Affording strategic proximity to the Strait of Gibraltar, Morocco was also of interest to the French throughout the first half of the twentieth century because they assumed that if they did not hold it, their grip on Algeria was always insecure.

A.
B. Without it their grip on Algeria would never be secure
C.
D.
E.

OA is B. Explanations states that the above statement is conditional of the form "if x happened, then Y would happen". But choice "B" eliminates the "If" from the "if...then" construction. Why is still conditional? I know "then" is some times eliminated from a conditional statement. Does that apply to "if" also?

Thanks.

Post all the answer choices.

All the other answers have clear issues.

C. their grip on Algeria was not ever secure if they did not hold it.
D. without that, they could never be secure about their grip on Algeria
E. never would their grip on Algeria be secure if they did not hold it.

C. E. Reference Errors
D. "that" should be "it"

I picked A. OA is B. Explanation is that because it is a conditional statement, one should use "would".

Thanks, givemeanid. Yes, even if you understand why the other answers are wrong, please do post the full text of the questions and answers - the forums are a resource for others as well, who will want to see the question in its entirety.

You are not always required to have "then" in the "if...then" construction. "Then" can be implied by the comma. And, yes, if you use i"f (noun - past tense verb)," then you need to use the conditional for the second half b/c whatever you're talking about in the second half would only happen if the first thing had happened. That's conditional.