ASSIGNMENT ON EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL RESPONSE Essay

ASSIGNMENT ON EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT AND ORGANISATIONAL RESPONSE - Essay Example Fast Food Industry The fast food industry has demonstrated significant growth and market opportunities which are characterized by the increase in disposable income among New Zealanders as attributed to the increased income and living standards. The trends of the New Zealand economy reveal an increase of monthly wage, benefits and bonuses among consumers. In addition, the busy lifestyles of consumers within the working class and institutions of learning have resulted to an increased consumption fast food. This is due to the cost effectiveness and convenience which characterize the fast food industry. It is in line with the market trends and business opportunities within the New Zealand food industry that Quick Meal Restaurant endeavors to invest within this market. Porter’s Five Forces Analysis Supplier power is one of the most important forces within the market which defines the competitiveness of a company (Pathak, 2012). The fast food production industry within New Zealand d epends largely on the ability of effective supply of raw materials for the production of high quality food products at the right time and quantity so that the needs of the consumers are met. The concentration of suppliers of food products within the New Zealand fast food industry is relatively high (Chand, Eyles & Ni Mhurchu, 2012). This reflects that fast food industries which require investing in this market have desirable market opportunities that they would invest in for competitive advantage. However, there are substitute food products within the New Zealand food industry which are likely to threaten the supply of fast food products. Porter’s analysis of market forces also demonstrates that the power of the buyer is one of the most significant forces within the market which determines the ability of a company to meet its business objectives (Pathak, 2012). The New Zealand fast food consumer is very sensitive to price and quality. This illustrates that the consumer factor s must be incorporated to company values for quality and price of fast food products for attainment of a competitive edge within this market. The threat of product or service substitutes is another external force within a market which influences the strategic competitive strategy of a company. For example food substitutes within large retailers and restaurants are likely to be a major business threat for a company that requires investing in the fast food market within this industry. The threat of new entrants into a specific market is described by Porter as a strong market force which determines the success of a brand within the market (Roy, 2009).

NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF HURRICANE KATRINA ON THE GULF REGION Essay

NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF HURRICANE KATRINA ON THE GULF REGION - Essay Example Moreover, while giving examples about the hurricanes that hit before the hurricane Katrina, it presents a comparative analysis of how the hurricane Katrina was different from those that happened earlier and why was it a major setback for the Homeland Security Departments of America. Furthermore, the book also describes the major factors and problems of the hurricane and why is it marked as an important event in the history of America. Also, this book gives details about how the government tried to help people recover all that they lost in this catastrophe, and what kind of role did the government play in helping them economically and psychologically (Hoffman, 2007, pp 25-89). Palser, B. (2007). Hurricane Katrina: Aftermath of Disaster. Compass Point Books. This is a comprehensive book, with easy to understand vocabulary and language. The book provides with the details of the hurricane Katrina that hit the Florida, rapidly moving towards the Gulf of Mexico, causing hundreds of deaths and heaving thousands homeless. Also, it states how the government failed to provide enough backup fur the people of America, as it was one of the most accurately predicted hurricanes in the history of America. ... Brinkley, D. (2007). The Great Deluge: Hurricane, New Orleans, and the Mississippi Gulf Coast. HarperCollins. This book written by the bestseller author, Douglas Brinkley (2007) epically describes the events that caused major devastation in the United States of America; the hurricane Katrina. The hurricane Katrina that demolished ‘Gulf Coast cities of America’ (Brinkley, 2007) and took away hundreds of lives within just five hours was one of the five most catastrophic hurricanes in the history of United States. This book highlights all the events preceding the hurricane Katrina, including the mismanagement of the government officials and the lack of preplanning in spite of the early prediction. Moreover, this book also records the stories of actual survivors who witnessed and experienced the hurricane, it narrates all the troubles that they went through and how the hurricane affected their lives. It states the emotional, physical and economic losses of the survivors and describes how they are coping up with their lives in the current time; years after the disaster took place. Moreover, it also identifies the role played the government to help the survivors. Plus it also plays a tribute to the unsung heroes of the hurricane Katrina, who sacrificed their own lives to save others (Brinkley, 2007). Brown, D. (2005). Hurricane Katrina: The first seven days of America’s worst natural disasters. Lulu.com Press. This book was written with the intentions of donating funds for charity purposes. The book narrates the whole event of hurricane Katrina that destroyed lives in America within just hours. It states how dramatically the lives of the victims changed

SSDD Forensics Issues Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

SSDD Forensics Issues - Essay Example The logical acquisition approach is based on acquiring a logical bit-by-bit copy of the directories and various types of files (address files) found within the iPhone file system. But, Physical acquisition implies a bit-by-bit copy of an entire physical store (e.g., a memory chip). Logical backups are considered a rich source of data files that can help build evidence. They can also provide proof of the pairing relationship between the computers that have been previously synced with the iPhone device if that computer was seized as part of the investigation. A physical acquisition has the advantage of allowing deleted files and data remnants to be examined. Physical extraction acquires information from the device by direct access to the flash memories. Generally, this is harder to achieve because the device vendors need to secure against the arbitrary reading of memory so that a device may be locked to a certain operator. The name of the backed-up folder is a long combination of forty hexadecimal numbers and characters (0-9 and a-f) and represents a unique identifier for the device from where the backup was obtained. This unique identifier appears to be a hashed value since it was the same unique name given to the backed-up folder by iTunes on both Mac and Windows operating systems. Within this folder reside hundreds of backup files with long hashed filenames consisting of forty numbers and characters. These filenames signify a unique identifier for each set of data or information copied from the iPhone memory. Backed-up data is stored in three file formats, plist files which stores data in plaintext format, mddata files which stores data in a raw binary format and info files which store encoded metadata of the corresponding binary mddata files. Figure 3 shows the Backup folder containing the backed-up files. Generally, the iPhone file system stores data in binary

Balancing College Studies with Work and Family Demands Essay - 1

Balancing College Studies with Work and Family Demands - Essay Example I also have to attend family gatherings during the weekends and holidays. On the other hand, in college, my lecturers expect me to study hard, do assignments and take exams to show that I appreciate my learning process. I also have to take part in co-curriculum activities such as athletics, music and theatre ensembles, student government and language clubs; all these are geared towards enhancing out-of-class experience. However, at times, I can become exhausted and unmotivated because of the amount of workload that I have to attend to, both at home and in college. As much as the college administration wants the students to focus of their studies, they also stress that co-curriculum activities are equally important. Moreover, for that reason, my class timetable includes a co-curricular session in which a student has to participate in at least one mandatory co-curriculum activity; this is according to college policies. In most circumstances, this turns out to be stressful in that I mig ht be having assignments that I am supposed to complete, but taking part in the co-curricular activity eats up my time, and as a result, I do not meet the deadline for the assignment, as I am forced to carry the assignment home. Even so, again, the failure of meeting an assignment deadline cannot be tolerated by my professor and this increases my stress level. At home, my parents expect my siblings, and I to perform certain chores according to a duty roster that they have created. The duty roster is to be followed regardless of whether I have college assignment or not, and when it is my duty it becomes very stressful since I am expected to accomplish my duties at home and finish my college assignment at the same time. After finishing my home chores at night, I retire to my room with the college assignment in my mind. By this time, I am so exhausted in the sense that I cannot fully concentrate on what I am supposed to focus on in order to complete my assignment with a standard that c an attract a high grade. The only thing that I can do automatically without any difficulty is sleeping. I wake up the following day at 6 AM with stress when I remember I did not complete the assignment, which I am supposed to turn in by 8 AM. I conclude that time management is my biggest problem since I am not able to balance my college work and family demands because they conflict with one another. I understand that as a student, maintaining mental health is very important, and this is achieved through a good time management. A good time management helps in balancing college studies with work and family demands. My stress level had increased because I was overwhelmed with both tasks at home and assignments in college. Time management will help me in dealing with this problem in that I will dedicate a specific time to handle one particular issue. All in all the objective of embarking on time management is to make certain that I finish my assignments in college and tasks at home on t ime. I realize that my stress starts when two activities that I am supposed to engage in conflict with each other. The conflict comes when I do not finish a task within the stipulated timeframe, and thus it hijacks the time that I am supposed to dedicate to the second activity. After a careful deliberation, I have decided that I will discuss with my parents the issue of my new schedule. The discussion will entailed creating a new duty roster,

Repetitive spreading depression Essay Example for Free

Repetitive spreading depression Essay Jefferson (1996) notes that fear of crime is comprised of two distinct elements: personal fear and the use of a public fear of crime discourse. The latter could be variably invested, and could be more about crime than fear of crime. It was sometimes inflected more with anger. Some were invested in other discourses, such as neighborhood decline. It has been found that personal fears were normally of particular crimes, notably burglary or sexual assault, and could vary: inside and outside the home; and within and beyond familiar, local territory. Women are found to be more likely to express personal fear and men are more likely to reproduce the public discourse, especially older men (Jefferson, 1996). In discerning the distinction between the two genders and how each is affected by the fear of crime phenomenon, it was found that sex as such was not predictive of fear of crime; however, the effects of gender increased fears of victimization among women and sense of safety among men. While women feared for physical safety, men were in fear only as far as crime against them, not necessarily that of physical endangerment. Age was influential and found to be especially true for men. Anxieties about declining health and strength were sometimes expressed and are perceived to be in direct relation with a males concern of aging and becoming unable to protect himself in the event of a crime. Age did not appear to affect women in the same level as it was apparent that women of all ages are concerned about being unable to protect themselves against the possibility of physical crime. While older women were more likely to experience this type of fear, it was in no way peculiar to an age group among women. Findings help to establish the means to derive a more complete view of a given social environment (Koehly et al, 1998, p. 3). Research findings have helped to explain the measurement problems of crime and the fear of crime phenomena as it relates to gender depression. In two groups of mostly local, young or middle-aged, low-crime women, levels of fear and anxiety exceeded very low risk. Three of these women (married with children) worried excessively about burglary, or physical and sexual assault, and were hence judged depressively anxious. Their anxieties centered on their children but also included other members of the family, as well, revealing a core anxiety expressed as traditional, caring femininity. The lack of identity beyond that of being wife or mother combines with projection of protective agency onto the men in their families, leaving them with excess vulnerability that manifests in fears of burglary and/or assault. For two women in the study, fear of crime centered on fear of male sexual violence linked to violent, alcoholic fathers (Jefferson, 1996). II. SIDE EFFECTS OF DEPRESSION During the past decade the prevalence of eating disorders has increased among teenage and college-age American women. This increase is probably caused in part by societys idea of the ideal woman as being overly thin in order to be beautiful. Research has shown that anorexia nervosa consists of several psychopathological components as well as the physical components, and that the psychopathological characteristics often include such things as depression, anxiety, and difficulty in social situations, as well as low self-esteem (Wilcox, 1996). Adolescence is an intense time and is normally a time of physical changes as well as psychological changes. Females in particular seem to experience stress that is not experienced by their male peers. Females commonly experience depression during adolescence and other characteristics such as obsessiveness, compulsion and general reticence are quite common. While most anorexics have co-occurring clinical depression there are others suffering from anxiety, substance abuse or personality problems as well as an increased risk of suicide. Parks et al (1997) notes that within nonclinical samples, body image distortions have been associated with lowered self-esteem, depression, and chronic dieting (p. 593). The vicious cycle that exists with depression and female eating disorders serves to perpetuate the mental imbalance. Indeed, the consequences are far greater than just being overweight. Obesity, in and of itself, leads to a number of other diseases and complications that can significantly shorten a persons life. Of the long list of ailments, those at the top include heart disease, some cancers, diabetes, high cholesterol and blood pressure, and gallbladder disease. However, the mental distress such behavior causes is a significant concern, for a poor emotional outlook also takes its toll on the body. A common denominator among women with eating disorders is the overwhelming feeling of inadequacy they experience. Attempts to control their problem usually prove futile, which serves to plummet them even further and further into the depths of shame and depression. Based upon an article from the British Medical Journal entitled Male Sexual Problems, the findings indicate that male sexual function is so completely interwoven with other factors that there is no one single factor that can be considered the cause of sexual dysfunction. Dysfunction is often the result of factors such as complications from illness, general poor health or even side effects from treatment of other illnesses. Impotence is the major common side effect of many drugs, and it has also been a known side effect of aging, anxiety and depression. Male sexual dysfunction is also a known result of all forms of psychiatric disorder either directly or indirectly, with the side effects of drugs taken in conjunction with psychiatric disorder leading to sexual dysfunction such as depression. As sexual function continues to wane, the incidence of increased depression becomes cyclical in nature (Gregoire, 1999). CHEMICAL ASPECT Establishing the determinants of depression and gender in relation to the death of astrocytes in the brain, one is compelled to investigate the myriad experiment data that has surfaced since it was first surmised that the two entities had any connection to each other. Indeed, it has been found that the lack of astrocytic activity in the brain is an integral component to the overall concept of depression; it is with this information that the psychological community has become better equipped to address the relationship between astrocytic death and depression. Considered for decades to be a disease of the insane, depression has finally been recognized for the debilitating and emotionally unbalancing illness it truly is. With an astounding fifteen million Americans suffering from clinical depression a full five percent of the entire United States population it can no longer be looked upon as nothing more than merely the blues. Additionally, another five percent are victims of occasional despondency, with one of every six people succumbing to a significant depressive episode at some point throughout their lives. Depression often hits the elderly more than any other age group; however, with each passing year the average age of sufferers continues to drop. The field of psychology utilizes a number of statistical procedures in order to effect the applicable findings. According to Kendall (1991), the typical procedure behind such research is accumulated by way of study reviews, which employ the use of methodological considerations. These include deciding upon outcome measures, regulating therapy quality, as well as investigating client and therapist characteristics and the therapeutic relationship (Kendall et al, 1991, p. 78). There exist a number of issues that serve to influence the comparison modes, such as side effects, compliance and quickness of action, which must also be taken into overall consideration when determining the data. Among the variables that exist within the framework of statistical procedures, defining whether or not there is a difference between gender participation is a significant consideration. One study in particular from the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program noted the differences between male and female patient statistical findings after a number of procedures were rendered. Zlotnick (1998) notes that depending upon the type of treatment each individual received placebo/clinical management; cognitive-behavioral therapy; interpersonal therapy; or imipramine/clinical management it was established that the final outcome was not influenced by gender. While the role of gender was examined in the process and outcome of therapy in the treatment (Zlotnick et al, 1998, p. 655) by reproducing the same findings in relation to psychotherapeutic treatment methods, it was determined that the second set of findings were the same. Researchers have been making the connection for some time now between depression and the death of astrocytes, noting that the astrocytes being essential for the brains nerve cells have been discovered to have healing properties. Pennisi (1999) notes how neurobiologists are beginning to recognize the regeneration components of astrocytes. Its going to make [neurobiologists] look at these cells in more detail. It will be interesting to see if they can be purified and used in [brain] repair (Pennisi 1999, p. PG). Understanding the roles that neurons and astrocytes play in the body helps one to fully comprehend why there may be a strong connection to depression. Astrocytic responsibility includes maintaining the blood brain barrier (BBB), as well as providing structural support, protection and repair of the central nervous system (CNS). Neurons, on the other hand, are the vital links between electrical impulses and the nervous system. Repetitive spreading depression (SD) waves, involving depolarization of neurons and astrocytes and up-regulation of glucose consumption, is thought to lower the threshold of neuronal death during and immediately after ischemia (Miettinen et al, 1997, pp. 6500-6505). In postulating the hypothesis that the growth or death of astrocytes somehow affects depression, it is relatively easy to recognize the fact that without the necessary astrocytes in place, conducting the brain-healing processes that they have been discovered to posses, it triggers within the brain the inability to maintain a sense of perspective. A kind of star-shaped brain cell that helps support surrounding nerve cells plays a much more pivotal role in maintaining the brains vitality than researchers had thought astrocytes double as neural stem cells, the source of new nerve cells (Pennisi, 1999, p. PG). Wineke (1996) notes the importance of ongoing research into the very real possibility that the absence of astrocytes serves to adversely effect brain function. Twenty years ago, the ideas we are studying were considered eccentric and fanciful. Now, this is really where its at (Wineke, 1996, p. 1G).

Thomsons Argument Of The Trolley Problem Philosophy Essay

Thomsons Argument Of The Trolley Problem Philosophy Essay A utilitarian is concerned with providing the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people, so in this first case a utilitarian would agree with Thomson and would say that it is mandatory to pull the lever and save the greater number of people. An opposing view would say that pulling the lever constitutes as a moral wrong, and would make the bystander partially responsible for the death. One has a moral obligation to get involved in these cases just by being present in the scenario and being able to change the outcome. Deciding to do nothing would be considered an immoral act if one values five lives more than one. In the first case, the bystander does not intend to harm anyone; the harm will be done regardless of which way the trolley goes. In the second case, pushing and harming the large man is the only way to save the five people on the trolley. in contrast, Thomson argues that a key distinction between the first trolley problem and the second case is that in the first case, you simply redirect the harm, but in the second case, you actually have to do something to the large man to save the five workers. Thomson states that in the first case, no worker has more of a right than the other not to be killed, but in the second case, the large man does have a right not to be pushed over the bridge, violating his right to life. To put the first trolley case in a different perspective I will present a similar case. Something has gone terribly wrong on an airplane and is inevitably about to crash and is heading straight to a heavily populated area. The airplane pilot knows that regardless innocent people will die so he turns the plane towards a less populated area, killing less innocent people. Was the pilots action to steer the plane in a different direction morally permissible? Thomson would say that the pilots actions were correct, because the greater populated are has the same right to live as the less populated area, and you are merely deflecting the harm to kill less people which is morally permissible because no rights have been violated. Thomson presents an alternative case to the second trolley problem to better illustrate her argument. In this case, a surgeon has 5 patients that are all in need of organ transplants, and they will die without the organ, but since they all have a rare blood type there are no organs available. A traveler comes into the office for a check up, and the doctor discovers that this traveler has the necessary organs that could save these five dying patients. The doctor asks the traveler if he would donate and but he sincerely declines. Would it be morally permissible for the doctor to kill the bystander and operate anyway? Thomson would argue that it is not permissible to operate on the traveler, because the doctor would be violating his right to life. This differs from the first trolley case because in the first case you are simply deflecting the harm as opposed to the second trolley case, and the transplant case, you have to act and do something to an innocent person in order to save the f ive people. In the first case none of the workers have more of a right than the other not to be killed, but in the second case the large man has a right not to be killed. In the transplant case, a utilitarian is concerned with the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, so just like in the first case where a utilitarian would say to pull the lever to kill one and save five, he would do the same in the transplant case to kill one and save five. Thomson disagrees and states that in the first case killing one is a side effect of killing five, in the transplant case you are violating a persons right where the act could have been avoided to begin with. Thomson states that killing is worse a death caused by letting someone die. In the first trolley case it would seem rational to agree that the person is morally obligated to pull the lever and save the five people. In the second case, the person should not be forced to push the large man onto the track because in this case he is killing the man to save the others where as in the first case it is inevitably one or the other. It would also seem rational that the doctor should not kill the man for the transplant because it is similar to the second case. Although in every case you are sacrificing one to save five, there are situations where it is not morally permissible to kill the one person, such as the second case and the transplant case. In these case the persons right to life is violated, and therefore would make it morally permissible to kill them. In order for Thomson to justify her opinions she needs to identify the differences in both cases that is strong enough to make a valid argument. In short, Thomson identifies that in both cases there is an innocent bystander who is not responsible in any of the events, but has the opportunity to get involved in order to save five people instead of the one. She assumes that there is no relationship or tension at all between the bystander and the workers so he has a clear mind on what his decision should be. Thomson states that we need to focus on the rights of the people as a means to an end relationship between the bystander and the workers. She argues that in both cases the bystander does wrong to the person whose life he chooses to sacrifice, but in the second case where the bystander pushes the large man, there is a direct violation of his rights. By performing the act of pushing, the bystander is directly violating on the large mans right not to be killed. This differs from the fi rst case where the bystander pulls a lever to kill one and save five, because it does not violate the single workers rights; diverting a train does not violate anyones rights, but pushing an innocent man does. Thomson feels that this explains why the bystander is allowed to intervene by pulling the lever because the bystander can maximize the utility without violating anyones rights, whereas in the second case, in order to maximize utility the bystander would have to violate someones rights. The problem arises that in the first case, although the bystander is not directly violating the single workers right, he is indirectly violating his right not to be killed. Thomson replies to this concern by saying that although this is true but it being direct or indirect is not relevant when a persons right not to be killed is concerned.

Oil Platforms Case Study

Oil Platforms Case Study The Oil Platforms Case The Rule of Force in International Law I. Introduction This paper relates to the Case Concerning Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States) of the International Court of Justice and its decision on the same delivered on November 6th, 2003. The dispute is related to a series of events that occurred during the Iran-Iraq war 1980-1988. During the war, due to attacks on merchant shipping vessels in the Persian Gulf, the US and other states engaged in â€Å"counter-attack† by targeting two Iranian oil platforms and severely damaging them in separate incidents. The US argued that it was only responding to a perceived threat and the attacks were only in the interest of security in the region. Tehran, not buying this theory of self-defence put forth by the US, cited several violations of bi-lateral International treaties crying foul over such use force. The prohibition of the usage of force by states in engrafted in customary international law as well as in Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter. But both fall short of containing force that is used in the States exercise of the right of self-defence. The ICJ in this particular case had to assert whether the force used by the US was really pre-emptive in nature; if it was, was it proportionate. The court whilst delivering its judgment developed an interesting new theory on such use of force by a state, a theory which has only been received critically. This paper shall seek to explore this particular theory in light of the aforementioned case. It must also be noted that this being a recent judgment holds immense practical significance with regard to the US operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and the troubled Baluchistan and NWFP provinces of Pakistan. To facilitate easy study, this paper has been divided into three parts; the first shall be an appraisal of the facts of the case itself, the second shall be a study of Article 2(4) and the final part will be a review judgment. II. The Facts of the Case and its Backdrop The case arose out of certain incidents during the Iran-Iraq war from 1980 to 1988. The case before the international Court of Justice revolved around the legality of the use of force with relation to two specific attacks against Iranian interests by US forces during the course of the war. The first instance was on October 19th, 1987. The US navy launched armed attacks against Irans Reshadat and Resalat oil complexes, both located in the Persian Gulf. This resulted in the complete annihilation of one of the oil platforms, whereas the other was severely damaged. As justification, the US claimed it was acting in ‘self-defence and the attack was in response to a missile strike three days prior on the Sea Isle City, a Kuwaiti tanker rebadged as a US flag-carrier in order to better ensure its safety. The second attack occurred a year later on April 18th, 1988 when US naval strikes severely damaged the Iranian Nasr and Salman complexes, nearly destroying the former. This time the US resorted to its prior justification of â€Å"acting in self-defence† again by stating that the attacks were in response to an American frigate, the USS Samuel B. Roberts, having been struck by a mine whilst sailing in international waters near Bahrain. On both instances the US notified the United Nations Security Council of its course of action in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. The Iranian Government in its Application to the court based its claims on the 1955Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between the US and Iran (the Treaty), not sparing basic principles of international law. The Courts (the International Court of Justice) jurisdiction was founded on Article XXI (2) of the Treaty. Article I of the Treaty provided that â€Å"there shall be firm and enduring peace and sincere friendship between the United States of America and Iran†. Article X(1) of the Treaty provided that there should be freedom of commerce and navigation between the parties territories: â€Å"Between the territories of the two High Contracting Parties there shall be freedom of commerce and navigation.† Based on Articles I and X(1) of the Treaty of Amity, Iran accused the United States of having breached the Treaty by attacking and destroying the oil platforms. It also submitted that United States â€Å"patently hostile and threatening attitude towards the Islamic Republic of Iran† was a breach of the very purpose and object of the Treaty of amity including Articles I and X(1), and principles of international law, and that the US was under an obligation to make reparations to Iran for the violation of such legal obligations. The US denied any breach of obligation with Iran under Article X(1) and replied that the attacks were necessary to protect its national security. This, according to the US, was covered by Article XX(1)(d) of the Treaty and read: â€Å"The present Treaty shall not preclude the application of measures: (d) necessary to fulfill the obligations of a High Contracting Party for the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security, or necessary to protect its essential security interests.† Also, the US, in another counter-claim pleaded unsuccessfully, claimed that Iran had violated Article X of the Treaty by attacking its vessels and laying mines in the Persian Gulf and â€Å"engaging in activities from 1987 to 1988 that were dangerous and detrimental to maritime commerce and navigation†. The US claims of military attack on merchant vessels and warships were not completely unfounded. During the from 1984 to 1988, known as the Tanker War, numerous vessels were attacked in the Persian Gulf and such attacks were perceived to be purported by the Iranian military by means of aerial attacks and the use of mines. The Llyods Maritime Information Service list noted more 546 incidents, 200 of which were directly attributed to Iran. Iran, however, directed such accusations to Iraq and claimed responsibility for none. It must be noted here that the Treaty of Amity was signed between the US and Iran back in 1955. After the Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran and the installation of the Khomeini as the head-of-state in all practical aspects, relations between the two states soured and was particularly before the start of the Iran-Iraq war. During the revolution, the US expressed its dissatisfaction with affairs in Iran by severing all diplomatic ties with the Islamic state. The American embassy at Tehran was seiged by supporters of the Khomeini and Americans were taken hostage for a considerable period of time. Irans previous democratically regime headed by the Shah had been seen by the US as an ally; this did not go down too well with its new Government which accused the US of â€Å"over-involvement† with its internal affairs during the past regime. Further, the new government of Iran saw the inability of the Security Council to prevent and contain Iraqs invasion of Iran in September, 1980 as the result of an anti-Iran bias in the Council and even in the UN as a whole. Under such circumstances, the Iranian regime saw the increasing presence of American forces in the Persian Gulf as a perceived threat to its interests resulting in the attacks. Ergo, this conflict was not completely unpredictable; nor was it unavoidable as it had been on the offing for a while. In this respect, the Security Council had failed to check the rising tension between the two states. As a body whose primary task is maintaining world peace and stability it had failed to contain such a conflict which could have been resolved had it played a more active role in mediation between the states. III. Article 2(4) The Blind-spot Article 2(4) of the UN Charter reads: This provision of the Charter however, finds itself lacking and is ill-equipped to handle a rather important aspect international armed conflict. Its blind-spot it has no provisions for prohibition of military threats or the threat of use of force. The ambit of article 2(4) is limited to actual use of military force and â€Å"threats† to impose economic or political sanctions are beyond it. According to the general scheme of the UN charter, a violation of Ar. 2(4) may be justified only on two grounds recourse to self defence and authorisation by the UNSC. This brings us to the moot question Are states free to reciprocate to threats when no armed attack has actually occurred? This question has been left unanswered and its outcome the many wars fought even after the UN Charter was adopted. Two perfect examples of such a situation arose in Europe in August, 1914, the beginning of the First World War and again during the Second World War. The question before a nation is whether to ignore the military threat or to issue a counter-threat. In such a situation when one party is advantaged by overwhelming military threat, the threat involved will become lopsided and there will not be any real escalation or build-up of bilateral tension. Any country will always place self-defence on a higher footing as compared to a policy of self-restraint considering the demands of national security. The prohibition on the use of force is found both in customary international law and, as stated above, in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. According to the UN Charter a state is not allowed to use force as a response to any intervention that falls short of an armed attack. The criterions established for the exercise of such retaliatory force include requirements that the force used must be necessary to repel the armed attack; it must be absolutely unavoidable and the force used must be proportionate. The Nicaragua decision [Case Concerning Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. USA)] echoed this principle. Article 51 carrying forward from Article 2(4) too recognizes states right to act in individual and collective self-defence if an armed attack is suffered by any member-state of the UN. Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, force may also be used to preserve or restore international peace and security in accordance with decisions of the UN Security Council. In the Nicaragua case, the Court rejected US arguments that US support for military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua could be justified on a basis of collective self-defence. These activities included certain activity of the contras in Nicaragua, including specified attacks, secret mine-laying, and a trade embargo imposed by the US against Nicaragua. The Court found the United States was in breach inter-alia of its obligations under customary international law not to intervene in the affairs of another State, not to violate the sovereignty of another State, not to interrupt peaceful maritime commerce and not to use force against another State. The US had also violated bilateral obligations to Nicaragua under a 1956 Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between the United States of America and the Republic of Nicaragua. In the Nicaragua case the US chose not to appear before the Court during proceedings on the merits of the case. The Courts jurisdiction was founded on the United States 1946 declaration of acceptance of the Courts jurisdiction under Article 36(2) of the Statute of the Court, as well as on the bilateral 1956 Treaty. IV. The Judgement The approach taken by the International Court of Justice in the Oil Platforms case was controversial. In respect of Irans claim, the Court decided to address the question of whether the US attacks on Iranian oil platforms fell within Article XX(1)(d), before moving on to considerwhether there had been a breach of Article X(1) as requestedby Iran. In examining the application of Article XX(1)(d) the Courtdecided to focus on whether US recourse to force had been consistentwith international law on self-defence. The Court reasoned that evena provision protecting national security interests could not have beenintended to sanction the use of force inconsistently with relevant internationallaw. The Court proceeded to find that the US had exceededthe boundaries of international law on the use of force, and this disposedof the US claim that it was protected by Article XX(1)(d). In this way, the case centred on the illegality of the usage of force by the US. Recalling the discussion Article 2(4), the Court found that the US had failed to produce enough evidence to prove an Iranian â€Å"armed attack† in the case of the Sea Isle City and the Samuel B. Roberts. The evidence furnished by the US was so inconclusive that the Court did not discount the possibility of the attacks being carried out by Iraq. The Court noted that the Sea Isle City, at the time of the attack, was in Kuwaiti waters and the missile was launched on to it from a distance of over a hundred kilometres. The target of the missile, considering the great distance, could not have been pre-determined and it could have been intended to strike just about any target in Kuwaiti waters. With regard to the impugned mine-laying activities of Iran, the Court was again discontent with the evidence provided. There was no conclusive evidence to prove that the mine struck by the USS Samuel B. Roberts was indeed an Iranian one. The region at that time was in a state of turmoil. Both parties were engaged in mining the conflict zone and merely because the impugned mines bore numbers matching an Iranian series, Iran can not be held guilty. Whilst leaving room for speculation with the issue of the origin of the mines, the Court felt that even if they had actually been of Iranian origin, the US attacks on the Salman and Nasr complexes were unjustified. Recalling the Nicaragua decision, the Court opined that the Iranian attacks, if at all they were Iranian, did not qualify as â€Å"the ‘most grave form of the use of force† and the US can not claim the defence of â€Å"inherent right of self-defence†. The US contended that the oil platforms were being used as military bases by Iran and were being used for the collection and reporting of intelligence on passing vessels. In this regard too, the Court found the American evidence lacking. Even if the accusations against Iran had been true, the Court opined that the attacks made on the platforms could not have been justified as acts of self-defence. The criteria for claiming the defence of ‘self-defence had been established by the Court while acting in its advisory role in the case of Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons; they were â€Å"necessity† and â€Å"proportionality†. The US had failed to make out a sufficient cause on both grounds. The Court noted that the attacks on the platforms were not ‘necessary as a response to the attacks on the American vessels and the US admitted to have attacked them as a â€Å"target of opportunity† and not as pre-determined military targets. While the US attack on the Reshadat and Resalat complexes might have been considered proportionate if it had been found to be necessary, the Court made clear its view that the US attack on the Salman and Nasr platforms could not be regarded as meeting the criterion of proportionality. Although the Samuel B. Roberts had been severely damaged it had not been sunk and there had been no loss of life. The Court concluded that as the US attacks on the Iranian oil platform were not consistent with these requirements of international law on self-defence they could not be found to fall within the protection of Article XX(1)(d) of the Treaty of Amity. Only at this point did the US get some reprieve when the Court turned to the Iranian accusation of the US having breached Article X(1) of the Treaty of Amity by interfering with the freedom of commerce and navigation between the territories of the two parties. The Court found that Iran had failed to establish that the US had breached Article X(1) on the occasion of either of the attacks at issue. In respect of the first US attack, on the Reshadat and Resalat platforms, the Court reached this conclusion primarily on the basis that these platforms had been put out of commission by earlier Iraqi attacks and were not producing oil at the time. Therefore there was no interference with commerce in oil. In respect of the second US attack, on the Salman and Nasr platforms, the Courts reasoning was that the US had already stopped all direct oil imports from Iran under an embargo imposed by Executive Order. Therefore, no interference with commerce in oil had resulted from this second attack. T he Court emphasised that Article X(1) applied only to protect freedom of commerce and navigation between the territories of the two parties, and its protection did not extend to indirect commerce in oil that continued despite the embargo via the territories of third parties. Accordingly, neither of the US attacks on the Iranian Oil Platforms was found to have interfered with freedom of commerce in oil. The US counterclaim against Iran likewise failed because none of the affected vessels was engaged in commerce or navigation between the territories of the two parties. Summing the case, in its dispositif at the end of its judgment, the Court stated that, by fourteen votes to two, it: Finds the actions of the United States of America against Iranian oil platforms on 19 October 1987 and 18 April 1988 cannot be justified as measures necessary to protect the essential security interests of the United States of America under Article XX, paragraph 1(d), of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between the United States of America and Iran, as interpreted in the light of international law on the use of force; finds further that the Court cannot however uphold the submission of the Islamic Republic of Iran that those actions constitute a breach of the obligations of the United States of America under Article X, paragraph 1, of that Treaty, regarding freedom of commerce between the territories of the parties, and that, accordingly, the claim of the Islamic Republic of Iran for reparation also cannot be upheld. V. Comments The Oil Platforms case is of immense significance in present times in light of the growing military activities of the US in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, its detractors criticise the judgment by stating that it laid too little importance on the aspect of trade and commerce and the role it plays in armed conflict. This can not be ignored completely; after all, most battles are fought with a hidden economic interest for atleast one of the parties. The dissenting judges opined that the Court let pass an opportunity for more lengthy engagement with significant questions associated with the effects of armed conflict on trade and commercial activity. But, this cases primary focus was the use of force and in the opinion of the researcher it has done absolute justice in establishing its principle. The conditions of â€Å"necessity† and â€Å"proportionality† have not only been reinforced by the Court but also been developed to address the growing concerns of armed conflicts between states. As the future of Afghanistan and Iraq unfold before us and American interest in Irans affairs rises, the contribution of the judgment in the Oil Platforms case can not be ignored. It shall be the judge in assessing US activities in the region and will assist in developing the yard-stick of the usage of force. In a way future military activities of the US and other NATO allies will be moulded by it, ensuring a more secure world. Bibliography Harris D.J., Cases and Materials on International Law, Sweet Maxwell, London, 6th edition. Goodrich Leland, Hanbro Eward, Simmons Anne, Charter of the UN: Commentary Documents, Oxford University Press, 3rd edition. Sturchler Nikolas, The Threat of force in International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007. General List No 90, I.C.J. Reports 2003 Sturchler Nikolas, The Threat of force in International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007. See the Courts Order dated 12th December, 1996. Judgment of the Court, para 23. Counter-Memorial of the United States, Exhibit 9, referred to in the Separate Opinion of Judge Kooijmans, para 11. See the Courts Judgment of 24 May 1980 in the Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran. Judgment of the Court, para 23ff; Separate Opinion of Judge Kooijmans, para 5ff. Goodrich Leland, Hanbro Eward, Simmons Anne, Charter of the UN: Commentary Documents, Oxford University Press, 3rd edition, p. 49. Supra n.2 Sturchler Nikolas, The Threat of force in International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007. General List no.70, Judgment of the Court of 27th June, 1986. Ibid. Judgment of the Court, para 61. Ibid., para 72. Ibid., para 64. Judgment of the Court, para. 71. Judgment of the Court, para. 64. Judgment of the Court, para. 74. ICJ Reports 1996 (I), p. 245, para.41. Judgment of the Court, para. 76. Judgment of the Court, para. 77. Judgment of the Court, para. 92ff. Judgment of the Court, para. 94ff. Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins para 51.