Kennan felt that the Munich agreement was no longer necessary because of two reasons. The first reason is that the defenses of the Czech people are very strong while the second reason is that apparently the German people are very much prepared to remove Hitler.
Governments typically had been either unitary or confederated. Or another way to say that is that they either focused on centralized power (in someone like a king) or particularized power -- the power in the parts of a kingdom rather than at the center.
So, for instance, in France (prior to its Revolution), all the power in the kingdom centered in the hands of the king. For 175 years, they didn't even have a meeting of the Estates General which was their version of a representative body. And the power of nobles on their lands was reduced while the king's power grew.
Meanwhile, in the German territories, there was a loose confederation called the Holy Roman Empire. One of the kings or princes held the title of "emperor," but he really had no imperial power. The confederated German states retained control over their own kingdoms or territories.
The American experiment mixed something of the best of both approaches. There would be strong central power in the federal government, but putting checks and balances on that power by retaining certain aspects of control in the hands of the states within the union.
The answer should be D. It advocated strong leadership by the federal government.
In a general sense, World War I and World War II were wars conducted on a massive scale unlike any other wars in history. They were similarly caused by nationalism, imperialism, alliances, and militarism. Both wars saw countries trying to upset the power balance in Europe for their own gain.
