The Appeal of Horror Movies Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

The Appeal of Horror Movies - Essay Example Horror movies have a cathartic effect on the viewer. Many fears, suppressed in real life because of the expected ridicule from peers, can be given vent to at the film: Arachnophobia permits a boy to scream aloud and give vent to his very real fear of spiders. Horror movies also give the viewer emotional escape from real-world anxieties, such as unemployment or debt. Â  Horror movies provide an opportunity to exhibit gender roles. Men can show that they are not afraid, while girls are free to act quintessentially ‘feminine.’ There is also the social satisfaction of belonging to a group which exhibits similar reactions. Most often, horror movies are viewed in a group. Â  Horror movies satisfy a very real need in humans. The stimulation of the senses gives a keenness to mundane lives; suppressed emotions find expression; there is an escape from the stress of the real world; social bonding is facilitated. It is obvious that horror movies satisfy a basic need in humans. Long live Horror Films! Â  From the time of Icarus, man has always dreamt of flying like the birds. This dream became a reality with the Wright Brothers, and travel by air is now very much a part of modern life. Air travel has improved life through the speed of transport, but has the negative effect of increasing global warming and adding to man’s destructive capabilities. Â  One undeniable benefit of air travel is the factor of speed. This speed is a great advantage for the emergency transport of both people and goods, particularly in inaccessible terrain. People can be rescued from disaster zones, airlifted for medical aid, and save time on travel. Perishable goods, medical supplies, and relief can be transported rapidly to areas of need.

University and Library Tab Resources Essay Example for Free

University and Library Tab Resources Essay Student resource Where found Summary of the resource Syllabus Main forum materials Possible credits, courses,subjects and schedule to take them. Class Policies Classroom, materials tab Policies and procedures University Library Classroom, library tab Resources and resources for school University Academic Catalog Program tab, right of my program Information on your degree program and requirements University Learning Goals Classroom tab then Materials tab, goal setting labs Information and help with setting goals for class. Life Resource Center Program tab, services then the life resources center Support for life, work and class Phoenix Career Services Library, University Library, to the top and far right or from page 5th ;ink down on your left. support for information on careers that match your degree Student Workshops Programs tab, Services first one or home page 3rd link on your left Student Workshops provide help with your classes PhoenixConnect Phoenix connect tab Connect with other faculty professors and students. Technical Support phone number (877) 832-4867 For technical issues online Part B: Follow-Up Question Based on the resources in the table, what are the attendance, posting, and participation requirements for the university? Online In order to be in attendance during a week, a student must post at least one message to any of the course forums on two separate days during the online week. Deadlines for attendance are based on Mountain Standard Time (MST). Attendance is tracked automati-cally in all online courses.

How To Motivate Students Education Essay

How To Motivate Students Education Essay What is physical education? What do people nowadays know about the importance of health fitness? Physical education is a course taken in primary and secondary education which involves physically learning and psychomotor learning. People nowadays take everything for granted; they take their own health for granted. They dont really care about fitness and psychomotor learning. This is why physical education not treated seriously in every educational institute. Based on some researches, there is a survey has been conducted by Singapore sports council in 2001 shows that most of the students does not exercise regularly. Besides, there is another survey on the new intake of 800 students conducted in ITE East (Yishun) in 2001 showed that up to 94% did not like PE and never exercised regularly. ( adapted from innovative ways in motivating students in physical education class- HUSSAIN KADIR (SH/PE/YS) TAN MENG HUAY (SH/PE/MP)). Our education system is concentrates more on academics instead on students physical development. Schools in Malaysia rather to say neglected the importance of physical education. Based on the timetable in every school, physical education class seems likely to be once a week and 40 minutes. Students get demotivated and lost their interest in physical education class. Based on a teacher who mentioned that People did, and maybe still do, think of physical education as recess time, said Shelley Randall, a P.E. teacher at Obsidian Middle School and a member of the Oregon Department of Education committee developing the standards. ( Adapted from Taylor, Ted. (December 4, 2000). The Bulletin. Bend, Oregon.). This shows that people still in their conservatives mind which academic ways too important than anything else that they neglected that physical education plays an important role in academic as well. According to an article, Judith Young, executive director of the National Association of Sports and Physical Education, said she wasnt sure P.E. ever had a major academic role. But frankly, we are seeing a need for it now because our lifestyles are getting increasingly sedentary, she said, citing many young people who would rather play a football game on a computer than go outside and toss the pigskin around with friends. ( Adapted from Taylor, Ted. (December 4, 2000). The Bulletin. Bend, Oregon.). These are the evidences show that physical education wasnt really treated seriously in school that is why demotivates students in their physical education class. Why students werent interested in physical educations class? The whole worldwide is encouraging that in reinforce the education system by emphasize the importance in physical education. As we know that physical education not just only helps to improves health but skill development, which allows for enjoyable participation in any physical activities in a proper appropriate techniques. But, why students nowadays werent interested in physical education class? Many factor either from internal or external bring huge impacts on the school kids interest in school. Firstly, the school plays an important role in taking care of students academic performances. The school concerns their students academic performances and their school well built reputation. This is the reason how the school pushes the students and teachers so hard to maintain their performances in such a stressful situation. The class timetable consisted 9 periods a day, and each period is 40 minutes. Apparently, the whole day in school was sedentary activities instead of having any physical activities. Students were all day packed with lectures in class and stuck on the chair almost half a day non-stop. The only thing they will move their body is when they have to attend to the washroom or their 20 minutes recess times which they will just sit and eat. Initially, school cut down the physical education class into 2 periods once in a week for each class. Basically, once a week the s tudents have their physical education class or the entire one and a half hours. The time schedules for physical education is simply unfair, either they arranges the class to after recess time or 2 periods before the school end. In the morning session, some physical education class arranges after recess time or in the middle of 3rd or 4th period right before the recess time. This odd timing discourage students interest in participate themselves in the class. Students need times to get change and took up half of the time that affected the teaching process in the class. Besides, some teacher who might took up the extra times after the bell rang, and this is one of the issues that affected the physical education class. Thus, students have insufficient time to get change and gather at the gym or school field. P.E teacher always faces this kind of problems, insufficient times to finish her teaching syllabus. Plus, students hates to get change again and again for that one hour plus. They think it was really troublesome especially for girls. Students need to wait in a long line to get change back to pinafore under the sweaty, uncomfortable situation. Girls especially who have menses problem will try their very best to avoid participate in P.E class. Schools environment also is an issue in discouraging students participates in P.E class. The school environment such as the washrooms, the location for P.E class, and so on. School that have insufficient washrooms may affect the students learning mood and enthusiastic in learning. If the washroom is too small or insufficient, students face problems in waiting in a long line to get change. Maybe there are 20-25 girls in a class and they might need some times to get change and wait in a line. This will affect the time management in P.E class, and the whole teaching procedure. Besides, if the washrooms condition was unhygienic is such a turn off for students to go in and change into their P.E suits. Students will find excuses such as left their suits at home, or not feeling well just to avoid get change and join the class. Moreover, some school doesnt possess with full equipment such as spacious field, equipment room, basic games courts. Students and teacher always cracks their head loo king for places to have their class. Students will feel tired and demotivated and get bored easily. Incomplete equipment such as insufficient of balls and so on might affected the teaching activities and students will get distracted because have to wait for their turn to play the game. Next, the teacher and students parents think that physical education wasnt a real subject. But, the fact is vital. On the school field, there are 30 over students surrounding their P.E teacher. But, when the teacher carries out an activity with the students the responds from the students are so direct and clear that whether they are enjoying the class. We can see that there are a lot of kids standing around and socializing or waiting in line or watching other children play. This proves that the basic lesson plan wasnt really well prepared. Besides, experts have determined whats wrong is that in most schools, the P.E. teachers are undertrained. In my opinion, I doubted that Malaysia do have sufficient trained P.E teachers. Malaysias schools system considered rather odd, they simply offer the P.E class to some teachers who are not trained in this field. So, is really common that mathematics teacher or maybe English teacher who are teaching P.E as well. Those untrained teacher definitel y conducted the class by using the textbook and ball games werent really teaching the correct and accurate techniques and skills to the students. That is why lesson plan wasnt really well planned and prepared, and situation such as students wandering around, socializing with one another, rather stares at the grass, lack of interest in participating in the class occurs. The main reason is the class is boring and not well managed. Parents on the other hand, who thinks academics are highly important that determined their childrens future. In fact, when a real trained P.E teacher was conducting the class parents should come in and see that theres real instruction going on. Quality physical education is not roll out the ball and play. Parents always thinks that eat healthier will improve health. Although they knows that exercise regularly is the best way to keep healthy and fitness, deep down in their mind was that such a waste of time for their kids to run along and roll with the balls. Physical education not just educates students but parents as well. According to Welscher from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, They need to know that what its going to teach is things that are going to make them live longer, a whole lot happier, protect them from a lot of negative behaviors, improve their mental health and this is at least as important as many of the other subjects. Parents should have encourages their children participate in P.E class. As a parent, it is important for them to maintain involvement in childrens education so that can ensure he or she attains the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to lead a healthy, active and productive life. How to motivate students to take part in physical educations class? There are few tips that show that benefits in taking part in physical activities, such as it helps to improves health. Regular exercises helps to circulate our blood circulation and our joints wont turn to rusty. It helps to prevent heart diseases, counteracts with the risk in obesity, diseases, inactivity and hypertension. With 20 minutes walk can help to circulate the blood circulation around our heart and enhance the function of our heart in healthy condition. Obesity and hypertension can prevented with 30 minutes jogs. After some physical activities, it helps to refresh a persons mind. After discussing the benefits of regular physical activity and all the factors that demotivated students participating in P.E class, there are ways in motivates them in the class. How to encourage and motivate students take part in their P.E class? There are many ways in motivate students take part in the class. Of course we opted for long term solutions instead of short term solutions. Short term solutions such as bribes the students by using extravaganzas prizes or maybe cashes to allure the students in taking part in the class. This will never work out. They are temporally attracted students for a short time and the objectives will never achieve. The school, teachers, students and parents have the responsibility to overcome this problem. The school should try to see this as serious matter by not just emphasizes in academic performance. School should have tried to work out some programs to encourage students take part in physical education class. They should have planned to have their sports day during the weekdays as attendance is compulsory. Many schools normally have their sports day during weekend. Weekends supposed to be non school day, this is the main reason that students will never turned up and shows the initiative t o participate in any sports programs. Even the teachers were lack of motivation to conduct the event or activity in a proper manner. In my opinion, the school should organize some sports programs or activities for the whole week. In the whole week, half of the day students are occupied with all sorts of programs. Such as interclass games competition, some in charge of having healthy and fitness mini seminar. The school can invite professionals to give talks or seminars to the students. This whole physical education week should organize consistently, is meaningful and education purposes. Besides, students felt bored in P.E class is because of the teacher is untrained and wasnt specialized in this field. This may cause confusion to the students. The best thing that can do is, have the teachers attend the workshop in physical education. A productive and knowledgeable teacher is a successful educator. Teacher who are specialized or not in this field should educate themselves more in this field, they should prepares themselves in any situation such as teaching the subject that they may not familiar with. Teacher should prepare interesting lesson plan and activities in order to let learning progress takes place. Teacher should be willing to learn and gain more Knowledge: As a physical education teacher have to learn about new activities and games, and apply them into their lesson plans. P.E teachers should learn new games and bring them into class. By bringing in new games it will not only broaden students knowledge of new skills, but they will also have fun learning new and different skills. The teachers attitude is also very important in teaching. Teacher should know how to handle classroom management so that students will respect he/her and take things seriously in physical education. Teachers should always possesses with positives attitude, always encourage students, never give up easily, and should influence the students in what is meant to be good for them. The most important thing is get to know them, understand them, and get to know what their needs are. Caring is always the most effective ways in teaching progress. Next, parents and schools bond with each other in an indirect way. Parents play an important role in this issue. Most of the parents thought that P.E class is such a waste of time, and a burden to a child for bringing extra clothes to school. Most parents have irrational thoughts such as, a lot of laundry to do if bringing extra P.E suits and so on. Parents should have encourage their children how important P.E is and should participate fully in the class. Besides, parents should often exposed P.E activity to their children since young or daily. It is a necessity to expose physical activity to children daily so that they will keep it as a habit. While the school environment also important in solving this problem. School should concern and take this seriously in improving the facilities in school. Such as, the sports field, the equipment room and etc. Especially the field, school authority should take care of the field as in trim the grass or mend the holes on the ground. This can reduce the risk of injury among the students. With a well cared field, students will love the field and willing to stretch their joints in any conditions. The equipment room should always updates. Balls especially always a problem for every school, insufficient amounts of balls always create havoc in P.E class. The school person in charge should check the remaining stocks consistently. Replace those equipments which are dysfunctions with new, add in better equipment in order to enhance the quality in teaching. The school environment such as renovates the toilet into spacious space for students able to get change or built in sports shower room for st udents to take a shower before they continue their next class. Besides, government should take this seriously as in promoting how important P.E is and encourages the society starts to concentrate in P.E activity. The government should promote scholarship schemes or better offer in sports academy for every student who contributes in sports or P.E class. The government should encourage each school to have a certified certificates to show attributes to all the students who did well in their P.E class. This will encourages and motivates the P.E culture in Malaysia soon. The best P.E. class and program will keep students in mind that this knowledge can last for a lifetime. ( Adapted from article: I hate P.E)

Recessions and Depressions Essay -- Economy, The Great Depression

America has experienced several recessions and depressions in the past. Most recently, the housing crisis sparked a recession which has led to rising unemployment. The largest recession so far has been the Great Depression of the 1930s. A stock market crash in 1929 caused loss of savings which led to unemployment, lower wages, and a distrust of the banking system. The affects of it lasted into the 1940s. Franklin Roosevelt was elected president during this period; legislation he passed tried to alleviate the suffering of the public. As a result of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt created the Civilian Conservation Corps to employ jobless young men and improve government land. The decade directly preceding the Great Depression was prosperous and lucrative. Many factors led to this era, often called the roaring twenties. The use of labor-saving machinery affected several industries. Henry Ford’s Model T suddenly was much cheaper, which enabled more families to purchase one. Less than seven million cars were on US highways in 1919. That number leaped to 23 million in 1929. This increase of cars and travel led to the expansion of gas stations, roadside restaurants, and service and repair stations. The use of machinery decreased the amount of labor needed on farms while increasing the yield per acre. Prohibition was still being enforced so the need for moonshine created an economic niche for those entrepreneurs not afraid of the law. Radio sales also increased rapidly. Total radio sales in 1922 were at $60 million while 1929 had radio sales totaling $850 million. This increase of radios also enabled more commercials to reach the ears of consu mers. For the first time, marketing messages were being sent direct... ... always conservation. As the depression slowly lessened and the program drew to a close, critics began to wonder if the Corps was conserving public lands, or over-developing it (â€Å"New Deal for Parks† 8). The looming threat of World War II redirected the efforts of the CCC. While the Corps still worked on government land, it was mainly on military bases to build or refurbish airfields and artillery ranges. When the United States officially joined World War II, funding for the Corps was cut. Even if funding had been continued, the program would’ve shrunk drastically as many of the enlistees joined the Army and were sent overseas to fight the war. The Civilian Conservation Corps is widely viewed as one of the more successful programs of the New Deal. It employed half a million young men while improving thousands of acres of public land (New Deal for Parks 8).

Life in the Slums Essay

Life In The Slums Plan Intro: Life is tough living in the slums, but I’m used to it now so it’s not as hard as it was when we first moved here. Especially considering we were looking to come to the city for a better lifestyle, and to have a better chance for my parents to get a job, and for my siblings and I to go to school. My name is Anikal and I’m 13, I have 3 older brothers, and one younger sister. Para 1: living conditions and hygiene and population density Moved to Mumbai 4 years ago looking for a better life- ended up in slums It is basically a tip where we live It’s so crowded- 56% of residences have 3 or more people living in a single room It’s so dirty, it smells (although we are used to it now) People evacuating their bowls in the middle of the streets- 5 million residents don’t have access to toilets We don’t have showers we have to find little pools to clean off in- they’re generally dirty water It is a tough life to get used to- nothing is easy We were playing cricket on a big stretch of concrete and the police came chasing after us- we had to run and weave through the slums Para 2: work and employment opportunities and school and exploitation of children We originally moved to the city for the reasons of work and schooling My siblings and I get to go to school twice a week as that’s all we can afford We all have to work to get enough money for our family to eat, and to go to school It can be tough labor a lot of the time for little amounts of money We are working towards starting a business selling stuff- we aren’t sure what yet There aren’t many opportunities in the slums for work, so you have to take anything you can get We thought there would be a lot of opportunities in Mumbai There are in the main city, but very few in the slums We have to go around asking everyone if there’s anything we can do for them to earn a little bit of money We don’t get to keep that money for ourselves, we give it to mum and dad, and they use it for all the things we need Para 3: buildings and structures and infrastructure and police and security There are so many buildings in a small area in our slum Over half the population lives on 12% of the land When you are walking around there is only a small gap for sunlight to get through All the buildings are right together and the roofs hang over the footpath- if you can even call it a foot path There are some buildings that are more than one story, but they aren’t very safe For some people it doesn’t matter how unsafe it is, they just need somewhere to live The security isn’t all that great in the slums The police are sort of against us, when ever we go places we aren’t supposed to they’re straight onto us and will chase us for ages With people in the main city, they will politely tell them off, but us, straight into a full chase. Our house is substandard When it rains torrentially it sometimes leak We have hardly any access to hospitals and medical attention Conclusion: Life in the slums is tough. We moved to the city with the intention of starting fresh, and having more opportunities but we ended up in the slums. We’ve been here for four years and it’s been hard. I’m used to it now though. It is very unhygienic and packed. The population density is ridiculous. It’s been a hard run in terms of work and school, we only get a small education, and don’t have a job, we just have to try help out with same labor work for some money. There are so many buildings in such a small area, and we don’t have any security, and the police are just out to catch us doing the wrong thing. Our house is very small and squishy, but it’s the life I’m now used to, whether I like it or not, it’s how it is. Essay Life is tough living in the slums, but I’m used to it now so it’s not as hard as it was when we first moved here. Especially considering we were looking to come to the city for a better lifestyle, a chance for my parents to get a job, and for my siblings and I to get an education. My name is Anikal, I’m 13, I have 3 older brothers, and one younger sister. I’m live in the slums of Mumbai. My family and I moved to Mumbai looking for a better lifestyle, but ended up in the slums pretty quickly. It is basically like a tip where we live, it’s terrible. It is so crowded, people everywhere, and in 56% of the residences there are three or more people living in just one room! It is all so dirty, and smells (although we are used to the smell now). People just go to the toilet in the streets, 5 million people don’t have access to toilets, and in Dharavi there is one toilet per 1440 people. We don’t have access to showers- not many people do, but we have to use the water we have, or find pools of water we can clean off in. It’s a tough life to get used to in the slums, nothing comes easy. We were just playing cricket out the back of the slums on the concrete on someone else’s land, but no one was there, we weren’t affecting anyone, and the police just chased us on motorbikes with sticks and all, and we had to run back into the slums, on the roofs trying to get away. We eventually got away then ran back the other way passed them on the roof, we saw them though the gap in between two houses. We originally moved to the city of Mumbai in search of better work and schooling opportunities. My siblings and I only get to go to school twice a week, and get a small education as that’s all we can afford on our very small budget. My whole family has to work as much as we can helping people out, doing laboring work just to get enough money for the things we need. We are working towards trying to start up our own small business, and hopefully then have a steady income that we can live off. There aren’t many opportunities in the slums of Mumbai, so we have to take any work we can get. There are many opportunities if you’re in the main part of Mumbai, but unfortunately we’re in the slums. My siblings and I don’t get any pocket money, any money we go out and earn goes straight to our parents so that they can buy all the things we need, like food. There are so many buildings and other structures in our small area of the slums. It is packed, over half of the population lives on only 12% of the land. When you are walking around through the slums, there is only a small gap for any sunlight to get through between the roofs of buildings, over the footpaths- if you can even call it a footpath. There are some buildings in our slum that are more than one story, they aren’t very safe though, but for some people, thats their only option. We don’t really have any security in our slums, and the police are just out to catch us, whenever we are doing anything wrong, even the smallest thing that would normally just be a warning for others, they chase us all through our slums trying to catch us. They’re just constantly out to get us. Our house is very substandard, it’s just like a little hut, with two rooms that we’re all squished into. When there is torrential rain it can sometimes get in, but it’s u sually pretty good. We have hardly any access to any sort of medical care, and hospitals, so when we get sick or injured, we just have to hope its not too bad and that we can get through and come out better in time. Life in the slums is tough. We moved to the city with the intention of starting fresh, and having more opportunities but we ended up in the slums. We’ve been here for four years and it’s been hard. I’m used to it now though. It is very unhygienic and packed. The population density is ridiculous. It’s been a hard run in terms of work and school, we only get a small education, and don’t have a job, we just have to try help out with same labor work for some money. There are so many buildings in such a small area, and we don’t have any security, and the police are just out to catch us doing the wrong thing. Our house is very small and squishy, but it’s the life I’m now used to, whether I like it or not, it’s how it is. Bibliography: â€Å"Living conditions in the slums.† Sites.google. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Apr. 2013. . Marotta, Stephen. â€Å"Slums – mumbaiindias jimdo page!.† Introduction – mumbaiindias jimdo page!. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Aug. 2013. . Slumdog millionaire. Dir. Danny Boyle. Perf. Jamal Malik. 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 2009. DVD. hallam, james. â€Å"Dharavi – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.† Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Aug. 2013. .

buy custom Analyzing an e-Business essay

buy custom Analyzing an e-Business essay PepsiCo is an American multinational corporation that formed in 1965 with the merger of Pepsi-Cola and Frito-Lay, Inc. and deals with production, marketing, and distribution of beverages and grain based snack foods. PepsiCo has its headquarters in Harrison, New York with its presence in four major divisions. In 2009, PepsiCo Americas Foods, which deals in foods and snacks in North and South America, contributed 43% of the total PepsiCo net profit. There is also PepsiCo America Beverages, a division that markets both carbonated and non-carbonated beverages in North and South America. Other divisions include PepsiCo Europe and PepsiCo Asia, Middle East and Africa. Globally, the company is the second largest food and beverages company and it operates in more than 200 countries In 2009, PepsiCo collected total revenue of $43.3 billion, and was rated the largest food and beverages company in North America. Pepsi Corporation distributes a number of brands, the key ones being those that generate annual sales of more than $1 billion each. These brands include Pepsi-Cola, 7Up, Fritos Mountain Dew, Gatorade, Doritos, Pepsi Max, Quaker Foods, Tropicana Cheetos, Miranda, Ruffles, Aquafina, Tostitos, Sierra Mist, Walkers, and Lays Lipton. Amid distribution of the brands, PepsiCo engages in charitable activities and environmental conservation programs like water usage in U.S, India and U.K, packaging and recycling, energy usage as well as pesticide regulation in India to ensure that the environment and the available resources are utilized properly. PepsiCos advancement in ecommerce has been evident, and that is the focus of this report. Project and Its Place within the Organization Changing to ecommerce involves fully understanding the normal offline transactions and applying the principals of electronic funds transfer and electronic data interchange. Ecommerce also includes Internet marketing and inventory management systems through the World Wide Web, especially for virtual items. Changing to ecommerce entails complete overhaul of marketing techniques to accommodate new internet marketing strategies, electronic payments and training of employees to match the new electronic commerce and business. PepsiCos adoption of ecommerce led to the collaboration with Yahoo. In the deal, PepsiCo would promote Yahoo on 1.5 billion soft drinks bottles displayed in 50,000 stores. In return, Yahoo would promote PepsiCo products on Yahoo cobranded site called Pepsistuff.com. This promotion started in August 2000 and has since led to advertisement cost minimization due to its ability to reach more people at ago through the website. What does not work, according to Burwick, PepsiCos former marketing manager, is an advertising approach on television that in his view only entertains and moves. However, Burwick notes that internet advertisement on the website provides a platform for interaction, which is a more active experience that is likely to have a more positive impact on sales. This web advertisement that included music sites, banner advertisement and internet sweepstakes and barter arrangement with Yahoo, helped PepsiCo establish loyalty among its customers, greater brand exposure among its consumers under 25 years old and at the same time obtained relevant data that enabled the company respond to customer demands. Pepsi also uses the extranet strategy where customers flash their names and continue the marketing efforts of tweaking websites. Other than its websites, PepsiCo has currently upheld its ecommerce strategy on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, which are social sites that provide interaction opportunities for millions of potential customers around the world. This has helped improve popularity of the corporations 19 major brands in all the four regions, and contributed to the revenue collected in 2009. Marketing the products plays a very important role in the consumer goods companies that consume $40 billion annually on non-internet advertising. Ecommerce in this regard plays a vital role in marketing, distribution, supply chain management, ordering and delivering of the products to the clients in all the four major regions. This strategy helps PepsiCo eliminate intermediaries in its business since consumers can order products directly. The company can also use banners on top of web pages to convey the information about its products. However, this has been eliciting responses that banners are too small and limit th e amount of information that can be conveyed through them. Besides Pepsistuff.com, PepsiCo also uses its website in providing information to all its customers and potential customers on the available products and the ordering and purchasing procedures as well as the charges involved for deliveries. The strategy of e-business is multifarious, is more focused on these internal processes. Its objective is to reduce costs while improving efficiency, as well as reducing costs while improving productivity. E-business includes ecommerce, and both address internal processes and technological infrastructure like application servers, security, databases, and legacy systems. E-commerce and e-business involve generating new value chains amid stakeholders, such as a company like PepsiCo and its clients. Original Business Model Employed By PepsiCo PepsiCo initially used non-internet advertisement that included high impact television spots that were prepared to evoke emotional reaction among its customers, appealing to woe customers to purchase. The company also minimally used PowerPoint presentations of its products to that are flashed on the websites. According to Hill Jones , PepsiCo changed its business model and the manner in which it differentiated its product. Before adoption of the ecommerce initiative, PepsiCo fully depended on five regions that include North America, South America, Europe, and Asia regions (including India) in manufacturing, marketing, and delivering. These activities constituted manual offline transactions. Any changes to the business model were necessitated by introduction of the e-Business initiative. The marketing, ordering, inventory management strategies, and the payment methods changed to adopt ecommerce methods. These necessitated change in PepsiCos organization structure and reduction of marketing staff and the cost of advertisement reduced by nearly 20% in 2010. Through e-business, PepsiCo was able to effectively cut human errors and evade uneconomical duplications of duties that add little or no value to the business. Consequently, this saved the company business time, colossal amounts of resources. The introduction of ecommerce into PepsiCo also improved the speed, accuracy, and efficiency in which processes are carried out in the corporation, leading to increased productivity. E-business guarantees proficiency in communication within PepsiCo and reduces turnaround time in ordering, delivery, and payment of products, as well as fostering faster decision-making process. The networking brought about by the use of Internet services gave PepsiCo an opportunity to easily compare and rate its products against those from its competitors in terms of quality, availability, and pricing. Strategic Components of E-business Planning for the changeover to e-business from the offline business is a strategic component that determines the success of the ecommerce strategy. It involves action plans that include making available the amount of capital required, trained human resource, information technology skills, technology hardware, such as computers and internet connections. This component of e-business dictates the decision on implementation methods and tools used in the changeover, depending on strengths and weaknesses of the business and the opportunities presented by ecommerce according to the vision and mission of the PepsiCo. Ecommerce business is an area faced with several risks. Therefore, companies need to understand it well to ensure that they are protected against such risks. PepsiCo faces such risks as well. Some of these risks include loss of merchandise as a result of fraud, misrouting during distribution process to wrong destinations (majorly when the merchants are untrustworthy and untraceable), leading to loss of both goods and money. Any businesses adopting ecommerce should ensure that third party merchants are well known, registered, and traceable to curb the loss of customers merchandise and money to potential fraudsters. This is also applicable to the risks of customers disputes of the delivered goods leading to loss of payments. PepsiCo needs to ensure that during ordering, customers provide adequate information to be able to distinguish genuine customers from fraudulent orders. This will reduce the loss money through credit card payments, which poses impacts both on the company and mercha nts who are forced to pay the bank charges to compensate the losses. Accuracy in processing the transactions remain key to efficient deals to avoid experiencing chargeback costs that also occur when customers dispute the transactions sometimes due to inaccuracy in the amount involved, errors in processing, authorization errors and fraudulent issues. These costs can be avoided if transactions are accurately and efficiently processed. Therefore, this means that the new ecommerce technology should be well understood before the implementation stage takes effect, to be able to seal all the possible loopholes that are likely to give way to losses. Provision of adequate infrastructure system that warns new clients who are not conversant with purchasing on the Internet is important in proving authenticity of the company. These systems should be in a position of protecting clients passwords to sensitive personal information like credit cards to avoid exposure to fraudsters and at the same time authenticate transactions when dealing with fresh clients before cl osing the purchase orders and delivering the products to the customers. Technological components must also be put in place for a company that needs to grow in the modern business environment that is full of competition through the use of high technology machines. The technological platform where e-Business is carried out involves of technologies that have to be tailor-made, tested out and integrated into the business. This component is one of the essential e-business components that include widely approved technological standards and requirements that generate technical procedures and platforms than computers, but can be used to pass information. Technology infrastructure involves reliable Internet connections and adequate machinery, such as computers and browser connections. Technological constituents, such as middleware, are important since they help build broad and complex e-commerce systems. Employee development is strategy that works well for many companies, including PepsiCo. Employees first need to be prepared for the change to avoid unnecessary resistance during the implementation stage. Employee development also involves training workers to be technology compliant and improve their IT skills, which are mandatory in ecommerce having in mind that technology innovation and improvement takes place every time. PepsiCo needs to train its clients on how to access information from the companys websites without risking exposing their information to non-deserving people, such as credit card fraudsters. This training can be done through seminars and online information that can be accessed by all existing and potential customers. Many clients are very skeptical when it comes to online purchases due to the widespread Internet fraud and may only be willing to do business with very organized and secure sites. PepsiCo also needs to segment its market during marketing and advertisement of the products. This segmentation can be done in terms of age, social class to provide products that all social groups can afford, and ensuring availability of these products from the distribution stores for the retail customers at all times. Reasons for Success and Of Pepsi Product Differentiation and positioning One reason that has led to the success of Pepsi products is the differentiation of its brands that have been established and have built customer loyalty in those regions. Product positioning remains vital in building customer loyalty. This can quickly be done through internet marketing, which reaches more people at ago all over the world. Planning and New Technology The companys first strategy involving agreements with Yahoo picked up well and were very successful because of adequate planning, as well as embracing of the new digital technology. Other reasons include adequate planning, employee development, good management kills, infrastructure, and risk management systems. Reasons for Lack of Success and Of Pepsi Fraudulent transactions Fraudulent transactions that have always mired online transactions that make the merchants and clients lose both merchandise and money are the loopholes that have hampered Pepsis success. Thus, they need to be sealed in order to drive businesses to higher levels. Analysis of the PepsiCo Initiative PepsiCo being the second largest food and Beverage Company has very strong financial base, which is enough to implement the ecommerce strategy. Training of employees on the new internet marketing skills, supply chain management, inventory management. Implementation of the ecommerce Technology in PepsiCo involved provision of the computer gadgets and internet connection that to provide necessary platform for the change to e-Business. PepsiCo also offered in-house trainings to the staff to be technology compliant ready to execute the ecommerce operations. The major stakeholders of the PepsiCo are the suppliers, customers, government, employees, and the management. The companys consumers need to utilize the ecommerce platform to order and pay for products conveniently, while maintaining and managing internet security risks. The internal control systems that are used to authenticate transactions need to be fully outlined with clear chain of command. The improvement of the technology has also provided good business growth opportunity enhancing PepsiCos strength in the market. The involvement of the society, production of healthy products with low sugar levels favorable for children, guarding them against health and lifestyle related diseases like obesity, diabetes, and the environmental protection projects, gave PepsiCo business advantage over its competitors, such as the Coca-Cola company. PepsiCo does this by converting its product portfolio, forming global initiatives like calorie labeling to increase nutrition education, and backup up programs that promote physical fitness centers. Responsible Electronic Marketing In the ecommerce, PepsiCo has adopted a responsible electronic marketing strategy that teaches children that good eating habits at an earlier age contribute to their future health. PepsiCo adopted a policy in 2009 not to advertise and sell certain products that do not meet specific nutrition level to children under age 12. The policy took effect in 2009 for beverages globally and all snacks and food in the whole world on January 1, 2011. Pepsi plans to stop selling full sugar soft drinks directly to primary and secondary schools across the world by 2012. This policy is to help schools to provide a wider range of low-calorie and nutritious beverages to their students in primary and secondary schools. PepsiCo plans to implement this policy fully by January 1, 2012 and it has announced this interest on the Internet. PepsiCo does not currently sell directly to primary and secondary schools full calorie drinks in Europe, Canada, and a number of countries in the Arabian Peninsula. Currently the use of iPhone has spread to users many including school going children who can easily access the information. For this reason, PepsiCo implements the responsible e-marketing strategy to ensure that information reaches the only relevant people. Reasons for Not Adopting the Ecommerce In as much as technology is acceptable, many online clients have since withdrawn from transacting businesses over the internet due to the widespread internet crimes committed by fraudsters. Many clients have expressed reservations and they prefer offline business transactions to e-business. Bad experience of wrong delivery and erroneous processing of transactions has also contributed to the failure of ecommerce initiative. Pepsi should not just adopt Ecommerce marketing coverage strategy since it focuses on differentiated marketing, they should also consider other aspects that accompany the marketing strategy. Many clients do not have sufficient IT skills that are required in carrying out e-business. This gave the changeover a slow start in some regions, including India, with many insisting on continued offline transaction. Conclusion Ecommerce and e-business have become the order of modern business. Many companies than need to compete have adapted the two innovations. Ecommerce and e-business involve the use of the Internet in the transaction of goods and services from production, order, delivery, marketing, and payment for the purchased goods and services. PepsiCo is one of the companies that have adopted ecommerce for about ten years and have used the new technology in inventory management, supply chain management, Internet marketing and electronic funds transfer. PepsiCo is an international company that deals in beverages and foods snacks in four major regions in North America, South America, Europe and Asia and African markets with a number of products like Pepsi-Cola, 7Up, Fritos Mountain Dew, Gatorade, Doritos, Pepsi Max, Quaker Foods, Tropicana Cheetos, Miranda, Ruffles, Aquafina, Tostitos, Sierra Mist, Walker's and Lay's Lipton. The company uses the Internet to market and sell these brands. Several strategies ensure all the stakeholders are successfully navigated through the navigation period. These include adequate planning, employee development, good management kills, infrastructure, and risk management systems. Buy custom Analyzing an e-Business essay

Frank Lloyd Wright Essays - Modernist Architects, Free Essays

Frank Lloyd Wright Essays - Modernist Architects, Free Essays Frank Lloyd Wright ".......having a good start not only do I fully intend to be the greatest architect who has yet lived, but fully intend to be the greatest architect who will ever live. Yes, I intend to be the greatest architect of all time." - Frank Lloyd Wright 1867-1959 CHILDHOOD Born in Richland Center, in southwestern Wisconsin, on June 8, 1867 (Sometimes reported as 1869) Frank Lincoln Wright (Changed by himself to Frank Lloyd Wright) was raised in the influence of a welsh heritage. The Lloyd-Jones family, his mother"s side of the family, had great influence on Mr. Wright throughout his life. The family was Unitary in faith and lived close to each other. Major aspects within the Lloyd-Jones family included education, religion, and nature. Wright"s family spent many evenings listening to William Lincoln Wright read the works of Emerson, Thoreau, and Blake outloud. Also his aunts Nell and Jane opened a school of their own pressing the philosophies of German educator, Froebel. Wright was brought up in a comfortable, but certainly not warm household. His father, William Carey Wright who worked as a preacher and a musician, moved from job to job, dragging his family across the United States. His parents divorced when Wright was still young. His mother Anna (Lloyd-Jones) Wright, relied heavily on upon her many brothers sisters and uncles, and was intellectually guided by his aunts and his mother. Before her son was born, Anna Wright had decided that her son was gong to be a great architect. Using Froebel"s geometric blocks to entertain and educate her son, Mrs. Wright must have struck genius her son possessed. Use of the imagination was encouraged and Wright was given free run of the playroom filled with paste, paper, and cardboard. On the door were the words, SANCTUM SANCTORUM (Latin for: place of inviolable privacy). Mr. Wright was seen as a dreamy and sensitive child, and cases of him running away while working on the farmlands with some uncles is noted. This pattern of running away continued throughout his lifetime. WRIGHT"S FIRST BREAK In 1887, at the age of twenty, Frank Lloyd Wright moved to Chicago. During the late nineteenth century, Chicago was a booming, crazy place. With an education of Engineering from the University of Wisconsin, Wright found a job as a draftsman in a Chicago architectural firm. During this short time with the firm of J. Lyman Silsbee, Wright started on his first project, the "Hillside Home" for his aunts, Nell and Jane. Impatiently moving forward, Wright got a job at one of the best known firms in Chicago at the time, Adler and Sullivan. Sullivan was to become Wright"s greatest mentor. LOUIS SULLIVAN: LIEBER MEISTER Wright Referred to Sullivan as "Lieber Meister" (beloved master). He admired his talent for ornamation, and his skill of drawing intricate plans and designs. Wright picked up on his ways of Sullivan and soon became ahead of Alder in importance within the firm. Wright"s relationship between he and his employer caused great amounts of tension between Wright and his fellow draftsmen, and as well as in-between Sullivan and Adler. Wright was assigned the residential contracts of the firm. His work soon greatend as he accepted jobs outside of the firm. When Sullivan found out about this in 1893, he called Wright on a breach of contract. Rather than to drop the "night jobs", Wright walked out of the firm. When Wright left the company, Sullivan"s quantity of contract declined quickly. Sullivan soon ran into economic troubles and his international reputation dwindled by 1920. Sullivan was soon reguarded as worthless to the architectural world. He resorted to alcoholism and died in 1924 without regaining the glory of what was held in their early years of Chicago. LIFE AFTER THE FIRM Wright quickly built up a practice in residential architecture. At one point in his career, Wright would produce 135 buildings in ten years. Wright took a different approach to architecture by designing the furniture, light fixtures, and other things that were in the structures that he made. He developed a unique type of architecture that was known as the "Prairie" style. Dominated by the horizontal line, the style would make-up the type of buildings designed in the 1900-1913 era of his career. Wright had two other distinctive styles and a period for each one of them, one being the Textile block (1917-1924) and the other the Usonian (1936-1959). In 1909 Wright took off for Europe, once again leaving a stable life, with six children, a wife and a well

Aggravated Assault essays

Aggravated Assault essays Aggravated assault is the unlawful threat of bodily violence or harm to somebody else, or an attempt to do such harm. The purpose of this paper is to inform the reader about all aspects of the personal crime of aggravated assault. It will illustrate the typical victim and offender and the situations that surround this crime from a citizen and criminologist perspective. Aggravated assault is more serious than assault because the offender inflicts an unlawful attack upon the victim for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. In 1998, there were a total of 1,673,640 aggravated assault victimizations and 1,457,800 incidences. Victimizations indicate the number of people that were received the criminal offense. Incidences mean the scene and time of the assault. For instance, two people are robbed at gunpoint. It is counted as two robbery victimizations and one robbery incidence. Of all the criminal offenses measured by the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), 5.3 percent of them were aggravated assaults. On average, about eight people in every one thousand people were the victims of aggravated assault. Out of one thousand people, 10.5 males were assaulted and 4.7 females. Black males and females are more likely to be the victim of aggravated assault between the ages of twenty to twenty-four. Twenty-six urban, black males out of every one thousand people are the victims. White males are more likely to be the victim between the ages of twelve to nineteen. White females are more likely to be the victim between the ages of sixteen to twenty-four. In all, black males are most likely to be the victim between the ages of twenty and twenty-four. Thirty-three percent of the victims had an income less than $7,500 annually. Such a low income is probably due to the young age...

Critically discuss the relationship between uneven geographic Essay

Critically discuss the relationship between uneven geographic development and globalization - Essay Example As a result of the geographical inequalities manifested in different places of the world, it can be argued that contrary to the popular belief that the globalisation is bridging the economic, social and cultural gap between different regions, it is actually increasing the social, cultural and economic inequality; hence, uneven geographic development. The term globalisation can be traced back to the late 1980s when globalisation became fashionable idea that described contexts related to historical processes where world economic and societal integration was taking place rapidly commonly referred to as structural globalisation in addition to contexts related to policies underlying the historical processes which represents ideological globalisation (Kacowicz 2013). This social and economic integration has had different repercussions for different world’s geographical regions and countries at least in its initial stages. Due to globalisation in the current situation, the increased competition among countries has affected more negatively the Northern countries especially the US compared to the effect it has had on some of the Southern countries. The reason for this imbalance can be argued in terms of exchanges in trade where during the 1970s many developing countries benefited from the higher prices for natural resources like oil in addition to the plentiful supply of credit and investments at highly favourable conditions due to the increased competition among Northern countries (Arrighi 2002). In order to effectively explore the different views on how globalisation impacted on geographic development, it is necessary that different perspectives on globalisation can be identified. Superficially, globalisation can be considered as the deepening, expanding and accelerating international interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary social life, which covers such diverse contexts as cultural to the criminal and from the financial to the spiritual undertakings (Saxena 2010). A computer programmer located in India is in a position to offer services to an employer in Europe or USA in real time. In addition to the fact that farming of poppies in Burma can have a connection with drug abuse in Berlin is a good enough example of how globalisation links one geographical location to another in a different continent. However, away from the broad perception of the continued escalation of global interconnectedness there is considerable divergent view as to how globalisation is best conceptualized, how its causal dynamics works, and how its structural impact should be characterized. Therefore, due to issues raised by the question of what globalisation represents, three broad schools of thought have developed each having a different perspective of globalisation but all endeavour to comprehend and elucidate this phenomenon. Firstly, there are those who see globalisation as representing a new epoch where people from different geographical regions are pr ogressively being subjected to the controls of the global market. Secondly, there are those who conceptualize globalisation as a myth, which obscure the truth about international economy, which is in reality segmented into geographical blocs characterized by a powerful

Form post Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

Form post - Essay Example Felix awakens from his naà ¯ve reverie to a complete grasp of his harsh reality. Nandi serves as a metaphor for the painful but necessary process of remembrance (Vimeo 2:43). Butler differentiates gender from sex, which nowadays many do not agree with. Nandi take her position to survey the bloody land after the brutal massacre and destruction. She makes Felix who is a man in a foreign country aware of what is happening in his homeland. She thinks here as a man though a woman. Butler state that individuals build their culture upon people they meet, education and living condition experienced. Nandi works alone in the harsh environment and takes the part of men culturally not to let the memories fade away. On contrary, Staurt describes cultural study as relationship between different culture and politics theoretically. Kentrige studies the South African past political events. He starts from the brutal killings and mass destruction to when there is first election. This displays transformation though the memories were still there for remembrance. Nandi a woman used as the surveyor to help cover all visible evidence of the past, portrays

The Arab-Israeli Conflict and its Correlation to Cold War Tensions Term Paper

The Arab-Israeli Conflict and its Correlation to Cold War Tensions - Term Paper Example History has been a direct witness to the fact that the powerful economies of the world, mainly the colonizers have redrawn the political boundaries of nations all around the globe, to serve their selfish needs. Even after the closure of the Second World War, British and French forces colonized the rest of the Mediterranean mainly, Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries. When Jewish populations were recovering from the Nazi storm that ate up three fourths of their population, Britain took the decision to create a separate land that would be called home of Jews. Israel was created as a Jewish national state and was founded in 1948. Everyone hoped for a bright future of the new state as the timing was parallel to when freedom was granted to large countries like India (which attained independence in 1947). Britain has been criticized for the cruel treatment of ethnic cleansing that it originally meted out to the Jewish populations after the World War I. However, since other populations like Germans and Italians were also experiencing the brunt of the British Empire (Dimitrakis, 2012, 78), they also resorted to ethnic cleansing, a mindset that led to the Second World War and the Holocaust (Ogilvie & Miller, 2006, 67). Britain’s anti-Jew and pro-Jew roles have been always criticized since, being a world power, it had initially done nothing to stop the ethnic cleansing of European countries. When the World War took immensely horrific shape, only then did Britain decide to take the side of the side that seemed to do the right thing, which in this context was the United States. The procedure of uprooting existing Palestinian populations to make way for a new land for the Jews had to always have a negative impact on the peace of the Arab world. The erstwhile Soviet Union was supportive of the new Jewish national state. However, when major Arab populations started

MTC Midterm Examination Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

MTC Midterm Examination - Case Study Example pressing need to enter into a joint venture with an appropriate manufacturer who has credentials and track records to produce and deliver the scanner as per the specifications of Montex. At this juncture, our company has options to start a joint venture with any one of the three companies namely Electronic Innovations (EI), Optics America (OA), and World Optics (WO) to cater the needs of the Montex. EI does not have the product right now as needed by Montex; however, it has capacity to develop the same in 4 months time. In view of the recent layoff at EI and with the possibility of another one in near future any dealing with this company is highly risky. Though EI claims that product will be compatible with our robotic arms, we cannot take the risk of any delay in development of the product and it is in our interest to rule out this option for obvious reasons. Currently, Optics America and World Optics both manufacture the scanners meeting the requirement of Montex. Either of these two companies can be suitable to us for starting a joint venture given the cost economics; however, we need to train our staff and create a new workflow and system for the scanner project. It is important to note that significant technology change will occur in the new venture and will force us to train our shop floor and allied staff to effect a smooth transition to a new process. Getting inspiratio n from Kotter (1996), I recommend four major initiatives to be carried out in the sequential order as listed here with. A Sense of Urgency needs to be established in the company to remove a false sense of complacency at all levels. Before starting any transformational program cooperation from numerous individuals is needed and a sense of urgency in the organization has to come from the top rank of the company. A team of people with sufficient power to lead the change is needed. The team members must possess enough expertise, credibility, and leadership quality to exercise the change. It

Business in Focus Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

Business in Focus - Essay Example US Laws protect citizens against any misuse of tax records and information sharing if not having support proper authorization (Hatch n.d.). In spite of such provision of protection according to Gregory Shaffer (2000), personal information is traded and transferred about each U.S. citizen very frequently. There are privacy breaches ranging from very serious identity theft incidents to marketing solicitations. Data unlike a physical object can be sold and distributed with relative ease in today's electronic society. Medical and financial records could be used in hiring decisions. Social security numbers could be used in case of identity theft and financial fraud. One's address could be used to conduct a hate crime. Terrorists and anti-government groups can use government security information to attack nuclear plants and other government targets. The U.S. legislation on national scale is not comprehensive on privacy legislation. Their numerous privacy statutes protect personal privacy in a piecemeal fashion. The Privacy Act of 1974 gives individuals the right to access and correct information held by the federal government but did not cover private entities and state and local governments. The financial Modernisation Act also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB passed in November 2000 eased the state and federal restrictions among financial institutions in USA. The law allowed sharing of information, non-public for specific purpose and in specific situation. This raised the issue of privacy and it was demanded for notification to consumers about the institution's privacy policy and is given a chance to opt -out of information sharing with non-affiliated third parties. The survey confirmed about the widespread use of non-public information by joint marketers and affiliated institutions. Protection of non-public personal information (NPI) is must because it might lead to fraud by companies for unauthorised use. The following important legislation in USA on Consumer Privacy: 1. Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970- in which credit agencies are required to make their records available, provides procedures for the correcting of information, and permits disclosure to authorized parties. 2. Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984- cable services are required to inform subscribers of the nature of personally identifiable information collected and the use of such information. The law restricts the collection and disclosure of such information by cable services. 3. Electronic Communication Privacy Act of 1986- The law extends Title III protections and requirements to new forms of voice, video data, and communications such as cellular phones, electronic mail, computer transmissions, and voice and display pagers. 4. Electronic Freedom of Information Act (1996) - The law allowed any person the right to obtain federal agency records unless the records are protected from disclosure by any of the nine exemptions contained in the law. 5. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 1996- The law requires healthcare facilities to implement security policies and systems to protect patient confidentiality. HIPAA only covers the security of the information and does not address information sharing. 6. Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (1999)- The law prevents personal informat

Unity and diversity in Contemporary America.(The Module) Essay

Unity and diversity in Contemporary America.(The Module) - Essay Example In this piece of writing, we are going to discuss and justify in depth the pragmatic Obama. President Obama’s foreign policies and decision making undergoes intensive planning and careful evaluation, only two years in his presidency Obama achieved success in four out of five countries he had earlier on engaged in national security issues. In events that seem out of control and beyond his capacity president Obama does not make snarl decisions based on certain ideologies but he resorts to analyzing how the events stretch out.. Not more than two years of his presidency, Obama has faced many foreign policy situations than any of his precursors. His leadership has been put to test in all perspectives availing a ground upon which criticism from his opponents and evaluation from his supporters use to rate him in matters to do with foreign policy (Obiwuru et al. 2011). Way back during his presidential campaigns, Obama set forth several strategies and principles that would be the path to his foreign policies. This includes the five denotative national security policy issues that he made the priority; to put an end to war in Iraq, to reduce nuclear weapons in the world, fight the terrorist groups that are Al Qaeda and Taliban, energy safety and reconstructing the confederations and working other countries in tackling today’s challenges. War in Iraq had been an issue that affected the overall world peace, this being one of the priorities president Obama managed to decimate this war with little criticism and minimal international concern (Lowenthal 2010). President Obama began by withdrawing 10000 soldiers from Iraq and launching operation new dawn that replaced the operation Iraqi freedom in 2010. The American soldiers were given new missions of advising, training, and helping the Iraqi security forces in bringing order and peace. Even thoug h plan to withdraw the US soldiers was prior to president Obama’s election he

MTC Midterm Examination Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

MTC Midterm Examination - Case Study Example pressing need to enter into a joint venture with an appropriate manufacturer who has credentials and track records to produce and deliver the scanner as per the specifications of Montex. At this juncture, our company has options to start a joint venture with any one of the three companies namely Electronic Innovations (EI), Optics America (OA), and World Optics (WO) to cater the needs of the Montex. EI does not have the product right now as needed by Montex; however, it has capacity to develop the same in 4 months time. In view of the recent layoff at EI and with the possibility of another one in near future any dealing with this company is highly risky. Though EI claims that product will be compatible with our robotic arms, we cannot take the risk of any delay in development of the product and it is in our interest to rule out this option for obvious reasons. Currently, Optics America and World Optics both manufacture the scanners meeting the requirement of Montex. Either of these two companies can be suitable to us for starting a joint venture given the cost economics; however, we need to train our staff and create a new workflow and system for the scanner project. It is important to note that significant technology change will occur in the new venture and will force us to train our shop floor and allied staff to effect a smooth transition to a new process. Getting inspiratio n from Kotter (1996), I recommend four major initiatives to be carried out in the sequential order as listed here with. A Sense of Urgency needs to be established in the company to remove a false sense of complacency at all levels. Before starting any transformational program cooperation from numerous individuals is needed and a sense of urgency in the organization has to come from the top rank of the company. A team of people with sufficient power to lead the change is needed. The team members must possess enough expertise, credibility, and leadership quality to exercise the change. It

Unity and diversity in Contemporary America.(The Module) Essay

Unity and diversity in Contemporary America.(The Module) - Essay Example In this piece of writing, we are going to discuss and justify in depth the pragmatic Obama. President Obama’s foreign policies and decision making undergoes intensive planning and careful evaluation, only two years in his presidency Obama achieved success in four out of five countries he had earlier on engaged in national security issues. In events that seem out of control and beyond his capacity president Obama does not make snarl decisions based on certain ideologies but he resorts to analyzing how the events stretch out.. Not more than two years of his presidency, Obama has faced many foreign policy situations than any of his precursors. His leadership has been put to test in all perspectives availing a ground upon which criticism from his opponents and evaluation from his supporters use to rate him in matters to do with foreign policy (Obiwuru et al. 2011). Way back during his presidential campaigns, Obama set forth several strategies and principles that would be the path to his foreign policies. This includes the five denotative national security policy issues that he made the priority; to put an end to war in Iraq, to reduce nuclear weapons in the world, fight the terrorist groups that are Al Qaeda and Taliban, energy safety and reconstructing the confederations and working other countries in tackling today’s challenges. War in Iraq had been an issue that affected the overall world peace, this being one of the priorities president Obama managed to decimate this war with little criticism and minimal international concern (Lowenthal 2010). President Obama began by withdrawing 10000 soldiers from Iraq and launching operation new dawn that replaced the operation Iraqi freedom in 2010. The American soldiers were given new missions of advising, training, and helping the Iraqi security forces in bringing order and peace. Even thoug h plan to withdraw the US soldiers was prior to president Obama’s election he

Problem of Evil Essay Example for Free

Problem of Evil Essay The traditional problem of evil emerges when people believe in and argue for the existence of a God who is both omnipotent and wholly good. According to Mackie’s study (1955), few of the solutions to the problem of evil could stand up to criticism. Today, someone suggests an alternative: God is not perfectly good, but maximally cool. By cool he means to be free from tension or violence. Since God is maximally cool, he is not so much concerned about either eliminating evil or maximizing goodness than promoting coolness. This God appears to be logically valid, but this essay will show that the existence of such God is impossible. First, we should ask this: if God aims to promote coolness, why would he bother to create evil? It is clear that evil is not cool, given that evil creates tension and violence. It may be replied that God is maximally cool and therefore creates anything based on his will and is not concerned with what happens to his creation afterwards. This reply is arguing that God created some cool thing which later then turned into the uncool evil. Then, the fact that uncool evil exists implies that God cannot make this uncool evil to be cool again, which contradicts with the premise that God is omnipotent. Secondly, good is also uncool. According to most theists, good is defined to be opposite to evil and thus always fights to expel evil (Mackie, 1955), so that good is in constant tension and possible violence with evil. Though the God in argument is claimed to be not perfectly good, this God is still good to a certain degree. Then he will still fights against evil and therefore is not always cool. This leads us to conclude that this God cannot be maximum cool. This guy in defense of the existence of a maximally cool God might argue that uncool is necessary as a counterpart to cool. It seems natural and necessary to consider why there should be uncool things if God is maximum cool. He might argue that if there were no uncool, there could be no cool either, in that if there were no violence or tension to be created and involved in, there could be no violence or tension to be free from. It might be that out of randomness, God created evil that generates tension and good that engages in tension against evil. To detach from involvement in tension or to destroy tension might create another tension and may incur violence. If God were to eliminate uncool things that he created, he would enter a tension between cool and uncool. Then, it would be uncool to make uncool things cool. Because God is maximally cool, he will not enter such tension and therefore he leaves good and evil as uncool as they are. By claiming that cool cannot exist without uncool, this guy shows that God cannot create cool without simultaneously creating uncool. This sets a limit to what God can do, which involves two possibilities: either God is not omnipotent or that omnipotence has some limits. If it is the first case, then we can deny the existence of a God who is omnipotent and maximally cool. If it is the second case, one may argue that these limits are logically impossibility. However, according to Mackie (1955), some theists hold the view that God can do what is logically impossible, while many theists maintain that God created logic. This leads us to the paradox of omnipotence, where we consider whether an omnipotent being can bind himself. According to Mackie, although we can avoid the paradox of omnipotence by putting God outside time, we cannot prove that an omnipotent God binds himself by logical laws. Therefore, it is a fallacious approach to prove the existence of a maximally cool and omnipotent by claiming that cool and uncool are counterparts to each other. To summarize, if a God is omniscience, then he must know the existence of uncool. If he is omnipotent and maximum cool, he will promote coolness to the maximum. However, we observe that there are uncool things which are against God’s will to promote coolness and which God cannot make them cool. Therefore, a God that is omniscience, omnipotent and maximally cool cannot exist. Works Cited J. L. Mackie, Evil and Omnipotence, Mind, New Series, Vol. 64, No. 254. (Apr. , 1955), pp. 200-212. In Pascal’s Wager, Pascal concludes that rationality requires people to wager for god. He bases his argument on mainly three premises. The first premise is his construct of the decision matrix of rewards. The second premise suggests that we are required by rationality to assign positive and not infinitesimal probability to God existing. The third premise states that we are required by rationality to perform the act of possible maximum expected utility. This essay will argue that Pascal’s Wager does not demonstrate solid prudential reasons for us to believe in God, by showing the third premise is not necessarily true. We consider that it is not in all cases that we are required by rationality to maximize expected utility. In Pascal’s Wager, we pay ‘one life’ to wager for God and obtain infinite expected utility. Paying finite amount to play a game with infinite expectation appear to be at our interests and can therefore serve as a prudential reason for us to wager for God. However, in certain cases, this action could be regarded as absurd and alternatively, and to the contrary, taking intuitively sub-optimal actions would actually maximize the expected utility. For example, the St. Petersburg paradox could be representative of this kind of situations. In the St. Petersburg game (Martin, 2011), we keep flipping a coin until we get a coin. The total number of flips, n, yields the prize which equals $2n. There are infinite sum of flips possible, so we have infinite number of possible consequences. The expected payoff of each consequence is $1 and therefore the ‘expected value’ of the game, which equals the sum of the expected payoffs of all the consequences, will be an infinite number of dollars. Then, intuitively we will be willing to play the game as long as we only need to pay a finite number of dollars, given that the ‘expected value’ of the game is infinite. However, Hacking (1980) suggested that â€Å"few of us would pay even $25 to enter such a game. † If we were to pay $25 for the game, half of the time we receive $2 and one quarter of the time the game pays $4, so the probability to break-even is less than one in twenty five. Still, because of the very small possibility of the number of flips to be greater than $25, the expected payoff of the game is larger than the $25 payment. According to standard Bayesian decision theory (Martin, 2011), we should play this game. Then again, because of the very small possibility of getting high enough payment, it is very likely that we will need to flip a coin longer than our physical possibility. In that sense, it will be absurd to pay this finite amount and flip longer than physical constraints for the infinite expected payoff. Therefore, it is not always true that rationality will require us to perform the act that yields maximal expected utility. In the St. Petersburg game we experiment infinitely many trials which yield infinite expectation. In Pascal’s wager, we have a single-trial which also yields infinite expectation. It seems natural for Pascal to assume that expectation is a good guide to solve this decision problem. However, according to Hajek (2012), we need to take variance into consideration to make better decision, because in this one-time shot, a large variance could lead us to an outcome which is much worse than the expectation. When the variance is small, it is probable to get an outcome close to the expectation. However, the further the distribution of outcomes spreads out, the more likely it is to get a bad outcome, and the less compelling the third premise seems to be. Assuming that the expectation of wagering for God is infinite, we can calculate the variance of the outcomes of the wager. Given the infinitely good of the good outcome and the status quo of the bad outcome, the variance is infinite. In the case of an infinite variance, due to our risk-aversion, we might be better off choosing to minimize variance than maximizing our expected utility. Indeed, if f2 is made as low as possible, the variance of wagering for God would be much greater than wagering against God. If the probability of the probability of receiving infinite good, is made as low as possible, the resulted variance might make we deviate much further away from the expected utility in an undesirable direction. Both cases above could happen, and if they do, we would feel less compelled by our rationality to maximize our expected utility because the large variance could lead us to a situation that is much worse than expectation. To summarize, Pascal’s premise three is not necessarily true. This premise says that we are required by nationality to maximize expected utility where there is one available. However, the St. Petersburg paradox suggests that rationality does not always require us to maximize our expected utility. Furthermore, in consideration of large variance, expectation might not be a good measure of choiceworthiness (Hajek, 2012). Without the validity of premise three, we cannot draw the conclusion that rationality requires us to wager for God. Therefore, Pascal’s wager does not solidly demonstrate that we have prudential reasons to believe in God. Works Cited Hajek, Alan, Pascals Wager, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed. ), URL = http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/win2012/entries/pascal-wager/ Martin, Robert, The St. Petersburg Paradox, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = . Hacking, Ian, 1980, â€Å"Strange Expectations†, Philosophy of Science 47: 562-567. According to Pollock (1986), you might be a brain floating in a vat filled with nutrient fluid. You do not realize that you are a brain in a vat because this brain is wired to a computer program that produces stimulation in brain to cause experiences that are qualitatively indistinguishable from normal experiences of being a human being. The problem lies exactly in that whether you are a brain in a vat or not, everything seems to be the same to you. Many philosophers have attempted to prove that you are not a brain in a vat and their approaches seem to be valid. Among those, Moore’s argument and Putnam’s argument are two influential but different approaches. This essay tries to show that you cannot use either of these arguments to prove that you are not a brain in a vat. While going through Moore’s argument seems to be an easy way to show that you are not a BIV (brain in a vat), it is not difficult to show how this approach is flawed either. By Moore’s argument, first you open your eyes and form perceptual knowledge that you have hands. Then you deduce that you are not a BIV which does not have hands and thereby you come to know that conclusion. However, it should be argued in the first place that your senses are not reliable. As Descartes argued in Meditations (1986), while you might form the perception that you are wearing a dress in the dream, you are actually undressed in your bed. The flaw in the logic of this approach can be demonstrated in the following analogous story. You see an empty glass on a table. The glass looks orange and in fact it is. You form perceptual knowledge that the glass is orange. You deduce that it is not colorless and filled with orange juice. You thereby come to know that the glass does not appear orange to you because it is colorless with orange juice filled in it. By assuming that there is orange juice in the glass, you establish that the glass does not appear orange to you because it is colorless with orange juice filled in it. Here the problem is that there is no orange juice and you are trying to prove there is orange juicy by assuming its existence. For the same token, if you are a BIV, then the hands that you perceive are hands* produced by one feature of the computer program. The premise asserting that you form a perception of hands is assuming that you are not a BIV and therefore can form a perceptual knowledge of hands. This is begging the question because we want to prove that we are not BIV. Therefore, you cannot prove that you are not a BIV by going through Moore’s argument. Another famous discussion is Putnam’s semantic arguments. One problem of this approach is the narrow scope of the arguments. Putnam started his arguments by drawing analogy between the mental image of a Martian and that of a BIV. Claiming that Mars does not have tree, Putnam established that BIV’s utterance of ‘tree’ has a different referent from the referent of a non-BIV speaking of a tree. While it is possible that you have always been a BIV since you come into being, so you have never seen a tree that a non-BIV sees. It is also possible that you have lived certain part of your life as a non-BIV and then at some point you are made into a BIV. For example, if you recall in The Problems of Knowledge (Pollock, 1986), by the time that Margot tells Mike that he is a brain in a vat, he has been a brain in a vat for three months. According to Margot, Henry, or the brain in a vat that Mike sees, receives a fictitious mental life that merges perfectly into Henry’s past life. To merge perfectly, the language and its referents that the computer generates for Henry must be indistinguishable from those before his envatment. Similarly, if Mike has been speaking English up until three months ago when he was envatted, his utterance of ‘Margot’ after envatment must have the same referent as the one he had before. It must be that now his words retain the same English referents to the same contents in order to achieve a perfect merge (Brueckner, 2012). This perfect merge makes brain* in a vat* the same as BIV, which means whether you are BIV or not, you always speak English rather than vat-English. Because there are no differences in the languages between BIV and non-BIV, the semantic arguments have nowhere to start in this case. Unless you know with certainty that all BIVs have been BIVs since they came into beings, you cannot use semantic arguments to prove that you are not a BIV. To summarize, Moore’s arguments appear to be an easy solution to the problem of knowledge, but these arguments are begging the question and therefore cannot refute the brain-in-a-vat hypotheses. It seems that Putnam’s arguments are more compelling, but still they fail to rule out all possible versions of the brain-in-a-vat hypotheses. Therefore, you cannot prove that you are a non-BIV by using either of these arguments. Works Cited Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1960. Print. Pollock, John L. Contemporary Theories of Knowledge. Totowa, NJ: Rowman Littlefield, 1986. Print. Brueckner, Tony, Skepticism and Content Externalism, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed. ), URL = .

Dynamics of Nuclear Disarmament Multilateral Negotiations

Dynamics of Nuclear Disarmament Multilateral Negotiations I. Introduction In 1957, Henry Kissinger aptly wrote that ‘ever since the end of the Second World War brought us not the peace we sought so earnestly, but an uneasy armistice, we have responded by what can best be described as a flight into technology: by devising ever more fearful weapons. The more powerful the weapons, however, the greater become the reluctance to use them. [1] He referred to the nuclear weapons as a powerful device that deters superpowers from major conflicts. His vision proved to be true, albeit difficult process of negotiations on nuclear disarmament throughout the Cold War period and beyond. Henceforth, common reluctance to use these deadly arsenals does not necessarily stop powerful states from acquiring them up to a certain deterrent level. Instead, nuclear weapons are even proliferated and technically perfected, and this, in my view, is the most striking dilemma and serves as the paradox of nuclear weapons. The year 2010 will be a very critical year for multilateral negotiation and talks on nuclear arms control and nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), [2] since the future of NPT and the progress and implementation of each of its article will be assessed through its five-yearly Review mechanism.[3] In particular, what it makes more crucial and fascinating is the promise made by US President Barack Obama on potential reduction of nuclear weapons. In his policy statement delivered in Prague, April 5th, 2009, President Barack Obama has made it very clear that he envisioned ‘a world that is free from nuclear weapons.'[4] Five months later, pouring all influence, persuasion and personal charms, President Obama chaired a meeting of the UN Security Council, which unanimously supported his vision. President Obamas initiative and political will his administration is willing to invest to build a critical mass and new thrust needed to move the troubled NPT in the next Review Conference in 2010. Yet, one must be well aware that reviving the NPT requires more than just rhetoric. One of the main articles of NPT, Article VI, clearly stipulates that the nuclear weapons states parties to the Treaty are under obligation to negotiate in good faith a nuclear weapons disarmament treaty under strict and effective international control at the earliest possible date.[5] Unfortunately, the sole multilateral negotiating forum entrusted to negotiate nuclear disarmament treaty, the UN Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, has failed to start the negotiations ever since it managed to conclude painstakingly the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). At this point, one important question to ask is whether or not the international community should see President Obamas recent drive to revive the negotiation of the reduction of US Russia nuclear arsenals as an integral part of this long-term vision—a world that is free of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, what strategy are now being devised to ensure the success of negotiation on both bilateral and more importantly multilateral fronts, provided that attempts to any reduction—particularly as dramatic and steep as it was contained in recent Obamas initiative—will encounter serious hurdles and challenges. It therefore surely remains to be seen whether this bilateral negotiation is driven by President Obamas long-term vision to totally get rid of these weapons of mass-destruction or by other ulterior motives. As mandated by Article VI of the NPT, negotiations on nuclear disarmament should be conducted multilaterally. Besides, if nuclear weapons were fought the whole world would suffer. It is therefore unfair to sideline the non-nuclear-weapons possessing states in the negotiation. The study therefore discusses the dynamics of nuclear disarmament proliferation treaty, by analyzing the policy of the U.S.—as one of the major nuclear weapon states (NWS)—on nuclear proliferation, and its interaction towards other nuclear states. It tries to answer one key question: ‘Why are the nuclear-weapons-possessing states, as parties to the NPT, so reluctant to negotiate a comprehensive nuclear weapons disarmament treaty under strict and effective international control? As the study carries the task to provide a clear understanding on the hesitation of nuclear weapon states in negotiating a comprehensive disarmament, it is therefore considered important for us to look at the theoretical as well as policy contexts. Hence, discussion presented in the study is threefold, namely: (1) the conceptual framework and theoretical foundations; (2) policy development surrounding nuclear disarmament; and; (3) the recent dynamics of NPT in conjunction with the attitude of the U.S. as one of the major nuclear weapons states. II. Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Foundations: Imagining Security, Survival and National Interests This study argues that the nuclear weapons states are so reluctant to negotiate the treaty for they firmly believed that their security and indeed existence (survival) critically hinges upon these weapons of mass-destruction, retaining and perfecting them thereby are mandatory. That above argument also underpins the departing point of our journey to understand the extent to which sense of insecurity and need for survival reinforce nuclear weapons states reluctance to conduct nuclear disarmament negotiations. The concepts of security and survival are essentially parts of the national interests of any state, including the nuclear weapon states. The two key concepts along with its national interest maximization are also core concepts of realism in the study of international relations. Under the logic and circumstances of anarchy, states are assumed to always rely on its own capability for survival. It is therefore a self-help system of international relations within which states and nations are living. Furthermore, a state, especially the smaller or less-powerful one, does have limited options or strategies for its survival. In a rather simplistic illustration, states can either compete or cooperate in advancing its respective national interests. Henceforth, to the realists, state of anarchy makes it more difficult for any state to cooperate with one another. In pursuing this, states often find themselves at odd to build alliance(s) with other states, yet, without any solid assurances concerning full commitments of each member of these cooperative and/or non-cooperative situations. There are a number of theories to explain that, widely stemming from the sense of insecurity to creating absolute gains (neo-liberal tradition) to building a complex of security identity (as proposed by a more recent constructivist tradition of international relations). Robert Jervis (1978) posed a valid question of why states would cooperate, provided that anarchy and the security dilemma make cooperation seemingly impossible. In other words, presumably, there must be some mechanisms which would allow states to bind themselves (and other members of the alliance) not to defect, or a mechanism by which to detect defection at the earliest possible stage, which enable an appropriate early response.[6] In so doing, states often find themselves under a dilemma—security dilemma. Despite of the many definitions and understanding on what constitute security dilemma, the essence of the dilemma is that â€Å"security seeking states more often than not get too much and too little, by assuming military posture that resembles that of an aggressor, which in turn causes states to assume the worst, and these attempts to increase security are consequently self-defeating.†[7] The more a state increases its security, the more it is likely for other state(s) to become insecure. In order to understand the situation under which security policies and strategies are formulated and thus executed, Jervis examines the conflicting situations by providing two basic models for situations of tension and conflict, based on the intentions of the adversary: spiral and deterrence. In the spiral model, intentions of both actors are objectively benign, whereas in the deterrence model, intentions of the adversary are malign.[8] Furthermore, in his deterrence model, Jervis (1976) ‘introduces a concept of malign power-seeking adversary, whereby actors in this situation are pursuing incompatible goals thus, making the strategy of deterrence the best possible option. In contrast, in the spiral model—often referred to as the true or ‘purest security dilemma situation, both actors are security-seekers, thus their interests are compatible.'[9] Yet, as analyzed by Andrej Nosko (2005), ‘the problem remains the inability of actors to distinguish which game they are playing, and what are the intentions of their adversaries.'[10] Although, according to Jervis it may not be possible to overcome the dilemma completely, it still may be possible to ‘break out of the security dilemma.'[11] He therefore suggests two major solutions to overcome the situation: Firstly, ‘to check the cognitive processes, when the adversarys intention is being perceived, so that the adversary is understood correctly. His second suggestion is ‘to employ specific military posture consisting of procurement of weapons that are useful for deterrence without simultaneously being as effective for aggression.'[12] Those practical suggestions form a powerful tool of analysis in what is referred to as ‘offense-defense balance variables, which are significant extension to the security dilemma further expanded by Jervis (and also by Glaser and Kaufmann, among others), as shown in the matrix below.[13] Source: , Strategy, Security Dilemma, and the Offense-Defense Balance, lecture material, accessed from http://ocw.tufts.edu/data/58/726832.pdf. In regard with the logic of nuclear weapons capability, it surely remain unclear whether or not the nuclear warheads installed in various Inter-Continental or Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs/SLBMs) constitute offensive or defensive, since the defense against ICBMs is ICBMs (deterrence) and SLBMs, on the other hand, are less accurate hence defensive. Therefore, security dilemma can be removed accordingly through the significant reduction of the number of nuclear warheads. As actors are striving to attain security while they are driven to acquire more and more power in order to escape the impact of the power of others, thus the intentions and motives of the actors are important primarily for any realists. In the U.S. case, while intentions for major reduction in its nuclear capability seemed to be imminent, yet, one looming question is whether other ‘adversarial nuclear weapons states such as North Korea would immediately follow the suit to reduce or eliminate its nuclear capabilities. Critics and pessimists were quick to answer that such a possibility for others to bandwagon and support the U.S. initiatives are too far-fetched, for a number of reasons such as the national aspiration to obtain nuclear capabilities, sense of insecurity, and the need to â€Å"hedge† its national security from possible nuclear outbreak in the future as part and parcel of their national threat perception. At this point, it is important to add other major concepts in the study of security from the lenses of (neo-)realism, as presented by Waltz (in his systemic self-help and survival theories) or Buzan in his concepts of threats and vulnerability. The links of these various concepts are quite clear: within a convoluted and uncertain international environment, it is postulated that ‘the mere uncertainty of international life creates a threatening environment for a state.'[14] While threats are normally coming from outside the country, vulnerabilities are, on the other, internal in nature, which demonstrate a ‘deficiency in the capability of a state to manage its security affairs.'[15] As argued further by Buzan, vulnerability can be reduced primarily by increasing self-reliance, or by countervailing forces to deal with specific threats.[16] Hypothetically speaking, obtaining or maintaining the level of nuclear warheads to hedge its security interests vis-a-vis other states is a ‘double-edged sword that can be used to minimize both threats and reduce vulnerability at the same time. The theoretical approach of this study suggests that there is a strong interlink between domestic/national considerations (i.e. political alignments in domestic politics and other domestic factors) on what constitute national vulnerability (which may derived from different sources of insecurity, widely stemming from economic, political, as well as the level of military capability relative to others, and vice versa) and threatening international system and environment (including not only the emerging and continued threats from its adversaries, but also the uncertainty of international regimes). This, for instance, has been quite evident in the case of Post-9/11 U.S. security policy in which strong bipartisanship on the Hill on what constitute major threat to security and how it should be overcome was built. Arguably, political dynamics will always affect a decision made by the Executive, and even more so in the national security domain. And a policy maker would eventually take all the se into his or her consideration. Presumably, President Obamas decision on the steep reduction—even elimination of nuclear warheads—was the result of these various considerations e.g. shared concerns amongst the elites over the possible illegal and illicit spread of nuclear warheads. III. Relative Peace amidst Constant Threats of Nuclear Annihilation: Deterrence, Negotiations, and Idiosyncrasy Indeed, in reality, questions and discourses surrounding nuclear weapons and its delivery systems remain as elusive and fascinating as ever, both in its theoretical and practical terms. One of the difficult puzzles that the epistemic community of international relations and strategic studies has been trying to understand and explain is the fact that despite its imminent threats of destruction within the context of intense Cold War, no single nuclear weapon has been used since Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. While this is surely a surprising, yet, welcomed situation, especially amongst non-nuclear weapons states, yet, it does not mean that the world is totally free from the fear and threats of global destruction caused by nuclear war. Arguably, this relative peaceful situation can be understood at least through three different prisms: first, the role of deterrence; second, diplomatic measures and negotiations; and, third, idiosyncrasy. Deterrence. In essence, a number of scholars and practitioners are convinced that nuclear capability has been playing an important role in deterring (external) threats.[17] Furthermore, nuclear deterrence provides strategic blanket in three specific terms: first, protection against attacks with nuclear weapons; second, protection against attacks with conventional forces; and, third, indefinable additional diplomatic clout.[18] Theoretically, some analysts of international relations and strategic studies believe that the relative peace is attainable mostly through effective deterrence, coercion, and all its derivative concepts such as Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) and Balance of Terror.[19] In his robust argument, Robert Jervis (1989) reiterated ‘the significance of the theory of the nuclear revolution: in a world of mutual second-strike nuclear capability (where an adversarys first strike cannot prevent a states retaliation), military victory in a total war is impossible.'[20] The handling of strategic nuclear weapons policy is also not without any idealistic consideration. In the hands of policy handlers, apart from the need to deter, another major consideration surrounding strategic nuclear policy is the moral and ethical dilemma that entail. For the US as a major nuclear weapons state, for instance, the dilemma is aptly captured by Robert E. Osgood (1988), who clearly stated the following: In the period since World War II, the United States has encountered moral and strategic issues concerning the management of force in peacetime that are unique in its historical experience and novel in the history of international politics. At the core of these issues lies a dilemma—namely, the moral (as well as ethical) and strategic predicament of being unable to pursue one course of action without incurring the disadvantage of another. It arises from the dependence of military security on nuclear weapons. This nuclear dilemma lurks in the background of every major military strategic choice and suffuses all major strategic debates. The history of US strategic thought can be largely be comprehended as the story of how Americans have tried to cope with this dilemma by rejecting, abolishing, or mitigating it.[21] Furthermore, he continued by defining precisely the dilemma the US (as arguably other nuclear weapons states) is facing in regard with its nuclear arsenal depository, as follows: The nuclear dilemma is simply an expression of the momentous fact that the security and peace of the United States and its major allies depend heavily on the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons, and on the fact that this deterrent, if used, would very probably lead to self-defeating destruction and, possibly, an ecological catastrophe for much of civilization.[22] In his critical analysis, Wilson (2008) however seriously questioned the role of deterrence in preventing the outbreak of nuclear war. His arguments rest on the assumption that the policy makers have so far misunderstood the true concept of deterrence. He maintained that that the logics of nuclear deterrence, as widely perceived by the policy-makers, were unwarranted simply because they either built on a fallacy of assumptions or were based on disproven facts.[23] Countering Kissingers arguments that nuclear attacks would likely to happen on major populous cities, as happened on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Wilson asserted that there has been no single solid evidence on the intention of the former USSR to attack U.S. major cities even at the height of nuclear tension during the Cold War. As he argued further, An examination of the practical record of nuclear deterrence shows doubtful successes and proven failures. If the conventional wisdom is wrong—if nuclear weapons might not deter nuclear attacks, do not deter conventional attacks, and do not reliably provide diplomatic leverage—then the case for disarmament, nonproliferation and banning nuclear weapons is immeasurably strengthened.[24] In the post 9/11 tragedy, the nature and logic of asymmetric wars has added more complexity to the already difficult policy options.[25] Fear from the possibility of illicit transfer and/or nuclear acquisitions by the so-called ‘terrorist groups, it is very clear that the US and its allies have been undertaking all possible diplomatic initiatives and even military actions to deny these groups access to any nuclear materials.[26] Negotiations and Diplomatic Measure. It is also worth to mention the role of diplomacy and diplomatic efforts in ensuring countries do not resort to their nuclear arsenal to settle whatever disputes they may have with one another. In this regard, the role of negotiators in ensuring the commitments and compliance of all states—both nuclear and non-nuclear ones—to international code of conducts and norms of non-proliferation is also significant. To date, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) remains at the very helm of global endeavor to keep the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and at the same time, restraining states from diverting its peaceful nuclear program towards provocative and militaristic uses. Corollary to this is the most authoritative nuclear weapons non-proliferation regime—the NPT- which was concluded in 1968 and has entered into force since 5 March 1974. Consisting of a Preamble and 11 articles,[27] more often than not that the treaty is widely interpreted as â€Å"a three pillar system†, namely: non-proliferation; disarmament ; and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology. [28] In operation, a safeguards system to verify compliance with the NPT is established under the auspices of the IAEA one of which is conducted through site inspections. As outlined in the Treaty, NPT seeks to promote cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology, including the use of nuclear energy and equal access to this technology for all States parties, and provide safeguards that prevent the diversion of fissile material for the development of nuclear weapons.[29] Idiosyncrasy. In contrast with the above analysis on the role of deterrence and diplomatic measures, a more recent study by Nina Tannenwald (2007) revealed a striking fact concerning the idiosyncratic factor of U.S. leaders regarding the use of nuclear weapons. Drawing on newly released archival sources, Tannenwald was able to dispute the widely accepted theory of deterrence as primary inhibitor to an open and global-scale nuclear war. Instead, she was in favor of what she calls a nuclear taboo, a widespread inhibition on using nuclear arsenals—which has arguably arisen in global politics. By analyzing four critical instances of wars where U.S. leaders considered using nuclear weapons (namely Japan 1945, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Gulf War 1991), Tannenwald produced a rich and convincing explanation on how the nuclear taboo has successfully helped prevent the U.S. and other world leaders from resorting to these ultimate weapons of mass-destruction. [30] In other words, Tannenwald believed that there has been some moral ingredient within the policy makers in regard with the use of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, from the leadership perspective and beliefs, Jacques E.C. Hymans (2006) convincingly demonstrates that leaders do play significant role in achieving nuclear capabilities.[31] Based on his findings on contending interests of leaders in the attainment of nuclear capabilities, he suggests three possible responses: first, a stricter international non-proliferation regime—controlling supply-demand side; second, nuclear abolition, in which the nuclear weapons states make much ‘more serious efforts towards disarmament and ‘resist the temptation to threaten nuclear attacks against non-nuclear weapons states, as they promised to do in Article VI and again at the NPT Review Conference in 2000; and, third, preventive military action/intervention against regimes whose leaders harbor nuclear weapons ambitions.[32] Apparently, those three responses are in combination taking place in todays world politics and international security. Despite their differences in mode of operation, all three prescriptions above do tell us common assumption that: nuclear weapons are highly attractive to many states; that nuclear weapons tend to proliferate. As argued by Hymans, ‘the ultimate solution to the proliferation puzzle lies in some sort of fundamental change to the international system, be it sovereignty-crashing inspections, universal disarmament, or a wholesale revision on the laws of war.'[33]This entails the need to change the way international law operates, which so far is seen as rather ineffective to ensure compliance. As radical it may sound, yet, it is surely rather difficult to be implemented on the ground. IV. Recent Major Development: A Fresher Outlook of Multilateral Negotiation? As one of the key nuclear weapons states, The U.S. has sheer diplomatic and military clout over the future of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons at the global scale. In this regard, it is important to note that any debate concerning the future of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is strategically important and critical. This has been truer especially since the new Obama Administration has expressed its commitments to pursue a deep and steep cut in its nuclear force, and to launch a major review of U.S. nuclear policy, which will hopefully be submitted to the Congress in February 2010. With its 2,200 operational strategic warheads (while the overall U.S. force to date is merely a fraction of one-fourth of its size a decade ago), yet, it is more capable to destroy an adversarys nuclear weapons before they can be used. In the realm of nuclear disarmament negotiations, the weight the U.S. diplomacy can throw to the success or failure of the negotiations is also visible. This was clearly shown, for instance, in President Obamas success to round commitments from the P-5 countries during last UNSC Summit on NPT on 24 September 2009, which unanimously adopted UNSC Resolution 1887 (2009). Resolution 1887 itself spells out, inter-alia, the â€Å"calls upon States Parties to the NPT to comply fully with all their obligations and fulfil their commitments under the Treaty† as well as refrain themselves from nuclear test explosion and sign the CTBT, and also exercise stricter measures to sensitive materials†[34]—as means to avoid nuclear warheads from falling into the terrorist group. The expected band-wagonning effect of the U.S. commitments, especially on the part of non-nuclear weapons states that are parties to NPT, will be prominent, thus, making the study of the Obama Administrations nuclear policy becomes more critical in our attempts to understand the dynamics of nuclear disarmament multilateral negotiations. But, what is the real impact of President Obamas initiatives on the future nuclear disarmament multilateral negotiations? To begin with, the U.S.—like any other country, has its own strategic sense of security—and even vulnerability, as reflected in the contours of its proliferation policies of the past decade or so. Sense of Insecurity. The threat of terrorism is one that is getting more prominence since 9/11. But deep beneath its psyche, the U.S. Government(s) continue to assert the US nuclear strategy does not hinge any longer on being able to deter a single, comparably powerful, nuclear rival. It goes even further beyond that. For instance, the Bush administrations 2002 National Security Strategy embraced ‘pre-emptive attacks, against certain potential adversaries, rather than a strategy of deterrence, under the assumption that terrorist groups and even certain ‘rogue states cannot be deterred.'[35] Furthermore, the same Administration stated in its 2006 National Security Strategy that despite its recognition to address the issues of proliferation through diplomacy and in concert with its allies and partners, the ‘the place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same.'[36] Departing from his predecessors position, in his illuminating speech in Prague, President Obama introduced a (new) calculus of US nuclear strategy. He outlined the intention of the U.S. to, among others, ‘aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), ‘seek a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons as means to cut off the building blocks needed for a bomb, and ‘strengthen the NPT as basis for cooperation.'[37] He further shared some initiatives for international cooperation. These include the efforts to strengthen the treaty and to need put resources and authority to strengthen international inspections, as well as the need to build a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation including an international fuel bank. He also called for â€Å"real and immediate consequences† for countries caught breaking the rules or trying to leave the treaty without cause—referring to the North Korea and Iran specifically.[38] President Obamas promise to fulfill his ‘world-that-is-free-from-nuclear-weapons vision indeed sparked optimism. Analyst like Tom Sauer (2009) even predicts that â€Å"the nuclear weapon states may opt sooner for nuclear elimination than generally expected, due to five factors: first, the danger of nuclear proliferation; second, the risk of nuclear terrorism; third, the nuclear taboo—as outlined earlier; fourth, the technological advancement of missile defense against nuclear arsenals, which reduced the ‘shock and awe capability of nuclear weapons; fifth, the increased importance of international laws.[39] While the optimism seems to be warranted, yet, it might be too little too soon for us to conclude that the age of nuclear proliferation is practically over. President Obamas promise will face a number of hurdles, from within and outside the U.S. Nuclear Rivalries. It will be immediately tested this year when the US and Russia resume haggling on an arms reduction pact and again meet at the crucial UN nuclear arms conference in May. Whether or not the American and Russian negotiators could agree on a successor pact to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-1) to cut nuclear weapons would serve as the litmus test on the feasibility of President Obamas calls. START-1 was an initiative proposed by the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1982, and completed under the administrations of U.S. President George H. W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991. As stipulated by the treaty, each country could deploy no more than 6,000 nuclear warheads and 1,600 strategic delivery vehicles — the single largest bilateral reductions in history.†[40] The concerns—and indeed stakes are now getting much heightened particularly since both Washington and Moscow missed their deadline in December to agree to ‘a new arms control treaty, which would have cut the worlds two largest nuclear arsenals by up to a third, though they vowed to generally abide by the old one while continuing negotiations. The good news is that the overall outline of the new treaty is apparent. At a meeting in Moscow in July 2009, Presidents Obama and Dmitry Medvedev narrowed the range for a cap on warheads to between 1,500 and 1,675, down from about 2,200, which each side now has. They are also expected to lower the ceiling on delivery vehicles intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-based missiles and strategic bombers to below 800, from 1,600. [41] It is widely believed that ‘a successor to START-1 would help restore relations between Moscow and Washington, which recently sank to a post-Cold War low due to many political and diplomatic upheavals as shown in the rift between the two countries over problems in Chechnya, Russian attacks on Georgia in August 2008, and so forth. In that sense, the new treaty should become ‘another milestone in disarmament and non-proliferation, taking the interaction between the US and Russia to a higher level and reaffirming their common goal of promoting mutual as well as global security.'[42] While the US and Russia are now still grappling over a few key differences (e.g. verification procedures) in their respective position concerning the common policy of nuclear weapons/warheads reduction, there are no guarantees that talks would yield a provisional accord. More fundamentally, the problems between these two largest and most important nuclear weapon states are more deeply rooted. Some within the U.S. strategic elites, particularly from the â€Å"republican camp,† argued that U.S. policymakers need to critically examine Russias views on nuclear weapons and doctrine. While successive U.S. Administrations have announced that Russia is no longer the enemy, Russia still considers the United States its â€Å"principal adversary,† despite President Barack Obamas attempts to â€Å"reset† bilateral relations. U.S. national leadership and arms control negotiators need to understand Russias nuclear doctrine and negotiating style as they are, not as the U.S. wants them to be.[43] In addition, Russia is not the only nuclear rival that the U.S. is facing. In the longer term, China, as dubbed by many analysts and observers, is likely to pose serious â€Å"challenges† to the status of the U.S. as the worlds dominant hyper-power. The rise of China as prominent nuclear power would eventually Dynamics of Nuclear Disarmament Multilateral Negotiations Dynamics of Nuclear Disarmament Multilateral Negotiations I. Introduction In 1957, Henry Kissinger aptly wrote that ‘ever since the end of the Second World War brought us not the peace we sought so earnestly, but an uneasy armistice, we have responded by what can best be described as a flight into technology: by devising ever more fearful weapons. The more powerful the weapons, however, the greater become the reluctance to use them. [1] He referred to the nuclear weapons as a powerful device that deters superpowers from major conflicts. His vision proved to be true, albeit difficult process of negotiations on nuclear disarmament throughout the Cold War period and beyond. Henceforth, common reluctance to use these deadly arsenals does not necessarily stop powerful states from acquiring them up to a certain deterrent level. Instead, nuclear weapons are even proliferated and technically perfected, and this, in my view, is the most striking dilemma and serves as the paradox of nuclear weapons. The year 2010 will be a very critical year for multilateral negotiation and talks on nuclear arms control and nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), [2] since the future of NPT and the progress and implementation of each of its article will be assessed through its five-yearly Review mechanism.[3] In particular, what it makes more crucial and fascinating is the promise made by US President Barack Obama on potential reduction of nuclear weapons. In his policy statement delivered in Prague, April 5th, 2009, President Barack Obama has made it very clear that he envisioned ‘a world that is free from nuclear weapons.'[4] Five months later, pouring all influence, persuasion and personal charms, President Obama chaired a meeting of the UN Security Council, which unanimously supported his vision. President Obamas initiative and political will his administration is willing to invest to build a critical mass and new thrust needed to move the troubled NPT in the next Review Conference in 2010. Yet, one must be well aware that reviving the NPT requires more than just rhetoric. One of the main articles of NPT, Article VI, clearly stipulates that the nuclear weapons states parties to the Treaty are under obligation to negotiate in good faith a nuclear weapons disarmament treaty under strict and effective international control at the earliest possible date.[5] Unfortunately, the sole multilateral negotiating forum entrusted to negotiate nuclear disarmament treaty, the UN Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, has failed to start the negotiations ever since it managed to conclude painstakingly the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). At this point, one important question to ask is whether or not the international community should see President Obamas recent drive to revive the negotiation of the reduction of US Russia nuclear arsenals as an integral part of this long-term vision—a world that is free of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, what strategy are now being devised to ensure the success of negotiation on both bilateral and more importantly multilateral fronts, provided that attempts to any reduction—particularly as dramatic and steep as it was contained in recent Obamas initiative—will encounter serious hurdles and challenges. It therefore surely remains to be seen whether this bilateral negotiation is driven by President Obamas long-term vision to totally get rid of these weapons of mass-destruction or by other ulterior motives. As mandated by Article VI of the NPT, negotiations on nuclear disarmament should be conducted multilaterally. Besides, if nuclear weapons were fought the whole world would suffer. It is therefore unfair to sideline the non-nuclear-weapons possessing states in the negotiation. The study therefore discusses the dynamics of nuclear disarmament proliferation treaty, by analyzing the policy of the U.S.—as one of the major nuclear weapon states (NWS)—on nuclear proliferation, and its interaction towards other nuclear states. It tries to answer one key question: ‘Why are the nuclear-weapons-possessing states, as parties to the NPT, so reluctant to negotiate a comprehensive nuclear weapons disarmament treaty under strict and effective international control? As the study carries the task to provide a clear understanding on the hesitation of nuclear weapon states in negotiating a comprehensive disarmament, it is therefore considered important for us to look at the theoretical as well as policy contexts. Hence, discussion presented in the study is threefold, namely: (1) the conceptual framework and theoretical foundations; (2) policy development surrounding nuclear disarmament; and; (3) the recent dynamics of NPT in conjunction with the attitude of the U.S. as one of the major nuclear weapons states. II. Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Foundations: Imagining Security, Survival and National Interests This study argues that the nuclear weapons states are so reluctant to negotiate the treaty for they firmly believed that their security and indeed existence (survival) critically hinges upon these weapons of mass-destruction, retaining and perfecting them thereby are mandatory. That above argument also underpins the departing point of our journey to understand the extent to which sense of insecurity and need for survival reinforce nuclear weapons states reluctance to conduct nuclear disarmament negotiations. The concepts of security and survival are essentially parts of the national interests of any state, including the nuclear weapon states. The two key concepts along with its national interest maximization are also core concepts of realism in the study of international relations. Under the logic and circumstances of anarchy, states are assumed to always rely on its own capability for survival. It is therefore a self-help system of international relations within which states and nations are living. Furthermore, a state, especially the smaller or less-powerful one, does have limited options or strategies for its survival. In a rather simplistic illustration, states can either compete or cooperate in advancing its respective national interests. Henceforth, to the realists, state of anarchy makes it more difficult for any state to cooperate with one another. In pursuing this, states often find themselves at odd to build alliance(s) with other states, yet, without any solid assurances concerning full commitments of each member of these cooperative and/or non-cooperative situations. There are a number of theories to explain that, widely stemming from the sense of insecurity to creating absolute gains (neo-liberal tradition) to building a complex of security identity (as proposed by a more recent constructivist tradition of international relations). Robert Jervis (1978) posed a valid question of why states would cooperate, provided that anarchy and the security dilemma make cooperation seemingly impossible. In other words, presumably, there must be some mechanisms which would allow states to bind themselves (and other members of the alliance) not to defect, or a mechanism by which to detect defection at the earliest possible stage, which enable an appropriate early response.[6] In so doing, states often find themselves under a dilemma—security dilemma. Despite of the many definitions and understanding on what constitute security dilemma, the essence of the dilemma is that â€Å"security seeking states more often than not get too much and too little, by assuming military posture that resembles that of an aggressor, which in turn causes states to assume the worst, and these attempts to increase security are consequently self-defeating.†[7] The more a state increases its security, the more it is likely for other state(s) to become insecure. In order to understand the situation under which security policies and strategies are formulated and thus executed, Jervis examines the conflicting situations by providing two basic models for situations of tension and conflict, based on the intentions of the adversary: spiral and deterrence. In the spiral model, intentions of both actors are objectively benign, whereas in the deterrence model, intentions of the adversary are malign.[8] Furthermore, in his deterrence model, Jervis (1976) ‘introduces a concept of malign power-seeking adversary, whereby actors in this situation are pursuing incompatible goals thus, making the strategy of deterrence the best possible option. In contrast, in the spiral model—often referred to as the true or ‘purest security dilemma situation, both actors are security-seekers, thus their interests are compatible.'[9] Yet, as analyzed by Andrej Nosko (2005), ‘the problem remains the inability of actors to distinguish which game they are playing, and what are the intentions of their adversaries.'[10] Although, according to Jervis it may not be possible to overcome the dilemma completely, it still may be possible to ‘break out of the security dilemma.'[11] He therefore suggests two major solutions to overcome the situation: Firstly, ‘to check the cognitive processes, when the adversarys intention is being perceived, so that the adversary is understood correctly. His second suggestion is ‘to employ specific military posture consisting of procurement of weapons that are useful for deterrence without simultaneously being as effective for aggression.'[12] Those practical suggestions form a powerful tool of analysis in what is referred to as ‘offense-defense balance variables, which are significant extension to the security dilemma further expanded by Jervis (and also by Glaser and Kaufmann, among others), as shown in the matrix below.[13] Source: , Strategy, Security Dilemma, and the Offense-Defense Balance, lecture material, accessed from http://ocw.tufts.edu/data/58/726832.pdf. In regard with the logic of nuclear weapons capability, it surely remain unclear whether or not the nuclear warheads installed in various Inter-Continental or Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs/SLBMs) constitute offensive or defensive, since the defense against ICBMs is ICBMs (deterrence) and SLBMs, on the other hand, are less accurate hence defensive. Therefore, security dilemma can be removed accordingly through the significant reduction of the number of nuclear warheads. As actors are striving to attain security while they are driven to acquire more and more power in order to escape the impact of the power of others, thus the intentions and motives of the actors are important primarily for any realists. In the U.S. case, while intentions for major reduction in its nuclear capability seemed to be imminent, yet, one looming question is whether other ‘adversarial nuclear weapons states such as North Korea would immediately follow the suit to reduce or eliminate its nuclear capabilities. Critics and pessimists were quick to answer that such a possibility for others to bandwagon and support the U.S. initiatives are too far-fetched, for a number of reasons such as the national aspiration to obtain nuclear capabilities, sense of insecurity, and the need to â€Å"hedge† its national security from possible nuclear outbreak in the future as part and parcel of their national threat perception. At this point, it is important to add other major concepts in the study of security from the lenses of (neo-)realism, as presented by Waltz (in his systemic self-help and survival theories) or Buzan in his concepts of threats and vulnerability. The links of these various concepts are quite clear: within a convoluted and uncertain international environment, it is postulated that ‘the mere uncertainty of international life creates a threatening environment for a state.'[14] While threats are normally coming from outside the country, vulnerabilities are, on the other, internal in nature, which demonstrate a ‘deficiency in the capability of a state to manage its security affairs.'[15] As argued further by Buzan, vulnerability can be reduced primarily by increasing self-reliance, or by countervailing forces to deal with specific threats.[16] Hypothetically speaking, obtaining or maintaining the level of nuclear warheads to hedge its security interests vis-a-vis other states is a ‘double-edged sword that can be used to minimize both threats and reduce vulnerability at the same time. The theoretical approach of this study suggests that there is a strong interlink between domestic/national considerations (i.e. political alignments in domestic politics and other domestic factors) on what constitute national vulnerability (which may derived from different sources of insecurity, widely stemming from economic, political, as well as the level of military capability relative to others, and vice versa) and threatening international system and environment (including not only the emerging and continued threats from its adversaries, but also the uncertainty of international regimes). This, for instance, has been quite evident in the case of Post-9/11 U.S. security policy in which strong bipartisanship on the Hill on what constitute major threat to security and how it should be overcome was built. Arguably, political dynamics will always affect a decision made by the Executive, and even more so in the national security domain. And a policy maker would eventually take all the se into his or her consideration. Presumably, President Obamas decision on the steep reduction—even elimination of nuclear warheads—was the result of these various considerations e.g. shared concerns amongst the elites over the possible illegal and illicit spread of nuclear warheads. III. Relative Peace amidst Constant Threats of Nuclear Annihilation: Deterrence, Negotiations, and Idiosyncrasy Indeed, in reality, questions and discourses surrounding nuclear weapons and its delivery systems remain as elusive and fascinating as ever, both in its theoretical and practical terms. One of the difficult puzzles that the epistemic community of international relations and strategic studies has been trying to understand and explain is the fact that despite its imminent threats of destruction within the context of intense Cold War, no single nuclear weapon has been used since Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. While this is surely a surprising, yet, welcomed situation, especially amongst non-nuclear weapons states, yet, it does not mean that the world is totally free from the fear and threats of global destruction caused by nuclear war. Arguably, this relative peaceful situation can be understood at least through three different prisms: first, the role of deterrence; second, diplomatic measures and negotiations; and, third, idiosyncrasy. Deterrence. In essence, a number of scholars and practitioners are convinced that nuclear capability has been playing an important role in deterring (external) threats.[17] Furthermore, nuclear deterrence provides strategic blanket in three specific terms: first, protection against attacks with nuclear weapons; second, protection against attacks with conventional forces; and, third, indefinable additional diplomatic clout.[18] Theoretically, some analysts of international relations and strategic studies believe that the relative peace is attainable mostly through effective deterrence, coercion, and all its derivative concepts such as Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) and Balance of Terror.[19] In his robust argument, Robert Jervis (1989) reiterated ‘the significance of the theory of the nuclear revolution: in a world of mutual second-strike nuclear capability (where an adversarys first strike cannot prevent a states retaliation), military victory in a total war is impossible.'[20] The handling of strategic nuclear weapons policy is also not without any idealistic consideration. In the hands of policy handlers, apart from the need to deter, another major consideration surrounding strategic nuclear policy is the moral and ethical dilemma that entail. For the US as a major nuclear weapons state, for instance, the dilemma is aptly captured by Robert E. Osgood (1988), who clearly stated the following: In the period since World War II, the United States has encountered moral and strategic issues concerning the management of force in peacetime that are unique in its historical experience and novel in the history of international politics. At the core of these issues lies a dilemma—namely, the moral (as well as ethical) and strategic predicament of being unable to pursue one course of action without incurring the disadvantage of another. It arises from the dependence of military security on nuclear weapons. This nuclear dilemma lurks in the background of every major military strategic choice and suffuses all major strategic debates. The history of US strategic thought can be largely be comprehended as the story of how Americans have tried to cope with this dilemma by rejecting, abolishing, or mitigating it.[21] Furthermore, he continued by defining precisely the dilemma the US (as arguably other nuclear weapons states) is facing in regard with its nuclear arsenal depository, as follows: The nuclear dilemma is simply an expression of the momentous fact that the security and peace of the United States and its major allies depend heavily on the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons, and on the fact that this deterrent, if used, would very probably lead to self-defeating destruction and, possibly, an ecological catastrophe for much of civilization.[22] In his critical analysis, Wilson (2008) however seriously questioned the role of deterrence in preventing the outbreak of nuclear war. His arguments rest on the assumption that the policy makers have so far misunderstood the true concept of deterrence. He maintained that that the logics of nuclear deterrence, as widely perceived by the policy-makers, were unwarranted simply because they either built on a fallacy of assumptions or were based on disproven facts.[23] Countering Kissingers arguments that nuclear attacks would likely to happen on major populous cities, as happened on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Wilson asserted that there has been no single solid evidence on the intention of the former USSR to attack U.S. major cities even at the height of nuclear tension during the Cold War. As he argued further, An examination of the practical record of nuclear deterrence shows doubtful successes and proven failures. If the conventional wisdom is wrong—if nuclear weapons might not deter nuclear attacks, do not deter conventional attacks, and do not reliably provide diplomatic leverage—then the case for disarmament, nonproliferation and banning nuclear weapons is immeasurably strengthened.[24] In the post 9/11 tragedy, the nature and logic of asymmetric wars has added more complexity to the already difficult policy options.[25] Fear from the possibility of illicit transfer and/or nuclear acquisitions by the so-called ‘terrorist groups, it is very clear that the US and its allies have been undertaking all possible diplomatic initiatives and even military actions to deny these groups access to any nuclear materials.[26] Negotiations and Diplomatic Measure. It is also worth to mention the role of diplomacy and diplomatic efforts in ensuring countries do not resort to their nuclear arsenal to settle whatever disputes they may have with one another. In this regard, the role of negotiators in ensuring the commitments and compliance of all states—both nuclear and non-nuclear ones—to international code of conducts and norms of non-proliferation is also significant. To date, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) remains at the very helm of global endeavor to keep the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and at the same time, restraining states from diverting its peaceful nuclear program towards provocative and militaristic uses. Corollary to this is the most authoritative nuclear weapons non-proliferation regime—the NPT- which was concluded in 1968 and has entered into force since 5 March 1974. Consisting of a Preamble and 11 articles,[27] more often than not that the treaty is widely interpreted as â€Å"a three pillar system†, namely: non-proliferation; disarmament ; and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology. [28] In operation, a safeguards system to verify compliance with the NPT is established under the auspices of the IAEA one of which is conducted through site inspections. As outlined in the Treaty, NPT seeks to promote cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology, including the use of nuclear energy and equal access to this technology for all States parties, and provide safeguards that prevent the diversion of fissile material for the development of nuclear weapons.[29] Idiosyncrasy. In contrast with the above analysis on the role of deterrence and diplomatic measures, a more recent study by Nina Tannenwald (2007) revealed a striking fact concerning the idiosyncratic factor of U.S. leaders regarding the use of nuclear weapons. Drawing on newly released archival sources, Tannenwald was able to dispute the widely accepted theory of deterrence as primary inhibitor to an open and global-scale nuclear war. Instead, she was in favor of what she calls a nuclear taboo, a widespread inhibition on using nuclear arsenals—which has arguably arisen in global politics. By analyzing four critical instances of wars where U.S. leaders considered using nuclear weapons (namely Japan 1945, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Gulf War 1991), Tannenwald produced a rich and convincing explanation on how the nuclear taboo has successfully helped prevent the U.S. and other world leaders from resorting to these ultimate weapons of mass-destruction. [30] In other words, Tannenwald believed that there has been some moral ingredient within the policy makers in regard with the use of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, from the leadership perspective and beliefs, Jacques E.C. Hymans (2006) convincingly demonstrates that leaders do play significant role in achieving nuclear capabilities.[31] Based on his findings on contending interests of leaders in the attainment of nuclear capabilities, he suggests three possible responses: first, a stricter international non-proliferation regime—controlling supply-demand side; second, nuclear abolition, in which the nuclear weapons states make much ‘more serious efforts towards disarmament and ‘resist the temptation to threaten nuclear attacks against non-nuclear weapons states, as they promised to do in Article VI and again at the NPT Review Conference in 2000; and, third, preventive military action/intervention against regimes whose leaders harbor nuclear weapons ambitions.[32] Apparently, those three responses are in combination taking place in todays world politics and international security. Despite their differences in mode of operation, all three prescriptions above do tell us common assumption that: nuclear weapons are highly attractive to many states; that nuclear weapons tend to proliferate. As argued by Hymans, ‘the ultimate solution to the proliferation puzzle lies in some sort of fundamental change to the international system, be it sovereignty-crashing inspections, universal disarmament, or a wholesale revision on the laws of war.'[33]This entails the need to change the way international law operates, which so far is seen as rather ineffective to ensure compliance. As radical it may sound, yet, it is surely rather difficult to be implemented on the ground. IV. Recent Major Development: A Fresher Outlook of Multilateral Negotiation? As one of the key nuclear weapons states, The U.S. has sheer diplomatic and military clout over the future of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons at the global scale. In this regard, it is important to note that any debate concerning the future of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is strategically important and critical. This has been truer especially since the new Obama Administration has expressed its commitments to pursue a deep and steep cut in its nuclear force, and to launch a major review of U.S. nuclear policy, which will hopefully be submitted to the Congress in February 2010. With its 2,200 operational strategic warheads (while the overall U.S. force to date is merely a fraction of one-fourth of its size a decade ago), yet, it is more capable to destroy an adversarys nuclear weapons before they can be used. In the realm of nuclear disarmament negotiations, the weight the U.S. diplomacy can throw to the success or failure of the negotiations is also visible. This was clearly shown, for instance, in President Obamas success to round commitments from the P-5 countries during last UNSC Summit on NPT on 24 September 2009, which unanimously adopted UNSC Resolution 1887 (2009). Resolution 1887 itself spells out, inter-alia, the â€Å"calls upon States Parties to the NPT to comply fully with all their obligations and fulfil their commitments under the Treaty† as well as refrain themselves from nuclear test explosion and sign the CTBT, and also exercise stricter measures to sensitive materials†[34]—as means to avoid nuclear warheads from falling into the terrorist group. The expected band-wagonning effect of the U.S. commitments, especially on the part of non-nuclear weapons states that are parties to NPT, will be prominent, thus, making the study of the Obama Administrations nuclear policy becomes more critical in our attempts to understand the dynamics of nuclear disarmament multilateral negotiations. But, what is the real impact of President Obamas initiatives on the future nuclear disarmament multilateral negotiations? To begin with, the U.S.—like any other country, has its own strategic sense of security—and even vulnerability, as reflected in the contours of its proliferation policies of the past decade or so. Sense of Insecurity. The threat of terrorism is one that is getting more prominence since 9/11. But deep beneath its psyche, the U.S. Government(s) continue to assert the US nuclear strategy does not hinge any longer on being able to deter a single, comparably powerful, nuclear rival. It goes even further beyond that. For instance, the Bush administrations 2002 National Security Strategy embraced ‘pre-emptive attacks, against certain potential adversaries, rather than a strategy of deterrence, under the assumption that terrorist groups and even certain ‘rogue states cannot be deterred.'[35] Furthermore, the same Administration stated in its 2006 National Security Strategy that despite its recognition to address the issues of proliferation through diplomacy and in concert with its allies and partners, the ‘the place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same.'[36] Departing from his predecessors position, in his illuminating speech in Prague, President Obama introduced a (new) calculus of US nuclear strategy. He outlined the intention of the U.S. to, among others, ‘aggressively pursue U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), ‘seek a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials intended for use in state nuclear weapons as means to cut off the building blocks needed for a bomb, and ‘strengthen the NPT as basis for cooperation.'[37] He further shared some initiatives for international cooperation. These include the efforts to strengthen the treaty and to need put resources and authority to strengthen international inspections, as well as the need to build a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation including an international fuel bank. He also called for â€Å"real and immediate consequences† for countries caught breaking the rules or trying to leave the treaty without cause—referring to the North Korea and Iran specifically.[38] President Obamas promise to fulfill his ‘world-that-is-free-from-nuclear-weapons vision indeed sparked optimism. Analyst like Tom Sauer (2009) even predicts that â€Å"the nuclear weapon states may opt sooner for nuclear elimination than generally expected, due to five factors: first, the danger of nuclear proliferation; second, the risk of nuclear terrorism; third, the nuclear taboo—as outlined earlier; fourth, the technological advancement of missile defense against nuclear arsenals, which reduced the ‘shock and awe capability of nuclear weapons; fifth, the increased importance of international laws.[39] While the optimism seems to be warranted, yet, it might be too little too soon for us to conclude that the age of nuclear proliferation is practically over. President Obamas promise will face a number of hurdles, from within and outside the U.S. Nuclear Rivalries. It will be immediately tested this year when the US and Russia resume haggling on an arms reduction pact and again meet at the crucial UN nuclear arms conference in May. Whether or not the American and Russian negotiators could agree on a successor pact to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-1) to cut nuclear weapons would serve as the litmus test on the feasibility of President Obamas calls. START-1 was an initiative proposed by the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1982, and completed under the administrations of U.S. President George H. W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1991. As stipulated by the treaty, each country could deploy no more than 6,000 nuclear warheads and 1,600 strategic delivery vehicles — the single largest bilateral reductions in history.†[40] The concerns—and indeed stakes are now getting much heightened particularly since both Washington and Moscow missed their deadline in December to agree to ‘a new arms control treaty, which would have cut the worlds two largest nuclear arsenals by up to a third, though they vowed to generally abide by the old one while continuing negotiations. The good news is that the overall outline of the new treaty is apparent. At a meeting in Moscow in July 2009, Presidents Obama and Dmitry Medvedev narrowed the range for a cap on warheads to between 1,500 and 1,675, down from about 2,200, which each side now has. They are also expected to lower the ceiling on delivery vehicles intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-based missiles and strategic bombers to below 800, from 1,600. [41] It is widely believed that ‘a successor to START-1 would help restore relations between Moscow and Washington, which recently sank to a post-Cold War low due to many political and diplomatic upheavals as shown in the rift between the two countries over problems in Chechnya, Russian attacks on Georgia in August 2008, and so forth. In that sense, the new treaty should become ‘another milestone in disarmament and non-proliferation, taking the interaction between the US and Russia to a higher level and reaffirming their common goal of promoting mutual as well as global security.'[42] While the US and Russia are now still grappling over a few key differences (e.g. verification procedures) in their respective position concerning the common policy of nuclear weapons/warheads reduction, there are no guarantees that talks would yield a provisional accord. More fundamentally, the problems between these two largest and most important nuclear weapon states are more deeply rooted. Some within the U.S. strategic elites, particularly from the â€Å"republican camp,† argued that U.S. policymakers need to critically examine Russias views on nuclear weapons and doctrine. While successive U.S. Administrations have announced that Russia is no longer the enemy, Russia still considers the United States its â€Å"principal adversary,† despite President Barack Obamas attempts to â€Å"reset† bilateral relations. U.S. national leadership and arms control negotiators need to understand Russias nuclear doctrine and negotiating style as they are, not as the U.S. wants them to be.[43] In addition, Russia is not the only nuclear rival that the U.S. is facing. In the longer term, China, as dubbed by many analysts and observers, is likely to pose serious â€Å"challenges† to the status of the U.S. as the worlds dominant hyper-power. The rise of China as prominent nuclear power would eventually