GS Analyst: Daily Editorial In Brief

The recent Independence Day address highlighted a governance model that combines discipline, citizen-centric policy, and cooperative federalism.

Vision and Policy Approach

• Discipline in Governance: Governance is anchored in rigorous preparation, attention to detail, and insistence on accountability at every level of decision-making.
• Policy as a Living Instrument: Policies are treated as adaptive tools, continuously refined to respond to economic rhythms rather than static documents.
• Cooperative Federalism: The functioning of the GST Council demonstrates rigorous debate between Centre and States, fostering consensus-driven outcomes.

Citizen-Centric Systems

• Infrastructure for Inclusion: The integration of digital identity, universal bank accounts, and real-time payments has institutionalised financial inclusion and reduced leakages.
• Antyodaya as Benchmark: The upliftment of the last citizen is treated as the ultimate test of schemes, ensuring benefits reach the most vulnerable sections.
• Technological Pragmatism; Innovations in areas such as bamboo-based biofuel are assessed not only for technological feasibility but also for supply chain resilience and farmer benefits.

Work Culture and Outcomes

• Civil but Unsparing Dialogue: Decision-making culture encourages diverse views but prioritises evidence-backed arguments, with responsibility and metrics clearly assigned.
• Outcomes over Spectacle: In domains like energy security and national security, actions are grounded in clarity, restraint, and focus on tangible benefits for citizens.
• Enduring Institutions: Governance emphasises building institutions, platforms, and standards that ensure stability for citizens, enterprises, and the state.

Mains Question:

“Examine how disciplined work ethic and citizen-centric systems can strengthen governance institutions in India. Illustrate with recent examples.”  (250 words)

Massive Gen Z-led protests in Nepal forced Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli to resign, leading to an interim government and elections scheduled for March 2026.

Immediate Fallout

• Resignation of Prime Minister: Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli resigned on September 9, 2025, following widespread Gen Z protests and public anger over excessive police action.
• Appointment of Interim PM: Former Chief Justice Sushila Karki was sworn in as interim Prime Minister on September 12, tasked with conducting elections within six months.
• Parliament Dissolution: Parliament was dissolved, and an apolitical expert cabinet is being formed to restore calm and ensure smooth election preparations.

Causes and Political Background

• Youth-Led Unrest: The protests reflected rising youth unemployment in Nepal (over 20%) and frustration with cronyism and coalition politics.
• Historical Political Instability: Since 2015, Nepal has seen seven governments under recurring leaders, frequent changes preventing job growth and economic development.
• Regional Context: Similar political upheavals occurred in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Myanmar due to youth protests, long-tenured leaders, and weak accountability mechanisms.

Challenges and Way Forward

• Election and Accountability: Interim government priorities include conducting March 5, 2026 elections, investigating police excesses, and exposing political corruption.
• Constitutional Concerns: Proposals to amend the 2015 constitution, including directly elected executives or weakening federalism, risk sparking protests among Madhesis, Janjatis, and Tharu communities.
• India-Nepal Relations: India maintained a neutral stance, with Prime Minister Modi extending support to the interim government and emphasizing peaceful, free, and fair elections.

Practice Question:

Examine the role of youth-led movements in shaping political transitions in South Asia, with reference to Nepal’s 2025 protests. Discuss the challenges of constitutional reforms and maintaining democratic stability in such transitions.

China’s announcement to forgo Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) at the WTO has implications for India’s trade and subsidy policies.

Trade and Subsidy Pressures

• Global Trade Context: China’s decision at the UN General Assembly signals potential pressure on India to conform with WTO rules while preserving domestic subsidies.
• Agricultural and Industrial Vulnerability: India’s reliance on SDT supports subsidies for farmers, agriculture, and public sector manufacturing, which face constraints if phased out.
• Food Security Risks: Phased removal of subsidies could reduce rural incomes by 10-15%, aggravate food price volatility, and increase malnutrition among children.

Strategic Policy Options

• Developed Country Comparison: Developed nations’ subsidies exceed global norms, yet India must defend its Green Box exemptions while expanding domestic capabilities.
• Sectoral Reforms: India should prioritize non-essential tariffs, enhance data localization, and strengthen digital commerce networks without breaching WTO rules.
• Innovation and Industrial Policy: Encouraging technology adoption, supply chain resilience, and domestic production in strategic sectors is key to offsetting SDT reduction impacts.

Future Engagement

• International Negotiations: India must negotiate carefully on tariff-free access, data rules, and standards alignment, balancing trade benefits and domestic interests.
• Intellectual Property and Digital Trade: Maintaining IP rights while promoting e-commerce and digital trade ensures competitiveness and innovation.
• Strategic Preparedness: India needs a medium-term WTO strategy aligned with economic growth, domestic welfare, and sectoral competitiveness before SDT obligations change.

Practice Question:

Examine the implications of China’s decision to forgo Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) at the WTO for India. Discuss strategies India should adopt to safeguard its agriculture, industry, and digital trade sectors.  (250 words)