An analysis of why economic sanctions are good Essay Example for Free

An analysis of why economic sanctions are good Essay A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury. John Mills OR Senator John Kerry once said We must retool our nation to prepare for the challenge we already face to maintain our position in the global economy. And this much is certain: America will not have national security without economic security. Therefore, I negate the resolution that: Resolved: Economic sanctions ought not to be used to achieve foreign policy objectives Definitions: Economic Sanctions- Economic penalties, such as stoppage of trade and financial transactions, imposed upon a country to force compliance with another countrys or UNs or WTOs demands. (businessdictionary.com) Ought- used to express obligation. Foreign Policy- the policy of a sovereign state in its interaction with other sovereign states. Objectives- : an aim, goal, or end of action. (In case of argumentation relating to resolve not confined to U.S.A) Sovereign- one that exercises supreme authority within a limited sphere. All unspecified definitions are from Merriam Webster Core Value: Societal Welfare- What is best for most of society Value Criterion- The neg shall prevail if I can prove that economic sanctions are a worthwhile method to achieve foreign policy objectives. But the aff shall prevail if, and only if he can prove otherwise C1: Smart economic sanctions are needed to compel foreign leaders. The resolution calls for a general ban on economic sanctions in dealing with foreign policy objectives. One of the foremost arguments against sanctions is the harm they may potentially bring. But these potential harms are mostly caused the imposition of broad, wide-ranging sanctions. But not all sanctions are harmful- there are good sanctions. The sanctions in the 21st century are targeted and narrow, not general. One of the common criticisms of economic sanctions is that they have injured civilian populations in the past. The problem with this line of reasoning is that it assumes that there is only one type of sanction to use, and that this type of sanctioning must necessarily hurt civilians. Most countries now understand that wide, indiscriminate sanction use may be counterproductive, so they take a smarter, tailored approach to economic sanctions that make sanctions more likely to achieve their policy objectives. Many countries now tailor their sanctions to specific goods. For exa mple, many countries place specific sanctions on narcotics related items or on materials that could be used to make weapons. These tailored sanctions still allow civilians to meet their basic needs, but also make it so that rogue states are unable to use their material resources to cause further harm. Additionally, economic sanctions are now being used to freeze assets and limit the travel of high ranking state officials, which puts pressure only on them to change their countrys policies. These smart sanctions create an opportunity for change without the harms that occurred from past sanctions. Another line of argument for the Neg is the toolbox argument: that the Affirmative would remove critical tools, including targeted sanctions, from the governments disposal. This would lead to a second dilemma, this time for the Affirmative: without the carrot and stick of economic sanctions, the government is left with a feather of non-economic sanctions and the bloody spike of war. C2: Economic sanctions are necessary foreign policy tools So what are the alternatives to sanctions? More diplomacy and military action. These have the problem of being two extremes meaning that there needs to be something in the middle. Diplomacy is the most obvious alternative. It would be lovely if all foreign policy objectives could be met simply by diplomacy but with contradictory interests, this is never going to happen in all cases. Many countries, particularly dictatorships but quite often also democracies such as the US, feel they can just ignore diplomacy if it is not backed up by anything more than a verbal lashing. Diplomacy needs something backing it up. At the moment this is the threat of some form of sanction (be it direct economic sanctions or more indirect be reducing the opportunities for that countries firms to operate in your market) or military action of some kind. Using military action as a threat can be extreme. How do you move between diplomacy and on to military action without something in the middle to show how serious your country is? If a country does not believe your threats, and you dont really want to attack him you have to be the one to back down. Providing economic sanctions creates a way of hurting him without having to go to the worse stage which is military action. Military action is the obvious hard alternative to sanctions. However it is not always possible. This could be because of domestic politics or because there is other significant actors in the international system who would react unfavorably to you engaging in military action, or else the consequences might be too severe. There are quite a few problems with military action apart from that it cant always be used due to politics. The most obvious is that it is an immense step up from diplomacy. The country you are going to attack needs to have done something serious to be able to justify an attack. Even if it is justifiable there are problems. Military action relies upon your country being powerful and being able to engage in military action whereas anyone can implement some form of sanctions and it is very costly. This is not only of course in terms of monetary cost to your country but also in lives lost and destroyed. There can also me many unintended consequences. You can intend the action to be a small police action but there is no guarantee that your opponent will see it that way so he may well strike back escalating towards full scale war. At the other extreme your actions my push a country towards falling apart and becoming a failed state. Yes it provides a very powerful tool for changing a states behavior- but most people would believe that it is not worth keeping the possibility of military action while getting rid of sanctions. Get rid of both and you essentially have no stick at all. States do not always respond to carrots you need to provide a big enough carrot that they can forgo a national interest after all. In the case of two interests being diametrically opposed then this cost could be immense. C3: Violation of Human Rights Natural rights of citizens are selfishly violated by corrupt leaders of governments. This impacts not only the natural rights of citizens from other countries; it also affects the natural rights of their own citizens. a. Citizens of countries oppressed by economic sanctions suffer when intended relief efforts are suppressed by their own government intercepting supplies. The citizens are never the target, but rather the behaviors of corrupt leaders. Natural rights of citizens are denied when a corrupt leader interrupts the harmonious relations and it becomes necessary to impose sanctions. Further, I extend my VPC in that when the naturals rights of other nations are infringed upon by these corrupt leaders, political justification demands punishment in the least destructive manner after diplomacy has failed. b. Citizens are justified to demand their natural rights which are being denied to them by the very government which is supposed to protect them. When corrupt leaders give in to decency and cooperate, the sanctions go away. Sanctions are nothing more than a legitimate form of punishment to achieve a defined and acceptable code of behavior. Natural rights of citizens are denied when a corrupt leader interrupts the harmonious relations and it becomes necessary to impose sanctions. Further, I extend my VPC in that when the naturals rights of other nations are infringed upon by these corrupt leaders, political justification demands punishment in the least destructive manner after diplomacy has failed. Possible Rebuttal: Although careful studies of economic sanctions have cast doubt on their effectiveness, 1 anecdote can be powerful rhetorical tools. A single important case that demonstrates sanctions potential allows advocates to argue that their cause is more akin to the success than to the failures. Frequently, advocates point to the case of sanctions applied in the mid-1980s against the apartheid regime in South Africa as just such a case. On the face of it, South African sanctions appear to have been successful. In response to the outrages of apartheid, many countries adopted trade and financial sanctions and a significant amount of foreign investment was withdrawn from South Africa. After the adoption of sanctions, South Africa experienced economic difficulty and numerous domestic actors commented on how the economic situation was untenable and required political change. By 1994, Nelson Mandela had been elected President of South Africa. He and other black leaders attributed to economic sanctions a significant role in bringing about the democratic transition.

The Parallel Plot Lines in Slaughterhouse-Five :: Slaughterhouse-Five Essays

The Parallel Plot Lines in Slaughterhouse-Five Kurt Vonnegut is and will always in my eyes and in the eyes of many others the writer who made the science-fiction genre safe for not only mainstream appeal, but also critical acclaim and intellectual contemplation. Even though Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey and Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker series were released in roughly the same timeframe as Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five, none has held the same aura of respect and significance to the literary zeitgeist as Vonnegut's monumental masterpiece. The respect Slaughterhouse-Five garnishes among bookworms and the intellectual elite alike is no accident. Kurt Vonnegut's universal acclaim and appeal surely comes in no small part from his gift for connecting, almost unnoticiably, seemingly unrelated objects and events to give them deeper meaning, creating a phenomenon known within Jungian circles as synchronicity. By making his novel so multi-layered by drawing these comparisons, such as in being transported from a train car into a POW camp to an extraterrestrial spaceship that hums like a melodious owl, human beings being trapped within each moment in time like an insect in amber, and the writer's own repetition of his current project to a jokey old song, the writer gives us a deeper insight into the real multi-layeredness of space and time. When Billy Pilgrim and his fellow POWs are transported out of their train car and toward the POW camp, Vonnegut compares the calm peeking-in and speech of the Axis power guards to the behavior of an owl. The owl had been mentioned earlier in the novel, more specifically in the persona of a clock hanging in Billy's office, and is brought up again here to describe Billy's antagonists: "The guards peeked in Billy's car owlishly, cooed calmingly." By using the owl already mentioned in the novel as a metaphor, Vonnegut makes an otherwise uncomfortable and tense situation more familiar. The writer uses this metaphor again while telling of the movement of the POWs out of the train car

P&G Research Essay

Does the company rely primarily on a customer intimacy, operational excellence, or product leadership customer value proposition? What evidence supports your conclusion? What business risks does P&G face that may threaten its ability to satisfy stockholder expectations? What are some examples of control activities that the company could use to reduce these risks? (Hint: Focus on page 28 of the annual report. ) What were P&Gs quarterly net sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005? What were Federated Department Stores quarterly net sales for 2004? Hint: see page 79 of its 10-K. ) How does P&Gs quarterly sales trend compare to Federated Department Stores quarterly sales trend? Which of the two quarterly sales trends is likely to cause greater cash budgeting concerns? Why? Describe the scope of P&Gs business in three respectsphysical facilities, products, and customers. More specifically, how many manufacturing facilities does P&G operate globally? What are P&Gs three Global Busine ss Units (GBUs)? Which of P&Gs 17 billion dollar brands are included in each of these GBUs? How many brands does P&G offer in total and in how many countries do they sell these brands? How many countries does P&Gs Market Development Organization operate in? Describe five uncertainties that complicate P&Gs efforts to accurately forecast its sales and expenses. P&Gs annual report briefly discuss the acquisition of Gillette (see pages 10-11). It acknowledges that Gillette has some different cultural norms in terms of how it defines accountability and communicates internally. Although not discussed in the annual report, how could differences in two organizations budgeting practices be responsible for these types of divergent cultural norms?

Profile of Jodi Arias and the Murder of Travis Alexander

Jodi Arias was arrested on July 15, 2008, charged with shooting and stabbing to death her 30-year-old ex-boyfriend, Travis Alexander, in his home in Mesa, Arizona. Arias pleaded not guilty, first claiming that she wasnt there, then that intruders had murdered him and she escaped, and finally that she had killed Alexander in self-defense following abuse. She was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Background Jodi Ann Arias was born in Salinas, California, on July 9, 1980, to William Angelo and Sandy D. Arias. She has an older half-sister, two younger brothers, and a sister. Beginning at age 10, Arias showed an interest in photography, which continued throughout her adult life. Her childhood years were unremarkable, although she has said that her parents abused her, hitting her with wooden spoons and a belt. The abuse allegedly began when she was 7. Arias dropped out of Yreka High School in Yreka, California, in the 11th grade. She continued to pursue her interest in professional photography while working at part-time jobs. Darryl Brewer In fall 2001, Arias began working as a server at a restaurant at the Ventana Inn and Spa in Carmel, California. Darryl Brewer, the food and beverage manager, was in charge of hiring and training the restaurants employees. Arias and Brewer lived in staff housing and in January 2003, they began dating; Arias was 21 and Brewer was 40. They had sex before they began to officially date. Brewer said that initially, Arias was a responsible, caring, loving person. In May 2005, Arias and Brewer purchased a home together in Palm Desert, California. They agreed each would pay half the monthly mortgage payment of $2008. In February 2006, Jodi began working for Prepaid Legal Services while keeping her servers job at Ventana. She also got involved with the Mormon Church. She started having Mormon visitors for Bible studies and group prayer sessions. In May, Jodi told Brewer that she no longer wanted a physical relationship. She wanted to practice what she was learning at church and save herself for her future husband. Around the same time she decided to have breast implants. According to Brewer, during the summer of 2006 Jodi began to change as her involvement with Prepaid Legal increased. She became financially irresponsible and defaulted on her financial responsibilities, including living expenses. As the relationship deteriorated, Brewer planned to move to Monterrey to be closer to his son. Jodi did not plan to move with him. They agreed that she would remain in the house until it was sold. Their relationship ended in December 2006, though they remained friends and occasionally called each other. The following year the house went into foreclosure. Travis Alexander Arias and Travis Alexander met in September 2006 in Las Vegas, Nevada, at a Prepaid Legal conference. Alexander, 30, was a motivational speaker and sales representative for Prepaid Legal. Arias was 28 and living in Yreka, working in sales for Prepaid Legal and trying to develop her photography business. There was an immediate attraction between Arias and Alexander. According to Arias, the relationship became sexual a week after they met. At the time, Alexander was living in Arizona. They began traveling together to other states and when apart they exchanged emails (eventually over 82,000) and talking daily on the phone. On November 26, 2006, Arias was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in her words to get closer to Alexander, a devout Mormon. Three months later Alexander and Arias began dating exclusively and she moved to Mesa, Arizona, to be closer to him. The relationship lasted four months, ending in June 2007, although they continued to have sex periodically. According to Arias, the relationship ended because she did not trust Alexander. She later alleged that he was a sexual deviant who physically and sexually abused her and wanted her to be his personal slave. After the relationship ended, Alexander began dating other women and allegedly complained to friends that Arias was jealous. He suspected that she had slashed his tires twice and sent threatening anonymous emails to him and to the woman he was dating. He also told friends that Arias had sneaked into his home through a dog door while he was sleeping. Secret Relationship Despite the claims of being stalked, Alexander and Arias continued to travel together in March 2008 and maintained their sexual relationship. According to Arias, she grew tired of being Alexanders secret girlfriend. When she had to find another place to live after her roommate married, she returned to California. Evidence shows that after Arias left Arizona, they continued to exchange sexually explicit Internet messages and pictures. According to Alexanders friends, in June 2008 he had had enough of Arias after suspecting her of hacking into his Facebook and bank accounts. He allegedly told her he wanted her out of his life. Alexander Murdered According to police records, on June 2, 2008, Arias rented a car in Redding, California, and drove to Alexanders home in Mesa, where they took pictures of themselves in various nude poses and having sex. On June 4, Arias drove back to California and returned the car. Alexanders friends became concerned when he missed an important meeting and didnt show up for a planned trip to Cancun, Mexico. On June 9, two of his friends went to his home and woke up one of his roommates, who insisted Alexander was out of town. He then checked Alexanders locked room and found him dead on the shower stall floor. An autopsy determined that Alexander had been shot in the head, stabbed 27 times, and his throat was slashed. Evidence Detectives investigating Alexanders murder collected a wealth of forensic evidence at the murder scene, including a camera that was found in the washing machine. Friends knew that Alexander had grown annoyed with Arias stalking. The first suggestion that Arias could be involved in his death came during the 911 call made after Alexanders body was found. Friends and family members interviewed by detectives suggested that the police interview Arias. Arias began calling Esteban Flores, the detective in charge of the case. She asked for details of the murder and offered to help in the investigation. She claimed to know nothing of the crime and had last seen Alexander in April 2008. On June 17, Arias agreed to be fingerprinted and swabbed for DNA, as did many of Alexanders friends. Two days after being fingerprinted, she was questioned about photos on the camera left in the washing machine. The photos, which were time-stamped June 4, 2008, showed images of Alexander in the shower, likely minutes before he was killed. There were also images of him lying on the floor bleeding. Other pictures, which had been deleted but were recovered, were of Jodi, nude and posed in provocative positions, time-stamped on the same day. Arias continued to insist that she had not seen Alexander since April. A week later lab tests showed that DNA found in a bloody print at the murder scene matched Arias and Alexander. Hair found at the scene also held a DNA match to her. Happy Birthday Over the following weeks, Arias attended a memorial service for Alexander, wrote a lengthy sympathy letter to his grandmother, arranged for flowers to be sent to his family, and posted loving messages about Alexander on her MySpace page. On July 9, 2008—Arias birthday—a grand jury indicted her for first-degree murder. Six days later she was arrested and charged with first-degree murder and in September she was extradited to Arizona to face trial. Story Changes Days after being incarcerated in Arizona, Arias granted an interview to the Arizona Republic, during which she insisted that she had nothing to do with Alexanders murder. She gave no explanation for why her DNA was found at the scene. On September 24, the television show Inside Edition interviewed Arias. This time she admitted that she was with Alexander when he was murdered but that two intruders did it. In an interview with 48 Hours on June 23, 2009, she said that she had been miraculously spared during a home invasion. According to her story, Alexander had been playing with his new camera and suddenly she found herself lying on the bathroom floor after hearing a loud pop. When she looked up, she saw a man and a woman, both dressed in black, approaching. They were carrying a knife and a gun. The man pointed the gun at her and pulled the trigger, she said, but nothing happened. She then ran from the house and did not look back. She didnt call police, she claimed, because she was afraid for her life and was pretending that none of it had happened. She drove back to California in fear. Death Penalty The Maricopa County Attorneys Office, describing Arias crimes as especially cruel, heinous, and depraved, sought the death penalty. Months before the trial was to begin, Arias told the judge that she wanted to represent herself. The judge allowed it, as long as a public defender was present during the trial. A few weeks later, Arias attempted to get letters into evidence that she alleged were written by Alexander. In the letters, Alexander admitted to being a pedophile. The letters were found to be forged. Within days of the forgery discovery, Arias told the judge that she was over her head, and legal counsel was reinstated. Trial Arias trial began on January 2, 2013, in Maricopa County Superior Court with Sherry K. Stephens presiding. Arias court-appointed lawyers,  L. Kirk Nurmi and Jennifer Willmott,  argued that Arias killed Alexander in self-defense after suffering domestic violence. The trial was live-streamed and gained worldwide attention. Arias spent 18 days on the witness stand, talking about being abused by her parents, sharing intimate details about her sex life with Alexander, and describing how the relationship became verbally and physically abusive.   After deliberating for 15 hours, the jury found Arias guilty of first-degree murder. On May 23, during the sentencing phase, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision. A second jury convened on October 20, 2014, but they too deadlocked 11-1 in favor of the death penalty. That left the sentencing decision up to Stephens, although the death penalty was now off the table. On April 13, 2015, Arias was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.   As of October 2019, Arias was in the Arizona State Prison Complex in Perryville, Arizona, classified as a high-risk prisoner. Sources Minutaglio, Rose. Jodi Arias: A Look Back at Her Gruesome Crime and Bizarre Trial. Good Housekeeping.Inmate Datasearch. Arizona Department of Corrections.