KSLU Solved Question Papers
Political Science (International Relations and Organisation)
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 4
2015 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 4 Political Science (International Relations and Organisation) 2015 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2015 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2015 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2015 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 13 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1What is meant by National Power ? Explain the limitations of National Power.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the meaning of national power (Palmer and Perkins; Morgenthau's "control over the minds and actions of other men"); its nature (relative, changing, potential and actual) and its two faces (hard and soft power, in Nye's words of 1990); why it needs limits (no world government; Morgenthau's "two devices"); its limitations under four heads: (A) Morgenthau's restraints (the balance of power, international law with Nicaragua, 1986, and Armed Activities, 2005, international morality, world public opinion with GA res. ES-11/1, 2022), (B) institutional restraints (the UN and collective security, regional bodies), (C) restraints of the modern world (interdependence, nuclear weapons), (D) internal restraints (limited resources, national morale, constitutional checks, errors of judgment); Suez, 1956, as an example; how far the limits work; a conclusion.
Meaning of national power
National power is the ability of a state to get what it wants in its dealings with other states. Palmer and Perkins describe power as "the totality of a state's effectiveness in world politics". Hans Morgenthau defined political power as "man's control over the minds and actions of other men". In simple words, a powerful state can make others act as it wishes, or stop them from acting against it.
Its nature. Three features matter for this question.
- It is relative. A state is strong or weak only in comparison with the states it faces.
- It changes. Economies grow or decline, weapons become outdated and leaders change.
- It is potential as well as actual. Resources and population are power only when a state organises and uses them.
Its two faces. Joseph Nye wrote in 1990 that "when one country gets other countries to want what it wants" it uses "co-optive or soft power". He contrasted this "with the hard or command power of ordering others to do what it wants". Hard power rests on armies and money. Soft power rests on culture, values and policies that others admire.
Why national power needs limits
There is no world government above states. Each state relies on its own power for its safety and its interests. If power had no limits, the strongest state would rule all the others. Morgenthau wrote that peace among sovereign nations can be kept only by "two devices". The first is the balance of power. The second is "normative limitations upon that struggle in the form of international law, international morality, and world public opinion". He gave three parts of his book to these "limitations of international power".
Limitations of national power
A. The restraints Morgenthau named
1. The balance of power. When one state grows too strong, others combine against it. Napoleon in 1815 and Hitler in 1945 were defeated by such coalitions. The fear of provoking a coalition makes a strong state cautious.
2. International law. The UN Charter forbids "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state" (art. 2(4)). Force is lawful only in self-defence (art. 51) or with Security Council authority. Courts apply this law even to great powers.
In Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), judgment of 27 June 1986, Nicaragua complained that the United States had armed and financed the contras, rebels fighting its government. It also complained that the United States had mined its waters and attacked its ports. The United States claimed collective self-defence of El Salvador. By twelve votes to three, the Court rejected that claim. It held that the United States had broken the rules against intervention and against the use of force. The case shows that law places a limit even on a superpower.
In Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), judgment of 19 December 2005, Ugandan forces had occupied the Ituri district of the Congo from 1998. They had also supported rebel groups there. Uganda pleaded consent and self-defence. By sixteen votes to one, the Court rejected both pleas. It held that Uganda had gravely violated the ban on the use of force and must make reparation. Here the law limited a regional power.
3. International morality. Some acts, such as killing prisoners or using poison gas, are condemned by almost all peoples. Leaders hold back because they share these moral rules or fear the shame of breaking them. Morgenthau thought this restraint real but weaker than it was in earlier centuries.
4. World public opinion. Governments care how others see them. On 2 March 2022 the General Assembly adopted resolution ES-11/1 by 141 votes to 5, with 35 abstentions. It deplored "in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter". It demanded that Russia "immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine". India abstained. The vote isolated Russia diplomatically, but it did not stop the fighting. World opinion is a real limit, but a weak one against a great power.
B. Institutional restraints
5. The UN and collective security. Under Chapter VII the Security Council can impose sanctions and authorise force against an aggressor. The UN also gives every state a forum to criticise another's conduct. But the veto lets the five permanent members escape action against themselves.
6. Regional organisations. Bodies such as the European Union and the African Union bind their members by common rules and decisions.
C. Restraints of the modern world
7. Economic interdependence. States depend on each other for trade, energy, capital and technology. Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye called this "complex interdependence". A state that uses force may lose its markets, its investment and its supplies.
8. Nuclear weapons. War between nuclear powers could destroy both sides. This fear limits how far even the strongest states push a quarrel with each other.
D. Internal restraints
9. Limited resources. No state has unlimited money, soldiers or materials. A state that spends too much on power abroad weakens itself at home.
10. National morale. Morgenthau called national morale "the degree of determination with which a nation supports the foreign policies of its government". The United States was far stronger than North Vietnam. Yet opposition at home to the long war helped bring the withdrawal of American forces in 1973.
11. Constitutional checks. Parliaments, courts, elections and a free press control what a government may do. In India, the Constitution directs the State to "promote international peace and security" (art. 51(a)).
12. Errors of judgment. Power cannot be measured exactly. Morgenthau warned against treating power as absolute, as permanent, or as resting on a single factor. A state that overrates its power may attempt what it cannot achieve.
An example: Suez, 1956
In October 1956 Israel attacked Egypt, and Britain and France landed troops to seize the Suez Canal. Britain and France vetoed action in the Security Council. The General Assembly then met in an emergency special session and set up the first UN Emergency Force by resolution 1000 of 5 November 1956. The United States, their own ally, pressed them to accept a ceasefire on 6 November. Two great powers were stopped by world opinion, the UN, an ally's pressure and the limits of their own economies.
How far the limits work
The limits work best against small and middle powers, and least against great powers with a veto. A court judgment binds only states that have accepted the Court's jurisdiction. World opinion can isolate a state, but it cannot force it to withdraw. Yet the limits add up. A state that ignores law, morality and opinion pays in lost friends, trade and trust.
The limitations at a glance
| Head | Limitation | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Morgenthau's restraints | Balance of power | Coalitions against Napoleon and Hitler |
| International law | Nicaragua (1986); Armed Activities (2005) | |
| Morality and world opinion | GA res. ES-11/1 (2022), 141 votes to 5 | |
| Institutions | UN, collective security, regional bodies | Suez, 1956 |
| Head | Limitation | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Modern world | Interdependence, nuclear weapons | Restraint between nuclear powers |
| Internal | Resources, morale, constitution, judgment | Vietnam, 1973 |
Conclusion. National power is a state's ability to control the conduct of others, by command or by attraction. It is relative, changing and partly potential. It is limited from outside by the balance of power, international law (Nicaragua; Armed Activities), morality and world opinion (resolution ES-11/1). The UN, regional bodies, interdependence and nuclear weapons add further limits. It is limited from inside by scarce resources, national morale, constitutional checks and errors of judgment. Suez shows that even great powers cannot do all they wish. These limits are weak against the strongest states, but none is free of them.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 4 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free, and so does the syllabus.
What should we fix or add?
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.