English Quiz for UIIC AO 2016 – Set 3

Read the followings carefully and answer

Directions (Q. 1-15):
Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain
words/ phrases are given in bold to help you locate them while answering some
of the questions.

Things have got so bad between
India and Pakistan that when they talk peace it looks like war. Their prime
ministers were to address the 65th annual session of the United Nations General
Assembly (UNGA) in New York and then meet on the sidelines. One day Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif made some illadvised, bellicose, Kashmir-related remarks
against India in his speech at the UNGA. On the following day Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh lashed out at Pakistan in his speech. Before they met the next
day Sharif reportedly called Singh a “village hag” (sic) off the
record and put paid to whatever diplomatic gains he had counted on. After that,
the meeting could not be one-on-one.

Back home, the Indo-Pak media war
was savage, sharpened by BJP leader Narendra Modi’s explosive reaction to the
“village hag” remark. One channel pitted the notoriously visceral
Pakistani politician Sheikh Rashid Ahmed against Hindu and Muslim Indians,
scoring brownie points while anchors lost their neutral cool. The New York
meeting achieved nothing except a vague agreement on sorting out the recent
Line of Control incidents through armies that hate each other. Pakistan’s
reference to Indian terrorism in Balochistan was correct but not comparable to
India’s globally accepted designation of Pakistan as the epicentre of
terrorism, threatening the world, including the US, the EU, India, Russia and
China, to say nothing of the Central Asian states, which cower before the Uzbek terrorists trained in Pakistan.

Manmohan Singh’s reaction to an
act of terrorism in Jammu on the eve of his meeting with Sharif was brave and
statesmanlike, given the negative press he has at home and the populist
atmospherics of the coming elections in India. He said he would not be deterred by terrorism while talking
peace with Pakistan. While in New York, he met President Barack Obama – who
could not find time for his Pakistani counterpart – and agreed to meet Sharif,
with caveats against pinning high
hopes on the meeting. Sharif’s reference to Kashmir at the UNGA was aimed more
at audiences at home than at India. He also expressed Pakistan’s newfound
plaint about the “unjust” global system created by a flawed UN and
called, unrealistically, for reforms in the world body. At home, right-wing TV
anchors and newspaper reporters were pleased that “he spoke softly but
gave a harsh message”. Some were put off because he was not
“fiery” enough, meaning that he lacked in denunciatory “Chavizmo” or the parading of a poor man’s
useless tumescence in global
politics.

Ace anchor Kamran Khan gave the
familiar, but repeatedly defeated, spin to the Jammu attack on Indian police
and military troops: “The attacks inflicted a heavy loss to the Indian
army and police and also revived the assertion that no effort for peace between
Pakistan and India could bear fruit until the Kashmir issue was resolved.”
Sharif was toeing the Foreign Office line, which has traditionally toed the
Pakistan army line, built on the frozen geopolitical position on India as a
permanent enemy opposed to the very existence of Pakistan. The last bit is
supported by the textbook brainwash in the schools of Pakistan, particularly
Punjab, currently ruled by Sharif’s rightwing PML(N). His plaint about Kashmir not finding place on the roster of issues at
the UN was purely for home consumption, because the 1972 Indo-Pak Simla
Agreement had forever assigned it to bilateral dialogue. Pakistan had – wrongly
– tried to move the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against India for the
1999 shooting down of a surveillance aircraft. The ICJ, while asserting that it
had no jurisdiction over the matter, gratuitously advised Pakistan to abide by
the 1972 change of status of all disputes.

1. Why did the issue
of Kashmir not figure on the roster of issues at the UN?

1) Because the UN does not want to poke its nose in such a
complicated issue.

2) Because the Kashmir issue is not so important in comparison
to other global issues.

3) Because, as per the Indo – Pak Shimla Agreement 1972,
Kashmir issue can be resolved only through bilateral dialogues.

4) Because ICJ does not exercise its jurisdiction over the
matters of India and Pakistan.

5) None of these

2. What results came
out of the New York meeting between the two Prime Ministers?

1) That they would effectively deal with the Uzbek terrorists
being trained in Pakistan

2) Both the countries agreed to reduce deployment of their
forces at Indo-Pak borders.

3) That they would take concrete steps to minimize the
threat of Indian terrorism in Baluchistan

4) Nothing except a vague agreement on sorting out the
recent LoC incidents through armies.

5) All the above

3. Why is it
mentioned that when India and Pakistan talk peace, it looks like war?

(A) Because the Prime Ministers of both the countries made
reproachful remarks against each other.

(B) Because both the countries are weak at their homes and
they cannot help a war talk.

(C) Because both the countries tend to behave in a savage
manner.

1) Only (A)

2) Only (B)

3) Only (C)

4) Both (A) and (B)

5) Both (A) and (C)

4. Why did Nawaz
Sharif call Manmohan Singh a ‘village hag’?

1) Because Nawaz Sharif has gone insane and does not have
any bit of courtesy and manner.

2) Because Manmohan singh had lashed out at Pakistan in his
speech just a day before.

3) Because of their bitter relationships

4) Because Nawaz Sharif knew that India is a very weak
country and would not dare to counter his remarks.

5) None of these

5. What prompted the
anchors of a media channel to lose their neutral cool?

(A) The pugnacious remarks made by Nawaz Sharif against
India

(B) Because of the humiliating remarks by a Pakistani politician
against Hindu and Muslim Indians

(C) Because of the rude tone of a prominent BJP leader

1) Only (A)

2) Only (B)

3) Both (A) and (B)

4) Both (A) and (C)

5) Only (C)

6. Why did Manmohan
Singh say before going to New York to meet President Barack Obama that he would not be deterred by terrorism while
talking peace with Pakistan?

1) Because he knew that war against war or terror against
terror cannot bring peace to a region.

2) Because he knew that Pakistan is not so weak that it
could be easily defeated in a war.

3) Because of the internal pressure from the party members.

4) Because he wanted to establish that an act of terrorism
cannot deter his strong determination of peace talk with Pakistan

5) Because he wanted to create populist atmospherics of the
coming elections in India.

7. Which of the
following is false about Sharif’s address to the 65th annual session of the
United Nations General Assembly in
New York?

1) Nawaz Sharif asserted Pakistan’s newfound complaint
against the unjust global system created by the United Nations.

2) As per the right-wing TV anchors and newspaper reporters,
Sharif gave a harsh message in soft tone.

3) Some of the left-wing TV anchors and newspaper reporters
claimed that his speech was not so fiery as it should have been.

4) Sharif’s reference to Kashmir at the UNGA was aimed at
India rather than at Pakistan.

5) All the above are true

8. Which of the following
is true about the given passage?

1) The given passage is a reflection of improving relationship
between India and Pakistan.

2) The given passage presents the current status of Indo-Pak
relations.

3) The given passage tries to defame the Prime Ministers of
both India and Pakistan.

4) The given passage has been written by a pro-Pakistan writer.

5) The given passage presents a distorted picture of Indo-Pak
relations.

9. What is Pakistan
doing, as a last resort, to create anti-India sentiment?

(A) It is helping terrorist organisations on its land.

(B) It is trying to brainwash school children and instil anti-India
sentiments in their minds.

(C) It is recruiting women suicide bombers in its territory.

1) Only (A)

2) Only (B)

3) Only (C)

4) Only (A) and (B)

5) Only (B) and (C)

Directions (Q. 10-12):
Choose the word/group of words which is MOST SIMILAR in meaning of the word/
group of words printed in bold as used
in the passage.

10. Caveat

1) reason 2) rule 3) caution

4) promise 5) attitude

11. Plaint

1) herb 2) simplicity 3) opinion

4) theory 5) allegations

12. Denunciatory

1) accusatory 2) praiseworthy 3) reforming

4) excellent 5) harsh

Directions (Q. 13-15):
Choose the word/group of words which is MOST OPPOSITE in meaning of the word/group of words printed in bold as used
in the passage.

13. Cower

1) meet 2) kowtow 3) face

4) cowardice 5) stand

14. Deterred

1) impeded 2) frightened 3) diverted

4) encouraged 5) stopped

15. Tumescence

1) void 2) totality 3) amplitude

4) congestion 5) surfeit