What should Nepal do to develop foreign trade and to minimize trade deficit?

There are several problems with Nepal’s foreign trade: It is a land-locked country competes with India in high imports and low exports, it produces low quality goods with a high cost of production, capital formation is inefficient and government policy is antiquated.

Land-locked

Geography is not in favor of Nepal. As a land-locked country it has to import/export through India which by itself raises the cost of commercial transactions not only in transportation costs, but on merchandise shifting from one mode of transportation to another, also, border crossing fees and transit time among other issues.

Open Border:

Nepal is bordered by India from three different sides that include an open border policy. As a result, there is a large flow of Indian goods at low prices. At borders, Indian goods are smuggled in and imported foreign goods trafficked into India through unofficial routes. Smugglers are the only beneficiaries of the illegal practices while the country has little to gain from these activities.

Balance of trade in Nepal is negative as it imports more than it exports both in terms of volume and value. Most exports are agricultural products, handcrafts and raw materials, which are all of low commercial value resources which bring little foreign currency to its treasury.

Nepal does not have a well-developed industrial base, therefore, production is of low quality and it cost more to produce which makes its products non-competitive for the international market place.

Low capital formation is another major problem for Nepal’s foreign trade by depriving the country with limited economic activity. It also lacks modern infrastructure for developing an industrial base while it lacks a favorable environment for private and foreign investment. This leaves the country dependent on domestic finances with little capital formation to grow and expand its productive base.

As more countries enter global trade Nepal is being left behind as it is becoming less and less competitive. Many countries are now exporting good quality manufactures at a lower price that Nepal can produce. Additionally, Nepal does not have the skill resources, educational base and modern production technologies to compete with international trade markets.

Modern trade policy is a major standing problem for Nepal’s efficiency in foreign trade. Since the 1990’s Nepal adopted a liberal trade policy of open borders. This permits the flow of foreign goods into Nepal unrestricted and with no effective policy to police its borders by poorly trained human resources. The combination of issues is causing large trade deficits with no trade policy in place because of either political will, corruption, or a combination of both.

What are the solutions?

• Enhance industrial bases
• Promote export-oriented goods
• Give appropriate incentives to exports
• Improve quality of goods
• Adopt proper trade policies
• Enhance training and skills

After 15 years of trying and hard work, Nepal became a member of WTO, the global trade body in 2004. Access to the WTO group of nation was supposed to aid in expanding Nepal’s international trade and its competitiveness abroad. However, after 14 years, Nepal’s exports have undergone a sharp decline, while imports are quickly rising and increasing the trade deficit. In joining WTO, Nepal was expected to diversify its exports and develop new trading partners. However, this hasn’t happened.

The main causes of widening trade deficit with India, China, and other countries are as follows:

• Nepal’s supply side constraints include political instability, low connectivity, a power generation crisis and difficult labor relation. In addition, geographic constraints such as high transit costs, delays at border crossing by red tape, waiting for transportation and lack of temporary storage at crossings has in total a negative effect on trade.

It follows that the recommendation for Nepal is that it must urgently address the factors that are minimizing its opportunities participating in WTO and relieve its widening global gap.

• The country should focus on promoting products and services where it has competitive advantage.
• It needs to expand its human resources base with better training and education for its entire work force.
• The government should facilitate the financial means and encourage entrepreneurs to engage in trade activities.
• Nepal should simplify transportation modalities that have high transit costs, improve its border crossing time, facilitate temporary storage and remove administrative hassles.
• Overall improvements should also be made to the exports of agricultural products that could mean accesses to 400 million consumers in bordering India.
• The government needs to implement policies that can attract foreign investment to develop or enhance basic industries that can promote capital growth and economic diversification.
• The country must invest in primary infrastructure like roads, railways electricity generation and storage depots to improve border crossing time and transport mode switching to minimize delays at the borders. Nepalese industries need to supply a sizable part of domestic demand of household goods in the wake of strong internal demand and the rapid price rise of Chinese goods.

In general, there is a great need for creating a favorable business environment in Nepal. Industrial unrest and rigid labor laws are some of the biggest obstacles to the industrialization of Nepal and its future participation in a fast globalizing economy.

Why does the EU tax cars from the US at 10%, while the US taxes European cars only at 2.5%?

Alfonso Llanes, Master Degree in International Development

Answered just now

Trump wrote on Twitter: “If the E.U. wants to further increase their already massive tariffs and barriers on U.S. companies doing business there, we will simply apply a Tax on their Cars which freely pour into the U.S.,” They make it impossible for our cars (and more) to sell there. Big trade imbalance!”

A burning issue with Trump’s tweets and statements is that they cannot pass a lie detector test for apparently this President has a lot of trouble with the truth. The United States imposes a 2.5% tariff on cars assembled in Europe and a 25% tariff on European-built vans and pickup trucks. Europe imposes a 10-percent tariff on U.S.-built cars which makes it a 13.75% on the average for cars and trucks going across the Atlantic. However, the proposed North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement would eliminate those tariffs but the process is yet to be started with Trump favoring bi-lateral trade agreements so that he can bully the weaker partner into concessions. The European Union on the other hand, prefers entering trade agreements as a block for its bargaining power is better aligned with large economies such as China’s US, Japan and so on.

In a recent statement Trump said: “The European Union has been brutal to us,” at a Florida fundraiser. “They’ve banded together in order to beat the United States in trade.” In response to Trump harsh criticism European Commissioner in a speech Friday night at Harvard University, Margrethe Vestager said the EU will respond to the tariffs “to defend European industry, and the world trading system,” according to a copy of her remarks. She called the Trump action “one-sided protectionist measures, which hurt, not just jobs, but the whole system of rules that makes our global economy work.”

German automakers argue that Volkswagen AG, Daimler AG and BMW AG build vehicles at plants in the United States. BMW employs more than 9,000 workers in South Carolina and is one of the state’s largest employers making Trump’s statements sound hollow. Moreover, the United States accounts for about 15% of worldwide Mercedes-Benz and BMW brand sales, while it accounts for 5% of VW brand sales and 12% of Audi sales. In contrast, the United States had a $22.3 billion automotive vehicle and parts trade deficit with Germany in 2017 and a $7 billion deficit with the United Kingdom, according to U.S. government data. But Germany’s automotive trade association said “the United States would be shooting itself in the foot by imposing tariffs or other trade barriers.”

Trump’s threat comes amid mounting transatlantic tension on trade as European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told German television that “We will put tariffs on Harley-Davidson (motorcycles), on bourbon and on blue jeans - Levis.” Canada and Mexico also said they will retaliate for any tariffs on steel and aluminum.

“Germany's carmakers responded by pointing out that German and European carmakers are major investors in the U.S. In 2017, German automakers alone were invested in 265 plants across the country and employed approximately 110,000 American workers.” According to Germany's Association of the Automotive Industry, Germans produced 854,000 vehicles in the U.S. in 2016, a four-fold increase in about seven years. More than 60% of those were exported to foreign markets. There are, however, at least 10 major European car makers that sell in the U.S. but do not produce there — these reportedly include the U.K.'s Land Rover and Jaguar as well as Audi and Porsche. Sweden's Volvo manufactured 6% of its cars in the U.S. in 2016.”

President Obama’s past announcement of the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is hugely important to the car industry and to car enthusiasts that Trump now is trying to undermine. The Partnership’s objectives include eliminating tariffs on imported cars, as well as finally implement parallel standards to meet U.S. and European automotive safety and environmental requirements. If adopted, the agreement could result in increased US manufacturing by European brands and American dealers stocking a broader product for consumers to choose from. Individual European countries don’t charge import duties, but the European Union charges a flat rate of 10 percent on imported automobiles. In simple terms, tariffs are taxes. They’re paid to governments by the businesses that import and export products are factored into the prices consumers pay. In contrast, if the proposed TTIP is in place, all tariffs on cars and about a billion other products that are exchanged across the Atlantic would almost definitely disappear. Whether ignorance, stupidity or both the Trump administration is exceeding disruption of sources and methods that the US has strongly articulated for over 50 years to improve trade and commerce among nations in general.

What is balance of power?

The equilibrium that must be maintain to prevent armed conflict among countries or alliances and to prevent any one country from becoming stronger than others and gain the ability to enforce its will on other nations is defined as Balance of Power. A main aspect of “real politik” where self-preservation is the primary guiding principle which leads to forging alliances with nations that shared ideologies. During the Cold War years, NATO and the Warsaw Pact operated with a balance of power principle, aware that "unbalancing" actions would trigger greater conflicts or even nuclear war.

The theory of “balance of power” predicts that a country will take advantage of its strength and attack weaker neighbors, thus providing an incentive for those threatened to unite in a defensive alliance such as NATO. The theory maintains that the status quo would be more stable as bellicosity would appear unattractive and would be deterred if there was equilibrium of power between the rival coalitions of nations. Other schools of international relations, such as the constructivists, are critical of the balance of power theory, disputing the core assumption realists make regarding the international order.

David Hume explained in his Essay on the Balance of Power, that the concept is as old as history, whereas it was used by Greeks such as Thucydides who was both a political theorists and a practical statesmen.

The concept was reenacted during the Renaissance among the Italian city-states in the 15th century. “Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, and Lorenzo de' Medici, ruler of Florence, were the first rulers actively to pursue such a policy, with the Italic League, though historians have generally attributed the innovation to the Medici rulers of Florence.”

Universalist doctrine, which was the central direction of European international relations before the Peace of Westphalia, gave way to the doctrine of the balance of power. This idea of balance-of-power principle, once formulated as a theory it became a subject-maxim of political science. Honore Daumier a famous French cartoonist represented in 1866, the balance of power as men in different military uniforms balancing the earth with bayonets.

Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said in 1946 that “If the Western Democracies do not stand together then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us all.” He follows with the population of the English-speaking Commonwealths be added to that of the United States with all that such co-operation implies in the air, on the sea, all over the globe and in science and in industry, and in moral force, there will be no quivering, precarious balance of power to offer its temptation to ambition or adventure. On the contrary, there will be an overwhelming assurance of security.”

Today’s international system is built not around a balance of power but around American hegemony with a work in progress theory of “Overwhelming Power” This new theoretical interpretation supersedes the old one and becomes the new 'paradigm' for successive inquiry into the subject.

Robert Pape, T. S. Paul, and Stephen Walt argue that traditional power balancing is not occurring, but instead they say the US is engaging in 'soft balancing where the net effect is that independent states are free to join or to refrain from joining alliances or align with others as each seeks to maximize its security and to advance its national interest.

The necessary preponderance of power is unlikely to emerge from any other international combination aside from the permanent alliance of the United States in NATO, with the addition of such Latin American states and such European democracies that might wish to join.

The US strategy throughout the Cold War was a strategy of preponderance or overwhelming force. This post-Cold War strategy holds that "only a preponderance of US power ensures peace.” This theory states that US capabilities are sufficient to intimidate all potential challengers and to comfort all coalition partners.

“Power Preponderance is going to replace balance-of-power neo-realism and become the dominant brand of American “Real Politik” for the foreseeable future.

Russian President Vladimir Putin complained: “Instead of establishing a new balance of power the United States has taken steps that throws the international system into a sharp and deep imbalance.”

Of course, such statement coming from a thug and dictator like Putin is laughable considering his current criminal behavior in the Ukraine and Syria.

What was John Rawls' view on universal basic income?

The view of capitalism, socialism and a the social welfare state was in the eyes of Van Parijs an unconditional basic income in his theory of “Real Freedom for All” second by the theory advanced by John Rawls of “Justice as Fairness”.

These two theories conclude that it is not only possible to justify an unconditional basic income of real “freedom for all,” but that it is also a justifiable unconditional basic income in Rawls’ “justice as fairness”.

Obama once proclaimed that it was urgent to examine our social compact, the same way this was revised in the 19th century. “Issues like a 40-hour working week, a minimum wage, or the abolishing of child labor seemed, at first sight, unrealistic and impossible to carry out in practice but have now become reality. The concept of an unconditional basic income might be a good solution to deal with some of the future changes in society (Obama, 2016).”

Switzerland and Finland already had a nationwide binding referendum on this topic. The Finnish government will start a national experiment in 2017, with up to 100,000 participants. Other countries like The Netherlands, Canada and France are performing pilot schemes in order to obtain more information.

This initial thrust follows Belgian philosopher Philippe Van Parijs, as the proponent and defender of an unconditional basic income.

His theory of ‘Real Freedom for All’ is based on a normative perspective of social justice. His theory however, lacks consensus for analysis and a more influential theory of justice and perhaps the most accepted to date is that of John Rawls as justice of fair-mindedness.

In a market-economy-model the exchange of supply and demand is established without hindering rules, coercion or government intervention. In this model the forces of supply and demand set prices for goods and services, at a point of equilibrium without any intervention. This free market system differentiates itself from a regulated market where other forces like government regulators play a role.

With this precedent supporters of capitalism will contend that a free market system generates efficiency and prosperity. One of the features of a free market is that everyone acts out of self-interest, and this should not be seen as an iniquity. The idea in the words of Adam Smith is that if everyone acts out of self-interest, which ultimately delivers the highest greatest collective prosperity (1776). Basically, the idea is sound after discounting corruption and undue influence on politics from the marketeers who rip benefits ahead of everyone else as our favored market economies behave today.

Other economist like Milton Freidman has argued that there is a link between economic growth and economic freedom. A similar argument made by Friedrich Hayek states that coercive redistribution by the state beyond the meeting of common basic needs involves an unjustifiable interference with individual liberty. This arguments fall short of considering the weight of subjective markets in the medium of “real politik.”

On the other hand the classic legitimacy of socialism refers to the ideals of equality and social justice because the means of production should be distributed justly and equally. In this model the government has the authority over distribution of the means of production. Socialist theories point out the importance of state intervention to solve social and economic problems which is opposite to the liberal view against such state interventions. However, the biggest disadvantage of a socialist system is it’sinefficient due to central planning and corruption in fewer hands promoting oligarchs in charge of the economy. Another issue is that socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature as it fails to emphasize economic incentives. Entrepreneurship or making profit is not possible and it fails to reward individual performance, talent and responsibilities. As a result, reduces motivation and productivity of a society which ultimately decrease overall welfare.

The social democratic welfare state has been a political alternative to other social compacts and it is being practiced in similar forms in the United States and Europe.

Danish sociologist, Esping Andersen, distinguishes three types of welfare state models that are all organized slightly different. It is not of great importance to look at the differences, but to summarize the features and variations of social democratic welfare states.

“The welfare state is often defined as a mixed economy (capitalism mixed with socialist features). Broadly speaking, this system is on the one hand capitalistic and has a free market in which most of the means of production are privately owned. On the other hand, the government ensures that inequality decreases through taxation and redistribution of the means of production. There are distributive institutions such as social payments, social security and provision of public goods, such as cheap and universal education, which ensure equality of opportunity and avoid the most excessive forms of poverty.”

Thomas Paine referred ‘agrarian justice’ in a 1797 pamphlet. In this paper he suggested that whoever owned land and resources should pay estate tax to the rest of the society, since these assets belong to everybody and in theory, everybody own these resources, therefore everyone had the right to have a share of the profit. “Hence, everyone should get a benefit in compensation and recognition of the fact that we all own the earth.”

In modern times there are examples that support this argument for instance in the state of Alaska. The state has a system with the concept of an unconditional basic income. The government of Alaska pays a dividend to every resident in Alaska since 1982. The motivation for this dividend is that oil revenues generated by the state shouldn’t exclusively benefit the former inhabitants but it should also benefit future inhabitants of Alaska. This idea be it as it may strongly relates to the notion of Thomas Paine who thought that revenues from natural resources should benefit everybody.

“Belgian researchers Axelle De Brandt, Pierre Catelijn and Ismaël Daoud have designed a calculation model and came to the mathematical conclusion that it is financially possible (Devillé, 2015). Introducing an unconditional basic income of €1500 a month will cost the government of Belgium roughly 187 billion a year. It is possible to save 70 billion on retirement benefits, child support and unemployment allowance. Furthermore, making public administration more efficient can save 25 billion. Increasing tax on capital could finance the remaining 92 billion, which is still a huge number. We have to be careful with such conclusions, since it is almost impossible to precisely predict the financial implications of implementing such major institutional changes.”

Rawls states that equality of opportunity does not require that public offices and positions be open to everyone but that everyone should have an equal opportunity of getting them. That is exactly what Van Parijs means with real freedom. The problem once again is not about equal opportunity but undue influence on the rule makers.

Rawls argues against three institutional structures: laissez-faire capitalism, command economy socialism and welfare state capitalism. Laissez-fair capitalism tends to produce nearly unlimited inequalities in outcome and opportunity which is not consistent the principles of justice. This system is consistent with the idea advanced by the “golden rule—whoever has the gold makes the rules.”

Rawls rejects command economies because in this system the state dictates where a person should live or work and as a result violates his first principle of justice. The system also reduces the number of people making decisions for all.

Finally, Rawls also rejects a welfare state capitalism because it fails to guarantee the value of political liberties and it cannot do achieve equality of opportunity.

Rawls favors a society he calls ‘property-owning democracy, however, he never provided a detailed structure of a fully functioning property-owning democracy or how a society can become one. Nevertheless, an inference can be made that his model would have institutional features similar to those proposed by Paine. In a paraphrase of Paine’s ideas--the land and its resources belongs to the public and “hence, everyone should get a benefit in compensation and recognition of the fact that we all own the earth.”

What is the broadest concept of technology for the whole education system?

What is Technological Literacy?

Research indicates that most people have a limited conception of technology. A Gallup poll conducted in 2004 asked 800 adults in the United States to name the first thing that came to mind when they heard the word technology. The answers were 60% said computers and 5% percent said electronics according to an International technology education association (ITEA) report.

Overall technology literacy is about human abilities to change the world: by cutting, shaping, or assembling together materials; to transport materials or people from one place to another; to reach the planets and explore our universe.

One way to conceptualize technology is to think of human beings as living in three dimensional surfaces where the ground water and air have their own environments interacting with each other to balance the wellbeing of the planet and its occupants. Technology is then a design that humans place on the natural world to accommodate and to satisfy their needs and wants.

In order to study technology, it is necessary to develop a catalog that classifies products and systems of technology into parts that can be analyzed individually. Cataloging is a continuing process parallel to the technological innovation that takes place. As an example, years past, information technology did not exist in our catalog of classes indicating that as new technologies are developed so are the classifications to name and catalog them. As students of science well know breaking things into smaller parts makes it easier to study and understand its functions like cells in the human body, atoms in particles and planets in outer space.

The committee Standards for Technological Literacy recognizes the following nomenclatures:

• Medical Technologies
• “Technologies associated with diagnosing, treating, and preventing disease and other damage to the body or mind.”
• Agriculture and Related Biotechnologies
• “Technologies that relate to raising crops and animals for food, feed, fiber, fuel, or other purposes.”
• Energy and Power Technologies
• “Technologies related to harnessing energy resources and converting energy to power.”
• Information and Communication Technologies
• “Technologies, including educational technologies, developed for gathering, manipulating, classifying, storing, and retrieving information.”
• Transportation Technologies
• “Technological processes and systems by which people or goods are moved from one place to another.”
• Manufacturing Technologies
• “Technological processes and systems that convert materials into finished products.”
• Construction Technologies
• “Technological processes and systems associated with the construction of buildings, roads, levees, and other structures.”

The International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA), states in its introductory remarks a background for technological development:

Historical background

“Human beings have been adapting their environment to better suit their needs and wants since before recorded history. There have always been people who designed and built tools or other devices to solve problems or improve lives. As civilizations developed, people began reshaping their environment with farms, villages, ships, roads, and eventually great cities. With each advance came new challenges that required more complex and creative solutions. One early example of an activity that we now call engineering was the construction and improvement of the aqueduct system that transported water in and around Rome starting in the fourth century BC. A project of that scope today would be largely the responsibility of engineers. The profession we know as engineering today emerged during the 1500’s when specialists began using mathematics to design military fortifications. These special military architects would generally let craftsmen do the actual construction, thus becoming the first true engineers in the modern sense of the word. It was during the late 1800’s when inventors began identifying with the engineering process and the engineering profession began to divide into special disciplines, such as civil, mechanical, and electrical engineering. Up until the Civil War, United States engineers were trained at military academies or through industry apprenticeship programs. Since the 1860’s more emphasis has been place on formal training that includes significant courses in mathematics and science. For example, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology opened in 1865 with 15 students.”

In the U.S., science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) degree production is not keeping pace with the demand for STEM talent. Women, ethnic minorities, and persons with disabilities represent the largest untapped STEM talent pool. STEM outlook for the coming generations of students is to support continuous improvement and accountability and the teaching and learning needed for the 21st century skills that students need to thrive in the global economy.

In a webinar conducted in January 10, 2018 Sharon Bowers, Senior STEM Education Specialist at the National Institute of Aerospace (NIA) shared NASA and NIA engineering and design challenges and resources during this session. Ms., Sharon was introduced as the program manager for NASA in World OPTIMUS PRIME Spinoff Promotion and Research Challenge and she has designed and teaches graduate courses for McDaniel College that lead to a certificate in STEM instructional leadership.

https://www.linkengineering.org/...

PRE-K

PRIMARY (K-2)

UPPER ELEMENTARY (3-5)

MIDDLE SCHOOL (6-8)

HIGH SCHOOL (9-12)

ALGEBRA

ARITHMETIC

ART

CALCULUS

CHEMISTRY

EARTH & SPACE SCIENCES

ENGINEERING

GEOMETRY

LANGUAGE ARTS

LIFE SCIENCES

PHYSICS/PHYSICAL SCIENCES

ARTS

SOCIAL STUDIES/HISTORY

TRIGONOMETRY

Here is a list of achievements in the 20th century on technology and engineering that has shaped our world. Published by the International Technology Education Association (ITEA).

1. Electrification

2. Automobile

3. Airplane

4. Water Supply and Distribution

5. Electronics

6. Radio and Television

7. Agricultural Mechanization

8. Computers

9. Telephone

10. Air Conditioning and Refrigeration

11. Highways

12. Spacecraft

13. Internet

14. Imaging

15. Household Appliances

16. Health Technologies

17. Petroleum and Petrochemical Technologies

18. Laser and Fiber Optics

19. Nuclear Technologies

20. High-performance Materials

Will US aluminum tariffs hurt Boeing exports?

Trump meets steel, aluminum leaders as he considers stiff tariffs on imports

Alfonso Llanes, Master Degree in International Development

Answered just now

The losers in this action by Trump will be the industries that depend on steel and aluminum which will face higher prices. That means some of the nation’s largest industries: automobile, aircraft, heavy machinery and heavy equipment manufacturing industries. These manufacturers that use steel and aluminum for their products are significantly larger than are steel and aluminum producers.

Statistically, steel imports are only about one-third of what US industry needs and so, the tariff would not apply to domestic steel production. Aluminum is a different matter for only 10 percent is produced domestically.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement states that countries are free to take actions they consider critical to their security interests. However, WTO members are very cautious about using this provision because of the dire consequences to trade and the implications it can provoke. It follows that China, India, Brazil and other countries are just as capable of making such fake claims based on similar national security rationales for restricting imports.

The provision of law that Trump is relying on for the imposition of this new tariffs is “Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 which allows imports to be blocked on national security grounds.”

Previous administrations had interpreted the provision narrowly, requiring evidence that the military needs or strategic industries could not be supplied by U.S. production. The US Commerce Department under Trump is disregarding a half century of precedent by finding that steel imports coming from the most-trusted U.S. allies, such as Canada and the EU need be taxed.

The risk assessment of Trump’s action is hard to quantify for the affected countries can easily retaliate by imposing tariffs on American goods. Moreover, tariffs could be imposed on targeted goods in order to cause economic and political sting. American exporters of all economic sectors should be weary of steps that might follow whether they are exporters of agricultural products or aerospace vehicles for once wars is started it is impossible to predict how it will end as history indicates from the 1930′s world economy experience.

The invocation of national security concerns by Trump could be used as a precedent in which other nations might be willing to use national security as grounds for tariffs, and thus, neutralizing the ability of the World Trade Organization to arbitrate disputes. The real risk is that an entire system of global trade which the United States was point in building after WWII might be under peril.

“In 2002 President George W. Bush imposed tariffs on steel imports, only to reverse them in 2003 after the WTO ruled they were illegal. The WTO ruling left the U.S. vulnerable to $2 billion in sanctions on U.S. exports.”

“It was once said that Britain lost its empire in a fit of absent-mindedness; the United States, now appears, it could lose its own in a fit of Donald Trump’s impulsiveness.”

Experienced generals well know that starting a war is not the issue but how it ends and at what cost in treasure and lives turns out to be. These are the questions that need be analyzed and evaluated before conflict actually starts. Whether a hot war or a trade war neither case is as easy as Trump claims it to be for our historical record indicates that wars in general have been started by either madness or stupidity.

What are the consequences of not enforcing a trade border?

This is a hot burning issue in the UK as the government disentangles itself from the European Union in a process that is prove to be more complex than voters expected. This is happening while the legitimacy of the vote to exit the EU hangs of the larger issue of Russia’s intervention of the popular vote and in Putin’s effort to dismantle western democracies and weaken countries in general.

“Tony Blair has said the EU is duty bound to block Theresa May’s negotiating goals as he made an impassioned call for new leadership to rescue the UK and Europe from economic disaster and the needless sacrifice of peace in Northern Ireland “on the altar of Brexit”.

Theresa May's recent speech on Brexit side steps the friction over the Irish border. Others like former PM John Major are questioning the wisdom of Brexit over the Good Friday agreement which has kept the peace in Northern Ireland since 1998.

Views vary about the chances of the EU agreeing to the “UK’s cherry-picking demands somewhere between nil and zilch”. A common regulatory area as proposed between the EU and Northern Ireland - would "threaten the constitutional integrity of the UK" by creating a border down the Irish Sea as stated by PM May to UK’s Parliament. The volatile allegation is that the EU is trying to "annex" Northern Ireland raising the stakes for negotiation.

The “Irish Question” has now being revisited and reopened. Prime Minister, Theresa May, claims that the European Commission proposal of a common regulatory area between the EU and Northern Ireland threaten the constitutional integrity of the UK. Former PM John Major challenged the argument that Brexit would have little impact on the UK, arguing instead that while the British people would "get through it", it was likely to leave the country "weaker and less prosperous" and a "diminished" force on the world stage.

However, Brexit troubles don’t stop just there as the only issue for the UK government which is expected to make an immediate legal challenge at the Supreme Court if the Scottish parliament votes for its own emergency powers over Brexit. The British government must finalize a deal with Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales before the summer in order to pass a Brexit Bill in the national parliament before risks to national unity surface.

Welsh, Cardiff officials say British Prime Minister Theresa May's current plan is to take control of laws and policies and reverse the process of devolved governments adding that such action is “simply not acceptable.”

On the north side of the border First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, stated that she still has "a mandate" to hold a second independence referendum if the government in London tries to impose its will on Scotland.

In the meantime, the international trading community also highlights the negative impact of inefficient border procedures on governments, businesses the consumer and finally the economy as a whole. Lack of enforcement at a border weakens a government’s ability to stop smuggling, fraud and national security problems, draining public funds, while businesses must pay a premium for unpredictable goods delivery. Moreover, expensive customs compliance will at the of the day reflect higher prices for the consumer. All what is gained by trade facilitation, as well as the costs and challenges invested in it for further multilateral trade liberalization collapses as inefficient border procedures higher cost to governments and lost revenue all pile up.

For instance, determining the origin of products or collecting trade statistics becomes a challenge for officials. Also, inefficient border procedures lead to wasteful export competitiveness, higher costs and make the country involved less attractive for investors.