Claim: Country X' s government lowered tariff barriers because doing so served the interests of powerful foreign companies. Principle: In order for a change to be explained by the advantage some person or group gained from it, it must be shown how the interests of the person or group played a role in bringing about the change. Which one of the following, if true, can most logically serve as a premise for an argument that uses the principle to counter the claim? ['Although foreign companies benefited when Country X lowered tariff barriers, there is no other evidence that these foreign companies induced the change.', "In the period since tariff barriers were lowered, price competition among importers has severely limited importers' profits from selling foreign companies' products in Country X.", "It was impossible to predict how Country X's economic reforms, which included lowering tariff barriers, would affect the economy in the short term.", "Many of the foreign companies that benefited from Country X's lowering tariff barriers compete fiercely among themselves both in Country X and in other markets."]