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 andquot;World War 3andquot; 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Class 12 Exam > Class 12 Questions > India really cannot handle tension in West As...

Join the Discussion on the App

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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?

a)
The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.
b)
The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.
c)
The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.
d)
The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Languages: Mock Test - 3

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

India really cannot handle tension in West Asia right now.That may see...

In the passage the author raises the concern that the US-Iran conflict will have for India. In the passage the author discusses the impact it will have on Indians working in the region and the danger it poses to Indian economy. Answer choice (c) captures this idea completely and accurately.

Incorrect Answers

(a) - This answer choice only considers the impact on Indian worker and leaves out the impact on Indian economy.

(b) - The issue of remittance is a specific issue that the author discusses in the passage. It is a supporting detail of the argument put forth by the author.

(d) - This looks to be a good option; however, it is misleading. The problem is with the word 'unnecessary'. Whether or not the military intervention is unnecessary is something that the author does not discuss. The author talks about the impact of the conflict with regards to India.

Author does not make a judgement on whether the conflict was necessary or unnecessary. This makes answer choice (d) incorrect.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam

Similar Class 12 Doubts

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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?

View answer

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. Why do the analysts expect that the international price of oil will not increase substantially?

View answer

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. Why do the analysts expect that the international price of oil will not increase substantially?

View answer

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?

View answer

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?

View answer

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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 best expresses the main idea of the passage?a)The killing of top Iranian military commander by the US has led to instability in the Middle east which in turn has put the Indians working in the region in huge danger.b)The US-Iran conflict will endanger the $40 million remittance from the Indians working in the region, which in turn will create a strong negative economic impact.c)The escalations of conflict between US and Iran following the killing of top Iranian military commander poses danger to Indians working in the region and to Indian economy.d)The unnecessary military intervention of US in Iran will not only hit the Indian economy badly but also put the Indians working in the region in jeopardy.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam