UGC NET/JRF EXAM, DEFENCE AND STRATEGIC STUDIES, June-2021 (Paper-II)

The post-cold war world has experienced many changes, not only in practical terms but also in theoretical sphere. One of the significant paradigm shift that took place was in the traditional.

The post-cold war world has experienced many changes, not only in practical terms but also in theoretical sphere. One of the significant paradigm shifts that took place was in the traditional meaning of security.

The traditional meaning of security is state centric, it means that the territory of the state needs to be protected against any hostile attack. It can also be seen as protection from external threats.

On the other hand, non-traditional security is human centric. It means that the people of a state should be protected from hunger, disease, poverty and natural disasters. In 1994, UNDP HDR presented a report according to which seven things were added to the concept of security;

these are personal, environmental, economic, political, community health and food security. The state should protect its people from these internal threats. The theories of Inter-national relations define security differently.

As Realist perceives the nature of human as selfish and egoistic which will incline more towards immorality.

They argue that as the nature of human is selfish, same is the case with the states, They also act selfishly by looking in to just their own national interests and have nothing to do with other's interest.

If war is in their national interest they will go for war, and if co-operation is in their interest, they will cooperate with the other state.

Neo realism, the branch of realism claims that there is no change in the world after the end of cold war, power is still the main entity in international relations and this power structure is due to the anarchical structure of international system.

The Realists and neorealists are not willing to come out of the traditional concept of state centric security.

According to passage, the post cold war world has seen many changes, both in practical and theoretical spheres but one of the most important paradigm shifts that took place was:

Arms production in India goes back two centuries, with the earliest recorded activity in 1801 when the East India Company established the Gun Carriage Agency near Calcutta.

However, since that time, and until Independence, colonial Britain did little to encourage the growth of the defence industry. The reason was simple: military equipment and ordnance could be sourced quickly and cheaply from British industry via established maritime supply routes.

Thus, while the origins of Indian arms production go back to the early nineteenth century, only six ordnance factories had been established by the British at the start of World War II.

After Independence, Nehru invited the eminent British theoretical physicist Patrick Blackett to advise the government on a strategy to develop defence science in India so that it could eventually become self-reliant in defence production.

Blackett advised the Indian government to equip itself with industrial and financial capabilities.

Given the low-level of industrialization in India, he recommended that India should focus on building non-competitive systems such as anti-aircraft guns and transport vehicles that put limited importance on the quality of the weapons system.

Blackett further recommended that India should lay the foundation for an effective aircraft industry by designing and developing a trainer aircraft.

These early moves towards technological independence showed that India was interested in building a defence-industrial base that was both comprehensive and advanced.

Since defence of newly independent India was a top national priority, defence industrialization became the "exclusive responsibility of the state".

According to paragraph, 'The East India Company' established defence production setup in 1801 named: