Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: Iran-Iraq War should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part one: Tensions in the Gulf within BE Conflict and tension in the Gulf and Afghanistan, 1990-2009 and directly supports Study regional instability, including consequences of the Iran-Iraq War, western and Russian interests in Iran and Iraq, oil-supply threats and Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Check this by using evidence, provenance, date, event, individual, policy, consequence; do not choose a distractor simply because it sounds historical.

The correct option is Iran-Iraq War should be explained before. This MCQ is about Which option separates cause and consequence, not just general recall. The correct option works because it matches the period context of Paper 1 Section B: Wider world depth studies and uses the same evidence base as Study regional instability, including consequences of the Iran-Iraq War, western and Russian interests in Iran and Iraq, oil-supply threats and Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The rejected options are weaker: 1) A source comment with no provenance.; 2) A long-term cause treated as a result.; 3) A similarity presented as a difference.. To decide between them, students should identify, support, test, reject the option against chronology, evidence and the learning objective, then keep evidence separate from opinion and interpretation.