TOP

UPSC SYLLABUS 2022-2023 [IAS Exam] Pre and Mains- TOPPERHD

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Tue, 1 Nov 2022 03:52:00 -0700

Pre Paper : GS Paper 1 [200 mark] and CSAT Paper

GS Pre Paper Questions : 100 [Paper 1] and CSAT Questions : 80 [Paper 2]

UPSC SYLLABUS :history, polity, Economy, Geography,Science and Technology, Currant Affiars, Art and Culture.

IAS syllabus is divided as per the choice process and tiers - prelims and mains. The UPSC Prelims examination is the first stage of the examination and is qualifying in nature. Candidates who clear the prelims examination appear for the UPSC Mains exam, which is descriptive in nature.

The candidates can down load the UPSC Syllabus for GS and optional topics separately. After the mains exam, chosen candidates show up for the interview stage. To make certain that you are entirely prepared, you have to go thru the entire UPSC syllabus and start your preparation. It is essential to notice that UPSC releases the IAS syllabus for mains one at a time for all the papers.

CLICK HERE DOWNLOAD.. UPSC website Syllabus

CLICK HERE DOWNLOAD... GS Score Syllabus

BIMSTEC needs to reinvent itself

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:39:00 -0700

BIMSTEC needs to reinvent itself

Context:

The foreign ministers of BIMSTEC (the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) met virtually on April 1.

That they made time to hold their 17th meeting is good news.

Their major task was to pave the way for the next summit, the grouping’s fifth, due to be held in Sri Lanka in the “next few months”.

While most multilateral groupings from G20 to ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) held their deliberations at the highest political level in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, BIMSTEC leaders failed to do so.

In contrast to a meeting of even SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) leaders held at India’s initiative a year ago, BIMSTEC could not arrange its ministerial meeting until April 2021.

This is due as much to contextual factors as the diplomatic environment prevailing today.

Background for BIMSTEC: Unfolding rejuvenation:

Established as a grouping of four nations: India, Thailand, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka through the Bangkok Declaration of 1997 to promote rapid economic development, BIMSTEC was expanded later to include three more countries: Myanmar, Nepal and Bhutan.

It moved at a leisurely pace during its first 20 years with only three summits held and a record of modest achievements.

But it suddenly received special attention as New Delhi chose to treat it as a more practical instrument for regional cooperation over a faltering SAARC.

The BIMSTEC Leaders’ Retreat, followed by their Outreach Summit with the BRICS leaders in Goa in October 2016, drew considerable international limelight to the low-profile regional grouping. This also opened up the path for its rejuvenation.

Objectives of BIMSTEC formation:

The Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) is a regional organization.

It comprises seven countries. Five of these seven countries- India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Bangladesh- are from South Asia while the remaining two, Thailand and Myanmar, are from Southeast Asia.

Creating an enabling environment for the rapid economic development of the sub-region.
Encouraging the spirit of equality and partnership.
Promoting active collaboration and mutual assistance in the areas of common interests of the member countries.
Accelerating support for each other in the fields of education, science, and technology, etc.

Institutional reform and renewal through the BIMSTEC:

The fourth leaders’ summit, held in Kathmandu in August 2018, devised an ambitious plan for institutional reform and renewal that would encompass economic and security cooperation.

It took the important decision to craft a charter to provide BIMSTEC with a more formal and stronger foundation.

The shared goal now is to head towards “a Peaceful, Prosperous and Sustainable Bay of Bengal Region”.

At the second swearing-in of the Modi government in May 2019, the leaders of BIMSTEC, not SAARC, were invited as honoured guests.

Soon thereafter, External Affairs Minister observed that India saw a mix of “energy, mindset and possibility” in BIMSTEC.

Recent decisions of BIMSTEC charter and signing of three agreements:

Two and a half years after the Kathmandu Summit, the grouping stands ready to move forward.
The foreign ministers cleared the draft for the BIMSTEC charter, recommending its early adoption.
They endorsed the rationalisation of sectors and sub-sectors of activity, with each member-state serving as a lead for the assigned areas of special interest.
The ministers also conveyed their support for the Master Plan for Transport Connectivity, which will be adopted at the next summit.
Preparations have been completed for the signing of three agreements relating to mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, cooperation between diplomatic academies, and the establishment of a technology transfer facility in Colombo.
What has been missing from recent deliberations is a reference to the lack of progress on the trade and economic dossier.
On this score, BIMSTEC remains a work in progress. Over 20 rounds of negotiations to operationalise the BIMSTEC Free Trade Area Framework Agreement, signed in 2004, are yet to bear fruit.
In contrast, much has been achieved in Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief and security, including counterterrorism, cyber security, and coastal security cooperation.
India has led through constant focus and follow-up to the extent that some member-states have complained about the ‘over-securitisation’ of BIMSTEC.
The trick to ensure balance is not to go slow on security but to accelerate the pace of forging solid arrangements for economic cooperation.
Similarly, while national business chambers are yet to be optimally engaged with the BIMSTEC project, the academic and strategic community has shown ample enthusiasm through the BIMSTEC Network of Policy Think Tanks and other fora.

How to overcome the present obstacles in BIMSTEC:

The goal now should be to overcome the obstacles leading to BIMSTEC’s success.

First, a strong BIMSTEC presupposes cordial and tension-free bilateral relations among all its member-states. This has not been the case, given the trajectory of India-Nepal, India-Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh-Myanmar ties in recent years.
Second, uncertainties over SAARC hovers, complicating matters. Both Kathmandu and Colombo want the SAARC summit revived, even as they cooperate within BIMSTEC, with diluted zeal.
Third, China’s decisive intrusion in the South-Southeast Asian space has cast dark shadows.
A renowned Bangladeshi scholar argued at a recent conference that BIMSTEC would make progress if China is accepted as its principal interlocutor and partner.
This perspective has hardly any takers in India and its friendly partners in the grouping.
Finally, the military coup in Myanmar, brutal crackdown of protesters and continuation of popular resistance resulting in a protracted impasse have produced a new set of challenges.

Conclusion:

A January 2018 study by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry had suggested that BIMSTEC urgently needed a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement to be a real game changer.

Ideally it should cover trade in goods, services and investment; promote regulatory harmonisation; adopt policies that develop regional value chains; and eliminate non-tariff barriers.

Also lacking was an effort to enthuse and engage the vibrant business communities of these seven countries, and expand their dialogue, interactions and transactions.

As BIMSTEC readies itself to celebrate the silver jubilee of its formation next year, it faces a serious challenge: to effect “a paradigm-shift in raising the level of our cooperation and regional integration”, as Mr. Jaishankar said on April 1.

The grouping needs to reinvent itself, possibly even rename itself as ‘The Bay of Bengal Community’. It should consider holding regular annual summits.

Only then will its leaders convince the region about their strong commitment to the new vision they have for this unique platform linking South Asia and Southeast Asia.

Sputnik V recommended for emergency use

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:05:00 -0700

Sputnik V recommended for emergency use

Part of: GS Prelims and GS – II – Health

In news

Russia’s COVID-19 vaccine — Sputnik V — has been recommended for emergency use authorisation in India following a meeting of the Subject Expert Committee (SEC).

Key takeaways

If approved by the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI), Sputnik V would be the third vaccine to be made available in India after the Serum Institute of India’s Covishield and Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin.
Sputnik V is developed by Russia’s Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology
It claims to be one of the three vaccines in the world with efficacy of over 90%.
The vaccine supplies for the global market will be produced by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) international partners in India, Brazil, China, South Korea and other countries

Deconstructing declarations of carbon-neutrality

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:29:00 -0700

Deconstructing declarations of carbon-neutrality

Introduction:

At the latest count by the non-profit Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), at the beginning of April, 32 countries had declared, in some documented form, their proposed intention to achieve carbon neutral status by mid-century or thereabouts.

Of these, only eight have any firm status, the rest being in the form of proposed legislation or mentions in policy documents.

Since some months ago, the UN Secretary General has taken the lead in sparking off an international chorus, led by global civil society organisations based in the developed countries and encouraged by their governments, that is urging all countries, especially India, to make explicit declarations.

Context:

virtual Climate Leaders’ Summit convened by US President Joe Biden on April 22-23 where Prime Minister Narendra Modi is one of the invitees.

In its bid to reclaim the global climate leadership, the US is widely expected to commit itself to a net-zero emission target for 2050 at the summit. Several other countries, including the UK and France, have already enacted laws promising to achieve a net-zero emission scenario by the middle of the century. China has promised to go net-zero by 2060.

Net zero: why is it necessary?

A number of countries, including the UK, have made commitments to move to a net zero emissions economy.
This is in response to climate science showing that in order to halt climate change, carbon emissions have to stop reducing them is not sufficient.
‘Net zero’ means that any emissions are balanced by absorbing an equivalent amount from the atmosphere.
Net-zero is a state in which a country’s emissions are compensated by absorption and removal of greenhouse gases from the atmospher
Absorption of the emissions can be increased by creating more carbon sinks such as forests, while removal of gases from the atmosphere requires futuristic technologies such as carbon capture and storage.
It is being argued that global carbon neutrality by 2050 is the only way to achieve the Paris Agreement target of keeping the planet’s temperature from rising beyond 2°C compared to pre-industrial times.
In order to meet the 5°C global warming target in the Paris Agreement, global carbon emissions should reach net zero around mid-century.
For developed nations such as the UK, the date may need to be earlier. Many have already set such dates.

Temperature goals according to Paris Agreement:

The impetus for such declarations arises from Article 4.1 of the Paris Agreement that states that

“In order to achieve the long-term temperature goal set out in Article 2, Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty”.

The temperature goal referred to is the much better known declaration of intent of the Paris Agreement, of limiting temperature rise to well below 2°C and further pursuing efforts to restrict it to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

Current pledges in Paris Agreement fall short:

The hard scientific reality is that such a three-way compatibility between temperature goals, carbon neutrality, and equity is not only not guaranteed, but cannot be achieved for the 1.5°C temperature goal at all. And even for the 2°C goal, the current pledges are highly inadequate.
This harsh conclusion follows from straightforward scientific considerations, based on the global carbon budget, which indicates the limits on global cumulative emissions, from the pre-industrial era to the time when net emissions cease, that correspond to definite levels of global temperature
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5° warming, what remains of this global carbon budget from 2018 onwards, for a 50% probability of restricting temperature rise to less than 1.5°C, is 480 Giga-tonnes (billion tonnes) of carbon dioxide equivalent.

Emissions in the West:

The hollowness of nation-level carbon neutrality declarations by developed countries is brought out more starkly when we consider the details, as in the case of the United States and the European Union.
Emissions in the U.S. peaked in 2005 and have declined at an average rate of 1.1% from then till 2017, with a maximum annual reduction of 6.3% in 2009, at the height of a recession.
Even if it did reach net-zero by 2050 at a steady linear rate of reduction, which is unprecedented, its cumulative emissions between 2018 and 2050 would be 106 GtCO2, which is 22% of the total remaining carbon budget for the whole world so high, that unless others reduced emissions at even faster rates, the world would most certainly cross 1.5°C warming.
Regrettably, a section of the climate policy modelling literature has promoted the illusion that this three-way compatibility is feasible through speculative “negative emissions”, ostensibly through dramatic expansion of carbon capture, primarily by the biosphere.
They have also been promoting the other illusion that not resorting to any serious emissions increase at all is the means to guarantee the successful development of the Third World.

According to the author, India has no carbon debt:

India clearly should not join this game of carbon neutrality declarations, for a number of reasons.

For one, India has to stay focused on development both as its immediate need as well as its aspirational goal.

While sustainability is desirable, the question of how low India’s future low-carbon development can be is highly uncertain.
India’s current low carbon footprint is a consequence of the utter poverty and deprivation of a majority of its population, and not by virtue of sustainability.

Second, India does not owe a carbon debt to the world.

India’s emissions (non-LULUCF) are no more than 3.5% of global cumulative emissions prior to 1990 and about 5% since till 2018.
Nor are India’s current annual emissions such as to seriously dent the emissions gap between what the world needs and the current level of mitigation effort, even as India’s mitigation efforts are quite compatible with a 2°C target.
Any self-sacrificial declaration of carbon neutrality today in the current international scenario would be a wasted gesture reducing the burden of the developed world and transferring it to the backs of the Indian people.

India’s twin burden of low-carbon development and adaptation to climate impacts, is onerous and no doubt requires serious, concerted action.

India’s approach to eventual net-zero emissions is contingent on deep first world emissions reductions and an adequate and unambiguous global carbon budget.

Meanwhile, India must reject any attempt to restrict its options and be led into a low-development trap, based on pseudo-scientific narratives.

Conclusion:

It is evident that the balance of emissions and removal of greenhouse gases is not sought on a country-wise basis but for the world as a whole.

Though both developed country governments and civil society outfits commonly state this as an individual commitment by all countries, the text of the Paris Agreement clearly indicates, based on considerations of equity and differentiation, that this is a global goal.

SC’s views on religious conversions

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 21:53:00 -0700

SC’s views on religious conversions

Part of: GS Prelims and GS – II – Fundamental Rights

In news

The SC said that people are free to choose their religion and it lashed out at a petition claiming there is mass religious conversion happening “by hook or by crook” across the country.

Key takeaways

It said that people have a right under the Constitution to profess, practise and propagate religion.
Article 25: It grants Fundamental right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality and health.
Every person is the final judge of his/her choice of religion or who their life partner should be.
Courts cannot sit in judgment of a person’s choice of religion or life partner.
Religious faith is a part of the fundamental right to privacy.
The Constitution Bench judgment had earlier upheld inviolability of the right to privacy, equating it with the rights to life, of dignity and liberty.

Dolphin boom in Odisha’s Chilika lake

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 21:33:00 -0700

Dolphin boom in Odisha’s Chilika lake:

Context:
Odisha has released the final data on the dolphin census.
Key findings:
The population of dolphins in Chilika, India’s largest brackish water lake, and along the Odisha coast has doubled this year compared with last year.
Three species were recorded during the census, with 544 Irrawaddy, bottle-nose and humpback dolphins sighted this year, compared with 233 last year.
The rise in the Irrawaddy dolphin population in Chilika can be attributed to the eviction of illegal fish enclosures.
About Irrawaddy dolphins:
Found in coastal areas in South and Southeast Asia, and in three rivers: the Irrawaddy (Myanmar), the Mahakam (Indonesian Borneo) and the Mekong (China).
They are ‘Endangered’ as per the IUCN Red List.
About Indo- Pacific Bottlenose dolphins:
Lives in the waters around India, northern Australia, South China, the Red Sea, and the eastern coast of Africa.
IUCN status: Near Threatened (Source: Wiki).
About Indian Ocean Humpback dolphins:
The Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin occurs within the Indian Ocean from South Africa to India.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) categorizes the Indian Ocean Humpback Dolphin as Endangered (Source: Wiki).
In India, Dolphins are endangered cetacean species, protected under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
Indian Humpback Dolphin is listed in Appendix I of The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Sat, 10 Apr 2021 00:47:00 -0700

What is NATO?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, the Atlantic Alliance or the Western Alliance, is an international organisation for collective security established in 1949, in support of the North Atlantic Treaty signed in Washington, DC, on 4 April 1949. Its headquarters are located in Brussels, Belgium. Its other official name is the French equivalent, l’Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord (OTAN) (English and French being the two official languages of the organisation).

Background

The Treaty of Brussels, signed on 17 March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, and the United Kingdom, is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. This treaty established a military alliance, later to become the Western European Union. However, American participation was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the Soviet Union, and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately. These talks resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed in Washington, DC on 4 April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states, United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. Three years later, on 18 February 1952, Greece and Turkey also joined. Because of geography, Australia and New Zealand missed out on membership. In place of this, the ANZUS agreement was made by the United States with these nations. The incorporation of West Germany into the organisation on 9 May 1955 was described as “a decisive turning point in the history of our continent” by Halvard Lange, Foreign Minister of Norway at the time. [5] Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the Warsaw Pact, signed on 14 May 1955 by the Soviet Union and its satellite states as a formal response to this event, firmly establishing the two opposing sides of the Cold War.

Détente

During most of the duration of the Cold War, NATO maintained a holding pattern with no actual military engagement as an organisation. On 1 July 1968, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opened for signature: NATO argued that its nuclear weapons sharing arrangements did not breach the treaty as US forces controlled the weapons until a decision was made to go to war, at which point the treaty would no longer be controlling. Few states knew of the NATO nuclear sharing arrangements at that time, and they were not challenged. On 30 May 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defences at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact’s offensive capabilities without spurring a further arms race. However, on 12 December 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of US Cruise and Pershing II theatre nuclear weapons in Europe. The new warheads were also meant to strengthen the western negotiating position in regard to nuclear disarmament. This policy was called the Dual Track policy. Similarly, in 1983–84, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact SS-20 medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deployed modern Pershing II missiles able to reach Moscow within minutes. This action led to peace movement protests throughout Western Europe. The membership of the organisation in this time period likewise remained largely static, with NATO only gaining one new member in 30 May 1982, when newly democratic Spain joined the alliance, following a referendum. Greece also in 1974 withdrew its forces from NATO’s military command structure, as a result of Greco-Turkish tensions following the 1974 Cyprus dispute; Greek forces were however readmitted in 1980. In November 1983, a NATO manoeuvre code-named Able Archer 83, which simulated a NATO nuclear release, caused panic in the Kremlin. Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary Yuri Andropov became concerned that US President Ronald Reagan may have been intending to launch a genuine first strike. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in Eastern Germany and Poland were placed on alert. Though at the time written off by US intelligence as a propaganda effort, many historians now believe Soviet fear of a NATO first strike was genuine.

Post-Cold War

The end of the Cold War, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, removed the de facto main adversary of NATO. This caused a strategic reevaluation of NATO’s purpose, nature and tasks. In practice, this ended up entailing a gradual (and still ongoing) expansion of NATO to Eastern Europe, as well as the extension of its activities to areas not formerly concerning it. The first post-Cold War expansion of NATO came with the reunification of Germany on 3 October 1990, when former East Germany became part of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance. This had been agreed in the Two Plus Four Treaty earlier in the year. To secure Soviet approval of a united Germany remaining in NATO, it was agreed that foreign troops and nuclear weapons would not be stationed in the east, and also that NATO would never expand further east. On 28 February 1994, NATO also took its first military action, shooting down four Bosnian Serb aircraft violating a UN no-fly zone over central Bosnia and Herzegovina. NATO airstrikes the following year helped bring the war in Bosnia to an end, resulting in the Dayton Agreement. Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbours were set up, like the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. On 8 July 1997, three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO, which finally happened in 1999. On 24 March 1999, NATO saw its first broad-scale military engagement in the Kosovo War, where it waged an 11-week bombing campaign against what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The conflict ended on 11 June 1999, when Yugoslavian leader Slobodan Milošević agreed to NATO’s demands by accepting UN resolution 1244. NATO then helped establish the KFOR, a NATO-led force under a United Nations mandate that operates the military mission in Kosovo. Debate concerning NATO’s role and the concerns of the wider international community continued throughout its expanded military activities: The United States opposed efforts to require the UN Security Council to approve NATO military strikes, such as the ongoing action against Yugoslavia, while France and other NATO countries claimed the alliance needed UN approval. American officials said that this would undermine the authority of the alliance, and they noted that Russia and China would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on Yugoslavia. In April 1999, at the Washington summit, a German proposal that NATO adopt a no-first-use nuclear strategy was rejected.

After the September 11th attacks

The expansion of the activities and geographical reach of NATO grew even further as an outcome of the September 11th attacks. These caused as a response the provisional invocation (on September 12) of the collective security of NATO’s charter — Article 5 which states that any attack on a member state will be considered an attack against the entire group of members. The invocation was confirmed on 4 October 2001 when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty. The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included the first two examples of military action taken in response to an invocation of Article 5: Operation Eagle Assist and Operation Active Endeavour. Despite this early show of solidarity, NATO faced a crisis little more than a year later, when on 10 February 2003, France and Belgium vetoed the procedure of silent approval concerning the timing of protective measures for Turkey in case of a possible war with Iraq. Germany did not use its right to break the procedure but said it supported the veto. On the issue of Afghanistan on the other hand, the alliance showed greater unity: On 16 April 2003 NATO agreed to take command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The decision came at the request of Germany and the Netherlands, the two nations leading ISAF at the time of the agreement, and all 19 NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously. The handover of control to NATO took place on 11 August, and marked the first time in NATO’s history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. Canada had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date.

Political Structure

Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its 26 member states. However, the North Atlantic Treaty, and other agreements, outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the 26 members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior civil servant or an experienced ambassador (and holding that diplomatic rank). Together the Permanent Members form the North Atlantic Council (NAC), a body which meets together at least once a week and has effective political authority and powers of decision in NATO. From time to time the Council also meets at higher levels involving Foreign Ministers, Defence Ministers or Heads of Government and it is at these meetings that major decisions regarding NATO’s policies are generally taken. However, it is worth noting that the Council has the same authority and powers of decision-making, and its decisions have the same status and validity, at whatever level it meets. The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the Secretary-General of NATO and, when decisions have to be made, the action is agreed upon on the basis of unanimity and common accord. There is no voting or decision by majority. Each nation represented at the Council table or on any of its subordinate committees retains complete sovereignty and responsibility for its own decisions. The second pivotal member of each country’s delegation is the Military Representative, a senior officer from each country’s armed forces. Together the Military Representatives from the Military Committee, a body responsible for recommending to NATO’s political authorities those measures considered necessary for the common defence of the NATO area. Its principal role is to provide direction and advice on military policy and strategy. It provides guidance on military matters to the NATO Strategic Commanders, whose representatives attend its meetings, and is responsible for the overall conduct of the military affairs of the Alliance under the authority of the Council. Like the council, from time to time the Military Committee also meets at a higher level, namely at the level of Chiefs of defence, the most senior military officer in each nation’s armed forces. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as 13 associate members.

Military structure

NATO’s military operations are directed by two Strategic Commanders, both senior U.S. officers assisted by a staff drawn from across NATO. The Strategic Commanders are responsible to the Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command. Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate command responsibility between Allied Command Transformation (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and Allied Command Operations, responsible for NATO operations worldwide. The commander of Allied Command Operations retained the title “Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)”, and is based in the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) located at Casteau, north of the Belgian city of Mons. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels.

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 9 Apr 2021 21:16:00 -0700

Muon g–2: New physics governing the laws of nature

Part of: GS Prelims and GS – III – Sci & tech

In news

Newly published results of an international experiment hint at the possibility of new physics governing the laws of nature.
The experiment, called Muon g–2 (g minus two), was conducted at the US Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab).

Key takeaways

The experiment studied a subatomic particle called the muon.
Its results do not match the predictions of the Standard Model, on which all particle physics is based.
The results instead reconfirm a discrepancy that had been detected in an experiment 20 years ago.
Concluded in 2001, the Brookhaven experiment came up with results that did not identically match predictions by the Standard Model.
The Muon g–2 experiment measured this quantity with greater accuracy.

What is the Standard Model?

The Standard Model is a rigorous theory that predicts the behaviour of the building blocks of the universe.
It lays out the rules for six types of quarks, six leptons, the Higgs boson, three fundamental forces, and how the subatomic particles behave under the influence of electromagnetic forces.
The muon is one of the leptons.
It is similar to the electron, but 200 times larger, and much more unstable, surviving for a fraction of a second.

What quantity was measured?

g–factor was measured.
It is a measure that derives from the magnetic properties of the muon.
The rate at which the muon wobbles is described by the g-factor.
This value is known to be close to 2, so scientists measure the deviation from 2. Hence the name g–2.
The new experimental results (combined from the Brookhaven and Fermilab results) announced are:
g-factor: 00233184122

anomalous magnetic moment: 00116592061

: New physics governing the laws of nature

Part of: GS Prelims and GS – III – Sci & tech

In news

Newly published results of an international experiment hint at the possibility of new physics governing the laws of nature.
The experiment, called Muon g–2 (g minus two), was conducted at the US Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab).

Key takeaways

The experiment studied a subatomic particle called the muon.
Its results do not match the predictions of the Standard Model, on which all particle physics is based.
The results instead reconfirm a discrepancy that had been detected in an experiment 20 years ago.
Concluded in 2001, the Brookhaven experiment came up with results that did not identically match predictions by the Standard Model.
The Muon g–2 experiment measured this quantity with greater accuracy.

What is the Standard Model?

The Standard Model is a rigorous theory that predicts the behaviour of the building blocks of the universe.
It lays out the rules for six types of quarks, six leptons, the Higgs boson, three fundamental forces, and how the subatomic particles behave under the influence of electromagnetic forces.
The muon is one of the leptons.
It is similar to the electron, but 200 times larger, and much more unstable, surviving for a fraction of a second.

What quantity was measured?

g–factor was measured.
It is a measure that derives from the magnetic properties of the muon.
The rate at which the muon wobbles is described by the g-factor.
This value is known to be close to 2, so scientists measure the deviation from 2. Hence the name g–2.
The new experimental results (combined from the Brookhaven and Fermilab results) announced are:
g-factor: 00233184122

anomalous magnetic moment: 00116592061

Facts for Prelims:

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 9 Apr 2021 21:03:00 -0700

Facts for Prelims:

U.K. to set up fund for migrants from Hong Kong:

The British government is setting up a £43 million ($59 million) fund to help migrants from Hong Kong settle in the country as they escape increasing political repression in the former colony.
The offer extends to holders of British National (Overseas) passports who have been offered special visas, opening a path to work, residency and eventual citizenship to up to 5 million of Hong Kong’s 7.4 million people.

Gyanvapi Mosque:

A local court in Varanasi has directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque, adjacent to the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, to find out whether it was a “superimposition, alteration or addition or if there is structural overlapping of any kind, with any other religious structure”.

What’s the issue?

The order came on a petition demanding restoration of the land on which the Gyanvapi Mosque stands to the Hindus, claiming that Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb had pulled down parts of the old Kashi Vishwanath Temple to build the mosque.

Articles to be covered tomorrow:

1. SC turns down release of Rohingya in Jammu.

Join our Official Telegram Channel HERE for Motivation and Fast Updates

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Motivational and New analysis videos

Civil defence volunteers:

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 9 Apr 2021 20:58:00 -0700

Civil defence volunteers:

Context:

The Delhi Police recently issued a statement, pointing out that civil defence personnel, also known as Delhi Civil Defence (DCD) volunteers, have no power to stop people using police barricades and prosecute them for violation of Covid-19 appropriate behaviour such as not wearing masks.

What’s the issue?

From being lauded for their work during the pandemic to facing allegations of high-handedness, the role of the civil defence volunteers in the national capital has come under intense scrutiny in the recent past.
One such incident recently turned into a full blown fist-fight between a group of civil defence personnel and general public near IIT-Delhi.

So, who are these civil defence volunteers?

In Delhi, these are men and women who work under the command of the district magistrates.

The overall command lies with the divisional commissioner, to which the DMs report.

These volunteers are governed by the Civil Defence Act, 1968.

What is civil defence?

According to the Civil Defence Act, 1968, civil defence is defined as any measure “not amounting to actual combat, that protects persons, property and places in India from hostile attack”.
The 2010 amendment expanded the definition by including disaster management as one of the responsibilities.

Basic role of the volunteers:

To assist the local administration. During the pandemic, the volunteers assumed the role of frontline workers by way of participating in screening hotspots and distributing food for the needy. In the recent months, DCD volunteers have also been deployed to ensure social distancing in markets and other crowded places and also at vaccination sites.

Incentives for solar energy sector:

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 9 Apr 2021 20:48:00 -0700

Incentives for solar energy sector:

Context:

The Union Cabinet has approved two production-linked incentive schemes for:

White goods (air-conditioners and LED lights).
High-efficiency solar photovoltaic modules.

About the PLI scheme:

The prime objective of the PLI scheme is to make manufacturing in India globally competitive by removing sectoral disabilities, creating economies of scale and ensuring efficiencies.
It is designed to create complete component ecosystem in India and make India an integral part of the global supply chains.
The scheme would extend an incentive of 4% to 6% on incremental sales of goods made in India for five years.

Benefits:

Additional 10,000 MW capacity of integrated solar PV manufacturing plants.
Direct investment of around Rs.17,200 crore in solar PV manufacturing projects.
Demand of Rs.17,500 crore over 5 years for ‘Balance of Materials’.
Direct employment of about 30,000 and Indirect employment of about 1,20,000 persons.
Import substitution of around Rs.17,500 crore every year.
Impetus to Research & Development to achieve higher efficiency in solar PV modules

RBI extends fresh support of ₹50,000 cr. to NABARD:

amitheroaction@gmail.com (help) — Fri, 9 Apr 2021 20:37:00 -0700

RBI extends fresh support of ₹50,000 cr. to NABARD:

Context:

To help mitigate the impact of the pandemic and aid economic revival, the RBI said it would extend fresh support of ₹50,000 crore to the All India Financial Institutions for new lending in FY22.

Details:

Accordingly, NABARD will be provided a special liquidity facility (SLF) of ₹25,000 crore for one year to support agriculture and allied activities, the rural non-farm sector and non-banking financial companies-micro finance institutions.
An SLF of ₹10,000 crore will be extended to the National Housing Bank for one year to support the housing sector.
SIDBI will be provided ₹15,000 crore under this facility for up to one year for funding of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs).

About NABARD:

It is an apex development and specialized bank established on 12 July 1982 by an act by the parliament of India.
Its main focus is to uplift rural India by increasing the credit flow for elevation of agriculture & rural non farm sector.
It was established based on the recommendations of the Committee set up by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under the chairmanship of Shri B. shivaraman.
It replaced the Agricultural Credit Department (ACD) and Rural Planning and Credit Cell (RPCC) of Reserve Bank of India, and Agricultural Refinance and Development Corporation (ARDC).
It has been accredited with “matters concerning policy, planning and operations in the field of credit for agriculture and other economic activities in rural areas in India”.

Important functions:

It provides refinance support for building rural infrastructure.
It prepares district level credit plans to guiding and motivating the banking industry in achieving these targets.
It supervises Cooperative Banks and Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) and helping them develop sound banking practices and integrate them to the CBS (Core Banking Solution) platform.
It provides training to handicraft artisans and helps them in developing a marketing platform for selling these articles