PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · Recent Developments in Foreign Policy — Part 1
Would you agree with the contention that India’s inclination to lean on a ‘more aggressive hyper-realist posture’ has gained a new momentum in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terrorist strike? Comment.
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
FLUW ONFFOMU! — now tne answer moves R1 “hyper-realist” = Bajpai’s strand > security from military strength / use of force, not institutions — Pahalgam + Sindoor gave it clearest momentum in declared posture R2 Pahalgam strike — Sindoor + “new normal” — force-first signalling – does the hyper-realist strand now have fresh momentum?
Body flow
Modi'’s “new normal” (retaliate on own terms / no nuclear blackmail / no terrorist-sponsor distinction) > strikes deep in Punjab + IWT in abeyance > Tarapore: restraint > cost- imposition (degrade, not just threaten) + Jacob: doctrinal innovation, terror strike = act of war, calls nuclear bluff
Counter-view
momentum in posture, not settled doctrine – Awasthi: “half- completed revolution,’ no codification + force stayed calibrated — strategic autonomy held (resisted mediation)
Conclusion routes
R1 real momentum, but firmer realism within calibrated routes _;; tradition + not wholesale conversion R2 hyperrealism ascendant in rhetoric + cost-imposition — yet bounded by calibration + autonomy — deepening, not displacement
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
