Statement:
Is the WTO regime unfair to India?
Arguments:
I. Yes, the WTO bureaucracy has been openly supporting the agenda of large capital form the developed countries, and increasingly does not even pay lip service to the genuine demands of developing countries like India.
II. No, if India cannot come up whit a consistent approach that links its domestic economic policy to its global trade strategy, why blame the WTO?

there is no relation between statement and argument so we cannot relate each other.
if neither I nor II is strong

if neither I nor II is strong; and

I is strong because it focusses on the problems caused by bullock carts.

Arguments I is strong because it pinpoints the negative feature of an illiterate bus driver . II is not strong because mechanical skill is not enough. Traffic rules are also important.

Argument I is too simplistic. Hence I is not strong but II is because it pinpoints the positive feature.

II is strong because it tells why the move is illegal. I is weak because the given analogy is not appropriate. Nor is it convincing.

I is weak because of the words ''no other way''. II is weak because it ignores the internal factors and circumstances of the country.

I is strong because it explains how the move is furitful for citizens. II is weak because it is based on the misinterpretation of the definition of human right.

if only argument I is strong

I is strong because law and order must be given priority. II is also strong. One has to go through various hassles for obtaining licenses, which will definitely affect adversely on the growth of these services.