General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Compulsory Illustrate

Q5

(a) Russia and Ukraine war has been going on for the last seven months. Different countries have taken independent stands and actions keeping in view their own national interests. We are all aware that war has its own impact on the different aspects of society, including human tragedy. What are those ethical issues that are crucial to be considered while launching the war and its continuation so far? Illustrate with justification the ethical issues involved in the given state of affair. (Answer in 150 words) 10 (b) Write short notes on the following in 30 words each: 2×5=10 (i) Constitutional morality (ii) Conflict of interest (iii) Probity in public life (iv) Challenges of digitalization (v) Devotion to duty

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) पिछले सात महीनों से रूस और यूक्रेन के बीच युद्ध जारी है। विभिन्न देशों ने अपने राष्ट्रीय हितों को ध्यान में रखते हुए स्वतंत्र स्टैंड लिया है और कार्यवाही की है। हम सभी जानते हैं कि मानव त्रासदी समेत समाज के विभिन्न पहलुओं पर युद्ध का अपना असर रहता है। वे कौन-से नैतिक मुद्दे हैं, जिन पर युद्ध शुरू करते समय और अब तक इसकी निरंतरता पर विचार करना महत्वपूर्ण है? इस मामले में दी गई स्थिति में शामिल नैतिक मुद्दों का औचित्यपूर्ण वर्णन कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) 10 (b) निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक पर 30 शब्दों में संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिए : 2×5=10 (i) संवैधानिक नैतिकता (ii) हितों का संघर्ष (iii) सार्वजनिक जीवन में सत्यनिष्ठा (iv) डिजिटीकरण की चुनौतियाँ (v) कर्तव्यनिष्ठा

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Illustrate

This question asks you to illustrate. 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 'illustrate with justification' in part (a) requires concrete examples and ethical reasoning, while parts (b)(i)-(v) demand precise 30-word definitions. Allocate ~100 words/6 minutes to part (a) covering jus ad bellum, jus in bello, humanitarian impact and India's principled stand; then ~25-30 words/2 minutes each for the five short notes, ensuring constitutional morality references Ambedkar, conflict of interest cites 2nd ARC, probity links to RTI, digitalization mentions AI ethics, and devotion to duty connects to civil service values.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Ethical issues in launching war — jus ad bellum principles (just cause, legitimate authority, last resort, proportionality) applied to Russia-Ukraine context
  • Part (a): Ethical issues in war continuation — jus in bello (discrimination, proportionality), civilian protection, refugee crisis, economic sanctions' humanitarian impact
  • Part (a): India's ethical stand — strategic autonomy, humanitarian aid to Ukraine, oil purchase realism, balancing national interest with moral principles
  • Part (b)(i): Constitutional morality — Ambedkar's concept, supremacy of constitutional values over public morality, Sabarimala judgment reference
  • Part (b)(ii): Conflict of interest — 2nd ARC definition, public duty vs. private interest, disqualification under RP Act, need for disclosure
  • Part (b)(iii): Probity in public life — integrity, honesty, RTI Act linkage, prevention of corruption, objectivity in decision-making
  • Part (b)(iv): Challenges of digitalization — privacy concerns, AI bias, cyber warfare, digital divide, ethical AI governance
  • Part (b)(v): Devotion to duty — civil service values, anonymity, impartiality, dedication to public welfare, constitutional oath

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Demand-directive understanding20%4For (a), correctly interprets 'illustrate with justification' by applying Just War Theory frameworks to Russia-Ukraine with explicit ethical reasoning; for (b), grasps that 'short notes' requires precise definitional economy within 30-word constraint per itemAddresses ethical issues in (a) descriptively without clear Just War Theory framework; (b) definitions exceed word limit or lack precisionMisreads (a) as mere opinion on war or (b) as elaborate essays; fails to distinguish between launching ethics and continuation ethics
Content depth & accuracy20%4Part (a) accurately deploys jus ad bellum/jus in bello distinctions, Geneva Conventions, and India's specific policy choices; parts (b)(i)-(v) demonstrate command of technical definitions with correct attribution to Ambedkar, 2nd ARC, RTI, etc.Covers ethical dimensions superficially in (a) with generic war analysis; (b) definitions are broadly correct but missing key thinkers or conflate related conceptsFactual errors in Just War Theory application; (b) definitions confused (e.g., constitutional morality with constitutionalism) or entirely omitted
Structure & flow20%4Part (a) follows clear tripartite structure: launching ethics → continuation ethics → India's ethical stance; parts (b) use parallel structure with term, definition, significance; overall 150-word discipline maintained with visual clarityPart (a) has discernible structure but mixes launching and continuation issues; (b) items present but uneven in format; minor word limit violationsRambling narrative in (a) without paragraph breaks; (b) items run together or missing; severe word limit breach indicating poor exam technique
Examples / case-law / data20%4Part (a) cites specific instances: Bucha massacre, Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, India's Operation Ganga, oil price cap negotiations; (b)(i) references Sabarimala, (b)(ii) cites 2nd ARC recommendations, (b)(iii) mentions Lokpal, (b)(iv) refers to Pegasus or AI bias casesPart (a) mentions Ukraine conflict generally without specific ethical incidents; (b) has one or two examples but mostly definitionalNo concrete examples in (a) beyond 'war is bad'; (b) entirely devoid of illustrations; or examples factually wrong (e.g., wrong commission cited)
Conclusion & analytical edge20%4Part (a) concludes with synthesis: ethical realism vs. idealism in India's foreign policy, or tension between state sovereignty and R2P; demonstrates independent ethical judgment on multipolar world order; (b) items show interconnection (e.g., probity enables constitutional morality)Part (a) ends with platitude about peace; no analytical integration of ethical frameworks with geopolitical reality; (b) items treated as isolatedNo conclusion in (a); abrupt ending; or conclusion contradicts earlier analysis; (b) items incomplete or missing entirely

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 →

More from General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV