Circular
Learnings
UPSC CSE Preparation
UPSC Mains — Previous Year Question
2024 GS4 Ethics 10 Marks
Question
“It is not enough to talk about peace, one must believe in it; and it is not enough to believe in it, one must act upon it.” In the present context, the major weapon industries of the developed nations are adversely influencing continuation of number of wars for their own self-interest, all around the world. What are the ethical considerations of the powerful nations in today’s international arena to stop continuation of ongoing conflicts?
Model Answer

The reflection that peace demands more than rhetoric—requiring genuine conviction and concrete diplomatic action—directly confronts contemporary international relations. The global Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) across major developed economies frequently creates structural commercial incentives that profit from the continuation of regional conflicts, creating an ethical tension between economic gain and humanitarian duty.

How Major Weapon Industries Influence the Continuation of Wars

  • Profit Incentives over Peaceful Resolutions: Global arms corporations benefit from extended defense procurements during wartime, creating commercial disincentives for rapid conflict resolution.
  • Corporate Lobbying on Foreign Policy: Weapons manufacturers exercise lobbying influence within legislative and defense procurement committees in developed capitals, shaping foreign assistance toward arms supplies rather than diplomatic mediation.
  • Creating Asymmetric Arms Dependencies: Supplying weapons systems to warring states creates ongoing dependencies for munitions, spare parts, and technical upgrades, sustaining regional arms races.
  • Proliferation to Non-State Militias: Inadequate monitoring allows conventional arms to reach non-state insurgent factions, exacerbating humanitarian crises across conflict zones in West Asia and Africa.

Ethical Considerations for Powerful Nations to Halt Conflicts

  • Adherence to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT): Powerful exporting states bear an ethical and legal obligation under international law to halt arms transfers where there is a clear risk weapons will be used to commit human rights violations.
  • The Just War Principle of Proportionality & Last Resort: Military assistance must be guided by principles of justice (jus in bello), ensuring that defensive support does not enable indiscriminate civilian devastation.
  • Kantian Obligation Against Exploitative Instruments: Kant’s categorical imperative requires treating civilians in conflict zones as ends in themselves, rather than as markets for military hardware.
  • Upholding Sovereign Equality & Non-Intervention: Powerful states must respect territorial sovereignty and refrain from using proxy conflicts to advance geopolitical influence.
  • Prioritizing Multilateral Mediation over Arms Aid: Shift foreign policy resources from military assistance packages toward negotiated ceasefires and multilateral peacebuilding under the UN Charter.
  • Corporate Social Responsibility in Defense: Mandate transparency in international arms sales and enforce severe penalties on domestic manufacturers that bypass end-user agreements.

Peace is an active moral commitment. Powerful nations must align their foreign policies with international humanitarian law, ensuring commercial interests do not override global peace and human dignity.

Keep Exploring

More PYQs from Circular Learnings

Stay Connected
Join our Telegram channel
Join Channel →