Current Affairs

UN Secretary-General’s Award 2025: Major Swathi Shantha Kumar from Bangalore has won it

Context: An Indian Army officer from Bengaluru, Major Swathi Shantha Kumar, has won the UN Secretary-General’s Award 2025 for her project Equal Partners, Lasting Peace.

• Major Swathi is currently serving on an United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) and her efforts are said to have significantly enhanced gender parity through the effective deployment and integration of the Indian Engagement team, thereby strengthening grassroot level engagement across the area of responsibility.
• Under her initiative and command, the team successfully conducted short- and long-distance patrols, integrated reverie patrols, and dynamic air patrols to far-flung counties of the host nation. These operations contributed substantially to creating a conducive and secure environment for more than 5,000 women, enabling meaningful participation and community confidence-building.
• Major Swathi is an officer in the Corps of Electronics and Mechanical Engineers (EME). Her father, R. Shantha Kumar, said that she did her schooling in Bengaluru and graduated from the New Horizon College of Engineering following which she was commissioned in the Indian Army.
• “We are very proud that our daughter is serving the nation in uniform, but like any other parent I am worried about her as she has to serve in very harsh terrains and conditions. This award is a recognition for her hard work and discipline which makes me a very happy and proud father,” Mr. Kumar said.
• He added that Major Swathi has been in South Sudan for nearly 15 months and is expected to return to India early next month following which she will be posted in Secunderabad.
• United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently announced and honored the winners of the Secretary General’s Award 2025.
• In his address Mr. Guterres said that the Mission has further strengthened the gender-inclusive approach by the UNMISS.
• This prestigious award recognises initiatives that advance gender parity and promote gender-responsive peacekeeping in alignment with the UN mandate.
• The team was shortlisted from nominations received across all UN peacekeeping missions and UN agencies worldwide and emerged as the winner in the Gender Category, securing the highest number of votes among four finalists through a UN-wide voting process involving the UN personnel globally.

The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) is the UN’s peacekeeping mission established in 2011 to support the world’s youngest nation. Its mandate—recently extended until 30 April 2026—focuses on protecting civilians, monitoring human rights, supporting peace processes, and facilitating humanitarian aid.

🌍 United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) – Complete Overview
🏛️ Background
Established: July 2011, following South Sudan’s independence.

Mandate Authority: UN Security Council Resolution 1996 (2011).

Current Mandate: Extended by Resolution 2779 (May 2025) until 30 April 2026.

Headquarters: Juba, South Sudan.

Personnel: Thousands of uniformed (military, police) and civilian staff from multiple UN member states.

🎯 Core Mandate & Objectives

📌 Recent Developments (2025–26)
Mandate Renewal: Security Council extended UNMISS until April 2026 amid rising instability.

Inclusive Spaces: UNMISS has worked to release recruited children, build peace, and protect vulnerable groups.

Infrastructure Support: Repairs and constructions to connect communities and mitigate climate change effects.

Justice Initiatives: Promoting accountability and strengthening local justice systems

✨ Significance
UNMISS is critical for stabilizing South Sudan, protecting civilians, and supporting peacebuilding.

Its presence reassures international partners and provides a framework for humanitarian aid delivery.

The mission also highlights the UN’s role in conflict prevention and post-conflict state-building.

India’s Contribution to UNMISS
India has been one of the largest and most consistent contributors to UN peacekeeping missions worldwide, and its role in UNMISS is particularly significant.

Troop Contributions
India has deployed over 2,000 personnel to UNMISS, including:

Infantry battalions for civilian protection and area security.

Engineering units for infrastructure development (roads, bridges, shelters).

Medical contingents providing healthcare to both UN staff and local civilians.

Indian peacekeepers are stationed in key regions like Juba, Bor, Malakal, and Bentiu, often in volatile conflict zones.

✨ Significance of India’s Role
Reinforces India’s image as a responsible global peacekeeper.

Strengthens India–Africa relations through humanitarian goodwill.

Demonstrates India’s commitment to the UN Charter and global stability.

Builds trust among local communities, where Indian peacekeepers are often praised for their approachability and compassion.

Central Ground Water Board: Andhra Pradesh is facing widespread contamination of groundwater

The Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) has stated in its Annual Ground Water Quality Report, 2025 that Andhra Pradesh is one of the States facing widespread contamination of groundwater as per the BIS standards.

• However, the report notes that the monsoon had shown some improvement in water quality, particularly in the areas affected by high electrical conductivity (EC) and fluoride.
• “Elevated uranium concentrations exceeding 30 parts per billion (ppb) were detected sporadically in Andhra Pradesh and four other States,” the report mentioned. High incidence of residual sodium carbonate beyond permissible limits was also recorded in Andhra Pradesh (26.87% of the samples analysed).
• The groundwater quality alerts issued by the CGWB during June 2024-–March 2025 highlighted the high incidence of nitrate, iron, fluoride, chromium, cobalt, manganese, nickel, zinc, arsenic, selenium, cadmium, lead, and uranium, with notable concerns in Andhra Pradesh and eight other States. Andhra Pradesh and some other States were found to be facing seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers, which was attributed to high levels of electrical conductivity.

Uranium hotspots

• Sixteen villages in Sri Sathya Sai district, and three in Tirupati district were found to have uranium levels exceeding 30 ppb.
• Five villages were identified as arsenic hotspots, where the concentration of the heavy metal exceeded 10 ppb. Fluoride contamination above 1.50 mg/l in areas, especially hard rock aquifers in Andhra Pradesh, where over-extraction enhances the mobilisation of fluoride-bearing minerals was one of the major findings.

Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill

Context: Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said that Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot has not returned the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill. The Governor has neither rejected nor approved the Bill, he said.

• Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said that Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot has not returned the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill.
• The Governor has neither rejected nor approved the Bill, he said.
• Speaking to presspersons before leaving for Bengaluru after winding up his programmes scheduled in Mangaluru on Saturday evening, Mr. Siddaramaiah said that the Governor will receive an explanation about the Bill if he seeks one.

📌 Governor’s Role under Article 200
The Constitution of India (Article 200) outlines the Governor’s powers when a Bill is presented for assent:

Assent: The Governor may approve the Bill, making it law.

Withhold Assent: The Governor may reject the Bill.

Return for Reconsideration: Except in the case of Money Bills, the Governor can return the Bill to the Legislature for reconsideration. If the Legislature passes it again, the Governor must give assent.

Reserve for President’s Consideration: The Governor may reserve the Bill for the President, especially if it conflicts with national interests or constitutional provisions.

👉 In the current case, the Governor has not exercised any of these options, leaving the Bill pending. This creates a constitutional limbo, where the Legislature has passed the Bill but it has not yet become law.

⚖️ About the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill
🎯 Objective
To prevent, regulate, and penalize hate speech and hate crimes in Karnataka.

To safeguard constitutional values of equality, fraternity, and secularism.

To provide a legal framework for law enforcement to act against individuals or groups inciting violence or discrimination.

📜 Key Provisions (as reported)
Definition of Hate Speech & Hate Crimes:

Hate speech includes verbal, written, or symbolic communication that promotes hatred, violence, or discrimination against communities.

Hate crimes include acts of violence motivated by prejudice against caste, religion, language, gender, or ethnicity.

Punishments:

Prescribes fines and imprisonment for offenders.

Enhanced penalties for repeat offenders or organized groups.

Law Enforcement Empowerment:

Police and investigating agencies are given authority to register cases, investigate, and prosecute offenders.

Special provisions for fast‑track trials in severe cases.

Community Safeguards:

Protection of vulnerable groups from targeted hate campaigns.

Mechanisms to monitor online hate speech and digital platforms.

🌍 Significance
Curbing Communal Tensions: Provides a legal deterrent against inflammatory speeches and hate‑driven violence.

Safeguarding Constitutional Values: Reinforces Articles 14 (Equality), 15 (Non‑discrimination), 19 (Reasonable restrictions on free speech), and 21 (Right to life and dignity).

Strengthening Law Enforcement: Gives police and judiciary clearer powers to act against hate‑based offences.

Public Confidence: Builds trust among minority and vulnerable communities that the State is committed to protecting them.

⚖️ Constitutional Balance
The Bill raises important questions about freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)) versus reasonable restrictions (Article 19(2)).

The Governor’s delay in assent highlights the checks and balances between Legislature and Executive.

If reserved for the President, the Bill will undergo Union‑level scrutiny, ensuring national consistency in hate speech laws.

✨ Conclusion
The Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill is a progressive attempt to legally address hate speech and hate‑driven violence, but its implementation depends on the Governor’s assent under Article 200. By defining hate speech, prescribing punishments, and empowering law enforcement, the Bill seeks to curb communal tensions and uphold constitutional values. However, the Governor’s inaction has left the Bill in a constitutional limbo, making its future uncertain until assent or reservation is decided.

Malayalam Bhasha Bill 2025 & Karnataka

Context: A day after Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan sought to allay fears of Kannada linguistic minority in Kerala about the Malayalam Bhasha Bill 2025, the Karnataka Border Area Development Authority (KBADA) has said that the Bill should explicitly exempt linguistic minority areas (parts of Kasaragod district) in the mandatory Malayalam first language clause — allowing Kannada to remain the first language, and also remove the inherent contradictions in the Bill.

• While Mr. Vijayan pointed out provisions in Clause 7 of the Bill to allay fears of the Kannada-speaking population, the authority pointed out contradictions in the provisions that was also leading to confusion.
• The assessment of the Karnataka government was that under the proposed legislation, those studying in Kannada medium would also need to study Malayalam as a compulsory subject/first language, affecting those who are unfamiliar with that language.

Academic performance

• It could affect the academic performance adversely and Kannada’s primacy would also get eroded over time. It may disrupt existing set-ups where Kannada was the first language, sources aware of the assessment said.
• This comes amidst concerns aired by Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah over the adverse effects of the Bill on the Kannada-speaking population in Kerala.
• The sources said that the Kerala government through the Bill should accelerate declaration of specific taluks in Kasaragod district as minority areas under the Bill and secure full benefit of Clause 7 in it that provided for bilingual signboards and teachers’ appointments in Kannada, among others.
• The authority chairman Somanna Bevinamarad is learnt to have echoed similar sentiments.
• An estimate puts the Kannada-speaking people in Kasargod to be more than 70% of the population.

Contradictions

• According to Prakash Matthihalli, secretary of the authority, despite protections in Clause 7 (special provisions regarding linguistic minorities) in the Bill, there were contradictions and difficulties in implementation.

• He said that while Clause 6(1) mandated Malayalam as the compulsory first language in all government and aided schools in Kerala up to 10th standard, Clause 7(1) provided for communication of all letters and transactions in local offices in the local language.
• “However, as per Clause 7(2) students whose mother tongue is any language other than Malayalam may pursue their studies in the languages of their choice that are available in the schools. When the second language English is compulsory in national education curriculum in Kerala, how can a student opt Kannada as first language when Clause 6(1) says Malayalam is mandatory across the State?”
• Further, Clause 7(3) that spoke of students from other States and foreign countries whose mother tongue was not Malayalam, provided for exemption only in 9th and 10th standards. “Clause 7 should explicitly specify the exemption to linguistic minorities areas.”
• Mr. Matthihalli said the Karnataka government had no problem with the Bill if the ambiguities in the provisions were cleared and it exempted the Kannada-speaking regions.

Karnataka’s border districts host significant linguistic minorities such as Marathi speakers in Belagavi, Telugu in Ballari and Raichur, Tamil in Bengaluru and Kolar, Malayalam in Kodagu, and Urdu across urban centers. The Indian Constitution protects these communities under Articles 29 and 30 (cultural and educational rights), Article 347 (recognition of languages), and Article 350A & 350B (instruction in mother tongue and linguistic minority commissioner).

🗣️ Linguistic Minorities in Karnataka
📍 Border Districts & Communities

📜 Constitutional Provisions for Linguistic Minorities

⚖️ Current Issues
Belagavi Dispute: Maharashtra claims Marathi-speaking areas; Karnataka asserts Kannada primacy.

Kasaragod Issue: Kerala’s Malayalam Bhasha Bill 2025 raised fears of marginalization of Kannada minorities in Kasaragod.

Education Rights: Linguistic minorities demand mother-tongue instruction in border schools.

Kathputli: pulling strings in Jaipur’s puppet colony

In this Jaipur corner, nearly 250 families carry forward one of Rajasthan’s oldest folk art forms, Kathputli; these artisans sew bright costumesonto small wooden puppets that are used by travelling performers who narrate tales of Rajput kings, warriors, folk heroes, and moral stories
In a maze of narrow lanes in the ‘Pink City’ of Jaipur lies Kathputli Nagar, a place where stories are not written but carved, stitched, and brought to life with strings. Inside cramped homes stacked close together, men and women sit on the floor, shaping small wooden faces, painting bold eyes, and sewing vibrant costumes. Nearly 250 families live here, many of them have been preserving the craft for generations. What begins in their modest homes eventually finds its way to bustling markets, cultural fairs, and stages across the world.

These puppets, known as Kathputlis, are one of Rajasthan’s oldest folk art forms. The name comes from kath (wood) and putli (doll), reflecting their simple yet expressive construction. Historically, Kathputli performances were used by travelling performers to narrate tales of Rajput kings, brave warriors, folk heroes, and moral stories to village audiences. Long before modern forms of entertainment, Kathputlis were a powerful medium of communication.

The design of these Rajasthani puppets mirrors the State’s rich culture. Their colourful attire draw inspiration from royal courts and desert traditions, while their sharp features and exaggerated expressions add drama to every movement. Each puppet represents a character from everyday life or folklore, helping preserve the State’s social and cultural identity.

Puppet shows remain the soul of this tradition. Accompanied by folk music on the dholak and harmonium, puppeteers bring the Kathputlis to life with strings and rhythmic narration. The performances brim with humour, music, and satire, often reflecting social realities alongside legendary tales. From the homes of Kathputli Nagar to bigger stages, Kathputlis continue to carry Rajasthan’s voice across generations.

Source: The Hindu

How will the U.S. exit affect climate action?

Why has U.S. President Donald Trump moved to withdraw the U.S. from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change? What will be the financial impact? What will it mean for international cooperation on climate change?’
U.S. President Donald Trump has signed a presidential memorandum withdrawing from 66 international organisations, such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

What does the U.S. exiting the FCCC mean?

Mr. Trump has been calling climate change a hoax. His government is also currently in the process of pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement. On February 4, 2025, he issued an executive order requiring the government “to determine which organisations, conventions, and treaties [to which the U.S. is party] are contrary” to its interests. His decision to exit the FCCC and the IPCC are based on this review.

Pulling out of the FCCC will exclude the U.S. from the core framework that organises almost all multilateral climate diplomacy. For instance, it won’t have to participate in the FCCC reporting system, which records countries’ greenhouse gas emissions and progress towards their commitments, and thus allows nations to monitor their collective efforts and hold each other accountable. Legally, the FCCC provides a way for countries to withdraw should they see fit. The FCCC also says withdrawing from it is treated as withdrawing from any protocol to which the party belongs. This includes the Paris Agreement. In practical terms, this means the U.S. will cease to be a party inside the system that runs the annual Conference of the Parties (COP) negotiations and the processes by which the rules are drafted for transparency, carbon markets, financial architecture, etc. The country will also lose its ability to negotiate from inside the room at COPs even if it can still attend some meetings as an observer. However, it won’t have the legal standing to bargain as a party.

How will climate finance be affected?

The FCCC has established a financial mechanism with operating entities including the Global Environment Facility and the Green Climate Fund, and the COP oversees the arrangements of that mechanism. If the U.S. isn’t a party, it will lose its leverage inside the COP over how that financial architecture evolves while also making it politically easier for a U.S. administration to justify withholding contributions.

Conversely, the exit will also raise the ‘cost of doing climate business’ for U.S. companies. Many private sector enterprises, investors, insurers, and subnational governments currently plan around the expectation that global climate rules will become tighter over time, so the U.S.’s decision to exit the FCCC could signal more policy volatility, in turn increasing risk premiums and leaving U.S. exporters more exposed to foreign climate-related trade measures. For many partner countries climate cooperation has become tied up with broader negotiations on energy security, critical minerals, industrial policy, and development finance. The potential implication here is that countries may now become more unwilling to cut side deals with Washington in adjacent domains because they will have to account for the durability of the U.S.’s commitments.

What does the IPCC do?

The IPCC assesses scientific research on climate change, compiling reports that synthesise the current understanding of climate science, the consequences, and potential strategies policymakers everywhere can implement. Pulling out of the IPCC would weaken the U.S.’s role in owning the shared scientific references climate negotiations rely on. This doesn’t automatically mean “American scientists will no longer be involved in climate reports” but it likely will reduce U.S. involvement. The IPCC reports’ authors are put together by a process in which governments and observer organisations nominate experts and the IPCC Bureau creates teams. If the U.S. stops nominating, an important pipeline for U.S.-based expertise — which is considerable — becomes narrower.

This said, the IPCC explicitly encourages experts who are nominated but not selected to contribute as expert reviewers. This role is open and large in scope and U.S. researchers could still participate if their government steps back. U.S. scientists can also still be nominated via non-government routes, for example, by observer organisations.

What are the global repercussions?

The climate talks run on reciprocity. When a very wealthy country with high emissions decides to quit, it weakens the expectation that other major players will also play by the same shared rules. This in turn can harden poor countries’ positions; these countries already believe their rich counterparts promise more than they deliver. It can also give cover to other reluctant governments to delay or dilute action.

The timing is also unfortunate because the conversation on climate finance has shifted from the older $100 billion goal towards much larger needs and new targets. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, economically developed countries mobilised $115.9 billion in climate finance in 2022, the first time it exceeded $100 billion. However, adaptation finance remains far below the need: the UN Adaptation Gap Report 2025 estimated it to be $310-365 billion per year by 2035 while international public adaptation finance flows were about $26 billion in 2023.

At the COP29 summit in 2024, governments agreed to a new collective quantified goal of at least $300 billion per year by 2035. The U.S. exiting the world’s main climate action bodies makes it harder to make credible deals to reach these numbers because other countries will ask why they should pay more when a major historical emitter is stepping away.

Source: The Hindu