Seven countries

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 5:38 pm
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:680

Seven countries

by dongkim2 » Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:35 am
Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

o the compliance date was subject to postponement according to the terms of the treaty
o one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
o each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
o the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
o there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete

OA: C

[spoiler]I thought the answer was B, but I wasn't really sure about this question. Please explain. Thanks![/spoiler]
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:27 pm
Location: Bloomington, IN
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:690

by salmaan » Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:39 am
dongkim2 wrote:Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

o the compliance date was subject to postponement according to the terms of the treaty
o one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
o each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
o the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
o there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete

OA: C

[spoiler]I thought the answer was B, but I wasn't really sure about this question. Please explain. Thanks![/spoiler]
A. This goes against the question stem (there is a specified date). Maybe possible (if anything's possible), but far from the best answer
B. This goes against the question stem (all countries must be involved)
D. This goes against the question stem (action must be simultaneous)
E. This goes against the question stem (there is a specified date)

Read the answer carefully. It is essentially saying that if the countries do not comply, they can blame each other. This is due to the "provision" requiring "simultaneous action."