Australia may be a Nuclear target - Kevin Rudd

1. What title does Kevin Rudd have in the Australian Government? Explain what this role entails.
Kevin Rudd is the Foreign Affairs minister for the Australian government. this involves interacting with various countries around the world and keeping an eye on things such as this imminent threat to Australia in the form of nuclear weapons.

2. What is Kevin Rudd's concern?

Kevin Rudd's concern is that North Korea's nuclear missiles and weapon programs are a direct threat to Australia. he believes that North Korea are "detached from reality" and are chasing after their own goals and endeavours and only doing what will benefit them. an example is their lust to continue with their uranium powered weapons program.

3. What forum was he at to express his concerns?

Kevin Rudd was at the ASEAN region forum ministers "meeting" in Nusa Dua, Bali. the other foreign ministers of the organisation were also present.

4. What actions have North Korea performed recently which have Rudd alarmed and the region lacking stability?

North Korea have recently torpedoed a South Korean naval frigate and also shelled civilians' homes across the border which is an act of unnecessary violence that is worrying for the rest of the world. they have also defied two UN security council resolutions by pursuing an enriched uranium weapons program

5. What is a 'direct threat' to Australia according to Rudd?

a direct threat to Australia according to our foreign affairs minister Kevin Rudd is the long range North Korean missile program. "Its a serious matter; it’s not out there on the margins of our national security concerns; it’s real and I reflected those concerns to the North Koreans today".

6. What do you think that Rudd is trying to accomplish diplomatically by calling out his North Korean counterpart publicly? How does this relate to Australia's relationship and role in the region? 

i think that Rudd is trying to raise the awareness of this threat. he's trying to bring it out and put it in the spotlight so other countries who are at risk can also see the dangers North Korea pose. this also puts Kevin Rudd in the spotlight and shows that he is worried not only for his countries sake but for our allies in the region. it shows that Australia is a wary country and isn't going to let a risk like this simply drift away.

7. How does this relate to Australia's relationship to major allies?

this instance shows to Australia's major allies that we are investigating this matter, our allies know we are being cautious as we should be which is a good thing. it also makes them more wary of the situation and the possible threat to their country as well. Australia is being seen as the country that is questioning North Korea's weapons program which personally i think other nations have been thinking about as well. Kevin Rudd has simply put it out there to debate about.

Foreign Aid Review

1. make dot points on the article:

• in the past 5 years our overseas aid budget has doubled and in the next 5 years it will double again
• by 2015 we'll be spending 8 billion dollars a year helping people overseas
• the report Kevin Rudd undertook along with a panel of experts last year about our foreign aid policy came back recently. neither the panel's report or the governments response answers the bigger question about the purpose of our aid program and why it's growing so fast
• 7 percent of our aid program is in emergency relief
• our aid program is aimed to help people who live on less than $1.25 a day
• In 1981, 54 per cent of the world's people lived in extreme poverty. By 2005 this had fallen to 25 per cent. In 2015 it will be less than 15 per cent, according to the World Bank
• poverty is not being beaten by aid but by ecenomic growth
• economic growth requires a confluence of factors such as social, political and technological, to start whole populations moving from semi-subsistence farming to paid work
• the alchemic growth depends on these factors
• Australia's aid program to PNG has and still is one of the biggest and most innovative programs in the world. even still, PNG has not made any sort of progress since it's independence in 1975
• Australia view some countries such as Indonesia as poor countries when really they are richer than us. Measured in purchasing power parity terms, which avoids exchange rate distortions and gives the truest index of relative economic weight, Indonesia's GDP is now significantly larger than ours

2. paragraph to summarise what the author is saying in my point of view:

i think that the author is trying to say to the reader that Australia is using an obsurd amount of money to support countries in need such as Indonesia and PNG when really some of them (Indonesia) don't really need any help as they are richer that us when it comes to reality. the author is giving us the facts about Australia's economic situation in terms of Aid and ecenomic growth and how they interrelate with each other. despite this evidence that contradicts the intensions of the government in providing aid for other countries, i think that what we are doing as a country is good for the economy and in a way shows to the world that we are making the effort to help people we believe are in need. i think we should keep doing what we are doing for the meantime untill we have more relevent information on the topic at hand that can be used for the benefit of the country and the country that is being cared for.

3. Why do you think Australia is giving more Aid?

i think australia is giving moe aid because it feels like it's not giving enough to make a difference. a perfect example is our programs in PNG which is one of the most recognised in the world and yet since it started the country has barely changed in terms of ecenomic growth and living standards. the solution to this problem hasn't been found yet, personally i dont belive the answer lies in money as that has already proved itself to be useless.

    What would be the benefits of such a policy?

this policy is not only going to be something that helps people who are in great need but it makes us as a country look good in the eyes of other countries such as the USA and the united kingdom. people from countries around the world would admire our generosity and think of us in a good way if they previously had not. also the countries we are helping would be forever greatful for what Australia has done.

    What would be the negatives?

less money for Australia is one of the main  negatives of this policy. things like infrastructure, our own instinces of unemployment and homlessness and the like, need to be supported as well and many would argue that they deserve to be treated before people overseas. personally i believe that Australians do take a lot of the things we have access to for granted. people overseas are a lot worse off then we are and i still think this policy should go ahead as it may provide peole in a more desperate situation with the help they need to survive.