Daily Passage Test for CLAT - May 20 MCQs & solutions Free

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?

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 EU's Schuman Defence and Security Forum as mentioned in the passage?

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?

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."

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?