Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 13:10

It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 13:10

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Critical Reasoning (CR)

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Nov 20
UCR MBA Impact - Live Q&A with UCR AdCom & Student
07:30 AM PST
-
08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 22
GMAT RC Masterclass
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Nov 23
Conquer Algebra on the GMAT Focus Edition
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Nov 25
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
10:00 AM EST
-
11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Commentator: The theory of trade retaliation states that countries clo

1 2

jabhatta2

Joined: 15 Dec 2016

Last visit: 21 Apr 2023

Posts: 1,294

Own Kudos:

317

Given Kudos: 188

Posts: 1,294

Kudos: 317

12 Dec 2022, 14:22

Kudos

Bookmarks

MartyTargetTestPrep - My question is on the conclusion (in red) - is my interpretation of the red accurate ?

Quote:

Lets say there are 200 countries on planet earth.

Country (1) and Country (2) are two countries that have closed off their markets completely to each other.

Based on the red -- isnt Country (1) having a problem with ALL REMAINING 199 countries AS WELL ?

That means -- Country (1) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
Country (2) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
Country (3) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
Country (4) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
Country (5) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
Country (6) has a problem with the remaining 199 countries
.................

Every country on this planet MUST HAVE A PROBLEM with EVERY OTHER country (remaining 199) for the red to be true

I thought the red implied the underline

Thoughts ?

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,476

Own Kudos:

5,579

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,476

Kudos: 5,579

12 Dec 2022, 15:23

Kudos

Bookmarks

jabhatta2

MartyTargetTestPrep - My question is on the conclusion (in red) - is my interpretation of the red accurate ?

Quote:

Hi jabhatta2.

Take another look to better understand what "this theory" is.

It's not for a country to close its markets to all other countries.

jabhatta2

Joined: 15 Dec 2016

Last visit: 21 Apr 2023

Posts: 1,294

Own Kudos:

317

Given Kudos: 188

Posts: 1,294

Kudos: 317

13 Dec 2022, 07:30

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep - "This Theory" - is certainly is about trade retaliation. Furthermore if you read the green bit - it is generic

However the conclusion in the red is MORE specific

Specifically, the phrase (in the yellow highlight) -- "any other"

Quote:

Doesnt the phrase "Any Other" - suggest that ?

Country (1) WILL EVENTUALLY SHUT ALL of its markets to all 199 countries

So country (1) has a fight with ALL 199 countries

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,476

Own Kudos:

5,579

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,476

Kudos: 5,579

13 Dec 2022, 08:41

Kudos

Bookmarks

jabhatta2

Quote:

Doesnt the phrase "Any Other" - suggest that ?

Country (1) WILL EVENTUALLY SHUT ALL of its markets to all 199 countries

So country (1) has a fight with ALL 199 countries

You're supporting the conclusion WITH THE CONCLUSION.

The evidence doesn't say SHUT ALL.

Look again. The evidence is what matters here and you're missing a key detail of what the green part says.

jabhatta2

Joined: 15 Dec 2016

Last visit: 21 Apr 2023

Posts: 1,294

Own Kudos:

317

Given Kudos: 188

Posts: 1,294

Kudos: 317

13 Dec 2022, 09:10

Kudos

Bookmarks

MartyTargetTestPrep

Quote:

You're supporting the conclusion WITH THE CONCLUSION.

The evidence doesn't say SHUT ALL.

Look again. The evidence is what matters here and you're missing a key detail of what the green part says.

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep - thanks for replying.

In the green part - i notice the word "Some"

So country (1) has a problem with country (2)

Country (2) lets say initiates the trade war and shuts down 5 of its markets. So five of Country 2's markets -- are not allowed to sell items to Country (1) specifically.

Country (1), in retaliation, shuts down 3 markets in retaliation vis a vis Country (1)

But again in the red-- the conclusion says : "If every country acted according to this theory, no country would trade with any other" ---

This red bit -- tells me that --- in the hypothetical scenario in the red -- Country (1) will shut down at least 1 market against all 199 countries.

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,476

Own Kudos:

5,579

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,476

Kudos: 5,579

13 Dec 2022, 09:22

Kudos

Bookmarks

jabhatta2

MartyTargetTestPrep

Quote:

You're supporting the conclusion WITH THE CONCLUSION.

The evidence doesn't say SHUT ALL.

Look again. The evidence is what matters here and you're missing a key detail of what the green part says.

YES, and you are ASSUMING that that conclusion is correct. You are basically assuming the correct answer to the question.

In other words, like the author of the argument, you are jumping from evidence about SOME markets to a conclusion about ALL markets.

OR maybe you are using the conclusion as evidence.

Either way, the point is that the evidence is about some markets, whereas the conclusion is about all markets, and the assumption has to fill the gap between the two.

TargetKellogg2024

MBA Section Director

Joined: 25 Apr 2018

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 442

Own Kudos:

732

Given Kudos: 159

Location: Germany

GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V36 Verified score

GMAT 2: 650 Q50 V28 Verified score

GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V163 Verified score

Products:

GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V37 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V163 Verified score

Posts: 442

Kudos: 732

01 Jul 2023, 16:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

Commentator: The theory of trade retaliation states that countries closed out of any of another country’s markets should close some of their own markets to the other country in order to pressure the other country to reopen its markets. If every country acted according to this theory, no country would trade with any other.

Theory of Trade retaliation = If country A closes doors to its markets for country B, then country B should also close doors to its markets for country A. This will pressurize country A to reopen its markets to country B. If every country acted acc to this theory, no country would trade with one another.
Conclusion: If all countries implement the theory of trade retaliation, no country would trade with one another.

The commentator’s argument relies on which of the following assumptions?

We need to identify the assumption

(A) No country actually acts according to the theory of trade retaliation.
Analysis: This speaks about the fact that no country actually acts according to the theory of trade retaliation. However, we are concerned about the hypothetical situation where all countries act according to the theory of retaliation.

(B) No country should block any of its markets to foreign trade.
We are not concerned with the actual facts. Therefore, "should" is not what we are looking for. We are looking for hypothetical scenarios.

(C) Trade disputes should be settled by international tribunal.
Who should settle the disputes is not the concern. We are concerned only about whether or not countries would trade with one another if a certain theory is adopted.

(D) For any two countries, at least one has some market closed to the other.
Negation: For any two countries, none had some market closed to the other.
Analysis: If the negation were true, then it follows that there will be at least two countries that trade with each other. Therefore, the conclusion falls apart. Keep it!

(E) Countries close their markets to foreigners to protect domestic producers.
We are not concerned about the reason for countries closing their market.

Therefore, the correct answer choice is (D)

Nrj0601

Joined: 15 May 2019

Last visit: 23 May 2024

Posts: 41

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 27

Status:Engineering Manager

Concentration: Leadership, Strategy

Schools: IIMA PGPX"20

WE:Engineering (Consulting)

Schools: IIMA PGPX"20

Posts: 41

Kudos: 12

10 Aug 2023, 05:21

Kudos

Bookmarks

D states the ans clearly. If you negate it, it will break the conclusion of the author

stackskillz

Joined: 28 Feb 2022

Last visit: 11 Jul 2025

Posts: 62

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 165

Posts: 62

Kudos: 13

13 Apr 2024, 04:57

Kudos

Bookmarks

Conc: If every country acted according to this theory, no country would trade with any other.

(A) No country actually acts according to the theory of trade retaliation - Notice the "if" in the conclusion, we're saying if X happens, then Y would happen. So to answer the question, we'll have to see if X leads to Y. The option just states Y doesn't happen, but doesn't explain the causal link between X and Y. X and Y being - "Acting according to theory" and "No trade". When given a conditional in conclusion, always be careful of the this type of trap. Also as an additional check - when negated this option can co-exist with the conclusion, i.e., some countries actually act according to theory of trade retaliation and some don't. This suggests that the conclusion is not invalid. Drop

(B) No country should block any of its markets to foreign trade - Should countries block their markets to foreign trade? Answering this doesn't seem to be the aim of the passage. Drop

(C) Trade disputes should be settled by international tribunal. - Who settles trade disputes? Not relevant to the conclusion. Drop

(D) For any two countries, at least one has some market closed to the other. This can be clearly assumed, i.e., if every country acted according to this theory, some if not all trade would cease to exist. Negate to check - For any two countries, none of them have some market closed to the other, i.e., all market are open to foreign trade. This means that even if countries follow this theory, everyone has an open market, meaning they do trade with one another. This breaks the conclusion. Keep

(E) Countries close their markets to foreigners to protect domestic producers - The reason for which countries close their market to foreigners is not relevant. Drop

rak08

Joined: 01 Feb 2025

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 236

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 338

Location: India

Schools: NUS '26 ISB '26 INSEAD Aug '26

GPA: 7.14

Products:

Schools: NUS '26 ISB '26 INSEAD Aug '26

Posts: 236

Kudos: 21

26 Apr 2025, 20:18

Kudos

Bookmarks

Can't we also say that they rely on the assumption that

The other country wont be under pressure, that is no country acts acc to theory of trade relalitation.

no seems defying the premise, so if i say the other country doesnt act acc to theory...
would that have changed the OA

Bhai

egmat

e-GMAT Representative

Joined: 02 Nov 2011

Last visit: 19 Nov 2025

Posts: 5,108

Own Kudos:

32,887

Given Kudos: 700

GMAT Date: 08-19-2020

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 5,108

Kudos: 32,887

23 Sep 2025, 00:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hey there! Let me help you work through this tricky assumption question about trade retaliation theory.

Understanding the Argument

First, let's break down what the commentator is saying. The trade retaliation theory tells us: if Country A blocks your markets, you should block Country A's markets right back to pressure them to reopen. The commentator then makes a bold claim - if everyone follows this theory, no country would trade with any other country at all.

Think about that for a moment. The commentator is saying we'd have complete trade shutdown worldwide. That's a pretty extreme conclusion!

Finding the Hidden Assumption

Here's what you need to see: For the commentator's conclusion to work (complete trade cessation), what must be true about the initial state of trade between countries?

Let's think through this step by step:
1. The retaliation theory only kicks in when countries are "closed out of any of another country's markets"
2. If some country pairs had completely open markets between them, would the theory apply? No!
3. Those countries with open markets could keep trading even if everyone else started retaliating
4. But the commentator says NO country would trade with ANY other

So what's missing? For the commentator's absolute conclusion to hold, every single country pair must have at least one market closure to trigger the retaliation cycle. Otherwise, some countries could still trade with each other.

Why D is Correct

Choice D states exactly this: "For any two countries, at least one has some market closed to the other." This gives us the universal trigger needed for the retaliation spiral to affect everyone.

Notice how choices B and C introduce "should" statements - but the argument isn't about what should happen, it's about what would happen. Choice E explains why countries might close markets, but the argument works regardless of the motivation behind closures.

---

You can check out the step-by-step solution on Neuron by e-GMAT to master the systematic approach for identifying assumptions in arguments with absolute conclusions. You'll also discover how to spot the difference between descriptive and normative arguments - a key skill for CR questions. You can explore other GMAT official questions with detailed solutions on Neuron for structured practice here.

1 2

Moderators:

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

7443 posts

GMATNinjaTwo

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

231 posts

miag

189 posts