At the completion of World War II, Japan agreed to abandon its positio

B is the answer because of parallelism

I would say B is wrong because of victims in (should be of) war crimes. That leaves C,D and E.
Among these I see only C as || because of agreed, allocated and signed

Answer should be B.. PARALLELISM

One hell of a question !

My gut feeling is B is wrong. Japan was not doing social service in the World War . Even if does its hard to digest that allocation of funds was result of the recanting the position - so I don't agree that --->

Japan agreed to abandon its position to allocate funds for victims in war crimes

But still difficult to pin point the answer.

IMO : C

C. Japan did 3 things.
1. Agreed to abandon
2. Allocated Funds
3. Signed.

Parallelism of the past tense verbs of Agreed, Allocated and Signed is necessary.

But then there one more way to interpret the sentence with the base verb "agreed"

agreed to abandon
agreed to allocate funds
agreed to sign the treaty

This makes B as a contender.

It has to be C.

B follows //sm -- but "victims in war " is wrong.

any luck on getting to OA ?
My answer is C and i see there is a chaos going on for correct answer to be C/B. please demystify.

I agree with onedayill.

1st split between "victims in war crimes" and "victims of war crimes". Here "victims of war crimes" is the correct form. So A and B eliminated.
2nd split is verb parallelism where C has parallel verb forms : agreed to abandon ... allocated funds ... signed the Treaty
[We could also have considered "agreed to x, to y and to z" parallel form, but eliminated because of split 1. Meaning of the 2 parallel forms is slightly different as explained below.]

At the completion of World War II, Japan agreed to abandon its position as an imperial power, allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed.
A) allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed
--> "victims in war crimes" is incorrect. "was signed" is passive and is not parallel to agreed and allocated
(B) to allocate funds for victims in war crimes, and to sign the Treaty of San Francisco
--> "victims in war crimes" is incorrect. Otherwise verb form can be taken as parallel : agreed to abandon ... to allocate ... to sign
--> The meaning is Japan "agreed" to do all 3 things.
(C)allocated funds for victims of war crimes, and signed the Treaty of San Francisco
--> CORRECT. The idiom "victims of war crimes" is correct. Parallel verb form : agreed to abandon ... allocated funds ... signed the Treaty
--> The meaning here is Japan did 3 things : agreed to xyz, allocated xyz and signed treaty. So agreed on 1 thing and carried out the other 2.
(D)allocating funds for victims of war crimes, and signing the Treaty of San Francisco
--> Not parallel: agreed ... allocating ... signing
(E) to allocate funds for victims of war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed
--> Not parallel : agreed to ... to allocate ... passive signed


Also for the Idiom, "Partners in Crime" is correct while "Victims in War" is wrong. "Victims of War", "Victim of mugging", etc are correct forms.

Could expert help to explain this question? Official answer is not submitted.

At the completion of World War II, Japan agreed to abandon its position as an imperial power, allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed.

(A) allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed ----- Unparallel active and passive voice combo
(B) to allocate funds for victims in war crimes, and to sign the Treaty of San Francisco -- ok on parallelism but wordy and idiom "in war" is inferior
(C) allocated funds for victims of war crimes, and signed the Treaty of San Francisco -- -- better than B
(D) allocating funds for victims of war crimes, and signing the Treaty of San Francisco ---- allocating funds and signing a treaty are not part of abandoning the imperial power. misused modfication
(E) to allocate funds for victims of war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed -- unparallel.

Struggled to chose B or C.
I went for answer choice C because the style of choice B

Japan agreed to abandon (OK), means Japan accepted to abandon as requested made by ......
Japan agreed to allocate funds (Not correct in the context). No one requested that Japan "allocate funds". It was a deliberate action. So "agreed" is not required.
Japan agreed to sign (OK)

OFFICIAL SOLUTION

The answer to this question is (B) due to parallel structure rules:

Japan agreed
A. To abandon
B. To allocate and
C. To sign.

By using an infinitive for all three verbs, we assure they are parallel.

In choices (A) and (E), “was signed” is not parallel.
In choice (C), “allocated” and “signed” are not parallel with “to abandon.”
In choice (D), “allocating” and “signing” are not parallel with “to abandon.”

Since you have the official solution , you must know the source . Can you please share the source? Thank you.


Edit :
B seems to be saying that because Japan wanted to allocate funds to victims and sign the Treaty of San Francisco that's why it decided to abandon its position as an imperial power.
Logic wise this does not seem appropriate.
Does not seem to be the intended meaning of the sentence.

At the completion of World War II, Japan agreed to abandon its position as an imperial power, allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed.

agreed to abandon, to allocate and to sign are parallel in B

(A) allocated funds for victims in war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed
(B) to allocate funds for victims in war crimes, and to sign the Treaty of San Francisco
(C) allocated funds for victims of war crimes, and signed the Treaty of San Francisco
(D) allocating funds for victims of war crimes, and signing the Treaty of San Francisco
(E) to allocate funds for victims of war crimes, and the Treaty of San Francisco was signed

IMO B

If we consider Japan agreed to do the 3 things then of course B is right.

However if we consider "Agreed to abandon" as the first activity then the other two activities also then C is right here too.

Option B would have been the right answer if it said " victims of war crimes" but since it says Victims in War Crimes it is wrong.
Option C would definitely make more sense as an answer.

could anyone provide concrete justification as to how "victims in war crimes" is a valid usage in the context of this sentence.