For UPSC CSE aspirants, analyzing editorials from The Indian Express is essential to build a comprehensive understanding of current affairs, policy debates, and socio-economic challenges. Here’s a structured breakdown of the editorial themes covered on January 30, 2025, tailored for UPSC preparation:
1. India and China need each other. But will the detente last?
India and China are engaging in renewed diplomatic interactions, moving towards a post-Galwan “normal” relationship. However, historical tensions, border disputes, and geopolitical competition remain unresolved. The present détente is driven by economic, military, and political factors, but its longevity remains uncertain.
Drivers of the India-China Détente
1. Economic Interdependence
- India’s economy is growing at 7% per annum, but it relies on Chinese imports for sectors like pharmaceuticals, electronics, and infrastructure.
- China’s economy is slowing to 5% per annum and faces Western protectionism, making India a crucial market for diversification.
- Mutual economic dependency incentivizes cooperation despite political frictions.
2. Military Stalemate
- Post-Galwan, both countries have heavily fortified the border, leading to prolonged troop deployments in extreme conditions.
- Neither side can achieve an outright victory, making continued conflict costly and unsustainable.
- China faces military challenges in East Asia (Taiwan, Senkaku, South China Sea), while India contends with Pakistan and potential two-front wars.
- Managing resources wisely necessitates diplomatic engagement to avoid unnecessary escalation.
3. Political and Strategic Calculations
- Both India and China seek to balance their relations with the US:
- India’s concerns: US stance on immigration, trade, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sikh separatist activities.
- China’s concerns: US weaponization of trade, technology sanctions, and human rights criticism (Tibet, Xinjiang).
- A tactical rapprochement allows India and China to enhance their bargaining power with Washington.
Challenges to Long-term Stability
1. Historical and Territorial Disputes
- Recurring border standoffs (Depsang 2013, Chumar 2014, Doklam 2017, Galwan 2020, Yangtse 2022) indicate deep-seated strategic mistrust.
- Land and water disputes are tied to sovereignty and national identity, making resolution difficult.
- Both nations have a historical sense of victimhood, complicating compromise.
2. Nationalism and Domestic Politics
- Both Modi and Xi face internal political pressures to project strength in foreign policy.
- Any perceived concession on border issues could be politically costly, limiting room for flexibility.
3. US-China-India Geopolitical Triangle
- If US-China tensions escalate, India may face renewed pressure to align with Washington, straining India-China engagement.
- The QUAD alliance (India, US, Japan, Australia) and China’s deepening ties with Pakistan could further strain relations.
Conclusion: Can the Détente Last?
- The current thaw in relations is structurally driven by economic needs, military realities, and geopolitical calculations.
- Short-term normalization is likely, but long-term peace remains uncertain due to unresolved territorial disputes, nationalism, and global strategic shifts.
- While Modi and Xi could negotiate a strategic bargain, neither seems in a hurry to do so.
- Cautious engagement with pragmatic diplomacy is the best way forward for both nations.
2. Critics don’t get it — free trade is good for India
India’s approach to free trade has been met with skepticism, with critics arguing that trade agreements expose the country to economic vulnerabilities. However, data suggests that India has successfully leveraged Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) to boost exports and strengthen manufacturing. The notion that India is merely a dumping ground for foreign goods is misleading, as it maintains a surplus in finished goods trade with several FTA partners, including ASEAN nations.
The Role of Free Trade in India’s Economic Strategy
1. Free Trade and Global Value Chains (GVCs)
- Integration into GVCs is crucial for economic expansion, as seen in the growth trajectories of China and Southeast Asia.
- India’s high tariff structure hinders participation in GVCs, affecting both exports and foreign direct investment (FDI).
- The frequent changes in customs duties create uncertainty, discouraging long-term investment in manufacturing.
2. India’s Experience with FTAs
- Contrary to the protectionist argument, India has a surplus in finished goods trade with many FTA partners.
- Example: India’s exports to ASEAN grew from $5 billion in 2003 to over $40 billion in 2022-23, with finished goods exports increasing tenfold.
- The perception that FTAs lead to one-sided benefits is not backed by data.
3. India’s Trade Policy and the Union Budget
- While the Union Budget is not primarily a trade policy document, it often reflects India’s approach to trade.
- High tariffs and policy instability hurt export competitiveness, as seen in the mobile phone industry, where fluctuating duties disrupted supply chains.
- A structured and predictable trade policy is essential to achieve India’s ambitious $2 trillion export target by 2030.
India and Mega Trade Agreements: RCEP vs. CPTPP
1. RCEP: A Risky Proposition?
- RCEP, dominated by China, could widen India’s trade deficit due to increased imports.
- While it could facilitate trade in intermediate goods, the potential gains are outweighed by the risks of excessive dependence on Chinese imports.
2. CPTPP: A Strategic Opportunity
- CPTPP excludes China, offering India a better negotiating environment.
- Potential benefits include increased exports to Mexico, Canada, and Australia.
- The agreement’s focus on quality standards and intellectual property aligns with India’s long-term economic goals.
Conclusion: Reassessing India’s Trade Strategy
- Trade protectionism is not the answer to India’s economic ambitions.
- FTAs have positively contributed to India’s export growth, particularly in finished goods.
- India should consider CPTPP as a viable trade bloc while remaining cautious about RCEP.
- Trade openness, combined with structural domestic reforms, will unlock India’s true economic potential.
3. For Nirmala Sitharaman, a wishlist from the armed forces
India’s defence budget has been witnessing a steady decline as a percentage of GDP and government expenditure, raising concerns about military modernisation. The imbalance between capital expenditure and personnel costs further limits the armed forces’ ability to acquire advanced weaponry. Addressing these challenges is crucial for strengthening national security and achieving self-reliance in defence manufacturing.
Key Takeaways:
1. Declining Defence Budget Allocation
- Defence spending has steadily decreased as a percentage of central government expenditure from 13.81% in 2020-21 to below 13% in 2024-25.
- As a percentage of GDP, it has declined from 2.4% (2020-21) to 1.9% (2024-25), falling below NATO’s recommended 2% benchmark.
- IMF and World Bank consider up to 3% of GDP for defence spending as acceptable.
2. Capital Expenditure (Capex) and Modernisation Challenges
- Capex for the armed forces has increased by ₹40,000 crore in the last four years, reaching ₹1,72,000 crore in 2024-25, but remains inadequate for India’s ambitious Atmanirbharta (self-reliance) programme.
- Distribution of capital budget among services:
- Indian Army (84% of personnel) gets 22-28% of capex, limiting funds for essential weaponry (artillery, helicopters, protective gear).
- Indian Navy (5.5% of personnel) receives 31-36% but lacks warships and submarines to safeguard India’s 7,500 km coastline and EEZ.
- Indian Air Force (10.5% of personnel) gets the largest share (38-45%) due to expensive aircraft procurement (e.g., 36 Rafale jets for $8.7 billion).
3. Personnel vs. Capital Expenditure Imbalance
- 57% of defence budget is spent on salaries, pensions, and civil organisations under MoD.
- Only 27.7% allocated for modernisation, whereas global standards suggest 50-60% for capital outlay.
- High costs of domestic production (e.g., Sukhoi-30MKI made in India is ₹100 crore costlier than imported version).
4. Issues in Budget Accounting and Transparency
- Confusing classification of expenditures:
- Border Roads Development Board (BRDB) and Jammu & Kashmir Light Infantry (JAK LI) are listed under MoD (Civil) instead of Army.
- Coast Guard budget is not placed under the Navy.
- Lack of separate accounting heads for Army, Navy, and Air Force in capital budget makes tracking allocations difficult.
5. Need for Strategic Defence Spending
- India lags in high-tech R&D funding for the military.
- Modern militaries prioritize capital investments for a technological edge over adversaries.
- Despite a ₹11,11,111 crore capital expenditure commitment in last year’s budget, defence gets limited share due to competing priorities.
4. Manoj Jha writes: UGC is diminishing universities
Introduction:
The UGC Draft Regulations 2025 have raised concerns over the autonomy of universities, faculty appointment criteria, and ideological influence in higher education. Critics argue that the proposed changes could dilute academic freedom, disrupt career progressions, and undermine federalism in university governance.
Key Points:
- Autonomy & Federalism Concerns:
- The new regulations limit state powers in university governance and reduce institutional autonomy.
- The appointment process for Vice-Chancellors (VCs) is perceived as an attempt to centralize control.
- Faculty Appointment & Promotion Issues:
- Clause 4.1 (iii) restricts direct promotions from assistant professor to professor, imposing a mandatory three-year associate professorship requirement.
- Promotion to Level 15 is restricted to only 10% of Level 14 professors, creating an artificial hierarchy.
- Clause 5.6 removes backdating of promotions, allowing delays without accountability, potentially harming faculty careers.
- Inconsistencies in Research & Publication Standards:
- The 2025 regulations reinstate books and chapters as eligibility criteria for promotions, contradicting the 2018 rules that emphasized journal publications.
- The disbanding of the CARE list of journals reflects inconsistent policies on scholarly publishing.
- Impact on Higher Education & Campus Culture:
- Frequent regulatory changes create uncertainty, discouraging long-term investment in research and teaching.
- HEIs are increasingly witnessing political and ideological interference in faculty recruitment and administration.
- Challenges to Representation & Affirmative Action:
- Under-representation of SC, ST, and OBC candidates due to vague rejections marked as “Not Found Suitable” (NFS).
- Growing concerns over ideological appointments in higher education institutions, limiting diversity and academic independence.
- National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 & Regulatory Confusion:
- NEP 2020 proposed replacing UGC with a Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), but legislative delays have left the UGC continuing to issue reforms.
- Clause 1.3 cites a retrospective pay revision from January 1, 2016, reflecting outdated policy decisions and lack of coherence.
- Call for Constitutional Scrutiny:
- Critics argue that the UGC’s new regulations must be evaluated on constitutional parameters, ensuring that they uphold academic freedom, fairness, and federal principles.
Conclusion:
The UGC Draft Regulations 2025 raise fundamental questions about university governance, faculty recruitment, and academic autonomy. A transparent, inclusive, and fair regulatory framework is essential to safeguard higher education from excessive centralization and ideological influence.
5. How UK and India can collaborate for a Viksit Bharat
The India-UK partnership holds immense potential in shaping India’s vision for Viksit Bharat 2047. Both nations can leverage their strengths in technology, finance, green energy, defence, and education to drive economic growth and innovation. Strengthening bilateral ties will create a mutually beneficial ecosystem for businesses, universities, and governments.
Key Points:
1. Technology & Innovation Collaboration:
- UK and India are global technology hubs; UKIBC welcomed the UK-India Technology Security Initiative to enhance cooperation in emerging technologies.
- Indian Global Capability Centres (GCCs) support UK industries in AI, fintech, and connected technologies.
- Increased collaboration in AI, virtual reality (VR), and telemedicine can transform education and healthcare.
2. Financial Services & Economic Ties:
- British banks are among the top investors in India, driving fintech innovations.
- Sharing regulatory best practices can enhance SME lending and financial inclusion in India.
- A G2G-backed investment fund can support India-UK start-up collaborations.
3. Green Energy & Climate Action:
- UK’s leadership in green technology can aid India’s energy transition.
- Collaboration in renewable energy, EV infrastructure, and climate modelling tools can address global challenges.
- The Sunrise Project, involving top universities from both nations, showcases the potential of joint research in sustainability.
4. Advanced Manufacturing & Defence:
- UK firms can invest in India’s defence sector by easing FDI norms and refining procurement policies.
- UKIBC’s aerospace and defence group (representing 22 UK firms with $60 billion in revenue) seeks deeper ties with India.
- India’s cost-effective manufacturing can integrate into UK supply chains, benefiting both economies.
5. Education & Skill Development:
- Encouraging British students to study in India for affordable AI and tech courses.
- Facilitating industry-academia linkages between IITs, IISc, Oxford, Cambridge, and Imperial College London.
- Strengthening vocational training to enhance workforce readiness in future technologies.
Conclusion:
India and the UK have a strong economic and strategic partnership that can be expanded through technology, trade, defence, and education. A long-term, visionary approach is needed to harness this relationship for Viksit Bharat 2047, ensuring inclusive growth and sustainable development.
6. For India, why the AI arms race is far from over
The global AI arms race is far from over, and India has the potential to emerge as a key player. The recent success of China’s DeepSeek, which developed a competitive AI model with fewer resources, challenges the notion that only the US can dominate AI innovation. For India, this serves as both a lesson and an opportunity to establish itself as a global AI powerhouse.
Key Points:
1. India’s Current Position in AI:
- India is third in the global AI race, behind the US and China.
- While India has strong IT talent and institutions (IITs, IISc), its AI sector lacks large-scale R&D investments.
- Indian AI research is still dependent on foreign funding and infrastructure (GPUs, cloud computing).
2. Lessons from China’s DeepSeek Breakthrough:
- AI development is not just about money or high-end GPUs—innovative architectural approaches can reduce costs.
- DeepSeek’s success came from investing in R&D, hiring young talent, and focusing on open-source AI models.
- China’s strategy proves that AI leadership can be achieved without blindly following US models.
3. Challenges India Faces in AI Development:
- Brain Drain: India’s top AI talent often moves abroad, benefiting the US rather than India.
- Lack of AI Infrastructure: No large-scale AI research hubs, supercomputing clusters, or indigenous GPU manufacturing.
- Insufficient Government and Private Sector Collaboration to fund foundational AI research.
4. What India Needs to Do:
- Invest in AI Research Labs: Create state-funded AI research centers across India.
- Retain Talent: Offer competitive salaries, funding, and grants to retain AI researchers.
- Develop Indigenous AI Models: Move away from dependency on Google/OpenAI and build India-first AI systems.
- Encourage AI Startups: Provide funding for deep-tech and AI startups, similar to China’s approach.
- Focus on Open-Source AI: Democratize AI access by developing open-source AI frameworks to drive innovation.
5. The Future of AI and India’s Role:
- The AI landscape is still evolving, and India can still compete if it acts quickly.
- Developing AI-driven applications for healthcare, governance, and fintech can position India as a leader in applied AI.
- If India scales AI infrastructure and fosters developer interest, it can become a major player in the AI arms race.
Conclusion:
India cannot afford to be a follower in AI. The country has the talent and potential, but it must invest in AI research, create a self-sufficient ecosystem, and take bold steps to compete with global AI leaders. The AI race is not over yet—India’s decisions today will determine its place in the future of AI.
Disclaimer:
This analysis is based on the editorial content published in Indian Express and is intended solely for informational and educational purposes. The views, opinions, and interpretations expressed herein are those of the author of original article. Readers are encouraged to refer to the original article for complete context and to exercise their own judgment while interpreting the analysis. The analysis does not constitute professional advice or endorsement of any political, economic, or social perspective.
Follow Fusion IAS