This is question set #17 of ‘ClearIAS UPSC CSE 2016 Mains 30-day Answer Writing Program (AWP)’. AWP is a UPSC mains oriented program from ClearIAS.com that consists of 5 questions in each post, published (around 8 pm) every day. Each of the 5 questions are selected from 5 papers mentioned in UPSC Mains syllabus namely Essay, GS1, GS2, GS3 and GS4 (ethics). Browse archives here.
Questions for Answer Writing – Selections for today:
- Essay Paper: India – a nation of nations. (1000-1200 words – 125 marks)
- GS 1 Paper: Anti-caste struggle in India had many things in common with the US civil rights movement. Compare and discuss the activities of Ambedkar and Dr Martin Luther King. (200 words – 12.5 marks)
- GS 2 Paper: BRICS 2016 Summit was actually a huge success for India, despite China’s machinations. Comment. (200 words – 12.5 marks)
- GS 3 Paper: India is not threatened as much by a foreign power than it is by internal threats. Critically analyse. (200 words – 12.5 marks)
- GS 4 Paper: Can a thing which is moral be unethical? Discuss. (150 words – 10 marks)
Marking Scheme
We have revised our marking scheme for our model tests, taking into account the latest trends in UPSC evaluation. Always keep in mind that content of the answer is more important than its length. Credit will be given to the grasp of the question, to the point answer, brevity, knowledge, clarity of expression etc.
Considering that toppers score 380-420 marks in GS papers out of 1000, we consider 40% marks for any answer as ‘above average’. The GS marks of AIR1 for last 3 years is: Gaurav Agrawal (2013) -338/1000; Ira Singhal (2014) – 455/1000; Tina Dabi (2015) – 424/1000. Please have a look at our marking scheme for the 30-day AWP for 2016 Mains.
- 0-19% – Not satisfactory.
- 20%-29% – Needs improvement.
- 30%-39% – Good answer.
- 40%-49% – Above Average Answer.
- 50%-59% – Excellent Answer.
- 60% and above – Exceptional Answer.
Note: Aspirants can select any question they wish to answer in the comment space provided below specifying the question. Please write the question first before you start answering, so that it would be easy for us and other readers. Though we encourage to type answers for better readability, if you prefer the ‘pen and paper way’ you need to scan your answers and upload it in a Google drive and share the link via comments. Please upload only one link (one answer) in one comment space. All the best!
rahul says
October 18, 2016 at 12:10 amQuestion:India is not threatened as much by a foreign power than it is by internal threats. Critically analyse.
Answer:
As former National security advisor said biggest concern for india is not on borders but inside indian territory.Days in 1960s or 1970s are gone when india’s border were threatened by neighboures.But now indias armed forces with nuclear arsenal are capable of thwarting any external threat.
however india’s internal problem are very much complex and integrated with diversify nature.
1)Naxalism : biggest internal threat.Red corridor spanning 11 states is still a unsolved issue for enforcement agencies
2)Insurgency : in North-eastern states and kashmir . Violent attack on security forces and then hide along borders is their tactics.
3)Communal riots : between Dalit’s and upper casts or between different religions causing enormous damage to property and human lives
4)cyber threat : attack on important sites,hacking into personal and banking accounts,
5)Regionalism : Directly threatens unity and integrity of india .Hate towards people of other regions and demanding son of soil theory
We need dedicated and specially trained security forces to tackle these
problems.Because we cannot rely on local police which are not specialist and focussed on filing and enquiring cases. It needed radical overhaul of police system by taking states into confidence.cuber security and safety of nationally important installations will be utmost priority.
ClearIAS.com says
October 18, 2016 at 2:20 pmGood attempt. Just mention foreign threats too for comparison. Avoid grammar/spelling mistakes. Give examples.
Marks: 35%
James says
October 20, 2016 at 4:27 pmClearIAS I think you unwittingly forgot to review other participants answer also which needs your review.
SUSANTA BARMAN says
October 18, 2016 at 10:00 am1. ESSAY: INDIA – A NATION OF NATIONS
1. Essay: India is a nation of nations
India, though a well-marked distinct unit unit geographically, is in size and dimensions is more like a continent than like a country . It is as large a Europe without Russia and about twenty times the area of Great Britain. In its vastness are found such varied physical features and social conditions as India has aptly been described as the epitome of the world. But there is a controversy about whether India may be called a nation or not. Before that, we should look to the The dictionary definition of Nation that says that A group of people who share the same culture, ethnicity and language, often possessing or seeking its own independent government. When one looks at this definition and then re-thinks about it for the Indian prospective, The first thing that come to the mind is either there is something remarkably wrong with the definition, as India has is a combination of a plethora of cultures, ethnicities and languages or hence is a complete misfit for being termed as a Nation or there is something wrong in the way with the way the world understand what a Nation is.
Basically the whole concept of nation is an imaginary concept. It’s never possible that people will be influenced by the same likes of culture or ethnicity. A human mind tends to deviate from what normal around it to explore new things, when a group of people live together by the will or by virtue its called a society. Each member of the society is unique, He might not be there purely because of his will to be there, But might be compelled to be there because of various factors. This might be financial, Social, And Family or lack of other options. We cannot interpret that the individuals staying in the society are part of the culture or adhere to the same ethnicity. The chances of them being there by choice is as good as for them being there by choice.
Now taking the concept of a society to a broader target, it gives us a few foundation pillars towards the concept of a Nation. Although people might be a part of it, but it’s not necessary they want to be there. They mostly are there, because either the decision to be there was taken on their behalf by their Elders (in case of a partition or plebiscite), by their Leaders (Again a leader is not one which represents everyone but a majority) or they belonged to the land from birth.
The concept of Nations is elaborated as expressed more much more complex than it was ever thought to be. As put in new literature by many writers, Nations is an imaginary concept and hence should be distinguished in the way they are imagined.
The fact is, the concept of a nation is more of an idea; it’s an idea of people from a common culture and values, their desire and will towards freedom. We had been reading from the text books for ages that Unity in Diversity is what India stands for as a nation. But the whole idea of India as a nation is been criticized much because of its failure to become a single unified Nation state in the likes of Germany (after the East Germany and West Germany) and Japan. One can also claim that India has done much better in terms of keeping the minor states together, unlike the rest of Europe or the far gone USSR which are now divided into various small states. The Indian nation reflects the counter of the Europe small countries that were homogeneous when considered in terms of population and culture, England, Germany and France to name a few. Even Islamic nations like Iran, Iraq or Saudi Arabia were let down when it came to a concept of Nations and ended up in military dictatorship or medieval style monarchies.
India as a Nation:
The nation state idea never worked for India, because of it size and diversity. For others like Europe, they had to work hard to suppress their divisions and prejudice the idea of nationhood. India also fails to stand as a nation unlike other Nations because India set out for a democratic model, whereas the other nations were on imperialistic rule and not an integrated culture encompassing the subcontinent.
Diversity in India adds to the failure of idea of the Indian Nation:
India with it diversity has failed as a nation right from the formation of India as an independent country. Firstly the formation of the Islamic nation of Pakistan, Then the Issue of Kashmir, The North-East, The khalistan Movement, The recent show downs from Telangana, Gorkhanland etc. India had been suffering at the hands of the minor states, and in order to maintain a nationwide feel, has been dealing with them by avoiding the issue till the very last stage when any further push will result in a crack in the complete National structure and then bending down to the demands. Not to mention after a heavy disrupt and unnecessary bloodshed.
The idea of the Nation of India chronologically speaking has never been a single State. History has its records that all those who tried to keep India as unified states failed in their endeavours weather it may be the King Ashoka or Alexander. What these great rulers identified in this land was that the diversity of its origin and existence is not only trivial to capture but to keep united in public interest is a herculean task. Yet, India emerged as a golden bird in the early 16th Century and attracted a lot of unwanted attention from other Nations. The British came to India for trade and sighted an opportunity to take charge as the nation was spread in forms of small princely states rather than as a Nation. It took our leader decades in the struggle for freedom, And the first thing that was set to harbinger the lack of National interests post independence was the partition of Pakistan and the formation of East and West Pakistan. The Indian political leaders had sleepless nights trying to put a map in place for the unified princely states in India. It was for the United National Congress will that they 562 princely states became a part of India. But not all the states were happy for this, As a result of this political decision, there were riots between Hindus and Sikhs and Hindus and Muslims. The demand for Hindu State from the Hindu Mahasabha, The demand for Sikh State in Punjab, The Dravidians in South India, The Tamil State and the issue with Hyderabad and Kashmir who cited independence. The anti Tamil riots in Karnataka in 1991, the attacks which mainly took place in Bangalore and Mysore was to show the disrespect against the orders of the Cauvery Water Tribunal appointed by the Government of India. Again a matter where Region over Nation.
The various other cited examples include The attack on North Indians in Maharashtra and the referring on Bihari’s as outsiders in Delhi by the Chief Minister of Delhi are clear depictions that the integrity is more towards regions rather than nations.
The Failure of the State:
The idea of India as a nation is clashes with the regional identity, Any political demand for statehood, or sub-statehood, when demonstrates identifiable support from masses clearly state the lack of Indian nationalism. The emergence of the various ethnic nations in India e.g. Bengali, Sikh, Gujarati, Manipuri, or Tamil have taken shape and protect their ideology with stronger support for their regions rather than the nation. The support is derived from the followers who put their region first to their Nation. And for them being a part of India is just a mere way of recognition till the point they get a identity of their own. The regional and sub regional accommodation of identity in India have served to weaken the bases of political secessionism and secessionism and separatism while not defeating the principle of internal self determination of nation.
The existence of India as a nation in itself a myth, If given a chance, there will be a handful who will not be willing to have a state or sub state like the Europe or former USSR. Europe failed through history in uniting as a subcontinent, though some attempts in this direction were made (for example, Napoleon). The only country of comparable size that has better succeeded than India through history in maintaining its unity as a country is China. But even China never had so much diversity as India.
But still India is better off from the modern Europe with their nationalistic phase, when every Indian state will start functioning as different countries or starts regarding them as different nations all together. Hopefully Indian political will would keep the Indian national interest at priority for a more stable time to come and help India avoid the European nationalistic phase and the very essence “unity in diversity ” so far emphasized by us , would be able to maintain the unity and integrity of our country.
Rajeshwari says
October 18, 2016 at 2:28 pmIndia as nation of nations is it a proud thing as it can hold together so diverse entities as a single nation or is it a criticism for not being a nation of unique culture? I think in this essay criticism is more than appreciation
Rajeshwari says
October 18, 2016 at 2:32 pmVery good essay with so much diverse and inclusive ideas
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 5:30 pmVery well written essay. Maybe improve the conclusion a little bit to take a more holistic approach. But it covers the points well.
Please review my answers too.
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 3:30 pm3. BRICS 2016 Summit was actually a huge success for India, despite China’s machinations.
BRICS 2016 for India was essentially a chance to establish consensus against Pakistan on cross-border terrorism, and seek unequivocal acknowledgement of role of Pakistan as a state sponsoring terrorism. To an extent India succeeded:
1. The statement denouncing TERRORISM signed jointly by BRICS heads recognised urgency to identify and fight terrorism
2. The outreach to BIMSTEC helped India establish her role as the leading power in south-east Asia, and provided credence to Act East Policy.
3. BRICS summit helped consolidate India’s role as one of the EMERGING GLOBAL POWERS, outside of just our neighborhood.
4. Helped solidify relations with RUSSIA, which at one point seemed to be giving way to greater Russia-Pakistan collaboration.
However, the BRICS summit was not an unqualified triumph, for the following reasons:
1. CHINA’s statement acknowledging sacrifices made by Islamabad, and its opposition to harsher language against Pakistan, diluted India’s strong claims.
2. INCONCLUSIVE NATURE of joint text stopped short of explicitly denouncing Paksitan-backed cross border terrorism
3. The terrorist units cited in the text are stronger on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, and as such do not impact India directly
4. Lack of emphasis on ECONOMICS meant that the sole purpose of BRICS was overshadowed by a single-point agenda
Considering one of our main goals from the BRICS Summit was to elicit denouncement of Pakistan-backed cross-border terrorism, the summit can be called a QUALIFIED SUCCESS.
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 3:35 pm4. India is not threatened as much by a foreign power than it is by internal threats. Critically analyse.
As one of the largest powers in the south Asia region, India faces many external threats from neighboring countries. India also faces internal threats by virtue of being a developing, democratic nation.
EXTERNAL THREATS
1. PAKISTAN has been an external threat for almost 70 years, and with increasing inflammatory rhetoric and rise in cross-border incursions, is one of the biggest threats today.
2. BANGLADESH is a relatively friendly nation, but the immigration of refugees makes it a demographic threat to India’s interests.
3. CHINA today remains primarily an economic threat, and with its String of Pearls policy could encircle and threaten India’s economic interests
However, the following internal threats are more pervasive, constant and capable of long-term damage:
1. KASHMIR CRISIS, which has seen over 100 days of unrest, could become a security threat for the nation
2. NAXALISM is a homegrown threat, creating a vast law and order problem in the resource-rich RED CORRIDOR
3. COMMUNALISM – The increasing communal undertones developing over issues such as the beef ban and the Uniform Civil Code could cause irrevocable damage to the secular nature of India.
4. NORTHEAST INSURGENCY is hampering development in one of India’s least developed regions.
5. ECONOMIC THREATS include poverty, unemployment and the responsibility to care for a burgeoning demographic dividend.
While the external threats occupy a greater place in the media and in the common man’s mind, the internal threats are more insidious, and must be taken care of quickly.
Diana J says
October 18, 2016 at 5:28 pmCan a thing which is moral be unethical??
ITS not a coincidence that highly moralistic individuals often behave unethically.Morality is an activity which is voluntary according to one’s own conscience for which men are praised or blamed,rewarded or punished, whereas ethics are some of these morals approved by the society or any group in a given time.
History defines great leaders not because they were ethical but largely in terms of their ability guided by their strong morals to bring about changes for better or worse.Peeking into the past most of the powerful leaders were considered unethical by their society,but that does not deny them being moral to themselves.
Hitler,Napolean and others on the line believed that their respective actions were morally justified for no one knowingly does wrong according to great philosophers like Socrates and Spinoza.Not only about these violent men but also it stands validated even in the case of powerful leaders who chose ahimsa as their way of life.
Ethics tend to change over a period of time.There was a time in history when evil practices like Sati,child marriage were treated as ethical but considered immoral by reformist individuals.There was a time when women education and widow remarriage were deemed to be unethical.There were also times when women were declared unfit to accomplish anything outside home but they have come out of their ethical barriers to stand out for their moral cause.
Although morality being the basis of ethics,it does not go hand in hand.Possibly ethics lags behind morality with time but both evolves with time and space.An act or idea unethical in a particular place could be treated as ethical somewhere else.
There cannot be an end in this conflict between morality and ethics.From public issues like war,human rights,monogomy to personal issues such as suicide everybody has their own moral ideas independent of the societal ethics,standing up for them differentiates men.For instance,loving a married person sounds unethical but it could be absolutely moral to oneself.
Unfortunately,morality is mistaken for something always seemingly good,it could be otherwise as well.Thus arises one more question,does ethical behaviour makes a person effective??
Thanks & Regards,
Kindly Review
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 5:32 pmExcellent answer. Although are you sure you want to be ending it on a question?
Please review mine too. Thanks.
Diana J says
October 18, 2016 at 6:42 pmHaha,you see in certain places u can apply ur own style.whether it works or not who knows,but better let flow ur creativity,always dont have to be stuck with traditions.
Dude,i dont wish to review answers which i dont attempt simply to avoid making sweeping statements.
Ur doing really well.keep it up
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 7:17 pmHaha that’s very true. You write well, might as well add a little bit of flourish.
That’s fair. I only ask because you seem to have a good handle on answer-writing. Thanks though.
James says
October 18, 2016 at 6:00 pmIts my humble request to ClearIAS to review my answer and suggest reforms so that I could able to know my mistakes so that I could able remove them in my next answer I also request ClearIAS to award me marks . Please! – James
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 6:04 pmI second that.
James says
October 18, 2016 at 7:21 pmAyush I requesting you to please review my answer-James
James says
October 18, 2016 at 7:03 pmBRICS 2016 Summit was actually a huge success for India, despite China’s machinations. Comment.(200 ) BRICS (Brazil,Russia,India,China and South Africa) is a Group of top 5 emergent economies of the world. BRICS found its genesis in 2006. The first session of BRICS is held in Russia in 2009. The 2016 summit of the BRICS is held in Goa, India on 15 October. This summit of the BRICS found very landmark in its history. The main topic of the BRICS this time is cross border terriosm. Every memeber of the BRICS signed on cross border terriosm. PM Modi in its speech in BRICS said that those who nurture, support,provides shelter to terrorists are the more serious threats than terriorits. China is continously using his veto in UN Security protecting Terriorist Masood Azar from declaring international terriorist. China is supporting Pakistan mainly due to its economic interest in it as he was also developing China Pakistan economic corridor there. the 2016 summit of BRICS bring huge success to India. India uses BRICS as platform and signed with Russia many defence, technological and economic deals. The major three defence deal are- India will get 5 triumf missile systems, 4 stealth frigates and a joint venture of Indian Company HAL and Russian Company Rostec State Corporationwhich will manufacture 200 Kamov helicopters in India promoting the policiy of Make in India of PM Modi. PM Modi also said without naming the country that there is only one neighbouring country who is supporting and providing shield to the terriosts using its powers. And there is also a news that China is adopting a polite attitude towards India in its membership in NSG and on the question on Masood Azar. Overall, this year BRICS Summit proved very benefitial to India despite China’s Machinations. India is getting triumf missile systems, stealth frigades and kamov helicopters from India, BRICS summit also shown the China’s weekening position in the global in the world and also shows the emergence of India as super power. In this summit we had notice the China’s polite attitude towards India in the question of its membership which is a good indicator for India. Hence, this year the summit proved a huge success for India
Ayush Kumar says
October 18, 2016 at 7:29 pmJames, you didn’t actually answer the question. The question was more about the specific impact of the BRICS Summit. Maybe focus more on directly answering the question instead of giving a lot of information that doesn’t directly relate to the question.
James says
October 18, 2016 at 8:42 pmAyush, Thankyou for your review. Please suggest some reforms in my answer so that it become actually to the point.
James says
October 18, 2016 at 7:14 pmPlease! ClearIAS I request you to review my answer at least once and suggest reforms in my answer. It’s my also a request to award me marks for my answer. Atleast one time review my answer. It’s my very humble request to you. Please! don’tignore my ccomment. Please! – James
ClearIAS.com says
October 18, 2016 at 8:26 pm@James – don’t worry. We are a little time-crunched but we will be reviewing answers of all participants. We just want serious and self-motivated aspirants to keep writing their original answers.
DK says
October 18, 2016 at 8:46 pm2-GS 1 Paper: Anti-caste struggle in India had many things in common with the US civil rights movement. Compare and discuss the activities of Ambedkar and Dr Martin Luther King. (200 words – 12.5 marks)
Ans- Cateism and racial discrimination are the two most prominent causes of internal conflicts which many countries have encountered and is still prevalent in some countries
India’s anti caste movement was for the demand of equality, justice and legal protection against discrimination quite similar to America’s civil rights movements. America’s civil rights movements was characterised by non-violent protest, civil disobedience which was again quite similar to the anti-caste movements in India
Both Ambedkar and Martin Luther made significant impact respectively in India and America. Our PM Modi also pointed out the similarities in Ambedkar and Luther recently.
Both were modern reformist who had the courage to fight against unjustified orthodox practices and beliefs. Both undertook major steps in this direction be it Luther’s march on Washington for jobs and freedom or Ambedkar’s Satyagraha in Mahad to draw water from the main water tank. Both focused on achieving their objectives through legal framework.
Ambedkar and Luther showed the world that how a single man can make a significant impact in the society provided he must have utter determination and will to power
James says
October 19, 2016 at 7:50 pmClearias Please also review the answers of this set-James
manoj says
October 19, 2016 at 8:32 pmQ5.Can a thing which is moral be unethical? Discuss. (150 words – 10 marks).
Ans.Morality or moral decisions are related to individual personal beliefs which help in determining right and wrong.On the other hand ethics are standards or principles determined by society ,social groups,religion and profession which help in determining right and wrong.Sun total of morality leads to emergence of ethical guidelines.There are chances when individual befies are not matching with collective beliefs or standards.For instance-a doctor have personal belief that he should not treat any unwanted element of society.But if any criminal brought to doctor by police for treatment his professional ethics force him to treat.Hence a moral thing can be unethical and viceversa.
James says
October 20, 2016 at 7:25 pmClearIAS review the answers of this question set.