the reason it's the answer is because the 2nd to last sentence mentions that repressive measures are necessary in the transition phase. that's the one exception (that is provided) that could justify repressive measures. the last sentence indicates that people criticize recent repressive measures, but we do not know whether these countries were transitioning from totalitarianism. if they were, the criticism is unwarranted, because the repressive measures are necessary, but if they weren't, then the criticism may be warranted. thus, you have to assume they were transitioning for the investor's argument to be valid about the criticism being hasty.