Very little information is available about the economic impact that whaling, or a permanent ban on whaling, would have on the Japanese economy. Factors that would need to be considered include employment issues, food supply, and the effect on lower level fish populations.

The effects of a permanent ban on whaling to the Japanese economy are extremely difficult to quantify. Sea Shepherd is an anti-whaling organization that appears to have some numbers regarding the effect of whaling on the Japanese economy, though they do not disclose their source on their organization website. According to SeaShepherd.org, “Japan’s economy, the world’s second biggest, has an annual output of 515 trillion yen or $8.2 trillion. So whaling accounts for 0.0014 per cent of the national economy.” This does not sound like a large percentage; however, Sea Shepherd is an organization with an agenda so it is difficult to ascertain how accurate their statements on this issue are.

Reports vary on how widely consumed whale meat is among those who live in Japan. Recently, a chef in the United States found himself in serious trouble after serving whale meat in his restaurant. Whale meat is not food for the common man in Japan, but it is not a high-priced delicacy either. Some have compared it to the consumption of horse meat – loved by some, reviled by others, but not a major dietary addition for the majority of Japan’s residents. In 2008, Time Magazine reported that “the average Japanese eats a little more than an ounce of whale meat per year.”

While the Japanese government has previously stated their desire to resume a sustainable whaling operation so that they might preserve existing fish populations lower on the food chain and acquire whale meat for consumption, many members of the international community oppose it. In the previously mentioned Time Magazine article, the writer explored the Japanese argument that whaling is needed to maintain appropriate levels of smaller fish populations. It seems though, that the eco-relationship along the food chain is much more complicated than Japanese whaling proponents let on. A researcher at Arizona State found that “if you remove whales, it has a negligible impact on the biomass that is commercially available for fishing.”

In the end, Japan must figure out how to balance their desire for scientific research, whale meat for consumption, the keeping of their cultural traditions, the sustainability of the whale population, and the need to maintain smaller fish levels. Until Japan can find the magic middle of all of these issues, this will continue to be an issue they need to deal with.

Because the Sho are a resourceful people, they find many uses for this bottle. Unfortunately, the Sho are not accustomed to having a limited resource. Their experience is that everything that had been given by the gods was given in sufficient supply for everyone to use. The existence of a single bottle, an allegory for globalization, threatens their cultural identity as jealousy, anger, and the concept of personal possessions begins to infiltrate their tribe. Even violence, as yet inexperienced by this tribe, creeps into their hearts as they fight over the single Pepsi bottle.

By its very nature, globalization does require some release of cultural identity. This is as true for tribal cultures as it is true for generational cultures. The above mentioned movie demonstrates how tribes can be affected by the infiltration of the outside culture. Also though, even the generational culture of the Baby Boomers can be affected by globalization when it is confronted with the new values and habits of younger generations who are more tech savvy and less comfortable to shelving their own desires for the greater good.

In America, a land once referred to as a “Melting Pot,” globalization has been lauded as an important value. However, many of the various people groups that immigrated to America began to lose their cultural identity for the sake of globalization. Over the course of a few generations, this caused America to move towards the “Salad Bowl” theory of globalization. The end result is that members of various ethnic and cultural groups retain what they can from their background, while attempting to integrate what is good and worthy from surrounding cultures.

The “Salad Bowl” theory is a way to reduce the threat of globalization towards cultural identity. It affects the language children are taught, the food people eat, and even the way people interact with one another in the work place. An immigrant family may choose to teach their child the native language and rely on local school systems to teach the child English. This helps the family maintain an important part of their cultural heritage – language – while still ensuring their child receives the benefit of living in another culture.

In heavily immigrant communities, such as south Florida, the Hispanic population outnumbers the non-Hispanic population, bringing a new meaning to globalization. There are segments of the city that resemble very closely the native countries of those areas residents. Despite this, the threat of globalization still exists as younger generations grow up and have to make hard decisions about whether not to stay in their current cultural ghetto or to move into another area.

Globalization does affect cultural identity. However, it does not need to threaten it. Each culture can choose for itself what it wants to keep and want it wants to share. In this way, every culture might find itself all the better for its exposure to other cultures.

In a free market economy, no one provides education, health care, or housing. To sum it up, the rich get richer and the poor become more deprived. There are no public goods such as street lighting, police, and fire services, or public transportation, because there is no profit in providing these goods. Products like cigarettes and alcohol will proliferate because there is profit to be taken by making them available to the public. The environment, road conditions, air, water supply will be ignored, again, because it doesn’t put money in a rich man’s pocket. To sum it up there will be wasted resources in a free market economy, social injustice will prevail and economic instability will result.

Monopolies will be another common occurrence, due to lack of regulation within the industries. Small business will cease to exist. Competition will prevent new players or start ups in the marketplace. The monopolies will result in the artificially inflated pricing for all goods, which can be restricted to simply drive up the price and availability. Consumers will be forced to pay those higher prices for bad quality goods and lousy levels of service and supply. Since the market is free there is no one to stop the corrupt corporate exercise of power. Government take over by business is inevitable.

Free market economies make luxury goods readily available to the wealthy consumers because this is where the money is. The drawback is that providers allocate all resources to pleasing the whims of the wealthy while neglecting the poor. Bear in mind, there will be no middle class in this type economy. It is either rich or poor, with no in between. Private firms in a free market ignore all social costs passing them on to those who can least afford them. Probably the worst problem of all is the neglect that will happen to the environment. There will be nothing to stop industry and corporations from polluting the air and literally killing the environment.

The disadvantages of a free market economy are many, leading one to wonder why would anyone be in favor of living under such a system. Well, in a free market place, capital flows to the source of greatest return which leads to maximum expansion. Anyone who has a good idea can get it to market more quickly. Free Market represents the ultimate in supply and demand. It is also easier for the guy with the good idea to transform persistence and hard work into major material wealth.

To summarize, free market economy is a survival of the fittest scenario. In other words, those who have the best ideas and can market them, will make it. Those who can’t will fall by the wayside. Money or the making of money controls all. Social policy and things such as health care, police and fire protection do not thrive, and in most cases, do not exist in a free market economy.

Examples of this systemic corruption can be seen in the countries of Kenya, Zimbabwe, DRC, Nigeria or Tanzania. These so called indebted and poor countries are some of the richest in the world in natural resources who at the same time, have a well educated work force. Yet the people are poor because their government abuses them and their resources, keeping the wealth for a few rather than for all. Canceling the world debt will not trickle down to the people as long as corrupt government officials stand in the way.

Canceling the debt may encourage more bad economic policy choices, while at the same time allowing irresponsible lender governments off the hook, free to form new alliances with criminal regimes. Much of this so called debt was merely a way for developed nations to carve out a stake in the natural resources of the poor country, in order to protect their personal interests. By canceling the debt corrupt lending countries can hide their complicity in the denigration of the poor country and its people. Hanging a blanket cancellation onto a country also means that it is not a creditworthy nation in the eyes of other world governments, making things worse.

Nor does it stop the cycle of criminality, because the countries must still borrow in order to survive and meet their other debts in the future. One way third world countries can get out of the financial and poverty inducing rut is to stay away from the patronage of rich nations who put them in trouble in the first place. Another way is to demand respect and proper treatment from creditors while eliminating the corruption endemic in their governments. It has been proven over and over again that the criminality and graft is a two way street. International law already allows countries to repudiate debt contracted without the consent of, nor spent in the interests of the people.

Under international law citizens of a country do not have to repay those financed their oppression such as America propping up tin hat dictators like Mbutu, to name one. What seems to be lacking is a will to eliminate the underlying root causes of third world problems. The tools for doing such are already there waiting to be used. Third world debt cancellation is merely addressing a symptom that will only give very short term relief while allowing the problem to recycle and become entrenched again. Breaking the cycle is the only way to alleviate the problem on a more permanent level.

The international community has not yet developed a unified coping strategy to handle these myriad problems, preferring to react to a given situation rather than seek proactive solutions and presenting a unified front. The result of this lack of joint policy speaks to the instability of the situation. Experts, some of them anyway, feel that the correct way to a stable and democratic world order must be grounded in dialog and communication if it is to succeed. Led by the UN General Assembly, that dialog has begun and show promise.

Attempts by nations to deal with threats unilaterally rather than in a multilateral fashion are useless and doomed to failure. A classic and recent example is the Bush Administration’s illogical military launch against Iraq. The US was forced to back down and broaden its international coalition in order to right the ship, so to speak and work toward the downturn in the war as implemented by President Barack Obama. The UN continues to work with the United States to stabilize Iraq and enable an American pull out in the next couple of years.
Russia has indicated that it believes the new world order must be predicated on collective mechanisms for handling global problems.

Russian leaders have said this new system must contain as many tools as possible to guarantee world stability. It has signed onto the idea that broader accord and interaction must take place across the globe and must include, G-8, the European Union, China, Japan, India, Africa, Latin America, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.

Russia is behind a move to keep the UN Security Council from rubber stamping the use of force in any governmental difference of opinion. Officials argue that each situation must be looked at individually with a preference for preventive interference rather than preemptive strike tendencies as espoused by the Bush Administration’s failed policies and false accusations leading to the conflict in Iraq. The dissolution of the Cold War bloc has led to positive changes for the Russian Federation which continues to build and improve upon its ties to the international community.

History teaches us that democracy cannot be imposed from the outside, as witnessed by American NeoCon attempts in the Middle East. Removing a leader by force only works to destabilize a country to the detriment of the people. Democratic institutions must be created from within with the help of the international community.

Since the U.S is so beholden to China, China’s agenda may become part of U.S. domestic policy. In early 2009, China’s Premier, Wen Jinbao expressed concerns over the U.S.’s ability to repay its already staggering debt obligations and stated that the U.S. should be nice to the countries that help to support it (Simpkins, 2009). The thinly veiled threat that statement contains could lead the U.S. to bend its current policies to allow China to control more than the national debt, which could include economic policy from concerns over getting repaid and U.S. International policy to favor China, its policies, and its allies. If China’s threat holds true, it could allow China to control what the U.S. does internally and externally, leaving the U.S. on shaky international soil. Recently, the Chinese are encouraging the U.S. to stop the sale of military equipment to Taiwan, citing that this action would undermine relations between the U.S. and China (China warns U.S., 2010). Could that mean that if the U.S. does not behave as the Chinese want that they will quit funding the U.S. recovery?

Currently, the Chinese economy is in a boom period, which could leave the U.S. high and dry (Yanping, 2010). With Chinese manufacturing creating the economic boom, it has no need to artificially create one by loaning money to outside sources in hopes of recovering its investment plus interest. This means that China may no longer buy the Treasury Bonds it has been lapping up, which will leave future spending on the economic recovery plan unfunded. Without funding, the U.S. economy as it is known will be bust, leaving the U.S. to be at the bottom of the economic food chain.

The truth is that China depends on the U.S. as much as the U.S. depends on China. In 2005 the U.S. was the second largest market where the Chinese exported goods (Morrison, 2006). If the U.S. economy collapsed, it would mean a significant reduction in income to the Chinese. While it may not be enough to topple the Chinese economy, China must recognize that it is in their best interest, as well as the U.S.’s best interest, to keep helping the U.S. recover. Once the U.S. recovers its economic stability, the Chinese will have two avenues of income from the U.S.; the sale of exports and the repayment of trillions in Treasury Bonds.

China does hold the fate of the U.S. in its hands. Quite easily, China could cause the complete collapse of the U.S. economy. China could stop buying Treasury Bonds or sell them off to other countries willing to invest in the U.S., but the likelihood of that happening is minimal since a large portion of the Chinese economy depends on the U.S. as well. Most likely, China will continue to support the U.S.’s efforts for recovery since the long term well being of the Chinese economy would benefit.

Resources
China warns U.S to cancel Taiwan arms. (2010, January 5). UPI. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from http://www.upi.com
Morrison, W. M. (2006, January 12) China’s economic conditions. CRS Issue Brief for Congress. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from http://www.fas.org
Simkins, J. (2009, March 25) Is China a threat to the U.S. economy? Yes and no… NuWire Investor. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from http://www.nuwireinvestor.com
Yanping, L. (2010, January 4). Chinese manufacturing grows by most since April 2004. BusinessWeek. Retrieved January 5, 2010, from http://www.businessweek.com

Thomas Jefferson once said, "he who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me."  Unfortunately, Thomas Jefferson lived in a different time.  He lived in a time when piracy was not as evident and intellectual property was not worth so much.  In China, the largest crime which is currently occurring is intellectual piracy.  Unlike the pirates of old who plundered the merchant vessels and ports of the South China Sea, modern day pirates are more interested in illegal replication of intellectual rights.  From music compact discs to computer software to films to best selling novels, The Chinese black market is a virtual warehouse of  "plundered goods".

It is estimated that there are at least thirty illegal high tech factories in China that can churn out over 20,000 optical discs a day.  America’s Microsoft estimates that 98 out of every 100 of its software programs being used in China are illegal copies .  Because of these statistics, and because this only amounts to a small amount of the estimated piracy which occurs in China, program manufacturers, worldwide, are lobbying the Chinese government to impose stricter standards and greater restrictions upon the distribution and sale of illegal intellectual rights.  In July of 1996, investigators from Microsoft led Chinese officials to a plant near Guilin in Guanxi Province, where they  found 5700 bootleg windows CDs.  The plant had four production lines.  Three of them were operated around the clock.  It was estimated that this particular plant churned out 20,000 illegal copies of Microsoft programs a day.

A trade report to Congress from the Trade office cites China as the worst violator of United States – copyrighted intellectual property.  The report, which came days after the joint raid on the Guilin plant by Microsoft and Chinese investigators, blasted China for failing to honor a February 1995 agreement to police production at its replication plants and mark the software with a source identification code.  In a statement, Microsoft characterized the raid as a matter of luck, not enforcement: "There were no copyright monitors stationed at the factory, nor were the source-identifier markings required under Chinese law in place."  

In June of 1996, the United States government planned to impose punitive tariffs against Chinese textiles and electronics imports.  These tariffs were going to be imposed if the Chinese government didn’t immediately comply with a US-Chinese piracy agreement.  However, at press time, China stated that they would retaliate with duties on American agricultural and automotive products.  China insisted that they were trying to rectify the situation, and the punitive tariffs never went through.  The United States currently has a 34 billion dollar balance-of-trade deficit with China.  If  2 billion dollars of illegally pirated U.S. goods are included in this amount, it counts for a lot.  Even though the Chinese government states that they are trying to prevent this piracy, they still have restrictions in place that only encourage it.  For example, China permits only 10 new foreign movies to be distributed within its borders each year.  Although China says this is to protect its domestic film industry, American film makers estimate that they lose $150 million a year due to piracy of films that would be otherwise unavailable to the Chinese public.

China may be the worst piracy offender, but it is not alone.  Around the world,  according to figures published on May 9th, 1996 by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), one in five recordings of music is now a pirated copy.  It is estimated that the music industry lost 5% of their revenues, or 2.1 billion dollars, because of this.  What worries officials about China is that it is estimated that they produce 150 million bootleg copies of music CDs a year.  However, it is estimated that China only consumes a total of 40 million CDs a year, bootlegged or legal.  It is obvious from these numbers that over 100 million bootlegged CDs are being exported from China each year.  Where as the United States only accounts for 13% of value of pirated CDs, other developing and economically or politically unstable countries, such as Russia or Mexico, are also consuming a large portion of China’s illegal goods.

 
Being China only produced 54 million bootlegged copies of music CDs in 1994, and it is estimated that they produce 150 million today, a new problem of exportation arises.  What if China breaks into the U.S. market, which consumes 30% of all recorded music?  If not put under control, the results could be crippling for the music industry, worldwide.

An escalating black market problem in China, which is gaining an international spotlight due to its human rights injustices, is the kidnapping and selling of women and children.  Late in 1988, a Chinese – language newspaper in Shanghai reported on rings of people who traded in women; the most expensive were slightly mentally retarded, because they worked hard but did what they were told without complaining or trying to run away.  One man in Hebei province had been imprisoned for trading in women, but used his connections with authorities to secure an early release and simply reestablish his former trade .  The sale of women was acknowledged as being among six types of very serious and widespread crimes targeted for suppression from the autumn of 1989.  This suggests that, before then, the abuse of power in the form of deliberate laxity in the face of serious crime had become a major problem among police and other authorities.  In a Beijing newspaper interview, Li Tieying, a CCP (Chinese Communist Party) Political Bureau member, stated that, "At present, party committees and governments at all levels must first of all be fully aware of the importance of cracking down on the criminal activities of kidnapping and selling of women and children as well as of prostitution and visiting whores. They must also be soberly aware that clamping down on this rampancy and the eradication of these vile social phenomena, is a significant struggle in protecting the personal interest of the masses, in maintaining social stability, and in straightening up current social practices. We must adopt a serious attitude and be responsible to the party, state, people, nationality, and history in this respect. We must carry out this task with a strong sense of responsibility and urgency."  Li Tieying’s statement expresses how the Chinese government sees this problem to be of timed importance.

Another black market problem, which is growing in China, is that of illegal dogs.  Among newly rich Chinese, cameras or refrigerators used to be the things to show you had arrived.  Now, to be associated with the "yuppy" class, the thing to have and show off is a pedigree lap dog.  Now, where this may sound crazy in most of the world, it is not in China.  Dogs are illegal in a lot of China and are generally destroyed. This is because of the fact that they spread rabies, which is responsible for thousands of deaths a year in China.  A pedigree dog could go for as much as $4500 on the black market in China, and it is becoming increasingly common to find "dog – pushers" in the back alleys and shady parts of Beijing.

Li Wenrui, deputy chief of the public order department of Beijing’s Dongcheng district, has dog squads established to help track down illegal dog owners and destroy their pets.  In Dongcheng, one of Beijing’s districts, Mr. Li stated that it is not uncommon to find and destroy approximately 500 dogs a week .

State run newspapers rage against dog lovers who lavish food and money on their pets.  On January 26th, 1994, the Legal Daily reported angrily that at one hospital doctors turned away a human patient because they were treating a dog at the time.  He had paid his way and had a life too, the doctors said in their defense. The pampered pekinese, shihtzus, and shapeis with ribbons in their fur, whose doting owners buy them sprays for their halitosis and additives for their food to make their droppings smell sweet, are usually sheltered from the dangers of street life.  Most are kept indoors, away from the prying eyes of those who might inform the dog squads.  "You don’t need to take your pet outside," says one owner.  "It doesn’t grow very big, so you can just keep it in a box." 

Even though in some areas of China, such as Xiamen and Shanghai, it is legal to own a dog, dogs may still wind up getting "cooked";  For it is becoming an increasingly popular delicacy in China to eat fried, stewed or baked dog.  What used to be popular only among the Cantonese has found a liking with Chinese northerners, and dogs can increasingly be found on the menus of Beijing restaurants.

A major cause of the ever increasing black market problem in China is corrupt politicians.  Organized crime seems, for the most part, to be organized by the state .  It is of general suspicion in China that the police and customs officials are involved heavily in smuggling and other illicit practices.  For example, Fangcheng, a small port in Guangxi Province, suddenly became one of the most popular harbors in China.  The reason was that the local customs officials were involved in small sideline broker companies that offered to handle all the paper work for importing goods.  These broker companies set up offices along a street near the port, and the importer simply handed shipping documents to the company, which then filled out all the required customs forms, obtained the import licenses, and ushered the goods through customs. 

For this the officials took a fat commission, but the buyer wasn’t affected at all.  The customs officers never assessed the true substantial duties on goods handled by the sideline companies, so importers saved large sums on duties.  Of the money saved, the brokers could skim nice percentages for themselves.  The central government realized something was up when cargoes destined for all parts of China lined up to use the one small port in Guangxi.  There were huge delays for ships to get into the port, and hardly any duty was being paid.  After an investigation, the port at Guangxi was shut down by the central government in 1993.

Although piracy and the black market are increasingly growing in China, the country may not entirely become sheathed in a cloak of crime.  A visitor to the United states in the 19th century might have easily been overwhelmed at the great injustices which occurred here.  Crime, crooked politicians, and even a basic anarchy were evident in many parts of our country.   At that time, we were in a period of rapid economic growth.  China is in a similar period of economic expansion, today.  If any similarities can be drawn, China will pull through.

The Joint Economic Committee stated that an across-the-board tax cut was not new. In the 20’s the Mellon tax cuts were implemented by Secretary of Treasury Andrew Mellon during the Administrations of Hoover, Harding, and Coolidge. In the 60’s Kennedy introduced tax cuts. In both instances the decrease of high marginal tax rates somehow increased tax payments by the rich. Perhaps a foreshadow of things to come.

Debates were raging over the Reagan tax cuts, known as the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (or, ERTA). This act was designed to spur savings, investment, work, and economic efficiency. This policy would impose a 25% across-the-board cut in personal marginal tax rates. In the act of decreasing marginal tax rates, and stimulating economic incentives, ERTA would increase the flow of resources into production, thus lifting economic growth. This policy received much criticism because its opponents argued that ERTA would be a giveaway to the rich, because their tax payments would collapse.

Reagan worked hard and skillfully with the congress to obtain legislation to stimulate economic growth and curb inflation, he embarked upon a course to cut taxes and curb inflation. President Reagan was able to sign into law a tax cut in late 1981 even though congressional Democrats tried to block his cuts. All tax payers received these cuts which helped to spur the economy. The cuts were taken over three years with a 5% cut in 1981, a 10% cut for 1982, and in 1983 another 10% cut.

Reagan’s call for extensive changes in the federal income tax laws helped bring about passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. In 1986 Reagan introduced the Tax Reform act of 1986. The tax reform act of 1986 chopped taxes, and indexed taxes for inflation as well. During Reagan’s first term the inflation rate was at -5.7%, unemployment was at1.4%, interest rates were at -.7, and the gross national product was 7%.

Reagan signed the tax reform bill entitled the Tax Reform act of 1986. This act simplified and reduced taxes, but the democrats wanted to claim equal credit for the bill as well. A stock market crash in 1987 raised questions about the nation’s economic health. A new bill to balance the federal budget became law in 1987, but the huge deficit continued to be a concern to the government.

Congress passed Reagan’s requests for cuts in taxes and in some government programs. Reagan also won increased funds for defense. By 1982, however, the country was in an recession, which meant that there was an extended decline in general business activity, typically three consecutive quarters of falling real gross national product.

The economy improved in 1983. But the increased defense spending and tax cut had led to a record budget deficit. Democrats attacked Reagan for cutting social welfare programs and called for reduced defense spending and a tax increase in order to lower the deficit.

Foreign Policy
President Reagan through foreign policy sought to achieve peace through strength. He had learned how to deal skillfully with Congress and obtain legislation to strengthen our national defense.

In 1983, Reagan sent U.S. Marines to Lebanon as part of a peacekeeping force. The Marines were recalled in 1984, after some 240 had been killed in a terrorist attack. Reagan also sent U.S. troops to Grenada in 1983, to prevent what the he saw as a Cuban attempt to take over the Caribbean island nation. The President denounced the left-wing Sandinista government of Nicaragua as a threat to peace in Central America, and he repeatedly requested military aid for the anti-Sandinista guerrillas, known as contras.

In November of 1986 President Reagan confirmed reports that the United States had secretly sold arms to Iran. He stated that the goal was to improve relations with Iran, not to obtain release of U.S. hostages held in the Middle East by terrorists. Later in November, Attorney General Edwin Meese discovered that some of the arms profits had been diverted to aid the Nicaraguan “contra” rebels–at a time when Congress had prohibited such aid. An independent special prosecutor, former federal judge Lawrence E. Walsh, was appointed to investigate the activities of persons involved in the arms sale or contra aid or both, including marine Lt. Col. Oliver North of the National Security Council (NSC) staff. In May 1989 North was tried and convicted of obstructing Congress and unlawfully destroying government documents, but his conviction was subsequently overturned.

Reagan ordered the bombing of military targets in Libya in 1986 in retaliation for its role in international terrorism. His policy of reflagging (flying the U.S. flag on) Kuwaiti oil tankers and providing them with a U.S. naval escort in the Persian Gulf led to clashes with Iran in 1987.

President Reagan during his administration sought to improve relation with the Former Soviet Union, and foreign relations did improve greatly. Reagan and Gorbachev paved the way to the end of the cold war. They accomplished this by means of Summit Conferences. Several of these conferences were held from 1985 to 1987. The President and Mr. Gorbachev conducted this summit in Geneva in 1985.

As the result of a U.S. initiative, President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev agreed at the November 1985 Geneva Summit to have experts explore the possibility of establishing centers to reduce the risk of nuclear war. The impetus for this initiative grew out of consultations between the Executive Branch and Congress, particularly Senators Sam Nunn and John Warner. U.S. and Soviet experts held informal meetings in Geneva on May 5-6 and August 25, 1986. In October 1986, at their meeting in Reykjavik, President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev indicated satisfaction with the progress made at the experts meetings and agreed to begin formal negotiations to establish Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers. Those negotiations were held in Geneva on January 13 and May 3-4, 1987.

The negotiations resulted in the Agreement that was signed in Washington September 15, 1987, by Secretary of State Shultz and Foreign Minister Shevardnadze.

Under the Agreement, which is of unlimited duration, each party agreed to establish a Nuclear Risk Reduction Center in its capital and to establish a special facsimile communications link between these Centers. These Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers became operational on April 1, 1988. The American National Center (known as the NRRC) is located in Washington, DC in the Department of State. The Soviet National Center became the Russian National Center with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and is located in Moscow in the Russian Federation Ministry of Defense.

Reagan’s greatest diplomatic achievement was the 1987 treaty with the Soviet Union banning intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF), it was approved by the Senate in 1988. The Iran-contra affair proved embarrassing to the congress. Congressional hearings in 1987 revealed that presidential aides had secretly sold arms to Iran in an effort to free U.S. citizens being held hostage in the Middle East. The aides had then illegally given some of the arms money to contra guerrillas.

Conclusion
The Reagan Tax cuts showed that reducing excessive tax rates stimulates growth, reduces tax avoidance, and can increase the share of tax payments given by the rich. With respect to foreign policy Reagan’s performances especially with Mikhail Gorbachev showed a high approval of performance with the people. Reagan had the highest poll ratings for performance of any president since World War 2. It appears that his leadership helped to make the feeling of the country to have a more confident outlook on the future.

References

“Iran-Contra Affair,” Microsoft(r) Encarta(r) 96 Encyclopedia 1993-1995.
1996 Grolier Interactive Inc.
Edition copyright (c) 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

http://www.house.gov/joe/welcome.html

http://www.reaganhome.com/taxcuts.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/atlantic/election/connections/foreign/reagrus.htm

Hyland, W.G., ed., The Reagan Foreign Policy (1987).
The American Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language, Third
The Atlantic Monthly, February 1994; Reagan and the Russians; Volume 273.
The Joint Economic Committee reports on the Reagan Tax Cuts

United Kingdom, 1982

While unloading the ship which carried the embassy’s materials, one box marked “household effects” dropped from a forklift. More than six hundred pounds of marijuana worth 500,000 British pounds (1982 prices) spilled dockside.

For centuries governments have used ambassadors, and diplomats to represent their nation. These special envoys have done everything from resolving years of conflict, deciding on how much humanitarian relief will be sent to a nation, or just being present at diplomatic dinners and ceremonies. These people have been the vital link between nations, and they have enjoyed complete immunity from the law of the host nation. Originally this immunity was extended as a courtesy to allow for an uneventful stay in the host country. While in a foreign country on official business, the diplomat would be granted exemption from arrest or detention by local authorities; their actions not subject to civil or criminal law. For the longest time this privilege produced little or no incidents. However, this unique position of freedom that diplomats, their family, and staff have been graced with has not been so ideal. Recently the occurrences of abuse for personal or national gain has grown out of proportion. What once protected the diplomat and his staff from parking tickets and some differing social laws, now grants them protection under the law to commit crimes such as drug trafficking, kidnapping, rape, and murder. Even though serious crimes are rare and punishable to various extents in most countries, domestic authorities were forced to look the other way. While it would be convenient to believe that the six hundred pounds of marijuana was sent for personal consumption at the embassy, it is evident a small drug trafficking ring was being protected under the guise of diplomatic immunity.

HISTORY/DESCRIPTION

The international community has tried to develop a universally accepted set of norms governing the conduct and privileges of diplomats abroad. These few Articles from the convention show the good faith of the convention:

Article 29: Diplomats are inviolable; exempt from any arrest/detention.

Article 31: Diplomats are exempt from criminal jurisdiction, they can be tried only if immunity is waived.

Article 32: Only the sending country can waive immunity

Article 41: Diplomats should still respect the laws and regulations of the host state.

Baring few changes, the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations remains the basis for interaction between states. This convention tackles the problem by dividing the privileges of immunity into four classes. The diplomat and his family enjoy “complete” immunity. They cannot be arrested, detained or taxed. They do not fall into the realm of jurisdiction of the host country. Further they cannot be asked to stand trial or submit to having their possessions searched. The diplomatic staff are granted these same rights while performing official diplomatic business. Private servants have only been granted immunity from taxation. The privilege of complete immunity allows
for the use of the “diplomatic pouch”. This not an actual pouch, rather it is the power to declare any belongings off limits. The crate being removed from the ship (above story) was considered diplomatic pouch.

The introduction of the term “diplomatic pouch”; brings us to one of the major problems with the standards regarding conduct of diplomats. Originally the concept of diplomatic pouch was used to permit secrecy on official visits by foreign staff. This policy of ultimate secrecy becomes important when diplomats are venturing into unfriendly territory. Further, an explicit trust is granted to the diplomats to allow for free communication between the diplomat and their sending country. However this gracious offer of trust allows for easy abuse. A British foreign affairs committee declared, “The only way, in fact, to find out if diplomatic bags contain prohibited items would be to
drop them while unloading them from the aircraft and hope that they would split open” (“First Report of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons,” p. 617).

Smuggling of drugs, weapons, and priceless artwork are all to common. In these cases, abuse of the diplomatic pouch is obvious, yet in some instances the sending country is also involved. Once a diplomat is accused of a crime in the host country the only means possible to bring the diplomat to justice is to have the sending country waive the diplomat’s immunity. In most cases the sending country wishes to protect its reputation and ultimately the reputation of the diplomat, therefore refusing to give up immunity.

The question of rescinding immunity brings up the second major aspect of this topic. When a crime is committed what options do the two countries have to solve the problem? The first option is to have the sending country waive the diplomat’s immunity, allowing the diplomat to be punished for the crimes committed in accordance with the laws of the host nation. While this is a preferable solution, it is not very common as explained earlier. Another solution is to declare the diplomat in question “persona non grata” (unacceptable). This forces the sending nation to recall the diplomat or remove the diplomat from the post all together. The third solution is the complete severing of all diplomatic ties. The latter two solutions present many problems. Rejection of a diplomatic mission produces unwanted tension between nations and jeopardizes current progress. Many times the crime goes unpunished.

Something must be said for the diplomats doing their job every day and making this world a little safer to live in. Most diplomats are courteous law abiding citizens of the sending country. Out of
respect for the host country and to protect the integrity of the mission most diplomats follow the laws and social graces of the host nation. However the Vienna Convention allows for an incredible amount of personal liberties, which can be easily abused.

There are a myriad of problems with diplomatic immunity. However all of the solutions fall into the category of international relations. When crimes of an individual are compared with interactions between two or more nation states, the alleged individual crimes become less important.
Nonethess, it is the truth and reality therefore we must deal with it accordingly. There have been many explanations supporting the need of diplomatic immunity. The many ideas can be reduced to three ideas. The first dates back many centuries. The diplomat was considered an arm of the government represented. Thus an insult to the diplomat was an insult to the sending ruler. The second idea is one of extraterritoriality. In short the diplomat never officially leaves the sending country. Just as embassies are considered territories of the countries the represent, the diplomat would remain within jurisdiction of the sending country while in the host country. The third idea and the by far the most popular explanation is one of :functional necessity.” The privilege of diplomatic immunity is argued to be necessary component of the diplomatic mission. Debate continues on the extent of this immunity, yet the agreement continues on the idea that nothing should impede the
promotion of peace. However as of 1977, $5,000,000.00 in uncollected parking tickets are attributed to UN officials in New York City.

Another example occurred in July of 1984. Customs officials in Rome were checking bags when they heard moans coming from one of the bags. The bag was marked “diplomatic bag” and belonged to the foreign minister in Cairo. When the bag was opened a drugged Israeli was found inside. The bag was evidently used often. It was lined in leather and had a chair fitted to the bottom. There was helmet for the persons head and various straps to contain the person properly. The Israeli was released and nothing was done.

North Koreans were caught smuggling marijuana in Oslo, Helsinki, and Copenhagen in 1976. Earlier officials had been detected carrying 400 kilos of hashish into Cairo. In all of these occurrences nothing could be done because of diplomatic immunity.

The abuses of immunity are becoming increasingly worse. While functional necessity is a valid argument, a solution to the problem is needed.

CURRENT STATUS

The current status of diplomatic immunity has been constant since the original draft of the Vienna Convention in 1961. On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Vienna Convention, the Legal Committee of the General Assembly reported that they were satisfied with the convention as it stood (A/RES/41/79). In 1989 the Legal Committee decided to examine the courier and his status. Experts were brought in at the next session to informally discuss the individual clauses and answer questions. Again the final response was that everything was acceptable (A/RES/45/43). The closest the United Nations has come to re-examining the entire convention was in 1985, when a opinion was drafted explaining the technicalities. (A/CN.4/SER.A/1985/Add.1( Part 2)) The United Nations has recognized the problem, but there currently remains no solution.

Solutions have been formally discussed yet no amicable resolution has been produced. Two ideas that have been discussed are based on the idea of insurance. The first theory proposes that a diplomat and the staff must buy an insurance policy. The second theory proposes a claims fund. Both theories allow countries to have a way to remunerate those who have suffered from criminal acts but it still does not insure the bringing to justice of the alleged perpatrator.

The most popular idea is the creation of a permanent international diplomatic court. Ideally the alleged would be brought to answer for the crime in front of his peers. However a myriad of problems arise. First, you must be able to bring the accused to the court to answer for the crime. Second, you must form a jury composed of enough countries to prevent a bias. Third you must account for a drastic difference in the underlying fabric of each countries values. Fourth and probably the hardest problem to deal with is the maintenance of the infrastructure needed to support this international court. Or in short who is going to pay for it? The United States has tried to change the situation at home. In 1987 the Senate passed a resolution making it a felony for anyone with a diplomatic immunity to use a firearm to commit a felony, with the exception of self-defense. Nonetheless, a solution should be produced by the whole international community.

COMMITTEE MISSION

Your mission is to solve some of the problems that diplomatic immunity has presented. As you know you must gather a majority to pass the resolution, so I will pass on a few tips and some questions you should consider. You must remember that sovereignty is basis for the United Nations. Therefore no resolution can violate the sovereignty of a nation. All resolutions should aspire to solve the problem and attempt to please all the parties directly and indirectly involved with the problem.

North American businesses are increasingly outsourcing business functions to companies outside of the United States. Often this outsourcing is seamless to the outside world. The company maintains control over the processes and results, while certain business functions are quietly conducted in another country. Companies often benefit from reduced operating costs and an eager workforce. For the employees, particularly those in struggling economies, they are afforded higher wages and an increased standard of living.

While this may seem to be a win-win proposition for all, it does not come without its share of naysayers who believe that this practice is further eroding the already shaky North American economy. To understand this controversy, we must look at why companies decide to outsource as well as the type of jobs being outsourced. Companies cite a variety of reasons for outsourcing from lack of qualified, available labor to cost concerns. Unfortunately, while many people in the United States want to work and some actively seek positions, sometimes these individuals are not qualified or unreliable. To the company, this creates a risk of missed deadlines, understaffing and its inherent consequences, under production, and so on.

Cost and competition raise another issue. Businesses around the country are vying for ways to reduce cost while increasing effectiveness and productivity. By using overseas outsourcing, companies are able to save on one of the largest line item expenses in business – human capital. Consider alone the skyrocketing cost of healthcare in the United States. Businesses can spend an additional $8000 – 10,000 per employee, per year on benefits alone. When added to salaries, workers compensation, and operational expenses it is easy to see why global outsourcing becomes an option.

Global outsourcing can also offer competitive advantages. Companies can take advantage of specialized knowledge and emerging technologies by outsourcing certain processes to other countries. In this way a company can hire those leading an industry and leverage that competitive advantage in the marketplace.

The underlying discontent with global outsourcing has to do with wages. In example, outsourcing to countries such as India and Mexico enables companies to pay much lower wages than they would pay North American workers. With an abundance of people in foreign countries interested in making higher North American wages, finding help is never a problem. For instance, a telecommunications company pays a customer service representative in the United States between $20,000 and $30,000 per year on average. If the company were to turn the same job over to someone in another country, they would likely pay between $10,000 and $15,000. For the foreign worker this salary enables them to significantly raise their standard of living while the same salary would be at the poverty level for North Americans. For the company and the overseas worker it is a win-win situation. However, this also means workers in the United States are being forced out of or passed over for jobs – thus the controversy.

American Express was one of the first companies to publicly come under fire for global outsourcing. Dell too has come under attack for basing customer service in India. United States customers complain about the language barrier and lack of service but neither company has suffered the loss of profits as a result of outsourcing.

From the viewpoint of the overseas’ employee, they simply want to make a decent living. With jobs difficult to find in their own country, accepting an outsourced job is a gift from Heaven. These people often make 100% or more of what they could make in their own country, which makes outsourcing highly profitable and very attractive. Obviously, with so much at stake, the outsourced workers are willing to be trained, to follow rules to the tee, to respect authority, and be to work on time, every time.

As you can see, outsourcing overseas is a huge dilemma, with growing concern. When you consider the growing positions being outsourced, the concern rises. Although you might generally think of customer support as being the number one outsourced job, you might be surprised. Below is a list of other jobs that are often outsourced:

• Customer Service – Although this was not one of the original aspects of a business outsourced, we now see a huge number of companies, small to large, using overseas services in all areas of customer support.

• Data Analysis – The amount of data being generated by companies throughout the United States is staggering. In most cases, conducting market analysis and reviewing trends is crucial to a number of industries. For instance, much of the data coming out of the New York Stock Exchange is sent to India where it goes through a complete analysis process.

• Research – Research is also another large area where overseas outsourcing is used. In this case, companies will outsource large or portions of large research projects to people in other countries, which covers everything imaginable such as pharmaceutical trials to genetics to nano stocks.

• Engineering Design – More and more, we see engineering design being outsourced. Typically, companies in the United States establish what is known as an Offshore Development Center or ODC, which includes a number of design fields such as architectural, mechanical, hardware, structural, and product.

• Medicare – Many people are unaware that Medicare is also outsourced to foreign countries. Services provided by employees could include data entry of doctor’s transcripts to interpretation of an MRI, CAT scan, or other medical imaging processes.

• Art and Animation – With different countries offering unique levels and genres of creativity, a company needing a website, illustrations, artwork, book cover design, television show, graphic art, and other similar functions would turn to other countries for fresh ideas

• Legal – Finally, we also see legal support services being outsourced overseas. Although professional services would not be included, we do see some of the more low-level tasks such as data entry of legal documents or transcripts and patent searches being performed.

Although outsourcing to other countries has been done since the early part of the 1990s, it has become a multi-billion dollar business for other countries. Although many of the workers are low skilled, they are again, eager and willing to work. The trend of outsourcing will likely to continue to expand. We often view the negative impact to North American workers but the reality is we too benefit from outsourcing.

Many small businesses provide services to other countries. Writers, web developers, marketing consultants and many others build a business that is largely global. These small businesses are often started by laid off or out placed corporate employees. Other countries outsource to the United States for the same reasons we do – specialized knowledge, lower costs, and qualified labor. Let’s face it the world has changed. The debate over outsourcing is unlikely to subside any time soon, but the rules will continue to be written.
About The Author

Richard A. Hall is founder and President/CEO of LexTech, Inc., a legal information consulting company. Mr. Hall has a unique breadth of experience which has enabled him to meld technology and sophisticated statistical analysis to produce a technology driven analytical model of the practice of law. As a busy civil trial attorney, he was responsible for the design and implementation of a LAN based litigation database and fully automated document production system for a mid-sized civil defense firm. He developed a task based billing model built on extensive statistical analysis of hundreds of litigated civil matters. In 1994, Mr. Hall invented linguistic modeling software which automatically reads, applies budget codes, budget codes and analyzes legal bill content. He also served as California Director and lecturer for a nationwide bar review. Mr. Hall continues to practice law and perform pro bono services for several Northern California judicial districts.

http://www.lextech.us