PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · India & the Global Centres of Power — Part 1
Discuss the significance of Indo-US strategic partnership and its implications for India’s security and national defence.
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
nn Eee Intro Rk! estrangement to entente (Hagerty) — close in practice, no treaty
Body flow
routes obligation > autonomy kept, defence stays India’s own responsibility R2 what changed is Indian military capability, not American obligation sO measure the partnership in capability, not guarantees
Counter-view
Body flow foundational architecture mapped one-to-one (GSOMIA information security — LEMOA logistics – COMCASA secure communication — BECA geospatial data, navigation, precision targeting) – Major Defence Partner 2016 + STA-1 2018, technology release eased — western Indian Ocean cooperation vs Gwadar and Djibouti — the sharper question: capability or only inventory — Panetta 2012, move beyond buyer-seller — October 2025 ten-year Framework as the formal answer: co-production in surveillance, undersea domain awareness, munitions; India as regional maintenance hub
Conclusion routes
Counter- Pant and Mishra: pressure to buy may pull it back into the buyer-seller view — pattern rejected in 2015 > Pant and Bommakanti: 2026 NDS names India nowhere, silent on the Quad as security provider — commitment cannot be assumed Conclusion R1 deterrence raised, not underwritten — value equals what India routes absorbs and builds R2 Staniland: hard-pressed power → the binding limit sits in Indian capacity, not in American intent
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
