Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries governed by

Question

Which of the following best completes the passage below?

Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries governed by dictators assume that the dictator will change policies unacceptable to the imposing nation when the citizens of the country against which the sanctions are imposed lose sufficient access to necessities such as food, water, and clothing. The reasoning of the imposing nation regarding the success of the sanctions is flawed because the imposing nation fails to consider that: __________.

A. citizens of the country against whom the sanctions are imposed are already accustomed to scarcity in resources 
 B. the dictator has ideological reasons for maintaining national policy 
 C. the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country 
 D. the dictator is not concerned by the inconvenience of his people 
 E. citizens of the country against whom the sanctions are imposed do not understand the leader’s policies

intheend14 · Answer

I was between C and D on this one. The other choices seem irrelevant to me. However, I went with Choice D.

The argument focuses on the suffering or inequities? of the people as a motivator for the dictator to change his/her ways. So, if the dictator is not subject to the people's suffering, the sanctions are ineffective.

However, I think the whole exports issue is out of scope and is a tempting wrong answer. I think mostly because we're looking at why the sanctions would fail, again from what the argument states.

aadit1984 · Answer

Clearly D.

This is a strengthen type of a question. In this question, the assumption is that the dictator will give in to the demands of the imposing nation, when the people of that country will suffer due to lack of food, clothing, shelter etc. So, in order to strengthen the author's hypothesis that this strategy does not work occasionally we have to attack the assumption that the dictator will empathize with the plight of his subjects. Choice D precisely does that, and clearly is the right answer!

sheolokesh · Answer

I initially thought C to be the option. But D it is...

Sanctions forbid trade with countries with dictatorial governments.
Why? Because Dictator is driven by the sufferings of people and change policies.
This approach occasionally proves unsuccessful.
When? If Dictator is not driven by the sufferings of people.--->D

God help me to improve...

ssriva2 · Answer

ITS STRAIGHT D!
d) the dictator is not moved by the suffering of his people

AbdurRakib · Answer

Which of the following best completes the passage below?

Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries with dictatorial governments assume that the dictator will change policies unacceptable to the imposing nation when the country’s citizens lose sufficient access to necessities such as food, water, and clothing. This approach occasionally proves unsuccessful, however, especially when .

a)  citizens  of the country  are  accustomed to being poor ........>It provides information that is  outside the scope of the argument 
b) the dictator has  ideological reasons  for maintaining national  policy  .......> Clearly irrelevant information ,because the argument is about changing policies of the dictatorial governments.
c) the country imposing the sanctions  relies on exports  from the subject country ...........>It  may not promote dictator to change  national policies(not Sufficient to tell)
d) the dictator is not moved by the suffering of his people ........>  Correct  
e) citizens of the country  do not understand  the leader’s policies .........> Out side the scope of the argument

Correct Answer D

LogicGuru1 · Answer

At the end of the day, it is the dictator which will decide what to do and what not. Citizens have no power as long as they are ruled by a dictator. 
Something has to happen to make the dictator crumble under the economic sanctions that are meant to destroy his citizen by cutting of their supplies of food , water and cloth. Now this approach to pressurise the dictator will fail, if he doesn't give a damn about this people. He will say :- Put as many sanction as you like. Let the people of my country die. I already don't care about these people.

a) citizens of the country are accustomed to being poor
 WRONG:- Poor is subjective term. Not having a car is poor in america. not having two meals a day is poor in africa. Not having good educated children is poor in India and China. Also there is a difference in being poor and being starved to death slowly. Despite being accustomed to poverty, one cannot live indefinitely with our food or water. Even poor people sometimes eat when they beg or when they go to a soup kitchen or when there is a charity for them.

b) the dictator has ideological reasons for maintaining national policy
 WRONG:- First it is irrelevant. The argument is about sanction of citizen and supply of food and water. Second If a dictator has idealogical reasons, then it is uncertain if he will change the policy or not depending the condition of his people. He may consider people important or his ideology important and thus can sacrifice a few citizen. NO DEFINITE OUTCOME --> so it is incorrect .

c) the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country
 WRONG:- The dictator can be a greedy bastard and still sell things to imposing country. Material from A to B are blocked. B to A can still happen.
 
d) the dictator is not moved by the suffering of his people
 CORRECT;- The imposing country believe that seeing his people die without food water and clothes will change the dictator. If he does not care about his citizen then the sanctions will fails.
 
e) citizens of the country do not understand the leader’s policies
 WRONG:- Irrelevant. The problem at hand is about sanctions and its adverse effects on the supply of food water and clothes. The argument is talking about the dictator being forced to change its policies. Only the dictator can change the policy. It is irrelevant if the citizen understand them or not. Even if the citizen understand the policy, will this knowledge remove the sanction. ? NO

Sayon · Answer

Let's see what's happening in the given premise-
 
Consider,
 Country A  - The country imposing Economic sanctions.
 Country B  - The country with the Dictatorial Government.

Country A  plans to impose economic sanctions on the  country B  so that  Country B's citizens  lose sufficient access to necessities such as food, water, and clothing.  Country A  feels, this sanction will thus force the dictator of  Country B  to change the policies which were unacceptable to  Country A .

The author says the plan of Country A will be unsuccessful if:
 
 a) citizens of the country are accustomed to being poor
 Citizens have no say in Country B.

b) the dictator has ideological reasons for maintaining national policy
 The ideological reasons may or may not make the dictator change policies acceptable to country A. Thus the outcome depends on his ideology.

c) the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country
 If this is the case the people of country B will suffer. But we are not sure whether this will make the dictator of Country B to change his policies.

d) the dictator is not moved by the suffering of his people
  If this is the case then the plan of country A will surely be unsuccessful. If the dictator is not bothered by the suffering of his people, why will he ever change the policy?

e) citizens of the country do not understand the leader’s policies
 Citizens have no say in Country B.

Answer D

Mavisdu1017 · Answer

I think this question is easily to provoke ambiguity. As the conclusion says “This approach occasionally proves unsuccessful”, and what does “approach” refer to? If “approach” means the sanction, C will be the answer. 
Because if the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country, it will have to stop the sanction initiatively and the approach will be unsuccessful.

AashishGautam · Answer

c) the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country.

We have two premises post reading C. first, the nation imposing the sanctions has already imposed them. Second, this nation alos relies on exports from the dictator nation. So, these can both be true when even in need of goods the nation imposing sanctions has found another source to procure or has reduced its dependency on these.

If the above happens, the imposing nation wont hae an effect of the sanctions, but what happens at the end if the dictator nation is not provided in this answer choice.

D is correct since it states the reason why there is no effect of the sanctions on the dictator nation.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Solution:

Which of the following best completes the passage below?
 
Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries governed by dictators assume that the dictator will change policies unacceptable to the imposing nation when the citizens of the country against which the sanctions are imposed lose sufficient access to necessities such as food, water, and clothing. The reasoning of the imposing nation regarding the success of the sanctions is flawed because the imposing nation fails to consider that: __________.
 
A. citizens of the country against whom the sanctions are imposed are already accustomed to scarcity in resources
B. the dictator has ideological reasons for maintaining national policy
C. the country imposing the sanctions relies on exports from the subject country
D. the dictator is not concerned by the inconvenience of his people
E. citizens of the country against whom the sanctions are imposed do not understand the leader’s policies

The question asks to find a flaw in the reasoning of the sanction-imposing nations - it does not ask to find whether or not the approach would be successful. The reasoning of the sanction imposing nation is as follows:

Premise:  The people of the country lose sufficient access to necessities such as food, water, and clothing.

Conclusion:  The dictator would change policies unacceptable to the imposing nation.

One underlying assumption in the reasoning of the imposing nation is that the dictator would be concerned by the inconvenience caused to his people who lose access to food, water and clothing, and because of his concern for his people, he would change the policies.

A. This option does not have relevance to the reasoning of the sanctioning country. The correct option must point out a flaw in the premise-to-conclusion link mentioned above. The people of the dictator’s nation might already be poor, but the logic of the argument is that losing access to food, water and clothing would be an additional inconvenience which might influence the dictator to change the policies.

B. Although this option points out a reason why the sanction could be unsuccessful, and indeed, a hard-minded dictator (which most of them are), would be unwilling to compromise but this option is incorrect as it goes outside of the argument's scope. The question asks to find a flaw in the reasoning of the sanction-imposing nations. We are told there are facts X and assumptions Y. The answer cannot be Z but has to be something that is based on X and Y. The dictator may have ideological reasons that might make the sanctions unsuccessful in changing his policies, but the reasoning of the sanctioning nations stated in the passage is not weakened by this option.

C. Although this option points out a reason why the sanction could be unsuccessful, this option does not address the connection between the premise and conclusion. As described earlier, the question asks to find a flaw in the reasoning of the sanction-imposing nations - it does not ask to find whether or not the approach would be successful. The economy of the imposing country might surfer because of the sanctioning, thereby giving a possibility that the sanction would be lifted, but the reasoning (premise-to-conclusion link) of the sanctioning nations stated in the passage is not attacked by this option.

D. CORRECT.  The original argument implies that the suffering itself is the primary lever. The imposition nation believes: "If we make them suffer enough, the dictator will change." This necessarily assumes the dictator is somehow motivated by or responsive to that suffering, either directly (by caring) or indirectly (by being vulnerable to the political fallout from suffering).

the dictator is not concerned by the inconvenience of his people  directly attacks this vulnerability. If he is not concerned, then the entire chain of "suffering -> pressure -> policy change" breaks down because the dictator has no reason to respond positively to the pressure. He simply doesn't care if his people are inconvenienced or worse, and therefore, he won't be moved to change policy because of that inconvenience.

E. This option does not have relevance to the reasoning of the sanctioning country. The correct option must point out a flaw in the premise-to-conclusion link mentioned above. Whether the citizens of a country understand the dictator’s policy has nothing to do with the reasoning of the sanctioning country.

Answer: D

Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries governed by

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Economic sanctions that forbid trade with countries governed by

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards