What to Read in Indian Express Editorial ( Topic and Syllabus wise)

 

Article 1: Union Budget 2026–27 and Air Pollution

Why in News: Experts have criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 for failing to prioritise air pollution control, despite severe air quality crises in Delhi-NCR and other Indian cities.

Key Details

The Budget speech did not explicitly mention air pollution or clean air as a policy priority.

Allocations for coal, nuclear energy, and carbon capture technologies have increased.

Funding for pollution control institutions like CPCB and CAQM remains modest.

Experts highlight growing divergence between economic growth policies and environmental protection.

Air Pollution Crisis in India: A Public Health Emergency

Scale of the problem: India records nearly 2.1 million premature deaths annually due to air pollution, making it one of the world’s most serious environmental health crises.

Economic cost: Studies estimate that air pollution causes a loss of 8–10% of India’s GDP, due to healthcare costs, productivity loss, and reduced life expectancy.

Urban vulnerability: Cities like Delhi-NCR consistently rank among the most polluted globally, especially during winter months due to industrial emissions, transport, construction dust, and biomass burning.

Constitutional dimension: Clean air is integral to Article 21 (Right to Life), as affirmed by Supreme Court judgments linking environmental quality to fundamental rights.

Budgetary Priorities in Union Budget 2026–27

Absence of explicit focus: Air pollution and environmental protection did not find direct mention in the Finance Minister’s Budget speech, reflecting limited political salience.

Increased fossil fuel emphasis: Allocation to the Coal Ministry has risen, reversing earlier declining trends, raising concerns over long-term sustainability.

Carbon Capture push: Continued support for Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) has been criticised as enabling prolonged coal and oil usage.

Environment as expenditure, not investment: Environmental protection appears treated as a secondary concern rather than essential “survival infrastructure”.

Carbon Capture vs Clean Air Goals

Limited scope of CCUS: CCUS focuses only on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, while ignoring toxic co-pollutants like PM2.5, SO₂, and NOx, which directly harm health.

Risk of fossil fuel lock-in: CCUS may allow continued coal and oil dependence, delaying the transition to renewable energy systems.

Mismatch with Indian realities: In India, coal combustion remains the largest contributor to air pollution, making CCUS insufficient as a clean air strategy.

Equity concerns: Pollution impacts disproportionately affect urban poor and informal workers, raising environmental justice issues.

Inadequate Institutional Funding for Pollution Control

Low CPCB allocation: The Central Pollution Control Board received only about ₹123 crore, largely spent on salaries and routine expenditure.

Marginal increase in clean air funding: Total air pollution control allocations increased modestly from ₹850 crore to around ₹1,091 crore, insufficient for large-scale impact.

Weak regulatory capacity: Underfunded regulators struggle with monitoring, enforcement, and data-driven policymaking.

Centre-State coordination gap: Pollution control requires strong fiscal and administrative support to State Pollution Control Boards, which remains inadequate.

Industrial Growth Without Environmental Safeguards

Industrial contribution to pollution: Industry accounts for 21–35% of India’s air pollution, according to emissions inventories.

Growth-first approach: The Budget strongly supports MSME expansion and industrial self-reliance, but without binding clean production conditions.

Missing green conditionalities: Financial incentives are not explicitly linked to emission reduction, energy efficiency, or clean technology adoption.

Urban environmental cuts: Reductions in urban environmental programmes may increase cities’ vulnerability to pollution and climate risks.

Policy Gap Between Economy and Environment

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): While the Budget rhetorically aligns with SDGs, actual allocations show a widening gap between economic and environmental policies.

Short-term growth bias: Emphasis on immediate economic expansion risks undermining long-term sustainability and public health outcomes.

Global commitments: India’s climate pledges under the Paris Agreement require integrated air quality and climate strategies.

Governance challenge: Environmental protection remains fragmented across ministries, weakening coordinated action.

Conclusion

Addressing air pollution requires treating the environment as core national infrastructure, not a peripheral concern. Future budgets must prioritise clean energy transitions, adequately fund pollution control institutions, integrate environmental safeguards into industrial growth, and align economic policy with constitutional and global sustainability commitments. Clean air is not a luxury—it is essential for public health, economic resilience, and democratic well-being.

EXPECTED QUESTIONS FOR UPSC CSE

Prelims MCQ

1. Which of the following institutions is primarily responsible for monitoring air pollution at the national level in India?
   (a) NITI Aayog
   (b) Central Pollution Control Board
   (c) Ministry of Power
   (d) National Disaster Management Authority
   Answer:(b)

 

 

Article 2: India–Pakistan Relations

Why in News: Recent opinion pieces and diplomatic discussions have revived the debate on whether calibrated dialogue, alongside firm security measures, can prevent perpetual hostility in India–Pakistan relations.

Key Details

India–Pakistan relations have remained largely frozen due to cross-border terrorism and trust deficit.

Past peace initiatives have often been derailed by terror attacks traced to Pakistan-based groups.

Complete disengagement has increased risks of miscalculation and escalation in a nuclearised region.

There is growing emphasis on incremental, issue-based engagement rather than summit-centric diplomacy.

Historical Trajectory of India–Pakistan Relations

Post-Independence Rivalry: Since 1947, India–Pakistan relations have been shaped by Partition, wars (1947, 1965, 1971, 1999), and the Kashmir dispute, creating deep strategic mistrust.

Peace Initiatives and Setbacks: Efforts such as the Lahore Declaration (1999), Agra Summit (2001), and composite dialogue were followed by events like Kargil conflict and 26/11 Mumbai attacks, undermining confidence.

Terrorism as Core Obstacle: India maintains that dialogue cannot proceed without credible action against terror groups operating from Pakistani soil, making terrorism the central issue.

Resultant Diplomatic Stalemate: Repeated disruptions have led to a rigid policy posture, limiting formal diplomatic engagement.

Security Concerns and India’s Strategic Position

Cross-Border Terrorism: Attacks such as Pathankot (2016) and Pulwama (2019) reinforced India’s position that security assurances must precede talks.

Doctrine of Accountability: India’s stance reflects the belief that dialogue without accountability risks legitimising hostile actions.

Military and Diplomatic Responses: Measures like surgical strikes (2016) and Balakot airstrikes (2019) signalled a shift towards deterrence without full-scale war.

Limits of Hard Power: While deterrence is necessary, it alone cannot address long-term instability or prevent accidental escalation.

Risks of No Dialogue in a Nuclearised Region

Communication Vacuum: Absence of diplomatic channels increases the danger of misinterpretation and unintended escalation.

Role of Hyper-Nationalism: Social media-driven rhetoric and domestic political pressures can rapidly escalate tensions.

Regional Volatility: South Asia remains a conflict-prone region, where even limited incidents can spiral due to lack of crisis-management mechanisms.

Strategic Stasis: Silence is not neutrality; it is stagnation that allows tensions to harden rather than resolve.

Case for Incremental and Layered Engagement

Beyond Summit Diplomacy: High-profile summits are vulnerable to disruption; sustained peace requires multi-layered engagement.

People-to-People Contacts: Cultural exchanges, sports, academic collaboration, and medical visas help humanise the “other” and counter stereotypes.

Low-Risk Engagement Areas: Pilgrimages, student exchanges, and artistic interactions pose minimal security risks while building social capital.

Expanding Peace Constituency: Such engagement strengthens moderate voices within Pakistan that favour stability over hostility.

Conditional and Calibrated Dialogue Framework

Engagement without Endorsement: Dialogue does not imply approval of hostile actions; it is an investment in conflict prevention.

Clear Benchmarks: India can set measurable conditions such as action against proscribed terror groups or curbing hate rhetoric.

Reciprocal Steps: Limited Pakistani compliance can be met with proportional Indian responses, such as Track-II talks or limited sporting ties.

From Binary to Incremental Diplomacy: Moving away from an “all or nothing” approach allows flexibility without compromising principles.

Role of Regional and Issue-Based Multilateralism

SAARC Limitations: Bilateral tensions have paralysed SAARC, reducing its effectiveness as a regional platform.

Alternative Cooperation Areas: Climate change, disaster relief, pandemic response, and Indus Waters Treaty mechanisms offer neutral ground for engagement.

Humanitarian Logic: Cooperation in non-political areas builds trust while addressing shared vulnerabilities.

Conclusion

India’s challenge is to balance uncompromising security concerns with pragmatic engagement strategies. Permanent disengagement risks conflict escalation, while unconditional dialogue risks moral hazard. A calibrated approach—firm on terrorism, flexible on contact, and incremental in confidence-building—offers the most realistic path forward. Peace is not a concession, and dialogue, when carefully structured, is not defeat but a strategic necessity in a volatile region.

EXPECTED QUESTIONS UPSC CSE

Prelims MCQ

1. Which of the following best explains the limitation of “no dialogue” policy in India–Pakistan relations?
   (a) It violates international law
   (b) It increases economic costs
   (c) It raises risks of miscalculation and escalation
   (d) It weakens regional organisations only
   Answer:(c)

Descriptive Question

1. Dialogue without accountability is risky, but no dialogue is equally dangerous. Examine this statement in the context of India–Pakistan relations. (150 Marks, 10 Marks)

 

 

Article 3: Carbon Capture is Key to Achieving Net-Zero Goal

Why in News: The Union Budget 2026 has allocated ₹20,000 crore over five years to accelerate Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) technologies to support India’s net-zero target.

Key Details

CCUS involves capturing carbon dioxide from industrial sources and storing or converting it into useful products.

India has committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070 (COP26, Glasgow).

Hard-to-abate sectors like cement, steel, power and chemicals are major focus areas.

Globally, CCUS deployment remains limited but is essential for meeting climate goals.

Understanding CCUS Technology (Static Concept)

Carbon Capture: CO₂ is captured from industrial processes such as cement kilns, steel furnaces, and power plants before it enters the atmosphere, reducing direct emissions.

Carbon Utilisation: Captured CO₂ can be converted into fuels, chemicals, building materials, or used in enhanced oil recovery, creating economic value.

Carbon Storage: CO₂ is stored in deep geological formations such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs, ensuring long-term isolation from the atmosphere.

Technology Spectrum: CCUS is not a single technology but a chain of processes involving capture, transport, utilisation and storage, each requiring advanced engineering.

Global Status of Carbon Capture

Limited Current Deployment: Around 45 commercial CCUS facilities operate globally, capturing only around 50 million tonnes of CO₂ annually, less than 0.5% of global emissions.

Gap with Climate Targets: To achieve global net-zero by 2050, CCUS capacity must reach 435 million tonnes per year by 2030, highlighting a massive scale-up challenge.

Regional Leaders: The US, Europe and China are leading CCUS deployment, driven by climate policies and industrial decarbonisation needs.

Cost and Scale Constraints: High costs, infrastructure needs and safety concerns have slowed widespread adoption.

Why CCUS Is Critical for India

Growing Emissions Trajectory: India’s emissions are expected to rise in the near term due to infrastructure development and industrial expansion.

Hard-to-Abate Sectors: In cement and steel industries, most CO₂ emissions arise from chemical processes, not fuel combustion, making renewable energy insufficient alone.

Net-Zero Commitment: Achieving net-zero by 2070 is impossible without CCUS, as recognised by global climate pathways and IPCC assessments.

Energy Security Balance: CCUS allows India to pursue decarbonisation without compromising growth and development needs.

India’s Progress on CCUS (Policy and Institutional Efforts)

Pilot Projects: Companies like NTPC, Tata Steel, Dalmia Cement and ONGC are running pilot and demonstration CCUS projects.

Research Ecosystem: Multiple institutions are developing indigenous solutions, supported by Centres of Excellence at IIT Bombay and JNCASR, Bengaluru.

Mapping Storage Potential: India has identified potential geological sites suitable for long-term carbon storage.

DST CCUS Roadmap 2030: Released in December, it identifies technological, financial and policy bottlenecks to scale-up.

Significance of Budgetary Support

Bridging the Funding Gap: Many CCUS technologies are laboratory-proven but require large investments for field-scale testing and commercialisation.

Improving Technology Readiness: Budgetary support aims to raise Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) from pilot to commercial deployment.

Sectoral Focus: Funds target power, steel, cement, refineries and chemicals — the largest industrial emitters in India.

Game-Changing Potential: Experts suggest commercial CCUS deployment in India could begin within the next five years.

Economic and Strategic Benefits

Industrial Competitiveness: CCUS can help Indian exports comply with mechanisms like the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).

Job Creation: New value chains in capture, transport, storage and utilisation can generate skilled employment.

Infrastructure Synergies: Supports continued infrastructure growth while lowering carbon intensity.

Climate Leadership: Indigenous CCUS solutions enhance India’s credibility as a responsible climate actor.

Conclusion

Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage is not an optional technology but a strategic necessity for India’s net-zero pathway. While renewables and efficiency measures remain central, CCUS provides the only viable solution for decarbonising hard-to-abate industries. The ₹20,000 crore budgetary push, combined with research, regulatory clarity, and private sector participation, can transform CCUS from pilot projects into a mainstream climate solution. A phased, region-specific and cost-effective deployment strategy will be crucial for long-term success.

EXPECTED QUESTION FOR UPSC CSE

Prelims MCQ

1. Consider the following statements about CCUS:

CCUS is primarily relevant for sectors where emissions arise from chemical processes.

Switching entirely to renewable electricity can eliminate CO₂ emissions from cement production.

CCUS technologies are essential for achieving global net-zero targets.

Which of the above statements are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) 1 and 3 only

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: c