Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europeandrsquo;s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement andndash; one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EUandrsquo;s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EUandrsquo;s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europeandrsquo;s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EUandrsquo;s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully...

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.

The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.

But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.

The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.

The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.

The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.

Q. What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europe's security structure?

a)
The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.
b)
The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.
c)
The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.
d)
The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.

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

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions...

The passage underscores the EU's endeavors to attain strategic independence while simultaneously strengthening its connections with NATO. According to the author, these two aspects should harmonize, and the direction Europe's security framework takes in the future will be greatly influenced by the synergy between its reliance on NATO and its pursuit of strategic autonomy. Consequently, Option C is the accurate conclusion to be drawn from the passage concerning the future of Europe's security architecture. The other options, either explicitly dismissed in the passage or unrelated to its context, are not suitable.

Therefore, Option C is the correct response.

Answered by Glance Learning Institute · View profile

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What is the main idea conveyed by the passage?

View answer

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What is the primary focus of the EUs Schuman Defence and Security Forum as mentioned in the passage?

View answer

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What word, opposite in meaning to complement, can be found in the following sentence: "From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other."

View answer

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What is the meaning of "poly-crises" in the context of the passage?

View answer

Passage:Management is a set of processesthat can keep a complicated system of people and technology running smoothly. The most important aspects of management include planning, budgeting, organizing, staffing, controlling, and problem-solving. Leadership is a set of processes that creates organisations in the first place or adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles. This distinction is absolutely crucial for our purposes here: Successful transformation is 70 to 90 per cent leadership and only 10 to 30 per cent management. Yet for historical reasons, many organisations today don‘t have much leadership. And almost everyone thinks about the problems here as one of managing change. For most of this century, as we created thousands and thousands of large organizations for the first time in human history, we didn‘t have enough good managers to keep all those burrreaucracies functioning. So many companies and universities developed management programmes, and hundreds and thousands of people were encouraged to learn management on the job. And they did. But, people were taught little about leadership. To some degree, management was emphasized because it‘s easier to teach than leadership. But even more so, management was the main item on the twentieth-century agenda because that‘s what was needed. For every entrepreneur or business builder who was a leader, we needed hundreds of managers to run their ever growing enterprises. Unfortunately for us today, this emphasis on management has often been institutionalized in corporate cultures that discourage employees from learning how to lead. Ironically, past success is usually the key ingredient in producing this outcome.The syndrome, as I have observed it on many occasions, goes like this: success creates some degree of market dominance, which in turn produces much growth. After a while keeping the ever larger organizations under control becomes the primary challenge. So attention turns inward, and managerial competencies are nurtured. With a strong emphasis on management but not on leadership, bureaucracy and an inward focus take over. But with continued success, the result mostly of market dominance, the problem often goes unaddressed and an unhealthy arrogance begins to evolve. All of these characteristics then make any transformation effort much more difficult. Arrogant managers can over- evaluate their current performance and competitive position, listen poorly, and learn slowly. Inwardly focused employees can have difficulty seeing the very forces that present threats and opportunities.Bureaucratic cultures an smother those who want to respond to shifting conditions. And the lack of leadership leaves no fore inside these organizations to break out of the morass.Q.In the passage, management is equated with

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Crash Course for CLAT

CLAT Mock Test Series 2026

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.The war in Ukraine has fundamentally altered Europe’s internal and external reference points of what was once a European security order. To its credit, Europe has been quick to condition itself to radically changed realities. A lot of that re-conditioning continues to be economically painful and is on a constant lookout for openings amid an era of poly-crises.But at a fundamental level, Europe mulls a viable security architecture for itself, best expressed through its recently held flagship security dialogue with two major verticals of engagement – one with NATO and the US and another with forging global defence partnerships; one extra layer of smaller but proactive deterrents, and several challenges. The first edition of EU’s biennial security dialogue, The Schuman Defence and Security Forum, which falls under the aegis of the European External Action Service, was held on 20 and 21 March at the EU parliament in Brussels. Not only is this dialogue a departure from the dominant geo-economic personality of the EU with its security outsourced to the US, it also merits attention for its singular emphasis on achieving strategic autonomy by building equal, pragmatic and flexible security partnerships across the globe as originally conceived in EU’s strategic compass. Does that mean the EU is looking for strategic autonomy? Quite the contrary.The future course of how Europe builds its security architecture will depend largely on how well it blends its dependence and deepening ties with NATO and its quest for strategic autonomy. From Europe’s perspective, these two verticals should complement each other. But can they? The first vertical of EU security is, unarguably, deepening ties with NATO that the war in Ukraine has cemented.The panel discussions at Schuman highlighted growing cooperation with organisations like the United Nations, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for crisis management and stabilisation. But EU’s evolving association with NATO remained the most pronounced of all.The January 2023 EU-NATO Joint Declaration ramps up this partnership with a sharp focus on climate change, space, artificial intelligence, and emerging and disruptive tech. Increase in overlapping membership with Finland already in NATO, Sweden next in line, and Denmark incorporated fully into CSDP-Europe, transatlantic ties have never been so strong.Q.What can be deduced from the passage concerning the future of Europes security structure?a)The EU will prioritize its pursuit of strategic independence above strengthening its relationship with NATO.b)The EU will depend exclusively on NATO for its security requirements.c)The EU will persist in strengthening its connections with NATO while concurrently pursuing strategic autonomy through collaborations with other entities.d)The EU will disengage from NATO and seek associations with non-Western nations for its security requirements.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam