INDUSTRIAL OUTPUT GROWTH
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
- IIP is a key high-frequency indicator reflecting the industrial sector’s performance, comprising manufacturing (77.6%), mining (14.4%), and electricity (8%).
- India’s industrial sector contributes nearly 25% to GDP and is central to initiatives like Make in India, Atmanirbhar Bharat, PLI schemes.
- The slowdown comes at a time of global supply chain volatility, GST & tariff policy changes, and uneven domestic consumption recovery post-COVID.
- The performance of consumer durables/non- durables reflects household demand sentiment, while capital goods mirrors investment activity.
- Industrial output trends directly influence monetary policy (RBI), fiscal planning, job creation, exports, and infrastructure push.
Key Facts / Data (Prelims Pointers)
- IIP growth (Aug 2025): 4% (vs. 4.3% in July; vs. 0% Aug 2024).
- Mining & Quarrying: +6% (14-month high; turnaround after 4 months contraction).
- Primary Goods: +5.2% (7-month high). Electricity: +4.1% (5-month high).
- Manufacturing: +3.8% (vs. 6% July; 1.2% Aug 2024).
- Capital Goods: +4.4% (vs. 6.7% July; vs. 0% Aug 2024).
- Consumer Durables: +3.5% (vs. 7.3% July; 5.4%
- Consumer Non-Durables: –6.3% (worst in 8 months).
- Tariffs: Implemented Aug 27, 2025. GST benefits: Effective from late Sept 2025.
- Institutional Source: MoSPI (Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation).
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Mining recovery boosts raw material availability → support for manufacturing & infrastructure.
- Primary goods & electricity uptick → signals improving base demand & energy- intensive activity.
- Faster growth compared to Aug 2024 shows resilience despite global slowdown.
- Positive alignment with PLI schemes, Make in India, National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP).
Challenges / Cons
- Consumption stress: Weak demand in consumer non-durables signals rural distress & inflationary impact on essentials.
- Manufacturing slowdown: Risks industrial revival & job creation.
- Investment drag: Slower capital goods growth → muted private sector capex.
- Policy timing: Tariffs & GST adjustments not reflected yet; uncertainty may dampen sentiment.
- Global exposure: Export-dependent sectors vulnerable to global demand shocks.
Long-Term Implications
- Sustained industrial growth critical for Vision 2047 goal of a developed India.
- Atmanirbhar Bharat push could reduce import-dependence but needs stable demand.
- Weak consumer goods data may stall SDG-8 (Decent Work & Economic Growth) progress.
- Stronger mining & infrastructure activity → supports energy transition and urbanisation goals.
- Industrial output trends affect India’s global positioning as a manufacturing hub amidst China+1 strategy.
Way Forward
- Boost domestic demand: Rural employment schemes (MGNREGA support), targeted consumption stimulus, direct benefit transfers.
- Ease regulatory burden: Simplify GST compliance, reduce tariff uncertainty.
- Accelerate infrastructure push: Timely execution of NIP, Gati Shakti plan for logistics efficiency.
- Support MSMEs & manufacturing clusters: Access to cheap credit, technology adoption, digitalisation.
- Encourage private capex: Tax incentives, de-risking large projects, deepen corporate bond markets.
- Diversify exports & supply chains: Strengthen FTAs, integrate with global value chains.
- Energy sector reforms: Expand renewable power & grid modernisation to sustain electricity demand.
LADAKH GROUP PROPOSAL
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
- Political:
- Post abrogation of Article 370 (2019), Ladakh was carved out as a separate Union Territory without legislature.
- This has triggered demands for Sixth Schedule–like constitutional safeguards to protect Ladakhi culture, demography, land, and jobs.
- Two key civil society groups spearheading the movement:
- Leh Apex Body (LAB)
- Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA) Recent Trigger:
- Death of 4 protestors (Sept 24, 2025) in Leh police action → resentment against Centre.
- LAB & KDA called off scheduled pre-HPC talks (Sept 30) with the Ministry of Home Affairs.
- Security Angle:
- Allegations of “anti-national” and “foreign links” against protestors.
- Detention of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk under National Security Act (NSA) deepened mistrust.
- Socio-Military Angle:
- Anger intensified after denial of public participation in cremations, including that of a Kargil war veteran.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- Bodies involved: LAB, KDA, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), High-Powered Committee (HPC).
- Sixth Schedule: Provides autonomy to tribal areas (Article 244, Parts IX & X, 5th/6th Schedules).
- Judicial Inquiry Demand: On Sept 24 Leh firing * 4 deaths, 50 detained.
- Institutions Involved: CRPF, District Magistrate (DM) permissions in law & order.
- Important Personality: Sonam Wangchuk (climate activist, ICE Stupa innovator).
- Security Law Mentioned: National Security Act (NSA, 1980).
- Date of Next Talks: Oct 6, 2025 (HPC dialogue).
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros (Significance):
- Safeguarding Demography: Prevents large-scale migration and land grabs in ecologically sensitive Ladakh.
- Cultural Identity: Recognises Ladakh’s Buddhist and Shia heritage.
- Democratic Deepening: Dialogue with civil society could strengthen trust in Indian federalism.
- Strategic Frontier: Addressing grievances in Ladakh is vital due to its border with China (LAC) and Pakistan.
Challenges / Cons:
- Trust Deficit: Allegations of “anti-national” links erode goodwill.
- Security vs. Civil Rights: Use of NSA and firing on civilians raises concerns about democratic space.
- Delayed Engagement: Perception of Centre’s “hesitation” to hold transparent inquiry worsens alienation.
- Youth Radicalisation Risk: Suppression without resolution may push youth towards unrest.
Long-Term Implications
- Vision 2047: Inclusion of frontier regions like Ladakh in developmental journey demands trust-based governance.
- Atmanirbhar Bharat: Local autonomy can empower Ladakhis to drive sustainable eco- tourism, renewable energy, and cold desert agriculture.
- SDGs: Links to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, Strong Institutions) and SDG 15 (Life on Land) due to fragile Himalayan ecology.
- Geopolitical Positioning: Ladakh is critical in India–China border disputes (Galwan 2020) → stability here strengthens India’s strategic posture.
Way Forward
- Judicial Accountability: Time-bound independent inquiry into Sept 24 deaths.
- Confidence-Building: Withdraw blanket “anti- national” tags; release non-violent detainees.
- Institutional Safeguards:
- Consider Sixth Schedule/Article 371–like protections.
- Empower LAHDCs (Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils).
- Balanced Security Approach: Distinguish between peaceful protest and external interference.
- Inclusive Dialogue: Formal, periodic engagement between Centre, LAB, KDA, religious & youth representatives.
- Development + Ecology: Policy push for renewable energy (solar, hydro), sustainable tourism, and glacial preservation.
U.S TARRIFS EFFECTS
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Backgroud
- U.S. tariffs under Trump administration target Indian exports, with marine exports (esp. shrimp) hit hardest.
- PAC deliberated on CAG’s performance audit report of Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) Scheme.
- India exploring FTAs with EFTA bloc, U.K., EU, and diversifying markets (Russia, others).
- PAC flagged weak outcomes of EPCG despite large duty foregone.
Key Facts / Data (Prelims Pointers)
- PAC chaired by K.C. Venugopal (INC).
- Tariffs: 50% duty imposed (Aug 2025) → effective levy 58%+ on shrimp exports.
- EPCG Scheme: Duty forgone ₹42,714 cr (2018- 19 to 2020-21).
- EFTA bloc: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland.
- Key competitor in pharma: China (also under tariffs).
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- FTAs with EU, U.K., EFTA can diversify markets, reduce dependence on U.S.
- Push for registration of marine export units in EU → new market access.
- EPCG Scheme conceptually promotes manufacturing competitiveness & technology imports.
Challenges / Cons
- Shrimp & marine export hubs in coastal towns face income & livelihood shocks.
- EPCG Scheme outcomes unclear → high revenue forgone without matching results.
- High tariffs erode India’s comparative advantage; competitors may capture market share.
Long-Term Implications
- Risk of trade concentration → underscores need for market diversification & resilient supply chains.
- EPCG inefficiency challenges Atmanirbhar Bharat manufacturing push.
- Tariff wars could realign global trade blocs, impacting India’s Vision 2047 export-led growth strategy.
- Impacts on SDGs (livelihoods, decent work, economic growth, reduced inequalities).
Way Forward
- Trade diplomacy: Accelerate FTA negotiations with EU, U.K., EFTA, ASEAN+ blocs.
- Marine sector resilience: Invest in value addition, branding, processing infra.
- EPCG reforms: Link benefits to measurable export growth & job creation.
- Market diversification: Strengthen access to Russia, Africa, Latin America.
- Long-term strategy: Reduce overdependence on single-country markets; align with Vision 2047 & global value chains.
AN ANTI -TERROR ROLE THAT DEFIES LOGIC
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Background
- Pakistan historically accused of harbouring terrorists (Osama bin Laden, LeT, JeM).
- Recent terror incidents: 2008 Mumbai, 2019 Pulwama, 2025 Pahalgam attack → India’s Operation Sindoor in response.
- Despite this record, Pakistan assumed:
- Chair of Taliban Sanctions Committee (UNSC) – June 2025.
- Vice-Chair of UN Counter-Terrorism Committee.
- UNSC Presidency – July 2025.
- IMF approved $1 billion loan (May 2025) under Extended Fund Facility despite concerns of terror financing misuse.
- Historical precedent: Controversial UN appointments (Libya – Human Rights Commission, Saudi Arabia – Women’s Rights Commission).
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- LeT & JeM: Pakistan-based UN-designated terrorist groups.
- FATF: Pakistan removed from grey list – Oct 2022.
- IMF loan: Part of $7 billion package; India abstained in vote.
- Pahalgam attack (April 22, 2025) → prompted Indian military action.
- UNSC composition: 15 members; committees work on consensus basis.
- Pakistan announced ₹14 crore compensation (May 2025) to families of slain terrorists.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Forum for India to expose Pakistan’s duplicity in front of UNSC.
- Strengthens India’s case for reforms in UN vetting processes and terror financing accountability.
- Push for global counter-terrorism narrative correction.
Challenges / Cons
- Pakistan gains legitimacy & platform to influence narratives.
- Risks derailing India’s efforts to sanction Pak-based terrorists.
- U.S. & other powers prioritising strategic/economic ties with Pakistan over terrorism concerns.
- Weakens credibility of UN counter- terror mechanisms.
Long-Term Implications
- Undermines UN’s global moral authority on terrorism.
- Potential to embolden state- sponsored terrorism.
- Could complicate India’s Vision 2047 security environment with heightened asymmetric warfare, infiltration, cyber threats.
- Challenges India’s positioning as a responsible global actor in counter- terrorism.
Way Forward
- Strengthen diplomatic coalitions in UNSC to counterbalance Pakistan.
- Demand performance reviews, stricter vetting & accountability for UN committee leadership.
- Use global media, diaspora, academia for narrative building on Pakistan’s terror links.
- Deepen engagement with Taliban regime (humanitarian diplomacy) to reduce Pakistan’s leverage.
- Invest in national security, intelligence, cyber defence to counter asymmetric warfare.
- Push for UN reforms → greater transparency in leadership selection, aligning with India’s permanent UNSC seat aspirations.
SSTC IS MORE THAN A DIPLOMATIC PHRASE
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Background
- With only one-third of the time left to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, urgency in innovative partnerships has grown.
- South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) has become central in global development discourse; recognised annually on 12 September (UN Day for SSTC).
- The day also commemorates the 1978 Buenos Aires Plan of Action (BAPA), which institutionalised South-South cooperation principles of solidarity, mutual respect, shared learning.
- Changing global order, climate crisis, conflicts, and declining development aid highlight the importance of alternative partnership models like SSTC.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- SSTC UN Day → 12 September (linked to 1978 BAPA).
- India’s role:
- Voice of the Global South Summits (2023, 2024).
- G-20 Presidency push for African Union’s permanent membership.
- Development Partnership Administration (MEA, 2012).
- Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) programme → trained professionals in 160+ countries.
- India-UN Development Partnership Fund (2017) → financed 75+ projects in 56 developing countries.
- Digital Public Infrastructure exports →Aadhaar UPI
- India-WFP Partnership (60+ years): pilots like Annapurti Grain ATM, Take- Home Ration scheme, rice fortification, PDS optimisation.
- Funding trends: 47 govts contributed to UN Fund for South-South Cooperation (projects in 70+ countries, 155 nations impacted)
- WFP 2024 mobilisation: $10.9 million for SSTC projects, esp. SDG-2 (Zero Hunger).
UN Day 2025 theme → “New Opportunities and Innovation through SSTC”.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Frugal & replicable models → context- sensitive solutions.
- Enhances global South solidarity; reduces dependence on traditional donors.
- India’s food security, digital, climate resilience models → exportable best practices.
- Strengthens Global South voice in multilateral platforms (G20, UN).
- Builds trust & mutual accountability through triangular cooperation (Global South + developed donors + institutions).
Challenges / Cons
- Funding for humanitarian & development aid shrinking.
- Risks of politicisation of aid & diplomacy.
- Implementation gaps: scaling up innovations globally is uneven.
- Dependence on host nation political stability & institutional capacity.
Long-Term Implications
- Supports Vision 2047 → India as Vishwa Guru & development partner.
- Reinforces Atmanirbhar Bharat philosophy by showcasing India’s self-reliant yet globally sharing model.
- Strengthens India’s role in achieving SDGs (esp. SDG-2: Zero Hunger, SDG-17: Partnerships).
- Enhances India’s strategic positioning in the Global South and as a bridge with developed nations.
Way Forward
- Scale-up financing mechanisms → expand India-UN Development Partnership Fund, leverage private sector & philanthropy.
- Invest in knowledge-sharing platforms & regional innovation hubs.
- Enhance monitoring & accountability frameworks to ensure impact.
- Mainstream civil society,private sector.grassroots communicates in SSTC projects.
CHIEF DEFLECTOR
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Backgroud
- Repeated exam paper leaks in Uttarakhand (UKSSSC 2021, UKPSC 2023, UKSSSC 2024) → undermine integrity of public recruitment.
- State already faces high unemployment +youth migration (“ghost villages” issue).
- CM’s political response (“nakal jihad”) highlights communal framing rather than institutional reform.
- Wider pattern across states (Rajasthan, MP, WB, Bihar) → erosion of aspirants’ trust in competitive exams.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- UKSSSC (Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission) & UKPSC (Uttarakhand Public Service Commission).
- September 21 exam: 416 vacancies, over 40,000 candidates (121 centres, Dehradun).
- India: ~65% population under 35 (youth bulge).
- Migration: many Uttarakhand villages depopulated due to lack of jobs.
- Public employment = key ladder of social mobility in fragile job market.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Chance to strengthen institutional accountability in recruitment.
- Push for digital reforms in exam conduct (CBT, blockchain, biometric verification).
- Could trigger wider debate on youth employment policies.
Challenges / Cons
- Erosion of trust in fairness of exams. Youth frustration → protests, unrest, alienation.
- Risk of communal polarization distracting from governance failures.
- Weak institutional capacity in states to safeguard exam processes.
Long-Term Implications
- If unaddressed → brain drain + migration intensifies, weakening hill state demography.
- Undermines Vision 2047 & Atmanirbhar Bharat: meritocracy and human capital key to growth.
- Compromises SDG 8 (Decent Work & Economic Growth) and SDG 16 (Strong Institutions).
- Risks widening gap between state promises vs youth aspirations.
Way Forward
- Strengthen exam security protocols (tech- enabled systems, encrypted papers, AI surveillance).
- Independent oversight body for recruitment exams.
- Transparent grievance redressal & fast-tracked trials in exam scam cases.
- Parallel push: skill development + private sector jobs to reduce sole reliance on govt jobs.
- Political leadership → avoid communal framing; focus on youth-centric policy & employment generation.
THE INDIAN OCEAN MINERAL EXPLORATION PUSH
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Background
- India has signed a 10,000 sq. km exploration contract (2024 application, 2025 approval) with the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for Polymetallic Sulphides (PMS) in the Carlsberg Ridge of the Indian Ocean.
- This makes India the first country with two PMS exploration contracts (earlier: Central & Southwest Indian Ridges, 2016).
- The development fits into India’s Deep Ocean Mission, Blue Economy goals, and strategic resource security planning.
- Globally, seabed mining is rising in importance due to the energy transition (green technologies, EV batteries, renewable systems).
Key Facts / Data (Prelims Pointers)
- Polymetallic Sulphides (PMS): Seabed deposits near hydrothermal vents; rich in copper, zinc, lead, gold, silver + trace rare metals.
- Carlsberg Ridge: Mid-ocean ridge between Indian Plate & Somali Plate; active seafloor spreading since ~40 Mya; spreading rate 2.4– 3.3 cm/year; closer to India (~2°N).
- Institutions: Exploration by Goa-based NCPOR (2026 onwards); supported by Matsya deep- sea vehicle (Samudrayaan Mission).
- ISA: UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)-based body regulating mineral resources in “the Area” (international seabed).
- Exploration Phases:
- Phase I – Reconnaissance surveys (ship- based).
- Phase II – Near-seabed surveys (AUVs/ROVs).
- Phase III – Resource evaluation.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Resource security: Reduces import dependence for critical minerals.
- Strategic advantage: India commands largest exploration area globally for PMS.
- Technological leap: Boost to deep-ocean research, robotics, navigation, AI-driven exploration.
- Geopolitical leverage: Counters China’s deep-sea mining push; enhances India’s role in Global South ocean governance.
- Blue Economy: Supports SDG-14 (Life Below Water) & India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat in green tech supply chains.
Challenges / Cons
- Technical difficulties: Harsh terrain, 2000–5000 m depths, uneven ridges.
- Environmental concerns: Hydrothermal vent ecosystems are poorly understood and fragile.
- High costs & uncertain returns: Commercial mining tech still under development.
- Global governance debates: Risk of disputes over seabed sovereignty and benefit-sharing under ISA.
Long-Term Implications
- Vision 2047: Potential to make India a net supplier of strategic minerals for the renewable & digital economy.
- Energy transition: Secures inputs for solar, wind, EV, semiconductors.
- Geopolitical positioning: Enhances India’s status in Indo-Pacific maritime resource competition.
- Science diplomacy: Contributes to India’s image as a responsible explorer under UNCLOS rules.
Way Forward
- Balanced approach: Pursue PMS exploration while building strong environmental safeguards.
- R&D push: Invest in AI, robotics, AUV/ROV tech, precision navigation for cost-efficient exploration.
- Multilateral engagement: Shape ISA rules on benefit-sharing, sustainability standards.
- Public-private partnerships: Involve industry to prepare for eventual commercial mining.
- Strategic diversification: Continue pursuing other Indian Ocean resources like cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts.
ATIPICHHDA NYAY SANKALP
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Background
- Bihar Assembly polls: Opposition targeting Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) (largest social group, ~36% of population).
- EBCs: Sub-category of OBCs (socially/educationally disadvantaged castes).
- Caste-based reservations: Bihar pioneer (Karpoori Thakur, 1978) → influenced Mandal Commission.
- Reservation debates: SC’s Indra Sawhney (1992) capped quotas at 50%; Bihar’s attempt (2023 law) raised it to 75%, struck down by Patna HC (2024).
- Politics: Congress, RJD, JD(U) competing for EBC votes → attempt to realign caste coalitions.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- EBCs in Bihar: ~130 castes, 36.01% of population (2023 caste survey).
- Reservation milestones:
- 1978: Karpoori Thakur – 26% quota (12% MBC/EBC, 8% OBC, 3% women, 3% EWS- upper castes).
- 1990s: Lalu & Rabri expanded EBC quotas (~14–18%).
- 2006: Nitish – 20% EBC quota in PRIs.
- 2023: JDU-RJD – EBC quota raised to 25%; total reservation = 75% (struck down in 2024).
- Ninth Schedule: Used to protect laws from judicial review, but I.R. Coelho (2007) allows SC to review if “basic structure” violated.
- NFS (Not Found Suitable) practice: 62– 65% SC/ST university recruitment interviews end with “NFS
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Political empowerment of marginalized groups (EBC = decisive vote bank).
- Ending “NFS” can ensure reserved seats are filled → greater representation.
- Land distribution → reduces rural inequality, supports urban housing rights.
- Enhanced EBC quotas in PRIs → grassroots democracy deepening.
- Push for Ninth Schedule inclusion → tests limits of constitutional flexibility.
Challenges / Cons
- Breaching 50% quota cap risks judicial invalidation (Indra Sawhney precedent).
- Ninth Schedule route uncertain (I.R. Coelho doctrine).
- Fiscal burden of expanded entitlements (scholarships, land distribution).
- Risk of caste polarization → deepens identity politics.
- Implementation gaps: past land allotments still pending for >50% eligible families.
Long-Term Implications
- Could redefine reservation jurisprudence in India.
- Rising caste census politics may pressure Centre for national-level revision of quotas.
- Impacts 2047 goals: inclusive growth, social justice, and reducing inequalities (SDG 10).
- Potential test case for Centre-State tensions in affirmative action policy.
- May set precedent for other states → political contagion effect.
Way Forward
- Constitutional clarity: National debate on 50% cap; consider proportionate representation models.
- Data-driven approach: Regular caste/economic surveys to target benefits better.
- Institutional reforms: Transparent recruitment, end misuse of “NFS”.
- Land & livelihood security: Link land allotments with skilling, micro-credit, and rural housing.
- Balance identity politics with inclusive development agenda → avoid fragmenting society.
LOYALTY AND LADAKH
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
- Ladakh unrest escalates after Sept 24 violence during protests led by civil society groups demanding statehood & Sixth Schedule inclusion.
- Sonam Wangchuk, climate activist & education reformer, detained under National Security Act (NSA).
- Ladakh carved out as Union Territory (UT) in 2019 after abrogation of Article 370; promises of statehood & safeguards remain unfulfilled.
- Tentative agreement (May 27, 2025) between Centre & local groups collapsed → deepening mistrust.
- Wider implications for border security (LAC with China), tribal rights, and Centre–periphery relations.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- Sixth Schedule: Provides autonomy to tribal regions (Article 244, 275). Present in NE states (Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram).
- NSA: Preventive detention law allowing detention up to 12 months without charge.
- FCRA licence revoked: SECMOL (school co- founded by Wangchuk).
- 2019 bifurcation: J&K Reorganisation Act created Ladakh UT (without legislature).
- Key demands: Statehood, job creation, cultural/tribal safeguards, environmental protection.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Addressing Ladakh’s concerns strengthens internal security in a sensitive border region.
- Statehood + Sixth Schedule could empower local governance & protect indigenous culture.
- Constructive engagement may serve as a model for conflict resolution in peripheral regions.
Challenges / Cons
- Use of NSA, ED, CBI seen as political misuse of institutions.
- Alienation of locals could fuel unrest & weaken trust in democratic processes.
- Risk of international criticism over treatment of activists & minority groups.
- Border security concerns with China may be aggravated if Ladakh’s grievances deepen.
Long-Term Implications
- Impacts Vision 2047 goals of inclusive governance & national integration.
- Affects Atmanirbhar Bharat (jobs, local industries, eco-tourism, solar energy potential).
- Links with SDGs (reduced inequalities, strong institutions, sustainable communities).
- India’s global positioning: How it handles Ladakh will shape its democratic image abroad.
Way Forward
- Resume dialogue with credibility by releasing/including Sonam Wangchuk in talks.
- Ensure constitutional safeguards (possible Sixth Schedule adaptation for Ladakh).
- Promote job creation, eco-friendly development, & youth engagement.
- Adopt statesmanship over strong-arm tactics → build trust, foster integration.
- Balance national security with democratic rights to maintain stability in Ladakh.
INCLUDE MIGRANTS IN CLIMATE POLICY
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
- Kerala is witnessing erratic weather patterns: early heatwaves and heavy rainfall, signals of climate change.
- Kerala State Action Plan on Climate Change (KSAPCC) projects a 1–2°C rise in average temperatures by 2050 under moderate to heavy emissions.
- Climate vulnerability is uneven; socio- economic status and adaptive capacity determine exposure. Migrant workers (28–31 lakh in Kerala) are particularly vulnerable.
- Past examples: 2018 floods, COVID-19 response highlighted inclusivity, but gaps remain in climate-specific support for migrants.
Key Facts/Data (Prelims Pointers)
- Migrant workers contribute ₹32,000 crore annually to Kerala economy (CMID)
- Employment sectors: construction (48.6%), plywood manufacturing (27.2%) — high heat exposure.
- Health risks: dehydration, fatigue, hypertension, chronic kidney disease.
- Housing: cramped, poorly ventilated, dilapidated; multiple families per house; inadequate water, sanitation, and waste services.
- Schemes & initiatives:
- Interstate Migrant Workers Welfare Scheme, Aawaz, Apna Ghar – social security, healthcare, housing.
- Roshni, Jyothi – educational support for migrant children.
- KSAPCC does not mention migrants; state guidelines advise against outdoor work 12–3 p.m., but enforcement is weak.
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros:
- Kerala’s inclusive intent during emergencies shows a strong governance model.
- Existing migrant welfare schemes provide a foundation for climate-inclusive interventions.
- Potential to integrate migrants into local climate resilience and development planning.
Challenges / Cons:
- Migrant-blind policies in climate interventions; climate-blind policies in social support.
- Poor housing, high rent, low wages exacerbate vulnerability.
- Enforcement gaps in work-hour restrictions and disaster relief planning.
- Segregation or lack of access in relief camps reduces resilience.
Long-Term Implications
- Climate-resilient migrant housing and work policies align with Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 3, 11, 13).
- Inclusive planning contributes to Vision 2047: equitable, resilient growth.
- Protecting migrant health and livelihoods supports Atmanirbhar Bharat by securing critical labor supply.
- Kerala can set a national model for migrant-inclusive climate adaptation.
Way Forward / Recommendations
- Local governments: enforce heat-resilient housing, basic services, mandatory rental registration.
- Labour Dept.: ensure drinking water, rest breaks (12– 3 p.m.), gender-segregated toilets, prevent wage cuts.
- Disaster Management Authorities: provide multilingual alerts, integrate migrants in relief planning.
- KSPB: include migrant perspectives in climate policy formulation.
POSTAL BALLOTS
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Backgroud
- Issue: Election Commission (EC) withdraws its 2019 directive that allowed EVM counting to continue irrespective of postal ballot status.
- Now (Sept 25, 2024): Penultimate EVM/VVPAT round won’t start until postal ballot counting is completed.
- Background: Opposition (INDIA bloc) in 2024 Lok Sabha had demanded reversal of 2019 rule, citing possible manipulation in close contests. EC then rejected, citing mid-election changes were not possible.
- Rule 54A of Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 mandates postal ballots be counted first.
- Linked to electoral credibility, transparency, and voter trust.
Key Facts / Prelims Pointers
- Rule 54A (1961 Rules): Postal ballots to be counted first.
- Who votes by post?
- Armed forces, govt staff abroad, election duty personnel.
- Special voters: President, VP, Governors, Union Ministers, Speakers.
- 2019: Absentee voters (railway, media, essential services).
- 2020: Senior citizens (80+), PwDs.
- ETPBS (2019): Electronically transmitted postal ballots for service voters. Ballot still returned physically.
- Postal ballot trends:
- 1996: 3.6 lakh (0.1% votes).
- 2024: 42.82 lakh (0.66% votes) → highest ever share.
- Growth: +53% (2019–2024), +143% (2014– 2019).
- Telangana: highest rise (959%).
- Maharashtra: decline (-12%).
- 2024: Top states – Andhra (5.12L), Rajasthan (3.76L), TN (3.11L), Gujarat (3.08L), WB (2.93L).
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- Reinforces Rule of Law → aligns with statutory provisions (Rule 54A).
- Enhances transparency & credibility in close elections.
- Protects against last-minute manipulation/rejection of postal ballots.
- Builds public trust in EC amid rising scrutiny.
Challenges / Cons
- Increased postal ballots → delays in final results.
- Logistical issues: manual counting, scrutiny, and rejections.
- Risk of litigation/political disputes over rejected ballots.
- Requires strong administrative machinery at counting centres.
Long-Term Implications
- Contributes to Vision 2047 goals of transparent, participatory democracy.
- Supports Atmanirbhar Bharat through institutional credibility & digital reforms (ETPBS).
- Aligns with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, Strong Institutions).
- International credibility: counters allegations of electoral manipulation.
Way Forward
- Digitisation & automation in postal ballot verification (QR codes, AI-based scanning).
- Awareness drives for absentee voters → reduce invalid votes.
- Institutional strengthening: EC autonomy, statutory clarity.
- Pilot projects for secure online voting for specific categories (service voters, PwDs).
- Regular review of rules to balance speed of results with accuracy & fairness.
THE NEW TARIFF
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context & Background
- U.S. President Donald Trump reimposed 100% tariff on branded/patented pharmaceuticals, 50% on kitchen cabinets/vanities, and 25% on heavy trucks effective Oct 1.
- Triggered by investigations under Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act (1962), which allows tariffs citing national security concerns.
- Part of Trump’s broader protectionist strategy to reduce trade deficits and push manufacturing back to the U.S.
- India’s pharma industry is heavily export- oriented: the U.S. accounts for ~40% of its pharma exports.
- Comes amid ongoing U.S.-India trade frictions (earlier tariffs on steel, aluminium, auto parts, copper, etc.).
Key Facts / Data (Prelims Pointers)
- Nifty Pharma Index dropped >2% after announcement.
- Stock impact: Sun Pharma (-4.9%), Biocon (-3.8%), Abbott India (-3.5%), Zydus (-3.4%).
- Section 232 tariffs vs. IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) tariffs:
- Section 232: framed under national security.
- IEEPA tariffs increasingly struck down byU.S. courts.
- Target: branded/patented drugs, not generics
* India may face limited direct impact (pending clarity on “branded generics”).
Critical Analysis Opportunities / Pros
- May push India to diversify export markets beyond the U.S. (EU, Africa, ASEAN, Latin America).
- Could accelerate domestic pharma reforms (R&D, innovation, cost efficiency).
- Chance to strengthen Atmanirbhar Bharat vision by enhancing indigenous pharma manufacturing.
Challenges / Cons
- Short-term market volatility and stock losses.
- Export dependency on U.S. → 40% of pharma exports at risk.
- Possible trade retaliation cycle impacting wider sectors.
- Increased cost of branded drugs in U.S. may hurt Indian companies with U.S. subsidiaries.
Long-Term Implications
- Aligns with global trend of protectionism & deglobalisation → India must adapt.
- Supports India’s case to pursue FTAs (EU, UK, GCC) more aggressively.
- Reinforces importance of domestic R&D and patent-driven innovation → key for Vision 2047.
- Atmanirbhar Bharat: push for self-reliance in healthcare & pharma innovation.
- May affect India’s positioning as “Pharmacy of the World” if branded exports take sustained hits.
Way Forward
- Trade Diplomacy: Fast-track U.S.-India trade deal; use WTO forums for tariff disputes.
- Market Diversification: Expand exports to Africa, Latin America, ASEAN, and emerging economies.
- Domestic Reforms:
- Incentivise R&D and innovation in new drug molecules.
- Reduce regulatory bottlenecks in pharma sector.
- Industrial Strategy: Strengthen PLI scheme for pharma; encourage API self-reliance.
- Strategic Approach: Balance protectionism with competitiveness; use Vision 2047 roadmap to ensure pharma stays globally dominant.
