UPSC Prelims Practice
Current Affairs Quiz 26 July 2026
Daily Practice
Test Your Knowledge
15 questions based on today’s current affairs & editorials
15 MCQs
Explanations
Statistics
Timed
Choose number of questions
Question 1 of 15
Kargil Vijay Diwas, observed on 26 July, marks the conclusion of which military operation?
FACT: Operation Vijay was the Indian Army operation to evict intruders from the Kargil heights in 1999, and success was declared on 26 July 1999. ANALYSIS: The campaign was deliberately confined to the Indian side of the Line of Control, making it a test case of whether conventional military action remained possible between two states that had tested nuclear weapons in May 1998.
📝 Concept Note
The Kargil campaign had three service components with distinct names: Operation Vijay for the Army, Operation Safed Sagar for the Indian Air Force and Operation Talwar for the Indian Navy. Operation Meghdoot (1984) was the operation to secure the Siachen Glacier, and Operation Parakram was the 2001-02 mobilisation after the Parliament attack.
Operation Rakshak refers to counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab.
Operation Rakshak refers to counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS1 post-independence consolidation, GS3 border area security. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | limited war, nuclear overhang, escalation control, Line of Control. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | confusing Operation Vijay (Kargil, 1999) with Operation Vijay (the 1961 liberation of Goa), which shares the name. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | memorise the three service-wise operation names together, they are a repeated Prelims pairing. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** did restraint at the LoC strengthen or weaken deterrence? |
Question 2 of 15
The Kargil Review Committee, constituted after the 1999 conflict, was chaired by:
FACT: The Kargil Review Committee was chaired by strategic affairs analyst K. Subrahmanyam, constituted in 1999, and submitted its report in 2000. ANALYSIS: Its central finding was that the intrusion represented an intelligence and coordination failure rather than a battlefield one, which is why its recommendations were institutional rather than tactical.
📝 Concept Note
The Committee’s recommendations were examined further by a Group of Ministers on national security. The institutional consequences included the Defence Intelligence Agency in 2002, the National Technical Research Organisation in 2004, and eventually the Chief of Defence Staff and Department of Military Affairs in 2019.
The Naresh Chandra Task Force (2011-12) and the Shekatkar Committee (2016) were later defence reform bodies.
The Naresh Chandra Task Force (2011-12) and the Shekatkar Committee (2016) were later defence reform bodies.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 statutory and non-statutory bodies, GS3 defence reforms. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | intelligence integration, jointness, higher defence management, civil-military relations. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | attributing the creation of the CDS directly to the Kargil Review Committee, when the post was created only in 2019 after a long gap. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | learn the reform bodies in sequence with their years. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** why did a 1999 recommendation take two decades to implement? |
Question 3 of 15
How many Param Vir Chakras were awarded for the 1999 Kargil conflict?
FACT: Four Param Vir Chakras were awarded for Kargil, to Captain Vikram Batra and Lieutenant Manoj Kumar Pandey posthumously, and to Grenadier Yogendra Singh Yadav and Rifleman Sanjay Kumar. ANALYSIS: The concentration of the highest gallantry award in a single short campaign reflects the tactical reality of uphill assaults against entrenched positions at extreme altitude.
📝 Concept Note
The Param Vir Chakra is India’s highest wartime gallantry award, instituted in 1950 with retrospective effect from 15 August 1947. The wartime gallantry sequence is Param Vir Chakra, Maha Vir Chakra and Vir Chakra.
The corresponding peacetime sequence is Ashoka Chakra, Kirti Chakra and Shaurya Chakra.
The corresponding peacetime sequence is Ashoka Chakra, Kirti Chakra and Shaurya Chakra.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS1 modern Indian history, GS4 ethics of service and sacrifice. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | gallantry awards, Veer Nari welfare, military ethos. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | mixing the wartime and peacetime gallantry sequences; the Ashoka Chakra is the peacetime equivalent of the Param Vir Chakra, not a lower wartime award. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | learn both sequences as parallel triples. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** how well does the state translate ceremonial honour into welfare delivery for Veer Naris? |
Question 4 of 15
The Viksit Vibrant Village Programme 2026, whose participants the Prime Minister addressed on 26 July 2026, is implemented through which platform?
FACT: The programme is implemented through MY Bharat (Mera Yuva Bharat), the autonomous body under the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports created as a national platform for youth volunteering and community engagement. ANALYSIS: Routing a border-area immersion through a youth platform rather than a security ministry reframes border development as a civic and developmental project rather than purely a defence one.
📝 Concept Note
The 2026 edition ran in two phases from 4 to 30 June 2026, covering 74 vibrant villages in Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Over 400 youth participants representing every State and Union Territory were selected through a nationwide online quiz that drew more than three lakh entrants.
The Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan and the National Service Scheme are older youth mobilisation structures; Atal Innovation Mission operates under NITI Aayog for innovation and entrepreneurship.
The Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan and the National Service Scheme are older youth mobilisation structures; Atal Innovation Mission operates under NITI Aayog for innovation and entrepreneurship.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 government policies and interventions, GS3 development-security linkage. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | border area development, out-migration, civic participation, convergence. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | conflating the Viksit Vibrant Village Programme 2026, a youth immersion, with the Vibrant Villages Programme, the Ministry of Home Affairs infrastructure scheme. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | note that these are distinct but related, and the ministries differ. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** can youth immersion meaningfully affect out-migration from border villages? |
Question 5 of 15
The Vibrant Villages Programme-II (VVP-II) was approved with an outlay of:
FACT: VVP-II was approved as a Central Sector Scheme on 2 April 2025 with an outlay of Rs 6,839 crore for the financial years 2024-25 to 2028-29, covering 1,954 identified villages. ANALYSIS: The larger outlay reflects a wider geography, since VVP-II covers all international land borders other than the northern border already handled under VVP-I.
📝 Concept Note
VVP-I was approved in February 2023 with an outlay of Rs 4,800 crore for 2022-23 to 2025-26, covering 662 villages across 46 blocks in Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Uttarakhand and Ladakh, of which Rs 2,500 crore was earmarked for road connectivity. VVP-II spans 15 States and 2 Union Territories and was launched in February 2026 from Nathanpur village in Cachar district, Assam.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 welfare and development schemes, GS3 internal security. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | Central Sector Scheme, convergence model, gap-filling funds, absorptive capacity. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | treating VVP as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme; it is a Central Sector Scheme, fully funded by the Union. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | remember the split, VVP-I is the northern border and VVP-II is everything else. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** does a convergence model dilute accountability for outcomes? |
Question 6 of 15
Which of the following correctly describes the membership of the East Asia Summit?
FACT: The East Asia Summit has 18 members, the ten ASEAN states plus India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Russia. ANALYSIS: The presence of India, China, the United States and Russia in the same leaders-led forum is precisely what gives the EAS its diplomatic utility for India, which can place positions on record multilaterally without generating bilateral friction.
📝 Concept Note
The EAS was established in 2005, with its first summit at Kuala Lumpur in December 2005, and India is a founding member. The forum began with sixteen participants; the United States and Russia joined in 2011, taking the membership to eighteen.
It operates on the principle of ASEAN centrality and is chaired by the ASEAN chair. The twenty-one member grouping is APEC, of which India is not a member.
It operates on the principle of ASEAN centrality and is chaired by the ASEAN chair. The twenty-one member grouping is APEC, of which India is not a member.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 regional groupings and agreements affecting India’s interests. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | ASEAN centrality, Indo-Pacific, minilateralism, consensus rule. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | confusing the EAS with APEC or the ASEAN Regional Forum; India is in the EAS and ARF but not in APEC. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | learn 2005 for establishment and 2011 for the US-Russia entry. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** does ASEAN centrality constrain or enable India’s Indo-Pacific ambitions? |
Question 7 of 15
At the 21st East Asia Summit, India stated that a South China Sea Code of Conduct should be compliant with:
FACT: India backed a substantive, effective and legally binding Code of Conduct compliant with UNCLOS 1982, and added that it must not prejudice the legitimate rights of all users of the sea, including non-signatories. ANALYSIS: The caveat about non-signatories matters because the Code is being negotiated only between China and the ten ASEAN states, and India is not a party; the clause defends third-party access to a waterway carrying a substantial share of Indian trade.
📝 Concept Note
The 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea was politically binding but not legally binding, which is why the shift to a Code of Conduct represents a move from political commitment to legal obligation. At Manila on 23 July 2026, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar also condemned attacks on seafarers, civilian shipping and infrastructure, and announced that India will host the 7th EAS Maritime Security Conference in Kochi.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 international agreements and India’s interests, GS1 world geography of trade routes. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | freedom of navigation, legally binding instrument, non-signatory rights, maritime commons. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | assuming India is a party to the Code of Conduct negotiations; it is not. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | UNCLOS 1982 is the anchor treaty for every maritime entitlement question. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** should a non-claimant state press for terms in another region’s maritime dispute? |
Question 8 of 15
A "123 Agreement", central to the US-Saudi civilian nuclear announcement, derives its name from:
FACT: A 123 Agreement takes its name from Section 123 of the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which requires a formal agreement for cooperation before the United States may transfer nuclear material, equipment or technology to another country. ANALYSIS: Because Congress has a role in the process, such negotiations are simultaneously diplomatic and domestic-political, which is why the enrichment question in the Saudi case is contested in public rather than settled quietly.
📝 Concept Note
Statutory conditions typically include IAEA safeguards on peaceful nuclear activities, guarantees against diversion to weapons use, and controls on retransfer. India signed its 123 Agreement with the United States in 2008, the same year it received a Nuclear Suppliers Group waiver.
The NSG itself was formed in 1974 in response to India’s first nuclear test.
The NSG itself was formed in 1974 in response to India’s first nuclear test.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 international agreements, GS3 nuclear energy. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | non-proliferation, strategic autonomy, safeguards, civil-military separation. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | believing India signed the NPT as part of the 2008 nuclear deal; India remains outside the NPT. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | 2008 is the anchor year for both the India-US 123 Agreement and the NSG waiver. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** was the India exception a one-off or a precedent? |
Question 9 of 15
In nuclear policy, the "gold standard" for a civil nuclear cooperation agreement refers to a partner state that:
FACT: The “gold standard” refers to an agreement in which the partner renounces uranium enrichment and reprocessing on its own soil, the benchmark set by the United Arab Emirates in its 2009 agreement with the United States. ANALYSIS: Enrichment rather than reactor ownership is the real proliferation threshold, because the same centrifuge cascade that produces reactor-grade fuel can, with more stages and time, produce weapons-grade material.
📝 Concept Note
Natural uranium contains about 0.7 per cent uranium-235; light-water power reactors typically need 3 to 5 per cent, while weapons-grade material is around 90 per cent. Reprocessing separates plutonium and unused uranium from spent fuel.
The US-Saudi agreement signed on 22 July 2026 contains no equivalent renunciation and does not require Saudi Arabia to adopt the IAEA Additional Protocol. It instead provides for a joint two-year study on the commercial viability of enrichment, with any facility to be built and operated by US companies without transferring sensitive technology to the Saudis.
The US-Saudi agreement signed on 22 July 2026 contains no equivalent renunciation and does not require Saudi Arabia to adopt the IAEA Additional Protocol. It instead provides for a joint two-year study on the commercial viability of enrichment, with any facility to be built and operated by US companies without transferring sensitive technology to the Saudis.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 international agreements and institutions, GS3 nuclear technology. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | nuclear latency, dual-use technology, cascading proliferation, safeguards. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | assuming NPT membership by itself bars enrichment; it does not, which is exactly the policy gap under discussion. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | remember the three enrichment percentages, they recur in Prelims. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** should suppliers impose conditions the NPT itself does not require? |
Question 10 of 15
The European Commission’s July 2026 fine on Google of 890 million euros was imposed under which regulation?
FACT: The fine was imposed on 23 July 2026 under the Digital Markets Act, split as 460 million euros for self-preferencing in Google Search and 430 million euros for restricting app developers from steering users to cheaper options outside Google Play. ANALYSIS: It is the first DMA penalty against Google and the largest issued under the regulation, and the coercive element is not the fine but the 60-day compliance deadline backed by periodic penalties of up to 5 per cent of worldwide turnover.
📝 Concept Note
The Digital Markets Act entered into force in 2022 and regulates designated gatekeeper platforms on an ex-ante basis, meaning obligations attach on designation rather than on proof of abuse in each case. The GDPR governs data protection, the Digital Services Act governs illegal content and platform accountability, and the AI Act governs risk-tiered regulation of artificial intelligence.
Distinguishing the four is a common Prelims requirement.
Distinguishing the four is a common Prelims requirement.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS3 competition and regulation, GS2 effect of developed-country policies on India. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | self-preferencing, anti-steering, market tipping, ex-ante regulation. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | treating the DMA and the DSA as interchangeable; the DMA is a competition instrument, the DSA a content and accountability instrument. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | learn the four EU digital regulations as a set with one-line mandates. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** should India copy the DMA or design its own thresholds? |
Question 11 of 15
The principal argument advanced for ex-ante regulation of digital markets, as against traditional antitrust, is that it:
FACT: Ex-ante regulation imposes conduct obligations in advance on designated firms, on the reasoning that in network-effect markets a remedy delivered after years of litigation may arrive only once the market has already tipped irreversibly. ANALYSIS: The counter-argument is regulatory error, since obligations imposed in advance apply to conduct not yet shown to be harmful in the specific market, which is why threshold design carries the entire analytical weight.
📝 Concept Note
India’s Competition Act, 2002, enforced by the Competition Commission of India, operates on the ex-post model. The Committee on Digital Competition Law recommended a separate ex-ante Digital Competition Act allowing the CCI to regulate large digital enterprises in advance.
The draft proposes designating Systemically Significant Digital Enterprises based on any of nine identified Core Digital Services plus thresholds including global market capitalisation above 75 billion US dollars and at least one crore end users or 10,000 business users, with penalties up to 10 per cent of global turnover.
The draft proposes designating Systemically Significant Digital Enterprises based on any of nine identified Core Digital Services plus thresholds including global market capitalisation above 75 billion US dollars and at least one crore end users or 10,000 business users, with penalties up to 10 per cent of global turnover.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS3 competition and regulation, GS2 regulatory bodies. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | ex-ante versus ex-post, gatekeeper, systemic significance, regulatory over-inclusion. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | assuming the Digital Competition Bill has been enacted; it remains under consideration. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | the SSDE thresholds are the most quotable numbers in this debate. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** do low thresholds protect competition or penalise Indian firms for growing? |
Question 12 of 15
SpaceX’s Starship Flight 13, launched on 24 July 2026, carried which payload?
FACT: Flight 13 deployed all 20 Starlink V3 satellites, and SpaceX confirmed contact with every one of them. ANALYSIS: Starlink V3 satellites are dimensioned for Starship’s payload volume rather than Falcon 9’s, which is the commercial logic that funds the development programme, since a larger vehicle enables larger satellites and more bandwidth delivered per launch.
📝 Concept Note
Flight 13 was the second launch of the Starship Version 3 configuration, lifting off from Starbase, Texas at 5:51 p.m. Central Time.
The Super Heavy first stage used 33 Raptor 3 engines and the upper stage six Raptor engines. The upper stage completed a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean, while the booster splashed down faster than planned after an incomplete landing burn.
Two earlier attempts were scrubbed, on 16 July at T-0 and on 23 July for weather.
The Super Heavy first stage used 33 Raptor 3 engines and the upper stage six Raptor engines. The upper stage completed a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean, while the booster splashed down faster than planned after an incomplete landing burn.
Two earlier attempts were scrubbed, on 16 July at T-0 and on 23 July for weather.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS3 space technology and indigenisation. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | full reusability, launch cost per kilogram, iterative testing, commercial space. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | describing Falcon 9 as fully reusable; it recovers only the first stage, and recovering the upper stage is the harder problem Starship targets. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | 33 engines on Super Heavy and six on the upper stage are the standard factual pair. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** should ISRO pursue full reusability or specialise elsewhere? |
Question 13 of 15
"Hot staging", used on Starship, refers to the practice of:
FACT: Hot staging means igniting the upper stage’s engines while the first stage is still attached and firing, avoiding the momentum loss of a coasting separation. ANALYSIS: The performance gain comes at an engineering cost, since the interstage structure must be designed to survive direct exhaust impingement, which is why the technique is a design trade-off rather than a free improvement.
📝 Concept Note
Hot staging is standard practice on Soviet and Russian launch vehicles and was adopted by SpaceX during the Starship development programme. India’s reusability work has proceeded through the Reusable Launch Vehicle Autonomous Landing Experiment series.
India’s heavy-lift vehicle is the LVM3, and human spaceflight development continues under the Gaganyaan programme.
India’s heavy-lift vehicle is the LVM3, and human spaceflight development continues under the Gaganyaan programme.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS3 developments in science and technology. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | staging, specific impulse, payload fraction, design trade-off. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | confusing hot staging with in-flight engine relight for landing burns; they are different manoeuvres at different flight phases. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | pair hot staging with its cost, interstage thermal protection. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** how much should a space agency borrow proven foreign techniques versus develop its own? |
Question 14 of 15
Which body issued the July 2026 global Expression of Interest for polymer substrate to print Indian banknotes?
FACT: Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Private Limited (BRBNMPL), the currency-printing arm wholly owned by the Reserve Bank of India, issued the Expression of Interest on 17 July 2026 seeking suppliers of polymer substrate sheets. ANALYSIS: An Expression of Interest is a market-sounding step rather than a procurement commitment, which is why the RBI has not confirmed denominations, launch date or circulation schedule.
📝 Concept Note
The indicative requirement was 68,000 reams of opacified polymer substrate with security features, each ream containing 500 sheets, split equally across two denominations, with bids open until 18 August 2026. Reporting suggests a pilot beginning with Rs 10 and Rs 20 notes and a possible wider rollout from 2027.
SPMCIL is the Government of India undertaking operating the other currency presses and the mints. The RBI’s note-issuing authority derives from Section 22 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, while the Government of India issues the one-rupee note and all coins.
SPMCIL is the Government of India undertaking operating the other currency presses and the mints. The RBI’s note-issuing authority derives from Section 22 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, while the Government of India issues the one-rupee note and all coins.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS3 money and banking, GS2 statutory bodies. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | currency management cost, counterfeit deterrence, note life-cycle, substrate recyclability. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | attributing all currency printing to the RBI; presses are split between BRBNMPL, an RBI subsidiary, and SPMCIL, a Government of India undertaking. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | Section 22 of the RBI Act, 1934 is the standard citation for note issue. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** do longer-lasting polymer notes offset their lower recyclability? |
Question 15 of 15
Under the Constitution, water is primarily a subject in which list, with inter-state rivers falling under a different entry?
FACT: Water is a State subject under Entry 17 of the State List, while the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys falls to Parliament under Entry 56 of the Union List. ANALYSIS: This split is the constitutional root of India’s inter-state water disputes, since a state’s plenary competence over water within its territory collides with the Union’s competence the moment a river crosses a boundary.
📝 Concept Note
The Rajasthan State Water Plan 2047, launched on 24 July 2026, is an example of state-level long-horizon planning within Entry 17, built on river-linking projects, groundwater conservation and public participation. Article 262 empowers Parliament to provide for the adjudication of inter-state river water disputes and to bar the jurisdiction of courts, under which the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 was enacted.
The Central Ground Water Board categorises assessment units as safe, semi-critical, critical or over-exploited.
The Central Ground Water Board categorises assessment units as safe, semi-critical, critical or over-exploited.
🎯 Concept Kit — tap to expand
| 🔗 Cross-Paper Links | GS2 federalism and centre-state relations, GS1 water resources geography, GS3 conservation. |
| ✍️ Mains Keywords | federal friction, Article 262, tribunal adjudication, groundwater over-extraction. |
| ⚠️ Common Mistake | citing Article 262 as the source of legislative competence; competence flows from the Seventh Schedule entries, while Article 262 concerns dispute adjudication. |
| 📌 Exam Tip | memorise Entry 17 and Entry 56 as a pair. |
| 🎤 Interview | ** should water move to the Concurrent List? |
–
/ 15
Performance
✓
Correct
0
✗
Incorrect
0
%
Accuracy
0%
⏱
Time Taken
–
Question-wise Result
Daily quiz questions on Telegram
Practice polls with instant explanations, plus every edition and free PDFs
Join Channel