🕸️BPSC WEB🕸️

Defence Indigenisation: Towards Strategic Autonomy Context: The Ministry of Defence notified the 6th Positive Indigenisation List (PIL), covering 405 strategically important items with a business potential of Rs. 3,070 crore. Key Features The list includes 389 DPSU items and 16 Indian Coast Guard items, which will be procured only from domestic industry after specified timelines. It covers components of LCA, ALH, LUH, Su-30MKI, T-72, T-90, BMP-II, warships and missile systems such as MRSAM, Konkurs-M and Invar. Indigenisation will be pursued through the Make procedure, in-house development and participation of private companies, MSMEs and start-ups. The SRIJAN Defence Portal, launched in 2020, connects the Armed Forces and DPSUs with domestic manufacturers for import substitution. Progress Over 33,000 defence items had been offered for indigenisation by June 2026. More than 15,700 items were indigenised in five years, achieving import substitution worth nearly Rs. 9,000 crore. DPSUs placed domestic procurement orders worth around Rs. 10,000 crore up to March 2026. Significance Reduces dependence on foreign suppliers and vulnerability to wartime supply disruptions. Promotes strategic autonomy, technology absorption and indigenous defence manufacturing. Creates opportunities for MSMEs, start-ups, skilled employment and defence exports. Conserves foreign exchange and strengthens India’s defence-industrial ecosystem. Challenges: Dependence on imported engines and critical technologies, limited indigenous R&D, lengthy procurement cycles, testing delays and inadequate economies of scale. Way Forward: Increase defence R&D expenditure, promote industry–DRDO–academia collaboration, ensure assured long-term orders, simplify procurement and focus on indigenous design and intellectual property- not merely local assembly. Conclusion: Positive Indigenisation Lists are shifting India from being a major arms importer towards becoming a designer, manufacturer and exporter of advanced defence systems, strengthening Atmanirbhar Bharat and strategic sovereignty. #GS1mains

NRC Demand in Manipur What is NRC? The National Register of Indian Citizens (NRC) records genuine Indian citizens to identify illegal migrants. It derives authority from Section 14A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 and the Citizenship Rules, 2003. Unlike the Census, which counts all residents, NRC verifies citizenship. Why demanded in Manipur? -Myanmar factor: Porous border and political instability in Myanmar have raised concerns over undocumented migration. -Indigenous identity: Locals fear pressure on tribal identity, customary land rights, jobs and limited resources. -Fair delimitation: Groups demand NRC before Census and delimitation so that non-citizens do not influence constituency boundaries and political representation. -National security: Unregulated migration may facilitate arms, drugs and insurgent movement. Concerns: Lack of documents may exclude genuine citizens; an ethnicity-driven process may deepen Meitei–Kuki and hill–valley tensions and violate Articles 14 and 21. Way Forward: NRC must be transparent, ethnicity-neutral and supported by legal aid, appeals, effective border management and a national refugee policy. Conclusion: NRC should protect indigenous rights and electoral integrity without becoming an instrument of ethnic exclusion.

AI Sovereignty: From Adoption to Independent Evaluation Context: India aims to become the world’s “AI use capital,” using its linguistic diversity, digital public infrastructure, young workforce and startup ecosystem. Core concern: AI success is measured through users, languages and adoption, but not through real outcomes, safety failures and social harms. Strategic dependency: India’s AI ecosystem largely depends on foreign foundation models and compute infrastructure. Dependence becomes risky when India cannot negotiate terms or verify performance independently. Meaning of AI sovereignty: It does not require building every model domestically; it means retaining the power to choose, test, regulate and set conditions for foreign and domestic AI systems. Independent evaluation: AI must be assessed in Indian languages and real-life settings for safety, bias, human–AI interaction, labour displacement, loss of human judgment and other systemic harms. Way forward: Use government procurement to enforce safety standards; establish application-layer testing sandboxes; strengthen post-deployment monitoring and grievance redressal; and fund independent third-party evaluators involving technical institutions and civil society. Conclusion: India can become an AI use capital only by simultaneously developing strong AI evaluation capacity, ensuring that technology remains useful, accountable and socially trustworthy. #GS2mains