Question map
Consider the following statements : 1. The Nuclear Security Summits are periodically held under the aegis of the United Nations. 2. The International Panel on Fissile Materials is an organ of International Atomic Energy Agency. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Explanation
The correct answer is option D (Neither 1 nor 2) because both statements are incorrect.
**Statement 1 is incorrect:** The Nuclear Security Summits were held in Washington D.C., Seoul and the Hague[1], and the Nuclear Security Summit process was mentioned alongside other international organizations and initiatives, such as the UN, INTERPOL, GICNT, and the Global Partnership[2]. This indicates that the Nuclear Security Summits were a separate process, not held under UN aegis. They were actually initiated by the United States and were independent of the United Nations framework.
**Statement 2 is incorrect:** The International Panel on Fissile Materials is described as an entity "Fostering initiatives to reduce stocks and end the production and use of highly enriched uranium and plutonium"[3], presented as an independent organization rather than an organ of the IAEA. The documents reference the IPFM and IAEA as separate entities, confirming that the IPFM is an independent expert group, not part of the IAEA's organizational structure.
Therefore, since both statements are incorrect, option D is the correct answer.
Sources- [1] https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1794_web.pdf
- [2] https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1794_web.pdf
- [3] https://fissilematerials.org/ipfm/members.html
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Guest previewThis question uses the classic 'Wrong Parent' trap. UPSC takes a real event (NSS) or body (IPFM) and falsely attributes it to a famous organization (UN/IAEA). Strategy: Whenever you read about a summit or body, explicitly memorize its 'convener' or 'parent organization'—this is a top-tier elimination filter.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Explicitly lists the UN and the Nuclear Security Summit process as separate items, implying the Summits were not conducted under the UN's aegis.
- Presents the Nuclear Security Summit process alongside other international initiatives rather than as a UN-led activity.
- Refers to four Nuclear Security Summits held in specific national capitals (Washington D.C., Seoul and the Hague), indicating they were separate events not described as UN-hosted.
- Describes the Summits as distinct meetings that brought the issue into the limelight, rather than UN conferences.
- Associates the Nuclear Security Summits with the international nuclear security architecture and highlights the IAEA's central role, suggesting coordination outside direct UN aegis.
- Shows the Summits are considered part of broader international mechanisms rather than explicitly under the UN.
Shows that major global summits (Millennium Summit) have been held at the United Nations' headquarters and organized under UN auspices.
A student could check whether the Nuclear Security Summits were similarly hosted at UN premises or formally organized by the UN secretariat.
Explicitly describes the Earth Summit as 'United Nations sponsored', establishing a pattern that large international summits on global issues can be UN-sponsored.
One could compare the official sponsor/host listed for each Nuclear Security Summit against the UN sponsorship pattern.
Contains a textbook question asserting that the Earth Summit 'was held under the aegis of the UN', showing textbooks treat some summits as UN-led.
A student could treat 'held under the aegis of the UN' as a definitional criterion and look for the same phrase or equivalent in Nuclear Security Summit documents.
Notes that India used the UN platform for disarmament but also took independent initiative to hold a six-nation summit, showing nuclear/disarmament meetings can be both UN-led or independently convened.
This suggests checking whether Nuclear Security Summits were UN initiatives or independent government-led initiatives (i.e., organizer/convener listed in summit records).
Discusses formal nuclear arms-control frameworks (NPT) as international instruments, indicating nuclear security is a subject of multilateral/regime-based governance.
A student could use this to reason that nuclear-security events might be run under treaty/UN frameworks or alternatively by states outside such frameworks and then verify which applies to the Nuclear Security Summits.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This tab shows concrete study steps: what to underline in books, how to map current affairs, and how to prepare for similar questions.
Login with Google to unlock study guidance.
Discover the small, exam-centric ideas hidden in this question and where they appear in your books and notes.
Login with Google to unlock micro-concepts.
Access hidden traps, elimination shortcuts, and Mains connections that give you an edge on every question.
Login with Google to unlock The Vault.