UPSC Insights SECURE SYNOPSIS : 7 October 2025

NOTE: Please remember that following ‘answers’ are NOT ‘model answers’. They are NOT synopsis too if we go by definition of the term. What we are providing is content that both meets demand of the question and at the same

General Studies – 1

Topic: World History

Q1. Examine the unintended consequences of the Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of Sèvres on the post-World War I global order. (10 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: InsightsIAS

Why the question:
How post–World War I peace settlements—particularly the Treaty of Versailles (1919) and the Treaty of Sèvres (1920)—reshaped the global order but also triggered unintended economic, political, and geopolitical consequences that sowed the seeds for later conflicts like World War II and Middle East instability.

Key Demand of the question:
You need to examine how both treaties, though meant to ensure peace and reorganization, led to unforeseen disruptions such as economic collapse, rise of nationalism, colonial redrawing of borders, and long-term instability in Europe and the Middle East.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction:
Briefly highlight the intent of both treaties and how their punitive or arbitrary nature shaped the post-war order.

Body:

• Unintended outcomes of the Treaty of Versailles: Mention economic devastation, political extremism in Germany, rise of Nazism, failure of League of Nations, and shift in global power.
• Unintended outcomes of the Treaty of Sèvres: Highlight Turkish nationalist revival, artificial Middle Eastern borders, Kurdish/Armenian question, and anti-Western sentiments.

Conclusion:
Conclude by underlining how the short-sighted punitive peace led to long-term instability and lessons for equitable international diplomacy.

Introduction

The Treaty of Versailles (1919) and the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) aimed to reshape the post-World War I global order by punishing the Central Powers and redrawing boundaries. However, these treaties had several unintended consequences, destabilizing regions and sowing the seeds for future conflicts.

Body

Unintended consequences of the Treaty of Versailles

1. Economic Instability in Germany: The harsh reparations imposed on Germany crippled its economy, leading to hyperinflation and widespread poverty, setting the stage for political extremism.

E.g. Hyperinflation in 1923, where the German Mark collapsed, led to the rise of the Nazi Party.

1. Rise of Nationalism: The punitive nature of the Treaty fostered deep resentment in Germany, contributing to the rise of Adolf Hitler and the outbreak of World War II.

E.g. Hitler’s rhetoric heavily relied on the “unfairness” of Versailles to mobilize the German people.

1. Weak League of Nations: The Treaty established the League of Nations but failed to ensure participation of key powers like the U.S., making it ineffective in preventing future conflicts.

E.g. The League failed to stop Japanese aggression in Manchuria (1931) and Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia (1935).

1. Political Fragmentation in Central Europe: The redrawing of borders created fragile, ethnically diverse states, leading to instability and conflicts in regions like Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.

E.g. Ethnic tensions contributed to the disintegration of Yugoslavia after WWII.

1. Shift in Global Power: The Treaty weakened European powers and inadvertently shifted global influence toward the U.S. and Japan, contributing to a new geopolitical order.

E.g. The U.S. emerged as a global economic leader, while Japan began asserting itself in East Asia.

 Unintended consequences of the Treaty of Sèvres 

1. Turkish Nationalist Rebellion: The Treaty dismembered the Ottoman Empire, but its harsh terms led to the rise of Turkish nationalism under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who rejected the treaty.

E.g. The Treaty of Lausanne (1923) replaced Sèvres, establishing the modern Republic of Turkey.

1. Middle Eastern Instability: The arbitrary division of Ottoman territories in the Middle East sowed the seeds of long-term instability by creating artificial borders and tensions between ethnic and religious groups.

E.g. The Sykes-Picot Agreement divided the region, contributing to modern conflicts in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

1. Kurdish and Armenian Issues: The Treaty promised independent states for Kurds and Armenians but failed to deliver, leading to unresolved ethnic tensions that persist today.

E.g. The Kurdish issue remains a point of contention in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria.

1. Rise of Anti-Western Sentiment: The imposition of mandates in the Middle East fostered distrust of Western powers, fueling nationalist and anti-imperialist movements in the region.

E.g. Anti-Western sentiments contributed to the rise of movements like Arab nationalism and later, Islamic fundamentalism.

1. Geopolitical Competition: The division of Ottoman lands heightened geopolitical competition between European powers, especially over control of oil-rich regions.

E.g. British and French mandates over Iraq and Syria created friction that influenced later Cold War alignments.

Conclusion

The Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of Sèvres, while intended to secure peace, inadvertently destabilized regions and set the stage for future conflicts. The key lesson is the importance of fair, inclusive, and balanced diplomacy in crafting treaties to ensure lasting global stability.

Topic: World History

Q2.“The resistance to colonialism in Asia was not uniform but varied in its approaches, intensity, and outcomes”. Discuss with examples. (15 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: InsightsIAS

Why the question:
The diverse nature of anti-colonial struggles across Asia — how differing political, social, and colonial contexts shaped the approaches, intensity, and outcomes of these movements. It expects comparative and illustrative analysis using regional examples.

Key Demand of the question:
To discuss how resistance movements in Asia differed in their methods (armed, non-violent, diplomatic), levels of intensity (localized to nationwide struggles), and final outcomes (success, suppression, or partial gains), supported by specific case studies.

Structure of the Answer:
Introduction:

Briefly introduce the idea that colonial resistance in Asia was a multifaceted phenomenon shaped by diverse socio-political contexts and colonial strategies.

Body:

• Approaches: Mention how resistance ranged from armed uprisings and guerrilla wars to non-violent and diplomatic means (e.g., Philippines, Vietnam, India, Sri Lanka).
• Intensity: Explain variations in scale and duration—high-intensity prolonged wars vs. moderate or symbolic protests (e.g., Vietnam vs. Korea).
• Outcomes: Highlight differential results—complete independence, negotiated settlements, or partial failures (e.g., India, Indonesia, Malaya).

Conclusion:

Conclude that the diversity of colonial experiences in Asia produced equally diverse trajectories of resistance, yet all contributed to the broader dismantling of imperialism and rise of nationalism.

Introduction
Resistance to colonialism across Asia displayed significant diversity in approaches, ranging from armed revolts to non-violent movements. The intensity of these struggles also varied, influenced by local conditions and colonial repression, ultimately leading to different outcomes in the quest for independence.

Body

Varied approaches to resistance

1. Armed Revolts: Armed struggles were the most direct form of resistance against colonial powers, often employed where colonial rule was deeply exploitative and oppressive.

E.g.: The Philippine Revolution (1896-1898), led by Emilio Aguinaldo, fought against Spanish rule, securing a brief period of independence before U.S. occupation.

1. Guerrilla Warfare: When direct confrontation was not feasible, many resistance movements adopted guerrilla tactics to undermine colonial powers.

E.g.: The Malayan Communist Party used guerrilla warfare during the Malayan Emergency (1948-1960) against British forces, though ultimately suppressed.

1. Non-violent Civil Disobedience: Non-violent resistance was a hallmark of movements that sought to morally challenge colonial authority.

E.g.: Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha in India, through actions like the Salt March (1930), effectively mobilized masses and pressured the British without violent conflict.

1. Diplomatic Negotiations: In some regions, colonial powers faced little violent resistance, and independence was achieved through political negotiation.

E.g.: Sri Lanka (Ceylon) gained peaceful independence from Britain in 1948 through negotiations, led by D.S. Senanayake.

1. Hybrid Strategies (Armed and Diplomatic): Some regions employed both armed resistance and diplomatic means to gain independence.

E.g.: Indonesia’s Sukarno led both armed resistance against Dutch forces and negotiated at international forums, culminating in independence in 1949.

Varied intensity of Resistance

1. High-Intensity Struggles: In regions where colonial repression was severe or where nationalism was strongly entrenched, resistance took on high intensity with prolonged and violent conflicts.

E.g.: The First Indochina War (1946-1954), led by Ho Chi Minh, saw Vietnam’s fierce struggle against French rule, ending with the defeat of France at Dien Bien Phu.

1. Moderate-Intensity Uprisings: Some resistance efforts were less intense, combining limited armed resistance with political and social movements.

E.g.: The Malayan Emergency saw guerrilla warfare but with limited civilian engagement compared to Vietnam, eventually subdued through British military efforts.

1. Non-violent Resistance: Movements like Gandhi’s in India were low in violent intensity but high in mass mobilization and political pressure.

E.g.: The Quit India Movement (1942) involved widespread civil disobedience without significant armed conflict, but it exerted strong pressure on British authorities.

1. Localized Resistance: In regions with fragmented colonial rule or divided local populations, the intensity of resistance was often localized and less widespread.

E.g.: Burmese Nationalism, led by Aung San, combined localized armed resistance and negotiations, leading to moderate intensity before achieving independence in 1948.

1. Symbolic Resistance: In some cases, resistance movements focused on symbolic acts to demonstrate opposition to colonial rule, without major military confrontations.

E.g.: The March 1st Movement (1919) in Korea was a non-violent but powerful demonstration against Japanese occupation, inspiring future nationalist movements.

Varied outcomes of resistance

1. Considerable Success (India): India’s non-violent civil disobedience, led by Mahatma Gandhi, resulted in the successful withdrawal of British colonial forces and partition in 1947.

E.g.: The Indian Independence Act (1947) marked the end of British rule in India and the creation of Pakistan.

1. Prolonged Struggle (Vietnam): Vietnam’s armed resistance against France resulted in independence in 1954, but the division of the country led to continued conflict in the Vietnam War.

E.g.: Vietnam was reunified under communist control in 1975 after U.S. withdrawal.

1. Diplomatic Success (Sri Lanka): Sri Lanka (Ceylon) gained peaceful independence through political negotiations with Britain in 1948, without major violence or conflict.

E.g.: Ceylon’s transition to independence was relatively smooth compared to other Asian colonies.

1. Partial Success (Malaya): Malaya’s communist insurgency was suppressed, but the country achieved independence through diplomatic negotiations in 1957.

E.g.: The British granted independence to Malaya while dealing with communist threats.

1. Failed Early Revolts (India, 1857): The Indian Rebellion of 1857 was violently crushed, leading to direct British rule but also setting the stage for later organized movements like the Indian National Congress.

E.g.: The Government of India Act (1858) transferred control from the East India Company to the British Crown.

Conclusion
The resistance to colonialism in Asia was multifaceted, with varying approaches ranging from armed conflict to peaceful negotiations, and with intensity shaped by local conditions. These movements had diverse outcomes, from swift independence to prolonged struggles, reflecting the complexity of anti-colonial resistance in Asia.

General Studies – 2

Topic: Mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections

Q3. “The architecture of criminal justice in India remains colonial in design but democratic in aspiration”. Explain the tension between punitive control and rights-based reform. Analyse how this tension shapes policy implementation. Suggest governance reforms to reconcile the two. (15 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: Mint

Why the question:
The ongoing tension between India’s colonial-era criminal justice institutions and current reforms like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2024) and Rights-based Prison Act (2023).

Key Demand of the question:
You must explain the contradiction between punitive colonial structures and democratic reform efforts, analyse how this tension affects implementation of criminal justice policies, and suggest governance reforms for harmonising control with citizens’ rights.

Structure of the Answer:
Introduction:

Briefly mention how India’s criminal justice system reflects colonial origins but aspires to constitutional justice.
Body:

• Explain the tension between colonial control mechanisms and democratic ideals of rights and fairness.
• Analyse how this contradiction affects institutional performance—police, judiciary, and prisons—creating policy distortions.
• Suggest governance reforms such as police modernisation, criminal law alignment, undertrial management, and data accountability.

Conclusion:

Conclude with the need for a shift from coercive governance to constitutional justice rooted in human dignity.

Introduction:
India’s criminal justice system is a paradox—rooted in colonial structures of control yet guided by the constitutional ideals of justice, liberty, and dignity (Article 21). While the police and prison framework still echo Macaulay’s and the 1861 Police Act’s punitive ethos, recent reforms such as the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2024) and Rights-based Prison Act (2023) reflect a democratic aspiration for humane justice.

Body

Colonial design versus democratic aspiration – the underlying tension

1. Colonial legacy of coercive institutions: The system was designed to preserve imperial order, not public justice, prioritising control over citizens.
   Eg: The Police Act, 1861, drafted after the 1857 Revolt, centralised police power to suppress dissent, a structure still largely unchanged.
2. Democratic reorientation through Constitution: The Constitution transformed the purpose of justice — from authority-centric to rights-centric — ensuring due process (Article 21) and equality before law (Article 14).
   Eg: In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court expanded Article 21 to include fairness and reasonableness in all state actions.
3. Persisting structural dissonance: Despite democratic ideals, policing and prisons operate under outdated laws and hierarchical command models that limit citizen accountability.
   Eg: The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2007) noted that the police still serve the government, not the public, recommending separation of investigation from law and order.

How this tension shapes policy implementation

1. Conflict between punitive enforcement and rights-based governance: Laws emphasise deterrence and control, often undermining rehabilitation and social justice objectives.
   Eg: NCRB 2023 data shows 75% of prisoners are undertrials, reflecting weak enforcement of speedy trial provisions (Article 39A).
2. Judicial and procedural overload: The colonial design’s rigidity has led to over-criminalisation and pendency, undermining efficiency and fairness.
   Eg: Over 5 crore pending cases (NJDG, 2024); the Malimath Committee (2003) warned that procedural rigidity prevents justice delivery.
3. Inconsistent policy outcomes due to institutional inertia: Rights-based initiatives like Model Prison Manual (2016) and Undertrial Review Committees face poor execution at the state level.
   Eg: NCRB’s 2023 Prison Statistics showed occupancy at 121%, with undertrial release committees functioning only in a few states.
4. Federal and coordination challenges: Crime and law & order are state subjects, but data and digital integration need national coherence.
   Eg: National Automated Fingerprint Identification System (2020) and Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System face uneven adoption among states (NCRB Report 2023).
5. Technology outpacing regulation: Democratic oversight lags behind in new domains like cybercrime, creating governance vacuums.
   Eg: Cybercrime rose 31.2% in 2023 (NCRB); the absence of a comprehensive Data Protection regime limits rights protection in digital investigation.

Governance reforms to reconcile punitive control with rights-based reform

1. Comprehensive police reform: Replace the 1861 Police Act with a citizen-centric framework ensuring autonomy, accountability, and service orientation.
   Eg: Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) mandated Police Complaints Authorities and tenure security for DGPs—yet implementation remains incomplete.
2. Criminal law modernisation: Ensure harmonisation between Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2024), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (2024), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (2024) to reflect restorative justice and procedural efficiency.
   Eg: These laws aim to digitise FIRs, mandate forensic investigation in heinous crimes, and speed up trial procedures.
3. Prison and undertrial reforms: Operationalise the 2023 Rights-based Prison Act and ensure functional undertrial committees across all districts.
   Eg: As per NCRB 2023, 3 out of 4 inmates are undertrials—indicating urgent need for review mechanisms and legal aid (Article 39A).
4. Data-driven governance with accountability: Strengthen NCRB’s data credibility by linking it with judiciary and prosecution records while ensuring privacy safeguards.
   Eg: The Justice Srikrishna Committee (2018) on Data Protection proposed clear accountability for state-held data systems.
5. Capacity-building and human rights sensitisation: Institutionalise continuous training for police and correctional staff on rights jurisprudence.
   Eg: Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D) modules on human rights are being expanded to all state academies since 2022.

Conclusion:

India’s criminal justice reform must shift from control to confidence—anchoring enforcement in constitutional morality rather than colonial rigidity. A calibrated blend of legal modernisation, data accountability, and institutional autonomy is the only path to reconcile punitive efficiency with democratic justice.

Topic: Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health.

Q4. Analyse how the growing burden of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) is reshaping India’s public health priorities. Examine the policy and institutional measures required to strengthen prevention and control. (10 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: TH

Why the question:
The rising share of Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) in India’s disease burden and the ongoing shift in public health governance from curative to preventive care, highlighted by recent ICMR–INDIAB findings.

Key Demand of the question:
To analyse how the growing burden of NCDs is transforming India’s health priorities and to examine the institutional and policy measures required for their effective prevention and control.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction:

Briefly introduce the epidemiological shift in India’s health profile and its implications for governance.
Body:

• Explain how rising NCDs are reshaping public health priorities—focus on preventive care, economic burden, and integration with national programmes.
• Suggest institutional and policy measures—strengthening primary healthcare, inter-ministerial coordination, fiscal interventions, and digital health systems.

Conclusion:

Conclude with the need for a preventive, data-driven, and multi-sectoral health governance model to tackle NCDs sustainably.

Introduction

India’s health landscape has undergone a profound epidemiological shift, with Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular ailments now accounting for 68% of total deaths (ICMR–INDIAB, 2025). This transition from infectious to chronic diseases demands a systemic reorientation of public health policy towards prevention, early detection, and lifestyle regulation.

Body

How NCDs are reshaping India’s public health priorities

1. Shift from communicable to lifestyle-based health strategy: Health planning is moving from epidemic control to long-term disease management.
   Eg: The National Programme for Prevention and Control of Cancer, Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases and Stroke (NPCDCS, 2010) expanded primary screening under Ayushman Bharat Health and Wellness Centres for community-level detection.
2. Integration of preventive healthcare in governance: Focus on behaviour modification, early diagnosis, and nutrition-sensitive interventions has become central to public policy.
   Eg: The National Health Policy (2017) emphasises preventive and promotive healthcare, setting a target to reduce premature NCD mortality by 25% by 2025.
3. Emergence of fiscal and economic imperatives: Rising NCD costs threaten productivity and GDP growth, forcing policy realignment towards prevention.
   Eg: The World Bank (2024) estimated that NCD-related productivity loss could reach 2.5% of India’s GDP by 2060, prompting integration of wellness into labour and education policy.
4. Urban health and food system reforms: The rise in obesity and dietary imbalances has spurred regulation of processed foods and unhealthy marketing.
   Eg: The FSSAI “Eat Right India” campaign (2018) promotes front-of-pack labelling, reduction of trans fats, and public awareness drives on dietary diversity.

Policy and institutional measures to strengthen prevention and control

1. Multi-sectoral institutional coordination: Strengthen convergence between MoHFW, Ministry of Agriculture, and Education for integrated nutrition and lifestyle interventions.
   Eg: The National Multi-sectoral Action Plan for NCDs (2017) mandates cross-ministerial coordination but requires operational decentralisation at district levels.
2. Strengthening primary healthcare infrastructure: Expand screening, counselling, and telemedicine for NCD management through Health and Wellness Centres (HWCs).
   Eg: As of 2025, over 1.5 lakh HWCs provide NCD services, covering 650 million citizens .
3. Fiscal policy for health behaviour regulation: Introduce sin taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages, tobacco, and processed foods to promote dietary change.
   Eg: The GST Council (2023) retained a 28% tax on tobacco and sugary drinks, aligning with WHO’s fiscal health recommendations.
4. Leveraging digital health and data integration: Use AI-based analytics and the Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission (2021) for NCD registry, predictive modelling, and tele-consultation.
   Eg: The National NCD Monitoring Framework (2024) integrates population-level screening data for real-time decision support.
5. Community participation and behaviour change: Incorporate health education through school curriculum and Self-Help Groups (SHGs) to modify risk behaviour.
   Eg: The Poshan Bhi Padhai Bhi initiative (2024) integrates nutritional literacy among children to tackle lifestyle disorders from early stages.

Conclusion

India’s battle against NCDs represents not just a medical but a governance transformation. A preventive, data-driven, and multi-sectoral approach, backed by fiscal discipline and citizen awareness, is vital for building a resilient public health ecosystem that safeguards both productivity and longevity.

General Studies – 3

Topic: Indian Economy and issues relating to planning, mobilization of resources, growth, development and employment.

Q5. Discuss how the expanding welfare architecture of Indian states has affected fiscal sustainability. Evaluate the trade-offs between welfare spending and capital formation. Propose institutional mechanisms for fiscal prudence without compromising inclusivity. (15 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: IE

Why the question:
To assess the fiscal challenges emerging from India’s expanding welfare model and evaluate how states can maintain social inclusivity while ensuring long-term fiscal discipline and sustainable capital formation.

Key Demand of the question:
The question requires analysing the impact of widening welfare commitments on states’ fiscal sustainability, discussing the trade-offs between welfare spending and capital investment, and suggesting institutional reforms that balance inclusivity with prudence.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction:

Define India’s welfare-oriented fiscal framework and link it to constitutional directives promoting social justice and equity.

Body:

• Explain how expanding welfare schemes have affected fiscal sustainability and debt levels of states.
• Analyse the trade-offs between welfare expenditure and capital formation in terms of growth, productivity, and inter-generational equity.
• Suggest institutional and policy mechanisms—like fiscal councils, FRBM reforms, outcome-based budgeting—to ensure prudence without diluting inclusivity.

Conclusion:

Emphasise the need for a calibrated fiscal architecture that transforms welfare from entitlement-based spending to empowerment-led development.

Introduction:

India’s welfare model has expanded rapidly, reflecting constitutional commitments to social justice and inclusive growth. However, this growth of entitlement-based welfare has stretched state finances, raising concerns over debt sustainability and crowding out of productive investment.

Body

Impact of expanding welfare architecture on fiscal sustainability

1. Rising committed expenditure: Growing subsidies, pensions, and salaries constrain fiscal flexibility and reduce developmental spending.
   Eg: CAG’s State Finances Report (2023) shows committed expenditure now forms over 55% of total revenue in states like Punjab and Kerala.
2. Dependence on borrowing and transfers: States resort to loans and off-budget guarantees to sustain welfare outlays, leading to mounting liabilities.
   Eg: RBI State Finances Study (2024) notes debt-to-GSDP exceeding 40% in 8 states, including Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.
3. Populist fiscal drift: Electoral competition drives expansion of short-term welfare schemes, often without sustainable revenue backing.
   Eg: Farm loan waivers in Andhra Pradesh and UP added nearly 0.3% of GDP to aggregate fiscal deficits (Source: FRBM Review Committee, 2017).
4. Erosion of fiscal space: Higher revenue expenditure limits states’ ability to respond to shocks or undertake counter-cyclical spending.
   Eg: During COVID-19, most states had to breach FRBM limits to fund emergency transfers.
5. Distortion in resource allocation: Overemphasis on consumption subsidies reduces fiscal capacity for infrastructure and skill development.
   Eg: NIP Progress Report (2023) flagged state underinvestment in infrastructure, especially in education and urban transport.

Trade-offs between welfare spending and capital formation

1. Short-term relief vs. long-term productivity: Welfare boosts immediate consumption, but unchecked expansion can depress capital expenditure critical for growth.
   Eg: Economic Survey 2023–24 found average state capex fell from 2.8% to 2.2% of GSDP over five years due to revenue pressures.
2. Equity vs. efficiency dilemma: Excessive subsidies may enhance equity but weaken productive efficiency if not targeted or phased.
   Eg: Power subsidy reforms in Punjab show the fiscal and efficiency costs of universal free power schemes.
3. Borrowing for revenue expenditure: Financing welfare through debt raises inter-generational inequity and reduces creditworthiness.
   Eg: RBI’s 2024 Bulletin warns that off-budget borrowings create hidden liabilities amounting to 1.5% of GSDP.
4. Crowding out of developmental capital: States prioritising welfare cut back on infrastructure and innovation spending.
   Eg: Tamil Nadu’s welfare-driven budget (2023–24) allocated less than 10% to infrastructure, below the national average.
5. Fiscal illusion through one-off revenues: States often rely on lotteries or land monetisation, which are unsustainable sources.
   Eg: Kerala’s lottery receipts crossed ₹12,000 crore in 2023, masking fiscal weakness (Source: CAG Report 2023).

Institutional mechanisms for fiscal prudence without compromising inclusivity

1. Outcome-based budgeting: Linking welfare schemes to measurable outcomes can improve efficiency and accountability.
   Eg: NITI Aayog’s SDG India Index (2023) encourages states to align schemes with outcome metrics.
2. Strengthening fiscal responsibility laws: Updating FRBM Acts to include escape clauses and real-time debt tracking enhances discipline.
   Eg: 15th Finance Commission (2021–26) recommended integrated Debt and Fiscal Responsibility Council for both Union and states.
3. Rationalisation of subsidies: Periodic review of non-merit subsidies to redirect funds toward targeted welfare.
   Eg: Expenditure Reforms Commission (2001) suggested prioritising health, education, and infrastructure subsidies.
4. Creation of State Fiscal Councils: Independent bodies to evaluate off-budget liabilities and assess fiscal risks objectively.
   Eg: RBI (2022) recommended state-level fiscal councils on the lines of the UK’s Office for Budget Responsibility.
5. Leveraging technology for direct benefit delivery: DBT reduces leakages, improving inclusivity at lower fiscal cost.
   Eg: Aadhaar-linked PM-KISAN payments saved over ₹13,000 crore in duplicate beneficiaries (Source: MoAFW, 2023).

Conclusion:

Sustaining welfare and fiscal health requires a shift from entitlement-based to empowerment-based models. Embedding fiscal prudence in institutional design — through transparency, targeting, and outcome monitoring — can ensure inclusive yet sustainable development, fulfilling both Article 38 and Article 41 of the Constitution.

Topic: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment

Q6. “Carbon Capture and Storage has turned into a fossil-fuel subsidy rather than a mitigation tool”. Discuss this assertion. Suggest measures to realign CCS with genuine decarbonisation goals. (10 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: DTE

Why the question:

Amid debates on the misuse of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in Asia as a tool for sustaining fossil fuel dependence rather than genuine emission reduction, as highlighted by the Climate Analytics 2025 report.

Key Demand of the question:
To examine how CCS has deviated from its original purpose of climate mitigation and become a fossil-fuel subsidy, and to suggest concrete policy and technological measures to realign it with authentic decarbonisation objectives.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction:

Briefly explain CCS and how its promise of emission reduction is increasingly questioned due to misuse by fossil industries.
Body:

• Discuss why CCS has become a fossil-fuel subsidy — highlight issues like enhanced oil recovery, low capture efficiency, and policy distortion.
• Suggest measures to realign CCS — targeted deployment, transparent regulation, subsidy redirection, and stronger carbon accounting.

Conclusion:

Conclude with the need for CCS as a niche, last-resort tool within a renewable-led transition framework.

Introduction

Despite being projected as a climate innovation, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) has often served to extend the fossil fuel economy under a “green” label, diverting public finance from renewables. Its limited efficiency and political misuse risk undermining the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target and global climate credibility.

Body

CCS as a fossil-fuel subsidy rather than a mitigation tool

1. Fossil fuel lock-in through enhanced oil recovery: Many CCS projects are designed to extract more oil and gas instead of cutting emissions.
   Eg: As per Climate Analytics Report 2025, over 80% of Asia’s CCS projects are linked to enhanced oil recovery (EOR) rather than genuine sequestration.
2. Low capture efficiency and high leakage risk: Most operational CCS plants capture only 40–60% of emissions, and leakage undermines storage reliability.
   Eg: The Global CCS Institute (2024) noted that CCS facilities collectively capture less than 0.1% of annual global CO₂ emissions despite decades of investment.
3. Public financing and subsidy distortion: Governments are funding CCS through tax rebates, diverting climate finance away from renewables.
   Eg: The US Inflation Reduction Act (2022) provides $85 per tonne of CO₂ captured, mostly benefiting oil companies using captured gas for EOR.
4. Greenwashing through policy and diplomacy: CCS is used in climate diplomacy to mask fossil expansion as “clean energy.”
   Eg: Japan’s Asia CCUS Network (2023) promotes CCS alongside LNG investments across Indonesia and Malaysia, creating dependency instead of transition (Source: IEA, 2024).
5. Neglect of upstream emissions: CCS ignores methane leaks and lifecycle emissions from fossil extraction and transport, giving a false net-zero narrative.
   Eg: IEA Global Hydrogen Review 2024 found that hydrogen from natural gas with CCS still emits 55–70% of original CO₂ when upstream leaks are included.

Measures to realign CCS with genuine decarbonisation goals

1. Restrict CCS use to hard-to-abate sectors: Deploy CCS only in cement, steel, and fertilisers, where direct electrification is not yet viable.
   Eg: The IEA Net Zero Roadmap 2023 advises limiting CCS to <10% of total emission reductions globally.
2. Integrate CCS under transparent carbon accounting: Make MRV (Monitoring, Reporting, Verification) mandatory to prevent double-counting and greenwashing.
   Eg: The UNFCCC Article 6 mechanisms can guide verified CCS accounting within national inventories.
3. Redirect subsidies toward renewables and green hydrogen: Rationalise public funds by prioritising battery storage and solar manufacturing over CCS-linked oil projects.
   Eg: India’s National Green Hydrogen Mission (2023) allocates ₹19,744 crore for clean hydrogen production with no CCS dependence.
4. Develop regional regulatory frameworks for geological storage: Mandate liability, long-term monitoring, and leakage penalties for CCS operators.
   Eg: Australia’s Offshore Petroleum Amendment Act (2022) created a carbon storage licence regime to ensure accountability and prevent misuse.
5. Encourage carbon removal over carbon reuse: Promote Direct Air Capture (DAC) and bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) for genuine atmospheric reduction.
   Eg: European Union Innovation Fund (2024) prioritises DAC facilities with verified negative emissions.

Conclusion

CCS can complement, not substitute, deep decarbonisation. Unless repurposed from fossil aid to climate integrity, it risks becoming the 21st century’s costliest green illusion. The future lies in renewable-led, low-CCS pathways anchored in transparency and verifiable emission cuts.

General Studies – 4

Q7. “True leadership begins where power ends”. Examine this statement in the context of ethical leadership in public life. Assess why humility and restraint are central to enduring authority. (10 M)

Difficulty Level: Medium

Reference: NIE

Why the question:
To assess the ethical dimensions of leadership beyond formal authority, highlighting how humility and restraint sustain moral legitimacy and institutional trust in public life.

Key Demand of the question:
The question requires an explanation of the meaning of the statement “True leadership begins where power ends,” followed by an ethical analysis of why humility and restraint are essential traits for enduring and value-based leadership in governance.

Structure of the Answer:

Introduction:

Define true leadership in moral terms, contrasting it with positional power; link it with democratic and Gandhian ethics.

Body:

• Explain the essence of the statement — leadership grounded in service and moral influence, not control.
• Discuss humility as a key ethical trait ensuring empathy, accountability, and institutional respect.
• Discuss restraint as the discipline that upholds constitutional morality and prevents abuse of authority.

Conclusion:

Emphasize that humility and restraint transform authority into legitimacy, ensuring leadership that outlasts office and upholds ethical governance.

Introduction:

Leadership that endures is not defined by control but by moral influence and service. In democratic ethics, power earns legitimacy only when exercised with humility, restraint, and commitment to the common good — echoing the Gandhian idea that authority flows from character, not position.

Body

Meaning of “True leadership begins where power ends”

1. Moral rather than positional authority: Ethical leadership relies on values and trust rather than formal authority or coercion.
   Eg: Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam’s presidency symbolised influence through humility and inspiration rather than constitutional power.
2. Service-oriented vision: When personal ambition subsides, service to others becomes the guiding force — aligning with the Constitutional ideal of public welfare (Article 38).
   Eg: Gandhi’s principle of servant leadership — “The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others.”
3. Detachment from power: True leaders remain anchored in purpose even without office — reflecting the ethical principle of Nishkama Karma (Gita, Ch. 2, Verse 47).
   Eg: Nelson Mandela’s voluntary exit from power demonstrated strength through restraint.

Importance of humility in ethical leadership

1. Prevents arrogance of office: Humility ensures that authority remains accountable and human-centred.
   Eg: Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC 2008) emphasised “servant leadership” as key to responsive administration.
2. Facilitates moral learning and empathy: Humility allows leaders to listen, introspect, and correct ethical errors — fostering emotional intelligence (Daniel Goleman, 1995).
   Eg: Lal Bahadur Shastri’s simple living and moral modesty enhanced people’s faith in government.
3. Builds collective ownership: Humble leaders empower others, strengthening institutional rather than personal power.
   Eg: Satya Nadella’s transformation of Microsoft through humility and empathy shows ethical leadership in practice.

Importance of restraint in enduring authority

1. Constitutional discipline: Ethical restraint aligns with the principle of Rule of Law (Article 14) — preventing misuse of discretion.
   Eg: Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) underscored restraint as essential to constitutional morality.
2. Balances conviction with compassion: Restraint ensures firmness without coercion — reflecting ethical prudence (Aristotelian mean) between excess and deficiency.
   Eg: Sardar Patel’s integration policy (1947–50) combined firmness with emotional restraint, avoiding bloodshed.
3. Ensures institutional continuity: Restraint prevents power concentration and safeguards democratic norms.
   Eg: Civil services conduct rules (1964) stress impartiality and restraint in expression, upholding neutrality.

Conclusion:

Humility and restraint convert power into moral legitimacy — transforming leadership from authority-driven to value-driven. In an era of populism, ethical self-discipline remains the truest measure of leadership, ensuring institutions outlive individuals and principles prevail over personalities.

Join our Official Telegram Channel HERE

Please subscribe to Our podcast channel HERE

Subscribe to our YouTube ChannelHERE

Follow our Twitter Account HERE

Follow our Instagram ID HERE

Follow us on LinkedIn : HERE