Statement: The Indian electronic component industry venturing into the West…

Concept: In Courses of Action questions, a suggested action 'follows' only when it is a practical, direct step that addresses the stated problem head-on — typically by improving capability or performance. A suggestion that avoids the problem (seeking a different arena instead of facing the difficulty), restates settled policy, or is a sweeping value judgment does not qualify as a course of action.

Application: The stated problem is tough competition from Japanese firms in the West European markets. Searching for other international markets sidesteps this competition rather than confronting it — an escapist suggestion that does not follow. Improving the quality of the electronic components is a direct, practical step that lets Indian industry meet the Japanese challenge in the very markets in question, so it follows as the appropriate course of action.

Cross-check — why the other combinations fail:

• Only I follows: treats the escapist suggestion as the fix, missing that avoiding competition does not build competitiveness.

• Either I or II follows: wrongly treats the two suggestions as equally valid alternatives, when only one is a genuine corrective step and the other is avoidance.

• Neither I nor II follows: wrongly dismisses the one suggestion that is a legitimate, practical response to the stated problem.

So only Course II follows.