Directions (1-10): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words are given in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.
Predictably, the chatter ahead of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak’s visit to the White House next week has focused either on specific deliverables, like potential defense deals, or thorny issues like a high-profile corruption scandal implicating the premier. While both sides are expected to make some headline-worthy progress in the heavily scrutinized visit, the true test for U.S.-Malaysia relations lies less in the successful conduct of this interaction and more in the ability of both sides to manage the challenges likely to relations further down the line.
For all the focus on Najib himself, the reality is that the United States and Malaysia have successfully cooperated on a range of issues under six prime ministers since the Southeast Asian state’s independence despite disagreements on matters such as economic policy, human rights, and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. And even though bilateral ties had hit new heights under Barack Obama – with both sides elevating ties to the level of a comprehensive partnership and Malaysia becoming a member of key U.S.-led initiatives, be it the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) or the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL – incidents like the 1MDB scandal and issues like human trafficking continued to pose complications for ties.
The initial forecast for U.S.-Malaysia relations under Trump seemed to be rather gloomy, with Malaysian policymakers, like their regional counterparts, worrying about the implications of a so-called America First foreign policy with the nixing of TPP, the release of a trade hit-list, the questioning of the One China policy, and the Trump travel ban. Yet as the Trump administration’s Asia policy began to take shape, convergence, as it often does, became clearer in certain areas like North Korea, eventually paving the way for Najib’s White House visit. There is no doubt that the visit itself is a feat within the context of the bilateral relationship. The last time Malaysia was granted a White House visit was in 2004 under former premier Abdullah Badawi, and this is Najib’s first-ever White House visit since coming to power nearly a decade ago. And though the fact that he is just the second Southeast Asian leader to visit the Trump White House (after Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc) is partly a consequence of scheduling changes, officials from both sides also had to do a lot of substantive work to get the visit through so early on in the Trump presidency and so quickly as well.
Both sides also do intend to make some tangible progress in the relationship during the visit. The official agenda itself will be presented as wide-ranging, in line with the 60th anniversary of diplomatic ties as well as the realities of the comprehensive partnership itself. But the top agenda items – which include North Korea, counterterrorism, and maritime security – expected defense deals, the timing of the visit (which coincides with September 11), as well as the nature of some of Najib’s more private engagements, will make the visit seem a bit security-heavy, albeit with the 1MDB scandal looming over it as well.
Such progress ought not to be dismissed, particularly at the beginning of a new U.S. administration. But at the same time, it is important to keep in mind that the true test for U.S.-Malaysia relations will lie less in the successful conduct of this interaction and more in the ability of both sides to manage three key challenges likely to relations further down the line. That misalignment can be exacerbated further by misguided policies, with a case in point being the initial stage of the George W. Bush’s war on terrorism, where the war in Iraq diminished the already relatively low popularity ratings that the United States had in Malaysia and made cooperation more difficult for policymakers. As I have noted before, it is not difficult to find Malaysian policymakers both fretting about the complications that arose in that era and being worried that history could repeat itself if Washington gets embroiled in another Middle East quagmire.
Q1. What is the main purpose of the visit of Malaysian Prime Minister to U.S.?
(a) To unsettle the complex defense deals.
(b) To facilitate the import and export of goods between the two nations.
(c) To withhold counterterrorism.
(d) To hinder maritime security
(e) None of these
Q2. Which of the following options is/are TRUE according to the given passage?
(i)The Malaysian Prime Minister will discuss about the various ways to tackle environmental goals imposed by US authorities on foreign nationals.
(ii) The Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak will discuss issues like North Korea, 1MDB scandal, maritime security, etc
(iii) The visit of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak will be heavily scrutinized across the globe.
(a) Only (i)
(b) Only (ii)
(c) Both (ii) & (iii)
(d) Both (i) and (ii)
(e) Both (i) and (iii)
Q3. “There is no doubt that the visit itself is a feat within the context of the bilateral relationship.” Explain.
(i) The last time Malaysia was granted a White House visit was in 1996 under the former premier Abdullah Rehman.
(ii) This is Najib’s first-ever White House visit since coming to power nearly a decade ago.
(iii) This is their 50th anniversary of diplomatic ties.
(a) Only (i)
(b) Only (ii)
(c) Both (i) and (ii)
(d) All are true
(e) None is true
Q4. According to the given passage, how did substantive work done by officials from both the nations help in bilateral ties?
(a) Malaysia became a member of Trans Pacific Partnership.
(b)Malaysia became a part of key US led initiative Global coalition to counter ISIL.
(c) Malaysia embraced the educational goals of US in Southeast Asia.
(d) Both (a) and (b)
(e) Both (a) and (c)
Q5. What kind of misalignment the author is talking about in this passage and what are its future implications?
(a) The author is skeptical about the foundation of the relations between the two nations.
(b) In spite of being optimistic about the future of both the countries, the author still fears that the history might get repeated.
(c) Earlier also the US President George W Bush’s policy on terrorism had brought huge criticism across the Malaysians.
(d) The US government war on terror in Iraq has diminished the already relatively low popularity of the US in Malaysia.
(e) All of these.
Q6. Choose the word that is most SIMILAR in meaning to the word “True” as used in the passage.
Q7. Choose the word that is most SIMILAR in meaning to the word “Reality” as used in the passage.
Q8. Choose the word that is most SIMILAR in meaning to the word “Gloomy” as used in the passage.
Q9. Choose the word that is most OPPOSITE in meaning to the word “Clearer” as used in the passage.
Q10. Choose the word that is most OPPOSITE in meaning to the word “Tangible” as used in the passage.
S1. Ans. (e)
Sol. Read the passage carefully, we can infer that the main reason of the visit of Malaysian Prime Minister to the US is to discuss issues and make deals on counterterrorism, maritime security, defense deals so that the bilateral ties between the two nations can be improved.
S2. Ans. (c)
Sol. Among the three given statements, statement second and third are true with the context of passage, remaining one statement is either irrelevant or not true in reference to the content of the passage.
S3. Ans. (b)
Sol. “There is no doubt that the visit itself is a feat within the context of the bilateral relationship”, hence we can easily conclude that the two nations have not shared good relations in the past as even after securing power ten years ago, the Malaysian Prime Minister is visiting the US now which itself is a big victory.
S4. Ans. (d)
Sol. The substantive work done by officials from both the nations has helped in strengthening bilateral ties by finalizing deals like TPP, ISIL, etc. So, both the statements (a) and (b) are true with reference to the content of the passage. Statement (c) doesn’t comply with the paragraph.
S5. Ans. (e)
Sol. The author is talking about any misalignment which can hamper the future of both the nations, so they want to pitch the topics in an effective manner which will result in achieving better outcomes.
S6. Ans. (a)
Sol. True means in accordance with fact or reality
(a) Accurate means (especially of information, measurements, or predictions) correct in all details; exact.
(b) Deceptive means giving an appearance or impression different from the true one; misleading.
(c) Frank means open, honest, and direct in speech or writing, especially when dealing with unpalatable matters.
(d) Strict means demanding that rules concerning behaviour are obeyed and observed.
(e) Conversely means just the opposite being true
S7. Ans. (b)
Sol. Reality means the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.
(a) Illusion means a conception or image created by the imagination and having no objective reality.
(b) Verisimilitude means the appearance of being true or real.
(c) Sensibility means the quality of being able to appreciate and respond to complex emotional or aesthetic influences; sensitivity.
(d) Effectuate means put into force or operation.
(e) Mirage means something that comes from or exists only in the mind and is not real.
S8. Ans. (b)
Sol. Gloomy means causing or feeling depression or despondency.
(a) Animated means full of life or excitement; lively
(b) Dismal means causing or marked by an atmosphere lacking in cheer
(c) Vivacious means (especially of a woman) attractively lively and animated
(d) Sparkling means shining brightly with flashes of light.
(e) Jaunty means having or expressing a lively, cheerful, and self-confident manner.
S9. Ans. (c)
Sol. Clearer means easily seen; sharply defined:
(a) Luminous means giving off light; bright or shining
(b) Shiny means (of a smooth surface) reflecting light, typically because very clean or polished.
(c) Obscure means not clearly expressed or easily understood.
(d) Imperturbable means unable to be upset or excited; calm.
(e) Clarion means loud and clear.
S10. Ans. (d)
Sol. Tangible means real and not imaginary; able to be shown, touched, or experienced:
(a) Ascertainable means to make certain, clear, or definitely known
(b) Composed means free from emotional or mental agitation
(c) Indubitable means impossible to doubt; unquestionable
(d) Imperceptible means not perceived by or affecting the senses
(e) Indisputable means unable to be challenged or denied