 Welcome to the Hindu 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 start today's analysis with this news article. This discussion is about recent apology by Facebook for misusing its platform for inciting offline violence. The syllabus relevant for this discussion is given here for your reference. In an unexpected time, a long-awaited apology from Facebook highlighted that the hate speech and rumors shared on an online platform will lead to offline violence. See, the ethnic conflict between Sinhali's majority and Tamil minority is well known to the world. But it is said that since 2012, there was also rising tensions between Buddhist majority and Sri Lankan Muslims. It is because there are growing fears among Sinhali's majority that international Islamic community may someday take over Sri Lanka. So, because of this, in 2018 anti-Muslim riots surfaced from the Buddhist majority in Sri Lanka, where they attacked mosques, Muslim-owned shops and homes. See, Facebook was cited as one of the reasons for this attack, as it was used to spread hate speech online. Due to this, in 2018, Facebook partnered with Article 1 to conduct an investigation. Here, Article 1 is a specialized ethics and human rights consulting firm. The assessment report of this Article 1 was released last week, which revealed that Facebook platform contributed to spreading of rumors and hate speech, which may have led to offline violence in Sri Lanka. The assessment also found that the proliferation of hate speech and misinformation may have contributed to unrest and in some cases resulted in physical harm. Consequently, Facebook apologized for the very real human rights impacts due to misuse of its platform. Thus, the recently released report acknowledges that how social media platforms and other online products were being used and abused to spread racism, Islamophobia, hate, violence, etc. This can be clearly seen in the case of India also, where hate speech has not been defined in any law. But the 267th report of Law Commission, which was on hate speech, somewhat defined this term. According to this Law Commission report, hate speech is an incitement to hate-read against a group of persons defined in terms of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. Simply, hate speech can be any word, sign, or visible representation with the intention of causing fear or incitement to violence. Hate speech is much harmful than we imagine, as it has the potential of provoking individuals or society to commit criminal acts, such as terrorism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc. We have clear examples in our country where online social media platforms like WhatsApp, Facebook were used to inset offline violence. Many reports point that the lynchmops and other types of communal violence in the country accelerated due to rumour originating on WhatsApp groups. So, if you ask whether our country has any legislation regarding hate speech and related misinformation, yes, there are certain legislations which talk about hate speech. For example, Section 153A of Indian Penal Code penalizes promotion of enmity between different groups and grounds of religion, race, place of birth, etc. Secondly, the representation of people at 1951 prohibits promotion of enmity on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language in connection with the elections as a corrupt electoral practice and prohibits it. So, for your reference, these are the other legislations which have bearing on hate speech in our country. As a conclusion, we can say that in this era of technology, online social media platforms play important role in advocating democracy. At the same time, they are being misused by social evils to spread hatred in the community. Even the so-called WhatsApp groups have become universities of misinformation. Hence, currently, the platforms are tackling this problem with the combination of artificial intelligence, user reporting, content moderators to enforce rules regarding appropriate content. However, until each country comes up with strict regulations prohibiting hate speech and stringent punishment for the same, this socially evils spreading social disharmony will continue unabated. With this, we come to the end of this news article. This practice question will be discussed at the end of the session. Dear aspirants, as we are talking about hate speech, we recommend you to follow official government handles on social media. Government as a part of e-governance updates every important government decision on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. If you are using any of these social media platforms, follow government accounts or handles to get yourself updated with the latest happenings in the country. This will also help your civil services exam preparation. For example, in this week's news analysis, we covered in-depth about Atma Nirbar Abhyan, Vande Bharat, Samudra Setu, etc. All these current events are concisely covered in the social media as you can see on the screen. Be a responsible citizen and stop the fake news and hate speech in online platforms. Let's move on to the next news article. Let us take up this news article. As we all know, the former army chief, General Bipin Ravath, has been appointed as chief of defense staff. The CDS is a four-star general whose salary and perquisites are equivalent to service chiefs of three armed forces. One of the most important functions of the CDS is to facilitate the restructuring of military commands, bringing about jointness in operations and the establishment of joint or theater commands. Today's article is about developments regarding theater commands. The syllabus relevant for the discussion is given here for your reference. If you see in modern warfare, nations do not have the luxury of continuing war for long durations. This is mainly because of military, economic, and domestic limitations, and most importantly, international pressure. So, in order to achieve strategic goals in the shortest time possible, we need the networking of armed forces. This is where theater command assumes significance. A theater command or integrated theater command is a military structure wherein all the assets of army, air force, and navy in a particular theater of war are under the operational control of a senior military commander. At present, India has a theater command in Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which was formed after the Kargil conflict. See, a theater command will bring together all the available resources under one commanding officer. Also, the three services will get to know each other, thereby strengthening the cohesion within our military. Also, when the command and control is under one person, it will ensure that there will be no fratricide. Know that fratricide means accidental killing of our own forces during a war. Also, integration will enable real-time sharing of intelligence and information between widely dispersed forces. It will also ensure common communication systems and also common training establishments and equipment wherever possible. So, with integration, maintenance, and logistics will come down and bring a lot of shareings. This will also bring down the time taken for processing of information, decision-making, and its execution. If you see, all this increase the chance of achieving our strategic goals in the shortest time possible. With this, let us discuss the news article. See, few months back, the chief of defense staff has said that India will have two to five theater commands along the borders with Pakistan and China. In this context, this article says that the land-based theater commands will mainly be between army and air force. But, the assets of Navy will also be used, especially in the Northern Theater Command, along the border with China and Pakistan. See, for example, Indian Navy's P-8I Long Range Maritime Petrol Aircraft was used for observing Chinese movements during the Doklam standoff in 2017. So, if naval fighter jets can be used in western desert areas, the Indian Air Force jets operating there can be moved to other borders. This will result in better utilization of resources and coordination among the forces. As per this article, the first integrated command in the works is Integrated Air Defense Command, which will be headed by Indian Air Force. It will be soon followed by a maritime command and then the land-based theater commands. It is said that these projects would take shape in two to three years. The article also says that the national security strategy, which is being prepared by Defense Planning Committee, is also being finalized. Know that the DPC, the Defense Planning Committee, was set up in 2018 and is a permanent body under the chairmanship of National Security Advisor. Apart from NSA, the DPC consists of Chief of Defense Staff, the three Service Chiefs, the Defense Secretary, and the Foreign Secretary. With this, we come to the end of analysis of this news article. This news article expresses the concerns of a policy advisor of Ministry of External Affairs over regional comprehensive economic partnership. The senior official has indicated that global concerns over China post COVID-19 has strengthened India's opposition to the proposed grouping. We know that RCEP was much in discussion last year. Originally, 16 countries were part of these negotiations for the proposed agreement that is RCEP, which included 10 countries of ASEAN and 6 free trade partners of ASEAN, which are India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand. Simply, RCEP is a free trade agreement between ASEAN and 6 other countries. Know that this agreement is not yet signed. If you see, a lot of trust was given last year to conclude this agreement. But in the month of November, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared that India will not join RCEP in its present format. The present draft format of this RCEP agreement is said to be detrimental to Indian manufacturing sector and make in India policy as well as to the Indian farmers. The same points have been reiterated in this news article. After this, reportedly, India was given a deadline up to May 15, 2020 to rejoin this RCEP negotiations. India has once again made a clear response that its position is not yet changed from the stance taken in November. In fact, its position on RCEP has been actually reinforced. If signed, this agreement would have been favorable to China to promote its manufacturing sector at the cost of domestic manufacturing in India. We do remember that the statement made by former Australian Prime Minister who said that RCEP deal appears as a trade arm of China's Belt and Road Initiative. But now, during the COVID-19 crisis, experts are of opinion that China is going to be a major player than before in global politics. We saw on news analysis on May 11 that the emergence of China is one of the geopolitical trends which is going to shape the post-COVID-19 world. In such scenario, India cannot afford to suffer by agreeing to a partnership where China is a proposed partner and especially when there is no demanded protection for Indian sectors. We should also note that few sectors of India, particularly Indian pharmaceutical sector, was much talked at the international level. So, India is also relatively emerging. The trade opportunities that India has cannot be compromised by a trade agreement that may limit India's potential. So, in this context post-COVID-19, the opposition of India to RCEP has only been reinforced and strengthened. If you see, it is important that, after a crisis, equitable norms have to be brought in place. In this context, we expect some reforms at the existing international trade mechanisms. See, in the aftermath of World War II, many nations were born as they became independent and a system was established to regulate trade in goods. This system had the core elements of a rule-based structure and principle of non-discrimination. Here, the system refers to GATT, the general agreement on tariffs and trade which was signed in 1947 by 23 countries. This agreement contained tariff concessions as well as a set of rules designed to prevent these concessions from being countered by restrictive trade measures. So, based on this GATT, multilateral trade was happening in the world provisionally from 1948 to 1994. But it also faced criticism such as there was not much differential protection or treatment to developing and least developed countries. Also, it did not cover services category. Because of these reasons, it was decided to move from GATT to more reformed institutional arrangement. This reformed institutional arrangement is the current world trade organization and its various agreements. In the agreements of WTO, developing nations did find some relief or protection in trade which is reflected in differential treatment against the developed nations. In addition to goods category, services and intellectual property rights also became part of WTO. This system seemed to be functioning quite well for developing countries still recently. This is because United States, a developed nation, attempted to break the differential treatment offered under the WTO framework. If you see America filed petitions against India at the WTO asking India not to extend support to some of the domestic programs focused on export promotion. In fact, US also started treating India as a developed nation in some aspects of trade. For example, as per US, India will not be given preferential treatment with respect to countervailing duties investigations. Such moves by US were seen as a disrespect to the differential stages of growth and development and lack of objective understanding about who is a developed nation and who is not. More importantly, there is something that US did in 2017. It withdrew its membership from Trans-Pacific Partnership in 2017. This partnership with the presence of US was said to become the world's largest free trade deal covering more than 40% of global economy. But citing some reasons, US withdrew from the deal. The reasons are, firstly, the deal would lead to US decline in domestic manufacturing. Second, it will lead to loss of jobs in US. Third, the other countries can take advantage of US and it will also increases US trade deficit with other partnering countries. Surprisingly, this was the stand taken by US, the nation which is held by many as a global superpower and a champion for free trade regimes. At a time when even the developed nations are extra cautious about protecting their domestic businesses, employment and other aspects. At a time when US moved from America first policy to America alone policy, a country like India which is a developing country cannot afford to join the proposed RCEP agreement. We can even take the example of Britain with respect to Brexit. Particularly, the entire nation has suffered a lot with the COVID-19 from the loss of lives to loss of jobs and livelihood. Therefore, it is time for India to drop such proposed frameworks. Moreover, the policy advisor also cited that India's experience with the trade agreements in the past have dealt a heavy blow to the domestic manufacturing. With this, we come to the end of analysis of this news article. Let's take up this main question at the end of the session. The next discussion is based on this question which is framed on this news article. This news article talks about Central Administrative Tribunal that is CAT. In this topic, we shall discuss CAT constitutional provisions and related legislations. See, the CAT has been established as mandated under article 323a of Indian Constitution. In pursuance of this article 323a, Parliament has passed the Administrative Tribunal's Act of 1985. This Act authorized the Central Government to establish one Central Administrative Tribunal and State Administrative Tribunals. Know that this Act enabled the speedy and inexpensive justice to the aggrieved public servants. See, the CAT provides for adjudication of disputes with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons who are appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of union or other authorities under the control of government. Currently, there are 17 benches and 21 circuit benches in the Central Administrative Tribunal all over India. See, also know that the CAT has original jurisdiction in relation to recruitment and all service matters of public servants covered by it. Its jurisdiction extends to all India's services, Central civil services, civil posts under centre and also civilian employees of defence services. Note that civilian employees of defence services. However, the members of defence forces, officers, service of Supreme Court and the secretarial staff of Parliament are not covered by it. Also, the Tribunal is guided by principles of natural justice are not bound by the civil procedure code. With this information, let's get back to the question. The question is, which among the following services or officers come under the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal? So, six services are given. The first one is all India services, second one, CAG, third one, controller, general of accounts, chief election commissioner, officers of ministries and departments of Central Government and sixth one is officers of Supreme Court. See, we have just discussed that Supreme Court officers won't come under this cat. If we remove the sixth one, we can arrive at the correct answer that is option D 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Let's move on to the next article. Let us look at this question which is based on this news article. The news article says that WHO has condemned the dangerous concept of herd immunity for managing the coronavirus pandemic. The article also says that it is wrong to think that countries can magically make their population immune to coronavirus. So, in this context, what is herd immunity? See, know that herd immunity is an indirect protection from a contagious infectious disease that happens when a population is immune. See, the immunity could be either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection that is natural herd immunity. For example, when we get a disease, our body develops antibodies. This means that even people who are not vaccinated or in whom the vaccine doesn't trigger immunity are protected because people around them who are immune can act as buffers between them and an infected person. See, for example, assume that A is a healthy person. He is surrounded by few people who are immune and few people who are infected with the virus. So, assume that B, C, D are immune people and E, F, G are infected people. So, this B, C, D act as buffers between infected people and healthy person. So, this is called herd immunity. See, the concept of herd immunity is generally used for calculating how many people need to be vaccinated in a population in order to protect those who are not vaccinated. See, once herd immunity has been established for a while, along with curving the ability of the disease to spread, then the disease can eventually be eliminated. For example, this is how the world eradicated smallpox. Also know that the more infectious a disease is, greater the population immunity is needed to ensure herd immunity. In simpler terms, if a disease has more infectious ability, then a greater population immunity is required to achieve herd immunity. Coming to news article, the WHO cautions that currently there is no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 are immune to second infection. So, herd immunity achieved through immunity developed by previous infection is currently not applicable or possible in case of COVID-19. See, infected people may have some level of protection against the virus, but the level and duration of protection is still not known. So, with this information, let's get back to the question. See, the question says that which among the following statements about herd immunity is not correct. Here, four options are given. Herd immunity is the indirect protection from a contagious disease that happens when a population is immune. Yes, this is the definition of the herd immunity. So, option A is not the answer. Coming to option B, once herd immunity is achieved, the disease is automatically eliminated. This statement is not correct, since even after herd immunity is achieved, the disease can be eliminated only if the spread of disease is curtailed. So, option B is the answer since we are supposed to identify not correct statement and going to option C, herd immunity can be achieved naturally by developing immunity through previous infection. Yes, this is correct. Option D, herd immunity can be achieved even through vaccination. Yes, this is also correct. So, the answer is option B. Let us move on to the next news article. Let us take up this question. This is framed based on this news article which talks about Centres Proposal to Encourage Greater Participation of Private Sector in Space Activities. See, in 2017, Department of Space came up with Space Activities Bill. It is a national space legislation for encouraging the enhanced participation of private sector in space activities. Apart from this, the emergence of New Space India Limiter would spur the growth of Indian industries in the space sector. In this discussion, let us focus on this New Space India Limiter. So, it was first announced in the budget of 2019-20, that is last year budget. Know that it is established as a central public sector enterprise under the administrative control of Department of Space. Also note that it is the second commercial entity of ISRO. Then, what is the first one? The first one is Antrex or Antrex Corporation Limited which was formed in 1992. See, the Antrex was formed for promotion and commercial exploitation of space products which are developed by ISRO. Another major objective is to support development of space-related industrial capabilities in India. Also note that Antrex is under administrative control of Department of Space. So, then what is the purpose of a new entity that is New Space India Limiter? See, the aim of New Space India Limited is to make use of research and development carried out by ISRO. The company will spearhead commercialization of various space products including production of launch vehicles, transfer of technologies and marketing of space products. We shall also see some important functions of New Space India Limited. The first one is technology transfer of small satellite to the industry. Here, the New Space India Limited will obtain a license from ISRO and sub-license it to industries. And the second is manufacturing of small satellite launch vehicle in collaboration with private sector. Also note that it is aimed at production of polar satellite launch vehicle that is PSLV through Indian industry. So, with this information, let's address this question. Consider the following statements regarding New Space India Limited. The statement one says it is a central public sector enterprise formed to spearhead commercialization of various space products including production of launch vehicles. As we have just seen, it is the primary objective of NSIL. Yes, the statement one is correct. The statement two says that this New Space India Limited is under the administrative control of Department of Science and Technology. No, the statement is incorrect since the New Space India Limited is under the control of Department of Space not under Department of Science and Technology. Correct answer for this question is option A, one only. Let us take up this question. This question is framed with reference to this news article which talks about the government's decision to corporatize the Ordnance Factory Sport. The article also mentions the government proposal to list it on stock exchanges as well. These measures are supposed to improve autonomy, accountability, and efficiency of Ordnance Factories Board or OFB. In this context, it is important for us to know what is OFB and its functions under whom. See, Ordnance Factories Board functions under the Department of Defense Production of Ministry of Defense. It is the world's and largest industrial setup which forms an integrated base for indigenous production of defense hardware and equipment. The primary objective of OFB is to achieve self-reliance in equipping the armed forces with state-of-art battlefield equipment. OFB claims it as the force behind the armed forces. Note that it is headquartered in Kolkata. Under the board, there are total of 41 Ordnance Factories. Mainly, these factories provide a broad defense production with multi-technology capabilities. Some other details of Ordnance Factories Board are given here for your reference. We just discussed that the primary objective of OFB is to achieve self-reliance in equipping the armed forces. So, the primary customers are Indian armed forces. Apart from supplying armaments to armed forces, Ordnance Factories also meet the requirements of central parametry forces as well as state police forces. Also know that this Ordnance Factories Board exports defense products to more than 30 countries. See, with this information, we'll take up this question. Consider the following statements with reference to Ordnance Factories Board. The first statement talks about objective of the OFB. Yes, the statement 1 is correct. Coming to statement 2, the first Ordnance Factory was established before the Indian Independence. Yes, the statement 2 is also correct. Know that the first Ordnance Factory was established at Kasipur in Kolkata in 1801. This factory is now known as Gun and Shell Factory. Around 18 Ordnance Factories were established even before Indian Independence. While many factories came even before Indian Independence, the Apex Board, that is Ordnance Factories Board, was set up in 1979. So, in the given question, both the statements are correct. So, correct answer is Option C, both 1 and 2. Let's take up other practice questions. This question is based on the news article we have discussed regarding hate speech. The question says, the Robert Plan of Action is related to the correct answer is Option D, prohibition of advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred. See, the full name of action is the Robert Plan of Action on the prohibition of advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence. See, it was launched by United Nations Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2013. See, this plan provides guidance on how to balance between Article 19 and Article 20 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. If you see, Article 19 is about freedom of expression and Article 20 is about prohibition of incitement of discrimination. So, this Plan of Action aims to provide guidance on how to balance between these two articles. Article 19 and Article 20 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Let us take up this main question. Evaluate India's decision of not joining the proposed RCEP in the context of post-COVID-19 world. See, for this question, you can start with brief introduction about India's decision of not joining RCEP. This is an evaluate question, so you need to see both positives and negatives and take a stand at the end. For example, positives include protecting domestic industries, protecting agriculture, protecting farmers, etc. On the negative side, you can talk about as a diplomatic failure in steering RCEP in favor of India's interests. Also, India for long has been an abstainer from international groupings. Abstaining from RCEP will make India a regional power without joining a major trade deal in its neighborhood. As a result, it affects Indian influence over the neighbors. Like this, you can write and take a stand at the end. Please write the answers and post them in the comments section. We will get back to you with feedback within short time. If you find this session resourceful, click on the like button and show your appreciation in the comment section. And don't forget to subscribe to our YouTube channel. Stay home, stay safe.