| |

CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive (Part 2)

Byadmin
CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive (Part 2)
CSS | Past Paper | Compulsory | 2017 | Part 2 | Descriptive

Below is the solution to PART-II (COMPULSORY) of the CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive (Part 2).

Question 2

Highlight the role of National Action Plan (NAP) in stabilization of internal security of Pakistan. Critically analyze its outcomes?

Introduction

After the terrible APS Peshawar attack in December 2014, Pakistan finally realized that terrorism had become a huge threat to its internal security. In response, the government introduced the National Action Plan (NAP). It was a 20-point agenda made to fight terrorism and extremism in a more serious and united way.

Main Objectives of NAP
  1. Crackdown on terrorist groups: Target banned outfits and militant groups working under different names.
  2. Curb hate speech: Ban publications and speeches that spread sectarian hate or extremist views.
  3. Reforms in madrassahs: Register religious schools and bring them under proper regulation.
  4. Reactivation of NACTA: Strengthen the National Counter Terrorism Authority.
  5. FATA reforms: Merge FATA with KPK to bring it into the national mainstream.
  6. Stop funding of terrorism: Block financial support channels to terrorist groups.
  7. Speedy trials through military courts: Set up special military courts for fast decisions on terror-related cases.
  8. Banning glorification of terrorists: No media or public support for extremists.
  9. Repatriation of Afghan refugees: Monitor and send back unregistered Afghan nationals.
  10. Policy on arms control: Control illegal weapons and arms licenses.
NAP’s Role in Improving Internal Security
  • Reduced major terrorist attacks: After NAP, many big attacks were stopped and overall violence dropped.
  • Improved coordination: Civil and military leadership started working more closely.
  • Successful operations like Zarb-e-Azb and Radd-ul-Fasaad: These helped in clearing militant hideouts in tribal areas.
  • Better public confidence: People felt that finally, the state was serious about defeating terrorism.
Critical Analysis of Outcomes

Even though NAP looked promising, its performance has been mixed.

Positive Outcomes
  • Terrorism reduced compared to 2014–2015.
  • Many sleeper cells were busted.
  • Karachi operation under NAP helped in restoring peace in the city.
  • Registration of many madrassahs took place.
Negative Points / Shortcomings
  • Lack of political will: Some points were not followed properly due to weak political action.
  • NACTA still weak: Even after being mentioned in NAP, NACTA didn’t become fully functional.
  • Failure in banning extremist groups: Some groups kept working with new names or through charity wings.
  • Madrassa reforms incomplete: Many religious schools are still not registered or monitored.
  • Judicial delays: Military courts worked for a short time, and later justice system went back to delays.
  • Hate speech still present: Many hate materials are still found online and in print.
  • Afghan refugee issue: Complete repatriation is still pending.
Conclusion

NAP was a bold step taken at a crucial time. It gave a clear roadmap to defeat terrorism and extremism. However, for long-term peace and internal security, all 20 points must be implemented fully and equally. Without political unity, strong law enforcement, and consistent follow-up, the true goals of NAP cannot be achieved. Pakistan needs not only military operations but also ideological and social reforms to win the war against terror completely.

Question 3

What measures do you suggest to improve the security conditions of Balochistan in respect to China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and the role of regional powers to sabotage it?

Introduction

Balochistan is the largest province of Pakistan by area and holds a very strategic position, especially because of Gwadar Port and the CPEC project. But the province has been suffering from security issues for many years due to terrorism, separatism, sectarian violence, and foreign interference. For CPEC to succeed, Balochistan’s security must be improved.

Importance of Balochistan in CPEC
  • Gwadar is the ending point of CPEC, which connects China’s Xinjiang to the Arabian Sea.
  • It offers China a shorter route for trade.
  • It brings economic opportunities for Pakistan, especially Balochistan.
  • Many CPEC projects like roads, energy plants, and ports are based in this province.
Security Challenges in Balochistan
  1. Separatist movements: Some groups demand independence and attack infrastructure and workers.
  2. Terrorist attacks: Targeted killings, bombings, and attacks on Chinese workers.
  3. Sectarian violence: Sunni-Shia clashes weaken peace and unity.
  4. Tribal rivalries and underdevelopment: Poverty and backwardness cause frustration among locals.
  5. Foreign involvement: Agencies like RAW (India) and others are blamed for funding anti-state elements.
Role of Regional Powers in Sabotaging CPEC
  • India: Openly opposes CPEC as it passes through Gilgit-Baltistan, which India claims as part of its territory. Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav was caught operating in Balochistan.
  • Afghanistan (sometimes indirectly): Due to a loose border and TTP hideouts, terrorism from Afghan soil affects Balochistan.
  • Iran (alleged): At times, some reports claimed Iranian soil was used by separatists, though Iran officially denies.
  • Western powers (some concerns): Some countries are not happy with China’s rising influence through CPEC.
Suggested Measures to Improve Security in Balochistan
  1. Strengthen Intelligence Network: Agencies like ISI and MI should improve coordination to stop foreign-funded sabotage.
  2. Secure CPEC Routes: Deploy special security forces for Chinese workers and key installations like Gwadar Port.
  3. Win hearts of locals: Launch development schemes in health, education, and employment to reduce local frustration.
  4. Bring Political Reforms: Give more political autonomy to Baloch people and include them in national matters.
  5. Speed up Fencing of Pak-Afghan Border: To stop movement of terrorists and weapons.
  6. Dialogue with Angry Baloch Leaders: Try to bring them into mainstream politics rather than ignoring their concerns.
  7. Media Campaign: Highlight positive impacts of CPEC for Balochistan’s future to counter negative propaganda.
  8. Work with China for joint strategy: Both countries should work on military and intelligence sharing.
Conclusion

CPEC is a game changer not only for Pakistan but also for the whole region. But without securing Balochistan, this project can’t reach its full potential. Enemies of Pakistan are trying to create chaos, especially in Balochistan, to damage the project. So, both civil and military leadership must work together, along with help from China, to bring peace, development, and trust to the people of Balochistan.

Question 4

Critically analyze the US-Russia relations in context of ISIS and its impact on the security situation of Middle East.

Introduction

The US and Russia have been two major global powers with opposite interests in many regions, especially in the Middle East. After the rise of ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), both countries got involved in the region. But their approaches were very different, which affected the security and stability of the Middle East.

Background of ISIS
  • ISIS came into power around 2014, capturing cities in Iraq and Syria.
  • It declared an Islamic Caliphate and carried out terror attacks inside and outside the region.
  • It became a major threat to global peace and especially Middle East security.
US Approach Towards ISIS
  • The US led a coalition of Western and Arab countries.
  • It mostly used airstrikes against ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria.
  • Supported Kurdish fighters (YPG) and Syrian Democratic Forces on the ground.
  • Focused on removing Bashar al-Assad (President of Syria), whom they saw as a dictator.
  • Gave military aid to selected rebel groups.
Russia’s Approach Towards ISIS
  • Russia supported the Assad government.
  • It also carried out airstrikes, but many times these were not just on ISIS but also on anti-Assad rebel groups.
  • Russia wanted to protect its ally Assad, and also secure its military base in Syria.
  • Criticized the US for supporting rebels, calling them terrorists in disguise.
US-Russia Tensions
  • The two countries disagreed on who to support in Syria.
  • Russia accused the US of using ISIS as an excuse to weaken Syria.
  • The US accused Russia of not targeting ISIS seriously.
  • There were several cases of near-miss confrontations between US and Russian forces in Syria.
Impact on Middle East Security
  1. Worsened Syrian Civil War: Due to opposing sides, the war became longer and more complex.
  2. More Civilian Suffering: Airstrikes from both sides caused destruction and refugee crises.
  3. Failed Peace Process: Because of US-Russia rivalry, peace talks never fully succeeded.
  4. Power Vacuum: The focus on fighting each other allowed ISIS and other groups to rise in some areas.
  5. Division of Middle East: Countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey all took sides, making the region more unstable.
Some Positive Outcomes
  • Despite rivalry, both US and Russia contributed to the weakening of ISIS by 2019.
  • ISIS lost most of its territory, including its capital Raqqa.
  • Some cooperation happened at technical levels to avoid direct conflict.
Conclusion

The fight against ISIS could have been more effective if US and Russia worked together. But due to their geopolitical interests, the Middle East suffered more. The rivalry turned Syria into a battleground. Even though ISIS was mostly defeated, the region is still unstable, and the shadow of US-Russia tensions continues to affect peace in the Middle East.

Question 5

Explain the salient contours of the US ‘rebalancing’ policy and China’s assertive policy in South China Sea and latter’s disputes with the regional countries. Critically evaluate.

Introduction

The Asia-Pacific region has become very important in world politics and trade. The US ‘rebalancing’ policy and China’s assertive strategy in the South China Sea reflect a growing power competition in this region. Both countries are trying to secure their interests, which has led to tensions with other regional players too.

US ‘Rebalancing’ Policy (also called Pivot to Asia)
  • Introduced under President Obama around 2011.
  • Goal was to shift US focus from Middle East to Asia-Pacific.
  • Main aims were:
    • Strengthen alliances with countries like Japan, South Korea, Philippines.
    • Increase military presence in Asia-Pacific region.
    • Support freedom of navigation and rule-based order in sea lanes.
    • Develop economic ties through deals like TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership).
  • It was mainly a strategy to counter China’s rising influence in Asia.
China’s Assertive Policy in South China Sea
  • China claims nearly 90% of the South China Sea under its “Nine-Dash Line”.
  • It has built artificial islands and military bases on disputed areas like Spratly and Paracel Islands.
  • China’s goals include:
    • Control of major sea trade routes.
    • Access to oil and gas resources.
    • Strategic military control of the sea region.
  • It rejects international rulings like the 2016 Hague tribunal, which ruled against China’s claims.
Disputes with Regional Countries
  1. Philippines: Disputes over Spratly Islands; won international case in 2016.
  2. Vietnam: Clashes over Paracel and Spratly Islands.
  3. Malaysia & Brunei: Also claim parts of the sea.
  4. Indonesia: Faces regular Chinese fishing boats entering its waters.
US-China Tensions in the Region
  • US conducts Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) to challenge China’s claims.
  • China sees US moves as provocative and interfering.
  • This leads to military stand-offs, near-miss encounters at sea and air.
  • The region becomes a flashpoint for possible future conflict.
Critical Evaluation
Positive Aspects
  • US presence keeps balance of power in the region.
  • China’s rise brings economic benefits for smaller Asian countries through trade and investment.
  • Tensions have pushed some nations to upgrade their defense and form alliances.
Negative Impacts
  • Regional instability has increased due to rising military activities.
  • ASEAN countries are divided, some support China, others rely on the US.
  • Risk of accidental war or military clash remains high.
  • International law is being ignored as China refuses to follow tribunal decisions.
Conclusion

The South China Sea is now one of the most sensitive areas in global geopolitics. The US rebalancing policy and China’s aggressive actions are part of a bigger power struggle in Asia. To maintain peace and stability, both sides need to focus on diplomatic solutions, respect for international law, and confidence-building measures. Otherwise, the region could move from cold tension to open conflict.

Question 6

The impact of burgeoning US-India strategic partnership over the security situation of the region and Indian Ocean Region.

Introduction

In the last two decades, US-India strategic relations have grown a lot. This partnership covers areas like defense, trade, nuclear cooperation, intelligence sharing, and regional influence. While it benefits both countries, it also has serious impacts on regional security, especially for Pakistan, China, and the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

Reasons Behind US-India Strategic Partnership
  • US wants to contain China’s rise in Asia, and India is a natural ally in that plan.
  • India wants advanced military technology and global recognition.
  • Both countries share democratic values and common security goals.
  • US sees India as a counterbalance to China in Indo-Pacific.
  • Economic ties have also increased, with huge trade and tech investments.
Key Areas of Cooperation
  1. Defense Agreements:
    • LEMOA (Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement) – allows use of each other’s military bases.
    • COMCASA and BECA – improve intelligence sharing and military coordination.
  2. Arms and Tech Transfers:
    • India has bought advanced weapons, drones, aircraft from the US.
    • US supports India’s entry into groups like NSG and MTCR.
  3. Military Exercises:
    • Joint drills like Malabar Exercise involving US, India, and sometimes Japan and Australia.
    • Strengthens naval presence in Indian Ocean.
  4. Support on Global Forums:
    • US supports India’s role in UN Security Council, while ignoring Pakistan’s concerns in Kashmir.
Impact on Regional Security
1. On Pakistan
  • Pakistan feels threatened due to advanced weapons and intel sharing between US and India.
  • Strategic imbalance in South Asia increases.
  • May push Pakistan closer to China and Russia for defense needs.
2. On China
  • India’s partnership with US is seen by China as part of encirclement strategy.
  • Leads to military competition in the Indo-Pacific region.
  • China has increased naval presence in IOR and formed alliances with regional countries.
3. On Indian Ocean Region (IOR)
  • US and India both trying to dominate sea lanes and trade routes.
  • Naval build-up in the IOR can cause arms race.
  • Smaller countries like Sri Lanka, Maldives, and Bangladesh get caught between power rivalry.
  • Freedom of navigation may get disturbed during tensions.
Critical Evaluation
Positives
  • The partnership helps in counter-terrorism, maritime security, and disaster relief.
  • Creates economic opportunities and new tech sharing.
  • Encourages democratic cooperation in the region.
Negatives
  • Makes South Asia more militarized and polarized.
  • Marginalizes Pakistan’s security concerns.
  • Increases the risk of conflict in case of a crisis between India and China or Pakistan.
  • Weakens the role of neutral diplomacy in the region.
Conclusion

The growing US-India strategic partnership has tilted the balance of power in South Asia and the Indian Ocean. While it brings some benefits, it also creates new security risks. For peace in the region, there must be efforts to ensure strategic stability, respect for regional sensitivities, and dialogue between rival powers. Otherwise, this partnership may lead to more tensions than peace.

Question 7

Critically examine China’s strategic vision behind its ‘One Belt, One Road’ venture.

Introduction

China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR), now called Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), is a massive global project launched by President Xi Jinping in 2013. Its main goal is to improve global connectivity through trade routes across Asia, Africa, Europe, and beyond. But behind this huge economic plan, China also has strategic goals to expand its global influence.

Main Pillars of OBOR
  1. Silk Road Economic Belt – land route connecting China to Central Asia, Europe, and the Middle East.
  2. 21st Century Maritime Silk Road – sea route connecting China to Southeast Asia, Africa, and Europe through ports and shipping lines.
China’s Strategic Vision Behind OBOR
  1. Economic Expansion:
    • China wants to export its surplus industrial capacity (steel, cement, etc.).
    • OBOR opens new markets for Chinese goods and services.
    • Helps develop underdeveloped western China by connecting it with global trade.
  2. Energy Security:
    • China imports a lot of oil and gas.
    • OBOR routes (like CPEC) offer shorter and safer energy supply lines.
    • Reduces dependency on routes like the Strait of Malacca, which can be blocked during conflict.
  3. Strategic Influence:
    • OBOR increases China’s soft power through infrastructure investments.
    • Creates dependence of weaker countries on Chinese loans and projects.
    • Builds a pro-China bloc in global politics.
  4. Countering US Dominance:
    • US dominates through Western financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank.
    • China wants to promote alternative systems like the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank).
    • Strengthens China’s position as a global leader, especially in Asia.
  5. Geopolitical Positioning:
    • OBOR allows China to build strategic ports (like Gwadar in Pakistan, Hambantota in Sri Lanka).
    • Increases Chinese naval access in key areas, especially in Indian Ocean and Africa.
Criticism and Challenges
  1. Debt Trap Diplomacy:
    • Many countries (e.g., Sri Lanka) are unable to repay Chinese loans.
    • Critics say China takes over strategic assets in return, harming local sovereignty.
  2. Lack of Transparency:
    • OBOR projects often have no open bidding, causing corruption and mistrust.
  3. Environmental and Social Issues:
    • Large infrastructure projects disturb local communities and ecosystems.
  4. Security Risks:
    • Projects like CPEC face threats from terrorism and political instability.
  5. Geopolitical Opposition:
    • US, India, and some Western countries oppose OBOR.
    • India boycotted OBOR because CPEC passes through disputed Kashmir.
Positive Aspects
  • Boosts global infrastructure development.
  • Helps in regional connectivity and economic growth.
  • Gives developing countries easy access to funds.
Conclusion

China’s OBOR is not just an economic plan, but a grand strategic vision to reshape global order in China’s favor. It brings economic opportunities, but also creates dependency and control. For success, China needs to make OBOR more transparent, fair, and inclusive, and address the concerns of partner countries. Otherwise, OBOR may bring more rivalry than cooperation.

Question 8

(a). Analyze the effects of commissioning of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), INS Arihant equipped with nuclear-capable missile called K-4 over the strategic stability of South Asia.

Introduction

INS Arihant is India’s first nuclear-powered submarine (SSBN) which can launch nuclear ballistic missiles like the K-4 missile (range ~3,500 km). With this, India has completed its nuclear triad—ability to launch nukes from land, air, and sea.

Strategic Impacts on South Asia
  1. Shift in Balance of Power:
    • Gives India second-strike capability, making its nuclear deterrence more solid.
    • It reduces Pakistan’s strategic edge and increases Indian confidence.
  2. Arms Race:
    • Pakistan may respond by upgrading its sea-based nuclear deterrence.
    • Leads to more military spending and regional insecurity.
  3. Increased Instability:
    • Submarines are hard to detect, which makes miscalculation and surprise attacks more likely in crisis.
  4. Pressure on Pakistan’s Naval Strategy:
    • Pakistan may focus on developing Babur-3 submarine-launched missile to match India.
  5. Strategic Deterrence:
    • On the positive side, it might create mutual assured destruction (MAD) balance, discouraging war.
Conclusion

INS Arihant and the K-4 missile have made India’s nuclear force more credible, but they have also raised strategic tensions in South Asia. Pakistan will likely respond with counter-measures, risking a naval nuclear arms race.

(b). US-India in August 2016 signed Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) that will reportedly facilitate the two allies to use each other’s military facilities to check China’s growing influence. Comment.

Introduction

In August 2016, the US and India signed LEMOA, allowing both countries to use each other’s military bases for refueling, repair, and logistics. It shows deepening defense ties, especially in the context of checking China’s rise in Asia.

Key Features of LEMOA
  • Access to naval and air bases for logistical support.
  • Enhances military coordination during exercises or emergencies.
  • Supports interoperability between Indian and US forces.
Strategic Objectives
  1. Countering China’s Influence:
    • Helps the US maintain presence in Indian Ocean and South China Sea.
    • India also wants to counter China’s moves in Pakistan (CPEC) and Indian Ocean.
  2. Boost to Indo-Pacific Strategy:
    • Fits into US Indo-Pacific strategy, which includes Japan and Australia.
    • India becomes a key player in balancing China.
  3. Signals to Regional Rivals:
    • Strong message to China and Pakistan that US and India are strategic allies.
    • May push China to increase its own military alliances (with Pakistan, Russia).
Concerns and Criticism
  • Critics in India fear loss of strategic autonomy.
  • Some regional countries fear Asia becoming a new Cold War zone.
Conclusion

LEMOA reflects stronger US-India defense partnership with a clear aim to counterbalance China’s expansion. While it improves India’s global position, it also increases regional competition, especially in the Indian Ocean.

📘 Benefits of Practicing This Descriptive Paper

  • ✅ These CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive questions are compiled from authentic FPSC CSS past papers, following the real written exam format.
  • 💬 Attempting this CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive helps students master structured writing and analytical skills for CSS exams.
  • 🧾 Every question in this CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive strictly follows the official CSS exam syllabus approved by FPSC.
  • 📊 Students preparing for CSS 2017 can rely on this CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive to practice time management and topic selection.
  • 🔍 The solved CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive contains concise explanations to improve conceptual understanding and writing clarity.
  • 🎯 Regular revision of this CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive builds confidence and strengthens your preparation for the CSS written paper.
  • 🏆 This CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive is essential for mastering exam techniques and achieving success in the FPSC CSS examination.
Download CSS Past Paper 2017 – Current Affairs

🏁 Final Note

Keep revising these CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive to strengthen your grip on important concepts and improve accuracy in upcoming CSS exams. Regular practice with these CSS Past Paper 2017 Current Affairs Descriptive will help you score higher and build full command over the CSS exam syllabus.

📰 Check out other years’ past papers of Current Affairs.

🔗 Check FPSC past papers directly from the official FPSC website.

Post Views: 194

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *