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

Route 1 “hyper-realist” = Bajpai’s strand security from military strength / use of force, not institutions Pahalgam + Sindoor gave it clearest momentum in declared posture

Route 2 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

Route 1 real momentum, but firmer realism within calibrated tradition not wholesale conversion

Route 2 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.

Handwritten model answer — UPSC PSIR 2025, Recent Developments in Foreign Policy — Part 1