UPSC Key: Trump unveils Board of Peace, Draft NEP 2026 and Parakram Diwas

Key Points to Ponder:

— What is Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan?

— What is the role and function of the Board of Peace?

— What are the concerns related to the Board of Peace?

— Suggest points in favour and against India’s joining of the Board of Peace

— Read about the Israel-Hamas war.

— What has been India’s stand on the Israel-Palestine conflict?

— What role has been played by the United Nations in resolving the issue?

— Who are the permanent members of the UN Security Council?

Key Takeaways:

— Sources said India has strong reasons for not joining the board immediately, and will prefer to wait and watch. It’s weighing a range of factors – from the cast of countries on the board, its legitimacy and longevity, challenge to the UN framework and multilateralism, the board’s scope and mandate, India’s own stand of a negotiated two-State solution to the Israel-Palestine question, and consequences from Trump if it does not join or vacillates.

— First, Delhi wants to see which countries are on the board – Trump’s invitation has been accepted by Argentina, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bulgaria, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Morocco, Mongolia, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

— The countries that have signed on to the board include West Asia majors Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, UAE, Turkey and Jordan. But Europe has largely stayed away. Trump ally Hungary has accepted his invitation but France, Germany, UK, Sweden and Italy have not joined.

— Permanent members of the UN Security Council – Russia, China, France and UK – have not joined and there’s a view in Delhi that the board, at least for now, lacks both heft and legitimacy.

— Second, the longevity of the board is also being assessed. As of now, it is Trump’s passion project. The day he leaves office, the board could become infructuous. So, Delhi is considering whether to put its time and energy in an initiative which is time-barred – the Trump term will end after another three years.

— Third, India’s commitment to the United Nations and multilateralism will be on test if the board tends to undermine the UN framework, and positions itself as a parallel body.

— Fourth, Delhi is wary that the Board of Peace might wade into other conflicts, beyond Gaza. And Trump’s penchant for getting involved – for instance, taking credit for halting the India-Pakistan conflict last summer – is something that worries Delhi.

From the Ideas Page: Dis/Agree

Joining Gaza Board of Peace will give India a say

— Sujan R Chinoy writes: Among the striking features of the board is that Trump will serve as the inaugural chairman, possibly holding the post beyond his presidential term. Another eye-catching provision is the call for a club-like contribution of US$1 billion to secure “permanent membership” beyond the initial three-year term.

— Trump’s invitation to Modi reflects recognition of India’s traditional influence in West Asia and credible voice on the global stage. Declining the invitation could be seen as reluctance to engage on a major international issue and may affect future engagement with Trump

— Participation in the board would allow India a greater say in determining Gaza’s future, including potential contracts for Indian companies in reconstruction, while underscoring India’s commitment to Palestinians and regional stability.

— The board is a US-led enterprise, unlike the UN-led processes preferred by Russia, China, and India. When the UNSC approved the board in November 2025, China and Russia abstained.

— Self-appointment by a single power of selected countries to manage international disputes sets a troubling precedent, even considering the US’s exceptional military and economic power.

— In taking a decision on participation, Indian policymakers will have to keep in mind what such a Board of Peace implies for other disputes.

Four reasons Delhi should decline

— Manav Sachdeva writes: India, out of deep respect and solidarity with the Palestinian people and its own history, moral standing, and Global South leadership, should decline — clearly, publicly, and without equivocation.

— This is not a question of money for Gaza, nor even of geopolitics in the narrow sense. It is a question of India’s constitutional morality, our Independence struggle’s memory, strategic autonomy, and moral credibility.

— India’s refusal must be rooted not in anti-Americanism as we are not anti-American per se, nor in reflexive ideology, but in four hard, defensible reasons that go to the core of what India claims to stand for in the world.

— First, any governance or “peace” mechanism for Gaza that is designed without the explicit, sovereign consent of the Palestinian people is not a mechanism for peace. It is an externally imposed trusteeship.

— To join a Gaza board structured primarily by external powers, especially in the immediate aftermath of mass civilian destruction, would place India on the wrong side of its own anti-colonial inheritance.

— Secondly, India’s strategic autonomy allows India to engage with all major powers without becoming an instrument of any. Accepting a $1 billion inducement tied to participation in a geopolitically loaded governance mechanism would erode that autonomy in practice, even if it remains intact in rhetoric.

— Third, India has spent decades cultivating trust across the Global South, as a country that understands occupation, displacement, and the long shadow of imperial arrangements. That credibility is not theoretical. It translates into diplomatic capital, coalition leadership, and moral authority in multilateral forums. Joining a Gaza peace board perceived — rightly or wrongly — as legitimising a post-conflict order without justice would fracture that trust.

— Fourth, there is a deeper, more uncomfortable truth: Peace imposed immediately after devastation, without accountability, is rarely peace. It is pacification. And papering over of injustice.

— If India truly wishes to contribute to peace, it should do so by insisting on humanitarian ceasefires, international accountability mechanisms, reconstruction led by Palestinians, and political processes rooted in consent, especially of the Gazans and all Palestinians, not by sitting on a board designed to manage the aftermath without taking the victims’ agency on board.

— India can offer humanitarian assistance without political strings. It can support reconstruction through UN agencies, advocate for international law consistently, and use its diplomatic channels to press for restraint, accountability, and dialogue.

Do You Know:

— After WWII, Britain decided to exit from Palestine and shifted the responsibility to address the issue to the United Nations (UN). On May 15, 1947, the UN established the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) to study the case of  Palestine. On August 31, 1947, UNSCOP published its findings and recommended the partition of Palestine.

— On November 2, 1947, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 181, recommending the partition of Palestine into a Jewish state (on around 56 per cent of land), and an Arab state (on around 43 per cent of land), with Jerusalem and Bethlehem put under a special international regime.

— Shortly after the UN Resolution 181, a civil war broke out, resulting in the violent expulsion of Palestinians from their towns and villages, which culminated in what is known as the Nakba (Catastrophe). By the time Britain withdrew, Israel had control over 77 per cent of the land, and one-third of the Arab population had been displaced and became refugees in neighbouring countries. Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948.

— India’s position in this conflict has remained consistent. It has supported a “negotiated two-state solution, towards the establishment of a sovereign, independent and viable State of Palestine within secure and recognised borders, living side by side in peace with Israel.”

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍The Israel-Hamas War, Middle East Geopolitics and Implications for India

📍Conflicts in West Asia: A brief history of the Israel-Palestine conflict

Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme:

(1) The term “two-state solution” is sometimes mentioned in the news in the context of the affairs of (UPSC CSE 2018)

(a) China

(b) Israel

(c) Iraq

(d) Yemen

ECONOMY

Data protection: Shorter timeline likely for Big Tech compliance

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance

Mains Examination: General Studies-II: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation

What’s the ongoing story: The Ministry of Electronics and IT (MeitY) may shorten the timeline for Big Tech companies such as Meta, Google, and Amazon to comply with India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and other related rules to 12 months from the current 18 months, as the government looks at creating separate compliance regimes for large companies and startups, The Indian Express has learnt. The move, though, could spark a wave of pushback from tech companies.

Key Points to Ponder:

— What are the key features of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023?

— What are ‘significant data fiduciaries’?

— What is Data localisation?

— What is Digital sovereignty? Why is it important?

— What is the issue of the Right to privacy under the Data Protection Act?

— What measures should be taken to ensure data privacy and cyber security?

— What is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)?

— Is the right to privacy a fundamental right? Which Supreme Court judgement has established this?

— What are the concerns related to diluting of RTI Act with the passage of DPDT Act?

Key Takeaways:

— In particular, provisions that place additional obligations on ‘significant data fiduciaries’ could see fast tracking in terms of compliance timelines, the ministry is understood to have communicated to the industry during a meeting Thursday.

— A significant data fiduciary will be determined on the basis of the volume and sensitivity of personal data they process, and the risks they might have on India’s sovereignty and integrity, electoral democracy, security, and public order.

— These specific provisions require tech companies to carry out a yearly data protection impact assessment, and verify that technical measures including their algorithmic software that deal with handling personal data don’t violate users’ rights.

— More notably, under the rules, the Centre will specify the kind of personal data which can be processed by “significant data fiduciaries” subject to the restriction that such personal data and traffic data related to its flow is not transferred outside the territory of India.

— The changes are being made to create a compliance gradient between bigger companies and smaller startups, with the idea being that the former already comply with strict privacy laws like those in Europe, and as a result have more institutional bandwidth to comply with India’s law.

— In the event of a data breach, data fiduciaries will have to intimate impacted individuals “without delay” a description of the breach, including its nature, extent and the timing and location of its occurrence; the consequences relevant to the impacted user, that are likely to arise from the breach; and the measures implemented and being implemented to mitigate risk among other things.

— The penalty for failing to have adequate safeguards for preventing a data breach could go as high as Rs 250 crore.

— The Act had come under scrutiny for granting wide-ranging exem­p­tions to the government or its agencies while processing citizens’ personal data on grounds of ‘national security’, ‘friendly relations with other states’, and ‘public order’, among other things. It was also called into question over allegedly diluting the RTI Act.

Do You Know:

— Last year, the IT Ministry had notified the long awaited data protection rules, paving the way for India to have a functional privacy law, eight years after the Supreme Court ruled it as a fundamental right. The notification of the rules came over two years after the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act received the President’s assent in August 2023.

— The DPDP Act amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. This section prevents a public authority from sharing anyone’s personal information on two main grounds – that the disclosure will have no bearing on any public activity, and that revealing such information would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an individual, unless such disclosure is justified in larger public interest.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Digital Personal Data Protection Rules 2025: Cyberlaw expert Pavan Duggal breaks down India’s new data privacy framework

📍Knowledge Nugget: Why is Right To Information Act important for UPSC?

Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme:

(2) ‘Right to Privacy’ is protected under which Article of the Constitution of India? (UPSC CSE 2021)

(a) Article 15

(b) Article 19

(c) Article 21

(d) Article 29

Draft NEP 2026 bets big on nuclear, tariff tweaks and cross-subsidy rules

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance.

Mains Examination: General Studies-II: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

What’s the ongoing story: Weeks after the government enacted the SHANTI Act to open India’s nuclear sector to private players, a new draft National Electricity Policy (NEP) signals a clear policy shift — a strong pivot to nuclear power as a potential substitute for coal-based thermal generation.

Key Points to Ponder:

— What are the key features of the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Act, 2025 (SHANTI)?

— What is the status of India in nuclear power?

— Know about India’s energy profile

— What are the Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)?

— What are the challenges faced by the DISCOM sector in India? Why are they crucial in the clean energy transition?

— What are the various reforms brought by the government for the DISCOM sector?

— What are the reasons for high aggregate technical and commercial losses (AT&C)?

Key Takeaways:

— India continues to rely heavily on thermal power, with coal dominating not just grid-based electricity but also captive power used by industries. Against this backdrop, the draft policy seeks to recalibrate the country’s power mix.

—- Set to replace the two-decade-old NEP notified in 2005, the draft policy 2026 pushes for the adoption of advanced nuclear technologies, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), other small-capacity reactors, and direct use of nuclear power by commercial and industrial consumers.

— This push aligns with the government’s ambition of scaling India’s nuclear capacity to 100 GWe by 2047 — more than ten times the current installed capacity of 8.8 GWe — and builds on the SHANTI Act’s removal of long-standing legal and regulatory barriers to private participation in the sector.

— At the same time, the draft policy proposes structural changes to improve the financial health of the power sector. It suggests an index-linked automatic tariff revision mechanism that would kick in if electricity regulators fail to revise tariffs on time, aimed at preventing revenue gaps for power utilities.

— The policy continues to back renewable energy expansion through market-based mechanisms and captive power plants, while placing greater emphasis on energy storage to ensure grid stability as variable renewable energy grows.

— The draft sets out ambitious demand-side targets, projecting per capita electricity consumption to rise to 2,000 kWh by 2030 and over 4,000 kWh by 2047, reflecting the scale of power demand expected from a growing economy.

— It ties this growth to India’s climate commitments—cutting emissions intensity by 45 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2070—underscoring the need for a decisive shift towards low-carbon energy pathways.

— Beyond generation, the policy places a strong focus on the financial health of distribution companies (discoms).

— “NEP 2026 seeks to restore financial health of the DISCOMs by promoting cost-reflective tariffs, timely cost pass-through, and reduction of AT&C losses,” the draft policy states.

— It also proposes linking tariffs to a suitable index for automatic annual revision if no tariff order is issued by state electricity regulatory commissions. Currently, tariffs are determined by regulatory commissions using a cost-plus approach — covering generation, transmission and distribution costs along with a reasonable return — while factoring in consumer categories and policy considerations.

— Another major change proposed is the exemption of manufacturing enterprises, Railways and Metro Railways from paying cross-subsidy charges and surcharges when procuring power through open access.

— At present, large consumers that bypass local discoms must pay these levies to compensate for revenue losses. Cross-subsidy charges offset lower tariffs for residential and agricultural users, while surcharges help recover fixed costs.

— The draft policy positions nuclear energy as a key pillar of India’s long-term energy security.

— To facilitate financing, the policy states that nuclear projects will be eligible for Green Bond funding — a mechanism used to raise capital for projects that mitigate climate change or help communities adapt to its impacts.

— While underlining the continued importance of coal-based power in meeting base-load demand, the draft places particular emphasis on nuclear power for captive use as a substitute for coal-based plants.

— It also advocates repurposing retired thermal power plant sites for nuclear generation wherever feasible.

— Notably, the bulk of India’s captive power capacity remains coal-based. According to NITI Aayog data, coal-fired captive capacity stood at 46 GW in 2023–24, followed by diesel at 19.6 GW and gas at 6.2 GW. India has so far seen no captive use of nuclear power by any industry.

— The draft policy nonetheless encourages large commercial and industrial consumers to shift towards nuclear-sourced power.

— However, industry insiders have been cautious about nuclear power, citing its highly capital-intensive nature.

Do You Know:

— SMRs are essentially advanced small nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of 30MWe to 300 MWe (megawatt electrical) per unit. Conventional nuclear reactors, the kind which are currently installed in India and elsewhere, usually have capacities to produce 500 MW of electricity or more.

— The relatively simpler and modular design of SMRs—enabling their components to be assembled in a factory instead of being constructed on-site—lowers costs and allows flexible deployment, making them a much more attractive proposition in recent years.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Energy transition will need more than chasing the sun and harnessing the wind 

📍In power sector, more players is the answer, not bailouts

Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme:

(3) Which one of the following is a purpose of ‘UDAY’, a scheme of the Government? (UPSC CSE 2016)

(a) Providing technical and financial assistance to start-up entrepreneurs in the field of renewable sources of energy

(b) Providing electricity to every household in the country by 2018

(c) Replacing the coal-based power plants with natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind and tidal power plants over a period of time

(d) Providing for financial turnaround and revival of power distribution companies

THE IDEAS PAGE

Netaji’s parakram lives on, illuminates a nation’s path

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: History of India and Indian National Movement

Mains Examination: General Studies-I: The Freedom Struggle — its various stages and important contributors/contributions from different parts of the country.

What’s the ongoing story: C P Radhakrishnan writes: On Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s birth anniversary, the nation pays tribute to his courage, sacrifice, and unyielding passion for freedom. From a young age, Netaji displayed rare moral intensity — renouncing personal comfort, worldly ambition and even a prestigious career in the Indian Civil Service to dedicate himself to India’s liberation.

Key Points to Ponder:

— Role of Subhas Chandra Bose in India’s independence struggle

— What was the role of the Indian National Army (INA) in India’s independence struggle?

— Know the history of INA

— Who is known as the “Bose of the South”?

— Who was the founder of INA?

— Know the difference in the ideology of Bose and Gandhi

Key Takeaways:

— A profound insight into Netaji’s personality comes from a remarkable tribute by Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore in 1939. He hailed Subhas Chandra Bose as deshnayak — the leader of the nation.

— Gurudev observed that in troubled times, a country needs the strong hand of an inspired and valiant leader. In Netaji, he saw a rare fusion of courage, vision and moral force.

— When conventional paths appeared inadequate to achieve Independence, Netaji charted his own course, transforming the freedom struggle into an international movement through the Indian National Army.

— Netaji’s clarion call —“Give me blood, and I will give you freedom”— resonated deeply across regions and communities of India, especially the people of the southern regions, the Tamils in particular.

— From the early 1920s, Netaji recognised the political importance of the Madras Presidency in the Indian national movement. As a Congress organiser and national leader, he engaged closely with political workers in the region.

— On September 3, 1939, Netaji arrived at Madras Central Station, where he was received by supporters, including lawyer and freedom fighter S Srinivasa Iyengar and Pasumpon U Muthuramalinga Thevar.

— During this visit, Pasumpon U Muthuramalinga Thevar, a close associate of Netaji, emerged as a key leader of the Forward Bloc in Tamil Nadu. Often remembered as the “Bose of the South”, he played a significant role in mobilising Tamil support for the INA. He also founded a Tamil weekly magazine, Netaji.

— In a stirring address at the Padang in Singapore in 1943, Netaji urged women to join the struggle, declaring that this must be a truly revolutionary army. His words deeply moved Tamil Indian women in Malaya, many of whom had endured hardship on rubber plantations. Despite having never seen India, nearly a thousand of them volunteered for the Rani of Jhansi Regiment.

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose

— While the bravery of Lakshmi Swaminathan (Captain Lakshmi Sahgal) is widely recognised, the contributions of Janaky Thevar, Anjalai Ponnusamy and Rasammah Bhupalan are equally inspiring.

— Janaky Thevar, only 14 when she first heard Netaji speak, donated her diamond earring to the INA and later rose to a senior leadership position in the Rani of Jhansi Regiment.

— Saraswathi Rajamani, often regarded as one of India’s youngest women intelligence operatives, joined the INA at 16 and served with distinction. In keeping with Netaji’s egalitarian vision, women trained and served alongside men, and caste divisions were rejected.

— Netaji believed that political independence was only the beginning; the greater task was to build a strong, united and self-reliant India that ensured dignity and justice for all.

— Prime Minister Narendra Modi has consistently emphasised the need to shed the colonial mindset, honour India’s values and freedom fighters, and advance towards true freedom of the mind and spirit.

— This vision is reflected in the government’s observance of Netaji’s birth anniversary as Parakram Diwas, the renaming of historic islands in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in his honour, and the installation of his statue at Kartavya Path.

Do You Know:

— The INA was formed on February 17, 1942, two days after the British surrendered to Japanese forces in Singapore. It mostly comprised Indian prisoners of war (PoWs) captured by the Japanese during their Southeast Asia campaign.

— Bose arrived in Singapore in July 1943 and took charge of the 12,000-strong INA on July 4.

— He gave the call of “Delhi Chalo” to INA to march on Delhi and liberate India from British rule. The INA crossed the Indo-Burma border and marched towards Imphal and Kohima in March 1944. The Chalo Delhi campaign ended at Imphal.

— By 1945, the British had launched their own campaign to retake Burma, and the INA once again found itself in retreat. After the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, the war came to an end.

— Bose wanted to stay with his troops for the surrender but was persuaded to leave by his subordinates. He died in a plane crash three days later.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Knowledge nugget of the day: Remembering Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose on Parakram Diwas

Previous year UPSC Prelims Question Covering similar theme:

(4) In the context of Colonial India, Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Kumar Sehgal and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon are remembered as (UPSC CSE 2021)

(a) leaders of Swadeshi and Boycott Movement

(b) members of the Interim Government in 1946

(c) members of the Drafting Committee in the Constituent Assembly

(d) officers of the Indian National Army

Previous year UPSC Mains Question Covering similar theme:

Highlight the differences in the approach of Subhash Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi in the struggle for freedom. (UPSC CSE 2016)

EXPLAINED

Trump Greenland gambit is his signature playbook

Syllabus:

Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international importance

Mains Examination: General Studies-II: Effect of policies and politics of developed and developing countries on India’s interests, Indian diaspora; Important International institutions, agencies and fora- their structure, mandate

What’s the ongoing story: After days of threats of military intervention and tariffs, US President Donald Trump walked off the ledge by announcing that a framework had been reached for a deal with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) over Greenland’s future.

Key Points to Ponder:

— Know the history, role, and function of NATO

— What is the geopolitical significance of Greenland in the context of Arctic politics?

— Why does Greenland matter to the US?

— What is the “Coalition of the Willing”?

— Know about the history of Greenland

— Map work: Locate Greenland and surrounding waterbodies on the map

Key Takeaways:

— The announcement followed his speech at the annual World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday (January 21). Negotiators from the US and Europe will now hammer out the details of the deal.

— The American President has argued that US control of Greenland would secure critical resources (the island is estimated to have enormous oil and gas reserves, as well as troves of rare-earth minerals such as cobalt, graphite, and lithium).

— Additionally, it would expand the US military’s reach in the Arctic and would challenge and circumscribe Chinese and Russian influence in a region key to American national security.

— First, Trump always dials up the rhetoric and makes a public spectacle of the matter at hand, even for sensitive international issues. His threats and bullying tactics on Greenland, through posts on Truth Social and statements to the press, had stunned many around the world — most importantly, the Europeans.

— He adopted a similar playbook for dealing with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last year in the Oval Office, when he — along with Vice President JD Vance — had publicly berated the Ukrainian President. Many were struck by Trump’s threatening behaviour, with statements such as “You don’t have the cards”.

— Second, the expected course of action follows, and those at the receiving end of Trump’s threats and tirades huddle together. After the Zelenskyy episode, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer met with the Europeans and formed the “Coalition of the Willing”, which included most NATO members and partners who had been supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression.

— Then comes an attempt at standing up to the US President. In Greenland’s case, the European allies, seven countries including France and Germany, sent a small contingent of troops to Greenland as a gesture of solidarity to defend Greenland against any military adventurism by the Americans.

— Similarly, Europe stepped up their defence supplies to Ukraine last year — as the US dithered and dilly-dallied over its support — and even paused defence and intelligence support to the US for a while.

— Fourth, the most important step, is talking to Trump himself. The US President likes to be wooed and pursued by his adversaries, even if their framing as such may be largely imagined or perceived.

Location of Greenland, in the Kingdom of Denmark. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

— The Coalition of the Willing spoke to the US President repeatedly. The European leaders swallowed their pride, went to the Oval Office and sat across the table with the US President to back Zelenskyy.

— Fifth, Trump is now closer to acquiring the rights to Greenland, without having to use force. He first came up with the idea of purchasing Greenland during his first term in 2019, which was dismissed as a fantasy by many.

— At the time, Brussels, Copenhagen, or Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, didn’t take the threat seriously. But, now, after having threatened military intervention and tariffs, he has moved closer to securing the rights of military expansion and mining natural resources.

— So, what Trump has now accomplished is the following: the Americans do not have to “take” Greenland by invading a NATO ally, by buying a sovereign territory or by a referendum in Greenland. Instead, he can get the rights to explore, mine and base his military through “essentially, a big real estate deal”.

— Sixth, the impact of this saga on the world order is chilling. He has shown world leaders, especially those of the major powers — be it Chinese President Xi Jinping or Russian President Vladimir Putin — what is possible through coercion, that consent doesn’t matter, and capitulation is the end goal. New Delhi will also be watching the turn of events.

From the Editorial page: Trump is succeeding because leaders across the world want to be little Trumps 

— Pratap Bhanu Mehta writes: One year into his presidency, the surprise is not that Trump is imperial or authoritarian. The disappointment is the absence of a serious global pushback. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has thrown down the gauntlet, describing this as a moment of rupture.

— Europe may finally be stirred after Trump’s threat to Greenland; Countries like India exhibit a sulky but ineffectual resistance. But by and large, capitulation has triumphed over meaningful resistance. This failure demands explanation.

— The usual explanations do not hold much water. One claim is, as Carney suggested, no one is willing to defend the old liberal international order because no such order ever truly existed. Great-power exceptionalism destroyed it.

— But the charge of liberal hypocrisy would be serious only if there was concerted global action to replace it with something fairer and equitable. Instead, what we are getting is greater comfort with international nihilism.

— Even if one has no attachment to liberal internationalism, there are compelling realist reasons to resist Trump far more forcefully… We might not care about norms or decaying international institutions. But Trump’s actions have significantly eroded the prospects for stable great-power relations.

— The most damaging aspect of Trump’s coveting of Greenland is not merely the threat of territorial annexation or resource exploitation.

— The greater danger is that Trump is placing great-power competition on an escalation ladder that will be exceedingly difficult to dismount. In both Venezuela and Greenland, the ostensible rationale is to deny China and Russia strategic space. But this is not a signal about spheres of influence; it is a signal of escalating confrontation.

— Even if such moves marginally strengthen the United States’ positional advantage in specific areas in the short run, they raise escalation risks everywhere else. They communicate not merely that the United States will resist China’s rise, but that it will not even seek a modus vivendi of managed rivalry. Trump’s actions do not reduce the risks of great-power conflict; they intensify them.

— Trump is redefining the rules of the international system by normalising unilateral territorial revisionism under the banner of strategic denial. The justification is the same: Preventing China or Russia from gaining influence.

— Global wars rarely begin with grand designs. They begin when misunderstandings multiply, and leaders gamble that escalation can be controlled. We are in that situation now.

— Perhaps we have been lulled by Trump’s own climbdowns. He does not really mean to play this game of exclusion and encirclement; after all, China forced him to retreat, and a modus vivendi may yet be possible.

— But this explanation does not hold water. We should remember that even if Trump retreats, the pattern of his behaviour still projects a willingness to test limits through maximalist threats.

— Perhaps there is another explanation: The lack of state capacity. Europe, as it is discovering, cannot realistically confront the United States. Building the institutions and power necessary to do so will take years. India faces a similar reality.

— The world had become too psychologically dependent on the United States. Trump can act as a patriarch because we have put the US in that position. Much of the world, even in the face of Trump’s perfidy, is behaving like errant children, seeking their father’s good graces.

— Perhaps Trump is succeeding because the world is full of leaders wanting to be little Trumps. We are not resisting him because we relish the permissions he is putting in place: The universalisation of narcissism and freedom from norms may be the newest form of American internationalism. All risks be damned.

Do You Know:

— Greenland holds the world’s eighth-largest store of rare earth minerals, according to the US Geological Survey, along with oil and gas, gold, nickel and cobalt reserves. Rare earths are vital for making superconductor chips, electric vehicles, green energy technologies, and also military technologies. Of the 34 classified rare earth minerals, Greenland has about 23.

— NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, was set up in 1949 by the US, Canada, and several western European nations to ensure their collective security against the Soviet Union. It was the US’s first peacetime military alliance outside the western hemisphere.

Other Important Articles Covering the same topic:

📍Trump is not the first to notice Greenland’s mineral wealth. Here are 3 reasons the minerals have stayed underground

📍Why Donald Trump wants to acquire Greenland: Key questions answered

UPSC Prelims Practice Question Covering similar theme:

(5) With reference to Greenland, consider the following statements:

1. It was once a Danish colony and is now an autonomous province of Denmark.

2. It is located in the South Atlantic Ocean.

3. Its strategic importance rose during the Cold War, and the US had a large air base in Greenland.

4. It is rich in rare earth minerals.

How many of the statements given above are correct?

(a) Only one

(b) Only two

(c) Only three

(d) All four

ALSO IN NEWS
ECI launches new app, CEC offers other countries help to develop similar platform	As the Election Commission on Thursday launched ECINet, a website and app that brings over 40 of its existing apps for voters and election officials on one platform, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar said the ECI can help other election management bodies in the world to develop a similar platform. The CEC launched the app on day two of the EC’s ongoing three-day international conference for election management bodies and experts. Addressing the foreign delegates, he extended the offer – that ECI could work with their election management bodies to develop a similar app as per their election laws and language.
Looking at social media ban for under-16 users, Andhra sets up ministers’ panel	A day after Andhra Pradesh’s IT and Education Minister Nara Lokesh said the Telugu Desam Party (TDP)-led government was mulling over bringing an Australia-like law on banning social media for children under the age of 16, a Group of Ministers (GoM) headed by him has been set up study the proposal. Andhra Pradesh is the first state where such a proposal has been mooted.

 

PRELIMS ANSWER KEY

1. (b)  2. (c)  3. (d)   4. (d)  5. (c)

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.

🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for January 2026. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com🚨