Strategies that the US can use to preserve access to energy for itself and its allies
Access to clean and affordable energy accounts for the high living standards that the US and its allies such as Japan and Germany are experiencing, hence there is a continuous need to preserve such important commodity need for growth and prosperity of economies. As the population continues to grow, the demand for clean energy is tremendously increasing hence the need to develop alternative sources of energy. The increasing demand for energy continues to pose threat to the environment and our health. In order to preserve our planet and continue improving our living standard there is need to find alternatives to existing sources of energy.
Over reliance on oil reserves constrain the economy of many countries and are leading to international conflict. History has shown that a country can not depend on one source of energy hence the need to develop more sources. Due to these the US government has adopted various strategies and policies that allow her to participate in world’s energy market. Over the last few decades has established international cooperation in energy relationships. Since early 1980, the US and Canadian governments have entered into energy relationship which saw deregulation of the energy market between the two countries. The US imports more than half of its total oil requirements and as result it has joined the international energy programs which are made up of 26 countries. Under this program, in case of disruption in oil supply then the available supply is shared. Again in order to preserve energy reserves the government has embarked on efforts to reduce energy consumptions through other alternatives to oil and conservations of available sources.
How the different views on terrorism between US and EU can be aligned to combat terrorism
Over the years there has been conflicting views on terrorism between the US and the EU. The EU has been opposed to the policies and mechanism adopted by the US to combat terrorism. The EU has been accusing the US of violation of human rights by the way it handled terrorism suspects during interrogation and also the EU was opposed to the oversees prisons. According to the EU such move contradicted to their human rights norms. Until the September 11, 2001 plane attacks in the US that gave the 25 EU member states the momentum to increase cooperation against terrorism among themselves and the US, there has been no such move ever before. However such cooperation is believed to facing challenges as they try to harmonize police, judicial and control of boarders.
For many years the EU’s attempt to address the issue has been hampered by differences among the member countries, lack of resources and untrustworthy law enforcement machineries. After the September attack, their views on terrorism between the US and EU change and they have cooperated to flush terrorist in countries such as Germany, Spain, Belgium and Italy. The EU realized that their difference in legal system and open boarders between member states allowed terrorists to travel around evading arrest and being brought to justice. As result the EU has since then has sought to harmonize national laws and scale down any barriers among member countries’ law enforcement agencies for easier information sharing and apprehending suspects. Further the E.U and U.S have improved on law enforcement collaboration. The US congress approved the EU involvement and interest to fight terrorism with hope that the move will help in flushing terrorism bases in Europe. Over the previous years, the US and EU officials have cooperated on police, boarder control policies and judicial matters which has helped to development of EU-US alliance.
The consequences of the US abrogating the ABM treaty
The ABM treaty was a compromise between the US and Soviet Union agreed upon in 1972 as a move to limit anti- missile system used to defend areas against missile attack. In 2002 the US withdrew from the treaty. The treaty was considered as landmark in limitation of arms as both the US and SU had to limit their offensive and defense systems. The US withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty has been criticized by some countries among them Russia and China. China fears that the move by the US to scrap the ABM treaty will see arm race emerge among Asian states. Further china suspects that the US withdrawal from the treaty might hinder China’s plan to develop forces. This is because with the US out of the treaty, it could extend its missile protection to countries neighboring china. As result of China’s fear, it is anticipated that China in response might build her weapons (Missile defense system).
Then if China develops missile defense system, it would be tempted to create more warheads and that might stir up arm race. If China builds more weapons of mass destruction her closed neighbor India may be develop too causing countries such as Pakistan to react too. There is possibility of recurrence of the cold war between the US and the Russian.
Bibliography
Archick Kristin, U.S.-EU Cooperation against Terrorism, CRS Report for Congress, 2006.
Crane, Mary U.S, “Treatment of Terror Suspects and U.S.-EU Relations” 2004.
Hosein Gus, “Threatening the Open Society: Comparing Anti-terror Policies and Strategies in the U.S and Europe”, Executive summary, 2007.
Prince Phil. “Canada-U.S. Energy Relations: Overview and Commentary,” Canadian Energy Research Institute 2004.
Simeone Nick, “Consequences of US ABM Withdrawal”. 2001. Web.