Political Science & IR 2021 Paper II 50 marks Comment

Paper II — Q6

(a) "Non-alignment was little more than a rational strategy on the part of a materially weak India to maximise its interests with…

(a)

"Non-alignment was little more than a rational strategy on the part of a materially weak India to maximise its interests with a bipolar distribution of global power." Comment. 20 marks

(b)

Examine the Geo-strategic points of contention in the bilateral relationship between India and China. 15 marks

(c)

Write a brief analysis of the ethnic conflicts and cross-border migrations along India-Myanmar and India-Bangladesh borders. 15 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a)

"गुटनिरपेक्षता की नीति वैश्विक शक्ति के द्विध्रुवीय वितरण के साथ अपने हितों को अधिकतम करने के लिये भौतिक रूप से कमजोर भारत की ओर से एक तर्कसंगत रणनीति से कुछ अधिक थी।" टिप्पणी कीजिये । (20 अंक)

(b)

भारत एवं चीन के मध्य द्विपक्षीय संबंधों में विवाद के भू-रणनीतिक बिंदुओं का परीक्षण कीजिये । (15 अंक)

(c)

भारत-म्यांमार एवं भारत-बांग्लादेश सीमा के साथ लगे संजातीय संघर्षों तथा सीमा-पार प्रवासन का एक संक्षिप्त विश्लेषण कीजिये । (15 अंक)

Q6 of the 2021 UPSC Mains Political Science & IR Paper II, as printed
The question as printed in the 2021 Political Science & IR paper

Model answer

Drafted with AI by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the expected length. UPSC does not publish answers for Mains — this is one way to score well, not an official key. How we build rubrics and answers.

(a) Non-alignment: material strategy and normative vision

Realist readings treat non-alignment as hedging by a materially weak India in a bipolar world, and Srinath Raghavan (War and Peace in Modern India, 2010) shows Nehru as a pragmatic strategist rather than a naive idealist. Post-Partition India faced industrial underdevelopment, military limits and food insecurity, and staying out of blocs let it draw capital, technology and food from both sides: PL-480 wheat from the US, and the Bhilai steel plant (agreement 1955) and MiG aircraft (from 1962) from the Soviet Union, without surrendering policy space. Yet reducing it to material calculus is reductionist. Nehru outlined the idea in his broadcast of 7 September 1946; it drew on anti-imperialism and Afro-Asian solidarity, expressed at Bandung (1955) and institutionalised at the Belgrade summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (1961) with Tito, Nasser, Sukarno and Nkrumah, and on the ethics of Panchsheel (1954). It sought to democratise global governance, champion disarmament and prevent the peripheralisation of the Global South, giving India diplomatic agency beyond its material capabilities. Its limits also show its pragmatism: Nehru sought US military help in the 1962 war, and the 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty tilted India towards Moscow. The quote is therefore half-true: non-alignment was structurally rational but also an independent normative project, and its legacy lives on as strategic autonomy and multi-alignment.

(b) Geo-strategic points of contention between India and China

The primary flashpoint is the unsettled 3,488-km Line of Actual Control, with competing claims over Aksai Chin in the Western Sector, pockets in the Middle Sector and Arunachal Pradesh in the Eastern Sector, which China calls "Zangnan" and where it periodically "renames" places. Doklam (2017) and Galwan (June 2020) were the worst crises in decades; the October 2024 patrolling agreement for Depsang and Demchok, Modi's visit to the SCO summit in Tianjin (2025) and resumed direct flights have produced a cautious thaw. Tibet and the Dalai Lama's succession (he affirmed in July 2025 that only his own trust will recognise his reincarnation) feed distrust, as do upper-riparian water concerns over Chinese dams on the Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra), including the Medog project begun in July 2025. CPEC traverses Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, infringing India's sovereignty claims. China's "String of Pearls" (Gwadar, Hambantota, Kyaukphyu and the Djibouti base of 2017) challenges Indian primacy in the Indian Ocean and fuels competition for influence in Nepal, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Bangladesh, against India's Act East and Neighbourhood First policies. Other irritants are India's trade deficit of nearly USD 100 billion (2024-25), China's past holds on UN terror listings, its opposition to India's NSG membership, and military support for Pakistan, whose Chinese-made weapons were used during Operation Sindoor (May 2025).

(c) Ethnic conflicts and cross-border migration: Myanmar and Bangladesh

Along the India-Myanmar border, kinship among Naga, Mizo and Chin-Kuki-Zomi groups has long offered safe havens to insurgents. The 2021 coup pushed refugees into Mizoram and Manipur and fed narcotics trafficking from the Golden Triangle, and the Manipur violence from May 2023 between Meiteis and Kuki-Zo groups was partly fuelled by fears of migration from Myanmar. In February 2024 the Centre announced that it would scrap the Free Movement Regime and fence the 1,643-km border, opposed by Mizoram and Nagaland because it divides kin communities. Rohingya arrivals after 2017 add a humanitarian and security dimension. Along the India-Bangladesh border, historical migration shapes the NRC debate in Assam. The 2015 Land Boundary Agreement (100th Amendment) exchanged 111 Indian and 51 Bangladeshi enclaves, but BSF firing incidents, the unresolved Teesta water-sharing agreement and climate displacement from low-lying deltas persist. Relations worsened after Sheikh Hasina's ouster in August 2024, with disputes over fencing, India's withdrawal of the transshipment facility in April 2025 and "push-backs" of alleged illegal migrants, and they remain in flux after the BNP won the February 2026 elections.

How this answer will be evaluated

What earns full marks: Comprehensive, well-structured, and analytically deep with specific examples and theoretical grounding.

Evaluation rubric

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

  1. (a) Contextualize the quote and provide a balanced judgment on Non-Alignment as a rational strategy. 20 marks

    comment— context → arguments both sides → judgment → close

    Must cover

    • Define Non-Alignment in the context of the Cold War
    • Explain the 'materially weak' constraint (economic/military)
    • Analyze the 'bipolar distribution' of global power
    • Provide a final judgment on the validity of the quote

    Loses marks

    • Treating Non-Alignment as mere 'neutrality' or 'passivity'
    • Ignoring the 'bipolar' context of the Cold War
    • Failing to provide a clear judgment on the quote

    Earns more

    • Mention the 'Third World' or 'Group of 77' as a platform
    • Reference the Bandung Conference or NAM founding
    • Contrast with 'Bandwagoning' or 'Hedging' strategies
    • Mention the 'Panchsheel' agreement as a strategic tool

    Extra mark

    • Cite Srinath Raghavan's War and Peace in Modern India (2010)
    • Reference a specific event like the 1962 Sino-Indian War
  2. (b) Identify and analyze the specific geo-strategic points of contention between India and China. 15 marks

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

    Must cover

    • Identify the LAC (Line of Actual Control) as a primary point
    • Discuss the 'String of Pearls' or 'Malacca Dilemma'
    • Analyze the 'Act East' vs 'Belt and Road' initiatives
    • Mention Tibet and the Himalayan boundary

    Loses marks

    • Focusing only on trade without geo-strategic context
    • Ignoring the 'String of Pearls' or 'Malacca Dilemma'
    • Failing to link points to specific geo-strategic locations

    Earns more

    • Reference the 2020 Galwan Valley clash
    • Mention Belt and Road debt concerns (e.g., Hambantota)
    • Discuss the 'Act East' policy as a counter-strategy
    • Mention water security over the Brahmaputra

    Extra mark

    • Cite the border peace agreements of 1993/1996 or the October 2024 patrolling agreement
    • Reference a specific port like 'Gwadar' or 'Hambantota'
  3. (c) Analyze the ethnic conflicts and cross-border migrations along the India-Myanmar and India-Bangladesh borders. 15 marks

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

    Must cover

    • Identify specific ethnic groups (e.g., Chakma, Rohingya, Mizo)
    • Explain the causes of cross-border migration (conflict, persecution)
    • Analyze the impact on India's internal security
    • Link to border management and India's Act East policy

    Loses marks

    • Focusing only on migration without ethnic conflict context
    • Ignoring border management and the Free Movement Regime
    • Failing to link ethnic groups to specific border regions

    Earns more

    • Reference the Rohingya crisis after 2017
    • Mention the 'Chakma' or 'Mizo' ethnic groups
    • Mention the Free Movement Regime and border fencing
    • Reference the '1971 Bangladesh Liberation War'

    Extra mark

    • Cite a specific treaty or agreement like the '1972 India-Bangladesh Treaty'
    • Reference a specific organization like 'UNHCR' or 'ICRC'
What "Comment" is asking you to do

Take a position on the statement and support it. Comment usually attaches to a quoted line in the short slots, so the reasoning must be compressed — an opening view, a few load-bearing reasons, and the limit of the claim.

Structure that answers it

Unpack what the statement asserts → your stance → two or three supporting reasons → the qualification that limits it

Where marks are lost

Neutral summary; a comment without a stance has not answered. Equally costly is accepting the quoted line wholesale and never testing where it fails.

All UPSC directive words, compared →

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 Political Science & IR 2021 Paper II

Write this answer and get it marked in about 20 seconds

Free account: 5 AI evaluations a month, marked against the rubric above.

Start free

Already have an account? Log in