Q1. With reference to global carbon emissions, consider the following statements:
- In 2023, India’s share of global carbon emissions was higher than that of the European Union.
- India’s per capita carbon emissions in 2023 were higher than those of Russia but remained below the global average.
- China’s contribution to global emissions in 2023 exceeded the combined emissions of the USA and India.
- The top five emitters—China, USA, India, European Union, and Russia—together accounted for around two-thirds of total global emissions.
Which of the above statements is/are correct?
Explanation
Statement 1 – Correct
- India’s share rose to 8.2% in 2023, while the EU’s emissions share has steadily declined.
- EU’s contribution is now below India’s, making India the third-largest emitter after China and the USA.
Statement 2 – Incorrect
- India’s per capita emissions remain below the global average.
- They are not higher than Russia’s — Russia’s per capita footprint is significantly higher than India’s.
Statement 3 – Correct
- China contributes nearly one-third (≈33%) of global emissions.
- USA’s share ≈ 13–14%, India’s ≈ 8.2%.
- Combined (≈21–22%) is still less than China alone, hence correct.
Statement 4 – Correct
- The top five (China, USA, India, EU, Russia) together produce more than 60% of total emissions.
- “Around two-thirds” (~66%) is factually consistent.
🌍 Global Carbon Emissions In 2023
Major Contributors
- ➤ China remains the single largest emitter, accounting for almost one-third of the world’s carbon output.
- ➤ United States and India, together with China, are responsible for nearly half of total global emissions.
- ➤ When combined, the top five emitters—China, USA, India, the European Union, and Russia—generate over 60% of worldwide emissions.
Concentration of Emissions
- ➤ The top 15 countries collectively release more than three-fourths of all carbon emissions, underscoring the highly uneven distribution of responsibility.
- ➤ By contrast, smaller nations contribute less than 1% each, but together they make up the remainder of global emissions.
Overall Global Picture
📊 In 2023, worldwide greenhouse gas emissions are estimated at around 53 billion metric tons of CO₂ equivalent.
Q2. With reference to Mount Wilhelm, consider the following statements:
- It is the highest peak of Papua New Guinea and is also regarded as the highest peak of Oceania when defined by national boundaries.
- It lies at the junction of three provinces: Chimbu, Jiwaka, and Madang.
- It is lower in elevation than Australia’s highest peak, Mt Kosciuszko.
- Its first recorded ascent was during the German colonial era.
How many of the above statements are correct?
Explanation
Statement 1 – Correct
- Mount Wilhelm (4,509 m) is the highest peak of Papua New Guinea.
- It is considered the highest peak of Oceania when defined by national boundaries.
Statement 2 – Correct
- Located at the junction of Chimbu, Jiwaka, and Madang provinces.
Statement 3 – Incorrect
- Mount Wilhelm is nearly twice the height of Mt Kosciuszko (2,228 m).
- Thus, the statement is false.
Statement 4 – Correct
- The first recorded ascent was in 1938, during the German colonial era.
Q3. Match List I (Mountains) with List II (Islands):
| List I (Mountain) | List II (Island) |
|---|---|
| A. Mauna Kea | 1. Borneo |
| B. Mount Kinabalu | 2. Honshu |
| C. Mount Fuji | 3. Hawaii |
| D. Puncak Jaya | 4. New Guinea |
Codes:
Explanation
- Mauna Kea → Hawaii
- Mount Kinabalu → Borneo
- Mount Fuji → Honshu (Japan)
- Puncak Jaya → New Guinea (Indonesia’s Papua province)
Q4. Assertion (A): The “Correct the Map” campaign promotes the Equal Earth projection to replace the Mercator projection.
Reason (R): The Mercator projection preserves local shapes and angles but distorts the relative size of landmasses, making Africa appear much smaller than it actually is.
Choose the correct answer:
Explanation
- Assertion (A) – Correct: The campaign indeed promotes the Equal Earth projection as an alternative to Mercator, to better reflect Africa’s true size.
- Reason (R) – Correct: Mercator is a conformal projection (preserves shapes/angles) but distorts area, exaggerating polar regions and shrinking equatorial regions like Africa.
- Since the campaign’s motivation directly arises from these distortions → R correctly explains A.
The “Correct the Map” Campaign
The Correct the Map initiative is an international effort to challenge the dominance of the Mercator projection, a mapping system that misrepresents the relative sizes of continents. This projection minimizes Africa’s true scale, making it look much smaller than it actually is. In reality, Africa is the second-largest continent, yet its importance is visually downplayed in maps widely used in classrooms, media, and policy.
The campaign advocates for the use of the Equal Earth projection, which provides a more faithful representation of the world. By doing so, it seeks to shift global perception toward acknowledging Africa’s actual size, diversity, and significance.
Why the Mercator Map is Problematic
- ➤ Historical Purpose: Created in 1569 by Gerardus Mercator, this map projection was designed to assist sailors. It allowed straight-line courses (rhumb lines) to be easily plotted for navigation.
- ➤ Defining Feature: It preserves shapes and angles locally (conformal), but at the cost of stretching the north–south scale.
- ➤ Main Distortion: Regions closer to the poles are enlarged, while equatorial regions are compressed. For instance, Greenland appears comparable to Africa in size, although Africa is nearly 14 times larger.
The Broader Goal
By highlighting these distortions and promoting more accurate mapping, the campaign aims to correct deep-rooted misconceptions. It is not only about geographical accuracy but also about reshaping how Africa’s role and potential are viewed in global discussions.
Q5. Consider the following military exercises:
- Dharma Guardian
- Shinyuu Maitri
- JIMEX
- Shakti
- Veer Guardian
- Garuda Shakti
How many of the above are bilateral exercises between India and Japan?
Explanation
- Dharma Guardian → India–Japan Army exercise
- Shinyuu Maitri → India–Japan Air Force exercise
- JIMEX → India–Japan Naval exercise
- Shakti → India–France Army exercise
- Veer Guardian → India–Japan Air exercise (started 2023)
- Garuda Shakti → India–Indonesia Army exercise
Thus, 4 out of 6 are India–Japan related: (1, 2, 3, and 5).
India–Japan Defence Exercises: Highlights & Purpose
1. Exercise Dharma Guardian
Overview: Dharma Guardian is a yearly military exercise between the Indian Army and Japan’s Ground Self Defence Force (JGSDF), held alternately in India and Japan.
Focus Areas:
- ➤ Urban warfare
- ➤ Counter terrorism under a UN peacekeeping mandate
- ➤ Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) drills
6th Edition (2025):
- ➤ Location: East Fuji Training Area, Japan
- ➤ Dates: February 24 to March 9, 2025
- ➤ Scale: Company-strength units from both sides
- ➤ Emphasis: Enhanced physical fitness, joint planning, tactical drills, and disaster response. Builds on growing defence cooperation between both nations.
2. Exercise Shinyuu Maitri
Overview: An aerial exercise between the Indian Air Force (IAF) and Japan Air Self Defence Force (JASDF), typically conducted alongside Dharma Guardian.
Key Features:
- ➤ Transport operations discussions
- ➤ Flying drills to enhance coordinated aerial processes
- ➤ Strengthens mutual understanding between IAF and JASDF
2023 Edition:
- ➤ Conducted March 1–2, 2023, at Komatsu, Japan
- ➤ Indian side: a single C-17 Globemaster III aircraft
- ➤ Japanese side: C-2 transport aircraft
- ➤ Format: Tactical planning followed by joint flying exercises
3. Exercise JIMEX (Japan-India Maritime Exercise)
Overview: A bilateral naval exercise launched in 2012, bringing together the Indian Navy and Japan Maritime Self Defence Force (JMSDF) to boost maritime coordination.
Core Components:
- ➤ Sea and harbour phases
- ➤ Visit-Board-Search Seizure (VBSS) drills
- ➤ Naval gunfire and helicopter operations
- ➤ Combined drills for surface, subsurface, and aerial threats
Latest Edition – JIMEX-24 (2024):
- ➤ Held in June 2024 at Yokosuka, Japan (8th iteration)
- ➤ India’s INS Shivalik and JMSDF’s JS Yūgiri participated
- ➤ Supported by integrated helicopters and sea drills
Previous Edition – JIMEX-23 (2023):
- ➤ Conducted in the Bay of Bengal
- ➤ Involved Indian ships Delhi, Kamorta, Shakti, and JMSDF’s Samidare
- ➤ Featured advanced drills across surface, subsurface, and air domains
Q6. With reference to the evolution of the Collegium system, which of the following pairs is/are correctly matched?
| Case (Year) | Key Outcome |
|---|---|
| 1. First Judges Case (1981) | Primacy of the judiciary in judicial appointments established |
| 2. Second Judges Case (1993) | Collegium system introduced with CJI and two senior-most judges |
| 3. Third Judges Case (1998) | Collegium expanded to CJI and four senior-most judges |
| 4. Fourth Judges Case (2015) | NJAC and 99th Constitutional Amendment declared unconstitutional |
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Explanation
- ➤ Pair 1 – Incorrect: The First Judges Case (1981) did not give primacy to the judiciary; it actually upheld the primacy of the executive in judicial appointments.
- ➤ Pair 2 – Correct: The Second Judges Case (1993) overturned the First Judges Case and introduced the Collegium system with CJI + two senior-most judges.
- ➤ Pair 3 – Correct: The Third Judges Case (1998), via Presidential Reference, expanded the Collegium to CJI + four senior-most judges.
- ➤ Pair 4 – Correct: The Fourth Judges Case (2015) struck down the NJAC and 99th Constitutional Amendment as unconstitutional, restoring the Collegium system.
Correct Answer: (a) 2, 3 and 4 only
The Collegium System for Judicial Appointments in India
The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts in India is not directly handled by the executive. Instead, it is guided by the Collegium system—a framework developed through a series of landmark Supreme Court judgments rather than being explicitly provided in the Constitution.
What is the Collegium System?
- ➤ Purpose: Recommends names for appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts.
- ➤ Constitutional Basis: Judges are formally appointed by the President under:
- • Article 124 – Supreme Court appointments
- • Article 217 – High Court appointments
- ➤ Composition:
- • For the Supreme Court: Chief Justice of India (CJI) + four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
- • For the High Court: CJI + two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
Evolution of the Collegium System
1. Pre-1980s:
➤ Judicial appointments were controlled largely by the executive.
➤ The President made appointments in “consultation” with the CJI, but the final say rested with the government.
2. First Judges Case (1981):
➤ Supreme Court ruled that “consultation” with the CJI did not mean “concurrence.”
➤ Executive primacy was upheld in judicial appointments.
3. Second Judges Case (1993):
➤ Court reinterpreted “consultation” to mean “concurrence.”
➤ This judgment gave primacy to the judiciary in appointments and formally introduced the Collegium system.
➤ Initially, it included the CJI and two senior-most judges.
4. Third Judges Case (1998):
➤ The Collegium was expanded to include the CJI and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
➤ This became the current structure for Supreme Court appointments.
5. Fourth Judges Case (2015):
➤ The Supreme Court struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), holding them unconstitutional.
➤ The Collegium system was reinstated, reaffirming judicial independence.