09 December 2025

• Lok Sabha marked 150 years of Vande Mataram, leading to strong exchanges between the Government and Opposition.
• PM Modi accused Congress of “fragmenting” the song under Muslim League pressure and downplaying its role in the freedom movement.
• Priyanka Gandhi Vadra countered that the debate was a political diversion from unemployment and inflation.
• Issue re-opened historical debates on the song’s evolution, communal politics of the 1930s, and its constitutional status.

Key Points

• PM Modi cited Nehru–Jinnah correspondence to claim Congress diluted Vande Mataram.
• Opposition presented the chronology: two original stanzas (1875), four added later, first sung by Tagore in 1896.
• CWC (1937) adopted only the first two stanzas due to communal sensitivities.
• Constituent Assembly unanimously validated the version; Ambedkar and Mookerjee were part of the decision.
• Opposition alleged the government was weaponising national symbols ahead of elections.

Static Linkages

• Written by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay; featured in Anandamath (1882).
• No Article in the Constitution defines “National Song”; recognition stems from CA Resolution (1950).
• National Anthem alone has statutory backing (Presidential Order, 1950).
• SC (2018) held National Song cannot be enforced by law.
• Article 51A(a): Duty to respect National Flag, National Anthem, Constitution (not National Song).

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Revives interest in freedom-struggle symbols.
  • Enhances public understanding of constitutional history.
  • Encourages reflection on national unity and cultural legacy.
• Concerns
  • Politicisation of symbols risks polarisation.
  • Diverts parliamentary time from economic and governance issues
  • Revisiting settled questions may fuel historical distortions.
  • Potential to deepen majoritarian–minoritarian tensions.
• Stakeholder Perspectives
  • Government: Correcting historical omissions; cultural assertion.
  • Opposition: Political distraction; defence of Nehru-era decisions.
  • Scholars: Emphasise contextual reading of 1930s communalism.
  • Public: Expect focus on livelihoods, not symbolic disputes.

Way Forward

• Promote non-partisan historical education.
• Build inclusive narratives around national symbols.  
• Prioritise policy debates in Parliament.
• Clarify ceremonial status of national symbols if needed.  
• Strengthen civic education on constitutional fraternity..

DEMOCRACY’S PARADOX UNVEILED

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• ECI launched a nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
• Petitions argue ECI is indirectly determining citizenship, a power vested in the MHA.
• The issue highlights India’s lack of a single conclusive document proving citizenship and revives debates around NPR–NRC and citizenship law evolution.

Key Points

• Legal objections to SIR:
  • ECI cannot determine citizenship; only MHA/Foreigners Tribunals can.
  • No legal basis for en masse SIR.
• ECI’s argument: Verifying eligibility for rolls requires assessing citizenship but is not a formal citizenship adjudication.
• India lacks definitive citizenship evidence; passports/voter IDs are insufficient due to possible forgery.
• Citizenship Act evolution:
  • Jus Soli (birth-based) diluted over time; post-2004, a child is a citizen only if one parent is Indian and the other is not an illegal migrant.
• NPR–NRC architecture:
  • NPR lists residents; NRC includes only those who can prove citizenship.
• Assam NRC (2019):
  • 19 lakh people marked “D” (doubtful).
  • Showed heavy documentation burdens and administrative pitfalls.

Static Linkages

• Article 11 empowers Parliament to regulate citizenship.
• Foreigners Act, 1946: Burden of proof lies on the individual.
• RPA 1950/1951: Framework for electoral rolls.
• NPR authorised by Citizenship (Registration of Citizens) Rules, 2003.
• Assam Accord (1985) → Section 6A and separate citizenship cut-off.

Critical Analysis

• Pros: Cleaner rolls, prevents enrollment of non-citizens, enhances electoral integrity.
• Concerns:
  • No clear citizenship document → risk of wrongful exclusion.
  • Low-level officials making subjective decisions.
  • Institutional overlap between ECI and MHA.
  • Vulnerable groups face documentation disadvantages.
  • Philosophical conflict: State determines who “the people” are, undermining popular sovereignty.

Way Forward

• Define standard documentary requirements for citizenship.
• Clear division of roles between ECI and MHA.
• Transparent, tech-enabled verification with strong grievance redressal.
• Protect vulnerable populations through documentation support.
• Conduct targeted, not blanket, verification drives.

INSIDE THE INDIA-RUSSIA SUMMIT

• 23rd India–Russia Annual Summit held in New Delhi; Putin’s first visit since the Ukraine war.
• Occurred amid Ukraine’s battlefield setbacks and shifting U.S. engagement, with India supporting ongoing peace efforts.
• India showcased strategic clarity; Russia reaffirmed India’s priority status.

Key Points

• High-powered Russian delegation signalled renewed momentum.
• Programme 2030 adopted to push $100 billion trade with focus on national currency settlements and removal of non-tariff barriers.
• Strong emphasis on energy security, including fossil fuels and critical minerals.
• Progress on Chennai–Vladivostok Corridor, Northern Sea Route, shipbuilding, and Arctic cooperation.
• Major breakthrough: India–Russia skilled worker mobility agreement driven by Russia’s demographic decline.
• Defence ties: BrahMos, S-400 (critical in Operation Sindoor), greater localisation, future focus on niche technologies.

Static Linkages

• India’s strategic autonomy tradition; 2000 Strategic Partnership institutionalised annual summits.
• Russia as longstanding partner in nuclear energy (Kudankulam) and defence (major share of India’s legacy inventory).
• India’s Arctic Policy (2022) enables bilateral and multilateral cooperation.
• Maritime corridors linked to Sagarmala and Maritime India Vision 2030.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Diversifies bilateral ties beyond defence.  
  • Enhances energy and mineral security.
  • Strengthens India’s position in Eurasia and Arctic routes.
  • Worker mobility leverages India’s demographic advantage.
• Challenges
  • Balancing Russia ties with U.S.–Europe sensitivities.
  • Sanction-related financial risks.
  • Russia’s tilt toward China limits India’s strategic space.
  • High costs in Arctic and CVMC infrastructure.

Way Forward

• Build durable currency-settlement systems.
• Fast-track connectivity projects (CVMC, Arctic logistics).
• Expand joint R&D in defence high-tech.
• Diversify energy agreements and secure critical minerals.
• Maintain calibrated engagement with U.S. and Europe.

• RBI’s MPC cut the repo rate by 25 bps to 5.25%; cumulative cuts in 2025 now 125 bps.
• Similar to 2019’s 135 bps cut cycle but under opposite growth conditions.
• GDP growth rising: 5.6% → 8.2% over the last four quarters.
• Concerns over low deflator-driven real growth, excess capacity, and U.S. 50% tariffs influencing the decision.
• MPC retains neutral stance to stay flexible amid global volatility.

Key Points

• Repo rate: 5.5% → 5.25%.
• Growth strong, but may be overstated due to low GDP deflator.
• Excess industrial capacity reduces overheating risks.
• Cheaper credit expected to help MSMEs and exporters facing tariff-induced stress.
• Inflation forecast cut to 2%, but vulnerable to food/oil shocks.
• Neutral stance signals readiness for quick policy reversal.

Static Linkages

• Role and mandate of Monetary Policy.
• Repo rate and transmission mechanisms.  GDP deflator and real vs. nominal growth.  
• Effects of trade tariffs on external sector.  Concept of output gap.
• Supply-driven inflation sensitivity (food, oil).

Critical Analysis

• Positives:
  • Supports investment and capacity utilisation.  
  • Eases stress on MSMEs/exporters.
  • Maintains policy flexibility.
• Concerns:
  • Inflation may rebound like 2019 episode.  
  • Risk of liquidity-driven asset bubbles.
  • External shocks may upset projections.
• Stakeholders:
  • Industry: Cheaper borrowing  Consumers: Lower EMIs
  • Banks: Higher credit demand but margin pressure
  • Government: Growth support without fiscal expansion

Way Forward

• Strengthen monetary transmission.
• Targeted credit for MSMEs/export sectors.
• Better inflation forecasting for volatile commodities.
• Boost capacity creation to sustain growth.
• Diversify exports and strengthen supply chains.
• Maintain fiscal–monetary coordination.

CARCERAL CULTURE

Context of the News

• SC issued directions to ensure disability support in prisons, triggered by denial of accommodations to G.N. Saibaba and Stan Swamy.
• Linked to Articles 14 & 21 and duties under the RPwD Act, 2016.
• National guidelines exist, but many State manuals retain outdated able-bodied assumptions.
• SC separately ruled caste-based segregation unconstitutional; will monitor discrimination on caste, gender, disability.
• NCRB data notes mental illness among inmates; Dalits and Adivasis are over- represented.

Key Points

• Mandatory disability screening at admission, accessible facilities, assistive support.
• States to revise manuals to align with RPwD Act.
• Expands Muruganantham (2025) directions nationwide.
• Recognizes structural caste bias in prison labour and treatment.
• Calls for independent inspections and publication of disaggregated data.
• Highlights underfunded rights-based functions due to “carceral austerity.”

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Strengthens rights and dignity of vulnerable inmates.
  • Forces modernization of outdated prison rules.
  • Enhances transparency through disaggregated data.
• Cons / Challenges
  • Funding gaps and staff shortages.
  • Limited disability expertise in prison systems.
  • Deep-rooted caste and colonial administrative structures.

Way Forward

• Update State manuals with clear disability duties.
• Increase budgets for accessibility and assistive services.
• Professional disability screening at entry.
• Mandatory caste/disability-disaggregated reporting.
• Stronger independent inspections & training for prison staff.

WIDENING INDIA’S STEM PIPELINE

Context of the News

• Government has asked ministries/departments to review PhD guide selection and align doctoral research with “emerging national priorities.”
• Objective: Promote innovation, technology development, and ensure public money funds nationally relevant research.
• The proposal has revived debates on academic autonomy, support for basic research, and persistent fellowship delays.

Key Points

• Govt suggests shifting research toward renewable energy, battery tech, sustainable agriculture, and health innovations.
• Critics argue this may undermine basic science, whose benefits often appear decades later (e.g., quantum physics → quantum computing).
• Bell Labs’ success shows the value of freedom to pursue non-immediate research.
• Structural issues:
  • Delayed DBT fellowship payments, sometimes for 6–9 months.
  • Non-NET fellowship stagnant at ₹8,000/month (since 2012).
  • Limited industry-funded PhDs outside elite institutions.
  • Humanities at risk of political influence if research is restricted to “national priorities.”

Static Linkages

• Constitutional basis: Art. 19(1)(a) (freedom of expression), Art. 51A(h) (scientific temper).
• India’s R&D spending: ~0.65% of GDP (Economic Survey).
• NEP 2020: Push for research autonomy, NRF for national + basic research.
• NCERT concepts: difference between basic and applied research.

Critical Analysis

• Pros
  • Stronger alignment with national missions
  • Clearer accountability for public R&D spending  Possibility of accelerating tech-driven development Concerns
  • Risk of centralised control over research topics.  Undervaluing long-term basic research.
  • Fellowship delays create severe financial insecurity.
  • Weak industry–academia linkages.
  • Vulnerability of humanities/social sciences to politicisation.
• Stakeholders
  • Government: Efficient, targeted R&D spending  Universities/Scholars: Need autonomy + predictable funding
  • Industry: Wants reliable collaboration timelines  
  • Society: Needs both innovation & critical inquiry

Way Forward

•  Guarantee timely DBT via automated tracking.  
• Revise fellowship amounts, index to inflation.
• Empower NRF to support basic + applied research.
• Expand industry–academia PhD programmes.
• Protect topic autonomy, especially in social sciences.
• Invest in long-term foundational science.