Linkages between Development and Spread of Extremism — Prelims Questions

Consider the following statements about the development-extremism nexus in India: 1. Regions with high mineral wealth but poor human development indicators are more prone to Left Wing Extremism 2. The Forest Rights Act 2006 was enacted partly to address grievances exploited by extremist groups 3. MGNREGA implementation has shown positive correlation with reduced extremist violence in affected areas 4. Constitutional provisions under Fifth Schedule apply only to Northeast states Which of the statements given above are correct?

Which of the following best explains the 'Development-Security Paradox' in the context of extremism-affected areas?

The Samatha vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1997) judgment is significant for understanding development-extremism linkages because it:

Consider the following pairs: 1. Red Corridor - Left Wing Extremism 2. Aspirational Districts Programme - Backward district development 3. Fifth Schedule - Northeast tribal areas 4. PESA Act - Scheduled Areas governance Which of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

Which of the following factors most directly explains why mineral-rich tribal areas are prone to extremism despite their resource wealth?