QUESTION : Comment on the changing behaviour of Pak’s foreign policy towards its neighbours especially India and future of both nations with respect to diplomatic relations.



  • Pakistan’s new disputed political map


  • The Ministry of External Affairs has termed Pakistan’s announcement of a new political map, which asserts its claims on Jammu and Kashmir, Siachen and Sir Creek, and lays a new claim to Junagadh, as an exercise in “political absurdity”, and accused Pakistan of – attempting a form of “territorial aggrandisement supported by cross-border terrorism”.


  • Pakistan released its controversial new map a day before the first anniversary of the Indian Government’s decision to withdraw the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and bifurcate the state into two union territories of J&K and Ladakh. India had revoked Article 370 that gave the special status to J&K on August 5, 2019.
  • In a similar move, India’s northern neighbour Nepal had released a revised political map on May 18 claiming key Indian territories of Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura. Nepal approved the new map through a constitutional amendment. India has rejected the move.


  • Pakistan’s decision to issue the map, a tit-for-tat manoeuvre in return for India’s decision to reorganise Jammu and Kashmir a year ago, appears to reset several agreements with India that have been concretised over the past 70 years.
  • The map the Imran Khan government unveiled lays claim to all of Jammu and Kashmir, thus far shown as disputed territory, draws a line demarcating Gilgit-Baltistan separately from the part of Kashmir under its control (Pakistan occupied Kashmir), and renames Jammu and Kashmir as “Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir”.
  • The new map leaves the claim line with Ladakh unclear.
  • While each of these acts is outrageous for New Delhi, it should also be questioned in Islamabad. Pakistan’s claim to all of Jammu and Kashmir, but not Ladakh, goes against its own commitment to adjudicate the future of all six parts of the erstwhile royal state of Jammu-Kashmir (Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan, PoK and Aksai Chin) with India.
  • The claims to Siachen and Sir Creek, that have been the subject of several discussions between India and Pakistan, are also a regressive step.
  • While both sides had reached an impasse on Siachen, the Sir Creek agreement had made considerable progress, and was reportedly even resolved, pending a political announcement in 2007.
  • Finally, the move on Junagadh, a former princely state whose accession to India was accepted by Pakistan, opens up a whole new dispute.
  • While Junagadh was in contention at the time of Partition, the issue was successfully resolved after a referendum was conducted there in February 1948, in which an overwhelming 95% of the state’s residents voted to stay with India.
  • The map also shows the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) as being part of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.


  • India has called Pakistan’s move as an exercise in political absurdity, which lays untenable claims to the Indian territories.
  • These assertions have neither legal validity nor international credibility and it only confirms the reality of Pakistan’s obsession with territorial aggrandisement supported by cross-border terrorism.


  • This is the second time in the recent past where India’s neighbouring country has published a new map claiming India’s territories. Nepal was the first country to do so.
  • Nepal published its news map claiming the territories of the Kalapani region.
  • Closeness of Nepal, Pakistan towards China.
  • Recently, China also changed the status quo along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the western sector in its favour.


  • It is a 96 km long strip of water disputed between India and Pakistan in the Rann of Kutch marshlands.
  • The dispute lies in the interpretation of the maritime boundary line between Kutch and Sindh.
  • Pakistan claims the line to follow the eastern shore of the estuary while India claims a centerline (differing interpretations of paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Bombay Government Resolution of 1914 signed between the then Government of Sindh and Rao Maharaj of Kutch).
  • India insists the Sir Creek should be divided between the two countries according to thalweg principle. Under international law, a thalweg is the middle of the primary navigable channel of a waterway that defines the boundary line between states.
  • The International Boundary in the Sir Creek area and International Maritime Boundary line (IMBL) between India and Pakistan have not been demarcated.


  • The Siachen Glacier is part of Ladakh which has now been converted into a Union Territory. It is the Second-Longest glacier in the World’s Non-Polar areas.
  • It is located in the Eastern Karakoram range in the Himalayas, just northeast of Point NJ9842 where the Line of Control between India and Pakistan ends.
  • It lies immediately south of the great drainage divide that separates the Eurasian Plate from the Indian subcontinent in the extensively glaciated portion of the Karakoram sometimes called the “Third Pole”.
  • It is the world’s highest battlefield.


  • The Federally Administered Tribal Areas was a semi-autonomous tribal region in northwestern Pakistan that existed from 1947. In 2018 it was merged with the neighboring province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.


  • The Pakistan–India Border is of 3,323 kilometres, known locally as the International Border (IB), is an international border running between Pakistan and India.
  • The border runs from the Line of Control (LoC), which separates Indian-administered Kashmir from Pakistan-administered Kashmir, in the north, to the Sir Creek in Rann of Kutch between the Indian state of Gujarat and the Sindh province of Pakistan, in the south.
  • Drafted and created based upon the Radcliffe line in 1947, the border, which divides Pakistan and India from each other, traverses a variety of terrains ranging from major urban areas to inhospitable deserts
  • The border between Indian-administered Kashmir and the Pakistani province of Punjab is officially called the “Working Boundary” by Pakistan. India regards it as the international border.
  • Working boundary: The line between Punjab Province of Pakistan along Sialkot and Indian controlled Kashmir. It is called a working boundary because on one side is an internationally recognized land (Sialkot) while on the other is a disputed territory.
  • Line of Control (LOC): Line of control is the boundary between the Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Indian-administered Kashmir. It was demarcated after the Simla pact in 1972.
  • International boundary: The demarcated line between the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan recognized internationally. Sir Cyril Radcliffe demarcated the land in 1947.


  • India and Pakistan are neighbours. Neighbours can’t be changed. Thus, it is in the better of interest of both the nations that they bring all the issues on the drawing board and resolve them amicably.
  • India wants Pakistan to act more strongly on the terrorism being sponsored from its soil.
  • Also, India wants Pakistan to conclude the trial of 26/11 sooner so that the victims are brought to justice and the conspirers meted out proper punishment.
  • India has genuine concerns, as there are internationally declared terrorists roaming freely in Pakistan and preaching hate sermons as well as instigating terror attacks.
  • With the international community accusing Pakistan of breeding terrorism on its soil, Pakistan cannot remain in denial state and thus, needs to act tougher on terrorism-related issues.
  • In 2018, Imran Khan became the 22nd Prime Minister of Pakistan. PM Imran Khan received a lot of praise for releasing the IAF pilot Abhinandan who was captured in Pakistan during the counter-terrorism operations (after the Pulwama attack) in 2019.


  • In order to strengthen the bilateral engagements between India and Pakistan need of the hour is to employ perfect balance of soft and hard power diplomacy coupled with International diplomacy.
  • With Nepal turning hostile, Sri Lanka tilted towards China, Bangladesh miffed over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 and India out of Iran’s Chabahar railway link project (which India was to have constructed), there is a relative decline in India’s sphere of influence, especially in its neighbourhood and the extended neighbourhood. This demands a deeper examination of the foreign policy.
  • New Delhi should be prepared for Pakistan taking all the issues it has raised with its new map to the international stage.
  • New Delhi must be well­prepared to deal with the three-pronged cartographic challenge it will face in the coming months.


QUESTION : Examine the factors that responsible for the lack of research and development in India? Also, elaborate on the importance of post-academic research in the country.”



  • Post Academic Research (PAR) and Science Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy


  • The Government of India is in the process of revisiting the Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy.


  • The policy will guide the agencies of the government-mandated with funding research in higher education institutions and national laboratories.
  • Therefore, at this stage, we need to find out the kind of research which should actually be given preference while funding.

 IMPORTANCE OF Academic Research (AR) and Post-Academic Research (PAR) :


  • Both AR and PAR generate knowledge that is necessary for national development.
  • When examined from the perspective of national development, pursuit of AR alone, while necessary, is not sufficient.

 Decision-making phase:

  • India has to decide where to increase investment: in AR or in PAR. Investment in research can translate into national development only through the pursuit of PAR.
  • Therefore, AR and PAR when pursued together and taken to their logical conclusion will result in a product or a process, or a better clinical practice, or a scientifically robust understanding of human health and disease, or provide inputs for a policy decision.

 Issues in comparing investment in research among countries

  • We cannot compare data with other countries without having correspondence between India’s data and data reported by others.
  • Countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report research statistics according to the Frascati Manual.

 Research and national development

  • Investment in research can translate into national development only through pursuit of PAR.
  • Our industry has not reached a stage where they can absorb research being done by higher education institutions.
  • This reveals that research being pursued is either not addressing national needs or is limited to AR.


  • Our industry has not reached a stage where they can absorb research being done by higher education institutions.
    • This also reveals that research being pursued is either not addressing national needs or is limited to AR.
  • Low funding: The STI policy, 2013 notes that India’s R&D investment is less than 2.5% of the global investments. It has been under 1% of the GDP.

 STI POLICY ,2013 :

  • Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (STI) 2013 seeks to send a signal to the Indian scientific community, both in the private and public domain, that science, technology and innovation should focus on faster, sustainable and inclusive development of the people.
  • It aims to bring all the benefits of Science, Technology & Innovation to the national development and sustainable and more inclusive growth. It seeks the right sizing of the gross expenditure on research and development by encouraging and incentivizing private sector participation in R & D, technology and innovation activities.


  • Promoting the spread of scientific temper amongst all sections of society.
  • Enhancing skills for applications of science among the young from all social sectors.
  • Making careers in science, research and innovation attractive enough for talented and bright minds.
  • Establishing the world-class infrastructure for R&D for gaining global leadership in some select frontier areas of science.
  • Positioning India among the top five global scientific powers by 2020 (by increasing the share of global scientific publications from 3.5% to over 7% and quadrupling the number of papers in top 1% journals from the current levels).
  • Linking contributions of Science Research and innovation system with the inclusive economic growth agenda and combining priorities of excellence and relevance.
  • Creating an environment for enhanced private sector participation in R &D.
  • Enabling conversion of R & D output with societal and commercial applications by replicating hitherto successful models, as well as establishing of new PPP structures.
  • Seeking S&T based on high risk innovation through new mechanisms.
  • Fostering resource optimized cost-effective innovation across size and technology domains.
  • Triggering in the mindset & value systems to recognize respect and reward performances which create wealth from S&T derived knowledge.
  • Creating a robust national innovation system


  • Judging the growth of S&T based only on publications (e.g. research papers) provides an incomplete picture.
  • We should increasing the technology intensity of industry, which was identified as one of the goals of the STI policy issued in 2013.
  • This needs reiteration and a mechanism should be devised to monitor progress with the objective of becoming an ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’.
  • The STI policy should emphasise PAR to ensure that investment in research results in economic growth.
  • To motivate the research community to pursue at least early-stage PAR, the reward system needs significant reorientation.
  • Academics in higher education institutions pursuing AR should pursue early-stage PAR themselves, or team up with those who are keen to pursue PAR.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *