Logical Reasoning

PT116 · S3 · Q26 In the aftermath of the

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

In the aftermath of the Cold War, international relations between Cold War allies became more difficult.

Statements

Countries that were allies during the Cold War found it more difficult to have international relations after the Cold War.

There were tensions between these former allies that had previously been overlooked, so now leaders of these nations had to conduct tactful economic negotiations.

Evaluate / Goal

These proposition / generalization versions of Most Supported like to express a "moral to the story", but we want to be cautious about picking something too strongly worded.

Since the story tells of two timeframes with some differences, the correct answer may try to "explain one Difference using another Difference".

During Cold War After Cold War

X, Y, and Z were allies Not technically allies

tensions overlooked tensions not overlooked

int'l relations between int'l relations between XYZ less difficult XYZ more difficult (tactful negotiations)

Let's look for an answer that safely reinforces that being Cold War allies was a causal difference-maker that allowed these countries to overlook tensions and have easier international relations.

26.

The situation described above conforms most closely to which one of the following propositions?

International economic competition is a
Opposite, if anything
The Cold War is an example of military tension, and during the Cold War, these allied nations overlooked their economic tensions. So it actually sounds more like military tension trumps economic tension.
4% picked this
Bonds between allies are stronger
Wrong Comparison
We don't have one situation where countries X, Y, and Z feared a common enemy and another situation where they had common economic goals. This answer wants us to compare those two things, but we never talked about those two things. At no point in the story we were told did allied (or previously allied) nations have shared economic goals. During both timeframes, these nations had economic tensions (implying competing economic goals), they just didn't worry about their competing economic goals while they were more worried about their fear of a common enemy.
8% picked this
When there is a military
Out of Scope: fundamental agreement
During the Cold War, these nations may have had a military commitment (they were allies, so that seems pretty fair to assume). Were we told during the Cold War that these nations reached a fundamental agreement on economic matters? No. It sounds like maybe they set aside economic matters, while they were worried about a common enemy. We'd have an easier time supporting an answer that says, When a military commitment between countries ends, fundamental disagreements between them on economic matters are more likely to resurface.
11% picked this
Economic matters are considered unimportant
Too Strong
Too Strong: unimportant Too Broad: actual or threatened war This is fairly close to the story. The Cold War was a time of threatened war (between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R). And we know that following the Cold War these former allies had to talk about economics delicately in order not to arouse tensions that had been overlooked. But it's an incredibly strong, sweeping claim to say that in a period of actual ? all economic matters or threatened war are unimportant We need something much more limited in scope and strength, in a period of actual ? econ tensions w/ allies or threatened war can be overlooked
4% picked this
Correct
A common enemy contributes to
Why this is right
During the Cold War, the allies had a common enemy (that's inherent in the definition of being allies in a war). International relations between these countries were easier during the war, then after, so the war seems to have contributed to a strengthened bond. After the war, leaders had to be very delicate in returning to economic negotiations, because the underlying tensions were a powder keg that had been overlooked for the sake of being allies. So being allies in the Cold War enabled these nations to "overlook tensions". The context of the final sentence implies that these tensions were economic in nature, because it's saying "economic negotiations had to be conducted tactfully in order not to arouse tensions".
Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
72% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free