 Welcome to the Hindi News Analysis by Shankar Ayes Academy. The list of topics chosen for today's discussion along with the page numbers is given here for your reference. Let us take up this opiate article which talks about a conversation between experts regarding India's neighborhood policy. So in this discussion, they talked about the relations of India with neighbors and what are the recent developments and how Indian relations with Nepal-Bangladesh have deteriorated in the recent years. So let us have this discussion. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See for any nation, the real test of foreign policy is in the handling of neighbors. This is mainly because our neighbors play a very important role in protecting our interests as well as sovereignty. So coming to India's case, we face challenges in relations with most of our immediate neighbors. Say China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal up to some extent with Sri Lanka. For example, we are having issues with Pakistan right from independence with China from 1960s and with Nepal with respect to recent changes in map and Sri Lanka in 1990s with respect to LTTE and Bangladesh that is Rohingya issue. So almost with all the neighbors, we are having some kind of disturbances. So what experts are saying on these current problems of India? Firstly, they tell that India's current foreign policy is episodic, which means like our foreign policy is an episode of a serial. So it changes from one episode to other episode. So it can be said that we take decisions with respect to our neighbors by taking into consideration only our domestic situations. This means we do not have a stable policy and according to authors, this is not a good idea because domestic drivers change frequently and have most of the times put foreign policy objectives to a lower position. For example, just now we talked about Bangladesh and CAA. CAA is a domestic issue but it has affected the relations with Bangladesh. Second, more often our relations with neighbors are getting deteriorated since we accuse them of engaging with China. But naturally, all these countries have a policy of balance relations with their neighbors be it India or China. Moreover, the world as a whole and South Asian region in particular has become an open competitive market. That means all these countries in our neighborhood that once depended and relied much on India are now adopting a first come first serve policy. It means if China is coming with a good policy, they are ready to accept China's initiatives. Third, others talk about advantage which China has. See they opine that most of the countries which have bilateral relations with India's neighbors are working in parallel without coordinating with each other. For example, in Nepal, the Britain, Japan, US and India had their own development cooperation programs. But they did not cooperate and coordinate with each other and often conflicted with each other on different issues. For example, US or Japan may be supporting projects which are not necessarily aligned with India. So China took this opportunity and used a divide and rule approach to break India from its neighbors. And this has benefited China in bringing Nepal into its site. Fourth, experts opine that South Asia is one of the least integrated regions with tremendous deficits in terms of infrastructure, connectivity and interdependence. And it also exposed to various geopolitical competition dynamics. For example, China is gaining more importance in the region through BRI, maritime Silk Road, etc. But according to others, India is not doing well on connectivity and regional policies. Even though we are part of many regional multilateral groupings like SARC, BIMSTEC, even BBIN, that is Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal, they are not working well. And also SARC is outdated and does not even serve the complex fluid regional cooperation agenda any longer. For example, you take Pakistan, a member of SARC, has taken a very different approach to regional connectivity. It sees itself as a hub between China and the Gulf or Central Asian regions. And due to the bad relations with Pakistan, India is not able to engage well with Central Asia or West since Pakistan is a blocking factor for India's connectivity. See, we all know that India to connect with Afghanistan, we had to go through Iran. And due to this, India has taken a pragmatic policy or realistic policy by engaging more towards the south, that is on Indian Ocean side and east with Southeast Asia. For example, India revived BIMSTEC and worked on BBIN Co-Dilateral for a framework on motor vehicle and water governance. So what are the suggestions given by the author? See, first they suggest that it is extremely important that our engagement with our neighboring countries should not be episodic or event oriented. Rather, it should be process oriented. We should have a plan for continuous engagement at various levels. Also, India's diplomacy should align in a manner that does not make our neighbors feel marginalized. And also, India should work on making clarity on policies and creating interdependence in this region. It is even said that South Asian region is the least integrated region across the world. Next, we should work for better connectivity with our neighbors with better planning and infrastructure. And more importantly, this connectivity should be linked with software of connectivity so that connectivity can be made realistic and it does not have any shortcomings. So what are we saying? Our procedures for allowing cargo or people to our neighboring countries are still archaic compared to what is found in Southeast Asia or Europe. If you take Europe, most of the constraints in connectivity or people transit are removed with the help of automation and softwares. So that is what we mean, software of connectivity. Also, we should give them importance by providing them national treatment with respect to the use of our transportation network, ports, exports, imports. So we have to allow them to use our infrastructure. Finally, in developmental activities of India, in our neighboring countries, India should work closer with like-minded partners like U.S., Japan, U.K., which are also democracies. And finally, all conflicts should be resolved through a process of coordination and integration. So these are the different opinions of experts with respect to India's foreign policy when it comes to neighborhood. See, we are having a policy called neighborhood-first policy where in India will give high preference to our neighbors. So these policies should be made even more realistic so that our neighbors won't get attracted towards China. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. Let us move on to next news article discussion. This news article is about the response of Union government on a proposal of election commission of India to eradicate the criminalization of politics. See, election commission proposed an idea of life ban for MPs or MLAs who were convicted for certain offenses under representation of People Act 1951 and who are convicted for corruption. It endorses that such criminals should not participate in election anymore and they should not form or become an office bearer of a political party. While this is a welcome solution to champion the cause of decriminalization of politics, the Union Ministry of Law and Justice has countered election commission based on some arguments. We will try to understand what is the stand of law ministry in this context. The court case is an advocate filed a petition in a Supreme Court that a life ban on conviction should uniformly apply for members of judiciary, executive and legislature and there should not be any discrimination of one from the other. The government states that an elected representative of people cannot be equated with public servants or civil servants who are banned for a lifetime on conviction. So generally when public servants are convicted, they will be banned for lifetime in a government job or anything like that. But when it comes to MLAs MPs, the ban is only for six years. So the government said that disqualification under RPA 1951 for the period of imprisonment and six years thereafter is enough. It means if I am convicted for two years and after two years I have to wait for six more years and I can participate in elections again. So this stand of government is criticized as taking a soft stand against the criminals. See as said before, a government employee is debored for life on conviction for offenses under IPC, money laundering, foreign exchange violation, unlawful activities prevention act, check cases, etc. But a legislator, either MLAs MP or MLC is only disqualified for the same offenses for a specified period only, that is conviction period plus six years. So there is a difference in treatment for the same offenses. So the law ministry's another argument is that legislators are not bound by specific service conditions. They are bound by their oath to serve citizens and country. They are bound by propriety, good conscience and interest of the nation. So they demand a difference in treatment and punishment for the conviction for same offenses. So somewhere in your mind article 14 might be floating that equality before law and equal protection of laws. So we have to wait and see how Supreme Court handles this case and gives its final judgment. Let us move on to next news article discussion. So these two news articles, one from main page and other from editorial page are about the ongoing negotiations between the former organizations and the union government over the three form bills. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See firstly these three bills were already passed by the parliament and also received ascent of president in the September of this year. So no longer their bills, their acts. The three acts are farmers produce trade and commerce act 2020, farmers agreement on price assurance and farm services act 2020, essential commodities amendment act of 2020. So these are the three acts which were either brought in or amended in the recent months and we have discussed the positives and negatives of these acts many times in the last three to four months. So today's question is why the farmers are protesting. See several farmer groups argue that the proposed changes to EC act that is essential commodities act would ultimately benefit only the middlemen and traders. Actually the amendment is government is relaxing the hoarding regulations. It means now traders can store the green and can sell them when price is good. So it would ultimately benefit only the middlemen and traders. See these people will buy the produce in the harvest season when prices are generally lower, they store them and release them when prices are high. So farmers are not going to benefit anything only the traders and middlemen are going to benefit. And coming to opening of agree marketing outside Mondays, farmers are fearing that private companies will establish private Mondays which will have no government regulation. One of their biggest concern is provision for contract forming which they fear will be exploitative as well as the corporates may take over the farmers line. So the farmers also believe that these acts are first step towards elimination of minimum support price program or MSP regime. They cite the Shanthakumar committee recommendation to stop bonuses on MSP paid by states to farmers and adopt cash transfer system. So the committee said that replace MSP with DBT that is direct benefit transfer. So coming back to the article it says that even the fourth round of talks between union government and farmer leaders ended in conclusively. But farmers are very stubborn and they are not accepting anything less than repealing all the three acts. So this is what the main page article says. Coming to editorial it says why the farmers are continuing protest against the government's assurance that MSP will be continued. Ironically at the time when Punjab-Haryana farmers are protesting in Delhi government is procuring lot of food grains from Punjab and Haryana. So even the government is saying that we are procuring grains farmers are worried that in the future MSP may be removed or replaced. So next question is why only the farmers of Punjab-Haryana up to some extent UP are worried about these acts. Why not farmers of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Odisha which are also important producers of rice are not worried. See in 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 in the two years nearly 88% of paddy and 70% of wheat in Punjab and Haryana has been absorbed through public procurement. In contrast in the other major paddy states like AP, Telangana, Odisha, UP only 40% of rice production is procured by public agencies. So it shows that farmers in Punjab and Haryana are heavily dependent on public procurement and assured price through MSP. Because of this heavy dependence on MSP and PDS the farmers are worried that the government may remove or replace MSP and PDS. So this is why the protests are largely in the states of Punjab-Haryana. See the solution suggested by Aadho is that the government shall continue procurement. Because more than the farmers government needs procurement to meet its targets under PDS and National Food Security Act. So author tells that there are nearly 80 crore NFSA beneficiaries and an additional 8 crore migrants who need to be supported under public distribution system. So to feed the poor government needs an uninterrupted supply of grain which comes mainly from Punjab and Haryana. So for this reason author says that more than the farmers government needs the procurement system and MSP. And as we all know the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the livelihood of many poor people and it also pushed many people into poverty. So the government has earmarked much larger quantities for public distribution. So we have discussed the easing of restrictions under EC Amendment Act. So there is a possibility of large scale hoarding which means traders may store the grains and will allow them into market only when prices are high. So government cannot go to open market where the price is very high for procurement. So it has to rely on public procurement especially from Punjab and Haryana. This is because nearly 35% of rice, 60% of wheat procured across India in last 3 years has been from these states and not just that even 50% of total coarse grains also came from these two states. So Punjab and Haryana are very very important to run public procurement as well as public distribution system in the country. So dismantling the procuring system is neither in the interests of farmers nor the government because both needs procurement system. So the solution is to reach out the farmer groups and assure them of the indispensability of MSP procurement system. There are even opinions that MSP should be legally mandated. It should be brought in as a statute. But we have to wait and see what government is going to do and how farmer groups are going to fight against the government. And there are many news articles in today's newspaper regarding this farmer protest, mainly the role of women in the protest. See women are not just taking part in the demonstrations. They are also mobilizing rations, preparing food for those agitating against the formulas. So the news article titled, Feeding a protest women keep the fire in the belly and hurt the burning. So we can relate these two times of freedom struggle wherein women played a very important role in supporting the protest movements. And this news article titled, Farmers refused to break bread with the government says that the farmers didn't even take the food offered by the government during the discussion stages. In the current negotiations, government has offered food for the farmers, but they have strongly said that until you repeal the three laws, we are not going to take anything. And this news article is about Punjab. See immediately after government has brought in those, Punjab has passed their own legislation, which negates or undermines all the changes brought by the central government. But this bill is pending because the governor has not given assent. Only after governor gives assent, Punjab bill can override union government's farm acts. Let us move on to next news article discussion. If you see this editorial, this talks about the Iran challenge. So we know that there is some problem going with Iran in West Asia. See broadly, there are three power centers in West Asia. One is Israel, other one is Saudi Arabia and third one is Iran. We know that Israel and Saudi Arabia are having good relations with U.S. And for many years, the relations between U.S. and Iran are not fruitful. But in 2015, what happened was, then president, Mr. Obama, along with five other nations, signed a deal with Iran. It is called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. So in 2015, the P5 countries, China, France, Russia, UK, USA, along with Germany and with European Union had signed a deal with Iran, which is called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. So this plan ensures that Iran's nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. It means Iran should not develop nuclear weapons. We should use nuclear technology only for civilian purpose, that is electricity, medical diagnostics, etc. So JCPOA imposed restrictions on Iran's nuclear enrichment program. So this was the case in 2015. But immediately after Trump became president in 2016, U.S. unilaterally withdrew from this deal and also imposed economic sanctions on Iran. And not just that, U.S. even became closer with other power centers that are Israel and Saudi Arabia. In the recent days, we have already seen that the Islam nations are recognizing the Israel for the first time. As a result, the relations between Iran and U.S. became even worse. But today's editorial expects that the new president-elect Joe Biden may reverse this U.S.-Iran relations. Even in the election campaign, Joe Biden promised that U.S. will be back into the Iran deal. But he also said that he will seek to extend the restrictions on Iran that is 15 years, according to JCPOA, and also discuss the Iran's malign activities in West Asia. So this broadly suggests that Mr. Biden, similar to Trump, is expecting Iran to come to the table to re-negotiate the deal. It means some agreements of the deal should be re-visited and should be changed. So even though Trump administration exerted maximum pressure policy on Iran, Iran didn't give up. Instead it came up with maximum resistance. In the recent days, Iran even shot a U.S. drone and in this year, U.S. killed an Iranian general. So the tensions became very hot and people even expected that U.S. and Iran may go into war. But with the change of presidency, all the international experts are optimistic that U.S. and Iran along with other European nations may come up with one more deal which will be peaceful and beneficial for all the key players of the West Asian region. So we have to wait and see what is going to happen once Biden takes the presidency of U.S. in the coming month. And this news article says that Iran is moving towards stepping up of nuclear enrichment. So this news article says that a new law was approved in Iran which mandates the Iran government to halt the UN inspections of its nuclear sites and step up uranium enrichment beyond the limit set under JCPOA nuclear deal. See under 2015 deal the civilian nuclear sites of Iran has been open for IAEA that is International Atomic Energy Agency's inspections. And this new law says that Iran should stop the IAEA's inspection of its nuclear sites and also should start enrichment of uranium. So when we start enrichment of uranium it means we are going to prepare an atomic bomb. So this law would make it even harder for Joe Biden to rejoin and renegotiate the agreement. So one side people are optimistic about Joe Biden as next president but on the other side Iran is even making it complicated to come back to nuclear deal. So let us wait and see what is going to happen in the coming months. So this is all about the discussion of these new articles. Just have a brief idea of JCPOA. What are the tensions in West Asia? And what are the different power centers in West Asia? Let us move on to next news article discussion. This article says that India's own vaccines could be available almost immediately for public use after the completion of phase 3 trials. See clinical trials are usually conducted in phases that build on one another. Each phase is designed to answer certain questions related to a drug. The term phase indicates stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or a biological product. So the phase is based on studies objective, number of participants and other characteristics. So generally there are 5 phases. Early phase 1, formerly listed as phase 0, then phase 1, phase 2, phase 3 and phase 4. So phase 0 trials are first clinical trials done among people. It means before that generally the trials will be done on animals. So this phase 0 trials aim to learn how a drug is processed in the body and how it affects the body. And coming to phase 1, it is a phase of research to describe clinical trials that focus on the safety of a drug. They are usually performed with healthy volunteers and the goal is to determine the drug's most frequent and serious adverse events and often how the drug is broken down and excreted by the body. So these trials usually involve a small number of participants. And coming to phase 2, it is a phase of research to describe clinical trials that gather preliminary data on whether a drug works in people who have certain condition or disease. For example, participants receiving the drug may be compared to similar participants receiving a different treatment, usually an inactive substance called a placebo or a different drug. So safety continues to be evaluated and short term adverse events are studied. So phase 2 is about test effectiveness and further evaluate safety. Coming to phase 3, it is a phase of research to describe clinical trials that gather more information about drugs safety and effectiveness. This is done by studying different populations, different dosages and by using drug in combination with other drugs. So this phase confirm effectiveness, also monitor side effects and collect more information. So these studies typically involve more participants. And coming to phase 4, it is a phase of research to describe clinical trials occurring after getting approval for drug marketing. So they include post market requirement and commitment studies. So these trials gather additional information about a drug safety, efficacy or optimal use. So simply put, phase 4 provides additional information after approval. So have a very brief idea on these four phases of clinical trial. So today's news article says that India's own vaccines, for example, Covaxin could be available almost immediately for public use after the completion of phase 3 trials. And article also mentions the term emergency use authorization. It means this authorization allows the medicine or the vaccine to be used on the public during health emergencies. As getting approval for a vaccine will take more time. See for example, Central Drug Standard Control Organization that is CDSCO, has earlier granted approval for the emergency use of remdesivir to treat COVID-19 patients. CDSCO comes under Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the functions of CDSCO are given here. Just have a very brief idea. So today we have discussed what are the different phases of a clinical trial and also emergency use authorization. That is we are authorizing the usage of drug in an emergency situation. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. Let us move on to next news article discussion. See this lead article from today's editorial page is with reference to an important legal question that is widely being discussed. Yes, we are talking about the religious conversion with reference to marriage. So we will try to discuss some of the relevant aspects in this analysis. The relevant syllabus is given here for your reference. See imagine two individuals who are belonging to different religions enter into a relationship and they decide to marry. For our convenience and to better relate to much talked news, let us assume that one individual is from Muslim and other individual is from Hinduism. So when they decide to marry, there could be several circumstances. One of the partners might willfully accept the principles of other religion and may adopt the religion of her or his partner and convert to the other religion. So in this case, a Hindu girl may convert into Islam or a Islam boy can convert into Hinduism. But the current buzz across the country is in the name of love jihad, Muslim men are intentionally supporting the Hindu girls and causing lot of troubles for them after the marriage. So in this context, different people across the country are having a antagonistic view on Muslim people. So coming back to our example, here the conversion came out of conscience and own will are not an account of any compulsion or any influence. So either girl or boy who is converting into other religion is not under any compulsion. But imagine another example where the family of one or both partners coerces or influence their child to ensure conversion of partner to other religion. So coming back to our example the family of a Islam boy say is forcing the girl to convert into Islam. They say that only then they will give approval for the marriage of their son or daughter. So here there are two situations. First one, the couple may be in disadvantage position to fight the inequities imposed on them by their parents because the parents are saying that if the partner is converted, the marriage is going to happen. There will be even death threats to their child or to their child's partner. As we know parents are also operated by some persons of community or the society. So at this stage, though not out of belief one of the partners may convert to other religion out of free will. The person may say it is not out of belief but out of my free will I have converted to my partner's religion. Over the course of time the person seeing the wrath of parents or nearby society may reconvert that is convert back to his or her previous religion. So these are the problems related to interfaith marriages in our country. And this comes mainly when a Muslim boy is marrying a Hindu girl. And there are even some laws which are prohibiting these kind of conversions. For example we have a law in Madhya Pradesh as well as in Odisha. So in few states laws require that a district magistrate be informed each time a conversion was made. And also these laws prohibit any conversion that was obtained through fraud or force. So this is the case of Odisha, Madhya Pradesh etc. The next condition is that the two adults may decide to follow no religion and wants to live peacefully. But even then the immediate families in the name of rituals, religion may cause some kind of trouble to the married couple. And in the recent days even UP government promulgated an ordinance called Uttar Pradesh prohibition of unlawful conversion of religion ordinance. So as per this ordinance no person shall convert or attempt to convert any other person from one religion to other by use of practice of misrepresentation force, undue influence, coercion or by any other fraudulent means or by marriage. And if a converted person reconverts to previous religion that will not be considered as conversion under this ordinance. So according to this law if a person is converting only sake of marriage even then it is not acceptable. So it may be out of free will but not by faith. So this is the basic objective of UP ordinance. Then who can give the complaint? See if complaint is being given by one of the partners then it is not a problem. But the ordinance says that any aggrieved person, his or her parents brothers, sisters or any person related to boy or girl by blood or marriage or even adoption may file a complaint for conversion of religion. So there is a very big ambit of people who can complain on the conversion. See we know that couple in a relationship face opposition from their own family members if they are in relationship with a person of different religion. See most of us have seen many cases where parents have refused to accept even both boy and girl are belonging to same religion. So obviously when people belong to different religion there will be more resistance from parents of both sides. So what if one of them give complaint and the couple is harassed and falsely implicated for this. For example the brother of a girl or brother of a boy who is not happy with the marriage may simply go to police station and raise a complaint. And for this complaint the couple will be harassed. But we have to note that this provision is not completely meaningless. Why because? See for example assume that girl has been converted to other religion here and she is not even allowed out of her house. And who will complain? Obviously her parents or brother or sister has to complain. So this provision if rightly used is beneficial and also prone to misuse. So according to the ordinance the punishment of conversion for marriage is imprisonment of 1 year to 5 years and also fine. See it is widely reported in social media even in many newspapers that ordinances are being brought to prevent muslim men from entering into relationship with Hindus. So some people are even saying that this is an attempt by muslim fundamentalists to convert a Hindu adult to Islam in the name of Love Jihad. So this is one opinion which we are seeing mostly in the social media. So petitions are filed in supreme court to declare the UP ordinance as unconstitutional and null and void. But we have to wait and see what court is going to pronounce. And today's article also says that in a recent order the alhabad high court declared that religious conversions even made solely for the purposes of marriage constitute a valid exercise of persons liberties. And high court even said that freedom to live with a person of one's choice is intrinsic to the fundamental right to life and personal liberty. The court even invoked the supreme court judgment in Puttaswamy case that is the right to privacy case. So there are even few judgments wherein high court has said that conversion by an individual to Islam was valid only when it was predicated on change of heart and on an harnessed conviction in the tenets of the newly adopted religion. It means only if you are having faith in opposite religion then it will be valid. So there are different high court judgments in this aspect. So we have to wait and see how supreme court is going to decide on this very important matter with respect to religion. So what is your take on this? If you have any opinion just post them in the comment sections. What do you feel by the UP ordinance? Do you really believe in Love Jihad? So if you have any opinions regarding this you can post them in the comment section. One thing I would like to add here is don't be carried away by any news articles just have your own view of what is morally right and wrong and never ever forget that we are a secular country. This is all about the discussion of the lead article along with other news article on UP ordinance. As we are talking about religion that is one more international aspect of religion in today's newspaper. Let us have a very quick view of this news article. So the news article says that India has asked the UN to expand its criticism of hatred and violence against religions beyond the three Abrahamic religions. When we say Abrahamic religions we are referring to Judaism, Christianity and Islam. We also said that India would fully agree to anti-Semitism which means hatred towards a particular religion, Islamophobia, anti-Christian acts. All these acts need to be condemned and India firmly condemns such acts. But the India's representative in UN has further said that resolutions on such important issues speak only of these three Abrahamic religions together. So we are saying that UN is self-centered only on three religions which are Judaism, Christianity and Islam and it is not considering the hatred towards Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism etc. See actually we know that in the last year we had attack in New Zealand called Christ Church attack wherein Muslims were targeted and in the response churches in Sri Lanka were targeted and in the recent days we are seeing beheading of people by Islamic fundamentalists in France. So on all these aspects UN has condemned with a firm voice as pointed out by India's representative. UN is not so firm and strong when it comes to hatred towards Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism. See overall Hinduism has more than 1.2 billion followers Buddhism around 500 million followers, Sikhism 30 million followers. So India is asking UN to maintain equality across all faiths. So this is all about the discussion of this news article. Just have a brief idea that India has raised issue of religions hatred in UN. We can write it somewhere in our mind and it means answers. Let us move on to practice questions discussion session. This question is based on fundamental rights. Subject to which of the following all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess practice and propagate religion in India. So three conditions are given here. Public order, morality and health. Yes all the three are exemptions to article 25 wherein it says that subject to public order, morality and health all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and right freely to profess practice and propagate religion. So the correct answer is option D 1, 2 and 3. With respect to CDSCO under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare consider the following statements. So four functions are given here which of the above are functions of CDSCO. All four are the functions of CDSCO. See as you can see here the functions of CDSCO include approval of new drugs and clinical trials. So one and three are included. Second import registration and licensing. Third license approving of blood banks, LVPs, vaccines etc. So four is also included. Amendment to DNC Act and Rules banning of drugs and cosmetics. So function 2 is also included. And other functions include grant of test license, personal license, NOCs for export, testing of new drugs, oversight and market surveillance. So correct answer is option D 1, 2, 3 and 4. Let us take up these two main questions. The existing measures are sufficient to effectively address criminalization of politics. Critically examine. You have to take a critical stand of the given statement and try to answer this question. And this question is based on India's foreign policy with the threats posed by more dominant neighbors and the changing geopolitical situations in South Asia. India should rework on its neighborhood policies to fulfill the aspiration of being a real leader in the regional level as well as in the global level. Comment. Try to answer this question in 250 words. With this we conclude today's news analysis. If you find this session resourceful click on the like button show your appreciation in the comment section and don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel.