Consider the following pairs : 1. Argentina - Worst economic crisis 2. Sudan - War between the country's regular army and paramilitary forces 3. Turkey - Rescinded its membership of NATO How many of the pairs given above are correctly matched ?

Describes a severe balance-of-payments crisis that prompted an IMF-sponsored bail-out and subsequent recovery via devaluation and foreign inflows — a pattern typical of large national crises.

A student could check whether Argentina in 2001–2002 showed a similar BOP collapse, IMF involvement, and devaluation to judge if that episode matches this crisis pattern.

Explains how sudden withdrawal of external loans created acute crises in multiple countries and particularly affected Latin America — a common mechanism behind major regional economic collapses.

A student could look up Argentina's external debt dynamics and whether sudden capital withdrawal or loss of foreign lending occurred around 2001–2002.

Notes the late-20th-century pattern where borrowing from Western banks led to periodic debt crises in the developing world, explicitly mentioning Latin America as vulnerable.

Use that pattern to investigate if Argentina’s 2001–2002 episode was part of such a debt-crisis pattern (e.g., unsustainable external borrowing and rising unemployment).

Summarises typical social effects of deep economic crises (currency loss, erosion of savings, middle-class distress), providing indicators to recognise a major crisis.

A student could compare social indicators (currency stability, savings value, middle-class hardship) in Argentina in 2001–2002 to see if the episode produced these severe effects.

Identifies that large trade deficits and falling external receipts can produce a severe BOP crisis leading to major reforms — a structural cause to look for in large crises.

Investigate whether Argentina experienced large trade deficits or collapsing external receipts around 2001–2002 as a plausible cause of a severe crisis.

States often face internal threats and 'internal wars' now constitute the vast majority of armed conflicts; this establishes a general pattern that internal armed fights between state forces and other armed groups are common.

A student could take this pattern and check whether Sudan experienced internal armed conflict in 2023 by consulting contemporary news/timeline sources about Sudan for that year.

The snippet describes how distrust between communities can escalate into civil war with large-scale casualties, illustrating how internal rivalries may transform into full-scale conflict.

A student could examine whether rivalries between Sudanese military/paramilitary actors existed before 2023 and whether they escalated that year into open conflict.

Example of prolonged militant/insurgent campaigns leading to extraordinary violence and direct army involvement shows how governments and armed groups can come into sustained combat.

Compare this template of insurgency-versus-army to Sudan: look for reports in 2023 of sustained clashes specifically between the national army and an organized internal armed formation (e.g., a paramilitary force).

Provides an example (Mizo rebellion) where an organized insurgent group fought a sustained guerilla war against the national army, showing the modal form internal conflict can take.

Use this example as a model to assess whether the Sudanese situation in 2023 matched guerrilla/paramilitary versus army patterns by checking the nature, organization, and duration of reported clashes.

Describes how territorial and strategic disputes between states (or within regions) can produce repeated wars and limited conflicts, highlighting that both full wars and limited internal conflicts are possible outcomes of political disputes.

A student could apply this distinction to Sudan in 2023 by determining whether clashes between army and a paramilitary were limited skirmishes or rose to the scale commonly described as a 'war'.