 Hello everyone, welcome back again to the Indian News Analysis by Shankar Iyer's Academy for the day 15th April 2021. These are the list of news articles that we will be discussing today and they are provided along with the page numbers of different editions. And also the link for the Android and Notes in media format and the time stamping for the discussed articles is given in the description box as well as in the comment section for the benefit of our aspirants. Now let us move on to the analysis of the first news article. Now look at this article. This article is about the judgment of Supreme Court regarding professional education. See according to the Supreme Court the access to professional education is not government largesse. See here largesse means generosity or gift or charity. So in this context let us see in detail about the Supreme Court's observations regarding the access to professional education. The syllabus covered by this article is given below. Now before going into the observations let us see why this case was filed. See two students from Ladakh they were nominated by the Union Territory Administration for MBBS studies and they were allocated seats in the prestigious Lady Hardinjant, Maulana Asad Medical Colleges. But the problem here was they weren't admitted. So following this the students moved to the Supreme Court claiming that the fundamental right to education was at the whims and fancies of the government authorities. So what happened is a bench was set up to take up this case and this bench pronounced the verdict in favor of the Ladakh students. Also the bench ordered that the students should be admitted within a week to the respective colleges to which they were assigned. Now along with the judgment the Supreme Court also made some observations which will play a huge role in accessing professional education. So now we will be looking at the observations made by the Supreme Court in this regard. See according to the Supreme Court the state has an affirmative obligation to facilitate access to education at all levels. In addition to that court also stated that this affirmative obligation assumes far greater importance for those students whose background imposes formidable obstacles on their path to accessing quality education. To put it in simple words if caste, class, gender, religion, disability and geographical region obstructs a person from getting educated then the government has got greater responsibility in providing access to quality education. Note that the Supreme Court also took this case as an opportunity to highlight the importance of creating an enabling environment to make it possible for students to pursue professional education. See the right to pursue higher or professional education has not been explicitly spelt out or mentioned as a fundamental right in path 3 of the constitution. When you look at article 21a guaranteed in the path 3 of the constitution it only talks about free and compulsory education of all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years as a fundamental right. So we can see here that it doesn't mention professional education. But according to the Supreme Court just because the professional education is not explicitly spelt as a fundamental right the access to professional education cannot be at governmental charity or generosity. And to support its stand the Supreme Court also referred to the vision that was envisaged by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. See the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is a UN body of 18 independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by its states parties. And this International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is a multilateral treaty that was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly back in 1966. And this Covenant commits its parties to work towards the granting of economic, social and cultural rights. And you should remember India is a signatory of this Covenant. Now on coming back to the article, see one of the clauses of this Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights states that as an empowerment right education is the primary vehicle by which economically and socially marginalized adults and children can lift themselves out of poverty and obtain the means to participate fully in their communities. See this clause stresses the importance of education especially in the upliftment of weaker sections of society. And the Supreme Court has aptly referred this clause to support its judgement. Now finally the Supreme Court recommended for the appointment of a nodal officer to ensure that the students were duly nominated where admitted in their chosen course of study. See according to the Supreme Court such an institutional framework will ensure that students are not left out due to the lack of help in securing their legitimate admission to the appropriate course. So with this information let's now move on to the next news article. Our next discussion will be based on this news article. See the issue is on April 7th the freedom of navigation operation was conducted by the U.S.'s John Paul Jones which is U.S.'s 7th Fleet Destroyer and this operation was conducted in just 130 nautical miles west of Lakshadweep but without India's consent. And this invited controversy taking ground from the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The syllabus relevant for this news article is given below for your reference. On a 10th April in the news analysis we had a discussion on the freedom of navigation operation. So now let's take a moment to refresh on it. First of all freedom of navigation simply means the freedom of movement for ships. It is a principle of customary international law that ships flying the flag of any sovereign state shall not suffer interference from other states apart from the exceptions provided in the international law. We know that they are one of the principle tools by which the United States challenges maritime claims deemed excessive under international law. And the United States Navy has conducted the freedom of navigation operations all over the world for nearly the past 40 years. And as we know this freedom of navigation operation was conducted well within India's exclusive economic zone. Already on a 13th April discussion we saw about the exclusive economic zone briefly but today let's go slightly deeper into it. See the exclusive economic zone is defined under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea which is commonly called as the Law of Seas. This convention gives four fold classification of marine resource and they are internal waters, territorial waters, contiguous zone and high seas. And now let's see about them one by one. Internal waters encompasses those areas with a land boundary of the sovereign state and this can be estuaries, lagoons etc. And note that the nation has got complete jurisdiction over it whatsoever. However innocent passage is permitted. You can have a look at this image for better understanding. Next comes the territorial waters. See the baseline measurement of 12 nautical miles constitutes territorial waters. Note that 1 nautical mile is equal to 1 degree of the latitude and it is equivalent to 1.15 mile or 1.852 kilometers. See remember the coastal states have got jurisdiction over the area not only on the surface but also over the soil, under the water, the subsoil as well as airspace. But the sovereignty is limited by innocent passage. Next is the contiguous zone and this zone extends by 24 nautical miles from the coast that is 12 miles from the point where the territorial waters end. And in this contiguous zone the coastal nation doesn't enjoy airspace sovereignty that is any aircraft can fly over the space but the coastal state reserves the right over and under the ocean. And then comes the exclusive economic zone. As you can see in the picture it lies adjacent to the territorial water and even the contiguous zone forms a part of this exclusive economic zone. See this exclusive economic zone extends by 200 nautical miles from the baseline measurement. See here the influence of the coastal state is severely limited but the coastal state can exploit the resources from the seas. And also the right of innocent passage exists. But provocative manoeuvres like that of US's are however prohibited. Last comes the high seas that is the area beyond the exclusive economic zone and this belongs to the global commons. So based on this we can infer that the passage of 7th fleet close to Lakshadweb Archipelago that is 130 nautical miles range seems like a clear violation of the convention. Now on coming to the article the authors have given a brief run through regarding the question of controversy in the article before they get into the details. We already know from the previous discussions that India is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea but US isn't. But however the customary international laws bind every country by convention. So the present tussle brings into picture the articles 58 and 87. See article 58 talks about the exclusive economic zone and article 87 talks about the freedom of navigation. When you look at article 87 it states that the high seas are open to all states whether coastal or landlocked. And the freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this convention and by other rules of international law and it has listed down a few freedoms. And in the second clause it states that these freedoms shall be exercised by all states with due regard for the interest of other states in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas and also with due regard for the rights under this convention with respect to activities in the area. But when you look at clause 3 of article 58 it states that in exercising their rights and performing their duties under this convention in the exclusive economic zone states shall have due regard to the rights and duties of the coastal state and shall comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal state in accordance with the provisions of this convention and other rules of international law in so far as they are not incompatible with this part. So as we can see the freedom of navigation in article 87 is limited by article 58 clause 3 that is by the relevant domestic laws. And remember the Indian law relevant in this regard is the territorial waters, continental shelf, exclusive economic zone and other maritime zones of India Act of 1976. And note that section 7 subsection 9 of this act recognizes the freedom of navigation of the ships of all states but it makes them subject to the exercise of rights by India within the zone. And further for any international convention the nations are permitted to make declaration regarding their acceptability and non-acceptability in tandem with the domestic laws. And the UN convention on the law of the seas provides it under article 310 and in that line even India made a declaration in 1995 reiterating its terms as mentioned in the statute. So rating article 58, article 87 and article 310 together it becomes obvious that United States should have taken Indian consent before performing such maneuvers. This is because arriving at international agreements on crucial issues is difficult and also such violations can make the hard earned international consensus less credible. So therefore it is important for nations to take a responsible course of action. So with this let's move on to the next part of the discussion. Now let's take up this editorial article which talks about citizens trust in public institutions based on the data from the IHDS or the India Human Development Survey. The relevant syllabus is highlighted below for your reference. See trust is the foundation upon which the legitimacy of public institutions is built. And it is very important for the success of a wide range of public policies that depend on behavioral responses from the public. Now for example public trust leads to greater compliance with regulations as well as the tax system. Now in this editorial the authors have taken the data from the India Human Development Survey 2005 and 2012 in order to highlight on how the trust over public institutions varies with each caste. Before moving further let us now have a brief understanding about this IHDS or the India Human Development Survey. See it is a nationally representative multi-topic survey and it is conducted by the scholars from the University of Maryland, the National Council on Applied Economic Research, Indiana University and also the University of Michigan. And this survey was conducted in two rounds and the IHDS I was conducted in 2005 to 2006 and IHDS II was in 2011 to 2012 and IHDS III is yet to come and it is slated for release in the year 2023. Now here you should note that the topics that were covered in the survey were with respect to health, education, employment, economic status marriage, fertility, gender relations and social capital. Here a unique feature of the 2005 and 2012 round of this IHDS is that they provide caste wise data on the trust over different public institutions. See in the survey the trust in public institutions is measured in terms of confidence level which are divided into three categories and the three categories include a great deal of confidence, only some confidence and hardly any confidence. As we know caste hierarchy reflects the socio economic status of the society. When you take India, Brahmins are at the top and they are followed by the high caste and then the other backward caste and all of them that is the Brahmins high caste and other backward caste, they come under the general category and then they are followed by the deprived section which includes the scheduled caste and scheduled tribes and then there is also the residual category termed as others which is mixed but closely related to high castes. Now let us see how these categories trusted institutions. In the 2012 round of the survey a vast majority of households that were surveyed lacked confidence in state governments and compared to the general category OBCs and STs, a higher proportion of under 45% of the scheduled caste displayed a great deal of confidence over state governments and only a very small proportion of the scheduled caste showed hardly any confidence. Now here you should think why SCs or the scheduled cast display so much confidence in state governments when compared to OBCs and STs and for this one of the reasons quoted by the authors is Kota's but here we should know that Kota is accessible even to OBCs and STs. So the main reason for this trend is the reliance on government. See the scheduled caste people are largely reliant on the welfare schemes provided by the state but in contrast to this the scheduled tribes are very much isolated from state schemes that means they are not able to adequately access or avail the social safety nets that are provided by the government. So this can be one of the reasons for their limited trust in the government but when you take judiciary the case is entirely different because a large majority reported a great deal of confidence on the judiciary and when we take caste-wise statistics a large majority of every caste displayed a great deal of confidence and in fact nearly 3 fourths of the scheduled tribes reported a great deal of confidence in the judicial system of the nation and when you look at the trust in the Polis system it is totally opposite because only a lower proportion showed a great deal of confidence in Polis and the lowest trust was found among the scheduled tribes and in fact a high proportion of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe displayed hardly any confidence over the Polis system. According to the authors this lack of trust is due to the rampant corruption that is happening in the Polis system and also because of its discrimination against lower caste. So based on the data we can infer that the most trusted was the judiciary and it was followed by the state governments and the Polis. Here the authors opined that even though the trust in these institutions rose between 2005 and 2012 the recent accounts indicate a sharp erosion of trust and they point out three reasons for this. They are the lack of inclusivity in state government policies the judicial verdicts that do not confirm to high standards of autonomy and fairness and also because of the brutal Polis actions that violates the rights of citizens. So the author conclude by saying that the government should focus more on inclusion, transparency and accountability and moreover there is an increasing need to educate the citizens and only if all these are implemented seriously the trust of citizens and the public institutions will increase. With this we have come to the end of this news discussion let's now move on to the next news article. Now this news article is with reference to India Russia Defence Day. The article says that both the nations are committed to completing their contract for the HES 400 missile system due to be delivered to India at the end of this year and this comes despite America's repeated threat that the $2.5 billion deal could attract sanctions under its CARSA law. So in this context let us have a brief understanding about S-400 and the CARSA. See the S-400 is one of the most sophisticated surface to air defence systems in the world and the S-400 Triumph is a mobile that is a moving multi-channel air defence missile system and it is designed to engage current and future threats. Know that it has got aircraft jammers, early warning and direction aircraft and also recognisance aircraft. Adding to this it has got the potential to attack strategic aircraft carrying airborne missiles, medium range ballistic missiles and other air attack vehicles by its every electronic countermeasure environment. And remember that it has a range of 400 kilometers and can shoot down more than 50 targets simultaneously. Now to understand how this S-400 works, have a look at this picture. Here the long range surveillance radar will track the objects and it relays information to the command vehicle which assesses the potential targets and then the target is identified and command vehicle orders missile launch and the launch data are sent to the launch vehicle and it releases the surface to air missiles and the radar will help to guide the missiles towards the target. So in brief this is about the missile. Now let's see about the card sound. See it is a short form for countering America's adversaries through sanctions act. Know that it is a specifically enacted legislation of USA and according to some sources its ultimate goal is to prevent the revenue from flowing to the Russian government. So towards that aim the sanctions were meant to deter American transactions but this term has not been defined by the legislation. However the US government classified the purchase of the S-400 system as a significant transaction when it had put sanctions over China. Know that US had already sanctioned China over its purchase of this S-400. Therefore India's purchase of this S-400 system from Russia would also be regarded as a significant transaction and invites mandatory sanctions. And as stated by the legislation the sanctions are to be imposed on the person who knowingly engaged in a significant transaction. So in that case if India purchases S-400 then the person to be sanctioned could either be the Defence Acquisition Council that is added by the Defence Minister or the Defence Procurement Board that is added by the Defence Secretary. I note that the choice of person to be sanctioned would be made by the US President or the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Treasury who has been delegated with these powers. With this information let's now move on to the next news article. Look at this news article. We by now are aware that the newly elected US administration is pulling out from Afghanistan after nearly 20 years of long drawn war with the Afghanistan Taliban group. And in this context along with the US the NATO is also withdrawing. Statistically speaking, US is the second largest troop contributor right now in the Afghan which is around 2,500 troops and NATO has got about 7,000 troops on ground. Most of the NATO troops they rely on the American air province not only for firepower but also for moving in and out of the landlocked nation through the difficult terrain. With US pulling out NATO pulling its troops out also becomes a necessity on considering this technical difficulty. The troop withdrawal however hasn't been a quick one and the reduction in presence has also been gradual. With the withdrawal of US and NATO henceforth the security will depend on the Afghan police and military forces that were trained through Operation Resolute Support. So what is this Operation Resolute Support? See the Resolute Support is a NATO led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan national defence and security forces and institutions and this Resolute Support operates with one central hub in Kabul and four spokes in Mazar-e-Sharif, Herat, Kandahar and Lagman. Note that this mission has even been ratified by the Afghan Parliament. Now through this article it is also known about NATO or the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation which was officially laid down on 4th of April 1949 of the North Atlantic Treaty which is more popularly called as the Washington Treaty. Now this treaty sought to create a counterweight to Soviet armies that were stationed in Central and Eastern part of Europe after World War II and this NATO has got its headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. At present it has got 30 members and in 1949 there were 12 founding members of the Alliance which included Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, UK and the US. And apart from these the other member countries include the Greece and Turkey, Germany, Spain, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, Albania and Russia and Montenegro and North Macedonia. But here you should know that major countries like Japan, Australia, India, China, Russia, Sweden and Finland are not its members and you can look at the map for a better understanding. You should also remember one more thing the essence of NATO is enshrined in Article 5 of the treaty wherein the attack on one member is perceived as an attack on every other member and this article for the first time was invoked following the 9-11 attacks. Having done with the news discussion let us now move on to the practice question discussion. Now look at this question consider the following statements with reference to S 400 triumph sometimes seen in news. Statement 1 it is a surface to air missile system. Statement 2 it is capable of destroying incoming or style aircraft, missiles and even drones within a range of up to 1500 kilometers. So we need to find the incorrect statement. So when you look at the first statement it is correct but the second statement is incorrect because the maximum range of S 400 missiles are 400 kilometers and not 1500 kilometer. So therefore the right option is option B that is 2 only. Look at this prelims practice question with reference to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Consider the following statements. Statement 1 it was formed in heights of cold war during 1970s. Statement 2 it is headquartered in Washington. See NATO was formed in 1949 after the World War II in order to counter the Soviet influence. So therefore statement 1 is wrong. And when you take statement 2 as we saw in the discussion, the headquarters of NATO is in Brussels, Belgium and also in Washington. So statement 2 is also wrong. And since the question wants us to find the correct answer, the right option is option D that is neither 1 nor 2. The list of main practice questions is displayed here. You can write your answers and post them in the comment section below. And with this we have come to the end of today's video. So if you like the video, don't forget to like, comment and share. And do subscribe to Shankar Aya's Academy YouTube channel for more updates regarding UPSC civil services preparation.