Does ethics ban all border roads?

No. It bans thoughtless roads. A needed patrol track with slope science is different from a tourist scar through a core habitat.

Is every war Clausewitzian?

Some violence is criminal or genocidal and should not be laundered as ordinary policy. The quote is a lens, not an excuse.

(a) Carl von Clausewitz once said, "War is a diplomacy by other means."

Revision summary

Open summary Close summary

Clausewitz is right that wars have political aims; he is incomplete because civilians, nuclear weapons and non-state actors change the moral math. Just-war rules and Gandhi’s stress on means still bind a democracy. Border projects pit delay-as-threat against forest, landslide and tribal consent. The ethical path is necessity with least harm, not a fake choice between soldier and tree. Integrity is a file that records both the threat and the ecology.

Model answer

Introduction

Clausewitz wrote that war is the continuation of policy by other means. He was describing Europe’s cabinets. Part (a) asks whether that line still explains today’s wars, and whether it should. Part (b) brings the same tension home: a road or a radar in an ecological border, where security, forest and people do not vote as one.

Body

(a) Clausewitz in contemporary conflict

The insight still holds in one sense: Hamas and Israel, Russia and Ukraine, the Red Sea are not earthquakes. They are political projects that chose force. Diplomacy did not vanish; it failed or was refused, and the gun became the memo.

The critique is ethical and empirical. Nuclear weapons make a “continuation” that can end the continuer. Non-state actors do not sit in Clausewitz’s cabinet. Information war harms civilians without a front. Just war tradition — jus ad bellum (just cause, last resort, right authority) and jus in bello (distinction, proportionality) — says that even a political aim does not wash every means. Gandhi rejected the means-ends split: “They say ‘means are after all means’. I would say ‘means are after all everything’.” A civil servant of a nuclear democracy should hear both: war can be policy, and policy can be a crime if it targets a hospital.

So the statement is analytically useful and morally incomplete. Diplomacy remains the first means; war is the last, and even then law of armed conflict binds.

(b) Environmental clearance in sensitive borders

A highway in Arunachal, a radar in a sanctuary, a hydel dam in a seismic Himalaya: the Ministry of Defence will say delay is a Chinese gift. The forest officer will say a landslide is also a security failure. Tribes will say consent under FRA is not anti-national.

Dilemmas: secrecy versus EIA public hearing; strategic time versus ecological time; national security versus local livelihood; temporary camp versus permanent town. Ethics of prudence (Aristotle) asks for the least harmful adequate project: tunnel over a scarified slope, night-time restriction, no-go core, compensatory that is real. National security is a public good; so is a standing forest that holds a border river. The officer’s integrity is to write both in the file, not to bury the bird survey or to leak the map.

The ethical frame is stewardship plus honest necessity, not “green versus jawan” as a television fight.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  C[Clausewitz: war as policy] --> J[Just war limits]
  B[Border project] --> S[Security]
  B --> E[Ecology FRA]
  S --> F[Reasoned clearance]
  E --> F

Conclusion

War still continues politics, but ethics and nuclear risk refuse a blank cheque to force. In border clearances the same mind must hold security, ecology and consent in one reasoned file.

Quick related

Students also ask

(a) "Those who in trouble untroubled are, Will trouble trouble itself." - Thiruvalluvar. (b) "The greatest discovery of my generation is that a human being can alter his life by altering his attitudes." - William James. (c) "The strength of a society is not in its laws, but in the morality of its people." - Swami Vivekananda.
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q3). View answer →
Does ethics ban all border roads?

No. It bans thoughtless roads. A needed patrol track with slope science is different from a tourist scar through a core habitat.
Is every war Clausewitzian?

Some violence is criminal or genocidal and should not be laundered as ordinary policy. The quote is a lens, not an excuse.

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

More from this paper

Q1 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 10 marks

(a) In the present digital age, social media has revolutionised our way of communication and interaction. However, it has raised several ethical issues and challenges. Describe the key ethical dilemmas in this regard. (b) "Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment but a product of civil education and adherence of the rule of law." Examine the significance of constitutional morality for public servant highlighting the role in promoting good governance and ensuring accountability in public administration.

Ethics in Public Administration

Social media speeds speech and also rumour, hate, privacy harm and blurred official voice. The ethical knots are truth versus virality, privacy versus publicity, and freedom versus incitement. Constitutional morality, as Ambedkar taught, is learned respect for constitutional forms, not a natural feeling. For a civil servant it means equality, dignity, reasoned process and files that can face a court. Good governance and accountability rest on that habit when popular anger or a minister wants a shortcut.

View answer → Download PDF

Q3 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 10 marks

(a) "Those who in trouble untroubled are, Will trouble trouble itself." - Thiruvalluvar. (b) "The greatest discovery of my generation is that a human being can alter his life by altering his attitudes." - William James. (c) "The strength of a society is not in its laws, but in the morality of its people." - Swami Vivekananda.

Attitude

Thiruvalluvar’s line is about equanimity: a calm officer can master a crisis that a panicked one worsens. William James argued that changing attention and attitude can change a life; for an officer that means seva, not cynicism, without blaming the poor. Vivekananda held that a society’s real strength is the people’s morality, not the thickness of the statute book. Laws still matter; they work when character supports them. Together the quotes train inner weather, professional will and social ethics.

View answer → Download PDF

Q4 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 10 marks

(a) "For any kind of social re-engineering by successfully implementing welfare schemes, a civil servant must use reason and critical thinking in an ethical framework." Justify this statement with suitable examples. (b) What are the major teachings of Mahavir? Explain their relevance in the contemporary world.

Ethics and Human Interface

Social re-engineering through welfare needs hard thinking about targeting and exclusion, inside a frame of dignity. Portal worship without a humane override can starve a rights-holder. Mahavira taught ahimsa, satya, aparigraha and anekantavada — non-violence, truth, non-possessiveness and many-sidedness. Those ideas check hate speech, corruption, ecological harm and one-sided files. Examples from PDS, MGNREGA and forest housing show the mix of reason and ethics.

View answer → Download PDF

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.