{"id":3937,"date":"2025-05-22T09:43:17","date_gmt":"2025-05-22T09:43:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lawentranceindia.com\/blogs\/?p=3937"},"modified":"2025-05-22T12:03:41","modified_gmt":"2025-05-22T12:03:41","slug":"mlc-daily-current-affairs-22-may-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawentranceindia.com\/blogs\/mlc-daily-current-affairs-22-may-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"MLC Daily Current Affairs – 22 May 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today in History (May 22nd<\/sup>,2000)<\/h1>\n

In\u00a0December 2000, the UN General Assembly adopted 22 May as IDB, to commemorate the adoption of the text of the Convention on 22 May 1992 by the Nairobi Final Act of the Conference for the Adoption of the Agreed Text of the Convention on Biological Diversity.<\/p>\n

Summary of Today’s News<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Heart Lamp\u00a0glows, story collection wins the Booker Prize for Banu and Deepa<\/span><\/h3>\n

\"International-Booker-Prize-2025-for-Banu-and-Deepa\"<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Banu Mushtaq<\/strong>, a 77-year-old Kannada writer, lawyer, and activist, has been writing for over five decades about the experiences of her people.<\/li>\n
  • Her short story collection, Heart Lamp<\/em><\/strong>, won the International Booker Prize 2025<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
  • The book includes 12 short stories<\/strong> written between 1990 and 2023<\/strong>, translated into English by Deepa Bhasthi<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
  • This marks the first-ever win for Kannada literature<\/strong> and the first time a short story collection<\/strong> has received the International Booker Prize.<\/li>\n
  • The 2025 shortlist featured books translated from French, Italian, Danish, and Japanese<\/strong>.<\/li>\n
  • The win follows Indian author Geetanjali Shree\u2019s<\/strong> 2022 win for Tomb of Sand<\/em> (translated from Hindi by Daisy Rockwell).<\/li>\n
  • Mushtaq, from Hassan, Karnataka<\/strong>, writes with emotional depth about the lives of Muslim women<\/strong> in patriarchal settings.<\/li>\n
  • Translator Deepa Bhasthi\u2019s work was praised by the jury for its \u201cradical translation\u201d<\/strong> and creative use of English, with Chair Max Porter<\/strong> highlighting its innovative texture and plurality.<\/li>\n
  • The achievement is celebrated as a milestone for Indian and regional language literature<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Should water be used as a weapon?<\/span><\/h3>\n

    \"Indus-Water-Treaty\"<\/p>\n

    All is fair in love and war<\/strong> is a phrase that has literary roots and rhetorical appeal, suggesting that in matters of passion and conflict, rules can be discarded, and morality suspended. But in the realpolitik of nation-states, especially when it comes to shared natural resources, such romantic notions may be specious.<\/p>\n

      \n
    • Context of the Debate:<\/strong><\/li>\n
    • The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) between India and Pakistan is under renewed scrutiny after recent terrorist attacks, raising the question: Can water be used as a weapon in geopolitical conflict?<\/em><\/li>\n
    • Water is more than a strategic resource; it is a lifeline and a basic human right, making its politicisation ethically and legally contentious.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      History and Significance of the Indus Waters Treaty:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
        \n
      • The IWT was signed in 1960 after Partition left the Indus basin\u2019s rivers unevenly divided between India (upstream) and Pakistan (downstream).<\/li>\n
      • Mediated by the World Bank, the treaty allocates the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India and<\/li>\n
      • the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, allowing India limited non-consumptive use like hydropower.<\/li>\n
      • The treaty has endured despite three major wars (1965, 1971, 1999), frequent skirmishes, and diplomatic breakdowns, largely due to its technical framework and dispute resolution mechanisms like<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Recent Strains and Hydro Projects:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
          \n
        • Calls to reconsider the treaty emerged after the 2016 Uri and 2019 Pulwama terrorist attacks.<\/li>\n
        • India has been developing hydropower infrastructure in Jammu and Kashmir, notably the Kishanganga (Jhelum) and Ratle (Chenab) projects.<\/li>\n
        • Pakistan alleges that India\u2019s projects violate the treaty by potentially giving it excessive control over water flow, especially during dry seasons.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          Dispute Resolution under the IWT:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
            \n
          • The Kishanganga dispute led to a 2013 ruling by the Court of Arbitration allowing India\u2019s project with conditions on minimum downstream flow.<\/li>\n
          • In the Ratle case, disagreement over the forum (neutral expert vs. Court of Arbitration) led to procedural deadlock, with both processes eventually allowed in 2022. India boycotted arbitration but engaged with the neutral expert.<\/li>\n
          • These cases show that the treaty\u2019s legal architecture is robust but can become a double-edged sword if India seeks to exit the treaty.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            On Third-Party Mediation:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
              \n
            • Though India generally insists on bilateral dispute resolution (as per the 1972 Simla Agreement), the IWT predates it and includes provisions for neutral and third-party adjudication.<\/li>\n
            • India\u2019s prior participation in arbitration processes under the IWT acknowledges this treaty-sanctioned mechanism.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              Global Comparisons and Lessons:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
                \n
              • Similar water disputes have occurred globally:\n
                  \n
                • The Danube River dispute between Hungary and Czechoslovakia post-WWI, and later Hungary and Slovakia, was resolved through international legal channels.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
                  \"Danube-River-dispute\"<\/div>\n
                    \n
                  • \n
                      \n
                    • In Southeast Asia, Mekong River disputes among Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand have been managed through the Mekong River Commission\u2019s multilateral dialogue framework.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
                      \"Mekong-River-disputes\"<\/div>\n
                        \n
                      • These examples show that unilateralism often escalates conflicts, while legal and diplomatic channels can manage even deeply rooted disputes.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        Risks of Withdrawing from the IWT:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
                          \n
                        • Unilateral withdrawal would violate international law and could damage India\u2019s global standing and credibility.<\/li>\n
                        • It may alarm regional neighbours like Nepal and Bangladesh, complicating future water cooperation.<\/li>\n
                        • The IWT does not contain a withdrawal clause; any such action would be scrutinised under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          Moral and Strategic Considerations:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
                            \n
                          • Using water as a tool of retaliation violates humanitarian principles and could cause serious harm to civilian populations downstream.<\/li>\n
                          • India\u2019s strength lies in adhering to a rules-based international order and upholding treaty commitments, rather than undermining them.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                            Conclusion and Way Forward:<\/strong><\/h4>\n
                              \n
                            • India is entitled to fully utilise its rights under the IWT, including hydropower development, as long as it adheres to treaty terms.<\/li>\n
                            • Abandoning the treaty could undermine decades of diplomacy and set a dangerous precedent.<\/li>\n
                            • The IWT remains a rare example of enduring cooperation between adversaries \u2014 a symbol that even in conflict, some resources and agreements must remain sacred.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n