单项选择题

American hopes that pressure from the US will force Japan to suddenly dismantle its trade barriers are almost certain to evaporate in disappointment. The fact is that Washington faces an obstacle far more formidable than a few power brokers in Tokyo’s government offices. It’s not in line with the centuries-old, deep-ingrained Japanese customs. To move the Japanese government, Washington government must move an entire nation. So far the US has had only limited success despite congressional threats to retaliate. In an April 9 nationwide broadcast, Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone urged the Japanese to buy more imported goods and unveiled a long-awaited three-year plan to ease import restrictions. But this program was far short of what Washington hoped to see. White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan said the Japanese offered "few new or immediate measures." While the plan did promise fewer shackles on imports of telecommunications gear, medicine and medical equipment, it offered no relief for American forest products—which are among the most contentious trade issues.
Nakasone gives every sign of being secure in his desire to reduce a Japanese surplus in trade with the US that hit 36.8 billion dollars in 1984 and could soon top billion. Yet to rely on any Japanese political leader, no matter how popular he is at home, to reverse trade policies is to underestimate the culture and traditions that weigh heavily against a breakthrough. Big business and dozens of anonymous bureaucrats have as much power as Japan’s top elected leaders. "The whole concept that we can turn this around right now is obviously ridiculous," says an American trader who has lived and worked here since 1952. "The vested interests are being shaken and slowly moved, but at a pace too slow for the eye to follow." That view is echoed by a US diplomat closely involved in the efforts to open the Japanese market to American goods, Washington’s main solution to the ballooning trade ambulance. "Japan is a relationship society rather than a transactional one," he says. "You cannot alter that kind of a system with a television speech or a few general proposals, no matter how well-intended they are."
Beyond specific tariffs or other official barriers to imports, experts here say that the US faces these obstacles. Nearly total domination of the Japanese market by a few dozen giant conglomerates that strongly op pose even token competition—be it from abroad or emerging domestic firms. An elite, thickly layered bureaucracy that historically has drafted laws and regulations as well as enforced them, and both of these powers would be threatened by trade reforms. A longtime relationship between business and government that critics say fosters collusion and hinders foreign entry into domestic markets.
Which of the following is NOT mentioned as one of the trade obstacles in the text

A. Resistance from a large number of big enterprises against foreign competition.
B. Hindrance of business and government to imported goods that threaten domestic markets.
C. Firm support for import restrictions among Japanese workers, one of the powerful political forces.
D. Historically formed bureaucracy which makes laws and regulations and enforces them.
热门 试题

单项选择题
The foundation of the American idea of the national good is ______. A. national cooperation B. the freedom of the individual C. shared sacrifice D. mutual trust
As the 21st century begins, a number of leaders in politics, education, and other professions believe that the United States must adopt some new values to go along the older traditional ones. What new values should Americans adopt This is a very difficult question to answer. Certainly, a greater value should be placed on the conservation of natural sources; Americans should learn to use less and waste less. But conservation has never been a strong value to Americans, who have believed that their country offered an endless, abundant supply of natural resources. Recently, progress has been made--more and more Americans are recycling their paper, cans, bottles, and other goods--but old wasteful habits die hard. Furthermore, their need to protect the environment may conflict with the need for job, as in the Northwest, where conservationists battle lumber companies that want to cut down ancient redwood trees. A belief in the value of conservation is still weak compared with other American values; it can become stronger only as Americans see the need for it more clearly.
In addition, Americans may need to place a stronger value on cooperation on a national scale to achieve important national objective. The American idea of the national good has never been based on national cooperation but rather on the freedom of the individual, maintaining those conditions that provide the greatest freedom and prosperity for the individual. It is far more difficult for Americans to accept shared sacrifice for the common good and well-being of the entire country. For example, although the majority of Americans believe that is extremely important to balance the national budget and reduce the deficit, they do not want to see cuts in government programs that benefit them personally.
The American value of competition also hinders the development of a spirit of national cooperation. Competition sometimes encourages feelings of suspicion rather than the mutual trust that is necessary for successful national Cooperation. Although Americans often cooperate successfully on the local level--in neighborhood groups and churches, for example they become suspicious when the national government becomes involved. For example, on the national level, they may see themselves as part of an interest group that is competing with other interest groups for government funds. A request by the national government for shared sacrifice may be seen as coercive and destructive rather than voluntary and constructive. However, the demands of the 21st century may compel Americans to place a greater value on national cooperation to solve problems that affect them all, directly or indirectly