imo
E.
If a rise in the fear of military aggression among nations results in increasing international arms expenditures, then arms production in "watchdog" countries such as the United States will increase, regardless of the level of fear of aggression among the general public.
Assuming that the statement above
concerning international aggression is accurate, which of the following strategies would most probably mitigate the fiscal consequences for a watchdog nation?
So pre-thinking --
international aggression -> Increase in international arms expenditures -> increase in arms production .. (Doesn't matter if general public's fear )
Now how to mitigate fiscal consequences .. If some how the country save money or get money from somewhere . Or reduce overall country's operational cost . A.Keeping the populace informed and reassured regarding national defense capabilities.
-- Doesnot matter .. Keeping the populace informed and reassured regarding national defense capabilities will not help them mitigating fiscal consequences B.Enforcing economic sanctions against former aggressor nations.
-- Fine but will that help in mitigating fiscal consequences ? No . coz may be no saving or getting of money to 'watchdog' countriesby enforcing economic sanctions C.Strictly controlling domestic news media coverage of international aggression.
-- Doesnot matter .. controlling domestic news media coverage of international aggression will not help them mitigating fiscal consequences D.Maintaining free and open diplomatic relations with allies and neutral countries.
-- Doesnot matter .. Maintaining free and open diplomatic relations with allies and neutral countries also will not help them mitigating fiscal consequences E.Investing in technology that makes arms production and deployment more cost-effective.
Correct .. Cost can be saved with improved efficiency and fiscal consequences can be mitigated