(a) Discuss the relevance of the normative ethos of the Non-Aligned Movement in magnifying India's soft power in pursuit of her national interest. 20

(b) In what ways does the functionalist approach in International relations help in maintaining pea

Question

(a) Discuss the relevance of the normative ethos of the Non-Aligned Movement in magnifying India's soft power in pursuit of her national interest. 20

(b) In what ways does the functionalist approach in International relations help in maintaining peace and order in global politics ? 15

(c) How does the regime change and political crisis in Myanmar threaten regional security and peace ? 15

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

The directive 'discuss' requires a balanced, analytical treatment with arguments for and against. For part (a) (20 marks), examine how NAM's normative principles—anti-colonialism, peaceful coexistence, strategic autonomy—enhance India's soft power and serve national interest today. For part (b) (15 marks), explain functionalism's spillover logic, technical cooperation, and neo-functionalism's relevance to institutions like the EU or ASEAN. For part (c) (15 marks), analyse the 2021 coup, refugee flows, insurgent safe havens, and India's Act East policy challenges. Allocate approximately 40% word/time to (a), 30% each to (b) and (c). Structure: integrated introduction → three distinct sections with clear sub-headings → synthesised conclusion on normative vs. functional vs. security dimensions of regional order.
- For (a): NAM's normative ethos—Panchsheel, anti-hegemonism, South-South solidarity—and their contemporary manifestation in India's multi-alignment, vaccine diplomacy, and leadership of Global South forums like G20
- For (a): Critical linkage between soft power (moral authority, cultural appeal, diplomatic credibility) and hard national interest (strategic space, energy security, market access, countering China)
- For (b): Functionalist theory—Mitrany's technical cooperation, spillover effect, depoliticisation—and neo-functionalism (Haas, Schmitter) with application to EU, ASEAN functional agencies, or IAEA technical cooperation
- For (c): Myanmar crisis specifics—February 2021 military coup, State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi's detention, National Unity Government (NUG), escalating civil war, and humanitarian catastrophe
- For (c): Regional security threats—refugee influx into Mizoram/Manipur (over 50,000), drug trafficking (Golden Triangle resurgence), insurgent cross-border operations (NSCN, ULFA), and ASEAN's failed Five-Point Consensus
- Synthesis: tension between normative foreign policy (democratic values, human rights) and functional imperatives (border stability, connectivity projects like Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project)

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	For (a), treats 'discuss' as requiring critical evaluation of NAM's continued relevance, not mere description; for (b), distinguishes between classical functionalism and neo-functionalism while addressing 'in what ways'; for (c), moves beyond narration to analyse causal mechanisms threatening security. Shows awareness that 'discuss' invites argumentation, not assertion.	Addresses all three parts but treats (a) as descriptive history of NAM summits; (b) as list of functionalist features without application; (c) as chronological account of coup without systematic threat analysis. Directive partially understood.	Misreads 'discuss' as 'list' or 'describe'; produces bullet-point summaries without engagement; confuses functionalism with realism or liberal institutionalism; treats Myanmar crisis as isolated event without regional implications.
Content depth & accuracy	20%	10	For (a), cites specific NAM principles (Bandung 1955, Belgrade 1961, Havana 1979) and their contemporary operationalisation; for (b), accurately distinguishes Mitrany's technical functionalism from Haas's political neo-functionalism; for (c), names specific actors (Tatmadaw, SAC, NUG, PDF, Arakan Army) and India's specific concerns (Look/Act East, Kaladan, Sittwe port).	Broadly accurate but generic: NAM mentioned without specific summit references; functionalism described without theoretical lineage; Myanmar actors unnamed or conflated. Some factual errors (e.g., confusing 1962 and 2021 coups).	Significant factual errors: misidentifies NAM founding principles, conflates functionalism with functionalist sociology or systems theory, locates Myanmar in wrong region, or fundamentally misunderstands India's current NAM posture (e.g., claiming full abandonment).
Structure & flow	20%	10	Clear tripartite structure with visible sub-headings or paragraph transitions; integrated introduction establishing thematic link (normative-functional-security nexus); logical progression within each part—(a) from historical ethos to contemporary application, (b) from theory to institutional practice, (c) from domestic crisis to regional spillover; conclusion synthesises across parts.	Three parts addressed sequentially but as disconnected essays; no visible thematic integration; abrupt transitions; some parts disproportionately developed (e.g., excessive NAM history, cursory Myanmar analysis).	No discernible structure; parts merged or omitted; repetitive or circular argumentation; conclusion merely restates points without synthesis; severe imbalance (e.g., 70% on (a), neglect of (c)).
Examples / case-law / data	20%	10	For (a): India's COVID-19 vaccine diplomacy, G20 presidency, ISA/CDRI leadership, or specific NAM statements on Ukraine; for (b): EU Coal and Steel Community spillover, ASEAN+3 functional cooperation, or ILO/ILO technical agencies; for (c): specific refugee figures (Mizoram camps), Kaladan project delays, India's Operation Sunrise, or ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus failure with timeline.	Some examples present but generic or dated: NAM limited to Cold War era; functionalism without institutional illustration; Myanmar without post-2021 specifics. Examples mentioned but not deployed analytically.	Virtually no examples; or irrelevant examples (e.g., NATO for functionalism, NATO for NAM); fabricated data; examples contradict argument (e.g., citing India's NAM withdrawal in 2016, which did not occur).
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	10	Synthesises across three parts: India's NAM-derived soft power faces limits when normative commitments (democracy, human rights) clash with functional imperatives (Myanmar stability, connectivity); offers forward-looking assessment—whether functional cooperation can contain security threats despite normative divergence; may critically evaluate whether NAM ethos remains viable instrument of national interest or requires reconceptualisation.	Separate conclusions for each part without cross-cutting synthesis; or generic conclusion on 'need for cooperation'; no critical self-awareness about tensions between India's normative claims and realist constraints.	No conclusion; or conclusion merely restates question; or conclusion introducing entirely new, unsupported argument; ends with platitude ('peace is good') without analytical engagement with the three substantive issues.

(a) Discuss the relevance of the normative ethos of the Non-Aligned Movement in magnifying India's soft power in pursuit of her…

Directive word: Discuss

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Practice this exact question

More from Political Science & IR 2023 Paper II