A global financial institution is designing a multi-region active-active architecture for its core transaction processing system. The system uses Amazon DynamoDB. To prevent split-brain scenarios and ensure strong consistency for critical transactions across regions, which approach should the architect take?

Use DynamoDB Global Tables with strongly consistent reads enabled across all regions.

Use DynamoDB Global Tables. Implement application-level optimistic concurrency control using conditional writes.

Deploy a single DynamoDB table in one region and use Amazon ElastiCache in other regions for low-latency writes.

Use Amazon Aurora Global Database instead, as DynamoDB does not support multi-region active-active.