Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx

Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedStates
and Mexico
Policy Paper Proposal
John Doe
GOVT 2305-2XXX Spring 2018
Dr. J. Mark Skorick
Word Count (206)
On January 1, 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) became law. NAFTA is an agreement between the
United States, Mexico, and Canada that allows free trade across
its borders and brings economic growth between the three
countries (Hymson et al. 220). The policy paper will speak
specifically on the economic trade between the United States
and Mexico. Currently, there are worries about the security of
the United States border due to several detrimental matters that

have occurred. Some major issues that have occurred since
NAFTA became law include: drug smuggling by criminal
cartels, human smuggling into the United States, money
laundering and sex trafficking, to name a few (Cooper 471-2).
While there are some risks that pose a threat to US border
security, the United States has greatly benefited from the
economic free trade with Mexico (Gallaher 331). Such benefits
include: reduced costs of goods, increased job growth, and
Mexico becoming one of the largest auto exporters to the United
States (Gallaher 332). This policy paper will outline the
advantages and disadvantages United States and Mexican
foreign policy concerning economic trade policy. The paper will
investigate various ways that both the United States and Mexico
can improve the border’s security so economic trade can
continue seamlessly.
Works Cited
COOPER, JAMES M. "The Rise of Private Actors along the
United States-Mexico Border." Wisconsin International Law
Journal, vol. 33, no. 3, Winter2015, pp. 470-511. EBSCOhost,
dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.dcccd
.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=113657684
&site=ehost-live.
Gallaher, Carolyn. "Mexico, the Failed State Debate, and the
Mérida Fix." Geographical Journal, vol. 182, no. 4, Dec. 2016,
pp. 331-341. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/geoj.12166.
Hymson, Edward, et al. "Increasing Benefits and Reducing
Harm Caused by the North American Free Trade Agreement."
Southern Law Journal, vol. 19, no. 1, Fall2009, pp. 219-243.
EBSCOhost,
.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=48238274&
site=ehost-live.
1

BUS407 Week 5 Scenario Script: Training Design
Slide #
Scene/Interaction
Narration
Slide 1
Scene 1
Taormina Conference Room
Deborah: Hello! Are you ready to get started?
Last week, we conducted a person analysis to determine
common elements affecting performance.
Then, we concluded that the employees at the call center
definitely need some training and development opportunities to
address the issues causing their performance gap.
Today we will start designing our training program.
We should start by defining the objectives of our program. What
do you think?
Remember, training objectives refer to all the objectives that
are developed for the training program.
You know how to create an effective training objective, correct?
Let’s complete a quick activity to make sure!
Slide 2
Test your Knowledge
A good objective should have the following 3 elements:
Desired outcome, conditions, and standards. Correct! An
effective training objective should specify what is expected to
occur; under what conditions is the outcome expected to occur;
and what criteria signify that the outcome is acceptable.
Budgeting, trainee population, and purpose statement. Incorrect!
Budgeting for training is estimated even before a TNA is

conducted. Even when the organization is not clear of what
training is required, the budget is always considered at the
beginning of any research effort. Trainee population has been
already identified when we conducted the training need
analysis. Also, the purpose statement is the summary of the
training objectives.
Deborah: Correct! An effective training objective should
specify what is expected to occur; under what conditions is the
outcome expected to occur; and what criteria signify that the
outcome is acceptable.
Incorrect! Budgeting for training is estimated even before a
TNA is conducted. Even when the organization is not clear of
what training is required, the budget is always considered at the
beginning of any research effort. Trainee population has been
already identified when we conducted the training need
analysis. Also, the purpose statement is the summary of the
training objectives.
Slide 3
Scene 2
Deborah’s Office
Deborah: Well done! A good training objective must specify the
desired outcome, the conditions, and the standards.
Our next step is to develop our training objective. A well-
defined training objective will ensure the success of the training
program. Remember, the training objective must be clear and
relevant, and most importantly, they must be communicated
with the audience that will receive the training,
Can you do that today? (pause)…Great!
Remember, when writing a training objective, we must think not
only about what will be learned, but also about how the learning
will be demonstrated.

Also, keep in mind that we are designing a training program to
address the lack of communication among co-workers and direct
supervisors.
Slide 4
Test your Knowledge
Which of the following objectives seem to be the most effective
for our training proposal:
At the completion of the training, the trainee will be able to use
three different communication strategies that fit the employee’s
personality to address a conflict during a managerial meeting.
Correct! This training objective has the three components
studied before. Desired outcome (the trainee will practice
learned concepts, which will be eventually transferred to the
job), conditions (the trainee will simulate a meeting scenario)
and, standards (the trainee must solve the conflict).
At the completion of the training, the trainee will be able to
address communication gaps among participants. Incorrect! This
objective is vague and it doesn’t have the three components of a
good objective: desired outcome, conditions, and standards.
At the completion of the training, the trainee will be able to
recite all communication strategies learned during the training
session as confirmation of the learning experience.Incorrect!
This objective is not effective. The employee will memorize
concepts; however, without practicing them, the transference of
learning is not guarantee. Moreover, it doesn’t have the three
components of a good objective: desired outcome, conditions,
and standards.
Deborah: Correct! This objective has the three components of
an effective training objective. First, desired outcome (the
trainee will practice learned concepts, which will be eventually
transferred to the job), second, conditions (the trainee will
simulate a meeting scenario) and, third, standards (the trainee
must solve the conflict).

Incorrect! This objective is vague and it doesn’t have the three
components of a good objective: desired outcome, conditions,
and standards.
Incorrect! This objective is not effective. The employee will
memorize concepts; however, without practicing them, the
transference of learning is not guarantee. Moreover, it doesn’t
have the three components of a good objective: desired
outcome, conditions, and standards.
Slide 5
Scene 3
Deborah’s office
Deborah: Great job completing this activity. You have written a
solid training objective.
Now, we have to meet with Ron to get his input.
Slide 6
Scene 4
Hallway
Ron: Hi Deborah! How are you?
Deborah: Good Ron, thank you for asking! And you?
Ron: Good too.
Deborah: My training specialist has written the training
objective. We would like your feedback. Do you have a few
minutes?
Ron: Of course. But first, let me call Alex. She has very good
critical thinking skills. She’s a big help to me on this team.
Deborah: Excellent!
Slide 7
Scene 5
Training Center
Alex: Hi all! How can I help you?

Ron: Well, Alex, Deborah and her training specialist have
written the training objective. They want us to provide some
input.
Alex:(reading some papers). Well, I would like to have the
name of the training to ensure the validity of this objective.
Deborah: Good thinking! The training program should be called:
Calling for Effective Communication. This could be a good
title, as we are addressing a need at a call center.
Alex: Sounds good to me! Well, the training objective seems to
cover all the needs that were brought up by us.
Deborah: Alex brought a good point to our training proposal.
The name of our training program should be connected to our
objective.
Slide 8
Scene 6
Deborah’s Office
Deborah:
Let’s review what we have done today.
All of our activities focused on designing our training program.
We reviewed the critical components of a good training
objective.
We used a panel of experts to validate the accuracy of the
training objective.
Finally, we gave a name to our training proposal, ensuring
connection with the training objective.
That’s what I call a good job!
Please participate in discussions about the topics we covered
today, as well as completing relevant e-Activities.
See you soon!

Strengthening the United States Cybersecurity Relationship with
China
Policy Paper Project
Jane Doe
GOVT 2305-2XXX
Dr. J. Mark Skorick
Spring 2018
Word Count (1636)
The United States and China are intense competitors for
global dominance. The U.S. and China are the two largest
economies in the world and the two nations are in constant
economic competition. The two nations also compete politically
and ideologically, with China being a communist state with
harsh restrictions on freedom of speech and the U.S. being a
representative democracy with strict protections for freedom of
speech. As China seeks to surpass the United States in economic
dominance, they have also become strong competitors in
cyberspace (Maker 16). Nations and people around the globe
have become increasingly interconnected via cyberspace. This
has led to cybersecurity becoming fundamentally necessary for
nations to address. Although the United States and China have
already implemented an agreement, the U.S. should work to
implement a more robust cybersecurity agreement with China.

In the United States, it is estimated that losses due to cyber
espionage are approximately $338 billion dollars and that
between 2015 and 2017 Chinese cyber attacks targeted
numerous industries including Infrastructure, Energy,
Healthcare, and Technology (Iasiello 57). United States federal
organizations have investigated numerous incidents of Chinese
attacks on American corporations (Maker 16). In 2014, a United
States grand jury even indicted five members of the Chinese
military’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) for hacking major
U.S. companies (Lindsay 8). Despite these documented
incidents, the U.S. has been hesitant to publicly attribute cyber
attacks to China (Maker 16-17). Even after it was discovered in
April 2015 that Chinese hackers had infiltrated the systems of
the United States Office of Personnel Management and gained
access to the information of more than 22 million government
employees, then President Barack Obama, the White House, and
the United States government would not formally acknowledge
China’s involvement in the cyber attacks (Maker 17-18).
In September 2015 just a few months after the discovery of the
breech at the Office of Personnel Management, U.S. President
Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping entered the two
nations into a cyber agreement. This agreement stated that
“neither country’s government will conduct or knowingly
support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including
trade secrets or other confidential business information, with
the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or
commercial sectors” (Iasiello 69). Essentially the brief
agreement was stating that the two governments would not hack
corporations or the commercial sector of the opposing
government for economic gain and they would corporate with
respective investigations by the other government into any
hacking that was discovered.
One major flaw of the US-China Cyber Agreement is that it
only addresses hacking in the commercial sector for economic
advantage. It also fails to specifically address hacking for
governmental purposes (Maker 19). This is especially troubling

for two reasons. First, China had already conducted a breech in
the government sector when its’ hackers attacked the Office of
Personnel Management. This agreement does nothing to address
that cyber attack. Second, the lines between the commercial and
government sectors are blurred in both China and the United
States. The Chinese government owns 12 of the largest
companies in China (Steinberg). In the United States, 80% of
the nations critical national infrastructure (CNI) is owned or
operated by commercial industry (Stoddart 811). In addition,
the United States awards contracts for defense, supplies,
information technology, etc. to commercial sector corporations.
It can be inferred that this agreement, would protect not only
China and America’s commercial sector but also a portion of
their government sectors. However, if either country were
hacking a commercial sector business, they could easily state
they were not hacking it for economic advantage but instead for
governmental purposes, which are not covered in the agreement
(Steinberg).
Other flaws in the US-China Cyber Agreement are that the
agreement does not define terms or standards, there are no clear
methods for enforceability of the agreement, and there are no
measurements to confirm each nation is adhering to the
agreement (Steinberg). This leaves a wide opportunity for
“misinterpretation, misunderstanding, and abuse” of the
agreement (Steinberg). Overall the US-China Cyber Agreement
simply does not do enough to curtail China’s continued cyber
attacks on American commercial and government interests. As
noted by Chris Porter, an intelligence strategist for FireEye,
“the total threat from China didn’t decrease [after the
agreement], it just changed shape” (Greenberg). China has
continued to push the limits of the agreement by not only
hacking American government and commercial entities but also
by pursuing numerous spying initiatives (Greenberg). With
China continuing to pose a cyber threat, the United States needs
to reexamine and strengthen the existing policy regarding
Chinese cyber attacks.

In any policy regarding China in cyberspace, the United States’
first course of action must be to strengthen its’ own cyber
defenses. Strengthening of the nations cyber defenses needs to
include working with key technical experts and lawmakers to
establish best practices, standards, and protocols to deal with
cyber threats (Maker 3). Technical experts can provide
assistance in the upgrading of systems, the use of new tools or
applications in cyber defenses, and threat assessment (Maker 3).
Strengthening America’s cyber defenses and establishing strong
cybersecurity practices at home allows America to have a strong
foundation for establishing cybersecurity foreign policies
(Iasiello 68).
In addition to establishing strong cyber defenses in America for
dealing with the cyber threats from China, there are two
possible ways in which the United States can address the issue
further. First, the United States could take a militaristic
approach to cyber attacks. In a NATO meeting held in Warsaw,
Poland in July of 2016, NATO allies agreed that cyberspace was
the fifth domain of warfare (Stoddart 827), adding to the
already established domains of land, sea, air, and space (Maker
6). In the Second Edition of the United Kingdom’s Ministry of
Defense’s “Cyber Primer”, it is argued that any cyber operation
that results in an equivalent effect as a physical operation would
meet appropriate qualifications for reactionary armed conflict
under the international Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC)
(Stoddart 831). With this interpretation the United States could
take military actions to stop, to prevent, or to retaliate against
cyber attacks made by China or any other government.
Although military action or the threat of military action in
response to cyber attacks may solve the issue, there are
considerable drawbacks. First, the response time to a cyber
attack is delayed due to the complexity of investigating the
cause and origin of the attack. Second, once a cause and origin
are identified it is difficult to determine the motivation of the
attacker. Third, attacks conducted by nonstate organizations like
terrorist organizations from inside the country of origin are

problematic when it comes to where to aim the military
response (Stoddart 831-832). The U.S. aiming an attack at a
nonstate organization within a country, could potentially cause
a response from the state itself. Finally, the biggest problem
with a militaristic approach to cyber attacks is the military
action itself. War is always expensive, in both money and lives,
so approaching every cyber attack with a military response
could be extremely costly.
The second way the United States can address cyber threats
from China after establishing strong internal cyber defenses is
to enter into a more robust cybersecurity agreement with China.
This agreement would fix the shortcomings of the current
agreement. The agreement would not only limit cyber attacks on
the commercial sector but also on the government sector. The
agreement would clearly define what attacks would be viewed
as cyber espionage into government entities, cyber espionage
into commercial entities, and what attacks would be viewed as
an attempt to take down critical national systems of both
countries like power grids, military installations, or government
offices.
The agreement would also provide clear consequences for
violation. Cyber espionage by either country on any level would
result in economic sanctions (Maker 37). Both nations would
agree that cyber attacks aimed at taken down critical national
systems would be met not only with harsh sanctions in all areas
but also possible military force, should the attack be deemed
sufficient in scale. The idea being that of the “Cold War
stability-instability paradox”, “mutual vulnerability to nuclear
retaliation inhibits nuclear war” (Lindsay 46). In this instance
mutual vulnerability to harsh sanctions and military force,
inhibits the cyber attacks of either nation.
In addition to the first action of strengthening America’s cyber
defenses at home, entering into a revised cybersecurity
agreement with China is the best of the two options to deal with
Chinese cyber attacks. The approach is best for ensuring non-
physical confrontation, loss of life, and is the most cost

effective. The revision of the agreement will take extensive
time and would involve not only both nations governments but
also key representatives from their commercial sectors. This
will ensure that the agreement is drafted to meet the needs of all
parties. While this agreement is being revised, the United States
needs to invest money and resources into strengthening the
nation’s cyber defenses. In addition, this new revised cyber
agreement between the United States and China could serve as a
basis for similar agreements between other nations.
The United States should not continue to tolerate Chinese
aggression in cyberspace. Chinese state actors have already
been indicted on cyber espionage against U.S. corporations and
have attacked U.S. government entities like the Office of
Personnel Management without being held accountable for their
actions. China continues to make cyber attacks against the
United States even after the two nations entered a cyber
agreement. The ramifications of the United States failure to stop
Chinese cyber attacks on U.S. entities and failure to punish
China when they have been proven as the originator of a cyber
attack, may lead to China taking bolder steps to attack more
critical United States targets in the future. The United States
must act now to protect the nation’s cyber landscape.
Works Cited
Greenberg, Andy. “China Tests the Limits of Its US Hacking
Truce.” The New York Times, 31
Oct. 2017.
Iasiello, Emilio. "China's Three Warfares Strategy Mitigates
Fallout from Cyber Espionage
Activities." Air & Space Power Journal: Afrique Et
Francophonie, vol. 8, no. 4, 2017 4th Quarter, pp. 56-77.
EBSCOhost,
.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=126727003
&site=ehost-live.

Lindsay, Jon R. "The Impact of China on Cybersecurity."
International Security, vol. 39, no. 3,
Winter 2014/2015, pp. 7-47. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00189.
Maker, Simran R. “New Frontier in Defense: Cyberspace and
U.S. Foreign Policy – A National
Committee on American Foreign Policy Report.” The National
Committee on American Foreign Policy, May 2017.
Steinberg, Joseph. “10 Issues with the China-US Cybersecurity
Agreement.” Wired Magazine,
27 Sep. 2015.
Stoddart, Kristan. "Live Free or Die Hard: U.S.-UK
Cybersecurity Policies." Political Science
Quarterly, vol. 131, no. 4, Winter 2016/2017, pp. 803-842.
EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/polq.12535.
5
Duong 1
Duong 2
Nuclear Proliferation
Policy Proposal Paper
Ngoc Duong
GOVT2305 Spring 2020
Prof. J. Mark Skorick

Word count (264)
International concern about nuclear proliferation has rapidly
increased since the end of the Cold War (Karl). In the 1960s it
was widely assumed that there would be 30-35 nuclear weapons
states by the turn of the century (World Nuclear Association).
Even more troubling, this threat is only one of several risks
imposed on humanity by the existence of nuclear weapons
(Panofsky). These risks fall into three classes: the risk that
some fraction, be it large or small, of the inventories of nuclear
weapons held by eight countries will be detonated either by
accident or deliberately; the risk that nuclear weapons
technology will diffuse to additional nations; and the risk that
nuclear weapons will reach the hands of terrorist individuals or
groups (Panofsky). The Treaty on the Non – Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons (NPT) entered into force on March 5, 1970,
with 43 Parties, including three of the five nuclear-weapon
states: The Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United
States (U.S. Delegation to the 2010 NPT Review Conference,
2010). While accepting safeguards at declared facilities, Iraq
and Iran had set up elaborate equipment elsewhere in an attempt
to enrich uranium, in Iraq's case, to weapons grade; North
Korea used research reactors (not commercial electricity-
generating reactors) and a reprocessing plant to produce some
weapons-grade plutonium (WNA). This policy paper will
mention the optimism and pessimism of the proliferation, in
addition to pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the
NPT. It will find out various ways to reduce the spread of
nuclear weapons so that the pact between countries will be
closer and lead to peace.

Works Cited
Panofsky, Wolfgang K.H. “Nuclear Proliferation Risks, New
and Old.” Issues in Science and Technology, vol. XIX, no. 4,
Summer 2003, issues.org/panofsky/
Karl, David J. “Proliferation pessimism and emerging nuclear
powers.” International Security. Winter96/97, Vol. 21 Issue 3,
p87. 33p. EBSCOhost,
dcccd.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail/detail?vid=6&sid=8c99e750-
9b0e-4cb5-ba14-
e321ce7b0a2f%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3Qtb
Gl2ZQ%3d%3d#anchor=AN9702062905-
2&AN=9702062905&db=a9h
“Safeguards to Prevent Nuclear Proliferation” Safeguards to
Prevent Nuclear Proliferation, September 2018, www.world-
nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/non-
proliferation/safeguards-to-prevent-nuclear-proliferation.aspx
Extra source:
“Treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapon” U.S.
Delegation to the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review
Conference, 2009-
2017.state.gov/documents/organization/141503.pdf

Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx

Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx

Similar to Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx (17)

More from margaretr5

More from margaretr5 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Conflicts Affecting Economic Trade Between the UnitedSta.docx