Question Description
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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for Banking Exams 2024 is part of Banking Exams preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Banking Exams exam syllabus. Information about 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Banking Exams 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Banking Exams. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Banking Exams Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice 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 andcontentious. 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 nucleardisarmamentunattained 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. Moscows 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 nuclearshenanigans of North Koreawhich 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 Israels nuclear weapons. This has now been much muddied by Irans 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 andintractableas 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 NWSs 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 willcoalescethe 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?a)Amalgamateb)Stiltedc)Strainedd)tranquilitye)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Banking Exams tests.