New Batch Starting Soon . . .   Chandigarh Centre: 8288021344   New Batch Starting Soon . . .   Chandigarh Centre: 8288021344   New Batch Starting Soon . . .   Chandigarh Centre: 8288021344   New Batch Starting Soon . . .   Chandigarh Centre: 8288021344

30 October 2025

TRUMP:U.S. PLANS TRADE DEAL WITH INDIA

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context of the News

  • U.S. President Donald Trump, at the APEC CEO Summit (Gyeongju, South Korea), said Washington is “doing a trade deal with India”.
  • He praised PM Modi, claimed to have mediated in the India–Pakistan conflict, and linked trade talks to regional peace.
  • This comes amid strained ties after the U.S. imposed 50% tariffs on Indian goods and an additional 25% on Russian crude imports.

Key Points

  • Trade Negotiations: Focus on tariff cuts, market access, and digital trade.
  • Economic Context: India–U.S. bilateral trade stands at $191 billion (2024).
  • Tariff Disputes: Affect key sectors—IT, pharma, textiles, steel.
  • Strategic Angle: U.S. pressures India over Russian oil; India defends strategic autonomy.
  • APEC Setting: India is not an APEC member but is impacted by Indo-Pacific trade shifts.

Static Linkages

  • India–U.S. Trade Relations:
    • The U.S. is India’s largest trading partner since FY2022–23.
    • India withdrew from the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) in 2019, impacting $5.6 billion worth of exports.
  • WTO Framework:
    • Both nations are WTO members; trade disputes are often raised under WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism.
  • Strategic Partnership:
    • 2005: India–U.S. Civil Nuclear Agreement marked a strategic shift.
    • 2018: Initiation of 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue covering defense and trade
  • Constitutional/Policy Context:
    • India’s foreign trade policy derives authority from the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.
    • The Commerce and Industry Ministry oversees trade negotiations.

Critical Analysis

  • Pros
    • Strengthens economic & strategic partnership.
    • Boosts exports, investment, technology transfer.
  • Cons
    • High tariffs disrupt trade flow.
    • Linking trade with geopolitics erodes autonomy.
    • U.S. demands on data, dairy & e-commerce remain hurdles.
  • Stakeholders:
    • India: Wants fair trade, GSP restoration.
    • U.S.: Seeks market access, reduced barriers.
    • Industry: Demands predictability and tariff stability.

Way Forward

  • Revive Trade Policy Forum (TPF).
  • Diversify energy imports.
  • Strengthen WTO-based resolution.
  • Balance autonomy with pragmatic engagement.
  • Build resilient Indo-Pacific supply chains..

AMENDED CONSTITUTION BILL ISSUES

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context of the News

  • The Central Government introduced the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, in Parliament to amend Articles 75, 164, and 239AA of the Constitution.
  • The Bill aims to provide for automatic removal or cessation of Ministers (including PM/CM) if arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days for offences punishable with imprisonment of five years or more.
  • The Bill has been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination following Opposition concerns over potential misuse of arrest and detention powers.

Key Points

  • Union & State Ministers: Removal by President/Governor on advice of PM/CM after 30 days’ custody.
  • PM/CM: Must resign or automatically cease to hold office by the 31st day.
  • Purpose: To uphold integrity and prevent continuation of Ministers with serious criminal charges.
  • Concerns: Arrest and detention powers are discretionary; may be politically misused.
  • Related Laws: BNSS (2023) — Sections 35, 36 parallel to CrPC’s 41, 41A governing arrest.
  • Judicial Precedents:
    • Joginder Kumar (1994) – Arrest must be justified.
    • Arnesh Kumar (2014) – Written reasons mandatory for arrest.
    • Satender Kumar Antil (2022) – Mandatory compliance with arrest safeguards.

Static Linkages

    • Articles 75, 164, 239AA – Relation between Executive and Legislature. Article 75(3) – Collective responsibility of Council of Ministers.
    • Article 164(2) – Collective responsibility to State Legislature.
    • Separation of Powers – Checks and balances between Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary.
    • Rule of Law – Every citizen, including Ministers, is subject to law.
    • Presumption of Innocence (Article 21) – A person is innocent until proven guilty.
    • Criminalization of Politics – Addressed in Supreme Court judgments (Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India, 2018).

Critical Analysis

  • Merits / Arguments in Favour
    • Promotes accountability and integrity in public office.
    • Aligns with constitutional morality and public faith in institutions.
    • Ensures ethical governance by preventing misuse of power by accused Ministers.
    • Reduces criminalization in politics, reinforcing probity and transparency.
  • Concerns / Opposition View
    • Discretionary Arrest Power – Subject to political misuse by enforcement agencies.
    • Bail and Detention Complexity – Thirty-day threshold too short given procedural delays.
    • Violation of Article 21 – May breach right to liberty and presumption of innocence.
    •  Special Laws (UAPA, PMLA) – Have stringent bail conditions; could disproportionately affect Opposition leaders.
    • Judicial Discretion – Bail outcomes often hinge on subjective judicial interpretation.

Way Forward

  • Define “serious offence” precisely.
  • Introduce judicial oversight before removal.
  • Ensure police autonomy and implement Prakash Singh reforms.
  • Adopt a Code of Conduct for Ministers pending trial.

A DECADE AFTER PARIS: GREEN SHIFT

KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context
  • Ten years after COP21 (2015, Paris), where 196 countries adopted the Paris Agreement, the global community is reviewing its progress ahead of COP30 in Belém, Brazil (2025).
  • Despite the commitment to limit warming well below 2°C (preferably 1.5°C), global GHG emissions and temperatures continue to rise.
  • The year 2025 has seen intensified climate impacts in India, including floods and landslides in Uttarakhand, Punjab, and Jammu & Kashmir.
  • However, global efforts have reduced projected warming from 4–5°C (pre-2015) to 2– 3°C, showing tangible gains of multilateral climate action.

Key Points

  • Paris Agreement Impact:
    • Shift toward renewable energy as the most competitive source.
    • EVs form 20% of global new car sales, reducing fossil fuel dependence.
  • India’s Role:
    • Co-founded the International Solar Alliance (ISA) with France at COP21.
    • ISA: 120+ member nations; promotes solar capacity, finance, and access.
    • 50% of India’s power capacity from non- fossil sources (2025) — 5 years ahead of target.
    • Aims for Net-Zero by 2070 and Viksit Bharat by 2047.
  • COP30 Priorities:
    • Raise global emission reduction ambition.
    • Ensure a just, inclusive transition.  Protect natural carbon sinks —  forests, mangroves, oceans.
    • Empower non-state actors (local govts, businesses, citizens).
    • Uphold climate science and counter misinformation.

Static Linkages

  • Paris Agreement (2015): Successor to Kyoto Protocol; legally binding global framework under UNFCCC.
  • NDCs: Voluntary national pledges for emission cuts.
  • ISA: First treaty-based intergovernmental body headquartered in Gurugram, India.
  • Green Climate Fund (2010): Supports developing nations’ mitigation and adaptation.
  • Natural Carbon Sinks: Forests and oceans absorb atmospheric CO₂.

Critical Analysis

  • Pros:
    • Demonstrates effective multilateralism.  Renewables now economically viable.
    • Expanding South–South cooperation via ISA & CDRI.
    • India emerging as a renewable leader.
  • Challenges:
    • Current pledges imply ~2.7°C warming (UNEP, 2024).
    • Climate finance gap persists; $100 bn goal unmet.
    • Adaptation and tech transfer remain slow.  Loss and Damage Fund still underfunded.

Way Forward

  • Strengthen NDC commitments at COP30.
  • Operationalize Loss and Damage Fund with assured finance.
  • Promote green tech transfer and local innovation.
  • Adopt just transition models for affected workers.
  • Enhance climate literacy and data transparency.
UNEVEN GROWTH
KEY HIGHLIGHTS
Context of the News
  • September 2025 IIP data offers insight into Q2 and H1 FY26 industrial trends.
  • Half-yearly growth (3%) — slowest in 5 years, though Q2 growth (4.1%) shows recovery from Q1 (2%).
  • Manufacturing up, mining down, and consumer non-durables weak, signalling uneven industrial revival.

Key Points

  • IIP growth (Apr–Sept 2025): 3% (lowest in 5 years).
  • Manufacturing: +4.8% in Sept; +4.9% in Q2 (best since Dec 2023); +4.1% in H1.
  • Mining: Contracted in Sept, Q2, and H1 — monsoon impact, weak output.
  • Sectoral spread: Over half of 23 manufacturing sub-sectors contracted
  • Labour-intensive sectors (textiles, leather, plastics) shrank; capital-intensive (metals, minerals) grew.
  • Consumer non-durables: Contracted for six straight quarters — weak demand persists.

Static Linkages

  • IIP compiled by: NSO, MoSPI (Base Year: 2011– 12).
  • Core Industries: 8 sectors = 40% IIP weight.
  • Industrial Policy 1991: Liberalization & private sector-led growth.
  • Govt Initiatives: Make in India, PLI, PM GatiShakti, NIP, Skill India.
  • Concepts: Base effect, capital vs labour- intensive industries.

Critical Analysis

  • Positives:
    • Sequential improvement (Q2 over Q1).
    • Manufacturing recovery post-2023 slowdown.
  • Concerns:
    • Growth not broad-based; labour-intensive sectors weak.
    • Demand slowdown in non-durables.
    • Mining contraction hits energy security.

Way Forward

  • Diversify growth via MSME & labour-intensive sectors.
  • Boost rural demand and job creation.  
  • Reform mining & expedite clearances.  
  • Broaden PLI to job-rich sectors.
  • Improve IIP data granularity.

FEDERALISM AND FUNDS

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context

  • Kerala signed the PM Schools for Rising India (PM SHRI) MoU aligned with NEP 2020 to upgrade 14,500 schools.
  • The move triggered a Left Democratic Front (LDF) rift — the MoU was signed without Cabinet nod.
  • Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal oppose NEP 2020, citing federal overreach and ideological bias.
  • The State aimed to access withheld Samagra Shiksha (SS) funds; implementation now paused pending review.

Key Points

  • PM SHRI: Centrally Sponsored Scheme (2022); funding ratio 60:40 (Centre–State).
  • Goal: Model schools reflecting NEP 2020 — holistic learning, digital access, Indian Knowledge Systems.
  • Kerala’s Profile:
    • Literacy 96.2% (NSO 2023), GER ≈ 100%, strong infrastructure.
  • Issue: Centre linking SS funds to NEP/PM SHRI seen as fiscal coercion.
  • Status: Kerala freezes scheme; Cabinet sub- committee to decide.

Static Linkages

  • Concurrent List – Entry 25: Education is a shared subject between Centre and States.
  • Article 246 & Seventh Schedule: Define distribution of legislative powers.
  • Article 282: Centre can make grants for public purposes even in State subjects.
  • Cooperative Federalism: Principle emphasized in NITI Aayog and 7th ARC Reports.
  • Samagra Shiksha Scheme (2018): Integrated scheme for school education (pre-primary to XII).
  • Supreme Court Precedents:
    • S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) – Federalism as part of Basic Structure.
    • State of W.B. v. Union of India (1963) – Balance between Union and State autonomy.

Critical Analysis

  • Pros
    • Upgrades schools; uniform national standards; central funding boost.
  • Cons
    • Undermines State autonomy; conditional funding violates federal spirit.
    • Inclusion of “Indian Knowledge Systems” may weaken scientific temper (Art 51A [h]).
  • Stakeholders
    • Centre: Uniform education standards.  States: Protect curriculum control.
    • Teachers: Concern over delayed salaries, overlapping schemes.

Way Forward

  • Judicial clarity on conditional grants (Art 282).  Strengthen Inter-State Council dialogue.
  • Transparent fund criteria, flexible NEP adoption.
  • Independent audit of learning outcomes.

THIS IS NOT WELFARE

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context of the News

  • The 2025 Bihar Assembly election has triggered concerns over competitive populism and fiscal irresponsibility.
  • Political parties across the spectrum have promised schemes worth ₹8 lakh crore annually, more than three times Bihar’s state budget.
  • The issue has reignited the freebies vs welfare debate, with the Supreme Court hearing a petition seeking to classify pre-poll freebies as “corrupt practices” under the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951.
  • The Election Commission (EC) and several economists have warned that such populist promises could lead to fiscal crises in poorer states.

Key Points

  • Nitish Kumar: 125 free power units, tripled pensions, 1 crore jobs.
  • Tejashwi Yadav: ₹2,500/month to women, 1 govt job per family.
  • PM Modi: ₹10,000 transfer to 75 lakh women before polls.
  • SC Case: Pending; suggests a constitutional body to regulate freebies.
  • Fiscal stress: Punjab’s debt-to-GSDP at 47.2%, Rajasthan ₹5.6 lakh crore debt.
  • Legal gap: Balaji vs TN (2013) — manifesto promises not “corrupt practices” under RPA

Static Linkages

  • Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Section 123) – Defines “corrupt practices” in elections.
  • Model Code of Conduct (MCC) – Restricts new government schemes post-election notification.
  • Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act, 2003 – Mandates fiscal prudence for Centre and States.
  • Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs): Articles 38, 39, 41, and 47 – Basis of legitimate welfare measures.
  • Article 282: Allows both Centre and States to grant financial assistance for public purposes beyond legislative competence.

Critical Analysis

  • Pros:
    •  Short-term relief for poor.
    • Political accountability through delivery.
  • Cons:
    • Fiscal strain, crowds out development.  Erodes voter rationality and ethics.
    • Creates dependency; distorts democracy. Stakeholders:
    • Judiciary: Urges regulation.  EC: Seeks legal backing.
    • Economists: Demand productivity-linked welfare.

Way Forward

  •  Make costed manifestos mandatory with penalties.
  • Amend RPA: Treat cash/freebie promises as bribery.
  • Constitutional body to define and monitor freebies.
  • Fiscal transparency: Parties to disclose funding sources.
  • Prioritise education, skills, and jobs over handouts.
A SMARTER HAPPINESS AGENDA

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context of the News

  • The World Happiness Report 2025 ranked India at 118th among 143 countries — a figure that reignited debate on how the nation measures progress.
  • Despite strong GDP growth and poverty reduction, India’s subjective well-being indicators (social trust, mental health, life satisfaction) remain low.
  • The editorial reflects on what constitutes “a good life” and how public policy can incorporate psychological and social well- being.

Key Points

  • India’s policy model equates happiness with economic and infrastructural growth, but once basic needs are met, well-being plateaus.
  • The hedonic treadmill effect: increases in income temporarily raise happiness but soon return to baseline.
  • Determinants of durable well-being: meaningful relationships, purposeful work, community engagement, and mental health.
  • Policy implications:
    • Treat relationships and public spaces as social infrastructure.
    • Integrate socio-emotional learning and life skills in education.
    • Promote digital hygiene and right-to- disconnect norms in workplaces.
  • Draws from Indian philosophical traditions (Sukha, Eudaimonia, Ataraxia) that equate happiness with balance, virtue, and purpose, not indulgence.

Static Linkages

  • GDP vs. HDI Debate – Limits of GDP as a measure of welfare (Economic Survey, 2018– 19).
  • Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness (GNH) model — integrates socio-economic, environmental, and cultural well-being.
  • Directive Principles of State Policy (Art. 38 & 47) — obligation of the State to promote social welfare and public health.
  • UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being), Goal 11 (Sustainable Cities & Communities).
  • World Bank’s Human Capital Index – measures education, health, and productivity potential.

Critical Analysis

  • Pros:
    • Encourages holistic, people-centric governance.
    • Promotes mental health and community bonding.
  • Challenges:
    • No national well-being metrics.  Survey bias in global indices.
    • Weak inter-ministerial coordination.

Way Forward

    1. Create a National Well-being Index (via NITI Aayog).
    2. Integrate socio-emotional learning in
    3. Develop community spaces to build social
    4. Ensure work-life balance and digital detox
    5. Foster civic volunteering and mentorship.

FOREIGN CAPITAL & INDIAN BANKS

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

Context

  • India’s net FDI has slowed, but FDI inflows into the financial sector have surged.
  • Global giants such as Blackstone, Zurich Insurance, Emirates NBD, Sumitomo Mitsui (SMBC), and Abu Dhabi’s IHC are investing heavily in Indian banks, insurers, and NBFCs.
  • Marks a strategic shift — from a protected domestic sector to a globally integrated one.

Key Developments

  • Major Deals
    • Blackstone acquired 9.99% stake in Federal Bank (₹6,196 crore).
    • Fairfax (Canada) allowed to hold majority stake in CSB Bank beyond 40% cap (RBI approval).
    • Several foreign players entering insurance, banking, and NBFC space.
  • Regulatory Changes
    • Insurance sector: FDI limit raised to 100%.
    • Private banks: FDI up to 74% (with RBI approval).
    • RBI & SEBI maintain cautious oversight — insist on compliance, ownership transparency, and capital adequacy norms.

Implications for India Positive Outcomes

  • Capital Inflow & Deepening of Credit Markets – strengthens liquidity, supports MSME and retail credit.
  • Technology & Risk Management Transfer – global best practices in governance and innovation.
  • Improved Efficiency – competition pressures Indian players to modernize.
  • Boost to Financial Inclusion – helps achieve national goals like Jan Dhan, Digital India.
  • Supports India’s $7 Trillion GDP Vision (by 2030) – helps meet rising capital demand.

Risks & Concerns

  • Foreign Control Over Strategic Assets – ownership could shift decision-making offshore.
  • Exposure to Global Shocks – e.g., 2008 crisis; contagion risk if parent firms face distress.
  • Uneven Playing Field – foreign entities have access to cheaper global funding.
  • Regulatory Challenges – complex mergers, cross-border compliance, systemic risk oversight.
  • Financial Sovereignty – need to ensure domestic stability and autonomy are not compromised.

Regulatory and Policy Safeguards

  • RBI’s cautious liberalisation — stepwise, case- by-case approach.
  • Fit-and-Proper criteria for foreign promoters.  Limits on voting rights & management control.
  • SEBI norms on disclosure and capital adequacy.
  • Need for a clear national framework on maximum permissible foreign control.

Key Terms / Concepts

  • FDI vs FPI: Long-term strategic control vs portfolio investment.
  • NBFC: Non-Banking Financial Company – provides credit outside formal banking system.
  • Financial Inclusion: Providing affordable financial services to all.
  • Systemic Risk: Risk of collapse of an entire financial system due to interlinkages.

Way Forward

  • Balanced Liberalisation: Encourage FDI without compromising regulatory autonomy.
  • Strengthen RBI Oversight: Real-time monitoring of cross-border ownership and risk.
  • Domestic Capacity Building: Strengthen Indian institutions through capital infusion and governance reforms.
  • Crisis Preparedness: Build buffers and contingency mechanisms.
  • Strategic Clarity: Define “critical financial infrastructure” with national control safeguards.