Banking Exams

Lakshay asked   •  7 minutes ago

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s forthcoming visit to China, beginning May 14, is of considerable interest not only to peoples inhabiting the two countries, but also to leaders and strategic analysts globally. In China, Mr. Modi will be visiting Xian, Beijing and Shanghai over three days, before leaving for Mongolia and South Korea. Mr. Modi’s visit follows Chinese President Xi Jinping’s trip to India in September 2014. There is a great deal hinging on its outcome with China being viewed today as a pivot-state, and India the only nation in the region capable of maintaining the balance in the region. For his part, Mr. Modi has, no doubt, indicated that trade and economic ties with China would be his main priority. However, there is much more to an Indian Prime Minister’s visit to China than economic relations — unstated though this may be. This visit is again taking place at a time when China has unveiled a new strategic vision, and elements of the strategy conform to Sun Tzu’s principle of “winning without fighting”. It implicitly includes rewarding nations that it perceives as “friends” and, by implication, excluding nations that stand in its way.
China is also currently affording an opportunity to nations in the region to become a part of a Beijing-contrived “security alliance”, holding out the promise of a new Asian security paradigm, previously embedded in Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “Code of Conduct for Asia” (2014). The latter contained a veiled “warning” to countries forging military alliances to counter China. Perhaps, having waded too far out by its references to the issue of maritime disputes in the South China Sea at various regional fora, and more explicitly in the Joint Strategic Vision for the Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean region following the U.S. President Barack Obama-Modi meeting in New Delhi in January this year, the Prime Minister may, hence, need to indulge in some intricate balancing acts to win the confidence of his hosts. Many Western analysts believe that China is presently demonstrating a degree of “strategic autism”, resulting from its growing power. The Indian side needs to factor this in its calculations. Under President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, China had, by and large, displayed a benign face. It was during this period, in 2008, that India and China unveiled a “Joint Strategic Vision for the 21st Century”. This was considered unusual even then for China generally finds it difficult to endorse a common vision. Under Mr. Xi, China has moved away from Deng Xiaoping’s injunction “to hide our capabilities and bide our time and never claim leadership”. It now countenances the employment of diplomacy as an instrument for the effective application of Chinese power in support of China’s ambitious and long-term foreign policy agenda. Effectively, therefore, the 2008 “Shared Vision Concept” is all but buried, and it would be useful to see what happens next. The Indian side must avoid falling into any kind of trap of arriving at decisions on strategic issues, made seemingly easy by the Chinese employing very simplified, schematic representations of highly complex realities. Meanwhile, current realities in the region are becoming more complex having entered a period fraught with change. The emergence of new dangers in West Asia, the uncertainty in Afghanistan, with the Islamic State (IS) now siding with the Taliban, tensions among different nations in South-East Asia and East Asia, and evidence of increasing Chinese assertiveness, have produced an unstable equilibrium.
Consequently, while there are many issues that would be uppermost in Mr. Modi’s mind, the visit provides an excellent opportunity for him to assess, at first hand, where China is headed. It will give him a chance to estimate the potential impact of recent developments on Sino-Indian relations. The Prime Minister could begin by making a realistic appraisal of China’s “Defence Posture” and the kind of threat this poses to India. Rising defence budgets (the 2015 defence Budget is estimated at $141.5 billion — the 26th year of normal double digit increases since 1989), unveiling of a host of new state-of-the-art weapons such as the DF-21D “Carrier Killer” anti-ship ballistic missile (the Assassin’s Mace according to the United States) and the J-20 stealth fighter aircraft, employment of asymmetric tactics which conform to Sun Tzu’s precepts, all send out a clear message that China is no longer willing to watch from the sidelines where its immediate and long-term security interests are concerned.
Mr. Modi would also have the opportunity to understand, first hand, the implications of China’s “Outreach Programme”. The launch of the New Development Bank and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has already demonstrated Beijing’s determination to build an alternative financial architecture. The “One Belt, One Road” initiative (inclusive of a Silk Road Development Fund) aims to boost connectivity with China’s Central Asian neighbours, and establish a Eurasian land corridor from the Pacific Coast to the Baltic Sea, which possibly signals China’s determination to undermine the U.S. Pivot to Asia. The ‘Maritime Silk Road’ concept is possibly an even more audacious move, with plans to connect more than 50 countries via the sea and build a network of port cities along the Silk Road. This could well result in circumventing and circumscribing India’s own outreach diplomacy. The ambit of China’s “Public Diplomacy” including the rapid expansion of Confucius Institutes (there are over 415 such institutes around the globe including around 15 in India at present) also merits the Prime Minister’s attention. The interconnecting links between these Institutes and the authorities in China are matters which require to be better understood in the context of China’s current “soft power” offensive. As in the case of China’s “Peaceful Rise”, there is room for worry and concern. China has already notched up several diplomatic successes — some of these will have an adverse impact on India’s external relations. The transformation in China-Russia relations is clearly one. This has been facilitated by the $400 billion gas deal, but it should not be overlooked that Russia was possibly the first overseas destination for Mr. Xi. What should specially concern India and Mr. Modi, is that China and Russia are now determined to deepen their “comprehensive strategic partnership” and “contribute to lasting world peace”. Likewise, China has gained a strategic beachhead in West Asia with its Iran connection. China is reaping the reward of standing by Iran. This will clearly put India on the back foot in a region which it has carefully nursed for a long time
Q. Choose an appropriate title for the passage.
... more

Ashwini Laknepally asked   •  29 minutes ago

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question given below it. Some words have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.
In the olden days, students used to stay in the teacher’s house and learn. At a young age, boys were sent to the teacher’s house. This system of education was called ‘Gurukula’.
Prabhakaran was a boy of twelve. He was staying in his teacher’s house to learn Sanskrit. Prabhakaran was a good student and his teacher liked him. But the teacher didn’t show his affection towards the boy. Rather, he was stricter towards him. One day Prabhakaran was not very attentive in the class. This made the teacher angry. He beat him severely. Prabhakaran wept for some time. Then he wanted to wreak his vengeance on the teacher. In his rage he decided to kill the teacher. He chalked out a plan for this; Prabhakaran would climb up to the roof of his teacher’s bedroom with heavy granite stone and drop it on the teacher’s head when he was asleep. So after taking the dinner, Prabhakaran went out, picked up a heavy stone and climbed to the roof of the room. After some time his teacher and his wife retired to bed. Before sleeping they talked for some time. During the talk Prabhakaran heard his name being mentioned. He listened to their conversation attentively. The teacher’s wife was equally fond of Prabhakaran. She was telling the teacher, ‘this morning you were very harsh on Prabhakaran. You beat him umpteen times, mercilessly. Is he not the best boy in your class? If you behave in this manner he will run away from here and you will lose a good student.’
The teacher replied, ‘you are right, I should not have been so cruel to him. But you know he was not attentive in the class. I was taking an important lesson and he was talking to another boy. When I saw it I lost my temper. Prabhakaran should not miss important lessons. So I beat him in such a way that the punishment may deter him from such indifference in future.’
On hearing this, Prabhakaran became very sad. It was with good intention that the teacher punished him. He was overwhelmed with remorse. The whole night he sat on the roof. The next morning after lessons, he approached his teacher when he was alone and confessed to him everything.
Q.Why did the teacher not show affection to Prabhakaran?
... more

Aditya Lakra asked   •  7 hours ago

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them.
The 2015 Review of the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) will take place in New York from  April 27 to   May 22  and the process is expected to be stormy and contentious. The event marks some significant anniversaries of conflict: the 100th —  of the use of chemical weapons in Ypres, Belgium; the 70th — of the  bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; and the 20th — of the indefinite extension of the NPT. A new set of geopolitical drivers will work the agendas of nuclear and non-nuclear members of the Treaty.
Coming into force  in 1970, the Treaty has been subjected to numerous pulls and pressures which have left the dream of nuclear disarmament unattained and the purpose of preventing proliferation defeated. The last review, in 2010, followed the complete failure of the 2005 Review conference, as a consequence of serious disagreements which had emerged over a decade. The desire of non-nuclear states to see better progress on disarmament by the Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) will figure as before. The discourse on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons has given a new shape to the NPT debate. 
The NWS have not been enthused by either of these two concepts. Relations among the NWS after Russian actions in Ukraine will have a substantial impact on the conference. Moscow’s rhetoric and responses have led to a rethink on the role and relevance of nuclear deterrence, even among the non-nuclear states of eastern Europe. As if this is not enough, the situation in  West Asia will loom large since it involves the uncertainties of Iran, Israel, Syria and the Islamic State (IS) in particular and the rest of the Arab world in general. In comparison, the nuclear shenanigans of North Korea which were once viewed as a major global danger, would remain a marginal issue.
The  NPT Review Conference in 2010 built a hard-fought consensus based on more than 60  action points spread over three broad areas. These three “pillars” were nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful uses of nuclear energy.  West Asia figured large, which primarily meant finding a way to a nuclear-free zone, which in turn meant addressing the issue of Israel’s nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied  by Iran’s own nuclear programme which in turn could now be resolved if the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between the P5+1 (the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia, and China, facilitated by the European Union) and Iran comes to fruition.  Three preparatory committee (Prepcom) meetings have been held so far to prepare an agenda or work plan for the 2015 Review Conference next  week. Reconciling the wide range of views of 190-member states has never been easy. Consequently, various consensus drafts have been attempted and what emerges as the agreed agenda for the conference remains to be seen. The three pillars are in themselves complex and intractable as examined  hereon.
Nuclear disarmament is possibly the easiest issue on the table, more so because there is no solution possible or even conceivable. As a result, a formulaic approach is likely to get used in which non-nuclear weapon states deplore the NWS’s lack of progress on reducing their arsenals and making good on promises made in the past. On their part, the NWS will reaffirm their commitment to disarmament, but point to the strategic security scenario to justify the incremental and slow progress so far. This will be contested strongly at the conference. The discourse on the humanitarian dangers, from the use, deliberate or accidental, of nuclear weapons either by states or non-state actors, has gathered strength. This requires, from the NWS, greater transparency and tangible steps on nuclear security. U.S. President Barack Obama has led the initiative on nuclear security through international conferences, which have yielded more statements of intentions than specific actions. This will coalesce the non-nuclear states into a large bloc demanding tangible action from the NWS. They would seek time bound progress on the long promised consultative process among the NWS.
Q. Which of the following is the synonym of the word “coalesce”?
... more

Jatin More asked   •  yesterday

The year is 2089. Beijing, London, New York and Paris are in contention to host the 2096 Olympics. The eventual winner is determined through several rounds of voting by members of the IOC with each member representing a different city. All the four cities in contention are also represented in IOC 
● In any round of voting, the city receiving the lowest number of votes in that rounds gets eliminated. The survivor after the last round of voting gets to host the events. 
● A member is allowed to cast votes for at most two different cities in all rounds of voting combined. (Hence, a member becomes ineligible to cast a vote in a given round if both the city (s) he voted for in earlier rounds are out of contention in that round of voting)
● A member is also ineligible to cast a vote, in a round if the city (s) he represents in contention in that round voting. 
● As long as the member is eligible, (s) he must vote and vote for only one candidate city in any round of voting. 
● The following incomplete table shows the information on cities that received the maximum and minimum votes in different rounds, the number of votes cast in their favour, and the total votes that were cast in those rounds. 


It is also known that : 
● All those who voted for London and Paris in round 1, continued to vote for the same cities in subsequent rounds as long as these cities were in contention. 75% of those who voted for Beijing in round 1, voted for Beijing in round 2 as well. 
● Those who voted for New York in around 1, voted either for Beijing or Paris in round 2.
● The difference in votes cast for the two contending cities in the last round was 1.
● 50% of those who voted for Beijing in round 1, voted for Paris in round 3
Q.What percentage of members from among those who voted for New York in round 1, voted for Beijing in round 2 ?
... more

Jatin More asked   •  yesterday

The year is 2089. Beijing, London, New York and Paris are in contention to host the 2096 Olympics. The eventual winner is determined through several rounds of voting by members of the IOC with each member representing a different city. All the four cities in contention are also represented in IOC 
● In any round of voting, the city receiving the lowest number of votes in that rounds gets eliminated. The survivor after the last round of voting gets to host the events. 
● A member is allowed to cast votes for at most two different cities in all rounds of voting combined. (Hence, a member becomes ineligible to cast a vote in a given round if both the city (s) he voted for in earlier rounds are out of contention in that round of voting)
● A member is also ineligible to cast a vote, in a round if the city (s) he represents in contention in that round voting. 
● As long as the member is eligible, (s) he must vote and vote for only one candidate city in any round of voting. 
● The following incomplete table shows the information on cities that received the maximum and minimum votes in different rounds, the number of votes cast in their favour, and the total votes that were cast in those rounds. 


It is also known that : 
● All those who voted for London and Paris in round 1, continued to vote for the same cities in subsequent rounds as long as these cities were in contention. 75% of those who voted for Beijing in round 1, voted for Beijing in round 2 as well. 
● Those who voted for New York in around 1, voted either for Beijing or Paris in round 2.
● The difference in votes cast for the two contending cities in the last round was 1.
● 50% of those who voted for Beijing in round 1, voted for Paris in round 3
.Q What is the number of votes cast for Paris in round 1 ?
... more

Pooja Chhatre asked   •  yesterday

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question given below it. Some words have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions.

In the olden days, students used to stay in the teacher’s house and learn. At a young age, boys were sent to the teacher’s house. This system of education was called ‘Gurukula’.
Prabhakaran was a boy of twelve. He was staying in his teacher’s house to learn Sanskrit. Prabhakaran was a good student and his teacher liked him. But the teacher didn’t show his affection towards the boy. Rather, he was stricter towards him. One day Prabhakaran was not very attentive in the class. This made the teacher angry. He beat him severely. Prabhakaran wept for some time. Then he wanted to wreak his vengeance on the teacher. In his rage he decided to kill the teacher. He chalked out a plan for this; Prabhakaran would climb up to the roof of his teacher’s bedroom with heavy granite stone and drop it on the teacher’s head when he was asleep. So after taking the dinner, Prabhakaran went out, picked up a heavy stone and climbed to the roof of the room. After some time his teacher and his wife retired to bed. Before sleeping they talked for some time. During the talk Prabhakaran heard his name being mentioned. He listened to their conversation attentively. The teacher’s wife was equally fond of Prabhakaran. She was telling the teacher, ‘this morning you were very harsh on Prabhakaran. You beat him umpteen times, mercilessly. Is he not the best boy in your class? If you behave in this manner he will run away from here and you will lose a good student.’
The teacher replied, ‘you are right, I should not have been so cruel to him. But you know he was not attentive in the class. I was taking an important lesson and he was talking to another boy. When I saw it I lost my temper. Prabhakaran should not miss important lessons. So I beat him in such a way that the punishment may deter him from such indifference in future.’
On hearing this, Prabhakaran became very sad. It was with good intention that the teacher punished him. He was overwhelmed with remorse. The whole night he sat on the roof. The next morning after lessons, he approached his teacher when he was alone and confessed to him everything.
Q. Why did the student decide to remain on the roof whole night?
... more

Fetching relevant content for you