Revision summary
The Asian century meant a shift of growth and weight to Asia with China and India as co-engines. Doklam, Galwan, a hard LAC and Chinese Indian Ocean presence make China India’s central strategic problem. Trade can continue without a political concert; the Quad and BRI are rival organising projects. Economically the shift to Asia can still happen; politically the century looks contested or bipolar, not harmonious. Feasible as theatre of world politics, not as a Sino-Indian team.
Model answer
Introduction
The Asian century is the claim that this century’s growth, population and eventually security weight would sit in Asia, with China and India as co-engines beside Japan, Korea and ASEAN. Growing friction between India and China asks whether that co-engine still exists. The idea remains feasible as arithmetic. It is less feasible as a shared political project.
Body
Why it looked feasible
East Asian industrialisation, China’s rise, and India’s post-1991 growth produced a shift of GDP and manufacturing toward Asia. Demography, a middle class, and regional production networks (even after deglobalisation) still point east of Suez. An Asian century did not require India–China friendship. It required both to grow inside one world-economy.
What friction does
Doklam 2017, Galwan 2020, a militarised Line of Actual Control, and China’s partnerships with Pakistan and in the Indian Ocean (Hambantota, other ports) turn China from a fellow Asian riser into India’s principal strategic problem. Trade remains large, but investment screening, app bans, and border deaths poison the political story of a joint Asian leadership. The Belt and Road is a Chinese order, not a Sino-Indian one. If Asia’s security splits into a Chinese sphere and an Indo-Pacific coalition around the Quad, the century is Asian in location and bipolar in structure. That is not the harmonious Asian century of early 2000s speeches.
- Friction also wastes resources: both states arm the Himalaya; India must still grow with a two-front problem; China must still manage the United States. Waltz would say two large neighbours in the same system tend toward rivalry. Kant’s pacific federation is not the LAC.
Verdict
The Asian century continues as a feasible economic description if China and India keep growing even while they quarrel — just as Europe’s century of power included Franco-German enmity. It does not continue as a feasible concert. Leadership of Asia will be contested. ASEAN will try to avoid choosing. India’s role becomes hinge of a multipolar Asia, not co-chair of a Beijing-friendly century. Feasible, then, with a changed meaning: Asia as the main theatre of world politics, not Asia as a team.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD AC[Asian century claim] --> G[China plus India growth] F[India-China friction] --> LAC[LAC Galwan Doklam] F --> BRI[BRI Indian Ocean] LAC --> B[Bipolar Asian security] G -.still possible.-> E[Economic shift]
Conclusion
India–China friction does not cancel Asian economic weight. It cancels the idea of a joint, peaceful Asian leadership. The Asian century remains feasible as a shift of wealth and attention. It is no longer feasible as a Sino-Indian partnership project.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the potential role that India could play as the leader of the Global South in realising the goal of establishing a new international economic order in the 21st century.
Next question in the 2024 paper (Q6). View answer →
-
Can trade save the Asian century?
Trade keeps the economic shift alive. It has not produced a security community. That split is the answer.
-
Is Japan still part of the Asian century?
Yes as capital and technology. Politically Japan is in the Quad, which is one reason the century is not China-led by default.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q5(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the reasons for lack of 'regionness' in South Asia? -
2023 · Q5(d) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Why do ethnic conflicts and insurgencies continue to remain major impediments to regional co-operation in South Asia? -
2022 · Q5(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the ways and means to realise greater economic co-operation among the Member States of South Asia. -
2022 · Q5(c) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the steps required to realise hydro-co-operation between India and Bangladesh. -
2022 · Q7(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What are the implications of 'Look-East' Policy on the north-eastern region of India? -
2021 · Q5(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the strategic implications of India's Look East Policy transforming into Act East Policy. -
2021 · Q7(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Why South Asia is considered as the world's politically and economically least integrated region? Explain -
2021 · Q8(a) · PSIR GS 2 · 20 marks
Relations between India and Russia are rooted in history, mutual trust and mutually beneficial cooperation. Discuss
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the interpretive approach to the study of comparative politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The interpretive approach studies political action as meaning in context, following Weber’s verstehen and later cultural and linguistic turns. It replies to behaviouralism’s search for covering laws by asking how votes, nations and authority are understood locally. Thick description, ethnography and discourse analysis are typical tools. It explains legitimacy, nationalism and everyday state practice that a constitution or a class map alone cannot supply. Limits are relativism, weak generalisation, and neglect of material and institutional constraint if used alone.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the central tenets of the World-Systems Theory.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
Wallerstein’s unit is the capitalist world-economy since the long sixteenth century, not the isolated nation-state. Core, semi-periphery and periphery form a durable three-tier division of labour. Unequal exchange and strong/weak states move surplus toward the core. The theory rejects modernisation’s national ladder and differs from Waltz’s interstate anarchy as first cause. Limits include economic determinism and underplaying state autonomy and culture; mobility exists but hierarchy persists.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
The expansionist tendencies of the current Russian regime indicate its intentions for the realization of a Greater Russia on the lines of the Soviet era. Comment.
Comparative Politics
Russia’s wars in Georgia and Ukraine, plus pressure on Belarus and nuclear signalling, show expansionist intent in the post-Soviet space. The Greater Russia story denies full independence of neighbours, especially Ukraine. The Soviet analogy fits geography of control more than ideology: today’s regime is nationalist and oligarchic, not a communist world-system. Morgenthau and Waltz explain power and structure; they do not make the war merely defensive. Comment: accept expansionism; reject a simple USSR restoration.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.