PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · India & the Nuclear Question
Critically analyze India’s 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
R1 two goals held at once: security + universal disarmament → strategic ambiguity (Pant) k2 2003 doctrine institutionalises the restraint-deterrence balance → NFU + credible minimum deterrence
Body flow
strategic ambiguity (Pant) ~ 2003 doctrine (CMD + NFU/CBW caveat + assured retaliation + civilian NCA) → strengths (responsible image, cost discipline, de-mated posture) — internal fault-line: “minimum” vs “massive” > Karnad (retaliation neither proportionate nor deliverable) + Narang (neither credible vs China nor minimal vs Pakistan) → recent shifts: Agni-V MIRV 2024 + canisterised /mated missiles → flexible, counterforce-ready deterrence → China ~600 vs India ~180 (SIPRI 2025) → “minimum” strained
Counter-view
restraint case (responsible image, cost discipline, de-mated posture, no arms race) vs credibility critique (minimum-massive incompatibility, modernising China + Pakistan's tactical weapons, drift toward counterforce)
Conclusion routes
R1 distinctive place: outside NPT/CTBT (discriminatory) yet inside the non-proliferation norm k2 pragmatic and restrained, tensions unresolved — periodic review + clearer operational definitions
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
