PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · India & the Global Centres of Power — Part 1
The natural behaviour of India and the United States is likely to serve each other’s interests. Hence, a deliberate strategy of dovetailing their efforts will obviously benefit both. Elaborate.
How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
OOO Ee eee Intro RI – Nehru, 1949, natural allies > fifty years of distance > Kux,
Body flow
routes estranged democracies → shared democracy settled nothing R2 naturalness is structural, not sentimental — structure changed, behaviour converged — dovetailing pays as far as structure holds
Counter-view
Body flow China's rise is the structure — Varshney’s new triangle, first courts the third — India’s security search + America’s balance search overlap needs no planning > Menon, unstated but China-driven > deliberate effort converts overlap into capability — 1990s dovetailing with engagement and enlargement — Act East + rebalance on one line — Major Defence Partner, foundational agreements, iCET, F414 → defence trade under $ibn (2008) to over $25bn (mid-2025)
Conclusion routes
Counter- the certainty overreaches — Hagerty, ally’s treatment without view alliance > complications over China avoided > neo-nonalignment as default Himalayan doubt — S-400, tariffs, visas Conclusion R1 pays where practical: technology, maritime security, supply chains routes _, weakens where continental threats meet global priorities R2 Pant, key partner at a principled distance — entente, not alliance, is the form that fits
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
