The U.S. pressured Cuba to accept the Platt Amendment in 1901. It made Cuba a protectorate of the United States. A protectorate is a ________.

U.S. possession

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Country that promises to help protect the United States

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Country that contributes soldiers to the U.S. Army

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Country that accepts U.S. protection in exchange for the right of the United States to intervene in its affairs

Right on! Give the BNAT exam to get a 100% scholarship for BYJUS courses

Country that is protected from U.S. aggression

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Open in App

Solution

The correct option is D Country that accepts U.S. protection in exchange for the right of the United States to intervene in its affairs
A protectorate is a country that accepts U.S. protection in exchange for the right of the United States to intervene in its affairs. The U.S. pressured Cuba to accept the Platt Amendment in 1901. It made Cuba a protectorate of the United States.

Suggest Corrections

Similar questions

Q. Many United States companies have unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980, the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies “dumped” their products in the United States at “less than fair value.” Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.
Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships. The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company.
Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports—and that the United States Company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad—the United States Company’s products will be uncompetitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties.
Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.
Q. The passage is chiefly concerned with

Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit foreign governments’ subsidies. Another 340 charge that foreign companies “dumped” their products in the United States at “less than fair value.” Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.

Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships. The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company.

Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports—and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad—the United States company’s products will be uncompetitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties.

Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The “United States” company claiming the injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate. In contrast, the “Canadian” companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt.

Q. As per the passage, which of the following is the second-largest producer of rock salt?

Q. An international bank issues its Traveler credit cards worldwide. When a customer makes a purchase using a Traveler card in currency different from the customer's home currency, the bank converts the purchase price at the daily foreign exchange rate and then charges a

4

% fee on the converted cost.
Sara lives in the United States, but is on vacation in India. She used her Traveler card for a purchase that cost

602

rupees (Indian currency). The bank posted a charge

9.88

t o h e r a c c o u n t t h a t i n c l u d e d t h e

4$% fee.
What foreign exchange rate, in Indian rupee per one U.S dollar, did the bank use for Sara's charge? Round your answer to the nearest whole number.

Q. was a policy that compelled Indian rulers to accept the Company’s dominance in return for protection.

Q. A/an is a device that is used to protect tall buildings from lightning.

Join BYJU'S Learning Program