Content
- Bihar’s Makhana Potential: From Local Crop to Global Superfood
- India–Peru & India–Chile Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): Strengthening India’s Latin America Footprint
- Not Just PMLA, UAPA – Give Reason for Arrest in All Offences: Supreme Court (Nov 2025)
- 15 Ophthalmologists per Million Indians (AIIMS, 2025)
- Why the Nomination Process Needs Reform
- Trump’s Nuclear Test Threat Risks Upending Global Test Ban Regime
- Global Warming Intensifies Despite La Niña Effects (WMO, 2025)
Bihar’s Makhana Potential: From Local Crop to Global Superfood
Why in News ?
- Bihar — India’s poorest state by per capita income — contributes 90% of India’s makhana (fox nut) output, and India itself produces ~90% of the world’s supply.
- Despite this dominance, Bihar’s makhana sector remains under-scaled, low in export share, and value distribution is skewed away from producers.
- The discussion has gained attention after GI tagging of “Mithila Makhana” (2022) and rising global demand for gluten-free superfoods.
Relevance
GS-1 (Geography & Society):
- Agrarian livelihoods in eastern India, esp. wetland ecosystems of North Bihar (Mithila).
- Socio-economic role of Mallah community in traditional occupations.
GS-3 (Economy & Agriculture):
- Agricultural diversification and value-chain development.
- Role in “One District One Product” and Agri-export strategy.
- GI tag (2022) – linkage with rural branding and Atmanirbhar Bharat.
- Integration with PMFME & Agricultural Export Policy under superfood category.
- Sustainable water-use and climate-resilient cultivation models.
Basic Context
- Botanical name: Euryale ferox (fox nut or gorgon nut).
- Nature: Aquatic crop cultivated in stagnant ponds and wetlands.
- Cultural significance: Used in traditional Indian diets and Ayurveda.
- Main growing regions in Bihar: Darbhanga, Madhubani, Sitamarhi, Katihar, Purnia.
Production and Global Standing
- Bihar’s share in India’s makhana: ~90%.
- India’s share in global output: ~90%.
- Global market value (2024): ~$100 million; projected to grow to $250–300 million by 2030 (IMARC estimate).
- Employment base: Over 5 lakh farmers, primarily from the Mallah community.
Core Issues and Challenges
- Lack of Scale:
- Despite being the largest producer, Bihar lacks export-scale production and quality infrastructure.
- Domestic and global demand far exceeds current quality-adjusted supply.
- Value Distribution Gap (GVC Problem):
- Like African cocoa producers who get <$10 billion from a $150 billion chocolate industry, Bihar’s farmers capture a small share of makhana’s total value.
- High-value post-production and export activities occur in other States — Punjab and Assam dominate processing and packaging.
- Technological and Quality Deficits:
- Traditional pond-based methods limit yield and uniformity.
- Field-based cultivation and mechanised popping technologies can improve quality and consistency.
- Data and Trade Recognition Gaps:
- Until 2022, makhana lacked a unique HS trade code — it was clubbed with other nuts, obscuring export data.
- Non-Price Barriers:
- Limited food safety certification, packaging quality, and traceability restrict export potential.
- Absence of independent certification and branding for quality assurance.
Opportunities and Potential
- Geographical Indication (GI) Tag (2022):
- Mithila Makhana GI tag can boost brand identity and price premium, similar to Darjeeling tea or Basmati rice.
- Real benefit depends on traceable value chain enforcement and export branding.
- Technological Upgradation:
- Move from pond- to field-based systems (reduces crop duration by 25–30%).
- Encourage transplanting method instead of traditional podcasting for higher yields.
- Introduce improved seed varieties for better popping quality.
- Value Addition and Diversification:
- Develop nutraceutical, cosmetic, and medicinal applications beyond snack form.
- Promote ready-to-eat and flavoured makhana, targeting global health markets.
- Inclusive Supply Chain Development:
- Integrate the Mallah community through cooperatives or FPOs for fair income distribution.
- Encourage public-private partnerships in post-harvest infrastructure.
Economic and Policy Implications
- Export and trade policy: Integrate makhana into India’s Agricultural Export Policy (AEP) under niche superfoods.
- Infrastructure: Develop processing clusters under the PM Formalisation of Micro Food Processing Enterprises (PMFME) scheme.
- Research: Strengthen ICAR–RCER (Patna) initiatives on makhana productivity and mechanisation.
- Sustainability: Promote water-efficient cultivation and climate-resilient varieties to counter pond drying and erratic monsoon.
India–Peru & India–Chile Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): Strengthening India’s Latin America Footprint
Why in News ?
- India has made “substantive progress” in FTA negotiations with Peru and Chile (Oct 27–Nov 5, 2025 visit by Indian delegation).
- Talks aim to boost cooperation in critical minerals, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, textiles, and food processing.
- These FTAs are part of India’s trade diversification strategy, especially amid US tariff hikes (50%) on Indian exports in Aug 2025.
Relevance
GS-2 (International Relations):
- Deepening South–South Cooperation; part of India’s outreach to Global South and Latin America.
- Strengthens India’s position against China’s growing influence in the region.
- Expands strategic partnerships in critical minerals (lithium, copper).
GS-3 (Economy):
- Trade diversification amid US tariff escalation (2025).
- Integration of FTAs with energy transition goals — EVs, Green Hydrogen, and ACC battery PLI.
- Strengthens India’s export basket (pharma, auto, textiles) and raw material security.
- Supports “Atmanirbhar Bharat” via assured critical mineral supply chains.
Background
- Latin America’s strategic role: Resource-rich region with high demand for Indian goods and potential for South-South cooperation.
- India–Chile PTA (Partial Scope Agreement):
- First signed in 2006, expanded in 2017 (covering ~2,000 products).
- Ongoing FTA aims to upgrade and broaden coverage to services, investments, and critical minerals.
- India–Peru FTA: Negotiations launched in 2017; 9th round held in Lima (Oct 2025) — now nearing finalization.
Strategic and Economic Significance
1. Access to Critical Minerals
- Peru and Chile among the world’s largest producers of lithium, copper, zinc, and molybdenum.
- Chile: 2nd largest lithium producer (after Australia).
- Peru: 2nd largest copper producer globally.
- Essential for India’s energy transition — electric vehicles, solar, and battery manufacturing under National Green Hydrogen Mission and PLI for ACC batteries.
2. Trade Diversification
- Counters heavy dependence on US, EU, and China.
- Latin America offers emerging market demand and new supply chains for Indian manufacturing and services.
3. Tariff and Market Access
- The US’s 50% import tariff (Aug 2025) on select Indian goods (steel, aluminum, textiles) makes Latin America a priority export alternative.
- India seeks zero or reduced tariffs on:
- Pharmaceuticals (India exports ~$700 million/year to Latin America)
- Automobiles and auto parts
- Textiles and processed foods
4. Complementary Economies
- India: Services and industrial strength.
- Peru/Chile: Resource and commodity wealth.
- Creates scope for balanced trade, unlike India’s China or US trade deficits.
Current Trade Data (2024–25)
- India–Latin America trade: ~$52 billion.
- India–Chile trade: ~$4.5 billion.
- India–Peru trade: ~$3 billion.
- Top Indian exports: Automobiles, pharmaceuticals, textiles.
- Top imports: Copper, minerals, and pulp.
Progress in Negotiations (2025 Rounds)
- Peru: 9th round concluded; next round planned for New Delhi, Jan 2026.
- Chile: Technical discussions advanced on goods, services, investment, and critical minerals cooperation.
- Both sides agreed to intersessional meetings to resolve pending chapters.
Broader Geoeconomic Implications
- Strengthens India’s role in Global South cooperation under IBSA and BRICS+ frameworks.
- Provides leverage against China’s expanding influence in Latin America (China–Chile FTA operational since 2006).
- Supports India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat and energy security goals by ensuring steady critical mineral supply.
Challenges Ahead
- Logistical barriers: Long shipping routes, high freight costs.
- Non-tariff barriers: Sanitary, phytosanitary, and technical standards.
- Investment protection clauses and services liberalization remain contentious.
- Competition from China: Deeply entrenched trade networks in both Peru and Chile.
Way Forward
- Fast-track negotiations to finalize by mid-2026.
- Link FTA outcomes with India’s Critical Minerals Mission (2023) for assured supply chains.
- Promote triangular cooperation — India–Latin America–Africa for technology and manufacturing.
- Expand pharma, EVs, and renewable energy collaboration.
Not Just PMLA, UAPA – Give Reason for Arrest in All Offences: Supreme Court
Why in News?
- The Supreme Court (Nov 6, 2025) ruled that the constitutional requirement to furnish grounds of arrest applies to all offences — not just under special statutes like PMLA (2002) or UAPA (1967).
- This judgment reinforces personal liberty under Article 22(1) and Article 21, mandating that every arrested person must be informed of the reasons for arrest at least two hours before being produced in court for remand.
Relevance
GS-2 (Polity & Governance):
- Reinforces Article 21 (Right to Life & Liberty) and Article 22 (Protection in Arrest).
- Expands scope of constitutional due process beyond special laws (UAPA, PMLA).
- Enhances accountability in law enforcement; aligns with Arnesh Kumar (2014) guidelines.
- Strengthens procedural fairness — cornerstone of “Rule of Law”.
- Supports police reforms and human rights jurisprudence.
Constitutional and Legal Framework
1. Constitutional Safeguards (Article 21 & 22)
- Article 21: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
- Article 22(1): Right to be informed of reasons for arrest and to consult a lawyer.
- Article 22(2): Mandates production before a magistrate within 24 hours.
2. Statutory Provisions
- Indian Penal Code (IPC) / Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 – defines offences.
- CrPC 1973 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 – procedural law governing arrest, remand, and investigation.
- Section 50 BNSS (analogous to CrPC Sec 50): Obligation to inform grounds of arrest and right to bail.
- Special Laws:
- PMLA 2002: Mandates communication of arrest grounds in writing (SC in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, 2023).
- UAPA 1967: Similar requirement for National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrests.
The Current Judgment (2025)
Core Ruling
- Requirement to inform arrest grounds is not limited to special laws but extends to all arrests under general laws (IPC/BNS).
- Such intimation must be given “at least two hours before the accused is produced for remand”.
- The duty is constitutional, not merely procedural — derived from Articles 21 and 22, ensuring “meaningful exercise of the right to liberty.”
Key Observations
- “Personal liberty cannot be a hollow formality.”
- Providing reasons ensures transparency and accountability in police power.
- Failure to communicate grounds vitiates the legality of arrest and can render subsequent detention unconstitutional.
- The right applies irrespective of the offence’s gravity or category — ensuring uniform protection under Article 14.
Significance
1. Strengthening Rule of Law
- Extends constitutional protection to every arrest — ending arbitrary distinction between ordinary and special laws.
- Reaffirms India’s commitment to due process, a cornerstone of Article 21 post-Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978).
2. Accountability in Law Enforcement
- Police must record and communicate reasons in writing — promoting transparency.
- Prevents misuse of arrest powers (India averages 60–70 lakh arrests annually, NCRB 2024).
- In 2024, ~70% of arrests were for offences punishable up to 7 years, often unnecessary per Supreme Court’s Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) guidelines.
3. Protecting Personal Liberty
- Aligns with India’s rising custodial death and pre-trial detention concerns:
- Custodial deaths (NCRB 2024): 175.
- Undertrials constitute 77% of prison population — among world’s highest.
- This judgment, thus, operationalises the “right to liberty before procedure” principle.
Relation to Previous Judgments
| Case | Year | Key Principle |
| DK Basu v. State of West Bengal | 1997 | Laid down arrest/detention guidelines. |
| Joginder Kumar v. State of UP | 1994 | Arrest should not be routine; must have justification. |
| Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar | 2014 | Police must record reasons for arrest in minor offences. |
| Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India | 2023 | Written grounds of arrest mandatory under PMLA. |
| Current Case (SC, 2025) | 2025 | Grounds of arrest mandatory in all offences, not just special laws. |
Overview
- Progressive move: Establishes uniform procedural rights and reduces arbitrary arrests.
- Challenges:
- Implementation gap — especially at police station level.
- Requires digital records, legal awareness, and training.
- Way Forward:
- Integrate “grounds of arrest disclosure” into BNSS digital e-FIR and e-remand modules.
- Strengthen police accountability commissions under State laws.
15 Ophthalmologists per Million Indians (AIIMS, 2025)
Why in News?
- A national survey by AIIMS Delhi (2025) on “Human Resources and Infrastructure for Ophthalmic Services in India” found India has only 15 ophthalmologists per million population — far below WHO’s recommended benchmarks.
- The survey covered 7,901 eye care institutes, highlighting regional disparity, workforce shortages, and infrastructure gaps in eye care services.
Relevance
GS-2 (Social Justice – Health):
- Public health infrastructure gaps; NPCBVI under Vision 2020.
- Human resource deficit in healthcare — shortage and regional imbalance.
- Policy need: Integrating eye care with primary healthcare (Ayushman Bharat–HWCs).
- Importance of telemedicine and digital health networks.
GS-3 (S&T and Economy):
- Strengthening healthcare R&D, medical education, and allied health services.
- Role of AI, tele-ophthalmology, and innovation in public health delivery.
Basic Context
1. What is Ophthalmology?
- Branch of medicine dealing with diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of eye diseases.
- Core to achieving Universal Eye Health and eliminating avoidable blindness.
2. Global Target – Vision 2020: The Right to Sight
- Joint initiative by WHO and International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness (IAPB).
- Aimed to eliminate avoidable blindness by 2020 and ensure equitable access to eye care.
- India adopted the Vision 2020: India program under the National Programme for Control of Blindness and Visual Impairment (NPCBVI).
Key Findings of AIIMS Study (2025)
| Indicator | Data |
| Institutes surveyed | 7,901 |
| Eye care beds per million population | 74 |
| Ophthalmologists (secondary + tertiary levels) | 20,944 |
| Optometrists | 17,849 |
| Average per capita availability | 15 ophthalmologists / million population |
| Target (WHO/AIIMS Vision 2020) | 20–25 ophthalmologists / million |
| States below benchmark | Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal |
| States meeting/exceeding | Delhi, Puducherry, Goa, Maharashtra |
| Highest variation | From 127 per million (Ladakh) to just 2 per million (Bihar) |
Overview
1. Magnitude of Deficit
- India’s 20,944 ophthalmologists for ~1.4 billion people = severe shortage.
- WHO recommends at least 20 per million → India falls short by ~25–30% nationally, and >70% in BIMARU states.
2. Regional Inequality
- Urban concentration: 70% of ophthalmologists in metro or Tier-1 cities.
- Rural areas: Home to 65% of population but only 20% of eye care facilities.
- States like Bihar and UP show “eye-care deserts”.
3. Infrastructure Deficits
- Only 15.6% public and 18.3% NGO-run institutes, the rest private — leading to affordability and access issues.
- Beds: 74 per million — far below desired 100 per million benchmark.
- Poor integration of primary eye care into general PHC system.
4. Burden of Eye Diseases
- India accounts for ~20% of global blindness burden.
- Major causes: Cataract (~66%), uncorrected refractive errors (~25%), glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy.
- National Blindness Survey 2019: Blindness prevalence = 0.36%, visual impairment = 2.55% — updated AIIMS projections (2025) show little improvement.
Programs & Initiatives
| Program | Key Features |
| NPCBVI (1976, revamped 2017) | Free cataract surgeries, vision screening, eye banks. |
| Ayushman Bharat Health & Wellness Centres | Integration of primary eye care. |
| Digital Health Mission | e-OPD, teleophthalmology in remote areas. |
| District Blindness Control Societies | Local implementation of eye-care schemes. |
| Pradhan Mantri Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission (PM-ABHIM) | Strengthens tertiary care, including eye hospitals. |
Challenges
- Shortage of trained ophthalmologists & optometrists in rural belts.
- Skewed distribution — north-central states lagging.
- Infrastructure underutilization due to lack of human resources.
- Limited R&D and training institutes in community ophthalmology.
- Dependence on NGOs like Aravind Eye Care, LV Prasad Eye Institute for outreach work.
Policy Implications
- India needs at least 35,000 ophthalmologists to meet the WHO norm.
- Expand fellowship and residency capacity under NPCBVI.
- Integrate optometrists into public health cadre under National Allied Health Policy (2023).
- Incentivize posting in underserved districts through performance-linked grants.
- Adopt “Hub and Spoke” eye-care networks using telemedicine (AIIMS model).
Electoral Nomination Process and Democratic Safeguards
Why in News?
A recent case from Dadra and Nagar Haveli municipal council elections (2025) highlighted arbitrary rejection of a candidate’s nomination without a hearing or verification, exposing flaws in India’s nomination scrutiny system under the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951.
Relevance
GS-2 (Polity & Governance):
- Issues in electoral process under Representation of the People Act, 1951.
- Arbitrary powers of Returning Officers — violation of Article 14 and 326.
- Highlights procedural opacity and need for digital reforms (ENCORE Portal).
- Supports recommendations of Law Commission and ECI for transparent scrutiny.
- Comparative perspective: Canada, UK models of error correction and reasoned scrutiny.
The Nomination Process
- Legal Basis:
Governed by Sections 33–36 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.- Section 33: Filing of nomination papers.
- Section 34: Security deposit.
- Section 35: Notice of nominations.
- Section 36: Scrutiny of nominations — Returning Officer (RO) empowered to accept or reject.
- Key Clause — Section 36(2):
Authorises RO to reject a nomination for “defects of a substantial character.”
However, the Act does not define what constitutes “substantial.” - Judicial Bar:
Under Article 329(b), courts cannot intervene during elections, so rejections can only be challenged after results, rendering remedies ineffective.
Core Issue
- Excessive discretionary power of Returning Officers (ROs).
- No uniform guidelines on what constitutes a “substantial defect.”
- Opaque, unreviewable process — enables political exclusion before voting even begins.
Recent Examples of Nomination Rejection
| Year | Case | Reason for Rejection | Impact |
| 2025 | Dadra & Nagar Haveli | No hearing given to candidate | Violation of natural justice |
| 2024 | Surat LS election | Opposition candidates’ proposers denied signatures | Seat won unopposed |
| 2019 | Varanasi | Tej Bahadur Yadav (ex-BSF) lacked EC certificate | Prevented independent challenge to PM |
| 2023 | Birbhum | Debasish Dhar delayed no-dues certificate | Eliminated from ballot |
| 2025 | Bihar (RJD) | Blank fields in form | Technical rejection |
Legal & Constitutional Angle
- Constitutional Safeguard:
- Article 326: Right to vote.
- Article 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(c): Freedom of expression and association (linked to political participation).
- Article 14: Equality before law.
Arbitrary nomination rejection undermines both the candidate’s right to contest and voters’ right to choose.
- Key Case Laws:
- Resurgence India v. Election Commission (2013):
False declarations invite prosecution but do not invalidate nomination; incomplete forms do.
⇒ Honest errors punished more than deliberate lies.
- K. Venkatachalam v. A. Swamickan (1999):
Courts can step in post-election if process violates constitutional principles.
- PUCL v. Union of India (2003):
Established voters’ right to know candidates’ background — basis of affidavit filing.
- Resurgence India v. Election Commission (2013):
Structural Weaknesses (“Procedural Traps”)
- Oath Trap:
Oath must be taken before a specified officer after nomination but before scrutiny; early/late timing = invalid. - Notarisation Trap:
Affidavit (Form 26) not notarised by specified authority = automatic rejection. - Certificate Trap:
“No-dues” or clearance certificates missing/delayed = rejection, often due to bureaucratic delay. - Checklist Illusion:
ROs provide checklists but are not legally binding. Even defect-free forms can later be rejected.
Global Best Practices
| Country | Safeguard Measure |
| UK | RO assists candidates to correct errors before deadlines. |
| Canada | 48-hour correction window for technical defects. |
| Germany | Written notice + appeal layers for errors. |
| Australia | Early submission encouraged to enable corrections. |
⇒ India treats RO as gatekeeper, while others treat them as facilitators.
Reforms Suggested
- Digital-by-Default Nomination System:
- Online filing, validation via electoral roll, auto-verification of voter ID, age, constituency.
- Real-time public dashboard showing nomination status, timestamps, and reasons for acceptance/rejection.
- Categorisation of Defects:
- (1) Technical/paperwork: should not lead to rejection.
- (2) Authenticity disputes: require verification.
- (3) Constitutional/Statutory disqualifications: valid grounds for rejection.
- Guaranteed 48-hour Correction Window:
Similar to Canada’s model, for candidates to fix errors. - Mandatory Reasoned Orders:
Each rejection must specify: violated clause, evidence, and why defect is “substantial.”
Broader Democratic Implications
- Democratic Legitimacy:
Without fair nomination scrutiny, the right to vote is hollow. - Political Competition:
Arbitrary rejections can skew contests — e.g., unopposed seats like Surat (2024). - Citizen Trust:
Opacity erodes confidence in ECI’s neutrality.
Data & Facts
- India had 8,000+ candidates rejected in 2019 Lok Sabha elections (ECI data; ~12% of total nominations).
- Average 4 candidates per constituency rejected for technical grounds.
- Lok Sabha 2024: Over 200 nominations rejected in first scrutiny day in Gujarat and Bihar.
- ECI Digital Reforms: ENCORE Portal currently digitises election management but not nomination scrutiny.
U.S. Nuclear Testing Debate and the Future of Global Non-Proliferation
Why in News?
- On October 29, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump, ahead of a meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping in Busan (South Korea), announced that the U.S. would resume nuclear weapons testing, claiming parity with other powers like Russia, China, and North Korea.
- His statement follows Russia’s 2025 tests of a nuclear-powered cruise missile (Burevestnik) and an underwater torpedo (Poseidon), reigniting global fears of a new nuclear arms race.
Relevance
GS-2 (International Relations):
- Undermines global non-proliferation architecture (CTBT, PTBT).
- Implications for India’s nuclear posture (No First Use, Credible Minimum Deterrence).
- Strategic stability challenges in Indo-Pacific and South Asia.
- Role of multilateral diplomacy — CTBTO, NAM, G-20, and UN disarmament forums.
GS-3 (Security):
- Nuclear deterrence, arms race dynamics, and India’s strategic autonomy.
- Implications for global peace and security architecture.
Nuclear Testing and Treaties
- First Nuclear Test: “Trinity” by the U.S. in 1945.
- Total Global Tests (as of 2025): ~2,056 nuclear detonations.
- Last Tests:
- U.S. – 1992
- Russia (then USSR) – 1990
- China – 1996
- India – 1998 (Pokhran-II)
- North Korea – 2017 (last confirmed test)
Key Treaties and Legal Framework
- Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT, 1963):
- Banned nuclear tests in the atmosphere, underwater, and outer space.
- Allowed underground testing.
- Signed by U.S., USSR, U.K.; India not a signatory.
- Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT, 1996):
- Bans all nuclear explosions (civilian or military).
- Not in force: 8 key countries (U.S., China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Egypt) haven’t ratified.
- U.S. & China: signed but not ratified.
- Russia: ratified in 2000, de-ratified in 2023 amid tensions with the U.S.
- Subcritical Tests:
- Use conventional explosives on fissile material (e.g., plutonium-239) without causing a chain reaction.
- Allowed under CTBT — used to maintain arsenal safety without actual detonations.
Global Nuclear Arsenals (2025, Source: Federation of American Scientists)
| Country | Estimated Warheads | Status |
| Russia | 4,309 | De-ratified CTBT; new delivery systems tested |
| U.S. | 3,708 | Subcritical tests continue |
| China | ~1,000 | Rapid buildup; new silos at Xinjiang |
| France | 290 | No recent tests |
| UK | 225 | Committed to moratorium |
| India | ~164 | No-testing pledge (1998) |
| North Korea | ~40–50 | Tested 6 times (2006–2017) |
Environmental & Human Implications
- Underground tests still cause severe radioactive contamination of soil, water, and air.
- Nevada Test Site (U.S.) — caused long-term radiation-linked health crises.
- Semipalatinsk (Kazakhstan) — over 1.5 million affected by Soviet-era tests.
- Pokhran (India) — minor radiation but ecological risk to Thar desert.
Strategic Implications
- Erosion of Non-Proliferation Regime:
- CTBT moratorium collapse may trigger arms race 2.0 among major powers.
- Nuclear Modernisation Race:
- U.S. pursuing B61-13 tactical bomb; Russia developing Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle; China expanding silo fields.
- Impact on South Asia:
- If China resumes testing, India may face pressure to do so for deterrence parity, forcing Pakistan to follow.
- Could undermine India’s 1998 self-imposed test moratorium and “credible minimum deterrence” policy.
- Global Security Risks:
- Testing resurgence could undermine New START (U.S.–Russia arms reduction treaty), already under strain.
U.S. Domestic Debate
- Pro-testing lobby:
- Argues resumption ensures arsenal reliability & technological edge.
- Cites “aging warheads” and emerging threats (China’s buildup).
- Anti-testing experts:
- Argue that computer simulations and subcritical tests suffice for maintenance.
- Fear political fallout and moral loss of leadership in global arms control.
India’s Stand
- India’s nuclear policy (since 1998):
- “No First Use” and “Credible Minimum Deterrence.”
- Supports universal and verifiable disarmament but refuses to sign CTBT citing discriminatory nature.
- Implication: If U.S.–Russia–China resume testing, India may face strategic compulsion to test for reliability and deterrence assurance.
Geopolitical Consequences
- Asia-Pacific Flashpoints:
- Heightened tension in Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, Korean Peninsula.
- Europe:
- U.S.–NATO missile defense tensions with Russia’s Kaliningrad deployment.
- Middle East:
- May embolden Iran to pursue enrichment unchecked.
Way Forward
- Revive CTBT Negotiations: Pressure U.S. and China to ratify; re-engage Russia.
- Establish Global Verification Regime: Strengthen CTBTO International Monitoring System (IMS).
- Promote Regional Test Bans: Similar to Treaty of Tlatelolco (Latin America).
- Enhance Transparency: Public declarations of test moratoriums, open inspection regimes.
- India’s Role: Champion “Responsible Restraint Framework” through NAM and G-20 platforms.
Global Warming Intensifies Despite La Niña Effects
Why in News ??
- The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released its State of the Global Climate Update 2025, warning that 2023–2025 is likely to be the warmest three-year period on record, despite cooling La Niña conditions.
- The period marks a historic acceleration of global warming, with 2025 expected to be among the top 2 hottest years ever recorded.
Relevance
GS-1 (Geography):
- Climatic trends, oceanic processes (La Niña, El Niño) and global heat balance.
- Regional impacts on South Asian monsoon and heat stress patterns.
GS-3 (Environment):
- Global warming data trends — WMO 2025 findings and 1.5°C threshold.
- Carbon budget and emission trajectory relevance for COP30 (Belém Summit).
- Sea-level rise, ocean heat content, and cryosphere loss.
- Reinforces need for India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and renewable transition.
Key Data and Findings (WMO Report 2025)
- Global mean temperature (2023–2025): ~1.4°C above pre-industrial levels (1850–1900).
- Decade 2015–2025: Warmest 10-year span in instrumental record.
- 2024:
- Recorded highest ocean heat content in history.
- 90%+ of excess heat from greenhouse gases absorbed by oceans.
- Sea level reached a new record high.
- La Niña Impact:
- Temporarily cooled global temperature slightly, but warming trend persisted.
- Preliminary 2025 data show a minor decline, but the long-term trajectory remains sharply upward.
Oceanic and Atmospheric Indicators
- Ocean Heat Content:
- Increased steadily since 2023, driving stronger cyclones and coral bleaching.
- Weakens ocean carbon sink capacity → less CO₂ absorption.
- Sea Level Rise:
- Accelerating due to melting of Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
- 2024 hydrological year (2023/24): 3rd consecutive record for global mass loss from glaciers (WMO Global Cryosphere Watch).
- Greenhouse Gas Concentrations (2024):
- CO₂ ~423 ppm, CH₄ ~1925 ppb, N₂O ~336 ppb — all record highs.
Regional & Temporal Trends
- Northern Hemisphere: Record heatwaves in 2024–25 (Europe, North America, China).
- South Asia: Warming aggravating monsoon variability and heat stress.
- 2024/25: WMO warns of El Niño–La Niña alternation, amplifying climate unpredictability.
Scientific & Policy Implications
- 1.5°C Threshold:
- UN Secretary-General António Guterres warns world is on track to breach 1.5°C within this decade if emissions continue.
- COP30 (Belém Summit, 2025) stresses need for accelerated decarbonization.
- Carbon Budget:
- Only ~250 Gt CO₂ left (≈6 years of emissions at current rates) before breaching 1.5°C.
- Urgent Warnings:
- Celeste Saulo (WMO Sec-Gen): Rising greenhouse gases make it “extremely difficult” to limit warming below 1.5°C without drastic emission cuts before 2030.
Long-Term Climate Trends
- Since 1850, global mean temperature rose by ~1.3–1.4°C.
- Over 90% of total excess energy trapped by greenhouse gases stored in oceans.
- Anthropogenic warming now overwhelms short-term natural cooling cycles like La Niña.
