Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Neither I nor II is strong
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:Foreign policy decisions should be based on national interest, strategic fit, and principles—not popularity or one-dimensional funding motives. We judge each argument’s validity against these standards.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:Appeals to popularity (“others do/do not support”) and “only way” funding arguments are logical fallacies (bandwagon, false dilemma). Strong arguments should emphasize independent interest and policy merits.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Evaluate I: Saying “many powerful countries do not support” is an appeal to popularity, not a reason rooted in India’s interests. Hence, I is weak.Evaluate II: Claiming support is the “only way” to get funds is an overstatement and reduces complex diplomacy to a single lever. It is narrow and speculative, thus weak.Verification / Alternative check:If we replaced USA with any nation, wholesale support would remain questionable; selective, interest-based cooperation is the rational standard, which neither argument articulates.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Common Pitfalls:Accepting bandwagon logic; assuming binary choices in diplomacy.
Final Answer:Neither I nor II is strong
Discussion & Comments