Content :
- Nuclear spectre
- A reset in West Asia, a ‘de-escalation’ for the world
- The need for gender equity in urban bureaucracy
Nuclear spectre
Context of Conflict:
- Israel launched a 12-day missile and air attack campaign on Iran, initially as a “pre-emptive” strike on its nuclear facilities, escalating into a full-fledged war.
- U.S. also conducted strikes on Iranian nuclear installations.
- Ceasefire announced on Tuesday, but actions ignored risks of radioactive leakage.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
Practice Question : Critically analyze the implications of recent Israeli-U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities for the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and global nuclear stability. Suggest measures to strengthen international norms and prevent nuclear brinkmanship. (150 words)
Iran’s Nuclear Status:
- Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has subjected its nuclear facilities to international inspections.
- Previously signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with P5+1 (U.S., Russia, China, UK, France, Germany) to ensure peaceful nuclear capabilities.
- U.S. withdrawal from JCPOA during Trump’s first term undermined the agreement.
- Attacks may have damaged Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities, pushing Iran to consider exiting the NPT (parliament mulling a bill) and pursuing nuclear weapons as a deterrent.
Escalating Nuclear Risks:
- Israeli-U.S. actions against Iran signal a fragile international order, with nuclear risks rising in West Asia, Ukraine, and the Indian subcontinent.
- Aggression against Iran, a compliant NPT signatory, could justify further attacks if Iran seeks nuclear weapons, undermining international law and NPT norms.
Israel’s Hypocrisy:
- Israel is not an NPT signatory, refuses oversight of its undeclared nuclear arsenal, and may value nuclear weapons for destructive potential rather than deterrence.
- U.S. support emboldens Israel’s aggressive policies, including in Gaza and wars in West Asia.
Global Nuclear Threats:
- Russia’s threats to use nuclear weapons in response to NATO’s actions in Ukraine highlight the destabilizing impact of great power competition.
- Nuclear disarmament efforts are failing as nuclear-armed states modernize and expand arsenals.
- Non-proliferation is at risk as more countries consider nuclear weapons for self-defense.
Implications and Recommendations:
- Current actions signal a new era of nuclear brinkmanship, potentially more dangerous than the Cold War.
- Urgent need for renewed diplomacy to:
- Re-establish international conflict norms.
- Push for disarmament among nuclear-armed states.
- Strengthen commitment to the NPT to prevent further escalation.
- Urgent need for renewed diplomacy to:
Key Takeaway: Israeli and U.S. actions against Iran, combined with global nuclear trends, are dismantling international stability, necessitating urgent diplomatic efforts to avert a catastrophic nuclear era.
Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed here are based on the original article published in THE HINDU and do not reflect the official stance of Legacy IAS Academy. This content is provided solely for Academic purposes.
A reset in West Asia, a ‘de-escalation’ for the world
Context :
- Israel and U.S. bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, neutralizing its nuclear threat, with tacit or open approval from most regional and global actors.
- Europe offered contradictory statements but had no influence; Russia and China, despite strategic partnerships with Iran (2025 and 2021), remained silent.
- Conscious choice by these countries not to intervene as Iran and its proxies (e.g., in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza) were dismantled.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
Practice Question : The recent Israel–U.S. strikes on Iran have reshaped West Asia’s balance of power, but risk triggering long-term instability. Examine the implications of this “West Asia reset” for regional peace, Gulf politics, and India’s strategic interests.(250 Words)
New Regional Reality:
- Israel emerges as the sole nuclear power in West Asia, backed by 40,000 U.S. troops and air/sea assets, ensuring no military challenge to Israel.
- Gulf states initially feared Iran’s strategic depth and ideology, aligning with Israel-U.S. to counter it, compromising on issues like the Palestinian cause.
- With Iran weakened, Gulf states may now question an unchecked Israel but have limited leverage.
Iran’s Retaliation and Crisis:
- Iran retaliated by targeting U.S. bases in Qatar (10,000 troops, largest in region) and Iraq, escalating tensions and violating Qatar’s sovereignty.
- Iran’s leadership, facing an existential crisis, sees retaliation as essential for political survival against U.S.-Israel’s aim for regime change.
- Risk of further escalation (e.g., closing Strait of Hormuz, exiting NPT) unless diplomacy intervenes.
Ceasefire and Implications:
- U.S. announced a ceasefire, offering Iran a way to de-escalate after proving resilience, while Israel also faced significant hits (downplayed by Western media).
- Ceasefire is a wake-up call for Gulf states, signaling their vulnerability and the need to support a revived nuclear deal (JCPOA) to stabilize the region.
- Weakening Iran risks regional instability (like Iraq/Libya), potentially boosting terrorism (e.g., Islamic State, al-Qaeda).
Israel’s Ambitions:
- With Iran’s nuclear program crippled, Israeli PM Netanyahu’s political fortunes are revived, paving the way for his “Eretz Israel” vision (annexation of Gaza and West Bank).
- Netanyahu’s UN map (2025) excludes Palestinian territories; annexation likely before U.S. 2026 elections, supported by ultra-right coalition members.
- Post-annexation, Israel may remain an apartheid state, denying Palestinians equal rights, rather than becoming a democracy.
Gulf States’ Dilemma:
- Gulf countries, focused on Abraham Accords and U.S. ties, have softened on Palestine, accepting Gaza’s devastation (56,000 killed, mass displacement) for regional stability.
- Annexation or continued occupation may force Gulf states to rethink their strategy, as long-term peace is unlikely without addressing Palestinian rights.
India’s Position:
India maintained strategic neutrality, echoing its approach to other major global conflicts.
- While silent on Israel’s strikes, India balances ties with Israel (aiding Operation Sindoor) and Iran (via Chabahar Port).
- Its call for “de-escalation” mirrors diplomatic advice once directed at India during India-Pakistan tensions.
- With key stakes in energy, diaspora, and regional connectivity, India’s cautious diplomacy aims to limit fallout without compromising strategic interests.
Global Perspective:
- U.S. ceasefire call is a rare voice of reason, but globally, “de-escalation” overshadows concerns about international law or territorial integrity.
- West Asia’s reset risks new crises (e.g., Israeli annexation), with global powers prioritizing stability over justice.
Key Takeaway:
The Israel-U.S. strikes on Iran have reshaped West Asia, leaving Israel dominant but risking new conflicts, like Palestinian annexation. Gulf states and global actors must push for diplomacy (e.g., JCPOA revival) to prevent further destabilization, while India’s neutral “de-escalation” stance reflects its strategic balancing act.
Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed here are based on the original article published in THE HINDU and do not reflect the official stance of Legacy IAS Academy. This content is provided solely for Academic purposes.
The need for gender equity in urban bureaucracy
Context
- India’s urban population to exceed 800 million by 2050, shaping democracy and development.
- Political representation of women has improved post-73rd & 74th Amendments; 46% of local reps are women.
- Yet, urban bureaucracy remains male-dominated, limiting inclusive governance.
Relevance : GS 2(Governance, Social Justice)
Practice Question : Despite progress in political representation, gender disparity persists in urban administration. Discuss how gender-inclusive bureaucracies can improve urban governance in India.(250 Words)
Low Representation in Urban Administration
- Only 20% of IAS officers and 11.7% of police personnel are women.
- Women are underrepresented in planning, engineering, transport, and often restricted to desk roles.
- This limits responsiveness to women’s urban needs (mobility, safety, caregiving).
Gendered Urban Experience
- Women rely more on public/shared transport and make multi-stop journeys.
- Yet urban design prioritizes mega projects over safe, accessible local infrastructure.
- 60% of public spaces in 50 cities were poorly lit (Safetipin, 2019), endangering women.
Women in Bureaucracy: Better Outcomes
- Studies show women officials prioritize health, water, safety, and foster public trust.
- Gender-balanced bureaucracies ensure inclusive, empathetic decision-making.
Gender Budgeting: Missed Potential
- India introduced Gender Budgeting (GRB) in 2005–06, but impact remains limited.
- Good practices:
- Delhi: women-only buses, better lighting
- TN & Kerala: wider GRB adoption
- Challenges: weak monitoring, poor institutional capacity in ULGs.
Global Best Practices
- Philippines: 5% local budgets for gender programmes
- Uganda: gender equity certificates for fund release
- Mexico & South Africa: results-based, participatory GRB
- These show how fiscal tools can drive equity.
What Needs to Change
- Move beyond quotas — focus on bureaucratic inclusion via:
- Gender quotas in technical/admin roles
- Scholarships, mentorship in planning/engineering
- Gender audits and participatory budgeting
Models to Emulate
- Kudumbashree (Kerala) and local gender equity councils can guide small cities.
- Global evidence:
- Rwanda: maternal health
- Brazil: sanitation
- South Korea: gender-sensitive transit
- Tunisia: technical leadership
Conclusion: Cities With, Not Just For, Women
- Inclusive cities must mainstream gender in planning and delivery.
- Representation must translate into decision-making power.
- Cities that reflect women’s lived realities work better for all.
Disclaimer : The views and opinions expressed here are based on the original article published in THE HINDU and do not reflect the official stance of Legacy IAS Academy. This content is provided solely for Academic purposes.
