Editorial 1: ​The building blocks of an India-U.S. energy future

Context

Nuclear energy and critical minerals can serve as the foundation for a strengthened partnership in the fields of energy and technology.

Introduction

U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance recently reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to deeper cooperation with India in energy and defence. India, in turn, stressed the need for collaboration across energy, defence, technology, and mobility of people. While the developments are recent, these core issues have long defined India-U.S. relations, despite shifting administrations. Today presents a clear opportunity for renewed investment. India’s energy security depends on adequate resources at predictable prices, stable supply chains, and a move toward a sustainable energy mix. In this, nuclear energy and critical minerals will be key pillars, forming the foundation of a stronger energy and technology partnership between New Delhi and Washington.

A critical minerals compact

Theme	Details
Energy Transition & Critical Minerals	Transition involves not just electrons (energy) but also elements (minerals). Rare earths are vital, and China has repeatedly disrupted their supply over the past decade.
China’s Dominance	– Controls ~90% of global rare earth processing.  – Uses this dominance for strategic leverage.  – Results in vulnerable, fragile supply chains for energy tech, electronics, and defence.
India-U.S. MoU (2024)	Signed to diversify supply chains for critical minerals, promoting stable, strategic collaboration.
Guiding Principle 1 Broader Framing	– Critical minerals are vital beyond mining: used across economy, especially in strategic sectors. – Emphasizes long-term strategy, enabling cross-sectoral tech and skill exchange.
Guiding Principle 2 Policy Level Coordination	– Bilateral & plurilateral policies needed for stable supply guarantees. – Demand-led partnerships preferred over coercive supply control. – Suggestion: India-U.S. consortium for joint exploration and processing.
Joint Investment Vision	India (exploration potential) + U.S. (capital & tech) to co-invest in mineral projects in Africa, South America, Southeast Asia.
Quad Collaboration	– Leverage Quad (India, U.S., Japan, Australia) for scaling mineral processing tech. – Promote transparency, traceability (e.g., blockchain standards like EU’s Battery Passport).
Digital Infrastructure	– Propose India-U.S. Mineral Exchange for secure, real-time trade/investment. – Co-develop traceability platforms for sensitive industries: EVs, semiconductors, aerospace.
Strategic Stockpiles	– Build joint India-U.S. reserves of key minerals. – Use existing infrastructure: India’s SPR & U.S. National Defense Stockpile for cost-effective storage.
India’s Early Initiatives	– First non-G7 member of Mineral Security Partnership. – Will host upcoming Quad summit. – Opportunity to formalize multi-nation mineral collaboration.
Guiding Principle 3 Long-Term Vision	– Mining & processing facilities require 12–16 years. – Partnership must be designed with a 20-year horizon. – Set interim goals aligned with India’s Critical Minerals Mission.
Foundational Investments Needed	Invest in “plumbing” of the partnership:  – Data-sharing protocols  – Investment tracking  – Workforce development  – Innovation corridors (via U.S.-India iCET platform)

Nuclear energy as next frontier of linkages

• As India’s electricity demand surges, the country needs a reliable energy source to complement the intermittent nature of solar and wind, ensuring a stable and secure power grid.
• While battery costs have declined significantly, nuclear power emerges as a firm, low-carbon energy source critical to achieving India’s net-zero emissions goals.
• India aims to achieve 100 GW of nuclear power capacity by 2047, but this requires a significant momentum shift.
• Currently, nuclear energy contributes just over 8 GW, accounting for only 2% of India’s installed capacity.
• To meet the 2047 target, India must commission 5–6 GW of nuclear capacity annually starting in the early 2030s.
• Studies by institutions such as the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) indicate that nuclear capacity may need to exceed 200 GW by 2070 under certain net-zero scenarios.

To realise this vision, three pivotal reforms are necessary

1. Shorten Deployment Timelines

• Accelerate project timelines to enable scale-up.
• Reducing build time from nine to six years can lower the levelised cost of electricity by 8%.
• Requires standardised reactor designs, faster regulatory approvals, and a skilled delivery ecosystem.

2. Enable Private Sector Participation

• Create credible offtakers to reduce risks.
• Structure competitive bidding processes and offer long-term power purchase commitments.
• Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), with lower capital costs, higher flexibility, and smaller land footprints, become viable only with private capital incentives and predictable returns.
• Use cases include:
  • Green steel production
  • High-energy AI applications
• Estimated capital requirement: up to $180 billion by 2047.
• Current exposure of Indian banks and NBFCs to the power sector: approx. $200 billion.
• India must restructure its financial system to support this massive investment.

3. Strengthen Policy and International Cooperation

• Ensure clear, stable policies, offtake guarantees, and timely payments.
• Collaborate with global technology partners for technology transfer and joint development.
• Develop and enforce robust waste management standards and regulations.

4. Amend the Legal Framework and Strengthen Safety Protocols

• Amend the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 to unlock private investment in nuclear power infrastructure.
• India’s indigenous reactor designs should be modularised to enable faster deployment and scalability.
• The recent approval for Holtec International to transfer Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology to Indian companies (e.g., Larsen & Toubro, Tata Consulting Engineers) highlights the potential of India-U.S. collaboration.
• India must prioritise nuclear safety, particularly in light of ambitions to lead in SMR manufacturing.
• SMRs offer smaller emergency zones and air-cooling capabilities, making them ideal for water-scarce regions.
• However, they also necessitate robust, centralised waste management systems and repurposing strategies from the outset.
• Emphasize adoption of advanced decommissioning and waste handling technologies to ensure long-term sustainability and safety.

Conclusion

The World Economic Outlook released by the IMF in April 2025 highlights alarming global uncertainty driven by ongoing trade and tariff disputes. To ensure India’s energy security and foster sustainable economic growth, it is imperative that India-U.S. bilateral ties provide stronger strategic reassurance and reinforce shared interests. India’s trajectory of consistent growth and the U.S.’s strengths in technology and capital form a mutually reinforcing partnership. Securing a resilient energy future demands a long-term strategic vision, not merely a focus on short-term gains, but rather a clear roadmap and a robust framework for cooperation.

Editorial 2: ​Strokes of justice

Context

India must remain prepared for potential escalatory actions by Pakistan.

Introduction

India recently launched precision military strikes across nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, targeting terrorist camps linked to Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba. This action, a response to the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, aims to disrupt cross-border terrorism. The strikes signify a shift in India’s strategy, emphasizing military, economic, and diplomatic responses to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

India’s Precision Military Strikes: Overview

• Date and Targets:
  • India conducted precision military strikes on nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) early on Wednesday.
  • Key targets included:
    • Bahawalpur: Headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammed.
    • Muridke: A nerve centre of Lashkar-e-Taiba.
• Objective:
  • The strikes aimed to destroy terrorist training camps and deter further cross-border attacks.
  • The action followed the Pahalgam terrorist attack on April 22, which killed 26 people.
• Strike Nature:
  • India’s military described the strikes as:
    • Measured and non-escalatory.
    • Proportionate and responsible.

Comparison with Past Strikes

• Previous Operations:
  • In 2019, India carried out surgical strikes in Balakot (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan) after the Pulwama attack.
• Current Operation:
  • This time, India’s response has been sharper and more resolute.
• Significance of Targets:
  • Muridke and Bahawalpur are located in Punjab, the heartland of Pakistan’s ruling elite, historically associated with terrorism.

India’s Response to Pakistan’s Terrorism

• Pakistan’s Role:
  • Pakistan has long used terrorism as a low-cost instrument of war against India, with an umbrella of nuclear blackmail.
  • Pakistan has harboured key terrorists like Osama bin Laden, despite claims of being an ally in the war on terror.
• India’s Military Strategy Shift:
  • Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India has shown a shift towards overt military action in response to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.
  • This approach signals that India may continue responding militarily, economically, and diplomatically in case of future terrorist attacks.
• International Pressure on Pakistan: India has urged world powers to use their influence to coerce Pakistan into responsible behaviour.

Continued Investigation and Political Consensus

• Ongoing Investigation:
  • The Pahalgam attack investigation must continue with full vigour and be pursued to its logical conclusion.
• Political Consensus:
  • All political parties have supported the military operation.
  • The Centre must also focus on restraining elements that incite communal strife, as these actions could play into Pakistan’s hands.
• Preparedness for Escalation:
  • India must remain vigilant for any escalatory moves by Pakistan and be prepared to respond both militarily and diplomatically.

Conclusion

India’s recent military strikes mark a decisive shift in its approach to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, signaling a stronger, overt response to cross-border attacks. While the strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure, long-term change in Pakistan’s behavior remains uncertain. Continued vigilance, international pressure on Pakistan, and a united domestic front are essential for preventing further escalation and ensuring lasting security.