0:06 Hello and welcome to ANA Academy IAS English a one-stop destination for the English medium civil services aspirants. A very good morning and welcome to the most comprehensive Hindu analysis on YouTube. So let's start our discussion by first looking at the topics that we are going to discuss today. Today's newspaper has plenty of articles related to the dastardly terror attack that took place in Pahelgam Kashmir a few days ago. This deadly attack has shook India. India has already responded with few measures aimed at Pakistan and its ter terror machine. But I would like to take up a separate discussion on the Pelgam terror attack and the deeper
0:52 implications of this terror incident. So I would not include those articles in today's discussion because today I will be bringing out a separate exclusive video on this pressing issue. So by evening we should have this video uploaded on our YouTube channel. So I urge all of you to watch this video without fail as we will discuss and break down this deadly terror incident that has shook the very core of India and triggered mass outrage across the country. So do ensure but that today evening you catch this video where we cover this incident separately. So apart from that we have many other important articles today. So let's focus on that. So let's mourn with the victims of this incident. Let's have a detailed analysis
1:37 and discussion on this incident. But at the same time let's focus on the other important articles in today's newspaper in the Hindu analysis for today. So these are the articles I'll be taking up for discussion. There are five important articles that deserve a comprehensive analysis both for prelims and mains and a couple of small articles relevant for your prelims exam. Now, if you want the PDF of the session, please join my Telegram channel by scanning the QR code. After the session ends, I'll be sharing the link. I'll be sharing the PDF itself on my Telegram channel. Now, before I proceed, I want to talk about the UPSC results for 2024. Of course, celebration and mourning can't go together. So, we have decided consciously keep the celebrations muted,
2:24 but we would just like to provide an update regarding how an academy students have performed in the UPSC civil services exam of 2024. We are glad to announce that 350 toppers amongst the entire toppers list at some point in time they were all anac academy learners. But let's be transparent. Let's be honest over here. These 350 plus learners, they were not all plus or paid students of an academy. They might have sub consumed the free special classes on the app or they might have watched our YouTube sessions etc. Please be very clear on this. We want to be very transparent in this regard and we don't want to mislead students or make any dishonest claims. When we say
3:11 350 plus toppers were from an academy, a number of them would would have consumed the free content or they would have attended the free mock interview under our interview guidance program. So let's look at the actual number around 80 plus learners. They were plus students of an academy which means that subscribed to our classroom program, attended our classes, not just consumed the free content but they were paid students. So this is a phenomenal result delivered by an academy plus learners and that is something I wanted to talk to you about. So these are the top students right who were in the plus classroom program or the iconic classroom program. So those of you who would be interested
3:56 to enroll for this program, you can do so by paying a price of just 199 which will give you a 12- month subscription with a 12-month free subscription essentially 2 years of subscription to our IAS classes. So to mark this event to mark the performance of our students the coming Sunday that's on 27th April an academy will be holding the monzil event the monzil event to recognize these toppers. So do ensure you watch this event and the event will be live on UPSC unstoppables YouTube channel. So the link will be provided in the video description. click on the link and ensure that you click on notify me so that when the event goes live on 27th April at 12 p.m. you'll get notified
4:43 about this. So let's get started with the discussion. First we have a very important article related to Indian polity. On page number 10, Fazar Mustafa, a leading legal and constitutional expert in the country talks about the topic of judicial review which has generated a lot of controversy in recent times. The writer is basically questioning whether judicial review the power of judicial review of the Supreme Court has it led to judicial despotism. Has the judiciary unnecessarily interfered with the powers of the parliament the executive and violated the doctrine of separation of powers and undermined the constitution
5:30 and the democracy. That is a key question being raised over here. See this strong discussion and argument comes up because a recent Supreme Court judgment concerning the role of the governor especially in the state of Tamil Nadu and the directions that the Supreme Court issued which curtails some of the discretionary powers of the governor. This has led to lot of criticism against the Supreme Court and this criticism has come from within the parliament and within the government. None other than the vice president of India Jag Dankar took aim at the Supreme Court at the judgment itself and he pointed out that the Supreme Court is misusing the extraordinary power which is vested with it under article 142. The vice president
6:15 even called article 142 a unguided nuclear missile which the Supreme Court is misusing to overstep its jurisdiction to overstep its constitutional mandate and enter the domain of the parliament the legislature and the executive. So this has been some harsh criticism coming from the vice president regarding the alleged misuse of the power of judicial review. So you might have heard of the term judicial activism. Whenever the Supreme Court tends to overstep its jurisdiction, it's often labeled as judicial activism. Whenever the Supreme Court enters the domain of the executive or the legislature, it's said to be judicial activism. Judicial review is nothing but the power of the Supreme Court to review
7:00 a law in order to uphold the rights that are guaranteed in the constitution, protect the very basic structure of the constitution. So judicial review, judicial activism are not very distinct from each other. In fact, they are the two sides of the same coin. So it's often alleged especially by the ruling party the party which would be in power not just by the current BJP NDA coalition but even previously we have seen this when the congress would be in power when the UPA coalition governments were in power even they would take aim at the judicial review power of the Supreme Court. They would criticize the Supreme Court in cases of judicial activism and they would try to push back against these powers of the Supreme Court. So this is nothing new. At the same time, if you look at
7:48 the opposition, the Congress which is in the opposition right now and the other opposition parties, they have criticized the vice president for using such strong statements against the Supreme Court. They have criticized the vice president for targeting article 142 which gives extraordinary power to the Supreme Court. So let's dive a little deep into this article and understand whether the statement of the vice president is it fair. Does it have some merit? Is the Supreme Court really becoming despotic? Is the Supreme Court really becoming supreme? Is it placing itself above the constitution and undermining the constitutional powers of the parliament and the government? The criticism coming from the opposition against the statement of the vice president. Is it valid? Is it justified? So let's evaluate all these arguments. It's a very sensitive
8:34 delicate topic. So let's go beyond the article as well and understand this in slight detail. Now where does the power of judicial review come from? Is it provided in the constitution? Can someone answer this in the comment section? Can someone tell me does the Indian constitution explicitly mention judicial review or not? Does the constitution of India provide the power of judicial review to the Supreme Court? Yes or no? Um Shik has given the right answer. Even Ritu and others very good. It is not mentioned in the constitution at all. The term judicial review does not find a reference. It's not explicitly mentioned in the constitution. So where does the Supreme Court get this power from? I'm
9:20 sure you would have studied article 13 when you read about fundamental rights. Article 13 essentially says that any law which goes against the constitution will be void. Any law that could violate your rights would be void. So from article 13 you can infer that the supreme court which is the guardian of the constitution it can step in and review any law any policy of the government in case of violation of any rights. In case a law is ultra vas the constitution it can be declared as null and void to the supreme court. That is where the power of judicial review stems from. You look at article 32, article 226 concerning the supreme court and the high courts respectively. These articles empower the
10:07 judiciary, the higher judiciary to protect your fundamental rights by providing these remedies. There are constitutional remedies which are built into the constitution under article 32 and 226 through the writ jurisdiction. the courts can protect your fundamental rights. So judicial review per se is not explicitly mentioned in the constitution but the supreme court the constitutional courts as well they can invoke the power of judicial review because it is inferred from the constitution. In fact it has now been interpreted as a part of the basic structure of the constitution through various judgments. The Supreme Court has made it clear that the power of judicial review is part of
10:53 the basic structure to protect the soul and the the very essence of the Indian constitution in spirit and law to ensure that the constitution is not undermined by the other organs of the state that is your government and the legislature. The Supreme Court which acts as the guardian uses this extraordinary power of judicial review to protect the essence of the Indian constitution. So there have been instances where the Supreme Court has used the extraordinary power of article 142 to intervene with the powers of the parliament and the government as well. There are instances where the Supreme Court has stepped in issuing policy guidelines when the government had failed to address certain policy issues. There have been instances where Supreme
11:40 Court has struck down certain laws as unconstitutional. It has struck down constitutional amendments as unconstitutional. So has the Supreme Court become an authority on its own? Has the Supreme Court misused this power of judicial review? Because don't forget at the end of the day these judges are unelected. Can unelected judges interfere with the powers of the elected members of the parliament? Can unelected judges disrupt the functioning of the popularly elected government? Doesn't that violate democracy? Because see under the Indian constitution under the scheme of things of the constitution doctrine of separation of powers is very crucial. It separates the jurisdiction
12:26 of the three main pillars of the state. The executive, the legislature, that's your parliament and the judiciary. They all have their clear mandates, clear jurisdictions drawn up. One should not meddle with the other. One should not interfere with the other. But at the same time the Supreme Court has this role this pivotal role to keep the executive under check to hold the government accountable and to ensure that the parliament as functions within the mandate given under the constitution. But one can argue that shouldn't parliament be supreme? Shouldn't parliament be considered as sovereign? Why should unelected authorities and bodies interfere with a elected legislature? Please understand India is not United
13:13 Kingdom. In the UK as per UK's constitution, the parliament is sovereign. Parliament is supreme. That's not the case in India. In India, it is the constitution which is supreme. There is no higher entity or authority that is above the constitution. Not the government, not the parliament, not the president, not even the Supreme Court itself. That clear? Even the Supreme Court is bound by the constitution at the end of the at the end of the day these different entities of the state are bound by the mandate of the constitution itself. So in India the parliament is not supreme or sovereign. The vice president was trying to make a point. Jagdep Dankar tried to indicate that parliament should be more supreme
13:59 and sovereign. But that is not what the constitution envisages. That's not what our founding fathers envisaged. And the Supreme Court is simply doing its job by keeping the executive and the government and uh of course the parliament under check under certain instances. Now see what has happened under article 142. Why is there such a big controversy about the power of judicial review? Article 142 is a extraordinary power given to the Supreme Court. It allows the Supreme Court to deliver complete justice and to deliver complete justice the Supreme Court can issue directions to the parliament to the government as well and this provision has been used several times by the Supreme Court. It's a extraordinary provision but it has been invoked several times recently.
14:47 This whole controversy is tied to the office of the governor and the role of the governor of Tamil Nadu Arin Ravi in particular regarding how the governor had stalled the bills that had been passed by the state legislature. So we have discussed this topic in detail in our previous sessions. The Supreme Court stepped in. It has virtually granted ascent to all these bills which the governor had reserved for president's consideration or where the governor had withheld ascent under the powers of article 200 and article 2.1 and the supreme court has laid down guidelines to restrict the discretionary powers of the governor under article 2001. Now the supreme court has set timelines a timeline of 1 month and 3 months within which the governor and the president
15:32 have to take a decision. The Supreme Court has also pointed out that Arn Rabi was acting with a malified intent deliberately trying to politicize the bills passed by elected legislature and undermining the federal nature of the Indian polity. So this is what led to vice president of India making the statement calling article 142 a unguided nuclear missile which the supreme court is misusing where supreme court is resorting to judicial activism and he went to the extent to point towards judicial despotism where the judiciary becomes despot placing itself above the mandate of the constitution itself. So the opposition mainly the Congress and the other parties they have come out in strong criticism of the vice president's statement because see don't
16:18 forget the same article 142 has served a very big purpose. For example supreme court has used article 142 to protect those in prison from being harassed and being tortured in custody. Supreme Court has ordered governments to give compensation to those prisoners who were tortured in custody. The Supreme Court has used article 142 to secure complete justice in several brutal cases of crime in several civil matters as well including divorce. Supreme Court has used this extraordinary power to secure complete justice to Indians. Be it with regard to environment, the impact of pollution, then in many other important matters,
17:05 Supreme Court has invoked article 142 use this extraordinary power to protect the genuine rights of the people. It's not that article 142 has always been misused. Yes, it is debatable. It is questionable. But at the same time, you need to know that article 142 has served a big purpose. It has helped the Supreme Court to deliver complete justice when the governments have failed when the parliament has failed. In the absence of a law, in the absence of a policy where citizens rights are being compromised, Supreme Court has stepped in use this extraordinary power of article 142 to secure complete justice to them. So how can you call it judicial activism and despotism? But again, let's keep it a very fair and unbiased discussion. We
17:50 are not just here to criticize the vice president or what statements were made by the vice president. Let's look at the opposition as well. Today the Congress and the other parties are criticizing the vice president for targeting the Supreme Court. But let me tell you the very same Congress party and other parties which are in the opposition when they were in government even they were criticizing the power of judicial review whenever judgments went against the governments have been critical of the Supreme Court. This has been the reality. If Supreme Court is passing judgments in favor of government, then governments are happy be it the current government or the previous governments. We have seen this with every government with every party in power. But when judgments go against them, that is when the criticism comes up. That is when the question comes up that is a Supreme
18:36 Court abusing its power of judicial review. Is a Supreme Court becoming a despot? So how can this be fair? So today the opposition which is criticizing the vice president in the ruling BJP should be reminded that Javal Nehu when he addressed the constituent assembly in 1949 he himself had warned about the possible intervention of the Supreme Court which could undermine the powers of the government and the parliament. Very similar to what Vice President Jag Dankar has said. Very similar to that, Pandit Deheru had made a similar observation to the constituent assembly. He had said if the Supreme Court intervenes and it oversteps the jurisdiction and if it steps into the
19:23 domain of the government or the parliament then governments will be pushed to appoint those judges who will favor the government. That's what his daughter did eventually. Prime Minister Indra Gandhi during the emergency period and right before that she went for super session of judges. I'm sure you would have read about this. So governments tend to show this tendency where they appoint judges since governments do play a role. They try to fill the judiciary with progovernment judges expecting progovernment judgments. Neu had warned about this. So now will the Congress criticize Nehu as well? Because Jagdep Dankar also has a point a valid point. What extent can the Supreme Court interfere? Where can we
20:10 draw that line? Now please understand the vice president of India is also wrong. The ruling BJP is also wrong in targeting the Supreme Court. Unnecessary. Why? In the last decade, if you look at some historic judgments of the Supreme Court, most of the judgments have been in favor of the government. How? Now take for example demonetization. The petitions against demonetization. What did the Supreme Court do? The Supreme Court upheld demonetization. It did not pass any unfavorable judgments against the government. Take for example the political crisis in Maharashtra. The Supreme Court essentially protected
20:55 the BJP Shiv Sena coalition government following the split in the Shiva. The judgment was in favor of the new government which was formed. So this in a way was in favor of the ruling party. Then you look at article 370 or petitions related to NRC petitions against citizenship amendment act. There has been substantial delay in hearing cases related to article 370 which was in favor of the government. Eventually article 370 and its constitutionality the revocation of the special status of JNK has been upheld. The Supreme Court has been very proactive in upholding the need for a NRC and also the constitutionality of CAA. So a lot of these decisions have
21:43 been in favor of the ruling party. It's not that all the judgments have gone against the BJP and against the current government. That's why I said governments find it convenient to criticize the Supreme Court when judgments go against them. They ignore the fact that many judgments would have been in favor of the government as well. We've seen this with previous governments as well. We are seeing that now today as well. There have been few judgments yes which have gone against the government. So that alone can't be an excuse to target the Supreme Court itself and question its credibility and question the power of judicial review which is so critical to protect our constitution. Now if you look at the electoral bonds case, yes the Supreme Court struck down electoral bonds, pushed for transparency in political funding. This was a ruling that went
22:29 against the government. If you look at the recent ruling with regard to the powers of the governor regarding the bills passed by the state legislature, it was a necessary intervention with the Supreme Court. And don't forget the Supreme Court was not unnecessarily interfering. Here you had a unelected governor who appointed by the central government acting like an agent, a political agent of the center with malified intention. The Supreme Court observed that the actions of Arn Ravi was of malified intent. It was erroneous in law to hold these bills passed by the state legislature. So to protect federalism, to protect the state legislature which is popularly elected in Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court intervened and laid down a set of guidelines. But let me also tell you the Supreme Court has shown restraint when
23:15 it is necessary. Do you remember the Babari Mazjid incident? Demolition of Babari Mazjid. The Supreme Court The Supreme Court came out with guidelines to deal with mob lynching, to deal with riots, but it never ordered the authorities to reverse what changes had happened. It understood the communal sentiment, the the possibility of a larger communal war breaking out in the country given the Hindu Muslim riots. And the Supreme Court actually did not step in with regard to let's say reconstruction of the Babari Mazjid Mosque at that point in the 1990s. The Supreme Court has been sensitive to such larger implications. It knows its
24:01 limits. It knows where it should not be stepping into. Now please understand article 142 is not a allencompassing power to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court can't make its own laws. It can't create a new legal edifice where none exists. Only if there is some deficiency in the law brought out by the parliament or if there is a misuse of the law by the government as we saw in the case of Governor Arn Ravi. Only in such extra extraordinary cases the Supreme Court steps in. But we can bring in a genuine criticism against the Supreme Court here which is the lack of transparency the opakeness it has maintained over the appointment of judges. This has to be one valid
24:47 criticism. The criticism made by the vice president by the government today or the past governments that may not be valid because Supreme Court by and large has stayed away from being a despot. It has not been a despot. It has functioned well within the norms of the constitution, upheld the rights of the citizens, acted only when it was necessary. It has shown restraint when it was necessary. It has passed fair judgments to be fair to our judges. Yes, some judgments will go against the government but doesn't mean the government can accuse the judges of being despots of violating the constitution. Right? There have been many judgments which have gone in favor of the government as well. As I said, article 142 does not allow the Supreme Court to make new laws. It can't create a new legal system where none exists. It simply looks at existing laws. It looks
25:33 at the policies which are present and it tries to secure complete justice by invoking this extraordinary power. But one fair criticism of the Supreme Court should be with regard to the appointment of judges. The Modi government pushed for a constitutional amendment through NJAC, the National Judicial Appointments Commission to bring in more transparency and fairness the appointment of judges. But the Supreme Court, what did it do? It struck down Njac and the constitutional amendment as unconstitutional to retain the opaque collagium system of appointment of judges. So this is where the Supreme Court should introspect look at other global models which are followed in other well-to-do democracies when it comes to appointment of judges. There is a need
26:18 to maintain transparency when it comes to appointment of judges. Yes, the judiciary should protect its independence at all costs. It can't allow the government or the parliament to play a bigger role in the appointment process. Correct? But at the same time in the name of judicial independence the Supreme Court can't stay away from transparency and keep the appointment process so opaque. Right now it's a process of judges appointing judges. So that is where the Supreme Court has to be criticized. But as I said what guides these different entities of the Indian state is constitutional morality. Constitution is supreme in the country. Not the parliament, not the president, not the government and definitely not the judiciary. They all have their jurisdictions, their mandates. They have to stay within the
27:05 limits. Yes, there should not be any overreach. Correct. At the same time, you can't use unfair criticism against the Supreme Court just because few judgments have gone against the government or against the ruling party. So that is what we learned from this important article. So let me know what you think in the comments and please take up this practice question. Write an answer based on what we have discussed. use the structure that I have followed and try to post your answers in the comment section. Now let's look at the next article. Another interesting article here which can be relevant for social issues under women empowerment and this could also be relevant for ethics or maybe even a essay topic related to this can come up. This article is related to the misworld
27:52 event. Now some of you might start wondering why are we discussing about this world? How is it relevant for the exam? The author here brings up a wonderful discussion on the misworld event. The the very event, the nature of the event. Is it pure vanity? Does it lead to commodification of women? Does it promote objectification of women or does it really lead to women empowerment? That is the key discussion that the writer is bringing out because see Telangana government is all set to host the upcoming misworld event in the first week of May. Telangana government is pushing this as a high-profile event and it's trying to attract more tourists as
28:38 well during this period. It's spending lot of resources as well to provide the facilities, the amenities needed to pull off the misworld event which is coming up. Now India is not new to MWorld event. We have played host for example in 1990s in Bengaluru Misworld event was hosted. Recently uh big controversy broke out when Mumbai was supposed to host the MWorld event. So each time when India has been the host of the MWorld event there has been a big controversy around it. The controversy comes not only from the fringe groups and the elements who attack the event itself saying that it pro promotes obscinity, profanity. While you can ignore those concerns, there are some genuine
29:24 concerns brought up by women groups against a event such as the Missworld event. Several civil society groups, women led organizations have often complained that events like MissWorld, Miss Universe, they simply promote objectification of women, commodification of women because eventually these events are tailor made to suit a certain capitalist patriarchal purpose. The women contestants are groomed, trained, they are pushed to behave in a certain way where looks are prioritized. Of course, you can have a counterargument here. You can say sir Miss World Miss Universe has reformed itself. It's no longer just about looks. It's about the talent as well. The question round was introduced to test the skills and the talent and the
30:10 confidence of the participants. So one might argue it's not just about external beauty and the vanity of the event. There is a deeper um a deeper objective which is achieved through Missorld Miss Universe events. Yes, that argument is also right. But the writer says that women groups in the country are raising a valid concern. What's the point of hosting these events when we are not really prioritizing women issues? Yes, a event like this world might lead to women empowerment. Correct? It might promote women empowerment. I'll come to that point. We'll discuss how a event like this world can cause or lead to women empowerment. But should our focus be on these grand events or should we really focus on grassroot women empowerment?
30:57 That is the discussion. Right? It's a ethical dilemma as well which the writer is presenting here. Now let's first have a discussion in favor of events such as Miss World, Miss Universe. Let's see how it actually leads to women empowerment. It does. You can't dismiss these events as simply obscene. You can't dismiss the events by just saying that it's promoting commodification, objectification of women. Yes, there is criticism. I'll come to that. But let's look at the points in favor of a event like Missorld. As I said, today Miss World Miss Universe events have really remodeled themselves. Maybe in one era, yes, they were purely based on external beauty of the aspirants. But that's no longer the case where the talent of the
31:44 aspirant or the participant is being judged. Right? question rounds have been introduced. They actually go on to play a big role in the future where they lead various social initiatives especially through the United Nations through various organs of the UN. They become ambassadors of the UN. They become ambassadors of UNICEF, UNESCO, leading uh some of the global initiatives on education, healthcare, development etc. Take for example those who have won from India the likes of Aishwaray Priyanka Chopra right Manushi Chiller or the other toppers as well like Shushmita Sai and the others. It gave them a platform. It gave them an opportunity. It gave a platform for someone who was a nobody to step out into the world become world known
32:31 renowned around the world and gain popularity as well and use that popularity for a good social cause. like Priyanka Chopra for example has been well known for leading various global campaigns, social campaigns, UN le campaigns but at the same time this element of opportunity being created for women. Yes, it does provide a platform for women to be recognized not just for external beauty and vanity but even for the talent and confidence they have. Despite that there is strong criticism against such events. Why? Because the whole model of these events is built on pure capitalism and commodification. Most of the
33:17 participants, those who win the events, they eventually they are pushed to become ambassadors of big brands, cosmetic brands for example or consumer goods. And it is this commodification where those who participate and win in these events, they are essentially commodified, right? It eventually leads to objectification. Eventually the judges as well are driven by the external vanity of the event and it does lead to the promotion of patriarchal mindsets because don't forget these participants are very well groomed. They are forced to conform. They're forced to behave in a certain way. It suits the patriarchal construct that women are not
34:05 on par with men. Women are meant to sell. Women are meant to be used to objectify, to commodify. So it pushes a pure capitalist patriarchal narrative. So that is a strong criticism against these events. That's why I said you can't simply dismiss the concerns which are being raised. Maybe you can dismiss the concern of these fringe groups which who say that it'll violate our culture. Oh, it'll violate our tradition. It's obscene. Yes, those are irrelevant arguments. But the genuine concerns does it really lead to women empowerment? Isn't isn't this commodification of our women? Doesn't it promote the capitalist patriarchal uh narrative? So that is something which has to be discussed. That is something which should be debated. So as a society right when you look at
34:51 such events it's more important to make women confident at the grassroot level it's not how it's not important how confident a woman is when she walks a ramp more important how the masses how general women common women in our villages how confident they feel instead of maybe these grand events why not use state resources because see don't forget Telangana government is spending resources to host this event Why not host an international conference on women education? Why not host an international event on women's health? It's not about promoting these events. Maybe we should focus on women's safety. Maybe that is where true women empowerment comes from. Ensure our women can walk safely on the street. It's not
35:38 how confidently they can walk on a ramp. So that is a very valid argument that the critics are bringing up. So it is a debatable topic that should we host such event? Should we really give priority for such events? Does it serve a purpose? It does according to the proponents yes it does because it creates a platform for a woman who's nobody. Take the example of Priyanky Chopra as I said Aishwaray. It created an opportunity for them and they've used that to not just rise up the social ladder but they have led global initiatives led social campaigns become ambassadors of several important initiatives. So it does lead to women empowerment according to the proponents. Critics are pointing out that that is not true of women empowerment. You're simply commodifying women, objectifying women, judging women on their external
36:25 beauty and it's purely a vanity event. You're just pushing the capitalist patriarchal narrative and instead we should be focusing on genuine issues which affect women on the ground. So let me know what you think. It's a very interesting topic. I know it's a slightly offbeat topic but UPSC can focus on this especially in ethics or maybe in essay or in the interview. You might be asked do such events promote commodification of women. Is it really women empowerment? Right? So that is something I think we should debate upon. Let me know what you think. What's your view on this and take up this practice question? Now let's look at a very important editorial on page number eight related to India US relations. I'll not take much of your time here. It's a very
37:10 small article. There's one update I want to give you and after that we'll move on to the next article. As you all know US Vice President JD Vance was visiting India with his entire family. I hope you know his wife is an Indian essentially right of Indian origin. So the family took the opportunity to visit India along with their children and it was indeed a high-profile visit. The visit was largely personal more than uh diplomatic and official. But USVP JD Vance did have interactions with India's leadership. He did meet with Prime Minister Modi and senior officials and ministers. Some important issues have been discussed. For example, the vice president sympathized
37:58 with India following the deadly terror attack in Kashmir. He said US stands with India that President Trump completely backs India in its fight against terrorism. So this is something that India really appreciates the complete unconditional support American support for India's fight against terrorism particularly Pakistan sponsored terrorism. So this is something which is huge for India because for many decades various US governments they have often ignored India's concerns over terrorism. There was a point in 1990s where then US governments would completely ignore Pakistan sponsor terrorism. They would even in a way shield Pakistan, protect Pakistan and undermine India's concerns. I'm reminded of these uh
38:45 incidents back in 1990s when Prime Minister Pin Narima presented evidence to American authorities, American officials pointing clear linkages showing evidence in a terror attack linking that with Pakistani state actors. But United States ignored the evidence given by the prime minister. That was the situation at one point. As US and Pakistan were close allies, India was never getting complete backing and support from the US in counterterrorism. But that has changed over the years with the 9/11 attacks. Starting from 2001, finally the US realized the duplicity of Pakistan, how dangerous Pakistan can be. It saw through Pakistan's double game. It realized Pakistan is the terror hub, a breeder of most terror groups in the
39:32 world in the Afak region. So US needed a reliable partner in counterterrorism and it started relying more on India. But even then India US weren't very close when it comes to counterterrorism and security. Rather we couldn't rely we couldn't trust US entirely. Look at the Mumbai attacks for example the US shielded the two main conspirators David Hedley and Tahur Rana for many years kept them away from India as deliberately. So India has a lot of complaints against the US. We have not seen US as a reliable partner in counterterrorism especially when it comes to targeting Pakistan. But this has been changing off late with growing strategic ties between India and US and especially under someone like President Trump. Trump believes US should not interfere in other count's business.
40:19 Trump is more of a businessman, right? He would leave South Asia to India. He would not dictate how India should handle the South Asia neighborhood. So this is something that would suit India's interest. Trump might be problematic for the world, problematic for the global economy, for several issues. But as far as India's self-interests are concerned with regard to counter terrorism, with regard to pressurizing Pakistan, Trump's administration could actually be beneficial to India and that's something India recognizes. So this is an issue which is very close to us and given the recent incident which has happened. Of course, the timing of the incident is also important. Many experts are of the view that the attack in Kashmir was probably designed to coincide with the visit of the US vice president to attract
41:05 international attention on Kashmir. But JD Vans and President Trump have been clear that US will not step into this issue and they'll stand with India as it fights terrorism. So this is something that works for India. This is something which goes in our interests. But what really bothers India with regard to the Trump administration would be the tariff wars unleashed by the Trump administration. This is the focus of the editorial. The editorial is urging India to take a very strong stand as we negotiate a trade deal with the US. As of now, President Trump has paused the tariffs. He did announce a 26% tariffs on India but these tariffs have been paused as part of the 90-day pause that US has placed but
41:50 however the 10% baseline tariffs are applying on all countries which export their goods to the US market. So India also falls under this bracket. So India has been rushing to quickly negotiate a trade deal so that we'll have some stability in our trade relationship because don't forget the US is a critical trade partner. one of our largest export markets, one amongst the top two trading partners of India. US and China are the top two trading partners for India. We have a export volume of $90 billion plus headed towards the US which is critical for our MSME industry, various critical industries and even agriculture industry. So it's important to secure a favorable trade deal. So this is where the editorial is urging the Indian government to take a stand to be firm
42:38 with the Trump administration because Trump administration is not reliable as well as we have seen with Trump's policies right his chaotic way of decision-m impulsive way of reacting to events and his repeated U-turns it has led to chaos in global markets wiping off trillions of dollars in investors wealth this is something that could disrupt trade this is something that could affect supply chains and affect Indian interests. So as we negotiate the trade deal right, India should be taking a clear stand to protect some of its core interests. That is what the editorial is urging the Indian government to do. So India US are right now confident that by the middle of this year in the next few months we must have a trade deal in place. Right now we have already
43:24 finalized the terms of reference as to what will be discussed what will be negotiated under the trade deal. So the terms of reference has been frozen. What issues will be discussed? This has been decided. Now it's about protecting the interests of India. Now let me tell you where the concerns come up for India. One major concern is the American demand for greater market access into the Indian market. As I said, Trump is a pure businessman. He wants to do business. He wants to increase American exports to other countries like India, reduce American dependency on Indian imports as well. That's what he wants to do. He's
44:09 always targeted the trade deficit, right? So he somehow believes the trade deficit is always a bad thing. So he wants to address that. So since US is pushing for greater market access, this is something that could affect Indian interests. We have seen reports that the Trump administration is actively pushing pressurizing India as well to give greater access to American companies like Amazon, Walmart which could be detrimental to Indian businesses especially the small businesses the Kirana stores they could possibly be wiped out of competition if American giants like Amazon, Walmart, others are given a free hand into the retail market. The US is pushing India in agriculture as well which is a very sensitive sector
44:55 for India. US wants to increase agricultural exports to our country. It wants to increase dairy meat exports to our country. This is something that will directly hit our farmers who are already facing so many challenges. The US is pressurizing India to eliminate the non-tariff barriers which is limiting the market access for American companies and American exporters. So this is where India should take a stand. Protect the core economic interest of the country. We should not fall under Trump's pressure at any cost. Yes, India may have to show some concession. That's how a negotiation works. You have to strike a compromise. But we should not compromise on what is of core interest for India. We can't compromise on the interests of the small industries, the medium small
45:40 enterprises. We can't compromise on the interests of the farmers. And to do that, India has to take a strong stand in the trade talks which have started and before the trade deal is finalized, we need to make it clear to the US that there are certain red lines which can't be crossed. So hope India stands up to it. Let's see how it develops in the coming months. Next on page 14, we have a very important article related to India's relations with Saudi Arabia. So let's quickly evaluate India's ties with Saudi Arabia and then we'll proceed to the next article. Now this topic is in news because Prime Minister Modi recently carried out a very
46:26 important historic visit to Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, it was cut short because of the deadly attack in Kashmir. PM Modi had to return a day earlier than it was planned. So even experts have said probably the timing of the attack was such that it was designed by the perpetrators to coincide with the visit of the US vice president to India and PM Modi's visit to Saudi Arabia because Saudi Arabia has become a critical partner for India. India Saudi Arabia not only have very strong economic relations, we have strong cultural ties and we have even built very close strategic defense relations as well. In fact, Saudi Arabia has become a key counterterrorism partner for India. So let's evaluate the relationship and let's see the big outcomes of PM Modi's visit to Saudi Arabia. Even though the
47:12 visit was cut short, the prime minister has managed to achieve a few key outcomes which can redefine our ties with Saudi Arabia. Now see please don't forget Saudi Arabia is a very very important regional power in West Asia. It's the leader of the Sunni group of countries. It leads a Sunni power block in the region and it plays a defining role when it comes to energy security of the world as one of the top oil gas producing nations. Right? One of the key suppliers of energy, one of the top suppliers of crude oil, founding member of OPEC, key member of OPEC plus. Saudi Arabia plays this pivotal
48:00 role, this critical role in energy prices. It has a big control on oil supplies in the global oil market. So, India as a country which depends on imports of oil of course needs good relations with Saudi Arabia because don't forget Saudi Arabia is critical for our energy security. Through OPEC and OPEC plus, Saudi Arabia not only plays a role in fixing oil prices but it is one of the top suppliers to India. Until recently it has been the second largest oil supplier to India after Iraq. But now in last few years Russia has overtaken everyone as we bought discounted oil from Russia. But still Saudi Arabia is in the top three. After Russia we would have Iraq and then Saudi Arabia. So Saudi Arabia
48:46 remains a top oil supplier critical for our energy security and eventually it is critical for our economic security. That is why this relationship is so critical. Then don't forget the cultural aspect of this relationship. There is a very very strong Indian diaspora community in Saudi Arabia. Close to 3 million Indians reside and work in the country forming a strong cultural bond. In fact, the Saudi economy is dependent on migrant workers, particularly from India. The oil industry, the construction industry in Saudi Arabia, the hospitality industry in Saudi Arabia is largely powered by workers, bluecollared workers from India. Today, even white collared
49:31 workers, software engineers, doctors, lawyers, etc., financial experts are moving to countries like Saudi Arabia, finding lucrative job opportunities. So Indian migrant workers have become the backbone of the Saudi economy. It benefits Saudi Arabia as well. It benefits India as well because the members of the diaspora are sending remittances back home. The money they send back home to India is helping us earn foreign exchange giving us a critical asset to bridge our current account deficit. And don't forget the Hajj yatra, the Hajj pilgrimage which is of great spiritual religious significance for Indian Muslims. of course for Muslims around the world but from India's perspective right fulfilling the Hajj pilgrimage is part of our cultural
50:18 diplomatic ties between India and Saudi Arabia helping Indian pilgrims visit Mecca Medina Jedha is part of a key responsibility and key driver of India Saudi relations so we have close economic ties close cultural ties there are Saudi companies looking to invest in India Saudi sovereign fund has invested in several Indian startups. Saudi giants like Aramco, one of the world's largest companies, definitely the largest oil company in the world, owned by the Saudi kingdom. It has been looking for investment opportunities in the energy oil sector in the hydrocarbon sector in the country. India has managed to rework the ties with the kingdom. Current crown prince Muhammad bin Salman
51:05 MBS has built a good rapo with the prime minister and PM Modi has done a great job of transforming the ties with Saudi Arabia. Now this transformation started in 2009 2010. Before that we actually had a complicated relationship with Saudi Arabia. Before 2009, I don't know if you guys know this, Saudi Arabia as a leader of the Sunni world was more pro-Pakistan and it would often even take a stand against India on certain critical matters especially when it comes to Pakistan sponsored terrorism when it comes to issues like Kashmir. When Pakistan would try to internationalize the Kashmir issue by
51:51 bringing it up at United Nations or at the organization of Islamic cooperation, Saudi Arabia would often support Pakistan and vote against India. When Pakistan would sponsor terrorism against the country, Saudi Arabia would often not sympathize with India. It would secretly back Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI, had even cultivated safe havens in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East for various terror groups targeting India. Terror leaders belonging to groups like Lashkar, Jasha Muhammad and several wanted terrorists including the likes of Dawi Ibrahim. They have been sheltered across West Asia with Pakistani state support across the West
52:36 Asia region from UAE to Saudi Arabia from cities like Sharah to Dubai, Abu Dhabi to Jedha and Riyad and these countries have been blind to it. So both Saudi and UAE the leading powers of the region the leading Sunni powers of the region historically were known for their proakistan approach and sometimes they would even take a anti-India approach when it comes to terrorism when it comes to Kashmir. This approach has finally changed. There has been a transformative shift a radical shift in India's ties with Saudi and UAE post 2009 2010. It was Prime Minister Manm Singh who drove this transformation with his historic visit to Saudi Arabia that led
53:22 to the signing of the Riyad declaration in 2010. This was after the 2611 attacks, the Mumbai attacks, India was engaging in course of diplomacy trying to isolate Pakistan, put pressure on Pakistan for sponsoring terrorism. After the Mumbai attacks, India started getting more support from US and Western powers and the US in particular pushed Saudi Arabia and UAE to change their approach towards India when it comes to counterterrorism because don't forget in the 20161 Mumbai attacks even Westerners were specifically singled out and targeted. It's not that US overnight became a great friend of Indian counterterrorism. US was still unreliable partner for us. But just because Americans, Europeans
54:08 were singled out and targeted by Lashkar to in Mumbai. Following that, the US and Western powers became more closer to us in the field of intelligence sharing and counterterrorism. They put pressure on Saudi and UAE as well because there were safe havens for terror groups. Terror groups like Indian Mujahedin were sheltered across this region with the help of Pakistan's ISI. So finally after the Riyad declaration strategic ties started developing and also don't forget by then India had become a major rising power. Saudi and UAE saw the opportunities in India. They saw that India is a huge consumer market. India is a great investment opportunity because these countries were sitting on piles of petro dollars. Massive wealth earned by selling petroleum products. They wanted good destinations for
54:53 investment and India was a lucrative investment opportunity for them. So this also drove a change in their mindset. On one side, American pressure, western push to work closely with India and on the other hand the economic opportunity that was opening up. So it would not just be a buyer seller relationship in oil. It would be a much more diversified relationship. So following the Riyad declaration, we saw a real transformation happen in India Saudi relations along with a transformation in India UAE relations. Today UAE is one of our closest partners. We even have a free trade agreement with the country. You see a similar development with Saudi Arabia as well. Saudi has become a strategic partner for India. Just look at the way how PM Modi was received in Saudi Arabia. When PM Modi's plane
55:40 entered Saudi airspace, he was escorted by the fighter jets of Saudi Air Force which is a very rare gesture. We have very close defense relations today. We have joint military exercises, close intelligence sharing arrangements. So truly our ties have transformed and the Modi government has taken it one step forward in the last 10 years. Today Saudi and UAE have become much much closer to India. They even take a stand against Pakistan if when it comes to counterterrorism. This is the big shift which has happened. I can give you examples as well. When the deadly Uri and Pulwama attacks happened and when India retaliated against Pakistan by carrying out surgical strikes and air
56:26 strikes, these two major West Asian powers, they did not criticize India. They rather targeted Pakistan. They stood with India. They empathized with India. They empathized with India for the losses we had suffered because of Pakistan sponsored terrorism. They directly blamed Pakistan for these attacks. And they defended India's right to self-defense. They defended India's right to strike at Pakistani terror camps. And when issues like Kashmir has been brought up at United Nations or OIC, these countries have abstained from these votes signaling a big shift in favor of India. Take for example the anti-CAA protests which Pakistan tried to internationalize. Or take for example Pakistan stand against the revocation of
57:13 special status that was given to Kashmir under article 370. Pakistan tried to bring these issues at UN and OIC but each time Saudi and UAE they went against Pakistan abstained from the vote and in a way they were signaling their support for India by taking a more neutral middle stand. It is this big shift which has happened that's why the relations with India Saudi is so important so critical. So in this historic visit, India, Saudi Arabia have agreed to work together to stabilize the global oil markets. India, Saudi Arabia will be working closely in the coming days to secure oil supplies to India and to stabilize the oil supplies and the oil prices in the oil markets because in recent years there has been lot of chaos when it comes to oil prices and the
57:59 stability of the oil market. Starting with the pandemic, then the wars, Russia Ukraine war, the Gaza war, they've caused sufficient disruption to the oil markets and now Trump's impulsive policies. So, India wants to work with Saudi Arabia. Both sides have signed an agreement in this regard to work together to stabilize oil supplies, to keep prices stable and to bring stability to the global oil markets. Now, there is great focus on technology as well. Saudi Arabia realizes that maybe the oil industry might face challenges in the coming decades because see today because of climate change, global warming, there is a lot of pressure to cut down on
58:45 consumption of fossil fuels. Saudi Arabia realizes that in the coming decades, 40, 50 years from now, they may not have the same dominant position if they just rely on oil. Oil was like gold at one point. Even now maybe it is. But the world of the future may not see oil as gold or oil as a critical asset. So Saudi Arabia is already diversifying. It's looking at emerging critical technologies like AI because they have the money to invest. They want innovation to happen. They want research and development. But they don't have the skilled labor, the skilled talent for that. They know India has it. So that is where they are seeking collaboration. with Saudi money bring Indian minds together, Indian companies, Indian researchers together to lead innovation
59:31 in AI, in cyber security, in clean renewable energy. So that's where the Saudi leadership is very smart, very far-sighted, MBS Muhammad bin Salman actually has been credited with transforming the very image of Saudi Arabia. He's seen as a reformative leader. He wants to shed the more conservative image that the country had. He wants to put it on a more progressive path because though Saudi Arabia is much larger in size, much more influential, it has fallen behind in terms of economic development when it compares to UAE. United Arab Emirates has gone much ahead in terms of modernization, in terms of economic growth, in terms of focus on investments in technology, innovation compared to Saudi Arabia. That's why cities like Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Shar more appealing to you, right? for
1:00:19 Indians in general compared to Saudi cities like Riyad or Jedha that's because Saudi Arabia knows it has fallen behind right so it is trying to shed that conservativism it's focusing on big events it's focusing on hosting the football world cup buying uh sporting teams trying to set up it itself as a hospitality destination as a new tourist hub in the region and India can play a big role in this transformation that's happening in Saudi Arabia because don't forget we are maritime neighbors. We are bound by the Arabian Sea, right? We have critical uh relations when it comes to stabilizing the Persian Gulf, the straight of Hormuz and the Red Sea. These shipping lanes are crucial for both the countries. We have very close
1:01:04 defense relations in this regard, especially naval cooperation ties between our two air forces is very very close to stabilize the shipping lanes, the the trade lanes around this region. So India can be a key partner in technology and innovation as well and in that regard agreements have been signed. Saudi will bring the funds, the investments needed and India will bring the talent, the labor which is needed and that is something which can drive the future of innovation between the two countries. So both sides are looking at clean renewable energy including let's say electric vehicles, battery technology, artificial intelligence, robotics. So these were the important outcomes of the visit of Prime Minister Modi. Is that clear? So please be aware of this. It's one of the most important relationships for us in this region. Next coming to the last big article for
1:01:51 today after which we'll take up the prelim section. In the supplement section today, the Hindu carries an article regarding the impact of heat waves on the common man especially workers in the informal sector. See, we are in the middle of the deadly summer season. I'm sure many of you who are from different parts of the country, you might be seeing pressures, right? Especially in certain northern parts of India, in certain central interior parts of India, right? Tell me what's the temperature in your city, in your town or in your village. There are many places which have already started hitting 40 42°C. There are places which are reporting 44 to 45°C.
1:02:39 The IMD has issued heatwave alerts in some parts of the country, right? And with global warming, with climate change, we will witness more frequent, more intense heatwave conditions. Now, whom does this really affect? A heat wave or the deadly heat that we often experience during summers, whom does it really affect? It doesn't affect the middle class. It definitely doesn't affect the upper middle class and the upper class. Most of us, you and me, we will never feel the true impact of heat wave. Don't tell me sir, I'm feeling very hot. I'm sweating a lot, so I'm affected by heat wave. No, that is not the real impact. If you have the luxury of staying inside your home, if
1:03:26 you have the luxury of affording a fan or a air conditioner or a air cooler or if you have access to drinking water, cold drinking water, if you have access to a place where you can take shelter, cool down and if you have access to first aid and electrolytes, trust me, you have no idea what heatwave means. So do I. Even I don't know. We have never experienced that because the true impact of heat wave is felt by those who are forced to stay in the open and work. It is mainly street vendors, construction workers, manual laborers. They are the ones who are forced to work in the open despite the heat. Just because there is a heat wave,
1:04:13 a street vendor can't stay at home. If he does, he'll have no livelihood. He can't feed his family. A construction worker, manual laborers, they can't say, "I'll not come to work because I need rest because there is too much heat and I'm getting affected." They can't take a break because they will lose their daily wage. So, heat waves are really brutal in that regard. It has a disproportionate impact on the most weakest and vulnerable sections. farmers then members in the rural community are highly prone. They are forced to work in the agricultural field irrespective of what the heat condition is. So you and me can't complain about heat. If we have a roof on our head, if
1:04:59 you are not forced to work in the streets in the out in the open, right, during the peak hours, let's say from 10:00 a.m. to 4 p.m., if you can take shelter, stay inside, switch on a fan, have a air conditioner, a air cooler, drink water, drink some electrolytes, you are actually in the elite section. You you can't really complain that I'm being affected by a heat wave. So that is the the stark difference which this disaster actually brings out. Heat wave is a disaster. It's a deadly disaster not for the middle class, not for the upper middle class or the upper classes, but for the poor common man on the ground, the informal workers in the informal sector who are forced because of economic necessity to go out in the street and work, to go out in the fields and work, to put in hard physical labor to earn a
1:05:46 daily wage just so that they can feed their family. They don't have access to cooling solution. They can't take a break. Imagine construction worker telling the employer that I need a break
…
