PSIR by PWOnlyIAS

In conclusion India must continually diversify its energy security routes and maintain robust, independent diplomatic channels in West Asia. As we can see that when the global superpower behaves unpredictably, regional stability cannot be outsourced, and middle powers like India must support international law and freedom of navigation to protect their economic security.

analysis of this article from psir perspective We can analyse this by connecting to the following scholars and dimensions Robert Keohane and Hegemonic Stability Theory. Keohane argued that a hegemon is required to sustain global order and public goods. This analysis shows the decline of this stabilising capacity. When a hegemon resorts to raw, un-nuanced military force without institutional consensus, it breeds instability rather than order. Joseph Nye's view can be added by calling it a deficit in Smart Power. The strategic combination of hard military power and soft diplomatic power. By shifting away from nuanced diplomacy like JCPOA to reckless bombardment, the US exhausted its geopolitical credibility.

connecting psir scholars and theories to this article analysis of the article - key argument is that states must employ anticipatory statecraft, which effectively means the capacity to foresee, shape, and institutionalise the rules of tomorrow's global governance before they harden into restrictive frameworks. China is attempting to create new international regimes in AI and space to set standards that lock in its structural advantages. China is utilising the grievances of the Global South to undermine the legitimacy of the Western led Liberal International Order, attempting to replace it with a Sino-centric normative framework. we can connect it to offensive realism as Mearsheimer’s thesis on China's bid for regional hegemony explains why Beijing favour's a multipolar world but rejects a multipolar Asia. China seeks to clear its own neighbourhood of any rival like India or Japan. To conclude we can add dimensions like India must be a rule-maker, not just a rule-taker.

Understanding the article Important article discusses various dimensions of power operate. How Iran uses funeral as a political tool to project power while not being powerful. Provides dimension of Constructivism and state power in action. Article has various dimensions  It shows the difference between symbols that express power and symbols that substitute for it. In Post-Structuralism, power is not just military hardware, it is discursive and symbolic. When Iran uses the Ya Hussein flag and the imagery of ballistic missiles, it is engaging in securitization through spectacle. As per Social Constructivism- threats and defeats are not just objective realities; they are socially constructed. Alexander Wendt can be linked as he states that Anarchy and defeat are what states make of them. Identity dictates interest, and the Shia identity of martyrdom is weaponized to maintain domestic cohesion.

Analysis of the article We can connect key arguments with the following scholars 1. John Mearsheimer’s theory of offensive realism, which notes that great powers face severe limits in projectable power over distant regions. The failure of the US to achieve its stated political objectives highlights the limits of military hegemony in an anarchic world order. 2. Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye’s framework from Power and Interdependence. They differentiate between sensitivity and vulnerability. Transition from a unipolar system toward regional multipolarity, where middle-tier regional powers like Iran can establish localized deterrence.

Connecting this topic with PSIR theoretical dimension along with ethics. Amartya Sen's Capability Approach can be connected straight to this article. True freedom depends on institutional capabilities. If a citizen chooses to die because they cannot afford palliative care or pain relief, it represents a structural failure of distributive justice by the State.

Article breakdown from upsc perspective Indo-Pacific is not a transient American narrative or invention; rather, it is a structural reality driven by Asian geography and Asian power politics. we can relate this article with Kenneth Waltz's structural realism where he argued that changes in the distribution of capabilities alter the structure of the international system. India is also facing alliance dilemma and need to be hard balancing (concept by Ashley Telllis - that india can't be overdependent on US). there can be a superb conclusion written on this basis of this article Ultimately, the Indo Pacific is not a geopolitical fiction authored by Washington, but a geographical imperative forced by Beijing. India needs to move past the binaries of entrapment and abandonment, anchoring its strategic autonomy in robust regional partnerships and indigenous defense capabilities.

We can connect it with following scholars and their ideas Yogendra Yadav & Suhas Palshikar - analysis of the Second Dominant Party System creates fragmentation of opposition parties driven not by ideological realignment but by state power, resource asymmetry, and structural vulnerabilities. One can also connect it to Milan Vaishnav’s point of political marketplace and transactional politics. In India as we witness that electorally Victory at any cost becomes the supreme virtue, forcing ideological considerations to take a backseat. To conclude Indian democracy must transition from mere procedural consolidation to substantive consolidation

Core idea of this article from psir perspective Democracy cannot survive on structural architecture alone, it requires normative integrity. Political parties are supposed to be laboratories of ideas and ideological collectives. When legislators defect based purely on transaction-based calculation, it subverts the Social Contract between the voter and the elected representative. It reduces democracy to what scholars call a procedural ritual rather than a substantive practice.

For context of these articles - you can refer this piece

To conclude - India needs to build AI capability as a nation that builds strong technology capability will hold technological sovereignty and build real long term capability breaking from core periphery dependence.

PSIR perspective on these articles discussing AI, technology and role of scaling capabilities. Important key words - Technology Sovereignty and technology denial as strategic tools. Remember China denied domestic companies to work in Joint Venture with Indian companies to work in the strategic EV sector and recently US limited AI model usage. Technology is no longer merely an instrument for economic growth but has evolved into the definitive primary substrate of national survival, power, and sovereignty. We can connect this article with Wallerstein’s world system theory and Samir Amin’s Dependency theory which talks about periphery exporting raw material while the core holds all the power as it holds the core technology on which holds real power. In the same way India today is facing denial of technology which previously it faced post test in Pokhran from regimes like MTCR and NSG earlier.