Time Left - 30:00 mins
Attempt now to get your rank among 5000 students!
Question 1
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
Eight People – Arun, Gaurav, Sumit, Deepak, Mohan, Arpit, Lucky and Manish live in eight different floors of building (but not necessarily in the same order). The lowermost floor of the building is numbered one, the one above that is numbered two, and so on till the topmost floor is numbered eight. Each one of them likes a different Actor, namely Sharukh, Salman, Amitabh, Shahid, Hrithik, Ranbir, Amir and Akshay (but not necessarily in the same order).
Arpit lives an odd numbered floor above the floor numbered four. Only one person lives between Arpit and the one who likes Amitabh. Only three people live between Deepak and the one who likes Ranbir. Sumit lives on one of the odd numbered floors above the one who likes Ranbir. Only two people live between Sumit and the one who likes Sharukh. The one who likes Amir lives immediately above Lucky, Lucky likes neither Ranbir nor Sharukh. The number of people living above Arpit is same as the number of people living between Arpit and Deepak. Mohan does not like Amir. Only three people live between Lucky and Arun. The one who likes Akshay lives immediately above the one who likes Salman, but not on the topmost floor. Only one person lives between the one who likes Akshay and Manish. Only one person lives between Gaurav and the one who likes Hrithik.
Which of the following statements is true with respect to the given information?
Question 2
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
Eight People – Arun, Gaurav, Sumit, Deepak, Mohan, Arpit, Lucky and Manish live in eight different floors of building (but not necessarily in the same order). The lowermost floor of the building is numbered one, the one above that is numbered two, and so on till the topmost floor is numbered eight. Each one of them likes a different Actor, namely Sharukh, Salman, Amitabh, Shahid, Hrithik, Ranbir, Amir and Akshay (but not necessarily in the same order).
Arpit lives an odd numbered floor above the floor numbered four. Only one person lives between Arpit and the one who likes Amitabh. Only three people live between Deepak and the one who likes Ranbir. Sumit lives on one of the odd numbered floors above the one who likes Ranbir. Only two people live between Sumit and the one who likes Sharukh. The one who likes Amir lives immediately above Lucky, Lucky likes neither Ranbir nor Sharukh. The number of people living above Arpit is same as the number of people living between Arpit and Deepak. Mohan does not like Amir. Only three people live between Lucky and Arun. The one who likes Akshay lives immediately above the one who likes Salman, but not on the topmost floor. Only one person lives between the one who likes Akshay and Manish. Only one person lives between Gaurav and the one who likes Hrithik.
Which of the following actor Arpit Likes?
Question 3
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
Eight People – Arun, Gaurav, Sumit, Deepak, Mohan, Arpit, Lucky and Manish live in eight different floors of building (but not necessarily in the same order). The lowermost floor of the building is numbered one, the one above that is numbered two, and so on till the topmost floor is numbered eight. Each one of them likes a different Actor, namely Sharukh, Salman, Amitabh, Shahid, Hrithik, Ranbir, Amir and Akshay (but not necessarily in the same order).
Arpit lives an odd numbered floor above the floor numbered four. Only one person lives between Arpit and the one who likes Amitabh. Only three people live between Deepak and the one who likes Ranbir. Sumit lives on one of the odd numbered floors above the one who likes Ranbir. Only two people live between Sumit and the one who likes Sharukh. The one who likes Amir lives immediately above Lucky, Lucky likes neither Ranbir nor Sharukh. The number of people living above Arpit is same as the number of people living between Arpit and Deepak. Mohan does not like Amir. Only three people live between Lucky and Arun. The one who likes Akshay lives immediately above the one who likes Salman, but not on the topmost floor. Only one person lives between the one who likes Akshay and Manish. Only one person lives between Gaurav and the one who likes Hrithik.
Who amongst the following lives exactly between Manish and the one who likes Salman?
Question 4
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
Eight People – Arun, Gaurav, Sumit, Deepak, Mohan, Arpit, Lucky and Manish live in eight different floors of building (but not necessarily in the same order). The lowermost floor of the building is numbered one, the one above that is numbered two, and so on till the topmost floor is numbered eight. Each one of them likes a different Actor, namely Sharukh, Salman, Amitabh, Shahid, Hrithik, Ranbir, Amir and Akshay (but not necessarily in the same order).
Arpit lives an odd numbered floor above the floor numbered four. Only one person lives between Arpit and the one who likes Amitabh. Only three people live between Deepak and the one who likes Ranbir. Sumit lives on one of the odd numbered floors above the one who likes Ranbir. Only two people live between Sumit and the one who likes Sharukh. The one who likes Amir lives immediately above Lucky, Lucky likes neither Ranbir nor Sharukh. The number of people living above Arpit is same as the number of people living between Arpit and Deepak. Mohan does not like Amir. Only three people live between Lucky and Arun. The one who likes Akshay lives immediately above the one who likes Salman, but not on the topmost floor. Only one person lives between the one who likes Akshay and Manish. Only one person lives between Gaurav and the one who likes Hrithik.
Four of the following five are alike in a certain way based on the given arrangement and so form a group. Which is the one that does not belong to that group?
Question 5
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
Eight People – Arun, Gaurav, Sumit, Deepak, Mohan, Arpit, Lucky and Manish live in eight different floors of building (but not necessarily in the same order). The lowermost floor of the building is numbered one, the one above that is numbered two, and so on till the topmost floor is numbered eight. Each one of them likes a different Actor, namely Sharukh, Salman, Amitabh, Shahid, Hrithik, Ranbir, Amir and Akshay (but not necessarily in the same order).
Arpit lives an odd numbered floor above the floor numbered four. Only one person lives between Arpit and the one who likes Amitabh. Only three people live between Deepak and the one who likes Ranbir. Sumit lives on one of the odd numbered floors above the one who likes Ranbir. Only two people live between Sumit and the one who likes Sharukh. The one who likes Amir lives immediately above Lucky, Lucky likes neither Ranbir nor Sharukh. The number of people living above Arpit is same as the number of people living between Arpit and Deepak. Mohan does not like Amir. Only three people live between Lucky and Arun. The one who likes Akshay lives immediately above the one who likes Salman, but not on the topmost floor. Only one person lives between the one who likes Akshay and Manish. Only one person lives between Gaurav and the one who likes Hrithik.
How many people live between Arun and the one who likes Amir?
Question 6
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
How is ‘mind’ written in that code language?
Question 7
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
What will be the possible code for ‘bright and clear’ in the given code language?
Question 8
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In the given code language, what does the code ‘ni’ stand for?
Question 9
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
How is ‘thoughts’ written in that code language?
Question 10
Direction: Study the information given below and answer the questions based on it.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In a certain language,
‘bright and intellectual students’ is written as ‘mt la ga pa’.
‘fresh and bright mind’ is written as ‘la pa ni dh’.
‘in mind thoughts clear’ is written as ’dh pz ma mi’.
‘intellectual thoughts in mind’ is written as ‘ma pz dh ga’.
In the given code language, what does the code ‘ga’ stand for?
Question 11
Direction: A part of the given sentence is underlined. Below it, alternatives to the underlined part are given which can help make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. Choose the correct alternative. If the given sentence is correct as it is, mark 'no correction required' as the answer.
Imports of lower-priced capital goods from China, such as turbines for electric utilities, can help India address the infrastructure bottlenecks—especially in roads, highways, ports, and electric power—that appeared as India’s manufacturing revolution gets under way.
Question 12
Direction: In the given question, a part of the sentence is underlined. Alternatives to the underlined part are given which may help make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. Choose the correct alternative.
In the fall of 1996, the Indian Government dispatched samples of the cells of the militants to those four US scientists, who were only the Americans authorised to test them.
Question 13
Direction: In the given question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Below the sentence, alternatives to the emboldened part are given as (A), (B), (C) and (D), which may help improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative out of the given five options. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer will be (E), i.e., "No correction required".
Born and brought up in a village were computers and the internet where objects of curiosity, presently, Ramesh barely gives a thought to the immense possibilities that the internet revolution has thrown open to him.
Question 14
Direction: In the given question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Below the sentence, alternatives to the emboldened part are given as (A), (B), (C) and (D), which may help improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative out of the given five options. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer will be option (E), i.e., "No correction required".
Panchayati Raj institutions are entrusted to the execution of all rural upliftment schemes and programs in our country.
Question 15
Direction: In the given question, a part of the sentence is printed in bold. Below the sentence, alternatives to the emboldened part are given as (A), (B), (C) and (D), which may help improve the sentence. Choose the correct alternative out of the given five options. In case the given sentence is correct, your answer will be (E), i.e., "No correction required".
Known the area was prone to earthquakes, all the buildings were reinforced with additional steel and concrete.
Question 16
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
What is the reason for Indian intervention in Doklam?
Question 17
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
How is Beijing violating the 2012 agreement?
Question 18
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
What is the Chinese precondition before any negotiations?
Question 19
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
Which of the following is not one of the characteristics of the Chinese foreign policy?
Question 20
Direction: Read the given passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
With the military standoff between India and China continuing in the Doklam area of the India-China-Bhutan border trijunction, Beijing has resorted to harsh rhetoric to put psychological pressure on New Delhi. It has used state-run Chinese media to issue not-so-subtle threats to India, asking the latter to learn from the lessons of the 1962 conflict between the two countries. This is totally uncalled for and shows China – which seeks to be the pre-eminent Asian power – in poor light. It once again highlights Beijing’s lack of respect for a rule-based global order.
The facts on the ground are that the area under contention is disputed between Bhutan and China with India having security sensitivities in the same region. The problem arose when China unilaterally sought to change the status quo of the trijunction through its road building activities. India was forced to defend its own interests as well as those of its ally Bhutan when the Chinese side refused to seriously consider Thimphu’s protestations. Plus, China’s moves are in clear violation of a 2012 agreement that the boundaries in the trijunction point are to be decided by the three parties together.
The only way out of the current standoff is through dialogue. But China insists that Indian troops pull back first before negotiations. This is again unhelpful and underlines Beijing’s propensity to arm-twist its neighbours. This is precisely what it has been doing in the South China Sea through its island building activities. Beijing is very good at changing facts on the ground and slowing altering the status quo in its favour. Hence, its neighbours are now holding their ground more resolutely. As pointed out by external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, a negotiated resolution to the Doklam standoff can be facilitated if both sides withdraw their troops from the area first. This will build the requisite mutual trust between the parties for talks.
It should also be recognised that such border disputes will continue to crop up until the boundary between India and China is fully demarcated. The Chinese attitude that the boundary only needs to be managed for the time being and a final resolution should be left to future generations no longer suffices. Both India and China should let go of past baggage and demarcate the boundary more or less along the present LAC alignment.
What does the author mean by using the phrase ‘arm twist its neighbors’?
Question 21
Directions: In the following question, two equations are given. You have to solve both the equations and find the relation between ‘m’ and ‘n’ and mark correct answer.
4m2 – 4m + 4 = 3 + m
2n2 – 2n + 2 = n2 + 1
2n2 – 2n + 2 = n2 + 1
Question 22
Directions: In the following question, two equations are given. You have to solve both the equations and find the relation between ‘m’ and ‘n’ and mark correct answer.
m2 – 11m + 30 = 0
2n2 – 7n + 6 =0
2n2 – 7n + 6 =0
Question 23
Directions: In the following question, two equations are given. You have to solve both the equations and find the relation between ‘m’ and ‘n’ and mark correct answer.
2m (m – 2) = m – 3
4n2 – 15(n – 1) = n
4n2 – 15(n – 1) = n
Question 24
Direction: In the following question two equations are given in variables m and n. You have to solve these equations and determine relation between m and n.
I. m2 – 1 = 23
II. n2 – 9n + 20 = 0
II. n2 – 9n + 20 = 0
Question 25
Direction: In the following question, there are two equations. Solve the equations and answer accordingly:
I. 5m2 – 15m + 5 = 3m – 4
II. 3n2 + 6n – 4 = 5n – 2
II. 3n2 + 6n – 4 = 5n – 2
Question 26
Direction: Study the following graphs and answer accordingly:
Number of manufactured televisions by three different companies in six different years (in Thousands)
25% televisions are black and white which are manufactured by Company A in all years, then how many colours televisions are manufactured by Company A in all years ?
Question 27
Direction: Study the following graphs and answer accordingly:
Number of manufactured televisions by three different companies in six different years (in Thousands)
In 2008, the cost price of one television is ₹12000, then what is the total expenditure of Company C in this year of his total manufactured televisions?
Question 28
Direction: Study the following graphs and answer accordingly:
Number of manufactured televisions by three different companies in six different years (in Thousands)
What is the percentage increase of manufactured televisions by Company C in 2008 with respect to the previous year?
Question 29
Direction: Study the following graphs and answer accordingly:
Number of manufactured televisions by three different companies in six different years (in Thousands)
What is the approximate average number manufactured televisions by Company B in all years ?
Question 30
Direction: Study the following graphs and answer accordingly:
Number of manufactured televisions by three different companies in six different years (in Thousands)
What is the respective ratio between the number of manufactured Televisions by Company B in 2006 and the number of manufactured televisions by Company A in 2005?
- 5000 attempts
- 61 upvotes
- 269 comments
Mar 15PO, Clerk, SO, Insurance
