This question tests the comprehension of a complex cause-and-effect relationship and focuses on how intentions can be subverted by unintended consequences. **Core Concept:** This assesses the contrast between the stated aim ('long-term peace') and the unexpected result ('created new tensions') and understanding the word ‘inadvertently’ which indicates the outcome was unintentional. The emphasis is on understanding that a goal and outcome can be inversely related. **Solution:** * **Option A:** This is incorrect because it directly contradicts the statement, which specifies new tensions were created, not eliminated. * **Option B:** This option incorrectly suggests a partial success in achieving peace, whereas the document suggests that it created new tensions instead. * **Option C:** This option correctly points out the conflict between the treaty's intention and outcome. The treaty aimed for peace but instead caused further tensions. * **Option D:** This option incorrectly dismisses the relationship between the goal and outcome, which were indirectly linked. The failure to address economic issues led to the rise in tension, an indirect but connected event. **Correct Answer:** C **Easy-mistake reminder:** The word 'inadvertently' is key. It's easy to assume that an aim and an outcome will be aligned. The 'inadvertently' shows a critical distinction between purpose and consequence, and the contrast here between peace and tensions.