 Welcome to the Hindu News Analysis by Shankaray's Academy. Today is Day 2 of Shankaray's Academy's Free Main Scholarship Test 2020. The question for today has been given in the end of the analysis. These are the list of news articles we have taken for today's analysis and the page numbers of different editions of the newspaper. The link for the handwritten notes in the PDF format and the timestamping of the discussed articles are provided in the description box and also in the comment section for the benefit of mobile phone viewers. Now let us move on to the analysis of the first article. This lead editorial article is with reference to India's foreign policy. In this column, the author tries to explain the challenges faced by India in terms of foreign policy and also the reasons for the recent fallout of India's relations with its neighbors. The syllabus relevant for the analysis of this editorial is highlighted here for your reference. First, the author analyzes the current global standing of India compared to, say, 10 to 15 years ago. Talking about India's neighborhood, author says that India was the de facto leader or the actual leader of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. India has historical and cultural ties with Nepal and it also enjoyed traditional goodwill and influence in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. In Afghanistan, India made significant investments and has cultivated very good ties with the post-Taliban stakeholders, that is, the governments that are formed in Afghanistan after the Taliban rule. Not just that, India was committed to multilateralism and also to the Central Asian Connectivity Project with Iran as its gateway. With respect to China, India was competing and cooperating at the same time. This assumes significance because the long border between the two countries largely remained peaceful for decades. Now let's come to the present. Firstly, China has reportedly changed the status quo along the line of actual control in the western sector of India-China border to its favor. At the government level, we can say China has surely attempted to change the status quo wherein, at a violent clash to prevent Chinese intrusion last month, we suffered casualties around 20 soldiers passed away in the violent clash. And this is said to be the fatalities for the first time in the last 45 years along the India-China border. And Sark has become out of context after the Uri terror attack that happened in September 2016. Coming to Nepal, it has turned hostile and has adopted a new map and revived border disputes with India. Coming to Sri Lanka, it has tilted towards China because of China's debt trap diplomacy. Bangladesh, a traditional partner of India, is clearly not happy with the passage of Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 and when Afghanistan is undergoing a major transition, India is not even a party to the demilitarizing process in Afghanistan. Now with respect to Chabahar and Central Asian connectivity project, Iran has reportedly dropped engaging India citing funding and development delay from Indian side. With all these things happening and China attempting to alter the status quo, Arthur feels that India is perhaps facing its gravest national security crisis in 20 years. Now the question is why or how India's foreign policy suffered a major setback. Arthur notes three reasons. One is a closer alignment of policy with that of United States, then coupling or linking of foreign policy with domestic politics and hubris or misplaced confidence. The first reason is a very close alignment of policy with that of United States. India's official policy is that India is committed to multilateralism. Now even after India started to move away from the non-alignment, India did maintain strategic autonomy to remain as bedrock of its policy thinking. But in the recent past, the author states that there has been a steady erosion in India's strategic autonomy. See, to counter China, India started moving closer to the United States and steadily aligned its foreign policy with the US interests. The best example is Iran. See, India started interacting with Iran on Chabahar port around 2003. But within a year, India kind of abandoned it as India started engaging with the United States. At that time, India needed US support with reference to signing civil nuclear deal. At that time, an acceptance from US mean India has a responsible nuclear power. These things were there, so we required US support. And between 2003 to 2014, in the year 2009, India even voted against Iran with respect to a resolution of International Atomic Energy Agency on the controversial nuclear program in Iran. And India also backed out from Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project because of worsening US-Iran ties on one side and also because of closer Pakistan-China ties on the other. Now, coming to 2015, when Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, otherwise called Iran Nuclear Deal, the sanctions on Iran were to some extent removed. Only then, India started engaging with Iran and a major push was given with reference to developing Chabahar port. In 2016, India agreed on a trilateral track with Iran and Afghanistan as well, wherein India would develop Chabahar and engage in Iran going forward with building railway and road networks, at least towards connecting with Afghanistan. This strategic plan was to make India a potential role-player in the duration scenario and also in Afghanistan. Once again, India because of pressure from United States, India was seen slowly moving with its development works in Iran. See, in 2003, India and Iran were closer. Immediately, India became less engaging because of US and the same thing happened again from 2016-17 with a new regime in United States with Mr. Trump as the President. Now, this confused two and four actions of India is also because of India's deepening defence and military ties with the United States. See, India was announced as a major defence partner of the United States in the year 2016. US wants India to play a bigger role in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific region to contain China's rise. India has been cautious by not becoming an ally of the United States, but it has steadily deepened military-to-military cooperation in the recent past. One example in this regard, we can say in the month of August 2016, India and US signed the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement. Arthur feels that the close relations of India with US is one of the main reasons behind escalated tensions among India and China. China may now consider India as an ally of US and it may try to shift the border status quo to its favour. Now, the second reason why India suffered a setback in its foreign policy is because of new changes in domestic policy. One is the passing of Citizenship Amendment Act 2019 and the second is the abrogation of special status of the erstwhile state of Jammu Kashmir. Experts say that CAA and NRC exercise has dented India's relations with its Muslim majority neighbours at some levels even among the population in the Gulf Cooperation Council as well. This is because of regionalisation of domestic problems of countries in India's neighbourhood. So these countries are kind of upset with India's move. Coming to the second one here, the abrogation of Article 370 and bifurcation of the erstwhile state of Jammu Kashmir. On one side, it has led to prolonged curfews or restrictions and suspension of fundamental rights in the Kashmir Valley. Even today it is reported that Jammu Kashmir, the union territory, has only 2G connectivity as 3G and 4G are still reportedly are still suspended. This move has affected India's democratic and human rights credentials at some levels and it is even considered that bringing Ladakh directly under the central government rule is another factor that has caused the Chinese aggression. Now the third reason for setback in India's policy is because of huge risk or misplaced confidence. Authorists of opinion that misplaced confidence is not good for rising powers or emerging powers like India. This is because great powers, they wait to establish their standing before declaring that they have arrived at the global level. For example, you take Soviet Union, it started acting like a superpower only after it won in the Second World War. China waited for four decades, focused on its economic rise before it started taking on the mighty United States. They said that since 1970s China focused almost entirely on its economic rise. Now coming to India, experts say that at the domestic level we say we are doing very well in terms of economy. But at the international level, say in world trade organizations, we fight for developing country status. While at the same time we also project ourselves as leaders in many spheres. Author says that some misplaced confidence is attached here. So India has to learn from Soviet Union and China in this regard. In the conclusion, author says that to address the current crisis, India has to reconsider its foreign policy trajectory. While India is a big power with one of the world's biggest militaries and a natural naval force. In that terms, it does not lack resources to claim what is its due in the global politics. Then where is India lacking? India is lacking in having a strategic depth in its foreign policy. What do we mean here by depth? See, this is related to having a policy that will bring our neighbors in close cooperation with us and not with China. At the same time, not compromising Indian interests abroad, say for example, how recently things happened in Iran. So these are the opinions of the author. So finally he calls that India should realign its foreign policy to suit its best interests at the same time, not losing neighboring partners. These are some of the important information with reference to the analysis of this lead editorial. Now let's move on to the analysis of next news article. This editorial article is with reference to draft environment impact assessment notification 2020, which is in public domain for getting the opinion of the public. If in the same manner it comes into effect, it will replace the environment impact assessment notification 2006. We have been hearing news about the campaign against this draft EIA notification organized by several environmentalists and non-governmental organizations working for the environmental rights. In this analysis, we will be discussing some contentious provisions from this draft EIA notification. The syllabus relevant for the analysis is highlighted here for your reference. Now, as we know, the objective of any environment impact assessment is to foresee or to predict the potential environmental and livelihood impacts of a particular project. This will be done at the early stage of project planning and design. The assessment will help the authorities involved and stakeholders to address the possible negative impacts by formulating mitigation measures or impact reduction measures. So in that manner, it ensures sustainable development by balancing both economic and environmental growth. So now what are the concerns about this draft EIA? See, one of the things is that the proposed draft, it reduces the period for public hearing, which includes submission of proceedings of public hearing. This period is reduced from 45 days to 40 days. The notification says that the public hearing shall be completed by the State Pollution Control Board or Unitary Pollution Control Board within a period of 40 working days from the date of receipt of request letter from the project proponent. Apart from this, the minimum notice period provided for the public to submit their responses in relation to public hearing is also reduced from a period of 30 days to 20 days. See, while we need development projects, it should not be at the cost of environment and the people's livelihood. A very important tool against harmful project is public opinion. But defenders of environmental rights, they allege that the proposed draft in effect reduces the time of public scrutiny of a project. Now the next concern is with reference to section 26 of the draft, which talks about exception of certain projects from prior environmental clearance or permission. Now we can see projects like coal and non-coal mineral prospecting, then cease-mix surveys for exploration of offshore and onshore oil and gas, which also include exploration of coal bed methane on shale gas on some lands. The notification deals with public consultation under section 14. It gives a list of projects that are exempted from public consultation. Now for example, this includes modernization of several irrigation projects, all projects concerning national defense and security, or projects involving strategic considerations as determined by the central government. These are all exempted from public consultation. Then the draft also retains a contentious class from the 2006 notification. It states that if the public agency or authority feels that because of local situation, it is not possible to conduct the public hearing, then the process of public consultation in the case need not include public hearing. Now the environmentalists allege that this provision could be arbitrarily used to avoid public hearing. So this compromises two cornerstones of any climate discussion which are public scrutiny and transparency. Now another criticism is the provision in the draft which allows for post-facto regularization of environmental violations. Now this means if a project operates in an area without getting prior environmental clearance, that particular project could be regularized in the future. The legalization or regularization of projects that violates environmental norms after paying a particular amount as fine is said to cause institutionalization of violations. So it also goes against the spirit of carnal principle of prior environmental clearance itself. So therefore activists argue that the pollute and pay principle has the potential to deeply degrade our environment. Now the next concern raised is with reference to increase in the validity of the environment clearances that are to be granted. For example if you take mining projects as against 30 years of validity in the current framework, it is proposed to be increased to 50 years. The validity for river valley projects is increased to 15 years from 10 years in the present framework. Now we should know that mining in forest areas and say river valley projects if not managed well they can cause irreversible damages to the environment and to the public. So these are some of the information with reference to the draft environment impact assessment notification. With these points the authors opinion is that much of the proposed EAA system can only make things worse. Meaning we are retreating from the progress is made so far that is why the article is titled as in reverse gear. Therefore the draft EAA in its present format should not be pushed through that is the call of the author. However we will have to wait and see how far the draft will be modified by the government before publishing the final notification in the gueset. In this analysis we saw about some of the contentious provisions of the proposed draft EAA notification. Now let us move on to the analysis of next news article. This news article is with reference to the opposition faced by the personal data protection bill 2019 from some members of parliament. In this regard we will discuss some aspects of this bill and also the contentious provisions in it. The syllabus relevant for the analysis is highlighted here for your reference. Now that at present the usage and transfer of personal data is regulated by IT rules 2011. Called as the IT rules reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information rules under the IT Act of 2000. We know that the use of IT is rapidly increasing in the society and also the technology itself is getting updated in a very fast pace. So it is very important to amend the legal provisions to protect the individuals in the society from the harms posed by the technology transfer of data. In this regard the data protection bill was introduced in parliament to provide protection of the privacy of individuals relating to their personal data. The bill also seeks to specify the flow and usage of personal data to protect the rights of individuals whose personal data are processed. It lays down norms for social media intermediaries then cross-border transfer of personal data and also accountability of entities that process personal data. The bill provides remedies for unauthorized and harmful processing of personal data. It also seeks to establish a data protection authority of India whose main duty among others is to protect the interests of data principles to prevent any misuse of personal data and to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Act and to promote awareness about data protection. Here when we say data principle we are referring to the natural person to whom the personal data relates to. The rights of data principles include seeking confirmation on whether their personal data has been processed and also including seeking correction and completion or erasure of their data as well. It also includes restricting the continuing disclosure of their personal data in case it is no longer necessary or if the consent earlier given is withdrawn. However there are some exceptions which have become bone of contention with regard to this bill. See as per the bill processing of personal data is exempt from the provisions of the bill in some cases. It states that government can by order exempt any of its agencies from the application of provisions of this Act. This is in the interest of security of state, sovereignty and integrity of India, friendly relations with foreign countries and one term we can find here is public order. This term is not defined in the bill and this gives room to wider interpretations as well. See under this section the central government can direct all or any of the provisions of this Act shall not apply to any agency of the government in respect of processing of such personal data. In such scenario how far getting consent to access individuals data will be adhered to by these agencies remains a question. So this gives government a free hand to use personal data in certain circumstances that is criticized. Coming to section 36 it says that processing of personal data is exempted from the provisions of the bill for certain purposes like prevention of any offence or investigation and prosecution of any offence with reference to research and also journalistic purposes. Then the personal data of individuals can be processed without their consent in certain circumstances. This includes the state processing personal data for providing benefits to the individual. Then it also includes use of data for legal proceedings or to respond to a medical emergency. These are two important sections that has raised or become bone of contention with reference to this data protection bill 2019. The opposition is that these provisions with lesser restrictions at present may be misused in violation of civil liberties of an individual or could be used in violation of civil liberties of an individual. So in this regard we should know that Supreme Court has held that right to privacy is a fundamental right. So when the data protection bill becomes an act it should align with the case law of Justice Putta Swami versus Union of India in 2017 wherein the Supreme Court held that right to privacy is a fundamental right. So these are some of the information with reference to the analysis of this news article. Now let us move on to next part of the discussion. This news article talks about the response of the central government in Supreme Court in connection with bunch of petitions which asked to transfer funds accrued in PM CARES fund to National Disaster Relief Fund. See the government maintained in Supreme Court that PM CARES fund is a public charitable trust to which anyone can contribute. And there is a misconception that contributions received by a public trust like PM CARES can be transferred to a statutory fund like National Disaster Relief Fund. In this regard let us discuss some differences between National Disaster Relief Fund and PM CARES fund. The NDRF is a financial mechanism which is set up under Disaster Management Act of 2005 at the national level. The funds under this NDRF is used to meet rescue and relief expenditure during any disaster. Also every state is also having its own state disaster response fund. So NDRF and SDRF they have a statutory backing under Disaster Management Act of 2005. Now coming to PM CARES it is a public charitable trust. PM CARES stands for Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund. It was set up to have a dedicated national fund with a primary objective so as to deal with any kind of emergency or distress situation. Unlike NDRF, PM CARES lacks a statutory backing. We have to note that in PM CARES fund Prime Minister is the ex-officio chairman and Union Ministers of the Portfolios of Defence, Home Affairs and Finance are ex-officio trustees of this fund. Now let's see how funds are allocated to NDRF and PM CARES. NDRF is funded mainly through budget resources and also through any grants that may be made by any person or institution for the purpose of disaster management. And the national calamity contingency duty imposed on some specified goods are also passed on to this fund. But if you take PM CARES fund it consists entirely of voluntary contributions from individuals or organizations. And the contributions made to PM CARES fund they qualify for 100% exemption under the Income Tax Act of 1961. Now let's see how these funds are used. See NDRF is meant to provide for immediate relief in case of severe calamity and these funds are primarily used to meet the expenses for emergency response relief and rehabilitation. And they are primarily not used for projects related to preparedness and mitigation because for preparedness and mitigation there is a separate fund called as National Disaster Mitigation Fund under section 47 of Disaster Management Act of 2005. On the other hand if you take PM CARES fund these are spent on relief or assistance of any kind relating to a public health emergency or any other kind of emergency. It includes calamity or distress which can be either manmade or natural. Funds can also be utilized for the creation or upgradation of healthcare facilities, pharmaceutical facilities, other necessary infrastructure, research activities and any other type of support. It can also be used for mitigation purposes. Now coming to the audit mechanism. See the accounts of NDRF are audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. But as of now as per the stand of central government PM CARES fund is not to be audited by Comptroller and Auditor General. Therefore even the article reports that PM CARES fund though contributed by anyone voluntarily it is not subject to public scrutiny. But note that on these issues the Supreme Court is expected to give a final direction or decision. So these are some of the information with reference to the analysis of this news article. Now let's move on to next part of the discussion. This news article talks about the rise in number of tigers in Nagarjuna Sagar Sri Sailam Tiger Reserve. Authorities mentioned that remarkable rise in numbers is because of persistent efforts through local community, intense patrolling and conservation methods. In this context let us discuss in brief about this tiger reserve. See Nagarjuna Sagar Sri Sailam Tiger Reserve is the largest tiger reserve in India. It spreads over districts in two states Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. This tiger reserve it covers a total area of about 3568 square kilometre where core area is more than 2595 square kilometres. In this regard know that the Nagarjuna Sagar Sri Sailam Tiger Sanctuary was declared officially in the year 1978. It was recognized under the project Tiger in 1983. This reserve has been renamed as Rajiv Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary in 1992. It is known for scenic beauty and it is also situated in deciduous Nallamala forest range as part of the eastern Ghats. Importantly River Krishna that originates in Sahadri Hills coming through Maharashtra and Karnataka flows across this tiger reserve in the Nallamala forest range. Now from Prillan's perspective coming to conservation status of tiger see it is listed as Endangered in IUCN Red List. Tiger also protected and appendix one of sites convention convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora. This also protected under schedule one of Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. Now we'll see in brief about Wildlife Institute of India and the National Tiger Conservation Authority mentioned in the news article. See Wildlife Institute of India was established in 1982 with Dehradun in Uttarakhand as its headquarters. It became an autonomous organization of Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change since the year 1986. It mainly offers training program, academic courses and advisories in relation to wildlife research and management. The mission of this Institute is to nurture the development of wildlife science and to promote its application in the field of conservation in consonance with cultural and socio-economic milieu. Now coming to National Tiger Conservation Authority it is a statutory body under the provisions of Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. It runs under Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Its main purpose is to strengthen tiger conservation in India. See it is the authority that coordinates project tiger which is a centrally sponsored scheme wherein central assistance is given to states that have tiger population or the conservation in designated tiger resource. So these are some of the information with reference to the analysis of this news article. Now let's move on to next part of the discussion. Now this news article is with reference to the content of court proceedings initiated by the Supreme Court against Mr. Prashant Bhushan who is an advocate at the Supreme Court. We would like to inform viewers that yesterday that is on 27th July 2020 news analysis. We discussed in detail about this matter. We saw the definition of content of court, the brief background of the issues that led to initiation of content of court proceedings and we also saw various opinions whether content of court is still relevant or required. And we also saw law commission's recommendation in relation to review of the content of courts act of 1971 limited to section 2 of the act. For these information we request the viewers to watch yesterday's analysis. Now let's move on to next part of the discussion. We have come to the last session, the practice questions discussion session. See this question here they have given tiger reserve on one side and the states on the other hand. We are asking which of the above pairs are correctly matched. First pair is incorrectly matched because the tiger reserve Nagarjuna Sagar Sri Sailam is found in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Second pair is also incorrectly matched because it is not found in Tripura but in Arunachal Pradesh. So this makes option D the correct answer three only. Indra Vadid Tiger Reserve is in the state of Chattisgarh. This question is with reference to personal data protection. The question reads consider the following statements with reference to personal data protection. Two statements are given. They are asking which of the statements given above are correct. Data protection is listed in the concurrent list of seventh schedule of Indian constitution. This statement is incorrect because data protection the term data is not found in seventh schedule. So such an entry is not listed in seventh schedule but we can understand that according to entry 97 of the union list. Parliament can make laws on any matter not enumerated in list two or list three. Which amounts to residual power which we say federalism with strong central tendency. So the first statement is incorrect here. Second statement the committee of expert on data protection to study various issues relating to personal data protection is chaired by Sri Krish Gopala Krishna. Now this statement is incorrect. Now the committee of expert on personal data protection was chaired by Justice Sri Krishna. In this context we have to know that last year in September the central government constituted an eight member committee with Mr. Krish Gopala Krishna co-founder Infosys as chairman in relation to non-personal data. The terms of reference for this committee of expert is to study various issues relating to non-personal data to make specific suggestions for consideration of central government on regulation of non-personal data. So here both the statements are incorrect. Therefore the correct answer for this question is option D neither one nor two. This question is with reference to PM Cares fund. Two statements are given they are asking which of the statements given above are correct. First statement it is a statutory fund which is funded through voluntary contributions from individuals or organizations. See first part is incorrect because it is not a statutory fund whereas the second part is correct anyhow overall the first statement is incorrect. The second statement the fund will be used for meeting the expenses of disaster response relief and also for mitigation purposes. This statement is correct because the funds under the PM Cares fund can be spent on any relief or assistance with respect to any emergency. It could be even for mitigation purposes. The correct answer is option B two only. Here is the second question for the main scholarship test 2020. Read the question carefully and answer accordingly. The question reads India's foreign policy does not lack resources to claim its due share in global politics. What it lacks is the strategic depth to attain the same elaborate. So the question is a 10 marks question. You have to write the answer within the word limit of 150 words. You can take a printout of the main answer sheet. The link for the same is available in the description and also in the comment section. If you do not have access to the printer, you have to draw margins on an A4 sheet. Access this link on how to draw margins. The link is available in the description and the comment section. So we hope you are aware of how to upload your answers in the portal. See you can access the link for answer upload portal or you can access the answer upload portal link which is available in the description section and in the comment section. The answer upload portal link will be disabled tomorrow evening at 6pm. So make sure to upload your answer before the upload portal is closed. Once the portal is closed, no answer will be accepted through the email. Answers posted in the comment section and sent through email will not be evaluated. Please note that the model answer for yesterday's question has been given in the description and in comment section. A new portal link will be shared for tomorrow's question. So ensure to upload the answers for today's question before 6pm tomorrow. Very importantly, before uploading the file name should be renamed to your unique ID. And one another important thing, the link for today's portal is different from that of yesterday's portal. So these are some of the points you have to note with reference to day 2 of Main Storming Scholarship Test. With this we come to the end of today's The Hindu News Analysis. If you like the video, click the like button, comment, share and subscribe to Shankarai's Academy YouTube channel for more updates and content on civil service exam preparation.