The Hindu Editorial Vocabulary– July 8, 2021; Day 95

The importance of reading editorials of reputed newspapers is not hidden from anybody. What causes obstruction are difficult words which act like speed-breakers forcing you to either refer to a dictionary for its meaning or simply guess it. While getting the meaning from the dictionary is the best way to understand it, sometimes a dictionary is not within your reach. Also, a number of aspirants get confused when they see more than one meaning next to a word in a dictionary. It becomes a difficult process for them to pick the relevant meaning.

We at PracticeMock understand this and that’s why we have come up with a series of Editorials’ Difficult Words where we shortlist the important editorials of the day and pick the difficult words/ phrases therein. Next to the word, we put only the contextual sense of the word/ phrase so that you don’t get confused. Now let’s go through today’s editorial.

Difficult Word/ Phrase	Contextual Sense
Bloodshed	the killing or wounding of people, typically on a large scale during a conflict
Province	the whole of a country outside the capital, especially when regarded as lacking in sophistication or culture
Power broker	a person who influences people to vote towards a particular client (i.e. elected official or referendum) in exchange for political and financial benefits
Troop	soldiers or armed forces
Relentless	continuing without becoming weaker, less severe, etc.
Abdication	failure to fulfill a responsibility or duty
Concession	the right to use land or other property for a specified purpose, granted by a government, company, or other controlling body
Pullout	a withdrawal, especially from military involvement or participation in a commercial venture
Legitimacy	conformity to the law or to rules
Warring	(of two or more people or groups) in conflict with each other

The surge : On Taliban’s recent gains in Afghanistan

The Taliban should not be allowed to take control of Afghanistan through bloodshed (the killing or wounding of people, typically on a large scale during a conflict)

The rapid territorial gains made by the Taliban over the last two months should worry both the Afghan government and the regional powers who are invested in the country’s long-term stability. The Taliban started their latest offensive on May 1, the day the remaining U.S. troops started withdrawing as part of President Joe Biden’s plan. With 90% of U.S. withdrawal complete, the Taliban have taken control of 195 of Afghanistan’s 407 districts, and are contesting 129 others. Most of their recent victories are in the northern provinces (the whole of a country outside the capital, especially when regarded as lacking in sophistication or culture) of Badakhshan and Takhar, which had resisted Taliban rule in the 1990s. In several northern districts, Afghan troops have either surrendered or retreated. If the north, home to Afghanistan’s elite power brokers (a person who influences people to vote towards a particular client (i.e. elected official or referendum) in exchange for political and financial benefits) and leaders, is lost, the risk of a total collapse of the government in Kabul would increase. The government still controls most of the provincial capitals and cities but are practically surrounded by the Taliban. Given the pace of the Taliban’s advancement in the countryside, it is possible they could launch an offensive to take the population centres once the foreign troops (soldiers or armed forces) are out.

The Taliban’s strategy is still not clear. Their political office in Doha, which started peace talks with Afghan government representatives in September 2020, continues to say they are committed to the dialogue. But on the battlefield in Afghanistan, they continue a relentless (continuing without becoming weaker, less severe, etc.) campaign aimed at capturing more territories. Part of the problem was the total abdication (failure to fulfill a responsibility or duty) of leadership and responsibility by the U.S., which invaded Afghanistan 20 years ago. When direct talks between the U.S. and the Taliban began, the U.S.’s focus was not on finding a peaceful settlement to the crisis that it partly created, but on exiting the war. Therefore, instead of putting pressure on the Taliban to extract concessions (the right to use land or other property for a specified purpose, granted by a government, company, or other controlling body), the U.S. struck a deal with them, completely ignoring the concerns of Kabul. Now, the Taliban are much more powerful on the ground and even if the peace process is revived after American pullout, they would negotiate from a position of strength. But that should not stop Kabul and regional powers China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan and India from seeking a political settlement. A violent takeover of the country by the Taliban, like in 1996, would not serve anybody’s interests. The Taliban would also not find international legitimacy (conformity to the law or to rules) if they capture Kabul through bloodshed. Afghan’s past experiences suggest that one-party regimes — the communist regime, Mujahideen or the Taliban — failed to stabilise the country or sustain themselves in the long term. Now that the invading troops are exiting Afghanistan, the warring ((of two or more people or groups) in conflict with each other.) parties’ focus should shift towards settlement and building lasting structures of power. Else, Afghanistan would fall into another cycle of violence.

Hope you got to know some new words/phrases which will definitely be useful in the English section of upcoming competitive exams. Wishing you all the best for your preparation!

Want to improve your vocabulary further? Download the Lists of Word-Meanings of Previous Months here.