General Studies 2025 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Compulsory Critically analyse

GS Paper IV — Q2

(a) Carl von Clausewitz once said, "War is a diplomacy by other means." Critically analyse the above statement in the present…

(a)

Carl von Clausewitz once said, "War is a diplomacy by other means." Critically analyse the above statement in the present context of contemporary geo-political conflict. (Answer in 150 words) 10 marks

(b)

Keeping the national security in mind, examine the ethical dilemmas related to controversies over environmental clearance of development projects in ecologically sensitive border areas in the country. (Answer in 150 words) 10 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a)

कार्ल वॉन क्लॉज़विट्ज़ ने एक बार कहा था, "युद्ध दूसरे माध्यमों से की जाने वाली एक कूटनीति है।" समकालीन भू-राजनीतिक संघर्ष के वर्तमान संदर्भ में उपर्युक्त कथन का आलोचनात्मक विश्लेषण कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) 10 marks

(b)

राष्ट्रीय सुरक्षा को ध्यान में रखते हुए देश में पारिस्थितिक रूप से संवेदनशील सीमावर्ती क्षेत्रों में विकास परियोजनाओं की पर्यावरणीय मंजूरी पर विवादों से संबंधित नैतिक दुविधाओं का परीक्षण कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) 10 marks

Q2 of the 2025 UPSC Mains General Studies GS Paper IV, as printed
The question as printed in the 2025 General Studies paper

Model answer

Written by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the 150-word length. UPSC does not publish answers for Mains — this is one way to score well, not an official key.

(a) Clausewitzian War in Contemporary Geopolitics Clausewitz conceived war as a rational instrument linking the trinity of government, military, and people. In contemporary geopolitics, nuclear deterrence, cyber warfare, and economic sanctions have transformed this continuum, turning total war from a diplomatic extension into an existential hazard. While the Russia-Ukraine war reflects military force replacing failed diplomacy, the India-China LAC standoffs illustrate military brinkmanship substituting for diplomatic breakthroughs. Thus, while military coercion remains wedded to statecraft, modern catastrophic risks make war a dangerous breakdown of diplomacy rather than its routine continuation.

(b) National Security vs. Ecological Ethics in Border Areas Strategic projects like the Char Dham highway, Zoji-La tunnel, and Arunachal frontier roads create an ethical clash between the Hobbesian imperative of national security as the supreme public good and the Rio Principles of intergenerational equity and nature's rights. Fast-tracking clearances under Environment Protection Act provisions exposes the institutional friction between the Ministry of Defence’s operational urgency and MoEFCC’s precautionary principle. As evidenced in NGT scrutiny over the Subansiri and Teesta-III projects, bypassing cumulative impact assessments in seismic Himalayan zones creates moral hazard, necessitating green engineering over unmitigated clearance.

What "Critically analyse" is asking you to do

Break the subject into its working parts and show how they act on each other. The marks are in the interconnections — which factor drives which, and what the resulting structure explains — not in the inventory of factors. “Critically” is not a section added at the end: name the yardstick you are judging by — the evidence, the stated objective, a constitutional principle, a rival explanation — and let a verdict close each part of the body. Where the question quotes a claim, that verdict must land on the claim itself, accepted, qualified or rejected, and not on the theme in general.

Structure that answers it

Define the whole → separate it into its parts → show which part drives which → what that interaction produces → what the structure implies

Where marks are lost

Merits in one paragraph, demerits in the next, and a conclusion calling for a balanced and holistic approach. That is a survey with the judgement left out and it holds the answer in the middle band. The opposite error is reading “critically” as permission to attack — and with the odd pairings, critically describe or critically explain, the exposition still carries most of the marks, the judgement being a layer on it rather than a substitute for it.

All UPSC directive words, compared →

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Framework: GS4 Ethical Dilemma & Governance Framework. (a) analyse: intro > causes > effects > stakeholders/linkages > way forward | (b) examine: intro > how/why with reasoning > evidence > conclusion Full marks: Precise, well-structured, with specific examples and critical analysis

Key points expected

  • Define 'war as diplomacy by other means'
  • Link to contemporary geo-political conflicts
  • Critically evaluate the statement's validity
  • Provide specific examples of modern conflicts
  • Identify ethical dilemmas in environmental clearance
  • Focus on ecologically sensitive border areas
  • Consider national security implications
  • Discuss controversies and their ethical dimensions

Evaluation rubric

Each sub-part is marked on its own, against the marks and word limit printed on the paper.

  1. (a) Critical analysis of Clausewitz's quote in the context of contemporary geo-political conflict. 10 marks · 150 words

    analyse— intro → causes → effects → stakeholders/linkages → way forward

    Must cover

    • Define 'war as diplomacy by other means'
    • Link to contemporary geo-political conflicts
    • Critically evaluate the statement's validity
    • Provide specific examples of modern conflicts

    Loses marks

    • Generic discussion of war without specific examples
    • Ignoring the 'critical' aspect of the command word
    • Failing to link to 'contemporary' context

    Earns more

    • Mention specific contemporary conflicts (e.g., Ukraine, Middle East)
    • Reference modern warfare concepts (cyber, economic)
    • Discuss the role of international organizations
    • Mention the concept of 'total war'

    Extra mark

    • Reference specific Clausewitz's work 'On War'
    • Mention specific diplomatic failures leading to war
  2. (b) Examination of ethical dilemmas in environmental clearance for border area projects. 10 marks · 150 words

    examine— intro → how/why with reasoning → evidence → conclusion

    Must cover

    • Identify ethical dilemmas in environmental clearance
    • Focus on ecologically sensitive border areas
    • Consider national security implications
    • Discuss controversies and their ethical dimensions

    Loses marks

    • Generic discussion of environmental issues without border focus
    • Ignoring the 'ethical dilemmas' aspect
    • Failing to consider 'national security' context

    Earns more

    • Mention specific border areas (e.g., Himalayan, Northeast)
    • Reference specific environmental laws (e.g., EIA Act)
    • Discuss stakeholder conflicts (military vs. environmentalists)
    • Mention specific projects (e.g., roads, dams)

    Extra mark

    • Reference specific environmental clearance cases
    • Mention specific ecological zones (e.g., Western Ghats)

Practice this exact question

Write your answer and it is marked point by point against the model answer above — what you covered, what you missed, what you got wrong.

Evaluate my answer →

More from General Studies 2025 GS Paper IV