Is military strength the most important element of national security?

Depending on the historical, geopolitical, and many other circumstances of the countries, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, military strength is not always the most important factor of national security. Now let me explain the details.     

First, national security is a complex issue, and not dependent only on military defense. Besides, you must also consider several other factors, such as economic, political, and environmental power. For example, healthy trade relations, natural resources, and even green forests are all important to maintain national security. So, military strength is only one of them.     

Next, having stronger military doesn’t always contribute to greater national security. On the contrary, huge military budgets often lead to financial burden, economic stagnation, and social unrest in turn. History has shown that wars and “arms races” have caused extensive damage even to “victorious nations.”           

What I have mentioned only outlined the issues: in fact, several other political and economic factors can contribute to national security. So, we must carefully consider the situation to lay down the optimal policy. Thank you for your attention. [183 Words Type-I]

How to eliminate Weapons of Mass Destruction [or WMD]?

Depending on how we are familiar with the topic, the answers may well vary, and they are all worth considering. But in my view, the international community has made progress over the years, in countering weapons of mass destruction, or WMDs. Now let me explain the details.     

First, less and less countries own WMDs nowadays, which is an important step to prevent them from spreading. To achieve this, UN member countries have monitored trade in WMD-materials and technology transfers, based on international framework. This has made it harder for terrorists to acquire WMD materials and skills.     

Next, international pressure and persuasion have successfully convinced countries such as South Africa and Ukraine to abandon their núclear programs. In fact, holding núclear weapons need huge costs, which can help convince countries to abandon them.           

If we work together on these points, we can make significant progress toward getting rid of WMDs. On this point, the UN Sustainable Development Goals have listed “eliminating any violence” as one of their key challenges. Therefore, we must pursue this goal to achieve a peaceful world. Thank you for your attention. [184 Words Type-G,H]

Obstacles to núclear disarmament

Depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, we still have obstacles to achieving núclear disarmament. Now let me explain some of them.     

First, there is a theory called “nuclear deterrence,” which argues that having nuclear weapons helps prevent war. So, some countries hold them to defend themselves against potential enemies. While this idea has a point, it creates mistrust between countries, which may bring about an actual nuclear war. Sadly, this perspective has even been in place in Japan year by year.     

Next, nowadays, “the arms industry” has a significant impact on various governments. For example, they convince governments to incréase military spending and purchase more weapons. Plus, they fund for pro-military campaigns, creating “conflicts of interest” for politicians working for núclear disarmament.     

These are two significant obstacles to achieving núclear disarmament. However, the UN Sustainable Development Goals have listed “eliminating any violence” as one of their key challenges. So, we must come together to get rid of them to achieve a peaceful world. Thank you for your attention. [181 Words Type-G]

holdは手放さないこと。ownは資産を持つこと。possessは固い表現。

Is pacifism rélevant in the 21st century?

This is an interesting topic; depending on circumstances of countries, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, pacifism is an important principle in our world today. Now let me explain the details.     

First, the world has rarely been at peace throughout history. And as globalization advances, conflict in one region can quickly affect others. Plus, even a UNSC permanent member dare to invade its neighboring country. In such situations, pacifism can help the parties involved negotiate, compromise, and mutually understand. In other words, pacifism is compatible with the ideals of globalization.     

Next, achieving a sustainable world needs a commitment to pacifism. For example, the UN Sustainable Development Goals has listed many challenges that humans need to address. However, any conflicts disrupt economies and drain resources toward war and its recovery. In such situations, there leaves nothing for achieving sustainability.     

Therefore, I conclude that pacifism is rélevant in the 21st century. Under the globalized world, few people will benefit from conflicts. So we should come together to achieve a sustainable and vibrant world. Thank you for your attention. [184 Words Type-L]

can serve as A: Aとして役立つ relevant: 価値・重要性を持つ

Can it be justified for one nation to interfere in the internal affairs of another?

Depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, interference in a country’s internal affairs is not justified as a rule. Now let me explain the details.     

First, we know that many countries have interfered in the affairs of foreign countries for many plausible reasons, such as protecting their citizens’ lives or protecting their companies’ assets. In this way, any country starts conflicts based on its own concept of “justice.” To put it the other way around, there’s no persuasive reason to interfere in another country.     

Next, I understand some may argue that countries should act against serious political disruption, such as genocide or tribal conflicts. However, even such events do not always justify a foreign interference. In other words, every country should follow rélevant UN resolutions to avoid “conflicts of interest”.           

Having said that, finding a balance between sovereignty and human rights is an important yet challenging matter for the international community. So, we must carefully consider these practices to establish an optimal approach. Thank you for your attention. [180 Words Type-F1]

Can peace in the Middle East ever be achieved?

The future is often hard to predict, especially when it comes to the Middle East situation: depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, peace in the Middle East is possible, but not likely anytime soon. Now let me explain the details.    

First, history has witnessed various factors, such as sectarian conflicts, territorial disputes, and foreign involvement, have triggered countless conflicts in the region. So, settling these complicated issues will need “a deus ex machina”, or a great deal of negotiation, compromise, and mutual understanding among all parties involved.     

Next, the Middle East is a major oil field. That is why many countries have complex and strong interests in the region. So, some parties, such as extremists and the arms industry, benefit from the instability, and work to disrupt peace in the area.            

Therefore, while “Peace in the Middle East” sounds fantastic, we should be skeptical about immediate progress, but need to keep talking with all parties involved to get closer to the ideal. Thank you for your attention. [180 Words Type-O]

Do you agree that the veto system of the UN Security Council [or UNSC] should be reformed to meet the demands of time? 

Depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, the current veto system should not be hastily reformed. Now let me explain the details.     

First, any change in the UN framework could disrupt the current balance of power, and cause unintended conflicts. Historically, the veto system was designed to keep the UN stable, and has prevented large-scale conflicts. In other words, the system has successfully prevented World War III. So few people argue that now is a good time to reform the UNSC.     

Next, I understand some may argue that more countries should have a say in international security, but if the UNSC becomes more multipolar, it could become indecisive, which may harm global security. However, that is the point. For example, Africa has had many huge conflicts, but has never gained a permanent seat, which is worth improving.           

Therefore, I conclude that the UNSC veto system should remain as it is, at least at this time. But we should continue to discuss this matter to get close to our ideal. Thank you for your attention. [186 Words Type-E]

Is the world heading toward another global conflict? 

Depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, a global conflict is not likely to occur anytime soon. Now let me explain the details.     

First, studies have shown that we are living in one of the most peaceful periods in history. It is because most countries today prioritize diplomatic resolutions over military action, which has successfully prevented or settled many worldwide conflicts.     

Next, I understand some may argue that conflicts have always existed throughout history. While this is true, history has always taught us that violence rarely benefits anyone. So, since the Westphalia Treaty, countries have made efforts to form international cooperation through agreements. And now, the UN is working hard to prevent, settle, and resolve conflicts. This means that we can unite for world peace.           

Therefore, I don’t believe we’re heading toward another world war. On this point, the UN Sustainable Development Goals have listed “eliminating any violence” as one of their key challenges. So, we must come together to achieve a peaceful world. Thank you for your attention. [181 Words Type-G]

Are war and violence inevitable in human society?

Depending on what we are, the answers may well vary, and they all make sense, but in my view, both war and violence are inevitable issues in human society. Now let me explain the details.     

First, violence has always existed throughout history, because humans have used violence to settle disputes and keep their societies stable. As social beings, humans are inclined to form tribes, societies, and countries, and violence has been the initial method to “protect” them from outsiders.     

Next, I understand some may argue that people will work together to overcome violence. Certainly, cooperation has also helped progress our civilization. But our world today still has diverse ideologies, religions, and political perspectives, and violence has proven itself to be effective. So, when resources are limited or there are fundamental differences in beliefs or policies, conflicts can occur easily.     

Therefore, war and violence are nearly inevitable even today. However, the UN Sustainable Development Goals have listed “eliminating any violence” as one of their key challenges. Thus, we must come together to achieve a peaceful world. Thank you for your attention. [180 Words Type-G]

*occur: 起こる内容が特定している <> happen