Statement–Argument (Abolish Military?): Statement: Should India have no military force at all? Arguments: I) No, other countries do not believe in non-violence. II) Yes, many Indians believe in non-violence. Choose which argument is strong.

Introduction / Context:
National defence hinges on external threat environment and deterrence. Internal beliefs alone cannot guarantee security.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Argument I: Notes a world with non-universal non-violence; defence capacity is therefore required—decision-relevant.
• Argument II: Domestic belief in non-violence does not alter external threats—non-responsive to the risk assessment.

Concept / Approach:
A strong argument must connect to security outcomes. I does; II is aspirational and insufficient.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Assess I: Realist premise ⇒ necessity of deterrence ⇒ strong.Assess II: Belief ≠ guarantee of safety ⇒ weak.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even peace-promoting states maintain defence for deterrence and humanitarian tasks.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Either/neither” misreads; “only II” ignores externalities.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing domestic ethics with international security dynamics.

Final Answer:
if only Argument I is strong.