PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · India & the Nuclear Question
Given the recent developments in the region, do you think that there is a need to change India’s ‘No First Use (NFU) nuclear policy?
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
rR! locate NFU (1998 → 2003 doctrine, CBW caveat) → credible minimum deterrence – is it now a liability? R2 region shifted (Pak tactical, China rise) – pressures real — stake the spine: capability, not first-use posture
Body flow
case for revision: China ~500 warheads erode Himalayan buffer + Pak sub-conventional / Nasr > Karnad “unenforceable,” peacetime-only + Chari frees Pak’s tactical use > Clary & Narang counterforce logic + exceptions to NFU → capabilities present (missiles, surveillance, BMD) but disarming strike “exceptionally difficult” → intent outpaces capability
Counter-view
retention holds: Sethi “liberating” (no first-use infra, no hair- trigger) » Subrahmanyam perception of survivable retaliation, not pre-emption → Basrur deployment differs little beyond declaratory policy
Conclusion routes
rR! Sindoor 2025 = punish terror without nuclear signalling → read as gradual recalibration + doctrinal ambiguity, not reversal R2 NFU suits conventionally dominant power, no existential threat → retain + strengthen triad / early warning / second- strike credibility
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
