PM IAS UPSC CURRENT EVENTS JAN 22

Under Trump, US withdraws from WHO: Impact, what this means for India

Source: The Indian Express

Syllabus: GS II International Relations

The U.S. Withdrawal from WHO: Implications for Global Health

Introduction
The United States’ recent decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO) has reignited debates on global health diplomacy, multilateralism, and the shifting dynamics of international relations. This move, initiated through an executive order by President Donald Trump, has far-reaching implications for global health governance and the strategic roles of emerging economies like India.

Background

The U.S. has historically been a significant contributor to WHO, providing nearly 20% of its funding. President Trump’s dissatisfaction with WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, perceived political biases, and the financial burden on the U.S. were cited as primary reasons for the withdrawal. Notably, a similar attempt was made during Trump’s first term in 2020, later reversed by President Joe Biden in 2021. The renewed withdrawal now poses serious questions about global health leadership and the U.S.’s commitment to international cooperation.

Key Reasons for Withdrawal

1. Mishandling of the COVID-19 Pandemic
   • Criticism of delayed responses and lack of accountability regarding China’s role during the early stages of the pandemic.
2. Perceived Political Bias
   • Accusations of WHO favoring certain member states, particularly China.
3. Financial Disparities
   • The U.S. contributes $100-$122 million annually in assessed dues and nearly $1.3 billion in voluntary funding (2022-2023), while other nations, like China, contribute significantly less.

Immediate Actions Outlined in the Executive Order

1. Cessation of Funding
   • Immediate halt to U.S. financial contributions to WHO.
2. Personnel Withdrawal
   • Recall of U.S. government staff engaged with WHO initiatives.
3. Development of Alternatives
   • Exploration of domestic and international partnerships to replace WHO’s functions.
4. Exit from Pandemic Treaty Negotiations
   • Withdrawal from efforts to establish a global framework for pandemic preparedness and response.

Implications for Global Health

1. Financial Impact on WHO
   • The U.S.’s funding accounts for a substantial share of WHO’s budget. Withdrawal could hinder essential programs like vaccine development, disease eradication (e.g., polio), and pandemic preparedness.
2. Disruptions in Developing Countries
   • Many health programs in low-resource nations, including India’s immunization and disease surveillance efforts, could face setbacks.
3. Loss of Expertise
   • Collaboration between U.S. institutions (e.g., CDC) and WHO would cease, affecting global health surveillance and crisis response.

Domestic Consequences for the U.S.

1. Limited Access to Global Health Data
   • Reduced access to information on emerging diseases could leave the U.S. vulnerable to new health threats.
2. Vaccine Preparedness
   • Disruption in sharing influenza strain samples may compromise vaccine efficacy, increasing preventable disease-related deaths.
3. Diminished Influence in Global Health Policy
   • The U.S. risks losing its leadership position, allowing nations like China to fill the void and shape global health governance.

Geopolitical Shifts and the Role of Emerging Economies

The U.S. withdrawal creates a leadership vacuum in global health governance. China and nations from the Global South, including India, are poised to take on greater roles:

1. China’s Increased Role
   • With an additional $30 million pledged to WHO, China is strategically strengthening its influence.
2. Opportunities for India
   • As a leading vaccine producer and advocate for the Global South, India has the potential to spearhead a balanced, equitable health framework.

Challenges for WHO

1. Internal Criticisms
   • Inefficiencies, delayed responses, and lack of transparency have eroded trust in WHO.
2. Impact of Funding Cuts
   • Financial constraints could exacerbate existing challenges, compromising WHO’s ability to address global health emergencies.

Way Forward

1. Judicial Review of U.S. Withdrawal
   • Legal experts argue that Congressional approval may be required, which could influence the decision’s permanence.
2. Reforming WHO
   • WHO must focus on improving transparency, enhancing efficiency, and streamlining emergency protocols to restore global confidence.
3. Collaboration Among Emerging Economies
   • India, along with other Global South nations, should intensify efforts to fill strategic and financial gaps, ensuring continuity in global health initiatives.

Conclusion

The U.S. withdrawal from WHO highlights the complexities of balancing national priorities with global responsibilities. While this move poses challenges to global health governance, it also presents opportunities for emerging economies to strengthen multilateral frameworks. A concerted effort toward reforming WHO and fostering collaborative leadership will be essential to ensure global health security.

India-Pak rift on Indus Water Treaty: Neutral expert backs New Delhi’s stand

Source: The Indian Express

Syllabus: GS II International Relations

Indus Water Treaty 1960: Neutral Expert’s Decision and Dispute Resolution

Introduction
The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) of 1960 is a landmark agreement between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank, for the equitable distribution of the Indus river system. Amid persistent disputes over hydroelectric projects like Kishenganga and Ratle, a recent decision by the World Bank-appointed Neutral Expert has significant implications for the treaty’s dispute resolution framework and regional cooperation.

Background of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT)

The treaty allocates water from the six rivers of the Indus basin:

1. India retains exclusive rights over the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej).
2. Pakistan receives control over the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab), with limited usage rights accorded to India for hydropower, irrigation, and navigation.

The IWT is often hailed as a successful model of conflict resolution, enduring despite decades of hostility between the two nations. However, disputes over India’s hydropower projects have repeatedly tested the treaty’s robustness.

Dispute Resolution Mechanism under the IWT

The treaty outlines a structured, three-tiered mechanism for resolving differences:

1. Permanent Indus Commission (PIC)

1. Initial Role: Both countries must notify each other of planned projects, sharing necessary technical details.
2. Objective: Resolve differences amicably through bilateral dialogue.
3. Outcome: If unresolved, the matter escalates.
4. Neutral Expert (NE)

2. World Bank’s Role: Appoints a Neutral Expert if technical differences persist after PIC efforts fail.
3. Scope: The NE assesses technical aspects and provides recommendations.
4. Escalation Clause: If the NE cannot resolve the issue, it transitions to a formal dispute.
5. Court of Arbitration (CoA)

3. Final Stage: Unresolved disputes reach the CoA, chaired by a World Bank-appointed arbitrator.
4. Binding Decision: The CoA’s rulings are conclusive and enforceable.

Recent Developments: Neutral Expert’s Decision

In January 2025, Neutral Expert Michel Lino affirmed his competence under Annexure F of the IWT to adjudicate seven technical differences regarding the Kishenganga and Ratle projects. India welcomed this decision as it aligns with the treaty’s provisions.

Key projects under scrutiny:

1. Kishenganga Project: Located on a tributary of Jhelum, it is critical for energy generation.
2. Ratle Project: On the Chenab River, it underscores India’s utilization of its allocated rights.

Parallel Mechanisms and Legal Challenges

• Pakistan’s Approach: In 2015, Pakistan sought a Neutral Expert but later withdrew the request in 2016, directly approaching the CoA, bypassing the treaty’s sequence.
• World Bank’s Role: In 2022, under Pakistan’s insistence, the World Bank facilitated both Neutral Expert and CoA proceedings simultaneously.
• India’s Stance: India termed the CoA “illegally constituted” and reiterated the NE as the sole competent authority under IWT.

Engagement on Treaty Review

• India’s Initiative: India invoked Article XII (3) of the IWT in January 2023, seeking modifications to address current challenges, including technological advancements and geopolitical realities.
• Pakistan’s Response: Despite multiple notices, Pakistan has not engaged substantively, stalling progress on treaty review.

Implications of the Neutral Expert’s Decision

1. For India:

1. Strengthens India’s legal and technical position on utilizing western rivers under IWT.
2. Validates adherence to the treaty’s mechanisms, highlighting India’s commitment to rule-based resolutions.
3. For Pakistan:
4. Challenges Pakistan’s strategy of bypassing established procedures, reinforcing the need for adherence to treaty norms.
5. For IWT:
6. Reaffirms the treaty’s robustness but underscores the necessity of updating its provisions to address contemporary issues.

Challenges in Dispute Resolution

1. Political Tensions: Bilateral distrust hampers effective engagement under PIC and treaty amendments.
2. Climate Change Impacts: Altered river flows and glacier melt necessitate recalibration of water-sharing norms.
3. Hydropower Projects: Differing interpretations of treaty provisions on permissible water use persist as flashpoints.

Way Forward

1. Strengthening the Dispute Mechanism:

1. Prioritize the sequence outlined under Article IX to avoid procedural conflicts.
2. Reinforce World Bank’s impartial role in dispute resolution.
3. Modernizing the IWT:
4. Include climate resilience and contemporary technological provisions to adapt to emerging challenges.
5. Enhanced Bilateral Engagement:
6. Encourage regular dialogue under PIC to build trust and resolve issues amicably.
7. Leveraging Multilateral Support:
8. Engage with neutral parties to foster confidence in dispute resolution while emphasizing adherence to treaty provisions.

Conclusion

The Neutral Expert’s ruling in favor of India marks a pivotal moment in the Indus Water Treaty’s history. While the decision reinforces India’s rights under the treaty, it also highlights the importance of adhering to established mechanisms. Moving forward, modernization of the treaty and strengthening of bilateral trust are essential to ensure equitable water sharing and sustainable management of the Indus river system.

The world has been changing for a while

Source: The Hindu

Syllabus: GS III Environment

The World in Transition: Navigating Environmental, Political, and Global Shifts

Introduction

The 21st century is witnessing unprecedented transformations across environmental, technological, and political landscapes. As a historian and traveler, the observation of these changes offers insights into humanity’s ability to adapt to disruptions while seizing emerging opportunities. From climate challenges in Chennai to shifting global power dynamics, understanding these changes is critical for charting a sustainable and inclusive path forward.

Environmental Challenges and Lessons from Chennai

In 2019, Chennai’s declaration of “Day Zero” underscored the urgency of water management reforms. Five years later, the city faced catastrophic floods due to unseasonal rains, highlighting the dual challenge of managing droughts and deluges.

Key Lessons:

1. Integrated Water Management: Urban planning must account for both water scarcity and flooding.
2. Climate Adaptation: Policies must consider unprecedented climatic shifts driven by rising global temperatures and record CO₂ levels.

Chennai’s case exemplifies the global reality: no human has lived in a world as warm or carbon-intensive as today. Half of all fossil fuels have been consumed within a few decades, emphasizing the need for urgent climate action.

Technological Disruptions and Societal Polarization

Technological advancements have transformed communication, enabling greater interconnectedness while fostering division. Social media platforms, for instance, empower individuals but also deepen political polarization. The challenge lies in leveraging technology for inclusivity while mitigating its adverse impacts.

Political Transitions: A Global Overview

Changing Electoral Trends

The 2024 elections marked a historic moment, with record voter turnout globally. Yet, the trend was clear: incumbent governments either lost power or saw their majorities significantly reduced. This reflects voters’ demand for solutions to address modern disruptions and opportunities.

The Return of Donald Trump

Donald Trump’s return to power signals profound implications for the global order:

1. Shifting U.S. Role: His presidency raises questions about America’s future as a stabilizing force.
2. Pragmatic Opportunism: Mr. Trump’s approach, exemplified by his intervention to sustain TikTok, reflects a blend of pragmatism and unpredictability.

Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar aptly noted that Trump’s return may herald a “new era,” with significant repercussions for geopolitics.

India’s Strategic Challenges in a Changing World

Balancing Strategic Alignments

India has skillfully managed a policy of multiple alignments:

1. Economic Ties: Engaging with BRICS and Quad simultaneously.
2. Defense Diversification: Procuring U.S.-made Apache helicopters and Russian S-400 systems.
3. Energy Security: Sourcing oil from sanctioned entities.

However, Mr. Trump’s transactional leadership may test India’s ability to sustain this delicate balancing act. His preference for exclusive partnerships could pressure India to recalibrate its foreign policy.

Geopolitical Dynamics

1. West Asia: The region’s evolving landscape, including potential breakthroughs in Palestine, presents opportunities and challenges for India’s strategic interests.
2. Global Powers: A weakened Iran, an enfeebled Russia post-Ukraine invasion, and a strategically repositioning China require India to adopt a dynamic foreign policy.

A Historian’s Perspective: The Nature of Change

Change, though often imperceptible, is constant. The ongoing transformations in the global order are neither sudden nor isolated but the culmination of long-term shifts. The historian’s lens reveals that we have been in a new era for some time, characterized by environmental reorganization, technological disruption, and geopolitical realignment.

Way Forward

1. Sustainable Urban Planning: Cities like Chennai must adopt climate-resilient infrastructure to mitigate extreme weather events.
2. Technological Governance: Governments must regulate technology to balance innovation with societal cohesion.
3. Strategic Diplomacy: India must strengthen multilateral engagements while recalibrating bilateral ties in response to evolving global power dynamics.
4. Climate Action: Prioritize global partnerships for reducing emissions and promoting renewable energy transitions.

Conclusion

The winds of change are reshaping our world, presenting both challenges and opportunities. As we navigate this transformative era, the lessons from history remind us of humanity’s resilience and adaptability. With prudent policies and collaborative efforts, nations can not only cope with disruptions but also thrive in a rapidly changing global landscape.

What is the status of the Smart Cities Mission?

Source: The Hindu

Syllabus: GS II Polity and Governance

The Smart Cities Mission: An Assessment

Introduction

The Smart Cities Mission, launched in June 2015, envisioned transforming 100 cities into models of sustainable and inclusive urbanisation. However, nearly a decade later, the initiative has largely fallen short of its ambitious goals, raising critical questions about governance, implementation, and the adaptability of such concepts in the Indian context.

Key Features of the Smart Cities Mission

1. Framework and Objectives:

1. Based on the Internet of Things (IoT) to integrate IT-enabled services like mobility and waste management.
2. Focused on two components:
   • Pan-City Proposals: IT-enabled urban services.
   • Area-Based Development (ABD): Retrofits, redevelopment, and greenfield projects within specific city zones.
3. Governance Model:

2. Relied on Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) registered under the Companies Act.
3. Local government participation was bypassed, assuming that private-sector-style management would ensure efficiency.
4. Challenges in Conceptualization:
5. The mission assumed that India’s urban areas were prepared for IoT-driven initiatives, overlooking the lack of basic urban infrastructure and services for a significant population.

The Case of Shimla

Background

Shimla was not part of the initial list of smart cities but was later included after legal challenges in the Himachal Pradesh High Court. The city’s Smart City Plan encompassed:

• Pan-city initiatives.
• ABD projects such as retrofitting and redevelopment of key areas like Lower Bazar, Middle Bazar, and Krishnanagar.
• Initiatives for eco-adventure tourism, water security, improved pedestrian crossings, and vehicular mobility.

Financial Estimates and Sources

The total projected investment was ₹2,906 crore, with funding from:

• ₹897.80 crore through Public-Private Partnerships (PPP).
• ₹101.77 crore via municipal bonds.
• ₹205.57 crore through external borrowings.
• ₹348.49 crore from State and Union government schemes.

Implementation and Outcomes

• As of now, only ₹707 crore (24% of the original budget) has been spent, primarily on ongoing projects.
• The PPP contribution and redevelopment of Lower Bazar, Middle Bazar, and Krishnanagar have seen no progress.
• Funds were misallocated to cosmetic enhancements such as flower pots worth ₹2 crore.
• Non-motorised mobility remains neglected, traffic congestion has worsened, and escalators obstructing valley views are non-operational.

Analysis of the Governance Model

1. Bypassing Local Governance:
2. The SPV-driven model sidelined city councils and other local governance mechanisms, undermining public accountability and ownership.
3. Lack of Inclusivity:
4. Urban planning did not adequately involve residents, leading to a disconnect between the projects and ground realities.
5. Funding Gaps and Execution Delays:

3. Unrealised PPP contributions and ineffective utilisation of municipal bonds hindered progress.
4. Resource mismanagement further exacerbated inefficiencies.

Lessons from the Smart Cities Mission

1. Contextual Adaptation:

1. Models successful in advanced economies cannot be transplanted directly into the Indian context without adapting to local socio-economic realities.
2. Basic urban infrastructure must precede the integration of high-tech solutions.
3. Strengthening Local Governance:
4. Urban initiatives must align with the principles of the 74th Constitutional Amendment, empowering local governments for effective planning and execution.
5. Community Participation:
6. Public involvement is critical for sustainable urban development, ensuring accountability and addressing local needs.
7. Resource Mobilization and Prioritization:

4. Leveraging municipal bonds, PPPs, and government schemes requires strategic planning and stringent monitoring.
5. Funds must be directed toward impactful projects rather than cosmetic enhancements.

The Way Forward

1. Reimagining Urban Development:
2. Shift focus from “smart” cities to “sustainable and inclusive” cities that prioritize basic services and resilience against climate challenges.
3. Integrated Governance:
4. Establish mechanisms for collaboration between SPVs, local governments, and civil society to ensure holistic urban planning.
5. Monitoring and Accountability:
6. Strengthen project monitoring frameworks to track progress, evaluate outcomes, and ensure transparency.
7. Pilot-Based Approach:
8. Implement pilot projects before scaling up to test feasibility and address contextual challenges.

Conclusion

The Smart Cities Mission highlights the challenges of implementing ambitious urban projects in a diverse and resource-constrained context like India. While the vision of smart cities was aspirational, its execution faltered due to governance gaps, inadequate public engagement, and misaligned priorities. The mission’s experiences underline the importance of empowering local governance, prioritizing basic infrastructure, and fostering inclusive development for India’s urban transformation.