General Studies 2021 GS Paper II 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q10

"The USA is facing an existential threat in the form of a China, that is much more challenging than the erstwhile Soviet Union." Explain. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

"संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका, चीन के रूप में एक ऐसे अस्तित्व के खतरे का सामना कर रहा है जो तत्कालीन सोवियत संघ की तुलना में कहीं अधिक चुनौतीपूर्ण है।" विवेचना कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 General Studies questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'explain' requires unpacking why China poses a more complex existential threat to USA than the Soviet Union did, through causal reasoning and comparative analysis. Structure: brief context setting → multi-dimensional comparison (economic, technological, ideological, military) → nuanced conclusion on implications for global order and India.

Key points expected

Economic interdependence vs. Soviet-era decoupling: China is deeply embedded in global supply chains unlike USSR's autarky
Technological competition in AI, 5G, semiconductors where China challenges US dominance directly
Ideological challenge combining authoritarian capitalism with developmental model attractive to Global South
Military-civilian fusion and grey-zone tactics vs. Soviet conventional deterrence
Multilateral institutional capture (AIIB, BRI) vs. Soviet bloc exclusivity
Implications for India's strategic autonomy in this bipolarity

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Clearly frames 'existential threat' beyond military to include economic, technological, ideological dimensions; explicitly contrasts with Soviet Union's threat profile rather than treating China in isolation	Mentions multiple threat dimensions but comparison with USSR remains implicit or superficial; conflates 'existential' with merely 'serious'	Describes US-China tensions without addressing why it's 'existential' or how it exceeds Soviet challenge; ignores comparative framework entirely
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Accurately distinguishes Soviet military-ideological threat from China's multi-domain challenge; references specific domains (semiconductor supply chains, BRI debt diplomacy, AI standards)	Covers 2-3 relevant dimensions with general accuracy but lacks specificity on mechanisms; some conflation of Cold War and current dynamics	Factual errors (e.g., claiming China is military superior to US); superficial listing without explaining why more challenging; irrelevant content on India-China border
Structure & flow	20%	2	Logical progression from thesis (why existential) → comparative analysis (why exceeds USSR) → synthesis; clear signposting between economic, tech, ideological, military dimensions within 150 words	Identifiable introduction and conclusion but body paragraphs lack clear comparative thread; some abrupt transitions between points	Disorganised listing without comparative architecture; no discernible introduction or conclusion; exceeds word limit significantly or severely underwrites
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Deploys precise examples: CHIPS Act response to semiconductor dependency, Huawei 5G bans, BRI debt trap cases (Sri Lanka/Hambantota), AIIB membership patterns, or specific trade deficit figures	Mentions one or two relevant examples but lacks specificity (e.g., 'trade war' without specifics); examples illustrate rather than substantiate comparative claim	No concrete examples; or irrelevant examples (Taiwan crisis 1996 without current context); generic references to 'technology' or 'economy' without instantiation
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Synthesises into insight: notes structural difference (USSR was containable, China requires managed interdependence); or flags implications for multipolarity, institutional fragmentation, or India's position	Restates main points without synthesis; standard conclusion on need for cooperation or 'complex relationship' without analytical advancement	No conclusion; or abrupt ending; or conclusion contradicts body (e.g., claiming China threat is overestimated after explaining why existential)

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →