01 November 2025

• India and the U.S. signed a 10-year “Framework for the U.S.–India Major Defence Partnership” at the 12th ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting- Plus (ADMM-Plus) in Kuala Lumpur.
• Signed by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
• Aims to enhance peace, security, and stability in the Indo-Pacific, amid ongoing tariff tensions.
• Builds on the 2013 Joint Principles for Defence Cooperation and the 2016 Major Defence Partner (MDP) status.

Key Points

• Duration: 2025–2035 — provides long-term strategic direction.
• Scope: Land, maritime, air, space, and cyberspace.
• Objectives:
  • Promote a free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific.
  • Enhance interoperability and maritime domain awareness.
  • Expand defence innovation and technology collaboration.
• COMPACT Initiative: Catalyzing Opportunities for Military Partnership, Accelerated Commerce and Technology — promotes co- development and co-production.
• Strategic Vision: Supports Quad cooperation, deters regional threats, and safeguards sovereignty.
• Industrial Linkages: Boosts joint R&D, innovation, and start-up-driven defence tech.

Static Linkages

• India’s Major Defence Partner status (U.S. NDAA 2017) enables advanced technology sharing.
• Key foundational pacts completed: LEMOA (2016), COMCASA (2018), BECA (2020).
• Indo-Pacific reflects India’s SAGAR doctrine — Security and Growth for All in the Region.
• ADMM-Plus: Forum for defence dialogue among ASEAN and partners.

Critical Analysis

• Opportunities
  • Reinforces India’s strategic autonomy and multipolar balancing.
  • Boosts defence indigenisation under Atmanirbhar Bharat.
  • Strengthens maritime surveillance and joint exercises.
  • Expands R&D and innovation ecosystems.
• Challenges
  • Trade frictions could affect trust.
  • Limited tech transfer due to export controls.  Managing China’s strategic sensitivity.
  • Need for genuine reciprocity and mutual benefit.

Way Forward

• Set up joint R&D hubs and integrated defence corridors.
• Broaden cooperation in AI, space, quantum, and cyber via iCET.
• Align Indo-Pacific strategy with ASEAN centrality.
• Ensure balanced tech access and policy reciprocity.
• Promote defence diplomacy through IORA and East Asia Summit.

AGENCIES CAN’T COMPEL LAWYER DISCLOSURES

• The Supreme Court ruled that investigating agencies cannot summon lawyers or force them to reveal confidential client communications.
• The judgment, delivered by a Bench headed by CJI B.R. Gavai, arose from a suo motu case after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoned two senior advocates for advice given to clients.
• The Court held that such actions violate constitutional rights under Articles 20(3), 19(1) (g), and 21.
• The judgment reaffirmed lawyer-client privilege under Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023.

Key Points

• Lawyers cannot be compelled to disclose confidential communications with clients.
• Article 20(3) protects against self- incrimination; forcing a lawyer to reveal client details breaches this right.
• Section 132, BSA 2023 ensures advocate-client confidentiality. Disclosure allowed only when:
  • The client consents, or
  • The communication furthers an illegal act, or
  • A crime/fraud results from it.
  • Summons safeguard: Any summons to an advocate must be approved by a superior officer (SP rank or above) with written justification.
  • Judicial observation: The advocate’s duty of trust is part of professional ethics and constitutional liberty.

Static Linkages

• Article 20(3): Protection against self- incrimination.
• Article 19(1)(g): Freedom to practise a profession.
• Article 21: Right to privacy and dignity (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy case, 2017).
• Advocates Act, 1961: Governs conduct and ethics of lawyers.
• Section 132, BSA 2023: Codifies privilege of legal communications (replaces Sec. 126 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872).
• Rule of Law: Ensures fairness and due process.

Critical Analysis

• Positive Aspects:
  • Protects client confidentiality and lawyer independence.
  • Prevents misuse of investigative powers.
  • Strengthens due process and fairness in criminal justice.
  • Reinforces constitutional morality and privacy.
• Concerns:
  • May delay investigations if misused to hide illegal acts.
  • “Illegal purpose” clause can be open to interpretation.
  • Need clarity on privilege in digital communications.
• Stakeholders:
  • Advocates and Bar Councils
  • Investigating Agencies (ED, CBI, Police)  
  • Judiciary and Law Ministry
  • Citizens seeking fair representation

Way Forward

• Guidelines for agencies to respect lawyer- client privilege.
• Training for investigators on limits of privilege exceptions.
• Clarify definitions of “illegal purpose” and “fraud exception.”
• Digital protection for emails and online consultations.
• Judicial oversight on cases alleging privilege breach.

 BOARD OF PEACE AND SUSTAINABLE SECURITY

• On the 80th anniversary of the UN, concerns grow over its failure to sustain peace despite reacting to conflicts.
• Experts propose creating a ‘Board of Peace and Sustainable Security (BPSS)’ under Article 22 of the UN Charter, empowering the UN General Assembly (UNGA) to set up new bodies.
• Aim: ensure continuous political engagement after conflicts, addressing UN’s institutional gap between peacekeeping and peacebuilding.

Key Points

• UNSC remains reactive; peacekeeping stabilises but lacks political follow-through.
• Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) has limited mandate in active transitions.
• BPSS proposal:
  • Established by UNGA (not UNSC).
  • Focus on post-conflict political engagement, not coercion.
  • Align peacekeeping with political outcomes.
  • Around 24 rotating members; balanced regional representation.
  • Regional bodies (AU, ASEAN, etc.) as full participants.
• Promotes concept of Sustainable Security – peace built on governance, inclusion, and legitimacy, not force.

Static Linkages

• Article 22, UN Charter – UNGA can form subsidiary bodies.
• UNSC (Chapter V) – primary peace and security organ; veto limits effectiveness.
• Peacebuilding Architecture (2005) – PBC, Peacebuilding Fund, and Support Office.
• India’s stand – long-time advocate of UN reform and Global South representation.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Fills institutional gap between mediation and peacebuilding.
  • Strengthens UNGA’s relevance and reduces UNSC dependency.
  • Encourages regional ownership and continuity in peace processes.
• Challenges:
  • Possible overlap with UNSC & SG’s powers.
  • Limited enforcement capacity.  Political resistance from P5; funding constraints.

Way Forward

• Promote functional reform under existing Charter.
• Link with SDG-16 (Peace, Justice & Strong Institutions).
• Ensure regional balance and inclusivity.
• Use digital tools to preserve institutional memory.
• India can lead Global South advocacy for reform.

TRUMP REVIVES U.S. NUCLEAR TESTING

• At 89 seconds from midnight on the Doomsday Clock, symbolising global instability, U.S. President Donald Trump announced plans to resume nuclear weapons testing after a 33- year moratorium.
• The announcement followed Russia’s test of a nuclear-capable cruise missile and coincided with Mr. Trump’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
• The move has sparked global concern over a potential new nuclear arms race and the erosion of non-proliferation norms.

Key Points

• Moratorium Break: The U.S. has not conducted a nuclear test since 1992; testing now would effectively end the global moratorium.
• Treaty Impact:
  • Could undermine the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which though not in force, enjoys near-universal adherence.
  • Threatens the New START Treaty, expiring in February 2026, which caps U.S.-Russia deployed strategic warheads.
• Global Domino Effect: Likely to push China, Russia, India, and Pakistan toward reconsidering their nuclear postures.
• NPT Undermined: The Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT)’s “grand bargain” — disarmament by nuclear states in return for restraint by non-nuclear states — risks collapsing.
• Security Implications: Could spur development of low-yield tactical nuclear weapons and erode trust in U.S. extended deterrence among allies.

Static Linkages

• The CTBT (1996) bans all nuclear explosions but is not in force as key states (U.S., China, North Korea, India, Pakistan) haven’t ratified it.
• Article VI of NPT (1968) obligates nuclear-weapon states to pursue disarmament negotiations.
• The New START Treaty (2010) limits each side to 1,550 deployed strategic warheads.
• India’s Nuclear Doctrine (2003): Commitment to “No First Use” (NFU) and credible minimum deterrence.
• The Doomsday Clock, set by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, represents proximity to global catastrophe.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • U.S. could claim need for modernization of deterrent and reliability testing.
  • May serve as leverage in future arms control negotiations.
• Cons / Concerns:
  • Erosion of Arms Control Frameworks: Undermines NPT, CTBT, and New START.
  • Arms Race Risk: Encourages Russia, China, and regional powers to resume testing.
  • Strategic Instability: Weakens trust-based deterrence; fuels insecurity in South Asia.
  • Environmental and Health Risks: Nuclear testing has severe ecological and humanitarian impacts.
  • Diplomatic Backlash: Damages U.S. moral authority in advocating global non-proliferation.

Way Forward

• Global Dialogue: Launch trilateral U.S.-Russia-China arms control talks ahead of New START expiry.
• Strengthen CTBT Regime: Encourage ratification and transparency via the International Monitoring System (IMS).
• Reaffirm NPT Commitments: Revitalize the Review Conference with a focus on verifiable disarmament steps.
• Adopt Global NFU Policy: Promote No-First-Use commitments to restore mutual trust.
• India’s Role: Continue supporting disarmament through UN initiatives and NAM forums.

• At the U.S.–China summit in Busan, Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping announced a pause in the tariff war, with limited tariff cuts and relaxation of trade restrictions.
• China agreed to resume U.S. farm imports (especially soybeans) and ease critical mineral export limits.
• The détente follows years of trade tensions since 2017, highlighting deeper structural power shifts in the global economy.

Key Points

• The U.S. trade deficit with China shrank by ~30%, mainly due to trade diversion via Mexico, Vietnam, and ASEAN, not re- industrialisation.
• China’s “dual circulation” balanced domestic demand and exports, absorbing tariff shocks.
• Tariffs raised costs for U.S. consumers; Chinese retaliatory tariffs hit U.S. farm states.
• China retains dominance in critical minerals, semiconductors, and intermediate goods, consolidating its position as the world’s manufacturing hub.
• The episode marks a structural inversion—the U.S. as top consumer, China as top producer.

Static Linkages

• Comparative Advantage Theory – explains China’s manufacturing rise.
• Balance of Payments – trade deficit affects current account balance.
• Global Value Chains (GVCs) – fragmentation of production across borders.
• WTO Norms – MFN principle challenged by tariff escalation.
• Industrial Policy – Made in China 2025 reflects state-led growth.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Reduces global trade uncertainty and inflation risks.
  • Encourages short-term stability in global commodity and tech supply chains.
• Cons:
  • Temporary truce; strategic rivalry persists.
  • Trade deficit reduction is cosmetic—driven by relocation, not productivity.
  • Rising geoeconomic fragmentation weakens WTO credibility.

• Stakeholders:
  • U.S. manufacturers: Prefer stable input access.
  • Chinese exporters: Benefit from policy cushioning.
  • Emerging economies: Gain relocation opportunities.
  • Multilateral bodies: Concerned about rule dilution.

Way Forward

• Diversify global supply chains through resilient sourcing.
• Strengthen WTO reforms and dispute settlement.
• Promote technology partnerships and domestic value addition.
• Encourage regional trade blocs for balanced interdependence.
• Build autonomy in critical minerals and semiconductors.