
Financial Vulnerability and Dependence:
- The UN’s financial dependence on a handful of countries, especially the United States (contributing around 22% of its regular budget), makes it vulnerable to political pressures. During the Trump presidency, proposals for an 83% cut in US foreign spending and sharp reductions in UN financing has highlighted the fragility of its funding base.
- Around 40 nations default on annual dues, while discretionary donations critical for humanitarian operations are declining. This financial fragility raises doubts about the UN’s ability to achieve ambitious goals like the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.
Bureaucratic Inefficiency and Weak Enforcement: The UN has been criticised for being slow, bureaucratic, and ineffective in enforcement. Even agreements like the Paris Climate Accord (2015) lack strong compliance mechanisms, leaving issues like climate change and terrorism unresolved.
Geopolitical Capture and Location Concerns: Critics argue that the UN’s headquarters in New York keeps it too close to Washington, tilting influence towards the US. Relocating or rotating UN headquarters to conflict-prone regions such as Kigali, Kyiv, or Khartoum is proposed to make the organisation more grounded in global realities.
Crisis of Courage and Leadership: Analysts argue that the UN has lost its courage to lead, act decisively, or stand up to great powers. This leadership deficit has eroded its moral authority, leaving it as a “toothless and clawless” organization.
Rise of Multipolar Alternatives: The growth of regional and global groupings such as G20, BRICS, SCO, AU, and ASEAN shows that states increasingly rely on other mechanisms for conflict resolution and cooperation. These platforms are often seen as more flexible and effective compared to the UN’s slow processes.

Supporters argue that despite its flaws, the UN remains necessary. As former Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld said, the UN “was not created to lead mankind to heaven but to save humanity from hell.” Without the UN, the world may be hungrier, poorer, less safe, and less sustainable.

Key Reform Suggestions for the United Nations:

Expand Security Council membership to reflect contemporary power realities and ensure equitable regional representation.
Restrict or suspend veto power in cases of genocide, war crimes, or humanitarian crises.
Diversify and stabilise UN financing to reduce donor dependence and enhance budget predictability.
Strengthen peacekeeping operations with clear mandates, adequate resources, and rapid deployment capacity.
Consider rotation of UN headquarters to conflict-prone or Global South regions for greater legitimacy.
Promote multilateralism by building synergy with regional platforms like G20, BRICS, and AU.
Strengthening of enforcement mechanisms for international treaties and agreements, including climate accords and arms control regimes.

In its current form, the UN risks becoming a symbolic institution rather than an effective guardian of peace and security in the 21st century. For the UN to regain relevance, it must reform its structure, restore courage in leadership, and rebuild trust in multilateralism.

India-China Border Relations

Context: India and China have renewed diplomatic activity such as border patrol agreements, resumption of direct flights and efforts to expand trade and cultural exchanges.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: India - China bilateral relations.

India-China border is un-demarcated and is referred to as the Line of Actual Control (LAC). The border length is around 3,488 km as per India, while China claims it to be about 2,000 km. The different interpretations by the two countries leads to frequent disputes.

The border is divided into three main sectors

Western Sector (Ladakh, ~1597 km): Aksai Chin (~38,000 sq. km) under Chinese occupation, and China also controls Shaksgam Valley ceded by Pakistan in 1963.
Middle Sector (Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, ~545 km) which is the least disputed, though differences exist near the Barahoti plains.
Eastern Sector (Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim, ~1346 km) where China claims about 90,000 sq. km of Arunachal Pradesh as “South Tibet,” while the Sikkim boundary is formally settled but still faces PLA activity.

India-China Border Dispute

Historically, the 1914 Simla Agreement drew the McMahon Line between British India and Tibet, but China rejected it.
China occupied Tibet in 1950 and built a road in Aksai Chin in the 1950s.
The 1962 India-China war resulted in India’s defeat, with China retaining Aksai Chin and withdrawing from its advances in Arunachal Pradesh, leaving the boundary issue unresolved. India-China relations after the 1962 war remained tense, with little progress on the boundary dispute.
In 1988, Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to Beijing marked a turning point, as it re-opened dialogue after decades of mistrust.
However, political instability in India (1989-1991) slowed progress until P.V. Narasimha Rao’s government (1991-1996) was able to re-focus on China.

Initial Steps (1988-1992):

Between 1988 and 1993, six rounds of talks of the Joint Working Group (JWG) were held.
The dialogue included both diplomats and military commanders, with first meetings at Bum La (eastern sector) and Chushul/Moldo (western sector) in 1992.
Border trade resumed in 1992 after a gap of over 30 years, and consulates were re-opened in Mumbai and Shanghai in December 1992.

Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement (BPTA), 1993:

Signed during Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s visit to Beijing in September 1993.
Core Principle: The boundary dispute would be resolved peacefully, and neither side would use or threaten force.
The Agreement recognised the Line of Actual Control (LAC) for the first time in an official bilateral document. Both sides agreed :
- Not to cross the LAC; if intrusions occurred, forces would withdraw upon caution.
- To jointly check and determine contested segments of the LAC.
- To maintain minimal force levels along the LAC and reduce them on the principle of mutual and equal security.
- To freeze the military situation, acknowledging India’s geographic disadvantage compared to China’s easy access through the Tibetan plateau.

The agreement emphasised setting aside the boundary dispute to build cooperation in other areas.

1996 Agreement on Confidence-Building Measures:

Signed during Chinese President Jiang Zemin’s visit to India in 1996.
Expanded upon the 1993 BPTA by specifying military confidence-building measures (CBMs).
Both sides agreed :
- Not to use force and to continue peaceful consultations.
- To reduce or limit military forces and heavy weaponry (tanks, artillery, missiles) in border areas.
- To avoid large-scale military exercises near the LAC; if held, exercises would be directed away from the other side.
- Article X: Stressed the need for a common understanding of the LAC alignment. Both sides committed to exchange maps for clarification and confirmation.

Challenge of LAC Clarification

In 2000, both sides exchanged maps of the relatively undisputed Central sector.
In 2002, maps of the western sector were exchanged, but were rejected within minutes as they represented maximalist positions of both sides.
By 2005, efforts to clarify the LAC were abandoned.
Key contested areas included: Samar Langpa, Trig Heights, Depsang, Kong Ka La, Pangong Tso, Spanggur Gap, Mount Sajun, Dumchele, Demchok, and Chumar. These same areas became flashpoints in later standoffs, including in 2020.

The 1993 and 1996 agreements marked important milestones in institutionalising peace and stability along the border. However, the failure to define and clarify the LAC meant that the agreements could only postpone and not prevent future confrontations.

The failure to achieve a mutually accepted definition of the Line of Actual Control left the core dispute unresolved making subsequent tensions and face-offs inevitable.

Also Read: hTaking stock of India-China Bilateral Ties

Crisis in Nepal: Why is Kathmandu Burning?

Context: Recently, Nepal witnessed a violent youth-led movement dominated by a generation known as ‘Gen Z’. It is the largest anti-establishment uprising since the abolition of monarchy in 2008.

Nepal’s President has appointed former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as the country’s new Prime Minister and dissolved Parliament. He announced fresh elections on March 5, 2026.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: India and its Neighbourhood: Crisis in Nepal & its Implications on India.

Gen Z Protests in Nepal

Youth-led movement dominated by those born between 1996 and 2012, a generation known as “Generation Z”, frustrated with corruption, nepotism, unemployment, and political dysfunction.
The protest began after the government banned 26 social media platforms in August 2025, cutting off their main space for expression and mobilisation.
The situation escalated when several protestors in Kathmandu were killed by police firing, turning a demand for digital freedom into a nationwide anti-establishment uprising.

Enraged youth set fire to government buildings, vandalised the homes of former Prime Ministers, attacked ministers, and even freed political prisoners from Central Jail.

Causes of the Protests?

Unfulfilled promise of 2008 Republic: Wave of discontent against geriatric and nepotistic leadership that ran Nepal with 17 different prime ministerships in the last 20 years. The governance has remained weak, unstable, and unresponsive.
Corruption and Nepotism: Anger against entrenched political elites and their children’s lavish lifestyles while ordinary citizens face unemployment and poverty due to economic stagnation.
Youth Disillusionment: Nepal has one of the world’s youngest populations (median age 25). Youth face high unemployment, lack of opportunities, and widespread inequality.
Ban of Social Media Platforms: The government’s ban on 26 social media platforms (Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, X, YouTube) cut off Gen Z’s primary space for political expression.
State Violence: The killing of protesters by security forces was the tipping point that transformed peaceful dissent into nationwide outrage.

Nature of the Protests:

Leaderless Mobilisation: Unlike the Jana Andolans of 1990 and 2006, the movement lacked structured leadership or clear political objectives.
Spontaneous and Digital-Driven: Mobilisation was initially through social media pages such as Next Generation Nepal.
Nihilistic Rage: Protesters attacked homes of five former Prime Ministers, vandalised state institutions, and freed political prisoners, showing an anti-establishment thrust rather than specific reform demands.
Urban-Centric but Spreading: While centred in Kathmandu, protests spread to other cities, reflecting nationwide disillusionment.

As protests turned violent, the Prime Minister of Nepal resigned, while the President remained absent deepening the leadership vacuum. In response, the Army was deployed to restore order.

Implications of the Gen Z Protests in Nepal:

Delegitimisation of Political Elites: Attacks on the homes of former Prime Ministers and ministers reflected a collapse of public trust in traditional parties and leaders.
Expansion of Military Role: The Army’s takeover of security functions raises concerns about potential military influence in political decision-making.
Emergence of New Political Voices: The protests weakened trust in established political parties and created space for new leaders. At the same time, pro-monarchy groups tried to use the unrest to push for a return of the old order.
Regional and Economic Impact: Instability threatens Nepal’s economy, deters investment and tourism, and poses security and diplomatic challenges for India and South Asia.

Implications for India:

Border Management and Security: Political instability in Nepal poses risks of refugee inflows, illegal activities, and cross-border crime across the open India-Nepal border.
Strategic Competition: Prolonged chaos could allow China or other external actors to expand their influence in Nepal, challenging India’s traditional strategic space.
Economic Disruptions: Instability undermines India’s trade and investment in Nepal, including energy, infrastructure, and hydropower projects.

India must focus its attention on supporting a crucial transition towards a new, more democratic and developed Nepal.