(a) Critically examine the continuity and change in India's Palestine policy in the wake of the ongoing Israel-Hamas War. (20…

(a) Critically examine the continuity and change in India's Palestine policy in the wake of the ongoing Israel-Hamas War. (20 marks) (b) Discuss the implications of the scrapping of the Free Movement Regime with Myanmar by the Indian Government on the complex ethno-political dynamics of the north-eastern region. (15 marks) (c) "India has of late, chosen to debunk non-alignment in its pursuit of multi-alignment." Comment. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) चल रहे इज़राइल-हमास युद्ध के मद्देनज़र भारत की फिलिस्तीन नीति में निरंतरता और परिवर्तन का आलोचनात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) उत्तर-पूर्वी क्षेत्र की जटिल नृजातीय-राजनीतिक गतिशीलता पर भारत सरकार द्वारा म्यांमार के साथ मुक्त आवागमन व्यवस्था (फ्री मूवमेंट रिजीम) को समाप्त करने के आशय पर चर्चा कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) "भारत ने हाल में, बहु-संरेखण की अपनी खोज में गुटनिरपेक्षता को खारिज करने का विकल्प चुना है।" टिप्पणी कीजिए। (15 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Political Science & IR questions

Directive word: Critically examine

This question asks you to critically examine. 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 primary directive is 'critically examine' for part (a), with 'discuss' for (b) and 'comment' for (c). Allocate approximately 40% of word budget to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure as: brief integrated introduction → three distinct sections addressing each sub-part with clear sub-headings → synthesized conclusion that ties India's evolving strategic autonomy across all three domains.

Key points expected

Part (a): Historical continuity in India's Palestine policy from Nehru's recognition of PLO (1974) to full diplomatic relations with Israel (1992), and recent shifts post-October 2023 including abstentions at UNGA and humanitarian aid to Gaza
Part (a): Critical analysis of the tension between de-hyphenation policy and domestic political compulsions, India's vote at UNESCO 2017 vs. 2023-24 positions, and the balancing act between energy security (I2U2) and civilizational solidarity with Arab states
Part (b): Free Movement Regime (FMR) origins under 2014 agreement, its scrapping in 2024, and immediate implications for border management in Manipur-Mizoram sector
Part (b): Complex ethno-political dynamics: impact on Kuki-Zo communities' cross-border kinship networks, potential escalation of Manipur violence, Myanmar refugee influx post-2021 coup, and security concerns regarding insurgent safe havens
Part (c): Conceptual distinction between Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) as institutionalized bloc politics versus 'multi-alignment' or 'strategic autonomy' as issue-based partnerships
Part (c): Evidence of debunking: Quad membership, I2U2, bilateral logistics agreements with US, France, yet simultaneous engagement with Russia (S-400) and Iran (Chabahar), suggesting continuity in principle despite tactical adaptation

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	For (a), distinguishes 'critically examine' from mere description by weighing continuity against change with evidence; for (b), moves beyond listing implications to analyzing causal mechanisms in ethno-political dynamics; for (c), recognizes 'comment' requires balanced judgment on whether multi-alignment constitutes genuine departure or rebranded NAM	Addresses all three directives but treats them descriptively; (a) lists policy shifts without critical weighing, (b) enumerates FMR implications without linking to specific ethnic tensions, (c) describes both concepts without clear evaluative stance	Misidentifies directives—treats 'critically examine' as 'describe', 'discuss' as 'list', and 'comment' as 'explain'; conflates all three parts into undifferentiated narrative on India's foreign policy
Content depth & accuracy	20%	10	Demonstrates command of specific diplomatic milestones: India's 1988 recognition of Palestine state, 2017 Sharm el-Sheikh summit, 2023-24 UN voting record; names FMR's 16 km free movement provision and specific affected tribes (Kuki, Chin, Mizo); accurately cites S. Jaishankar's 'India-Russia relationship has worked to our advantage' and 'multi-alignment' formulation	Covers major policy shifts with approximate dates; mentions FMR scrapping and general border tensions; describes multi-alignment without specific ministerial statements or concrete policy examples beyond Quad	Factual errors: confuses India's Israel recognition timeline, misidentifies FMR as visa-free regime for all citizens rather than border residents, or claims India has formally exited NAM; relies on outdated 2014-2016 policy positions
Structure & flow	20%	10	Clear tripartite structure with explicit sub-headings; seamless transitions between parts via thematic linkage (e.g., from Palestine policy's pragmatic realism to FMR's security-first approach to multi-alignment's strategic calculus); integrated conclusion synthesizing India's evolving approach to sovereignty, security, and solidarity	Three identifiable sections but abrupt transitions; conclusion merely summarizes three parts without synthesis; some imbalance in length (e.g., excessive detail on Israel-Palestine history at expense of FMR analysis)	No structural demarcation between parts; stream-of-consciousness narrative mixing all three topics; missing introduction or conclusion; significant word imbalance (e.g., 70% on part (a), perfunctory treatment of (b) and (c))
Examples / case-law / data	20%	10	Rich empirical grounding: UNGA Resolution ES-10/21 (2023) and India's abstention explanation; specific FMR provisions (16 km border zone, 72-hour stay); quantitative data on Myanmar refugees in Mizoram (est. 40,000+ post-coup); cites specific agreements (LEMOA 2016, COMCASA 2018, BECA 2020) as multi-alignment evidence; references Manipur violence statistics (May 2023 onwards)	Some concrete examples: mentions UN abstention without resolution number, general reference to Myanmar refugees without figures, lists Quad without bilateral enabling agreements; no specific data on north-eastern ethnic composition or border length	Vague generalizations ('India supports Palestine', 'border tensions exist', 'India has many friends'); no specific dates, agreements, or data; relies on common knowledge without precision; confuses Myanmar with other neighbors
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	10	Synthesizes three strands into coherent thesis: India's 'principled pragmatism' where solidarity rhetoric meets security imperatives; offers nuanced judgment that multi-alignment is NAM's functional successor adapted for multipolarity, not its negation; anticipates future challenges (Gaza reconstruction role, refugee crisis management, US-China rivalry pressures) with policy recommendations	Restates main points in conclusion without advancing argument; offers either/or judgment on non-alignment (either fully abandoned or unchanged) without nuance; no forward-looking element or policy prescription	Missing conclusion or purely perfunctory ending ('thus we have seen...'); no analytical integration between parts; contradictory judgments across sub-parts without acknowledgment; purely descriptive closing without evaluative stance

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 →