Quiz: Reading Comprehension

Dear Readers,
                        Today’s comprehension is related to India’s relation with China and the race to the supreme power. This article is written by Sanjaya Baru (Director for Geo-economics and Strategy, International Institute for Strategic Studies, and Honorary Senior Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.) . It is relevant as per IBPS, SBI, SSC, and other Govt. exam.



Directions (Q.1-10):
Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below.
Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them.

    A week before marking the first anniversary of his
assumption of office, Prime Minister Narendra Modi ends his year of hectic
diplomacy with a visit to China. For India, no other bilateral relationship is
more complex and challenging than the one with its biggest neighbour.
Fortunately, the mistakes that could have been made by India’s political
leadership in dealing with a big neighbour were limited mostly to the very
first decade of the republic. For half a century, India has been on a learning
curve. Jawaharlal Nehru’s errors of judgment in dealing with China cast a long
shadow on bilateral relations. Every Prime Minister since has tread cautiously,
perhaps far too cautiously, in dealing with China. Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh once said that he had devoted considerable time to reading carefully
through the Nehru files on China so as not to repeat any of his predecessor’s
mistakes. I guess every Prime Minister would have done that and Mr. Modi may
well have done this too.
    But, Nehru’s errors of judgment were not inevitable.
Indeed, we now know that as early as on November 7, 1950, Sardar Vallabhbhai
Patel had cautioned Nehru about the trust deficit in the bilateral relationship
and of China’s expansionist instincts in Asia. Patel’s prescient and
cautionary note to Nehru, buried in government files for decades, was made
public a decade ago and is now freely available on the Internet. If China annexed
Tibet in Nehru’s time, it now seeks to usurp maritime territory in South
China Sea. Time was when Chairman Mao Zedong dubbed the Soviets as “social
imperialists”. No one has yet so branded China. However, unlike in the 1950s
when the world adopted a more benign approach to China’s land grab,
there has been greater concern about China’s assertiveness in Asia which has
put its leadership on notice. While the Western leadership seems to be in
disarray in responding to China’s smart diplomatic forays, India has pursued a
balanced and wise policy of engaging China at every possible level while
remaining on full alert in dealing with Chinese assertiveness. One of the great
positives of the India-China relationship over the past decade has been the
increased business-to-business and people-to-people contacts between citizens
of the two countries. A highlight of Mr. Modi’s visit will be a public meeting
with the Indian community in China. While this draws attention to the increased
presence of Indians in China, India can do more to facilitate the travel of
Chinese to India. Millions of Chinese Buddhists would want to visit if India
were to become a more attractive destination. Institutional and professional
interaction must also increase. Indian-Americans in the U.S. are full of
stories about how they find it easier to travel to and work with Chinese
academics and businesses than with Indian counterparts. As a U.S. analyst once
put it, “China is a closed society with an open mind, India is an open society
with a closed mind”. The time has come for the bilateral relationship to move
well beyond official government-to-government relations, precisely because the
bilateral relationship has become more stable, despite episodic provocation on
the border by China. There are several reasons why China may not want to push
India beyond a point. First, India has demonstrated its ability to tide over a
variety of political and economic storms that have engulfed it from time to
time, thereby establishing the resilience of the Indian state; second, despite
all its weaknesses, the Indian economy has demonstrated its capacity to sustain
higher rates of economic growth; third, India’s flexible diplomacy has enabled
it to widen its geopolitical options; finally, China’s assertiveness in its
neighbourhood has encouraged many Asian nations to take a more benign view of
India’s rise.
    The problem that India’s political leadership has
dealt with is the coming to terms with China’s manifest, comprehensive national
power. India was lulled into complacency by the myth that the two
civilisational neighbours were somehow in the same league merely because both
had a population of over a billion! Today, China’s economy is five times bigger
than India’s. That China was already in a different league was made brutally
clear to India even as early as in 1945 by none other than John Maynard Keynes
who refused to give India the same voting share as that of China in the newly
formed International Monetary Fund. Keynes’s student, J.J. Anjaria,
representing the government of India, fought for parity with China but failed
to convince Keynes and the Americans. Then came the membership of the United
Nations Security Council and of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
    Make
no mistake. The 21st century will not be China’s century alone nor will it
remain America’s. The geopolitical and geoeconomic conditions that enabled
Britain to become ‘Great’ in the 19th century and claim that century for
itself, building a global empire, and that enabled the U.S. to emerge as the
dominant world power of the 20th century do not exist for China or anyone else
today. The “unipolar” world of the British and American empires was a
historical aberration. European scholarship wrongly viewed all great
powers in history as “global powers”. The global moment of many of them was
short-lived. At best they were all continental powers. Multipolarity or
polycentric dispersal of power and prosperity defines the normal state of the
world. If China succeeds in becoming both a predominant maritime power of the
Indo-Pacific region and the predominant land power of the Eurasian land mass,
it would of course emerge as the dominant world power of the 21st century.
China’s control of Tibet and its sway over the Eurasian land mass, on the one
side, and its control over South China Sea and the Indo-Pacific region on the
other become central to any quest for unipolar dominance. But that is not
inevitable. If China seeks to dominate the land to its west and the waters to
its east and south and thereby emerge as the hegemon of the century, it will
force all other major powers, including Russia at some point, to come together
and resist such a build-up. On the other hand, if China rejects such an
imperialist view of history, and truly believes in the creation of a multipolar
world of the pre-imperial era, then it can work with India and other powers of
Europe and Asia. What path China chooses for itself will determine how other
nations respond to its rise. For India, the task is cut out. At the end of a
year of hectic diplomacy, Mr. Modi would have discovered that all the king’s
horses and all the king’s men cannot put the Humpty-Dumpty of national power
back in shape if its economy crumbles under the weight of bad policy. A
country’s international stature and power is built in its fields, factories,
classrooms, laboratories and neighbourhoods. Not at the high tables of
diplomacy, nor on television.
-Source The Hindu, Delhi Edition, 11th May

Q.1.Choose an appropriate title for the
passage.
1) The Business Partners
2) India and China in a Multipolar World
3) The Trans Business
4) Business Diplomacy
5) The Default Diplomacy
Q.2.Which of the following is true according
to the passage?
A) India has always adopted balanced and wise technique against
china while remaining on full alert in dealing with
Chinese assertiveness.
B) European scholarship wrongly viewed
all great powers in history as “global powers”
C) A country’s actual stature and power is built in its core, not
in media or on tables of diplomacy.
1) A and B
2) Only A
3) All A, B, and C
4) None
5) A and C
Q.3. Which of the following will help China
dominate the world?
A) If it succeeds in having good relationship with its
neighbouring countries.
B) If it succeed to be both predominant
maritime power and land power.
C) Unipolar Dominance is perfectly evitable for China.
1) A and B
2) Only A
3) All A, B and C
4) Only C
5) Only B
Q.4.According to the passage, what are the
reasons mentioned for China not pushing India beyond a point?
1) Because of the sheer pressure from the UN and major countries
who doesn’t want China to grow with such explicable growth rate.
2) Because India is a growing nation and China cannot repeat the
incidents of 1962 because this time India would be more capable and armed
despite all the situation.
3) Because India is capable of recovering any economic
storm and has widened its geographical reach with the help of its flexible
diplomacy.
4) All of the above
5) None of these
Q.5. What does the author mean by the phrase “world adopted a more benign approach to China’s”?
1) the other countries were gentle and kind to China’s
approach.
2) the other countries were angry what China did.
3) the other countries were unaware of the fact what China did at
that point of time.
4) the other countries were united against the China.
5) None of the above
Q.6.What is the synonym of the word “aberration”?
1) Anomaly
2) Digression
3) Rogue
4) Quirk
5) All of the above
Q.7.What is the synonym of the word “usurp”?
1) Expropriate
2) Relinquish
3) Ameliorate
4) Approbation
5) Vacillate
Q.8.What is the synonym of the word “prescient”?
1) Proliferate
2) Propitiate
3) Prophetic
4) Prevaricate
5) All of the above
Q.9.What is not the synonym of the word “annexed”?
1) Conquer
2) Garrison
3) Usurp
4) Relinquish
5) None of the above
Q.10.What is not the synonym of the word “inevitable”?
1) Mollify
2) Occlude
3) Uncertain
4) All of the above
5) None of the above

1. (2
2. (3
3. (5
4. (3
5. (1
6. (5
7. (1
8. (3
9. (4
10. (3