Class 12 Exam  >  Class 12 Questions  >  India really cannot handle tension in West As... Start Learning for Free
India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.
That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. It's not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.
There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.
One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.
But even if there isn't all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubai's struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.
Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.
Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no one's interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.
Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the world's oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.
Even if India's economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.
Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?
  • a)
    In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.
  • b)
    An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.
  • c)
    All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.
  • d)
    There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may see...
You are asked to identify the statement which cannot be inferred from the passage. The passage says that West Asia contributes to more than 50% of the total remittance to India. It is not necessary that more than 50% of Indians work in that region.
There is no data which can help us arrive at that claim.
Consider this example: Say there are two countries A and B. Remittance from A is 100 and remittance from B is 50. If there are 20 people in A and 50 people in B (each person in A sends 5 and each person in B sends 1), it is possible that there can be less number of Indians working in A than in B even though the remittance from A is higher] Since answer choice (d) cannot be inferred, it is the correct answer.
Incorrect Answers
(a) - Refer to this sentence: "Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return.". "many more will return" suggests that there have been people who have returned in the past. Answer choice (a) can be inferred.
(b) - The author states that "A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to..." The author states that the places Indians return to will be under pressure if there is a sudden jolt. Answer choice (b) can be inferred.
(c) The author states that more than 50% of all remittances to India is from West Asia. So, all the other region put together would be less than 50% and therefore it would be less than the remittance from West Asia. Answer choice (c) can be inferred.
Explore Courses for Class 12 exam
India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may seem obvious: after all, any escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States, after the latter killed top Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani, will have a huge impact across the region and beyond. Its not for nothing that "World War 3" trended on Twitter on Friday.There are two primary dangers for India, other than the extremely destabilising effects of any outright war in the region.One, there are 8 million Indians living and working in West Asia, the vast majority of whom live in the Arabian Gulf. Conflict would put them all in danger, as it did at the start of the 1990s, when the US went to war with Iraq and New Delhi had to arrange an airlift of more than 110,000 Indian citizens.But even if there isnt all-out conflict, heightened tensions could hurt the economies of the region, and endanger the jobs of many Indians. Already the events of the last few years, including inter-regional conflict between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, employment nationalisation drives in a number of countries and Dubais struggles to recover from economic crisis, have hurt the diaspora.Kerala has already begun coming to terms with the idea that many more will return. A sudden jolt would put pressure on the places Indians return to, and also endanger the $40 billion in remittances India receives from West Asia - more than 50% of all remittances to the country, a key source of foreign exchange.Then there is the question of oil prices. Though international prices have gone up by 4% since the strike on Soleimani, analysts do not currently expect them to get much higher - presuming it is in no ones interests for that to happen and that both the US and Iran will back down from outright conflict.Yet if that presumption is wrong, India will face some difficult times. Although India does not now import much oil from Iran, it is still heavily reliant on the Strait of Hormuz - the tiny span of water through which a quarter of the worlds oil and a third of its natural gas travels. Higher oil prices would automatically mean inflation in India, where analysts are already worried about rising food prices.Even if Indias economy were on a more stable footing, conflict in the region would be dangerous. But the current tensions, coming as they do when the Indian economy seems poised on a precipice, should be even more alarming for policymakers.Q. Which one of the following CANNOT be inferred from the information given in the fifth paragraph?a)In the past, there have been instance of Keralites working abroad returning to Kerala.b)An influx of migrant workers returning to a state would have some burden on the state.c)All the regions other than West Asia cumulatively have lesser remittances to India than the remittances from West Asia.d)There are a greater number of Indians working in West Asia than any other region abroad.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.
Explore Courses for Class 12 exam
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev