UPSC Mains Current Affairs for 24 October 2026

India-China Border Tensions: LAC, ITBP and Border Management

October 24, 2026

India-China Border Tensions Latest News

Recently, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) attributed recurring disturbances along the India-China border to Chinese forces deviating from established patrolling patterns, following the ITBP chief's remarks about ongoing face-offs at multiple locations in Arunachal Pradesh.

Historical Background of India-China Border Relations

India and China share an approximately 3,488-km-long disputed boundary, commonly referred to as the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
Unlike an internationally demarcated border, the LAC reflects the areas where the two countries exercise actual control, and differences in its perception have contributed to recurring confrontations.
The 1962 India-China war deepened mutual distrust and shaped India's approach to border security. Subsequent agreements sought to prevent escalation and maintain peace despite the unresolved boundary dispute.
Important developments include:
- 1993 Agreement: Established principles for maintaining peace and tranquillity along the LAC.
- 1996 Agreement: Introduced confidence-building measures, including restrictions on certain military activities and weapons near the LAC.
- 2005 agreements: Further developed political principles and measures for implementing confidence-building arrangements.
- 2020 eastern Ladakh crisis: A serious military confrontation, including the Galwan Valley clash, disrupted bilateral relations and led to sustained military deployments.
- 2024 disengagement efforts: Agreements concerning patrolling arrangements in parts of eastern Ladakh supported efforts to reduce tensions, although the wider boundary dispute remained unresolved.

Strategic Significance of the LAC

The India-China border has considerable strategic importance because of its difficult terrain, proximity to sensitive military positions and implications for regional security.
Arunachal Pradesh is particularly significant. China claims parts of the Indian state and refers to it as “Zangnan” or southern Tibet, while India maintains that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral and inalienable part of the country.
The LAC's differing perceptions can lead to opposing patrols entering areas claimed by both sides, creating the risk of face-offs and escalation.
Border management therefore requires effective surveillance, infrastructure development, military preparedness and reliable communication between local commanders and diplomatic authorities.

Border Management and Confidence-Building Mechanisms

India and China use diplomatic and military mechanisms to manage disputes and prevent local confrontations from escalating into wider conflict.
- Corps Commander-level talks: Facilitate negotiations on troop deployments, disengagement and specific border tensions.
- Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC): Provides a diplomatic platform for discussing border affairs and coordinating efforts to maintain peace.
- Border Personnel Meetings: Enable local military commanders to communicate directly and address incidents.
- Diplomatic engagement: Helps clarify positions, manage disagreements and maintain channels for negotiations.
- Confidence-building measures: Agreements and communication arrangements seek to prevent misunderstandings and reduce the risk of unintended escalation.
These mechanisms are particularly important because the absence of a mutually agreed, clearly demarcated boundary makes local incidents difficult to resolve without sustained communication.

News Summary

MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated that disturbances along the India-China border occur when Chinese forces diverge from established patrolling patterns.
He emphasised that both countries continue to use existing diplomatic and military mechanisms to resolve outstanding issues and prevent misunderstandings or miscalculations along the LAC.
The MEA also reiterated that maintaining peace and tranquillity in border areas is essential for the overall development of bilateral relations.
Both sides have agreed to discuss ways to improve their understanding of the LAC in appropriate areas to strengthen border management.

ITBP’s Shaurya Commandos and Continuing Face-offs in Arunachal Pradesh

Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) Director General Shatrujeet Singh Kapoor stated that the force's newly established Shaurya commando teams had performed effectively during face-offs with China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) at several locations in Arunachal Pradesh. He described the confrontations as ongoing.
The ITBP is expanding these specialised teams across its border battalions, with the objective of developing a dedicated high-altitude combat capability.
The force is also strengthening modernisation, drone operations and counter-drone capabilities.
He highlighted the need to adapt to changing warfare technologies, noting that conventional methods alone may be insufficient against a modernising adversary.
He cited increased investment in drones, drone-pilot training and indigenous drone production as important elements of the ITBP's modernisation programme.
The remarks followed Corps Commander-level talks held in September at the Wacha–Damai border meeting point in Arunachal Pradesh amid reported tensions in the Taksing area of Upper Subansiri district.

Challenges and the Way Forward

India's border strategy must combine operational readiness with sustained diplomatic engagement.
Strengthen surveillance: Expand the use of drones, sensors, satellite imagery and secure communication systems.
Improve infrastructure: Develop roads, bridges, logistics facilities and communications in border regions.
Modernise border forces: Provide specialised high-altitude training, modern equipment and integrated drone and counter-drone capabilities.
Maintain dialogue: Continue military and diplomatic negotiations to clarify the LAC and resolve outstanding disputes.
Prevent escalation: Strengthen local communication and incident-management protocols to reduce the possibility of miscalculation.
Ensure transparency: Provide accurate and timely information about significant border developments while protecting operationally sensitive details.

Source: IE | TOI

India-China Border Relations FAQs

Q1: What is the Line of Actual Control (LAC)?

Ans: The LAC is the line separating areas under Indian and Chinese control, although the two countries differ in their perceptions of its alignment.

Q2: Why do face-offs occur along the India–China border?

Ans: Differing perceptions of the LAC and disputes over established patrolling patterns can bring Indian and Chinese patrols into confrontation.

Q3: What is the role of the ITBP?

Ans: The ITBP is a specialised border-guarding force responsible for guarding India's border with China and operating in challenging high-altitude terrain.

Q4: What are the Shaurya commandos?

Ans: They are specialised ITBP teams being developed to strengthen high-altitude combat readiness and operational capabilities along the China border.

Q5: How do India and China manage border tensions?

Ans: They use military commander-level talks, Border Personnel Meetings, diplomatic consultations and confidence-building mechanisms to resolve disputes and prevent escalation.

PLFS Revamp – Capturing India’s Gig Economy and the Invisible Burden of Unpaid Work

October 24, 2026

PLFS Revamp Latest News

The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) is revamping the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) to improve the measurement of emerging forms of employment and unpaid work.
The revised design will be implemented from January 2027, and the proposed changes seek to better capture digital platform workers, unpaid household and caregiving work, volunteer activities and unpaid trainee work.
The move is significant because conventional employment statistics can understate the contribution of workers engaged in informal, platform-based and non-market activities, particularly women’s unpaid work.

Better Coverage of Gig and Platform Workers

Creating a separate sampling stratum:
- MoSPI had begun collecting information on digital platform workers experimentally from January 2026. However, the existing sampling arrangement did not identify sufficient platform workers.
- The revised PLFS will create a separate Second Stage Stratum (SSS) for households containing digital platform workers, thereby improving their representation in the sample.
- An additional yes/no screening question will ask whether any household member worked through a digital platform during the preceding 365 days.
- Platforms mentioned include Ola, Uber, Zomato, Amazon and Urban Company.
- The information will help identify households eligible for inclusion in the new platform-worker stratum.
Understanding the nature of platform work:
- Identified platform workers will be asked about the goods or services provided; whether they work for multiple platforms; reasons for entering platform work; and major challenges faced.
- These challenges may include long working hours, harsh weather conditions, uncertain earnings, accident-related risks and inadequate social security.
- The data can help policymakers design appropriate labour protection, social-security and income-security mechanisms for the growing platform economy.
Why it matters: A NITI Aayog estimate put India's gig and platform workforce at 77 lakh in 2020–21, projected to reach 2.35 crore by 2029–30. Better data is therefore essential for evidence-based policymaking.

Beyond Conventional Employment Statistics

The revised PLFS will collect information on own-use production, unpaid household and caregiving activities, volunteer work and unpaid trainee work.
Questions will cover activities such as fetching water; cooking and cleaning; washing clothes; feeding and caring for children; caring for elderly family members; and producing goods or providing services for household consumption.
The survey will also distinguish between activities undertaken for own consumption and those intended for sale.
These questions will be asked to persons aged 15 years and above during the first visit in both rural and urban areas.

Women’s Labour Force Participation

The reform is particularly important from a gender perspective. MoSPI’s 2024 Time Use Survey found a substantial gender gap in unpaid domestic and caregiving work.
- For example, females aged above six spent, on average, more than 4.5 hours a day on such activities, compared with only 37 minutes for males.
The revised PLFS will additionally ask whether individuals -
- Sought paid work or work for profit during the preceding 30 days;
- Currently want such work; and
- If they did not seek work, the principal reason, including family and household responsibilities.
- This can help determine whether women remain outside the labour market because of personal choice, social norms or constraints created by unpaid care responsibilities.
Time poverty:

- The disproportionate burden of unpaid care work can produce “time poverty”.
- It is a shortage of discretionary time that limits women’s ability to undertake paid employment, acquire skills and pursue better economic opportunities.
- Thus, measuring unpaid work is important not merely for household statistics but also for understanding female labour force participation, gender inequality and economic empowerment.

Updating the Sampling Frame

The revamped PLFS will use an updated sampling frame reflecting the new urban settlements; changes in urbanisation; creation, merger or division of districts and administrative units; etc.
The Urban Frame Survey will inform the updated urban frame, while the rural Census 2011 frame will undergo follow-up updating.
The revised allocation and stratification criteria are intended to improve sample selection and reduce operational difficulties.

Significance of PLFS Revamp

It represents a shift towards a more comprehensive measurement of employment and economic activity.
It will -
- Improve statistical visibility of gig and platform workers;
- Capture the scale and nature of unpaid domestic and care work;
- Strengthen gender-sensitive labour-market analysis;
- Reflect changing urbanisation and population patterns; and
- Provide evidence for policies on social security, employment generation, women’s workforce participation and the future of work.
Overall, the reform recognises that economic contribution cannot be assessed only through conventional paid employment.
A modern labour-statistics system must also capture the growing platform economy and the substantial unpaid work that sustains households and communities.

Source: IE | ET

PLFS Revamp FAQs

Q1: Why is PLFS being revamped to capture digital platform workers?

Ans: To improve their representation in labour statistics and enable evidence-based policies on social security.

Q2: What is the significance of creating a separate Second Stage Stratum (SSS) for platform workers?

Ans: It will improve the sampling and identification of households with digital platform workers.

Q3: What types of unpaid activities will the revised PLFS capture?

Ans: It will cover own-use production, unpaid domestic and caregiving work, volunteer activities, etc.

Q4: How does unpaid care work contribute to women’s ‘time poverty’?

Ans: It reduces women’s time for paid employment, skill development and better livelihood opportunities.

Q5: How will the revised PLFS improve the quality of labour-market estimates?

Ans: It will improve population representation and reduce sampling and operational gaps.

Legislative Councils in India: Powers, Elections and Role

October 24, 2026

Legislative Councils in India Latest News

Elections to 28 seats across the Legislative Councils of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, and Karnataka were held recently. Unlike elections for Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs), not every adult citizen can vote for Members of Legislative Councils (MLCs) — and not all states even have a Legislative Council.
This raises a fundamental constitutional question: why does this body exist, and what role does it play in India’s political system?

What Are Legislative Councils?

Just as the Indian Union has a bicameral Parliament (Lok Sabha + Rajya Sabha), some states have a bicameral legislature — a Legislative Assembly plus a Legislative Council.
Currently six states have Legislative Councils: Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh.

Colonial Origins

Traces back to the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, which created the Council of State at the national level in 1919.
The Government of India Act, 1935 established bicameral legislatures in provinces.
The first Legislative Council began functioning in Bengal in 1937.

Similarities With the Rajya Sabha

Acts as a “second layer” of deliberation in the law-making process.
Bills require its approval to become law.
Minimum age to contest: above 30 years (versus 25 for Lok Sabha/Assembly elections).
Members serve six-year terms via indirect elections.
Cannot be dissolved; one-third of members retire every two years.

The Constituent Assembly Debate

Views on the need for Legislative Councils were sharply divided.
Leaders argued for a check on the Lower House, citing concerns about placing all power “in the hands of those... not only literate but wise too.” (His reasoning reflected the era’s elitist anxieties about universal adult franchise.)
Critics pointed out the Council’s limited powers — notably, it cannot reject the Assembly’s decisions on a Money Bill — questioning whether a body with such restricted authority justified the added public expenditure.
The debate over whether to have a Council at all remains politically contentious even today: Tamil Nadu’s AIADMK government abolished its Council in 1986; the DMK has since repeatedly sought to revive it.

Political Significance of MLC Elections

Though not contested on party symbols, candidates are still backed by political parties.
These elections function as a political barometer — signalling party strength among educated groups and professionals, or indicating overall political standing ahead of major elections (as seen currently in Uttar Pradesh).

Constitutional Framework: How Councils Are Created and Composed

Article 169: Parliament can create or abolish a Legislative Council if the state’s Legislative Assembly passes a resolution by:
- A majority of total Assembly membership, and
- A majority of at least two-thirds of members present and voting.
Article 171 — Composition rules:
- Total MLCs cannot exceed one-third of the state’s total MLAs.
- Total MLCs cannot be fewer than 40.

How MLCs Are Elected: The Composition Formula

Elections use proportional representation via the single transferable vote, with electors ranking candidates by preference. The composition breaks down as:
- One-third: Elected by municipalities, district boards, and other local authorities.
- One-twelfth: Elected by graduates (minimum 3 years as a university graduate, or equivalent qualification) residing in the state — the “Graduates’ constituency.”
- One-twelfth: Elected by teachers with at least 3 years of teaching experience in institutions of secondary school level or above — the “Teachers’ constituency.”
- Remaining members: Partly elected by MLAs themselves, and partly nominated by the Governor, chosen for “special knowledge or practical experience” in fields like literature, science, art, and social service.

Conclusion

The Legislative Council remains one of India’s more underexamined constitutional institutions — a colonial-era holdover retained in only a handful of states, serving as a deliberative check rather than a co-equal legislative power.
While it lacks the Rajya Sabha’s robust authority — most notably on Money Bills — its unique functional constituencies for graduates and teachers reflect an attempt to bring specialised, non-partisan expertise into lawmaking.
As debates over its utility continue in states like Tamil Nadu, the Council’s survival ultimately hinges on a political calculation: whether the value of deliberative scrutiny outweighs the cost of maintaining a second chamber with limited veto power.

Source: IE

Legislative Councils in India FAQs

Q1: What are Legislative Councils in India?

Ans: Legislative Councils in India are upper houses in certain state legislatures, providing an additional forum for legislative deliberation alongside the elected Legislative Assembly.

Q2: Which states currently have Legislative Councils in India?

Ans: Legislative Councils in India exist in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, creating bicameral legislatures in these six states.

Q3: How are members of Legislative Councils in India elected?

Ans: Members of Legislative Councils in India are selected through local authorities, graduates, teachers, MLAs and gubernatorial nominations, with elections using proportional representation and the single transferable vote.

Q4: Which constitutional articles govern Legislative Councils in India?

Ans: Article 169 governs the creation or abolition of Legislative Councils in India, while Article 171 specifies their composition and limits on membership.

Q5: What are the main powers and limitations of Legislative Councils in India?

Ans: Legislative Councils in India provide additional legislative scrutiny, but their powers are limited compared with Assemblies, particularly because they cannot reject a Money Bill permanently.

Social Unrest in Europe: Economic Causes and Consequences

October 24, 2026

Social Unrest in Europe Latest News

A wave of social unrest is sweeping across Europe — France, Albania, Belgium, Italy, and Portugal are all witnessing widespread street protests.
As in France, where unrest began with student dissatisfaction over school facilities, many of these movements have evolved into a broader outcry over the cost-of-living crisis.
While the timing is political — with countries like France and Italy heading into 2027 national elections — the underlying drivers are predominantly economic.
This raises a crucial question: what actually causes such unrest, and what are its economic consequences?

Is Rising Inequality the Real Culprit?

A common explanation — including arguments made by anti-immigration voices — is that rising economic inequality fuels unrest.
The World Inequality Report (WIR) 2026, using data through 2024, measures this via the “Income Gap” — defined as the ratio between the income share of the top 10% and the bottom 50% of a population. A higher ratio means greater inequality.
Findings for France: The income gap has increased between 2014 and 2024 — similarly for Italy.
However, this trend isn’t universal: In the UK, Germany, and Spain, the income gap has actually fallen over the same period.
Crucially, France’s inequality is still comparatively low: Its income gap remains among the lowest among peers like Germany. For context, India’s income gap is 38, and South Africa’s is 118 — far higher than France’s.
Conclusion: Rising inequality in France is real, but it is not exceptionally severe by global standards — suggesting inequality alone is an incomplete explanation.

What Else Predicts Social Unrest?

IMF economists noted: “Although inequality has crept up slowly in recent decades, it has not significantly worsened over the past decade in a way that would explain the recent surge of discontent.”
IMF researchers used machine learning on over 340 economic and social indicators to identify unrest predictors. Their central finding:
- Past turmoil — both domestic and in neighbouring countries — is by far the most important predictor of future unrest, roughly 10 times more informative than any economic or social factor.
The Bank Run Analogy: Just as people rush to withdraw deposits when they see others doing so, visible protests elsewhere act as “coordinating signals” — encouraging people to join in, especially in culturally similar neighbouring countries.
Other Predictive Factors Identified: Digital access and social media penetration — suggesting that the ability to communicate and coordinate at scale is crucial for mobilising protest activity.
That said, economic factors aren’t irrelevant — researchers noted “prices, particularly of food and fuel, seem to be particularly important” as triggers.

The Economic Consequences of Unrest

While economic factors may not be the biggest predictor of unrest, they play a much larger role in its aftermath:
- IMF economists found a close link between unrest and subsequent economic performance.
- Key finding: On average, major unrest events are followed by a 1 percentage point reduction in GDP, measured six quarters after the event.
Nature of Unrest Matters
- Unrest driven by socioeconomic factors leads to sharper GDP contractions than unrest driven by purely political motives.
- Unrest triggered by a combination of both socioeconomic and political factors produces the sharpest GDP contractions of all.

Conclusion

Europe’s protests tell us something simple: inequality alone doesn’t explain unrest. Economic grievances, especially rising food and fuel prices, do play a role. But they are not the main trigger.
Often, it is the sight of protests elsewhere that pushes people to join in. Digital connectivity speeds this up. Once unrest begins, though, its economic cost is real. GDP falls the most when economic and political causes mix together. This leaves governments in a tough spot.
Fixing cost-of-living problems may not stop unrest from spreading. But ignoring them only deepens the economic damage that follows.

Source: IE

Social Unrest in Europe FAQs

Q1: What are the main causes of social unrest in Europe?

Ans: Social unrest in Europe reflects cost-of-living pressures, rising food and fuel prices, political tensions, past turmoil, and the spread of protests across neighbouring countries.

Q2: Does economic inequality explain social unrest in Europe?

Ans: Economic inequality alone cannot explain social unrest in Europe. Research suggests that previous unrest, food and fuel prices, and protest coordination also influence mobilisation.

Q3: How does social media contribute to social unrest in Europe?

Ans: Social media can accelerate social unrest in Europe by helping people communicate, coordinate demonstrations, observe protests elsewhere, and mobilise participants across communities and borders.

Q4: What economic consequences follow social unrest in Europe?

Ans: Social unrest in Europe can weaken economic performance. IMF economists found that major unrest events are followed, on average, by a one-percentage-point reduction in GDP after six quarters.

Q5: Why does politically motivated unrest affect economic growth differently?

Ans: Unrest combining political and socioeconomic grievances tends to produce sharper GDP contractions than unrest driven purely by political motives.