🕸️BPSC WEB🕸️

Old Memories

Photo from Twinkle

FOR QUERY CONTACT @Civils_web_BPSC_web_Support FEEDBACK GROUP : https://t.me/+UCOoR5yJgqxkYTM1 Link to Buy the course 👇 👇 👇 👇 https://bukbeo.on-app.in/app/oc/774502/bukbeo?utm_source%3Dcopy-link%26utm_medium%3Dtutor-course-referral%26utm_campaign%3Dcourse-overview-app Android user : CIVILS WEB App IOS user : CLASSPLUS APP ORG CODE : BUKBEO

India has signed 8 FTAs within just 6 years under Trade Minister Piyush Goyal.

India  chose to stay away from endorsing or participating in this initiative. Because of the absence of Palestinian representation, the unilateral nature of the proposal, and India’s long-standing  commitment to multilateral, inclusive, and legally grounded peace processes. 1. WHAT IS BOARD OF PEACE A proposed international supervisory body intended to: --> Oversee post-conflict arrangements in Gaza --> Replace negotiated political solutions. --> Key features: -No Palestinian representation -No UN mandate -No clearly defined legal authority -Membership based on US strategic preferences, not regional legitimacy -->West Asia peace efforts historically led through: -UN-backed multilateral frameworks -Inclusive negotiations --> Trump-era diplomacy emphasised: - Unilateralism - Transactional peace --> Why the Proposal is Problematic -Violates principle of self-determination - Converts political conflict into a technocratic management issue - Risks becoming an instrument of great power dominance --> India’s Position and Rationale - India has consistently supported Palestinian statehood - Emphasised dialogue-led solutions. --> India views BoP as: - Lacking inclusiveness - Undermining multilateralism --> Participation would: - Contradict India’s normative diplomacy - Dilute its credibility in the Global South --> Ethical and Moral Dimensions - Peace without representation is ethical exclusion. --> Imposed peace ignores: -Agency of affected populations - Human dignity --> Implications for Global Governance - Ad-hoc peace mechanisms - Marginalisation of UN processes - Encourages: Power-centric peace enforcement - Weakens: International humanitarian norms, Rule-based global order --> Why India’s Distance Matters: Commitment to: - Legitimate multilateralism - Inclusive peace - Reinforces India’s image as: Independent actor and Normative power - Avoids complicity in symbolic but ineffective diplomacy - 2003 : India didn't join COALITION OF THE WILLING to deploy military contingent in Kurdish region of Iraq. India instead joined consensus based SCO - sovereign equaity , justice and cooperative autonomy - India first : National interest.

IMPACT OF USA exit from ISA 1. Impact on ISA’s Financial and Operational Capacity - The U.S. contribution accounted for only ~1% of ISA’s total funds. - Hence, the exit is not a financial shock to the alliance. 2. Implications for India’s Solar Manufacturing —> India’s solar manufacturing has scaled rapidly: - Solar module capacity ~144 GW - Solar cell capacity ~25 GW (2025) - India does not depend on the U.S. for key solar equipment. - The decision does not affect electricity tariffs or domestic solar deployment. —> Potential upside: More inward-looking U.S. market could open export opportunities for Indian manufacturers, subject to standards and trade agreements. 3. Impact on Investments in Solar Projects - Investments in Indian solar power are largely domestic-demand driven. - Projects are backed by long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) with state utilities and central agencies. - Funding primarily comes from Indian banks, global funds, and development institutions, not the U.S. government. - Therefore, investment flows in India are unlikely to slow. 4. Real Economic Risk: Global South - Greater impact likely in Africa and poorer developing countries, where: - Solar projects rely heavily on cheap international finance and confidence in global climate cooperation. - U.S. withdrawal may make lenders more cautious, slowing project approvals and financing. 5. Strategic and Diplomatic Implications - ISA remains a key instrument of India’s climate diplomacy and Global South leadership. - India’s leadership role increases, along with greater responsibility for sustaining momentum.

WE THE PEOPLE SABKA PRAYAS JAN ANDOLAN

Development vs Indigenous Rights Debate:- Arguments for Development —>Strategic maritime hub near Malacca Strait. —>Boost to trade, connectivity, and national security. —>Economic development and employment. Arguments Against —>Cultural extinction risk. —>Ecological destruction in fragile island ecosystem. —>Violation of tribal self-governance and rights. —>Social displacement and livelihood loss.