Logical Reasoning – Statements and Conclusions (international relations): Nation X has faced growing international opposition because it decided to explode eight nuclear weapons at its test site. Based on this information alone, determine which of the following conclusions logically follow: (I) The citizens of Nation X favored the government’s decision; (II) Some powerful countries do not want other nations to become as powerful as they are.

Given data

• Statement: Nation X faced growing international opposition for exploding eight nuclear weapons at its test site.
• Conclusion I: Citizens of Nation X favored the decision.
• Conclusion II: Some powerful countries oppose other nations becoming equally powerful.

Concept/Approach
We test each conclusion for logical necessity—it must follow directly from the statement without adding unstated causes, motives, or public-opinion data.

Step-by-step evaluation
• Conclusion I adds an internal public-opinion claim (citizens’ support). The statement gives only international (external) reaction; it says nothing about domestic support or opposition. Hence I does not follow.• Conclusion II imputes motives to powerful countries (power balancing). The statement merely notes opposition; it does not specify why (e.g., non-proliferation norms, treaty violations, regional stability). Therefore II does not follow.

Verification/Alternative
If citizens were divided or opposed, the statement could still be true. If opposition stemmed from treaty concerns (not power jealousy), the statement also remains true. Thus, neither conclusion is compelled.

Common pitfalls

• Inferring domestic sentiment from international reactions.
• Projecting motives not stated in the premise.

Final Answer
Neither I nor II follows.