Q.1-10. Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some questions.
Playing cricket with Pakistan is inevitably a source of controversy. There was no shortage of complaints when India resumed playing with its neighbour after the Kargil conflict. The shadow of the 26/11 terrorist attacks understandably hangs over the latest decision to invite the Pakistan national team to tour India.
The strongest argument in favour of maintaining cricket ties with Pakistan is to say that India's neighbour is a house divided - and the cricket-playing side is the version of Pakistan that India favours. Pakistan is a nation under siege. It is being sucked into a civil conflict largely of its own creation, a domestic struggle about the future nature of Pakistan. At one extreme is the Lashkar-e-Taiba, whose vision of Pakistan is violent and medieval, governed by a primitive Islamicist ideology and consumed by a hatred of India. On the other is an older Pakistani nationalism that is democratic, moderately religious and animated by desires not overly dissimilar from those evident in the Indian polity. Its exemplars are the mainstream political parties, most of whose leaders have been loud advocates for normal relations with India. Many will ask whether hitting bats with balls matters when it comes to a matter as weighty as the course of a nation's evolution. It should be evident that the manner in which India can assist Pakistan the most in choosing a less nihilistic path is to allow interaction between the two countries' civil societies. There is a formal view that India and Pakistan need only solve their territorial disputes to fall into each other's arms, but the truth is that the problem of Pakistan goes far beyond just the issue of land and water. Resolving Kashmir and the like is important, but it is crucial in large part because it is the main obstacle in the way of bilateral civil society engagement.
The Pakistani military establishment has sought to keep the two societies at arm's length. This stance has begun to soften over the past several years. Travelling between the two countries by air and land is now taken for granted. Pakistan has at last conceded most-favoured nation status, paving the way for cross-border trade and investment. The two countries are confident of putting in place a much-relaxed visa regime. With this sort of momentum behind the relationship, it would be absurd for India to suddenly become opposed to something as politically neutral as cricket matches. There is a dangerous and much more crucial game on for the soul of Pakistan. The only strategy with a chance of success is one that looks beyond individual events, however bloody and tragic, and looks towards healing the larger social disease that afflicts Pakistan.
Q.1. Which of the following, according to the passage has/have been of the view to have normal relation with India?
(1) Sportspersons of Pakistan, now, residing in India.
(2) Leaders of mainstream political parties.
(3) Citizens of Pakistan
(4) Press and Media of Pakistan
(5) All of these
Q.2. Why has the author called cricket matches as something politically neutral’?
(1) Politics can not be played in cricket.
(2) Earlier cricket was full of politics
(3) Cricketers make great politicians.
(4) Cricket has nothing to do with political issues
(5) Not mentioned in the passage
Q.3. What is the formal view about India and Pakistan, according to the passage?
(1) If the two countries resolve their territorial disputes they will have cordial relationship.
(2) India must give Kashmir to Pakistan in order to have peace.
(3) India should remain adamant on the Kashmir issue.
(4) It is impossible to resolve the ongoing tension between the two countries
(5) None of these
Q.4. Which of the following has been said in the passage, about traveling between India and Pakistan?
(1) One has to follow certain rules when traveling by air.
(2) Travelling is not allowed between the two countries.
(3) One can travel freely by air and land.
(4) Only political leaders can travel freely between the two countries.
(5) Nothing has been mentioned in this regard.
Q.5. Which of the following is Lashkar-e-Taiba governed by?
(1) Racism and Islamic prejudices.
(2) Primitive Islamicist ideology.
(3) Modern patriotic ideology.
(4) Traditional beliefs and myths.
(5) None of these
Q.6. What happened when India started playing cricket with Pakistan after the Kargil attack?
(1) There were conflicts on the economic front.
(2) India’s move was globally appreciated
(3) There was a terrorist attack from Pakistan on India
(4) Relations between the two nations remained normal.
(5) None of these
Q.7. Why have India and Pakistan favored a much relaxed Visa regime?
A. Travelling between the two countries is eased.
B. Cross border trade becomes possible.
C. Indian investors can invest in Pakistan and vice versa.
(1) Only C (2) All A, B and C (3) All except B (4) Only A (5) Only B and C
Q.8. Which of the following is most opposite to the word weighty as mentioned in the passage?
(1) crucial (2) heinous (3) trivial (4) controversial (5) Far
Q.9. Which of the following is most similar in meaning to the word siege as given in the passage?
(1) Development (2) Destruction (3) Supervision (4) Reformation (5) Flood
Q.10. Which of the following is most opposite in meaning to the word ‘absurd’ as mentioned in the passage?
(1) foolish (2) creative (3) logical (4) Unique (5) Direct
Answers
Q.1.(2)
Q.2.(4)
Q.3.(1)
Q.4.(3)
Q.5.(2) Primitive Islamicist Ideology.
Q.6.(5)
Q.7.(2)
Q.8.(3) For other options :
Crucial (adj) - Important
controversial (adj) - having controversy attached.
Q.9.(2) Destruction
Q.10.(3) Logical
.jpg)