1.Why NATO Members Have Agreed to Increase Their Defence Spending –

Why in News

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) took a significant decision at its 2025 summit in The Hague, agreeing to increase defence spending to counter emerging global threats. This decision follows years of pressure from former US President Donald Trump, who criticized NATO allies—particularly in Europe—for relying too heavily on American military support. In the face of mounting geopolitical instability, NATO’s move to elevate defence spending to 5% of GDP marks a historical turning point for collective security and sovereignty in Europe and beyond.

Introduction: Changing Global Defence Landscape

NATO was formed in 1949 to create a system of collective defence in which member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party. Throughout the Cold War and beyond, the alliance served as the bedrock of Western military strategy. However, the changing dynamics of global power, Russia’s aggressive posturing in Eastern Europe, increasing cyber threats, and the US’s changing strategic priorities, especially under Trump, have forced NATO to evolve. The 2025 decision to increase spending symbolizes a shift in NATO’s philosophy—from dependency on US leadership to shared responsibility and regional resilience.

What Is the New Defence Spending Goal?

NATO members have now committed to spending 5% of their GDP on defence by 2035. This includes:
– 3.5% for traditional military expenditure: troops, weapons, and battlefield infrastructure.
– 1.5% for broader security investments such as cyber defence, transportation logistics (roads, bridges, and ports), and energy infrastructure security.
This is a bold step compared to the previous 2% GDP target agreed at the 2014 Wales Summit, which many member nations failed to meet. The 5% target aims to enhance operational readiness and self-reliance within Europe.

Why Has the Spending Increased Now?

Multiple factors have converged to necessitate this sharp increase:
1. **Russia’s war in Ukraine** continues to destabilize Eastern Europe. NATO sees this as a long-term threat, not a temporary conflict.
2. **Trump’s criticism of NATO** has forced European countries to accept more military and financial responsibilities.
3. **Cybersecurity vulnerabilities** have been exposed through ransomware attacks and election interference, often linked to Russian and Chinese hackers.
4. **US shift to the Indo-Pacific**: America is increasingly focusing on countering China in the Indo-Pacific, reducing its strategic interest in Europe.
5. **Energy dependency risks**: Europe has learned hard lessons from relying on Russian gas pipelines, many of which are now targets of cyber warfare.

Where Will the Money Come From?

Each NATO member will determine its funding strategy. Richer nations like Germany and France are considering tax reforms, budget reallocations, and defence bonds. The European Union is also playing a key role by preparing a €150-billion collective borrowing program to fund pan-European defence infrastructure.
This model is inspired by the COVID-19 recovery fund. The pooled money will support joint research on military technology, standardized weapon systems, and unified cybersecurity strategies.

Is There a Uniform Metric?

Measuring defence spending isn’t always straightforward. NATO currently tracks core defence budgets but does not yet have a system for measuring ‘broader’ security expenditures. Roads, ports, and cybersecurity projects often serve both civilian and military uses. NATO has pledged to create a unified metric system by 2027 to allow transparency and accountability.

Strategic Implications

This financial and strategic shift has several long-term implications:
– NATO is preparing for **multi-domain warfare**—including cyber, space, and conventional military.
– It marks a move towards **European strategic autonomy**, reducing dependency on Washington.
– Nations like Poland, Finland, and the Baltic States will now be better equipped to deter aggression from Russia.
– There will be **increased arms procurement**, likely boosting Western defence contractors like Lockheed Martin and Rheinmetall.
– **Joint command and control structures** will be modernized, improving interoperability among NATO forces.

Notes: Explanation of Key Terms

• NATO: An intergovernmental military alliance between 31 North American and European countries.
• GDP: Gross Domestic Product – the total monetary value of all goods and services produced in a country.
• Cybersecurity: Defensive mechanisms to protect digital infrastructure from attacks.
• Indo-Pacific: A geostrategic region covering the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
• Strategic Autonomy: Europe’s ability to defend itself without relying on American support.
• Joint Defence Projects: Collaborative infrastructure and technology initiatives across NATO members.
• Defence Bonds: Financial instruments issued to fund military expenditure.
• Multi-domain Warfare: Simultaneous combat operations across land, sea, air, cyber, and space.

2.Turning Point in Eurasia – Summary for CLAT 2026 Aspirants

Why in News?

• Former US President Donald Trump has reignited global strategic debates by:
  • Questioning NATO’s relevance.
  • Facilitating military actions like bombing Iranian nuclear sites.
  • Mediating a fragile truce between Tel Aviv (Israel) and Tehran (Iran).
• This coincides with the NATO summit in The Hague, marking a pivotal moment for transatlantic (US-Europe) relations.
• The Indo-Pacific, once a peripheral concern for Europe, is now becoming central to Eurasian geopolitics.
• Germany emerges as a new axis of leadership in Europe, challenging the old security order.

 Introduction: Eurasia at a Strategic Crossroads

Eurasia, the massive landmass that includes both Europe and Asia, is witnessing a historic transformation in its political and security dynamics. The article reflects on how Trump’s disruptive foreign policy — from Middle East interventions to questioning NATO — is compelling European powers to redefine their defence frameworks, alliances, and global partnerships. As Indo-Pacific tensions rise, Eurasian powers are being forced to seek new security strategies outside traditional structures like NATO or US hegemony.

 Point-Wise Summary

1. Trump’s Shift from Middle East to Europe

• After disrupting Middle East dynamics (Iran-Israel tensions), Trump has shifted focus to European security.
• His questioning of NATO’s purpose challenges the long-standing transatlantic alliance between the US and Europe.

2. NATO Summit as a Strategic Moment

• The NATO summit in The Hague is seen as a turning point.
• Europe is being forced to rethink its military independence.
• The US no longer guarantees automatic military support for NATO allies, especially against Russia.

3. Germany’s Emergence as Eurasia’s Pivot

• Germany, under new leadership (e.g., Friedrich Merz), is:
  • Accelerating military reforms.
  • Leading efforts for NATO’s eastern flank (e.g., Lithuania).
  • Working to prevent future Russian aggression.

4. Russia’s Complex Position

• Russia, once a member of the G8, is now:
  • Pushing against NATO’s expansion.
  • Engaged in the Ukraine conflict and diplomatic tension with NATO states.
• Trump’s stance on Russia remains ambiguous:
  • He doesn’t see Russia as an outright threat.
  • Some European leaders now consider engagement with Russia essential for stability.

5. Disintegration of Old Security Norms

• The post-World War II formula (“Americans in, Germans down, Russians out”) is collapsing.
• Germany is now demanding strategic leadership and investing heavily in defence.
• European nations no longer want to depend blindly on US protection.

6. The Abraham Accords and New Alliances

• Trump’s foreign policy legacy includes:
  • Mediation between Israel and Arab states.
  • Deepening US-Saudi ties.
• He visualizes a new “Cyrus Accord”, reshaping Middle Eastern alignments.

7. Indo-Pacific’s Role in Eurasian Affairs

• Asian alliances are growing in relevance:
  • US is shifting military focus to contain China.
  • NATO allies are also exploring partnerships in Indo-Pacific.
• This could diminish Europe’s centrality in global strategy.

8. The Budget & Burden Sharing Debate

• Trump has demanded increased European military spending.
• NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte proposed:
  • A 5% GDP spending target for NATO members.
  • Bridging ideological gaps between Washington and Brussels.

9. Strategic Autonomy in Europe

• Europe is exploring “strategic autonomy” — the ability to:
  • Defend itself without American military backing.
  • Form independent defence partnerships (e.g., with Indo-Pacific nations).

10. Challenges Ahead for Eurasia

• Simply increasing defence budgets won’t suffice.
• Eurasia must:
  • Rethink political alliances.
  • Develop new institutional frameworks.
  • Deal with internal disunity and external threats (e.g., from Russia, China, terrorism).

Key Takeaways for CLAT 2026 Aspirants

• Geopolitical Shifts: Europe is becoming less dependent on the US. Power is rebalancing toward Asia.
• NATO’s Relevance Debated: Trump’s criticism has forced Europe to question NATO’s viability.
• Germany’s Strategic Rise: From a pacifist past to a military powerhouse in Europe.
• Russia’s Unpredictable Role: From a pariah to a potential peace partner for some.
• US’s Indo-Pacific Focus: America is pivoting to Asia to counter China.
• Need for Regional Solutions: Eurasian powers must solve their own security issues, not rely on US military guarantees.

 Notes: Explanation of Peculiar Terms

3.Why the UN’s Fourth Development Conference in Seville Matters: A Comprehensive CLAT 2026 Insight

Why in News?

Global leaders have gathered in Seville, Spain, for the Fourth UN Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4), a once-in-a-decade summit aimed at reshaping the world’s financial and aid architecture. This year’s focus is on resolving pressing development finance challenges like climate adaptation, debt crises, fair taxation, and sustainable development financing, all within a context of geopolitical turbulence and economic uncertainty.

For CLAT 2026 aspirants, this conference is an important international event involving global cooperation, public finance, and international law—topics that regularly appear in CLAT GK and Current Affairs sections.

 Introduction: What Is the FFD Conference?

• The Financing for Development (FFD) Conference is a high-level UN-led initiative.
• It gathers heads of state, finance ministers, trade officials, and international financial institutions to agree on frameworks for funding sustainable development.
• This is the fourth edition of the conference, being held in Seville, Spain.
• The main output is the “Seville Commitment,” a non-binding blueprint to guide development financing over the next 10 years.
• These commitments are not legally enforceable treaties but global political declarations meant to shape funding and policy directions.

 Historical Timeline: Past Conferences

 What is the “Seville Commitment”?

• A 38-page political declaration, not a treaty.
• Finalized through months of negotiations.
• Seeks to:
  • Resolve issues around climate change funding, debt crises, and natural disasters.
  • Address global solidarity levies, such as taxes on international shipping and aviation to fund climate action.
  • Promote fair taxation and clamp down on illicit financial flows.
  • Push for better multilateral lending and infrastructure funding frameworks.
  • Strengthen the role of development banks and private investors.

 Who Will Participate?

• Over 70 Heads of State and Government Representatives.
• Key participants include:
  • UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed
  • Emmanuel Macron (France)
  • Cyril Ramaphosa (South Africa, G20 Chair)
  • Mia Mottley (Barbados PM, climate finance advocate)
  • Ajay Banga, World Bank President
  • Representatives from Gates Foundation, development banks, and civil society.

🇺🇸 Absence of the United States: A Concern?

• USA is notably absent, despite being the world’s largest economy.
• Historically, US participation has influenced tax and climate financing frameworks.
• US withdrawal could:
  • Slow down climate finance negotiations.
  • Disrupt global tax reform consensus.
  • Weaken commitments on debt relief for poorer nations.

 What Is the Backdrop of This Year’s Conference?

• Comes amid global financial uncertainty, climate scepticism, and rising debt.
• US pullback on climate under former President Donald Trump had already hurt global consensus.
• World leaders are under pressure to revamp outdated financial systems that:
  • Are not aligned with climate goals.
  • Are skewed against Low-Income Countries (LICs).
  • Create funding bottlenecks for urgent projects.

 Key Themes of FFD4

1. Debt Crisis Management
   • Addressing the ballooning external debts of poorer countries.
   • Strengthening debt restructuring mechanisms.
2. Climate Financing
   • Raising funds for climate adaptation and loss & damage financing.
   • Enabling countries to cope with floods, heatwaves, and sea-level rise.
3. Global Taxation Reform
   • Proposing solidarity levies on aviation/shipping.
   • Curbing tax avoidance by multinational companies.
4. Strengthening Development Banks
   • Empowering institutions like the World Bank and African Development Bank.
   • Encouraging private-public investment alliances.
5. Gender & Social Equity
   • Ensuring women and marginalized groups are integrated into financial planning.
   • Promoting inclusive finance frameworks.
6. Multilateral Lending Reform
   • Revising loan conditionalities.
   • Promoting fairness and long-term sustainability in lending.

 Peculiar Terms Explained (Useful for CLAT 2026)

 Relevance for CLAT Aspirants

This topic links deeply with:

• International Organizations (UN, World Bank, G20)
• Global Legal Frameworks (non-binding agreements, political commitments)
• Environmental Law and Policy (climate adaptation financing)
• Public International Law (multilateral negotiation processes)
• Current Affairs 2026, especially international cooperation and diplomacy

Questions can be asked on:

• Comparison of past FFD outcomes.
• Nature of global tax reforms.
• Legal bindingness of Seville Commitment.
• Role of UN in global economic governance.

Why the FFD4 Matters for India

• India’s role in shaping climate financing architecture is increasing.
• PM Modi has advocated for:
  • Fairer access to climate funds.
  • Support for South-South cooperation.
  • Promoting the role of Indian-led development finance institutions.
• Indian economist Ajay Banga heads the World Bank, strengthening India’s position.

 Long-Term Implications

• If adopted widely, the Seville Commitment can:
  • Rebalance the North-South economic divide.
  • Improve the creditworthiness of poorer countries.
  • Push for inclusive, green, and transparent development finance.
• However, the lack of US participation and implementation mechanisms remains a challenge.
• The final effectiveness depends on how G20 nations, multilateral lenders, and private investors align their agendas with the document’s spirit.

4.Where Fear Is, Justice Cannot Be’: The Intrepid Mr. H.R. Khanna

 Why in News?

Justice H.R. Khanna’s legacy is being revisited in light of renewed discussions on constitutional morality, judicial independence, and the Emergency of 1975. His principled dissent in the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) case is considered one of the most courageous acts in Indian judicial history.

This article is especially important for aspirants of CLAT 2026, UPSC, and other law exams as it links constitutional interpretation, Article 21, rule of law, and judicial dissent, offering both legal depth and historical insight.

 Introduction

Justice Hans Raj Khanna, a Supreme Court judge, etched his name into Indian constitutional history during the Emergency (1975–77). When civil liberties were suspended and the Executive gained overwhelming control, Justice Khanna stood alone in defending the fundamental right to life and liberty, even in the absence of Article 21. His lone dissent in the ADM Jabalpur case was a moral and constitutional high point, despite costing him the Chief Justiceship of India.

 Point-Wise Summary of the Article

1. Emergency Period and Judicial Confrontation

• The Emergency (June 1975 – March 1977) saw over 1 lakh people imprisoned without trial, including major Opposition leaders.
• Fundamental rights under Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) were suspended.
• During this time, the judiciary came under pressure from the Executive.

2. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla Case

• Also called the Habeas Corpus case, it questioned whether a person could approach the court to seek release from unlawful detention during Emergency.
• A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court ruled 4:1 in favor of the Government, denying judicial remedy during the Emergency.
• Justice H.R. Khanna was the sole dissenter.

3. Justice Khanna’s Historic Dissent

• He argued that even if Article 21 was absent, no State has the right to take away life or liberty without due process of law.
• In his autobiography Neither Roses Nor Thorns, he narrates how he asked a hypothetical question in court: “Would there be no remedy even if a police officer killed a man out of personal enmity?”
• The Attorney General shockingly answered “No remedy” during Emergency, which Justice Khanna termed “shocking to the conscience”.

4. Article 21’s Supremacy and Natural Law

• Justice Khanna stated that even without Article 21, the right to life is an inherent human right and cannot be suspended.
• He wrote: “Supposing Article 21 was not there in the Constitution, no state or policeman could deprive a person of life or liberty without authority of law.”

5. Cost of Conscience: Loss of Chief Justiceship

• Justice Khanna was due to become the Chief Justice of India by seniority.
• Before pronouncing his dissenting judgment on April 28, 1976, he told his wife and sister: “This will cost me the Chief Justiceship.”
• On January 28, 1977, Justice Mirza Hameedullah Beg, junior to him, was appointed CJI instead.
• Justice Khanna resigned immediately in protest.

6. Aftermath and Recognition

• Lawyers across India boycotted courts to protest the government bypassing Khanna.
• The New York Times and many international voices praised his courage.
• Justice Khanna was admired even by some Congress MPs who quietly supported his moral stand.

7. Legacy and Farewell Address

• At his farewell dinner, he warned:

“There can be no greater indication of the decay in rule of law than a docile Bar, a subservient judiciary, and a society with a choked conscience. Where fear is, justice cannot be.”

Key Constitutional Concepts for CLAT

 Notes for CLAT 2026 and Legal Interpretation

 Justice Khanna’s Interpretation:

• Emphasized that natural justice and human rights are not merely constitutional but intrinsic to human dignity.
• Upheld the doctrine of constitutional morality and the supremacy of law over executive expediency.

 CLAT Strategy Tip:

• Quote Justice Khanna’s dissent in essays or answers related to Emergency, Fundamental Rights, or Judicial Ethics.
• His stance is frequently referenced in Landmark Judgments sections.

 Impact on Indian Legal System

1. Restoration of Article 21’s sanctity post-Emergency through the Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) case.
2. ADM Jabalpur ruling was effectively overruled and considered a “dark chapter” in constitutional law.
3. Justice Khanna’s dissent is now treated as the correct constitutional position.

 Relevant Quotes for Legal Reasoning

• “Where fear is, justice cannot be.” – H.R. Khanna
• “Unanimity at the cost of conscience is not desirable in the apex court.”
• “No authority can deprive life and liberty without legal sanction – even in the absence of Article 21.”

 Analysis for CLAT and UPSC Aspirants