Daily Mains Answer Writing – 2 October 2025

Introduction

• In June 2025, Pakistan assumed leadership of the UNSC Taliban Sanctions Committee and became Vice-Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, despite global concern over its terror record.
• This decision, coupled with Pakistan’s Presidency of the UNSC in July 2025, highlights a troubling contradiction between the UN’s stated objectives and its operational choices.
• The development exposes deeper flaws in multilateral governance and challenges India’s counter-terror diplomacy.

Systemic Weaknesses in the UN Framework

• Ad hoc and Reactive Strategy: The UN’s counter-terrorism policy remains fragmented and event-driven, responding to crises rather than addressing root causes.
• Dominance of P5 and Political Bargaining: Appointments often reflect great-power deals rather than performance standards; Pakistan’s rise reflects strategic compromises among major powers.
• Lack of Accountability and Vetting: No transparent criteria exist for leadership in UN committees; Pakistan’s removal from the FATF grey list (2022) despite evidence of ongoing terror financing reflects this institutional leniency.
• Moral and Strategic Inconsistency: Precedents such as Libya chairing the UN Human Rights Commission and Saudi Arabia leading UN Women reveal ethical double standards.
• Erosion of Credibility: Empowering a country accused of training LeT and JeM and harbouring Osama bin Laden risks normalising state-sponsored terrorism.
• Instrumentalisation of the UN: Counter-terror mechanisms are increasingly used by powerful states for strategic influence rather than collective security.

Implications for India

• Pakistan may use its position to shape global narratives on regional stability and deflect blame for terrorism in Kashmir and Balochistan.
• It could obstruct India’s efforts to sanction Pakistan-based terrorists and influence decisions within the Taliban Sanctions Committee.

India’s Diplomatic Options

• Coalition Diplomacy: Work with like-minded nations in the UNSC to counter Pakistan’s influence and demand performance reviews of committee members.
• Narrative Building: Launch sustained diplomatic and media campaigns exposing Pakistan’s terror links and misuse of IMF and UN platforms.
• Regional Outreach: Deepen engagement with the Taliban regime through humanitarian channels to reduce Pakistan’s leverage in Afghanistan.
• Institutional Reform: Advocate transparent vetting, accountability mechanisms, and legal oversight for UN counter-terror appointments.
• Strategic Vigilance: Strengthen national intelligence, cyber-defence, and border management to deter asymmetric threats.

Conclusion

• Pakistan’s elevation to global counter-terror roles symbolizes the moral drift and politicisation of multilateralism.
• For India, effective response lies in combining strategic restraint with proactive diplomacy—to both safeguard national security and push for reform that restores credibility to the UN’s counter-terrorism architecture.

Introduction

• Climate–Migration Link: Climate-induced migration has emerged as one of India’s most significant socio-environmental challenges, yet remains underrepresented in national policy frameworks.
• Policy Blind Spot: Frameworks like the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) focus on mitigation and adaptation but overlook migration as both an outcome and an adaptation strategy.

Body

• Scale of Displacement: Estimates suggest up to 45 million people could be displaced by 2050 due to extreme weather and livelihood loss.
• Socioeconomic Inequities: Internal migrants, largely from weaker socio-economic backgrounds, face heightened vulnerability—being the first to suffer and last to recover after disasters.
• Urban Exclusion: Migrants often inhabit overcrowded, heat-trapping dwellings lacking clean water, sanitation, or ventilation—compounding climate exposure and health risks.
• Informal Economies: With stagnant wages and inflated rents, their adaptive capacity remains limited, reinforcing cycles of insecurity.
• Justice-Based Integration: Recognizing migrants as a policy category is essential to embed climate justice within adaptation frameworks.
• Legal Recognition: Defining “climate migrants” as a legal category can facilitate inclusion in welfare schemes like MGNREGA, health insurance, and resettlement entitlements.
• Infrastructure Investment: Climate-resilient housing, sanitation, and healthcare must be expanded at both source and destination regions.
• Portable Social Protection: Schemes such as One Nation One Ration Card ensure continuity of access to essential entitlements.
• Participatory Governance: Local governments and Panchayati Raj institutions should identify vulnerabilities and plan adaptation with migrant participation.
• Equity Principle: Inclusion of migration operationalizes climate justice by protecting those least responsible for emissions yet most affected by impacts.

Conclusion

• Policy Imperative: Integrating migration into India’s climate policy bridges the gap between resilience and equity.
• Transformative Outcome: Such inclusion converts migration from a crisis narrative into a strategic adaptation tool, aligning India’s climate governance with constitutional ideals of justice, equality, and sustainability.

Introduction

• Dual Identity: Migrants in India embody both vulnerability and agency in the context of climate stress.
• Adaptive Lens: Migration, when recognized within policy, can become a deliberate adaptation mechanism rather than a forced survival choice.

Body

• As Victims: Migrants face precarious urban conditions—cramped, poorly ventilated, and flood-prone housing lacking basic services.
• Empirical Evidence: The IIHS study shows that restrictive landlords and lack of community networks deepen social exclusion.
• Economic Insecurity: High living costs and stagnant wages leave little room for recovery from climate shocks.
• As Adaptive Actors: Migration diversifies income, spreads risk, and allows households to escape environmental degradation.
• Labour Mobility: Seasonal migration sustains national growth while protecting rural families from crop or livelihood failures.
• State-Level Innovations:
• Odisha and Telangana’s MMPTF: Links rural resilience, social protection, and migration management through gender-responsive frameworks.
• Assam’s Rural Capacity Programs: Strengthen adaptive skills and food security for women-led households affected by floods.
• Policy Gaps: Most national and state-level frameworks still treat migration as a problem, not as an adaptation pathway.
• Recognition Needed: Policy acknowledgment of migration’s adaptive potential would shift planning from relief-based to resilience-based approaches.
• Social Protection Measures: Portable entitlements, temporary shelters, and re-skilling initiatives can turn migration into a structured adaptation process.
• Participatory Planning: Inclusion of migrants in decision-making ensures culturally sensitive and equitable outcomes.

Conclusion

• Reframing Migration: Migrants are not passive victims but strategic actors navigating climate stress.
• Policy Takeaway: By embedding migration into adaptation planning, India can transform vulnerability into resilience—advancing both climate justice and developmental equity.

Introduction

• Localized Governance: State-level programs increasingly integrate climate resilience with livelihood and migration management.
• National Relevance: These models demonstrate how decentralized adaptation can inform a cohesive national strategy on climate-induced migration.

Body

• Odisha and Telangana – MMPTF: The Migration Multi-Partner Trust Fund, supported by FAO and IOM, enhances climate resilience for rural households.
• Inclusive Approach: Focuses on small farmers, women, and youth using intersectional, gender-responsive frameworks.
• Social Protection Linkages: Provides livelihood diversification and migration-aware social welfare schemes.
• Kerala – Punargeham Project: A relocation initiative that moves coastal families away from erosion zones, ensuring housing and livelihood continuity.
• Institutional Integration: Backed by the State Disaster Mitigation Fund, Kerala’s SAPCC 2.0 explicitly connects migration with climate adaptation.

Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh – MGNREGA Adaptation:

• Employment Buffer: Expanded MGNREGA wage days reduce distress migration during climate shocks.
• Local Adaptation: Public works strengthen water conservation, soil health, and rural infrastructure.

• Assam – Rural Adaptive Capacity: Targets flood-prone households, especially women-led families, with training and food security measures.
• Social Impact: Empowers left-behind communities, balancing gender and livelihood resilience.
• Common Features: Participatory design, temporary shelters, and portable entitlements ensure inclusivity.
• Institutional Coordination: Labour, environment, and rural development departments collaborate on integrated resilience-building.

Lessons for National Framework:

• Multi-Sectoral Integration: Combine migration management with social welfare and climate adaptation.
• Entitlement Portability: Ensure uninterrupted access to rations, health care, and insurance.
• Participatory Governance: Include migrant voices in adaptation planning.
• Preventive Adaptation: Invest in rural assets to reduce forced migration.

Conclusion

• Synthesis: State-led innovations demonstrate how migration, if managed as adaptation, strengthens resilience and livelihood security.
• Policy Direction: A national framework must scale these efforts—mainstreaming migration into climate planning as a proactive and justice-oriented strategy.