North Korea agrees to China's request for nuclear disarmament talks

            With the strong push of Chinese President Xi Jinping, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has inched closer to the table for six-party talks on nuclear disarmament that also involve the United States, South Korea, Japan, and Russia. A North Korean envoy states that the country wishes to concentrate on economic development and thus is open to working towards more peaceful relations with other countries. Both parties wish to cooperate in promoting stability on the peninsula and to strengthen ties with each other.

            Because China is the one country with the most access to North Korea’s decision-makers, it is crucial that President Xi Jinping prioritize the success of the talks in ending Pyongyang’s nuclear proliferation. But such six-party talks have failed in the past: beginning in 2003, the talks were created in response to North Korea breaking the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. North Korea left these talks in 2009 when the United Nations Security Council resolved to impose heavier sanctions on the former for a nuclear test than in years past. Since then, Pyongyang has refused to acknowledge the world’s disapproval of its currently running nuclear weapons program. The country’s bitter threats of war against the United States these past few years never existed as true actions. Although the world breathes a sigh of relief in China’s stronger encouragement for nuclear disarmament in North Korea, will North Korea truly consider ceasing to develop nuclear weapons?

            Many citizens believe that North Korea will not return to an agreement like that of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; more likely, North Korea will settle for no less than a certain, agreed-upon number of nuclear ballistic missiles. Again, this is only if the six-party talks really proceed and end in agreement between countries that, for years now, have developed hostile relations. At the very least, however, China’s move is a hope for mollified tension.

About Us: Rex Peel

Describe yourself.
I am a pragmatic and honest person who feels committed to making the United States of America an even better place than it already is. I am inspired by key figures in American history and I am intrigued by the US government. People often tell me that I have a varied set of interests. I enjoy keeping up with current events, as well as working on old cars and riding my motorcycle in my free time. I am drawn to post-World War II American culture and I aspire to work for the federal government upon my graduation from college.

How did you become interested in International Relations?
I have always been interested in what is happening around the world at any given time. However, what really boosted my curiosity and understanding of the complex matter of foreign affairs was Mr. Phillips' class on International Relations. Mr. Phillips devotes all of his time to his IR class and to our expansion of knowledge and it shows. Because of my experience in his class, I feel that I am better prepared to serve the American public when I am eventually part the United States government. As time goes on, I seem to become more interested in international politics and the coordination between groups from different parts of the world. The more I learn, my perspective broadens and my vision of what is happening around the globe and its effect on the United States becomes clearer.

Favorite topics/focuses relating to International Relations?
My favorite aspect of International Relations is that of national security and defense. It is the most dynamic in my view. The military role of the United States around the world is constantly changing, as is the the manner in which the government copes with foreign threats.

What you plan on majoring in, in the future?
I am going to be working on a mechanical engineering major at Virginia Tech over the next four years. Even if I may not pursue a career as an engineer, I have always been intrigued by machines and I believe the practical and logical approach to problems that I will acquire with an education in engineering can be applied to nearly every profession. I will minor in political science.

Character/public figure you hope to emulate?
There are many people whom I look up to, but the greatest of them all is undoubtedly George Washington. He was a farmer who was arguably the best general that this nation's military ever had. He was reluctant to serve as the first president of the United States, but because of his devotion to his country and respect for his peers who unanimously elected him for the job, he decided to make the sacrifice, putting off his own personal interests for the benefit of the nation.

Why did you join the Plenipotentiaries?
I joined the Plenipotentiaries because I was confident that it would be an excellent opportunity to not only discuss my own views on global matters, but also to learn from my colleagues and develop more educated opinions.

What do you hope to do after leaving Mills?
I hope that I will be successful in college and take advantage of all of the opportunities that Virginia Tech provides. Subsequently, I plan to serve the United States government in either one of the branches of the armed forces or a federal agency.

Globalization and the American Worker

These past few weeks have been long. I am finally wrapping up my high school career and moving on to bigger and better things. It has been a while since my last post, but now I'm back.

      Those who know me understand that I am a strong advocate of foreign aid and other forms of United States international affairs, or at least I hope that they do. I believe that this nation's superpower status deeply relies on its relationships with other nations, both industrialized and developing. Trade between the USA and its economic partners is imperative to maintain the global economy. In no way do I believe that the United States of America should isolate itself. But I have one concession to make.
     In the 1980s, American manufacturing firms began moving a great deal of their labor from their home to poor, developing nations in East Asia and South America. They claimed, accurately, that products manufactured by this cheaper labor would bring a higher profit margin and help United States corporations sell their products for a lower cost. The public understandably welcomed this change. After all, they would be paying less for just about everything they could buy.
     The true cost of this change, however, was considerably higher than people believed. It was also dangerously invisible. Companies saw their bottom lines remain stagnant while others were seeing huge increases since exploiting cheap labor in China, Bangladesh, and India. They inevitably panicked. They laid off workers and shut down factories that in some cases had been in operation for over a century (see Levi's). Working men and women were left out in the cold. Too many factory workers struggled to support their families. Their kids went hungry. The government was not untouched. Unemployed factory workers were not able to pay taxes. Instead, they needed to borrow from their countrymen to sustain themselves, putting them to shame. Schools were closed and essential services such as police and fire were cut back because of the newfound (and currently remaining) budget deficits.
     There has also been a more subtle detractor to outsourcing. American corporations such as Boeing and General Electric that spend a great deal of capital on research and development have moved much of their manufacturing to nations that have very little regard for intellectual property. The rate of reverse engineering of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner wings, GE's jet engine parts, and other high technology products is quite high, proving that outsourcing is not only detrimental to the United States, but is also a poor business decision.
     Factories and the workers that operated them have effectively made the United States an industrial and economic giant. Since the colonists first landed at Jamestown, the integrity of this great nation was built upon the promise of the American worker. Businesses that put money ahead of morality in conjunction with free trade are unraveling the fabric that has maintained the industrial power of the United States.
     In order to clarify my purpose, I will concede that I am relatively conservative. I believe in capitalism and the free market. I understand the importance of the private sector in the United States and appreciate its efficiency and dedication to performance. However, in my eyes, the American worker should always come first. In my eyes, the conservative state of mind revolves around the idea of the value of the individual. Betraying American workers by replacing them with the foreign working poor does not respect the value of the individual.
     The modern world is a global one, and I truly believe that this nation is committed to making the world a better place. In order for the United States to remain strong and capable of providing foreign aid, its people need to realize the true cost of outsourcing and understand the value of the American worker.