It is currently 14 Dec 2017, 11:02

# Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Wharton R1 | Stanford R1 | Tuck R1 | Ross R1 | Haas R1 | UCLA R1

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Posts: 322

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 0

Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2010, 11:08
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (01:04) correct 50% (01:21) wrong based on 7 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.
If the statements above are true, and if negotiations between the two sides do begin soon, at the time those negotiations begin each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:
(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 356

Kudos [?]: 428 [0], given: 47

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2010, 12:16
Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.
If the statements above are true, and if negotiations between the two sides do begin soon, at the time those negotiations begin each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:
(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

D is the answer... the rest all would be true... as stated in the stem and question......
_________________

Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!!

|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|

~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~

Kudos [?]: 428 [0], given: 47

Manager
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 192

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2010, 13:58
E;

expectations is other countries to facilitate the truce but what if contrary has to happen...

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 123

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2010, 08:22
e

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 12

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 269

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 25

Location: India

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2010, 09:34
Rules
-----
1. No negotiation --> cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute

2. Pressure by other countries --> Negotiation

3. Continue Pressure --> Agreement

4. International troops enforcement/ --> negotiation held

5. suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting --> Negotiation

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

Only E doent follow the rules
_________________

Cheers,
SD

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 25

Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 538

Kudos [?]: 626 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

23 Feb 2010, 17:42
Question asks about at the time of negotiations. However, E says negotiations reching at agreement. this is wrong and not in sync with question. Therfore IMO E. OA please.
angel2009 wrote:
Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.
If the statements above are true, and if negotiations between the two sides do begin soon, at the time those negotiations begin each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:
(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

Kudos [?]: 626 [0], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
Posts: 186

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2010, 20:16
IMO E.
what is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 152 [0], given: 6

Manhattan Prep Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 347

Kudos [?]: 1710 [1], given: 11

Location: San Francisco

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2010, 11:41
1
KUDOS
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 1710 [1], given: 11

Manager
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 50

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 3

Location: baltimore, md
Schools: kellogg, booth, stern, ann arbor

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2010, 16:59
i'm going to go with E.
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!

this might be right, but i have an issue with A when considering the text and what answer choice B says. it may be true that negotiations can still take place even after a cease-fire has been violated, but wouldn't that contradict answer choice B? Here is my reasoning:

the text states that "...no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side..." From this, you could say that any violation of the cease-fire would prove that the international troops have not demonstrated an ability to do their jobs (as they're job is to enforce the cease fire). Their failure, from the text, means that negotiations will not occur. thusly, in order for international troops to demonstrate their ability, there must be no violation of the cease-fire. this would cause A to be true. or at least i would think it does.

anyone have the OA?
_________________

Paaaaayyy Meeeee!!!!!

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 3

Director
Affiliations: Consortium (CGSM.org), NSHMBA
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 937

Kudos [?]: 237 [0], given: 113

Location: New Haven
Schools: Yale SOM Class of 2012
WE 1: Investment Banking Summer Associate (Boutique tech M&A)

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2010, 23:20
angel2009 wrote:
Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute. Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate; an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations. But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side, thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting.

If the statements above are true, and if negotiations between the two sides do begin soon, at the time those negotiations begin each of the following must also be true EXCEPT:
(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.

try to diagram every sentence in an "if -> then" statement (and also diagram the contra positive)

Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute

1a. if cease fire will not be violated by either side -> then negotiations began soon
1b. if negotiations did not begin soon -> then cease fire was violated by one of the 2 sides

Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate;

2a. if negotiations will be held -> then other countries pressured 2 sides
2b. if other countries did not pressure both sides -> then negotiations will not be held

an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations.

3a. if agreement will emerge-> then other countries continued pressure
3b. if other countries do not continue pressure -> then agreement will not emerge

But no negotiations will be held until international troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side,

4a. if negotiations will be held -> then international troops demonstrated ability to counter aggression
4b. if troops did not demonstrate ability to counter -> no negotiations will be held

next, take the bold part as true, and follow the logical chain:
5. if negotiations begin soon --> (int'l troops demonstrated ability to counter aggression) AND (other countries pressured both sides)

we got this by looking at statements 4a and 2a. since we know that everything in statement 5 is true, then B and D are automatically out. we're left with A,C and E. E states that the agreement is dependent in part on the actions of other countries. we know from 3a. that the agreement is linked to other countries exerting pressure, so E is also true.

we're left with A and C. A is tricky, since you can put it before statement 5 and make it true. however, it doesn't have to be true, and the question only talks about statements that have to be true (i.e. statements that would come after statement 5, not before it). between A and C, i'd pick A to be the one that doesn't have to be true, so i'd guess A as my answer.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 237 [0], given: 113

Manager
Status: Applying
Joined: 18 Jul 2009
Posts: 148

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 6

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.65
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 03:39
Hi,

COnsidering we are left with only 2 options A or E. A is better since by the process of elimination E follows directly from one of the premises given in the question i.e. " an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations" ...So E cannot be false. may be the countries are able to apply that pressure throughout negotiations or not is another question but looking at A, it has not been mentioned anywhere that the the sides cannot negotiate after breaking the cease fire.

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 6

Intern
Joined: 22 Nov 2009
Posts: 30

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 08:58
what is the OA and source for this question?
_________________

kudos +1 ?

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 1

Retired Moderator
Status: Darden Class of 2013
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 1834

Kudos [?]: 398 [0], given: 37

Schools: University of Virginia

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 10:32
E for me as well.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 398 [0], given: 37

Manager
Joined: 17 Jan 2010
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 11

Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.78
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2010, 14:16
The statement says “Negotiations will be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate”…that does not imply that the negotiation will reach an agreement. So the answer should be E (in my opinion)

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 11

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 953

Kudos [?]: 931 [0], given: 36

Location: Singapore
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Chicago Booth - Class of 2015

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2010, 04:51
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!

Hey tommy

I beieve it all depends on the direction of the inference.

Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire .......blah blah.....
cause -> effect
negotiations -> cease-fire

X -> Y (reverse may not be true)

But A says Y -> X.
cease fire -> negotiations
hence its the odd one in the choices.

Kudos [?]: 931 [0], given: 36

Manager
Joined: 14 Feb 2010
Posts: 98

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2010, 06:40
Again..No OA!

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 07 Oct 2006
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 3

Location: India

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2010, 06:52
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!

I agree with you. I have also answered A. Please publish OA to end this topic.
_________________

-------------------------------------

For English Grammar tips, consider visiting http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/index.html.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 3

Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 924

Kudos [?]: 1561 [0], given: 40

WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2010, 08:18
I am with E, as A is ruled out y the first premise of the argument.

Kudos [?]: 1561 [0], given: 40

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1438

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)

### Show Tags

02 Jul 2010, 08:31
Very well explained indeed!

TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.
ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1438

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)

### Show Tags

02 Jul 2010, 08:47
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey All,

Wow! This is a tough question. I've never seen it before, and I risk going out on a limb and being wrong, but I'm afraid I disagree with what you've all said. I believe the answer is A, for reasons I'll lay out. I'll make use of quotes from the passage to defend my answer.

(A) The cease-fire has not been violated by either of the two sides.

This is indeed the perfect answer

X ---> If negotiations don't being soon
Y ---> Ceasefire will be violated
If X then Y and if Not X (Negotiations DO being soon) then Not Y (ceasefire has NOT been violated) is NOT NECESSARILY true;

Remember in cases where IF X THEN Y ==> If not Y then Not X is true BUT if Not X then Not Y may or may not be true.

ANSWER: Though the passage says "Unless negotiations begin soon, the cease-fire will be violated by one of the two sides to the dispute." This does NOT imply that negotiations CANNOT happen if the cease-fire is violated. This makes it the correct answer.

(B) International troops enforcing the cease-fire have demonstrated that they can counter aggression from either of the two sides.
PROBLEM: "No negotiations will be held until international troops have demonstrated their ability to counter any aggression from either side."

(C) A major incentive for the two sides to resume hostilities has been suppressed.
PROBLEM: "...thus suppressing a major incentive for the two sides to resume fighting." This is a continuation of B. If that happens, then the incentive will have been suppressed.

(D) Other countries have exerted pressure on the two sides to the dispute.
"Negotiations will only be held only if other countries have pressured the two sides to negotiate."

(E) The negotiations’ reaching an agreement depends in part on the actions of other countries.
"...an agreement will emerge only if other countries continue such pressure throughout the negotiations." I think many of you thought this was the answer because the passage asks "at the time those negotiations begin...", which made you think that the agreement doesn't matter yet. But if every word in the passage is true (as the question stem says is the case), then even at the start of the negotiation, agreement can only be reached through the actions of other countries.

I'm up for argument, as I've never seen this question before, but I think my logic is sound.

Hope that helps!

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

Re: negotiations   [#permalink] 02 Jul 2010, 08:47

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 21 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by