North Korea Memo

320 Washington St. 
Easton, MA 02357 

                                                                                                                                 30 March 2017 

From Elif Okan 

To: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson 

Thru: The Department of State 

Subject: Improving North Korea's human right problem 

Reply to: Elif Okan Attn of: Okan 

1. Our current foreign policy with North Korea needs to change. Currently there are too many human right problems in North Korea that no one is trying to stop. We need to change this to help the citizens in North Korea to improve their conditions. Our main focus should be on getting rid of the concentration camps and making it so the citizens living in North Korea have access to information from the outside world. 

Issues With Previous Foreign Policy Strategies 

2. While the United States did intend to improve and promote human rights in North Korea with the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004, not much have changed since then. The act aimed to provide humanitarian assistance to North Koreans both in North Korea and the ones that fled North Korea and tried to increasing the availability of information inside North Korea among other things. 

1. While the act itself had good intendants, it did not help as much as it could have and should have enforced more strongly to improve North Korea over a prolonged period of time. 

1. While initially provided $4 million to promote human rights, there was a decrease to $2 million in 2008 when the 2004 act was extended. There must not be a decrease in the amount of money we were giving since the citizens of North Korea themselves do need help and it is like quitting. 

A New Strategy 

3. The United States is one of the most powerful countries in the world, but should not take control of fixing North Korea. Rather, we should get the help of other groups like the United Nations and work on the solution together. With this we could get better results and come up with different ideas that may be better than anything the United States would come up with alone. 

4. While there is a lot of different parts about North Korea that we could try to fix, the most important issues are currently the concentration camps in which anyone can get sent to and killed without a good reason, and the lack of information about the outside world available to the North Korean public.  

1. While we could send in military to North Korea to take over and then get rid of all the concentration camps, this would not be a good idea since North Korea still have the possibility to use their nuclear bomb if we did this and it is not worth the risk. Instead of the military, the United States and other countries should first try to improve our relations with North Korea so they do not hate us and the rest of the world so much. 

1. o improve our relations instead of just sending in aid and food, we must use diplomatic means. For example, creating a friendlier relationship through social interaction, like when the U.S. sent in the basketball team to North Korea or ping pong diplomacy.  

1. After the U.S. improves its relationship with North Korea, the U.S. would engage in a diplomatic discussion to convince Kim Jong-un to give the North Koreans access to outside information without prosecution 

1. Since this is unlikely to happen, the United States can try to secretly give North Koreans access to outside information and try to make sure they are not prosecuted for this. This would be hard to do but can be done. 

1. It is unlikely Kim Jong-un would willingly get rid of the concentration camps but the United States can do try to secretly get of the concentration camps when we are have good relations and are close enough with North Korea. We may need to lose military as a last resort. 

2. If we improve our relationship, North Korea may be willing to sign a peace treaty or make an agreement with us for these two problems 

Challenges 

5. Other countries or the United Nations may not be willing to help us improve North Korea in which case we would be on our own again.  6. We could try our best but still unable to improve our relationship with North Korea 7. We may have to use military to get rid of the concentration camps and making it so the citizens living in North Korea have access to information from the outside world which could end badly for us and the rest of the world.  

1. North Korea could us their nuclear bombs if this happened.  

Why A New Foreign Policy Strategy is Needed 

8. Our current one does not work and the North Koreans need help  
9. if we do nothing then nothing in North Korea will ever change 
10.  Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter.

Memo on North Korea

320 Washington St.
Easton, MA 02357

                                                                                                                                    

23 Mar 2017

From:

Orlando Manfredi

Reply to Attn of:

Orlando Manfredi

To:	Secretary of State Rex Tillerson,
Thru:	(1) The State Department
Subj:	ROADMAP FOR FUTURE NORTH KOREA RELATIONS

     

1.     The current foreign policy strategy with regards to the Kim regime in North Korea needs to be re-evaluated and strengthen to reduce the capability of the North Korean nuclear program, provide aid to the oppressed North Korean people and increased efforts negotiate with China to find common ground in how to prevent catastrophe from occurring in the region. 

ISSUES WITH PREVIOUS FOREIGN POLICY STRATEGIES

2. The United States has had relations with the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea since 1948 to various degrees of involvement in the subsequent decades. One of the chief goals of North Korean foreign policy has been the reduction or elimination of the North Korean nuclear program. This due to China's support has been nearly impossible and so due to the latest round of nuclear talks falling through North Korea stated that they would never return to the negotiation table. 

3. Attempts to aid the North Korean people have also been equally unsuccessful as the government would confiscate all aid efforts given to the people. 

A NEW STRATEGY

3. The crux of the new strategy to gain increased diplomatic leverage over the North Korean government is to instead of increasing diplomatic efforts with North Korea itself but strengthen diplomatic ties to China in order to find greater common ground in how to manage the region. 

          a. To gain greater leverage the United States should engage China in a series of talks and discuss how each would like to see the region be managed in the near future. China says it wants stability in the region and that overthrowing the Kim regime would plunge the region into chaos especially now that there is a significant chance that the North Korean government already has a nuclear warhead. 

          b. The United States must be willing to compromise a great deal to China in order to secure a more peaceful North Korea and the goals will not be as drastic as installing a democracy. If the United States and China can simply agree to put pressure on the Kim regime to reduce its human rights abuses then the US can funnel more aid to China so that the North Korean people can receive more aid form a country more "friendly" to their government.

CHALLENGES

4. The greatest challenge to this renewed focus on North Korea and increased negotiations with China over the country is simply that China is unwilling to change the status quo. As of right now it is true that China has no incentive to follow the international community and put pressure on the regime to change it's ways. That is why the State Department and the President must do all they can to make incentives for the Chinese government to become more cooperative with US goals for the area. 

WHY IS A NEW FOREIGN POLICY STRATEGY NEEDED?

5. North Korea is one of the few nations that under no circumstances can be trusted with militarized nuclear capabilities. It must not be able to have the ability to mass produce nuclear missiles with the capability of striking the United States. That is why the US needs the aid of China to cool tensions in the region. Priority one should be the nuclear disarmament of North Korea as that is a chief national security threat and in order to appease the North Koreans a friendly nation is needed at the negotiation table. The US by coming to China will boost confidence and possible cooperation of the CCP and with the added incentives that would be included in such a deal it may be possible to freeze or disarm North Korea. 

6. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal.

Bibliography

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-china-america-can-make-serious-north-korea-deal-17985

Article on the United States and Russia's Relations

Elif Okan
POL 245 American Foreign Policy
Professor Shirk
16 March 2017
                                          Article on the United States and Russia's Relations

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-cold-war-russia-u-s-relations-lowest-point-1970s-n660126

This article talked about how there might be a new cold war between the USA and Russia since our relationship together has been at its lowest since the last cold war in the 1970s. Russia's ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, has denied the claim that we might be in another cold war saying that a "Real Cold War is when we're investing enormous resources in order to prepare seriously for a nuclear war against each other. This is not the case now." while retired Admiral James Stavridis from the United States said that "The trend lines are very bad. We're not in a new Cold War, but we're edging close to one". This article also talked a lot about American undercover spies, Russia hacking the United States, and how some of the United States officials with diplomatic passports were attacked when they went to Russia. The article talked about how Russia currently is economically weak and how also "Russia is making mischief precisely because it is weak and without friends" making it harder to have a global influence compared to the United States.
Our textbook reading talked about how President Obama was able to "reset" our relations with Russia since there were no major confrontations between the two so they could work together on a logical and practical basis even though the problem of the sleeper spies from Russia in the United States that were arrested in 2010.The textbook also talked about how Russia has a hard time finding allies from around them and from Europe itself. Even though the article did not talk about this much, it did say that Russia does not have many allies which show that even though the textbox was written in 2011, the article and current events shows more of a trend demonstrated by the textbook than a change. The fact that Russia still tried to hack the United States also shows a trend since Russia has sent spies to the United States before that have been caught. This shows their pattern of trying to keep spying and gaining more information about the United States. Also even though the United States knows about this, they have not done much to try to stop it from what I could from both the article and textbook. Also like the textbook said our relationship could change at pretty much any moment with Russia. The article showed the change from 2012 when the textbook was written to 2016 when the article was written

U.S. Influence in NATO

(Link at bottom)

Kosovo's president seeks NATO support for creating army

On March 14^th, the President of Kosovo, Hashim Thaci, announced his nation’s plans to increase their security force to a full-fledged army with heavy weaponry and equipment. NATO, as well as rival Serbia, are against this move. Kosovo’s constitution only allows for the security force, and an amendment is needed to change this through their parliament. However, some of their parliament is made up of Serb minority, who have boycotted parliament over the poor relationship Kosovo maintains with Serbia. If the increase is made without full parliamentary procedure, NATO and the United States may decide to withhold international and agency cooperation. President Thaci went on to say that establishing the security force as an actual military would help pave the way towards becoming a member of NATO, and that Serbia did not support the move (or recognize Kosovo as a sovereign state) since they are backed by Russia.

In relation to the reading, this article discusses how the United States reacts to a nation building up its military strength in a region which has seen much instability over the last 2 decades. On page 246 of the reading, Kosovo is mentioned as a rebellious province in the former Republic of Yugoslavia, during the late 1990’s, in which violence was occurring. NATO peacekeepers went in to relieve the situation, and this aided the American hope of bringing in new states from the former USSR to be allies of NATO nations, and eventually (in the case of Romania, Bulgaria Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic, and the Baltic states) members themselves. Bringing these nations closer to the U.S. gave them more regional power, and weakened the Russian’s chance of maintaining a large sphere of influence. With Kosovo currently hoping to join the NATO alliance, this would be a further hit to the possibility of Russia holding a strong area where they have the most influence. The article states that the United States would pull aid to Kosovo if they did not follow a proper route to creating an army, which demonstrates the Americans’ power in helping determine international affairs. The increase of NATO nations and the United States’ power and influence in determining events within the organization shows how the trend of America’s leadership in NATO is continuing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/kosovos-president-seeks-nato-support-for-creating-army/2017/03/14/7d141bd6-08c7-11e7-bd19-fd3afa0f7e2a_story.html?utm_term=.fb8a688a44b3

NATO

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/06/politics/trump-nato-centcom/

Kevin Liptak in his article, “Trump Salutes NATO with Vow of Strong Support” provides an update on Trumps current stance on NATO. Throughout his campaign trump questioned the relevance of NATO and held varying opinions. He said that it was unable to protect against modern day threats. Now upon entering into office Trump proclaims his support for the organization. His main concern at this time is that all member countries pay their full dues. Many countries are not doing so right now. Only five of the 28 countries have met the necessary 2% of their gross domestic products on defense payment towards the alliance. In his support for the organization Trump vows to provide new equipment to better ensure global security.

The text spends a lot of time discussing NATO expansion. As of March 1999, only 19 countries held membership in the organization. President Clinton sought the enlargement of the alliance in order to protect US interests. Current events suggest the expected change from events portrayed in the text. NATO is now 28 countries strong. Trump also held differing views on the importance of NATO during his campaign in contrast to Clinton’s stressed importance on the organization. Clinton viewed NATO as crucial to supporting the US, However, Trump portrayed the view while campaigning that it was out of date and nonessential. Trump in his demands that countries pay up also goes against the idea of enlargement of NATO. It is clear that support and strength of NATO has developed and changed overtime from the section in the text book and current events. 

US Russia Relations Blog Post

Orlando Manfredi
POL 245
Professor Shirk

Article on US Russia Relations

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/russian-military-massive-weapons-upgrade-article-1.2979056

According to the article I found in the NY Daily News, over the course of 2016 the Russian military purchased 41 ICBMs in a widespread modernization project of the armed forces. This effort to modernize has lead to 905 new tanks, 17 new ships and 170 new aircraft. Despite the recent peaceful ties with the United States, Russia claims that it needs a more capable and modern military to deal with global threats and also contend with land disputes with Japan regarding various Pacific islands that were seized by Russia at the end of World War Two.

This article relates directly to the readings as each of those is in regards to Russian nuclear capabilities and how those capabilities relate to those of the United States. This article also touches on the philosophical differences between the US and Russian military that is also talked about in the given readings. Russia as a nation has always relied on overwhelming force of numbers to defeat enemies and these weapons have very rapid turnover rate. This is in stark contrast to the arms doctrine of the United States where the military equipment is built to last for decades and those few pieces of military hardware are destructive enough on their own to carry the day.

Overall as of right now the trend has seemingly reversed in US government where previously during the Obama administration, Democrats were very open and willing to do a "reset" of relations with Russia and Republicans were the ones to remind Americans that Russia is still a country not to be treated as a close friend or ally. But now with the Trump administration and the seemingly close ties Russia has with Trump and many of his appointees and cabinet members it is the Democrats who are against close friendly relations with Russia and some Trump allied Republicans are advocating for a turning of a new leaf with the country.

Despite the change of administration Russia-US ties are stronger and more cooperative than ever and unless some truly catastrophic even happens the US and Russia will likely continue to see greater cooperation despite many the many differences between the two.

Memorandum on the US policy on the Cold War

Memorandum on the US policy on the Cold War 

To: President Truman 

From: Elif Okan 

Date: September 10, 1947 

Subject: Containment of the Soviet Union in the Cold War      

World War II recently ended, and now another war may start between the Soviet Union and us. The United States and the Soviet Union were allies during World War II, but our alliance is starting to fray after we helped to defeated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The United States want to spread democracy while the Soviet Union wants to spread communism. We can not let the Soviet Union spread communism to the rest of the world so we can no longer be there allies and should stop what little may remain. The best way to deal with the Soviet Union is though containment which has worked pretty well so far.  

Currently, we are the world's superpower and are the least hurt from War World II since the war took place away from our home. We are stronger than the Soviet Union currently so we can afford to use containment and wait it out. With the current state the Soviet Union is in, it will not take long for them to fall on their own which may seem crazy to us as of now but it is possible. There is no need to send in troops to the Soviet Union and fight a real war with them. The best thing we can do is use containment to stop the spread of communism from the Soviet Union to the other countries that the Soviet Union may or may not be trying to affect and change. If we do nothing to stop the Soviet Union's spread of communism than the Domino Theory may come true. Like dominos after the Soviet Union has successfully stayed communism and spread communism to another country like China as an example turning them into communists as well then they will spread to another country like Korea and keep going until the whole world ends up being turned into communists. If one country falls and becomes communists like the Soviet Union, then the whole world can. 

The Soviet Union's aggression and the way they keep trying to expand shows that they should be contained before something bad like the Domino Theory happens or something worse happens. We have to contain our enemies so they cannot do anything bad to us or the rest of the world since everyone looks to us as a leading example. Even though we may have more than one enemy at a time and other countries may be trying to become communists like China, we have to look at our worst enemy and deal with them first instead of trying to deal with more than one at a time which can make us weaker. The Soviet Union is the second strongest country after us which is why we need to focus a lot of our energy to contain them and to make it so they cannot spread communism. If the Soviet Union fails and stops being communists than other smaller countries like China would also fail and most likely cease to be Communists.   

It is important to keep in mind that we dropped the nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. It is important because it means that we currently have nuclear weapons. If the Soviet Union got nuclear bombs or any nuclear weapons as well and we both used them it would be terrible not just for the Soviet Union and us but the rest of the world as well. The nuclear weapons could destroy the world so they should never be used again, especially not over something like our fight with the Soviet Union. On top of the containment of the Soviet Union, we as the United States and the world's super power that everyone looks to as an example should give aid to European countries. We should give the European countries aid since the European economy is in shambles right now because of World War II. Giving them aid is not just because it is the right thing to do or because we are the world's superpower but also because our sphere of influence would largely increase and it would give us access to the market as well as military bases. Not only would this make the European countries like us more but it will most likely keep the other European countries from turning to the Soviet Union and communism to find relief from their current state.  

Overall we should look to contain the Soviet Union to stop them from spreading communism and look into helping the European countries that need it since we can afford to and it would greatly benefit us.