Revision summary
India’s Africa push is driven by diaspora, ITEC, peacekeeping, pharma, digital public goods, minerals and Global South diplomacy. China competes on BRI-scale infrastructure and credit; India cannot win that race on money. Long-term advantage is plausible in skills, affordable tech, political comfort and a less threatening profile. Delivery failures and domestic racism can still waste the advantage. Pick trust and human capital, not a stadium-for-stadium contest.
Model answer
Introduction
India’s new African interests are not a discovery of the continent. They are a thicker, more strategic return: votes, minerals, markets, energy, and a Global South story that cannot be only Asian. China is the scale competitor — Belt and Road, contractors, and credit. The question asks for drivers that might yield a long-term comparative advantage, not a fantasy of out-spending Beijing next year.
Body
Drivers
Diaspora and history — from Gandhi’s Natal to traders in East Africa — give a human network China must buy. ITEC and education still train officers and doctors who later sit in cabinets. UN peacekeeping is an Indian comparative practice. Generic pharma and vaccine manufacturing (including the COVID years) hit a need China does not own. Digital public infrastructure — identity, payments, open networks — is a 2020s export that fits African leapfrogging better than some heavy BRI monuments. Critical minerals and energy (oil, solar partnerships) are the hard-economy driver. African Union in the G20 and India–Africa Forum Summits are the diplomatic driver: voice, not only projects. Defence training and maritime awareness in the western Indian Ocean complete the security ring.
Versus China
- China wins speed and steel: ports, rails, stadiums, and a willingness to ignore governance sermons. It also accumulates debt-and-image problems that African publics now debate. India cannot copy the chequebook. It can copy presence of people: students, SMEs, English-language professional classes, and a democracy that, however noisy, is intelligible to African plural societies. Advantage, if it comes, will be in human capital, affordable tech, pharma, and political comfort, plus a less threatening naval profile than either China or old extra-regional powers.
Long-term, not brochure
Comparative advantage is not automatic. Indian delivery is slow; projects stall; racism toward Africans in Indian cities wrecks the brand; and some African states want Chinese speed anyway. A serious policy would finish lines of credit, stay in mining with environmental care, and keep peacekeeping. The G20 AU seat is a joint win, not an Indian trophy. Advantage over China is plausible in trust and skill intensity. It is implausible in bulk infrastructure. Honesty is part of the 15-mark answer: do not claim a race India is not funding.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD D[Drivers] --> P[People ITEC pharma DPI] D --> M[Minerals energy G20] C[China BRI] --> ST[Steel and speed] P --> A[Long-term trust advantage] ST --> SC[Scale not India’s race]
Conclusion
India’s African drivers are people, training, pharma, digital public goods, minerals and a South–South voice. Those can beat China in trust over a generation. They will not beat China in concrete next quarter. Policy should pick the race it can win.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the potential role India can play in initiating a possible phase of trilateral economic engagement among India, China and Nepal
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q8). View answer →
-
Is ‘not China’ enough of a policy?
No. African states want options, not an anti-China sermon. India’s offer must be usable projects and training, not only a warning about debt.
-
Does peacekeeping still matter?
Yes as reputation and as knowledge of African security elites. It is not a mineral strategy by itself.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2024 · Q2(b) · PSIR GS 2 · 15 marks
What are the distinctive features of the post-modern state in the advanced capitalist economies? Analyse.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the psychological approach to the study of comparative politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
The psychological approach studies personality, attitudes, civic culture and cognition in comparative politics. Lasswell, Adorno, Almond and Verba, Easton and later political psychology are the main lineage. It explains voting, protest, obedience and leadership better than a constitution or a class map alone. Surveys, experiments and psychobiography are typical methods. It is a layer, not a substitute for institutions and political economy.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Neo-liberalism lightened neo-realism's dark view of international politics. Comment.
Comparative Politics
Waltzian neorealism pictures anarchy, self-help and relative gains as a dark constant. Keohane and Nye’s neoliberalism keeps anarchy but adds complex interdependence, regimes and absolute gains. Institutions reduce cheating and transaction costs; they do not create a world state. Ukraine, tariffs and health-governance shocks show both residual darkness and institutional repair. The ‘lightening’ is cooperation under anarchy, not the end of power politics.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain the non-traditional security threats in the context of food and environmental crises.
Comparative Politics
Non-traditional security covers harms beyond organised military attack: food, environment, health, cyber and crime. Food security is availability, access, utilisation and stability; war, climate and export bans can all break it. Environmental crisis is a threat multiplier through climate, water, disaster and migration. UNDP 1994 human security and Buzan’s sectors supply the theory. These shocks overload the state and also force cooperation through FAO, WHO, Paris and regional reserves.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.