General Studies 2024 GS Paper I 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Evaluate

Q12

How far is it correct to say that the First World War was fought essentially for the preservation of balance of power? (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

यह कहना कहाँ तक उचित है कि प्रथम विश्वयुद्ध मूलतः शक्ति-संतुलन को बनाए रखने के लिए लड़ा गया था? (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Directive word: Evaluate

This question asks you to evaluate. 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

Evaluate the extent to which balance of power was the essential cause of WWI, weighing it against other factors. Structure: brief introduction defining balance of power and stating thesis; body presenting arguments for and against with evidence; conclusion synthesizing that while important, it was not the sole or essential cause.

Key points expected

Definition of balance of power in European context pre-1914 and its role in alliance systems (Triple Alliance vs Triple Entente)
Analysis of how balance of power logic actually precipitated war (security dilemma, rigid alliances, mobilization schedules)
Counter-arguments: economic imperialism, nationalism (Balkan crises), militarism, and the July Crisis as immediate triggers
Specific reference to Bismarckian system collapse and its replacement with inflexible alliances under Wilhelm II
Assessment of whether preservation or disruption of balance was the actual war aim—Germany seeking hegemony vs others defending status quo

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Correctly interprets 'evaluate' and 'how far' as requiring judgment on proportionality, not mere description; explicitly weighs balance of power thesis against alternative explanations	Partially understands evaluative demand but treats question as descriptive list of causes without clear assessment of 'essential' nature	Misreads directive as 'explain causes' or 'describe events'; no engagement with 'how far' or evaluative framing
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Accurately distinguishes between systemic balance-of-power theory and actual 1914 dynamics; correctly identifies German Weltpolitik as challenge to, not preservation of, balance	Basic factual accuracy on alliances and chronology but conflates balance of power with collective security or treats all causes equally without hierarchy	Major factual errors (wrong alliances, dates, causation); anachronistic application of Cold War concepts to pre-1914 Europe
Structure & flow	20%	3	Clear thesis-antithesis-synthesis progression; logical movement from systemic analysis to specific crisis; effective signposting of evalative turns	Presentable structure with introduction-body-conclusion but body paragraphs lack clear thematic organization or evaluative progression	Disorganized narrative; no clear argument thread; conclusion merely restates points without synthesis
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Deploys specific evidence: Congress of Berlin 1878, Moroccan Crises 1905/1911, Balkan Wars 1912-13, Schlieffen Plan implications; references historians like Fritz Fischer or A.J.P. Taylor	General reference to alliance systems and Sarajevo assassination without specific dates or contextual precision	No concrete examples; vague references to 'countries' or 'empires' without specificity; irrelevant inclusion of WWII or post-1945 developments
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Nuanced judgment: balance of power was the structural framework but not the essential cause—war resulted from its breakdown combined with nationalism and agency of decision-makers; may reference Indian decolonization consequences as indirect outcome	Balanced but bland conclusion stating 'many factors were responsible' without clear prioritization or original insight	Absolute conclusion ('entirely correct' or 'completely wrong'); no conclusion; or conclusion introducing new unsubstantiated claims

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 →