General Studies 2021 GS Paper III 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Analyse

Q20

Analyse the complexity and intensity of terrorism, its causes, linkages and obnoxious nexus. Also suggest measures required to be taken to eradicate the menace of terrorism. (Answer in 250 words)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

आतंकवाद की जटिलता और तीव्रता, इसके कारणों, सम्बन्धों तथा अप्रिय गठजोड़ का विश्लेषण कीजिए । आतंकवाद के खतरे के उन्मूलन के लिए उठाए जाने वाले उपायों का भी सुझाव दीजिए । (250 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए)

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

Directive word: Analyse

This question asks you to analyse. 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 'analyse' requires breaking down terrorism into constituent elements—complexity, intensity, causes, linkages, and nexus—while maintaining interconnections. Structure as: introduction defining terrorism's evolving nature; body covering multidimensional analysis (complexity/intensity, root causes, regional/global linkages, terror-crime-state nexus); conclusion with integrated, forward-looking measures.

Key points expected

Distinguish between traditional and new-age terrorism (lone wolves, cyber-terror, state-sponsored vs non-state actors) showing complexity
Analyse intensity through casualty data, geographic spread, and asymmetric warfare tactics
Identify causes: political (self-determination), economic (underdevelopment, unemployment), social (religious radicalization, identity politics), technological (social media recruitment)
Explain linkages: terror-organized crime nexus (drugs, arms, human trafficking), state sponsorship (Pakistan's role in Kashmir militancy), global networks (ISIS-Al Qaeda ideological diffusion)
Suggest multi-pronged measures: legislative (UAPA amendments), institutional (NIA strengthening, NATGRID), developmental (Panchsheel strategy in LWE areas), international (UNSC 1267, FATF, BIMSTEC cooperation), technological (AI for pattern recognition)
Mention India's specific vulnerabilities: Pakistan-based groups (LeT, JeM), Northeast insurgencies, Left-Wing Extremism, and radicalization in Kashmir

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Demonstrates clear grasp that 'analyse' requires deconstruction of terrorism into complexity, intensity, causes, linkages AND nexus as interconnected phenomena; addresses 'suggest' for measures without conflating directives	Addresses most components but treats them as isolated lists; some confusion between analysis and description; measures section descriptive rather than analytical	Misinterprets directive as 'describe' or 'list'; misses nexus/linkages distinction; fails to address measures or treats entire answer as suggestion-only
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Accurately covers all five analytical domains with conceptual precision (e.g., distinguishes terror-crime nexus from state-sponsored terror); includes contemporary dimensions like cyber-terrorism and drone warfare	Covers 3-4 domains adequately but with gaps (e.g., mentions nexus without explaining mechanisms); some outdated or generic content; conflates causes and linkages	Superficial treatment with factual errors; confuses terrorism with insurgency or extremism; missing 2+ core domains; measures are generic or unrealistic
Structure & flow	20%	3	Logical progression: introduction → complexity/intensity → causes → linkages → nexus → integrated measures → conclusion; smooth transitions showing causal chains between poverty-radicalization-recruitment	Recognizable structure but uneven weightage (e.g., overlong on causes, rushed measures); some abrupt transitions; conclusion merely summarizes	Disorganized or haphazard arrangement; no clear paragraphing; missing introduction/conclusion; word limit violations (substantially under or over)
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Specific Indian examples: 26/11 Mumbai attacks (complexity), Pulwama (intensity), UAPA 2019 amendments, NIA successes; global references: ISIS caliphate, FATF grey listing of Pakistan; quantitative hint (e.g., South Asia terrorism deaths)	Some Indian examples but generic (only mentions Kashmir without specificity); international examples lack precision; no data or legal references	No examples or irrelevant foreign examples only; factual errors in citing incidents; confuses organizations (e.g., ISIS with Al Qaeda operations in India)
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Synthesizes analysis into coherent argument that terrorism requires 'comprehensive national security' approach; offers original insight (e.g., need for deradicalization ecosystem, counter-narrative through education); ends with forward-looking, balanced tone	Restates points without synthesis; measures in conclusion merely repeat body content; lacks original insight but technically complete	No conclusion or abrupt ending; purely emotional/preachy ending; contradicts own analysis; suggests unrealistic solutions (complete eradication without nuance)

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 →