Context

• On April 24, India announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, declaring it would hold the agreement in abeyance until Pakistan ceased its support for cross-border terrorism.
• This decision, following the Pahalgam terror attack of April 22, marked a significant departure from India’s traditionally cautious approach to the IWT, a cornerstone of India-Pakistan relations.
• While the term abeyance suggests a temporary suspension with the option of reinstatement, it raises critical legal, diplomatic, and strategic questions, shedding light on India’s evolving tactics in addressing its complex relationship with Pakistan.

The Legal Context and Meaning of ‘Abeyance’

• The Legal Context
  • The term abeyance, as invoked by India, finds no grounding in the formal language of international law.
  • The IWT itself, as well as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969, does not recognise such a concept.
  • Notably, India is not a party to the VCLT, while Pakistan, though a signatory, has not ratified it.
  • International law, including the principles enshrined in the IWT, emphasises cooperation over unilateral action.
  • Articles XII(3) and (4) of the IWT stipulate that any modification or termination of the treaty requires mutual consent, a scenario that appears unlikely given the current diplomatic stalemate.
  • Moreover, while the VCLT allows for suspension or termination of treaties under specific exceptional circumstances, such as a material breach (Article 60), impossibility of performance (Article 61), or a fundamental change in circumstances (Article 62), India has not formally invoked these provisions.
• Meaning of ‘Abeyance’
  • Its use of abeyance, therefore, appears more symbolic than legally enforceable, effectively serving as a political statement rather than a legitimate suspension of treaty obligations.
  • In practical terms, India’s decision may enable it to halt cooperation on critical operational aspects of the treaty.
  • This includes withholding data on water resource projects and flood forecasting, actions that could temporarily jeopardize Pakistan’s water security.
  • Additionally, India might proceed with certain infrastructural activities, such as flushing silt from its reservoirs, without notifying Pakistan as required under the IWT, further straining bilateral trust.

Strategic Calculations and the ‘Two-Level Game’

• India’s choice of ‘abeyance’ reflects a strategic balancing act. Domestically, the decision likely aimed to demonstrate a swift and robust response to terrorism, providing solace to a grieving nation.
• Internationally, it signals India’s mounting frustration with Pakistan’s intransigence.
• This move also appears designed to free India, at least temporarily, from the procedural constraints that Pakistan has frequently used to delay critical water infrastructure projects, such as the Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower initiatives.
• The strategy, however, is fraught with risks. Pakistan, heavily reliant on Indus waters, has already characterised India’s actions as an existential threat, potentially inflaming tensions in an already volatile relationship.
• The current political instability in Pakistan, exacerbated by internal dissent, economic challenges, and efforts to internationalise the Kashmir dispute, further complicates India’s calculations.
• Whether India’s abeyance will exert meaningful pressure on Pakistan remains an open question.

Potential Ramifications for India

• Legal and Diplomatic Challenges
  • Domestically, India’s move has resonated powerfully, aligning with public sentiment and garnering widespread political support.
  • Yet, beneath this immediate approval lie deeper concerns.
  • On the international stage, unilaterally undermining the IWT risks exposing India to legal challenges before the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the International Court of Justice.
  • Such a development could tarnish India’s reputation as a responsible global actor committed to international norms.
• Environmental Concerns
  • Equally critical are the environmental and social risks.
  • Fast-tracking water infrastructure projects to consolidate India’s water rights, while politically expedient, may sideline essential environmental reviews and public consultation processes.
  • The Indus basin, rich in biodiversity and seismically sensitive, could face significant ecological damage, undermining long-term sustainability and the very national security the strategy seeks to bolster. 

The Path Forward: Balancing Security and Responsibility

• As India navigates this delicate terrain, it must weigh immediate security imperatives against broader geopolitical and environmental considerations.
• While strong rhetoric and decisive action may satisfy domestic demands, lasting solutions to cross-border terrorism require a nuanced approach.
• India’s future strategy should prioritise reinforcing its standing as a responsible democracy that champions both environmental stewardship and international law.
• In this context, the IWT abeyance serves as a double-edged sword: it offers short-term tactical gains but carries long-term strategic risks.
• To maintain credibility and avoid unintended consequences, India must carefully craft its narrative, ensuring that any operational steps remain within the bounds of legal defensibility and environmental prudence.
• Simultaneously, diplomatic channels must remain open to manage tensions and prevent the situation from spiralling into open conflict.

Conclusion

• India’s decision to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance marks a pivotal moment in its bilateral relationship with Pakistan.
• While it demonstrates a tougher stance against terrorism and asserts India’s strategic interests, it also exposes complex legal, environmental, and geopolitical challenges.
• The true test lies ahead: can India leverage this strategy effectively without compromising its commitment to international norms and ecological sustainability?
• The answer will shape not only India’s regional influence but also its global reputation in the years to come.

Q1. What did India announce on April 24 regarding the Indus Waters Treaty?
Ans.  India announced it would hold the treaty in "abeyance" until Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism.

Q2. Does the term "abeyance" have legal recognition under the IWT?
Ans. No, "abeyance" is not recognized under the IWT or international treaty law.

Q3.  What risks does India face by unilaterally suspending the treaty?
Ans. India risks legal challenges and damage to its global reputation.

Q4. Why might India be using "abeyance" strategically?
Ans. To pressure Pakistan while advancing its own water infrastructure projects.
Q5. What is a major environmental concern linked to India’s move?
Ans. Potential ecological harm in the biodiversity-rich Indus basin. 

Source:The Hindu

Context

• The rapid evolution of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionised numerous sectors, making once-difficult creative and analytical tasks incredibly simple and fast.
• Tools such as ChatGPT-4o can, for instance, generate detailed, Studio Ghibli-inspired portraits within seconds, opening up new horizons for creators and businesses alike.
• However, this technological ease and accessibility conceal a significant downside: the enormous energy required to power these AI systems.
• As AI adoption continues to surge, concerns about its environmental footprint become increasingly urgent, raising critical questions about how to reconcile technological progress with sustainable practices. 

The Hidden Energy Costs of AI

• Contrary to popular perception, AI services are far from energy-neutral.
• Each time a user interacts with a generative AI tool, whether crafting text, images, or performing complex analyses, it activates servers housed in data centres scattered across the globe.
• These data centres rely heavily on electricity, much of which is still generated by burning fossil fuels.
• This dependency on non-renewable energy sources makes AI’s environmental cost significant.
• Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, highlighted this issue in a candid remark: It’s super fun seeing people love images in ChatGPT, but our GPUs are melting.
• This statement underscores the immense computational demand behind seemingly simple user requests.
• According to projections, data centres could account for up to 10% of the world’s total electricity consumption by 2030, a staggering figure that illustrates the potential long-term strain on global energy resources.

Environmental Impact of AI Training and Operation

• AI's environmental footprint extends beyond its operational phase. The training of large AI models is particularly resource-intensive.
• For instance, training a single large-scale AI model, whether a conversational tool like ChatGPT or a visual generator like Midjourney, can emit as much carbon dioxide as five cars running continuously throughout their lifespans.
• These emissions arise from the vast computational processes involved in teaching AI to recognise patterns, understand language, and generate creative outputs.
• Even after deployment, AI systems continue to consume immense amounts of energy.
• Each user request triggers computations that draw power from data centres, and as user bases expand, so does the cumulative environmental impact.
• Without robust sustainability measures, the continued proliferation of AI tools threatens to exacerbate global carbon emissions and deepen reliance on fossil fuels.

The Need for Transparency

• One of the most effective initial steps toward mitigating AI’s environmental impact is greater transparency from companies operating in this sector.
• Just as existing laws mandate data privacy disclosures, similar regulations should require AI companies to publish detailed reports on their energy usage.
• These disclosures should address:
  • Total Energy Consumption: Detailed metrics on how much electricity their AI tools consume, both during model training and in day-to-day operations.
  • Sources of Energy: Information on whether their electricity is sourced from renewable, nuclear, or fossil fuel-based energy.
  • Sustainability Measures: Concrete steps being taken to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions.
• Such transparency will empower regulators, researchers, and the public to hold companies accountable and encourage innovation toward more energy-efficient AI models.

Small Modular Reactors: A Promising Solution

• What are SMRs?
  • Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are a new generation of nuclear reactors designed to be compact, flexible, and scalable.
  • Unlike traditional nuclear plants, which are large, expensive, and require extensive infrastructure, SMRs are built in modular units that can be assembled off-site and transported to their final location.
  • This flexibility allows SMRs to be deployed close to high-demand facilities, such as data centres, significantly reducing transmission losses and ensuring reliable energy supply.
• Advantages of SMRs
  • Continuous, Zero-Carbon Energy: Unlike renewable sources such as wind and solar, which are subject to weather variability, SMRs provide a constant and reliable power supply, ensuring 24/7 availability of clean energy.
  • Faster and Cost-Effective Deployment: Their modular design allows for faster construction and lower upfront costs compared to conventional nuclear power plants, enabling quicker response to growing energy demands.
  • Enhanced Safety Features: SMRs are equipped with passive safety systems that rely on natural processes (like convection and gravity) to cool the reactor core in emergencies, minimising the risk of accidents and making them safer than traditional nuclear reactors.
  • Adaptability: SMRs can be deployed in a variety of settings, from urban centres to remote locations, facilitating decentralised energy production. This decentralisation enhances grid resilience and reduces the risk of widespread outages.

Challenges of SMR Deployment

• Regulatory and Policy Barriers
  • Developing a comprehensive regulatory framework that ensures safety, effective waste management, and public trust is critical.
  • Policymakers will need to navigate complex technical and social issues to secure widespread acceptance.
• High Initial Investment
  • Although SMRs promise lower long-term costs, the initial investment remains significant.
  • This financial barrier could delay widespread adoption, especially in developing countries.
• Integration with Renewable Energy
  • It is essential to coordinate SMR deployment with existing renewable energy initiatives.
  • Careful planning is required to avoid redundancy and ensure that SMRs complement, rather than compete with, solar, wind, and other green energy sources.
• In India’s context, while these challenges are real, there are promising signs.
• Estimates suggest that once operational, the cost of electricity from SMRs could fall from ₹10.3 to ₹5 per kWh, making it competitive with or even cheaper than current average electricity costs.

The Way Forward

• The future of AI is undeniably bright, but its sustainability hinges on addressing its environmental impact.
• To ensure that AI continues to thrive without depleting planetary resources, a multifaceted strategy is required.
• Public-private partnerships offer a promising pathway, allowing governments and industry leaders to collaborate on the development of SMRs and other sustainable energy sources.

Conclusion

• Transparent energy reporting, robust regulations, and innovative energy solutions like SMRs can together forge a future where technological progress and environmental stewardship go hand in hand.
• By acting decisively today, we can ensure that AI remains a tool for empowerment, without becoming a burden on our planet.

Q1. What is the environmental impact of AI?
Ans. AI consumes massive amounts of energy, often from fossil fuels, contributing to carbon emissions and environmental degradation.

Q2. How can Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) help AI sustainability?
Ans. SMRs provide reliable, zero-carbon energy, ideal for powering AI and data centres without relying on intermittent renewable sources.

Q3. Why is transparency important in AI's energy use?
Ans. Transparency allows companies to disclose energy consumption, helping identify inefficiencies and promoting greener AI solutions.

Q4. What challenges do Small Modular Reactors face?
Ans. SMRs face regulatory hurdles, high upfront costs, and the need for integration with existing renewable energy systems.

Q5. How can public-private partnerships support sustainable AI development?
Ans. Collaboration between governments and companies can accelerate the adoption of SMRs and other sustainable energy solutions for AI. 

Source:The Hindu

Context

• The global geopolitical landscape is undergoing profound transformations, and nowhere is this shift more surprising than in the Arctic.
• Once a domain celebrated for its scientific cooperation and environmental stewardship, the Arctic is rapidly morphing into a contested geopolitical and military arena.
• As conflict zones proliferate worldwide, the polar north has emerged as a new frontier of competition, where great powers jostle for influence, resources, and strategic advantage.

The Arctic’s Rising Strategic Importance and The Steady March of Militarisation

• The Arctic’s Rising Strategic Importance
  • The renewed strategic focus on the Arctic is not merely the result of escalating geopolitical ambitions.
  • Crucially, climate change has played an enabling role by reshaping the physical and economic contours of the region.
  • The Northern Sea Route (NSR), once navigable only during brief summer months, is now increasingly accessible year-round.
  • This development has heightened global interest, with the NSR promising to redraw major trade routes and unlock untapped resource wealth.
  • Consequently, traffic along these corridors has surged, accentuating the Arctic’s transition from a scientific preserve to a geopolitical hotspot.
• The Steady March of Militarisation
  • Parallel to these commercial opportunities is a more troubling trend: the militarisation of the high north.
  • Arctic states are not only reviving dormant military installations but also enhancing their operational capabilities through submarine deployments and conspicuous shows of force.
  • Although this militarisation is not entirely new, its intensification marks a significant shift in the stakes for control and influence.
  • A symbolic turning point came in 2019 when U.S. President Donald Trump proposed purchasing Greenland, a move widely dismissed as absurd but, in reality, underscoring the Arctic’s growing centrality in global power politics.

India’s Paradoxical Posture and Strategic Stakes for India

• India’s Paradoxical Posture
  • For non-Arctic nations such as India, these shifts hold significant implications. Yet, India’s response has been paradoxically subdued.
  • The country's 2022 Arctic Policy is commendable for its clarity and focus on climate science, environmental protection, and sustainable development.
  • It draws strength from India’s experience with the Himalayan Third Pole, recognizing the interconnectedness between polar changes and South Asia’s water security.
  • However, the policy’s emphasis remains firmly on scientific and environmental dimensions, underplaying the Arctic’s fast-evolving strategic realities.
  • India’s current posture appears increasingly out of step with the region’s new dynamics.
  • While the Arctic Council and India’s research activities in Svalbard testify to a sustained presence, these initiatives are rooted in a bygone era of cooperative diplomacy.
  • As the Arctic order frays under the weight of geopolitical rivalry, India’s reliance on scientific diplomacy risks marginalisation.
• Strategic Stakes for India
  • The Arctic’s geopolitical recalibration is not a distant concern for India; its ramifications are tangible and far-reaching.
  • As the NSR gains prominence, India’s traditional dominance over Indian Ocean trade routes may come under pressure, challenging its vision of becoming a linchpin of Indo-Pacific connectivity.
  • The deepening collaboration between Russia and China in the Arctic, coupled with China’s growing maritime presence in the Indian Ocean, blurs the line between the Arctic and Indo-Pacific theatres, compelling India to reassess its regional strategies.
  • Moreover, India faces a delicate diplomatic balancing act.
  • Its historical ties with Russia are increasingly scrutinised by Nordic states, particularly in the wake of Russia’s assertive posture in Ukraine.
  • New Delhi has yet to convincingly articulate how its principle of strategic autonomy can align with the evolving interests of its Arctic partners.

The Way Forward: Toward a More Purposeful Arctic Engagement

• India’s future in the Arctic demands a strategic recalibration, one that preserves its environmental ethos while embedding a sharper geopolitical focus.
• A multi-pronged strategy is imperative. First, institutionalising Arctic engagement through dedicated desks in the Foreign and Defence Ministries, supported by regular inter-agency coordination and think tank collaboration, would establish a robust policy framework.
• Second, India should actively seek partnerships with like-minded Arctic states in dual-use areas such as polar logistics, maritime domain awareness, and satellite monitoring, enhancing its credibility while avoiding overt militarisation.
• Third, as new governance forums arise, India must secure its place in shaping rules and standards concerning infrastructure, shipping, and the blue economy, always engaging local communities with respect and restraint.

Conclusion

• India’s Arctic strategy, while thoughtful in its scientific and environmental emphasis, is no longer sufficient in the face of mounting geopolitical rivalries.
• The Arctic is no longer merely a zone of principle-driven cooperation; it is increasingly defined by power politics.
• If India fails to adapt its approach, it risks being sidelined in the emerging Arctic order.
• A more integrated and strategic engagement, balancing climate consciousness with pragmatic geopolitics, will be vital for safeguarding India’s long-term interests in this rapidly transforming region.

Q1. Why is the Arctic becoming geopolitically important?

Ans. Climate change is opening new sea routes and resources, attracting global competition.

Q2. What is India’s main focus in its Arctic policy?

Ans. India emphasizes climate science, environmental protection, and sustainable development.

Q3.  What challenge does India face with Arctic militarisation?

Ans. India risks being sidelined as Arctic powers shift focus from science to geopolitics.

Q4.  Why is the Northern Sea Route significant for India?

Ans. It could divert trade away from Indian Ocean routes, affecting India's connectivity role.

Q5. What strategic adjustment is suggested for India?

Ans. India should deepen Arctic engagement beyond science to include security and governance. 

Source:The Hindu