Content:
- The fragmentation in the global fight against terror
- Power and pitfalls of digital influence
The fragmentation in the global fight against terror
Context : Post-9/11 Unity Has Eroded
- The early 2000s saw global unity in fighting terrorism, especially after 9/11.
- In recent years, this consensus has weakened due to shifting priorities and regional biases.
- Newer threats like cyberterrorism and Ideological extremism have diverted global attention from traditional forms of terrorism, especially cross-border.
Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security) ,GS 2(International Relations)
Practice Question : The global consensus on combating terrorism has significantly weakened in recent years, with selective application of norms and political expediency replacing principles. In this context, critically analyse the challenges India faces in garnering global support against state-sponsored terrorism. (250 words)
Selective Approach to Terrorism
- Different standards are applied across regions — what is labeled terrorism in one is downplayed as “internal unrest” in another.
- Demand for “concrete evidence” from some nations before action delays global response.
- State-sponsored terrorism often escapes collective global condemnation due to strategic interests.
Challenges Faced by India
- India, a frequent target of cross-border terror, finds it difficult to mobilize global action.
- Narratives around “regional peace” often dilute accountability for terror incidents.
- Calls for “restraint” overshadow justice and deterrence — despite clear threats to civilian life and national security.
Multilateral Gridlocks
- UNSC mechanisms to blacklist terror operatives are vulnerable to political vetoes (e.g., 2022 proposals blocked).
- International treaties (like the Indus Waters Treaty) are selectively interpreted in diplomatic forums, creating further obstacles.
- Multilateral forums often fail to deliver unified responses due to divergent national interests.
Dilution of Moral Clarity
- Attacks with religious or ideological motivations often receive uneven global attention.
- Emerging threats like ideological extremism are acknowledged, but cross-border terrorism in South Asia receives limited emphasis.
- There is a need to apply the same standards of condemnation across all regions and communities.
Strategic Autonomy and India’s Roadmap
- In the absence of cohesive international response, India must rely on:
- Bilateral diplomacy to build pressure and isolate terror-supporting actors.
- Legal mechanisms like FATF and international courts to seek accountability.
- Strategic partnerships to enhance intelligence-sharing and counter-terror cooperation.
- Expanding dialogue with non-traditional partners (e.g., Gulf countries) offers new diplomatic avenues.
Key Takeaways
- Global counter-terrorism frameworks are weakened by strategic interests and selective outrage.
- India’s consistent victimhood places it in a difficult position vis-à-vis international support.
- India must adopt a multi–pronged approach — legal, diplomatic, strategic — to ensure national security.
- A renewed global framework grounded in objectivity, accountability, and consistency is crucial.
Power and pitfalls of digital influence
Context : Power of Digital Influence
- Widespread Reach: Social media enables rapid communication, brand promotion, and democratized expression.
- Mindful Consumption: De-influencing can promote sustainable choices by challenging consumerism.
- Trust Factor: Influencers have become opinion leaders, shaping public discourse across sectors like health, finance, and lifestyle.
- Citizen Engagement: Empowers individuals to share experiences and grievances, sometimes spurring systemic reforms.
Relevance : GS 1(Society),GS 2(Social Issues)
Practice Question: “The power of digital influence is a double-edged sword — it can educate or mislead.” Critically examine the impact of social media influencers on public discourse and consumer behavior in India. (250 words)
Pitfalls and Challenges
- Misinformation Spread: Viral, unchecked content (especially AI-generated) contributes to rising disinformation, especially in India (WEF 2024 Report).
- Sensationalism for Clicks: Influencers often use shock value, half-truths, and clickbait to boost engagement.
- De-influencing Manipulation: While it claims to support critical thinking, it often thrives on negativity and controversy.
- Blurring Lines: Difficulty in distinguishing paid promotions from genuine content—especially dangerous in health and finance.
Legal and Regulatory Framework
- Constitutional Limits: Article 19(1)(a) (free speech) is limited by Article 19(2) (defamation, public order, etc.).
- Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Bans misleading ads; holds influencers accountable for deceptive promotions.
- IT Act & Intermediary Rules, 2021: Penalizes digital harm, mandates platform responsibility.
- ASCI & SEBI Guidelines: Offer ethical norms (though ASCI is not legally binding); SEBI has tightened rules on “finfluencers”.
Judicial Intervention
- Delhi High Court: Upheld brand protection from disparaging claims; mandated credential disclosure for health advice.
- IMA vs Union of India: Established liability for misleading health endorsements by influencers.
- Focus on Intent: Courts differentiate between honest critique and malicious defamation for profit.
Ethical Concerns
- Cherry-picked Narratives: Influencers may manipulate studies, use ambiguous language, and mislead audiences.
- Health Content Vulnerability: Given its potential harm, health advice must come from qualified, verifiable sources.
- Trust Erosion: Exploiting public trust for gains damages both influencer credibility and brand value.
Recommendations and Solutions
- Stricter Enforcement: Regulators must enforce transparency, punish false endorsements, and monitor high-risk content.
- Influencer Registry: Especially for public health content, to enable credential verification and accountability.
- Consumer Literacy: Brands should invest in educating audiences about digital literacy and content evaluation.
- Cross-sector Collaboration: Legal, technological, and ethical efforts must converge to safeguard digital ecosystems.
