Paper II — Q1
Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative…
Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics. (10 marks) (b) Explain the central tenets of the World-Systems Theory. (10 marks) (c) The expansionist tendencies of the current Russian regime indicate its intentions for the realisation of a Greater Russia on the lines of the Soviet era. Comment. (10 marks) (d) Explain the various facets of the idealist approach to the study of international relations. Comment on its contemporary relevance. (10 marks) (e) The changing global order and ongoing regional conflicts, with the global powers taking sides, have jeopardised the progress made towards disarmament in the past. Comment. (10 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए : (a) तुलनात्मक राजनीति के अध्ययन के व्याख्यात्मक दृष्टिकोण की चर्चा कीजिए। (10 अंक) (b) विश्व-व्यवस्था सिद्धांत के केंद्रीय तत्वों की व्याख्या कीजिए। (10 अंक) (c) रूस के वर्तमान शासन की विस्तारवादी प्रवृत्ति उसके सोवियत जमाने जैसा महा रूस बनाने के इरादों का संकेत देती है। टिप्पणी कीजिए। (10 अंक) (d) अंतर्राष्ट्रीय संबंधों के अध्ययन के लिए आदर्शवादी दृष्टिकोण के विभिन्न पहलुओं की व्याख्या कीजिए। इस दृष्टिकोण की समसामयिक प्रासंगिकता पर टिप्पणी कीजिए। (10 अंक) (e) बदलती विश्व व्यवस्था तथा चल रहे क्षेत्रीय संघर्षों ने, साथ ही वैश्विक शक्तियों का इनमें पक्ष लेना, निरस्त्रीकरण के लिए पहले हुई प्रगति को खतरे में डाल दिया है। टिप्पणी कीजिए। (10 अंक)
Directive word: Discuss
This question asks you to discuss. 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 'discuss' in part (a) requires critical examination with multiple perspectives, while parts (b)-(e) demand 'explain' and 'comment'—needing clear exposition with evaluative elements. Allocate approximately 30 words (20% time) per sub-part given equal 10-mark weighting, ensuring each response has a brief definitional opening, 2-3 substantive analytical points, and a concluding synthesis. Prioritize precision over elaboration given the 150-word constraint per part.
Key points expected
- (a) Interpretive approach: Meaning-centric analysis (Geertz's 'thick description'), rejection of positivist causality, emphasis on subjective understanding (Verstehen), interpretivists like Bevir & Rhodes, critique regarding generalizability
- (b) World-Systems Theory: Core-periphery-semiperiphery structure (Wallerstein), capitalist world-economy as unit of analysis, long waves of accumulation, unequal exchange, historical development of modern world-system since 16th century
- (c) Russian expansionism: Annexation of Crimea (2014), Ukraine invasion (2022), 'near abroad' doctrine, comparison with Soviet sphere of influence, Eurasian Economic Union, limitations to Soviet-era restoration thesis
- (d) Idealist approach: Human nature as improvable, international morality and law, collective security (League precedent), democratic peace thesis, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points; contemporary relevance: UN Charter, human rights regimes, R2P, climate governance
- (e) Disarmament reversal: New START tensions, AUKUS nuclear submarine deal, hypersonic weapons race, collapse of INF Treaty, great power rivalry undermining NPT Review Conferences, nuclear modernization programs
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demand-directive understanding | 20% | 10 | Correctly distinguishes 'discuss' (part a) requiring balanced argumentation from 'explain' (parts b, d) and 'comment' (parts c, e) requiring evaluative judgment; for (a) presents multiple interpretive perspectives with critique, for (c) and (e) offers reasoned assessment rather than mere description | Treats all directives similarly with descriptive coverage; some attempt at evaluation in comment-based parts but lacks clear thesis or balanced argumentation in discuss/explain components | Misreads directives—provides pure description where evaluation needed, or offers opinion without substantiation; confuses 'interpretive approach' with 'interpretivism' in IR rather than comparative politics |
| Content depth & accuracy | 20% | 10 | Demonstrates accurate command of Wallerstein's world-systems mechanics, precise differentiation of Russian neo-imperialism from Soviet ideology, correct identification of idealist tenets (Wilson, Angell), and specific disarmament treaty references (INF, New START, NPT) | Generally accurate content with minor errors—e.g., conflates world-systems with dependency theory, oversimplifies Russian motivations as purely ideological, or lists idealist features without theoretical grounding | Significant factual errors—attributes world-systems to Waltz or Huntington, misidentifies interpretive approach as quantitative methodology, confuses idealism with liberal institutionalism, or makes anachronistic disarmament claims |
| Structure & flow | 20% | 10 | Each 150-word segment follows micro-structure: definitional anchor → 2-3 analytical nodes → synthesizing conclusion; clear visual/paragraph separation between (a)-(e); logical progression within each part without fragmentation | Identifiable structure per sub-part but uneven—some parts lack conclusion, others over-extend introduction; transitions between sub-parts may be abrupt; occasional word count imbalance favoring certain parts | Undifferentiated text stream or poorly demarcated parts; rambling structure with no clear entry/exit points per sub-question; severe word misallocation (e.g., 80 words on one part, 20 on another) |
| Examples / case-law / data | 20% | 10 | Specific exemplification: for (a) cites Bevir & Rhodes or Geertz; for (b) references 16th-century Dutch hegemony or 20th-century US hegemony; for (c) names Crimea 2014, Donbas, Syria intervention; for (d) invokes Kellogg-Briand Pact or ICC; for (e) cites specific treaty years and SIPRI data | Some relevant examples but generic—'Cold War' for (c), 'League of Nations' for (d) without specificity; examples mentioned but not integrated analytically; missing contemporary instances for (e) | No concrete examples or factually wrong references; relies on vague assertions ('some countries', 'recent events'); invents non-existent theorists or treaties; anachronistic examples undermining credibility |
| Conclusion & analytical edge | 20% | 10 | Each sub-part concludes with incisive synthesis—(a) assesses interpretivism's contribution to post-positivist turn; (c) offers nuanced judgment on 'Greater Russia' thesis limitations; (e) connects disarmament erosion to multipolarity without deterministic fatalism; demonstrates independent critical voice | Summative conclusions restating main points without advancement; some evaluative attempt in higher-order parts (c, e) but descriptive closure in others; limited evidence of original analytical framing | Absent or tautological conclusions ('thus we see interpretive approach is important'); purely descriptive endings; contradictory final statements; conclusion reveals fundamental misunderstanding of question intent |
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 Political Science & IR 2024 Paper II
- Q1 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the interpretive appr…
- Q2 (a) "Deglobalisation is displacing globalisation." Comment. (20 marks) (b) What are the d…
- Q3 (a) Discuss the major recent social movements related to the physical rights of women in…
- Q4 (a) "The Gramscian theory of hegemony provides many valuable insights into the nature of…