We Real Cool, Poetry Explanation

STUDENT NAME PROFESSOR CLASS DATE We Real Cool: Poetry Explication â€Å"We Real Cool† is a poem written by Gwendolyn Brooks in 1959, and published in her book The Bean Eaters (We Real Cool, pg 1). A simple and light poem, â€Å"We Real Cool† is vague enough to allow readers to visualize their own characters and setting, but specific enough to keep a consistent rebellious image. Brook’s attitude toward the characters is undecided, as the tone is neither tragic nor victorious, but more so just balanced and neutral. â€Å"We Real Cool† is written from the perspective of the involved fictional characters.It is as if the reader is in the presence of these characters as they introduce themselves. They speak with confidence and defiance, describing their actions and self-ideals in a rhythmic stanza form. We are not presented with any specific character ethnicities or backgrounds, nor year or time, but we are provided a fictional setting of a place called The Gol den Shovel. Containing only ten sentences, â€Å"We Real Cool† begins with the line, The Pool Players. With this line, we are able to imagine the type of characters we will be following.The assumptions are, there will be alcohol and cigarettes involved, as those are typical stereotypes when thinking about pool halls. The second line within the same stanza is, Seven at The Golden Shovel. From this line we are able to assume or imagine that there are a total of seven characters involved in the scene. With just these two simple lines composed of simple words, imagery is created in order to set the stage for the next stanzas. Moving into the body of â€Å"We Real Cool†, Brooks begins each sentence with the word, We, making it a point that the narrator comprises of multiple people, specifically the seven pool players.The first line to begin the second stanza is, We real cool. This not only states the title of the poem, but also sets the intellectual level of the seven pool players. Grammatically correct, but more along the lines of slang, the last word of this sentence begins the rhyme scheme that will follow. The second half of this stanza is, We left school. This is an obvious statement of action, but leaves the reader questioning whether they left a not-yet-dismissed school day or a school day that had come to an end. As a third option, the reader might also assume they left school for good.The couplets continue in the next stanza with, We lurk late. With this line we can assume the verb lurk is meant to represent a much less gracious movement, an almost monstrous, but comical way of walking. In the poem’s consistent three word lines, the word late is included to end the sentence. This gives the reader an idea of when the poem can possibly take place within the time of day. Although it may not be a literal statement regarding the time of day, as it can also translate to a rebellious activity the characters wish to point out.The second senten ce within this stanza is, We strike straight. This line can also have multiple meanings depending on the usage and perspective of the words strike and straight. Two possible literal translations can be deal with fighting, as strike means hit or punch, while another meaning of strike is how one lights a cigarette. The fourth stanza begins with, We sing sin, a line that can also have multiple meanings. If taken from a paradox angle, the gentleness and innocence of singing contradicts with the literal meaning of sin.This method of verbal irony is what keeps the tone consistently light throughout the poem, and when strategically placed near the middle of the poem allows for a smooth transition from the previous darker stanza. Another translation of We sing sin can also be that the group likes to listen to contemporary music, possibly singing along. In certain days of past, and even currently, music is often labeled as the â€Å"Devil’s Music† by those who choose to be prud e, or overly religious. Ending this stanza is, We thin gin, an assumed reference to alcohol, something not out of the ordinary for a group of ragtag young’ins in this poem.Wrapping up the poem, the last stanza begins with, We Jazz June. A line like this, as did the previous lines, can have multiple meanings, or possible connotation to slang of the days the poem was written. Quite possibly, the literal translation can be that this poem takes place in the summer season of June, with the Jazz portion representing the music genre, Jazz. Jazz June could also be placed intentionally at this part of the poem in order to establish the name of the group of seven, the Jazz June.An additional meaning could be that the terms Jazz June has something to do with slang of those days. The last line of this stanza and poem is, We die soon, translating to a living a fast life on edge. With a rebellious life, this can lead to a shortened life span, as one is susceptible the dangers of life when staying out late, smoking cigarettes, and drinking alcohol. On a positive side, it can also mean, life is too short, and regardless, we will all die soon, so enjoy and be free. â€Å"We Real Cool† is a combination narrative and lyric poem that contains a very simple couplet, rhyming scheme.The simplicity and depth of the poem lasts the test of time as it very much can be relatable to this day and age of Hip Hop. The ambiguity of character background, location and time allows the reader to use their imagination and apply their perspective to the translation. I thoroughly enjoyed Gwendolyn Brooks’ â€Å"We Real Cool† and feel its relevance to contemporary poetry is vibrant and refreshing, making it a timeless piece of literature. Works Cited â€Å"We Real Cool† Wikipedia. 2012. . [Web site with no author. 21 May. 2012 is copyright date and 9 Nov. 2012 is access date. ]

Role of Biology in Life

Role of Biology in Life Role of biology in lifeOur blue planet is the one where life exists. So when we mention "bio" we talk about life on earth. Hence we can say that biology is the study of living organisms. The fact that it is the study of animals and plants makes sense that it would affect a person's daily life. In fact, everything about biology affects our daily life. Biology is a "natural science of organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution" (Science Reference Biology, n.d.), and all body processes from eating, digesting, respiration, nervous system. Without the knowledge of biology we cannot understand the world around us. It explains how a simple life right from fungi to a huge animal comes from and what it needs to survive.The first thing that probably crosses the people's minds is the evolution of the species those exist on the earth that operates through the survival of the fittest or oxygen is necessary for life or some other similar study taught in biology class.English: Phylogeni of living organism. ÄÅ'esky: Fyl...This study is useful in summarizing statements about one of the most characteristic features of living organization: it has a very high degree of order. But "instead of calling up associations with biology in the classroom, we look around and try to describe life as we actually see it" . If one looks around, one would see that it is not just a predictable distribution of a particular element but rather an assortment of living things - an assortment that differs in each direction one looks. Hence it is true of any biological system: a cell, an organism, a group of organisms, in fact the whole universe is comprised of elements different from each other. Therefore, we can say that from the very small algae...

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites

The Kostenki Archaeological Sites Kostenki refers to a complex of open-air archaeological sites located in the Pokrovsky Valley of Russia, on the west bank of the Don River, about 400 kilometers (250 miles) south of Moscow and 40 km (25 mi) south of the city of Voronezh, Russia. Together, they contain important evidence concerning the timing and complexity of the various waves of anatomically modern humans as they left Africa some 100,000 or more years ago The main site (Kostenki 14, see page 2) is located near the mouth of a small steep ravine; the upper reaches of this ravine contain evidence of a handful of other Upper Paleolithic occupations. The Kostenki sites lie deeply buried (between 10-20 meters [30-60 feet]) beneath the modern surface. The sites were buried by alluvium which was deposited by the Don River and its tributaries beginning at least 50,000 years ago. Terrace Stratigraphy The occupations at Kostenki include several Late Early Upper Paleolithic levels, dated between 42,000 to 30,000 calibrated years ago (cal BP). Smack dab in the middle of those levels is a layer of volcanic ash, associated with the volcanic eruptions of the Phlegrean Fields of Italy (aka Campanian Ignimbrite or CI Tephra), which erupted about 39,300 cal BP. The stratigraphic sequence at the Kostenki sites are broadly described as containing six main units: Modern levels at the top: black, highly humic soil with abundant bioturbation, churning by living animals, in this case mainly burrowing by rodents.Cover Loam: loess-like deposit with several stacked occupations dated to the Eastern Gravettian (such as Kostenki 1 at 29,000 cal BP; and Epi-Gravettian (Kostenki 11, 14,000-19,000 cal BP)Upper Humic Complex/Bed (UHB): yellowish chalky loam with several stacked occupations, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local GorodsovianWhitish Loam: homogenous loam with some sub-horizontal lamination and in the lower part in situ or reworked volcanic ash (CI Tephra, independently dated 39,300 years agoLower Humic Complex/Bed (LHB): stratified loamy deposits with several stacked horizons, early and mid-Upper Paleolithic, including Initial Upper Paleolithic, Aurignacian, Gravettian and local Gorodsovian (similar to UHB)Chalky Loam: upper alluvium stratified with coarse deposits Controversy: Late Early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki In 2007, the excavators at Kostenki (Anikovich et al.) reported that they had identified occupation levels within and below the ash level. They found the remnants of the Early Upper Paleolithic culture called the Aurignacian Dufour, numerous small bladelets quite similar to lithic tools found in similarly dated sites in western Europe. Prior to Kostenki, the Aurignacian sequence was considered the oldest component associated with modern humans at archaeological sites in Europe, underlain by Mousterian-like deposits representing Neanderthals. At Kostenki, a sophisticated tool kit of prismatic blades, burins, bone antler, and ivory artifacts, and small perforated shell ornaments lies below the CI Tephra and Aurignacian Dufour assemblage: these were identified as an earlier presence of modern humans in Eurasia than previously recognized. The discovery of modern human cultural material below the tephra was quite controversial at the time it was reported, and a debate about the context and date of the tephra arose. That debate was a complex one, best addressed elsewhere. Read more about the Pre-Aurignacian deposits at Kostenki Comments from John Hoffecker concerning initial criticism of the age of the site Since 2007, additional sites such as Byzovaya and Mamontovaya Kurya have lent additional support to the presence of early modern human occupations of the eastern Plains of Russia. Kostenki 14, also known as Markina Gora, is the main site at Kostenki, and it has been found to contain genetic evidence concerning the migration of early modern humans from Africa into Eurasia. Markina Gora is located on the flank of a ravine cut into one of the river terraces. The site covers hundred of meters of sediment within seven cultural levels. Cultural Layer (CL) I, in the Cover Loam, 26,500-27,600 cal BP, Kostenki-Avdeevo cultureCL II, within the Upper Humic Bed (UHB), 31,500-33,600 cal BP, Gorodsovian, mid Upper Paleolithic mammoth bone industryCL III, UHB, 33,200-35,300 cal BP, blade-based and bone industry, Gorodsovian, Mid Upper PaleolithicLVA (layer in volcanic ash, 39,300 cal BP), small assemblage, unipolar blades and Dufour bladelets, AurignacianCL IV in the Lower Humic Bed (LHB), older than the tephra, undiagnostic blade-dominated industryCL IVa, LHB, 36,000-39,100, a few lithics, large numbers of horse bones (at least 50 individual animals)Fossil Soil, LHB, 37,500-40,800 cal BPCL IVb, LHB, 39,900-42,200 cal BP, distinctive Upper Paleolithic, endscrapers, possible horse head out of carved mammoth ivory, human tooth (EMH) A complete early modern human skeleton was recovered from Kostenki 14 in 1954, buried in a tightly flexed position in a oval burial pit (99x39 centimeters or 39x15 inches) which had been dug through the ash layer and then was sealed by Cultural Layer III. The skeleton was direct-dated to 36,262-38,684 cal BP. The skeleton represents an adult man, 20-25 years old with a robust skull and short stature (1.6 meters [5 foot 3 inches]). A few stone flakes, animal bones and a sprinkle of dark red pigment were found in the burial pit. Based on its location within the strata, the skeleton can be generally dated to the Early Upper Paleolithic period. Genomic Sequence from Markina Gora Skeleton In 2014, Eske Willerslev and associates (Seguin-Orlando et al) reported the genomic structure of the skeleton at Markina Gora. They perfomed 12 DNA extractions from the skeletons left arm bone, and compared the sequence to the growing numbers of ancient and modern DNA. They identified genetic relationships between Kostenki 14 and Neanderthalsmore evidence that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbredas well as genetic connections to the Malta individual from Siberia and European Neolithic farmers. Further, they found a fairly distant relationship to Australo-Melanesian or eastern Asian populations. The Markina Gora skeletons DNA indicates a deep-aged human migration out of Africa separate from that of Asian populations, supporting the Southern Dispersal Route as a possible corridor for population of those areas. All humans are derived from the same populations in Africa; but we colonized the world in different waves and perhaps along different exit routes. The genomic data recovered from Markina Gora is further evidence that the population of our world by humans was very complex, and we have a long way to go before we understand it. Excavations at Kostenki Kostenki was discovered in 1879; and a long series of excavations have followed. Kostenki 14 was discovered by P.P. Efimenko in 1928 and has been excavated since the 1950s via a series of trenches. The oldest occupations at the site were reported in 2007, where the combination of great age and sophistication created quite a stir. Sources This glossary entry is a part of the About.com guide to Upper Paleolithic , and the Dictionary of Archaeology. Anikovich MV, Sinitsyn AA, Hoffecker JF, Holliday VT, Popov VV, Lisitsyn SN, Forman SL, Levkovskaya GM, Pospelova GA, Kuzmina IE et al. 2007. Early Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe and Implications for the Dispersal of Modern Humans. Science 315(5809):223-226. Hoffecker JF. 2011. The early upper Paleolithic of eastern Europe reconsidered. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20(1):24-39. Revedin A, Aranguren B, Becattini R, Longo L, Marconi E, Mariotti Lippi M, Skakun N, Sinitsyn A, Spiridonova E, and Svoboda J. 2010. Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(44):18815-18819. Seguin-Orlando A, Korneliussen TS, Sikora M, Malaspinas A-S, Manica A, Moltke I, Albrechtsen A, Ko A, Margaryan A, Moiseyev V et al. 2014. Genomic structure in Europeans dating back at least 36,200 years. ScienceExpress 6 November 2014(6 November 2014) doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0114. Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Illingworth JS, Amirkhanov H, Praslov ND, and Street M. 2000. Palaeolithic perishables made permanent. Antiquity 74:812-821. Svendsen JI, Heggen HP, Hufthammer AK, Mangerud J, Pavlov P, and Roebroeks W. 2010. Geo-archaeological investigations of Palaeolithic sites along the Ural Mountains - On the northern presence of humans during the last Ice Age. Quaternary Science Reviews 29(23-24):3138-3156. Svoboda JA. 2007. The Gravettian on the Middle Danube. Paleobiology 19:203-220. Velichko AA, Pisareva VV, Sedov SN, Sinitsyn AA, and Timireva SN. 2009. Paleogeography of Kostenki-14 (Markina Gora). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia 37(4):35-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aeae.2010.02.002

Statistics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 7

Statistics - Essay Example Statistics has greatly enabled me to fully understand the weather changes. Before I learned statistics, I could just hear the theory of weather forecasting dominating the news but I could not believe that in real sense it can be forecasted. Through learning statistics and acquiring the relevant skills, I can build statistics and use the computer representations to compare the previous weather condition with the current one, then predict future weather patterns. Additionally, statistics has enabled me to predict the deadly diseases that one can contract. I used to hear of bulletin journalists reporting the number of people who perished from a chronic disease like liver cirrhosis that was meaningless to me (Freedman et al., 2008). When statistics came in, I could comprehend how it can even affect me. I heard of studies showing that almost 90% of individuals who drink alcohol are likely to contract liver cirrhosis. This tells me that a large number of people who die from alcohol consumption. Apparently, if I do not want to die from such a disease, then I should not drink

Organ Transplants Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Organ Transplants - Essay Example Several apocryphal accounts of transplants exist well prior to the scientific understanding and advancements that would be necessary for them to have actually occurred. The Chinese physician Pien Ch-iao reportedly exchanged hearts between a man of strong spirit but weak will with one of a man of weak spirit but strong will in an attempt to achieve balance in each man. Roman Catholic mythology reports the third-century saints Damian and Cosmas as replacing the gangrenous leg of the Roman deacon Justinian with the leg of a recently deceased Ethiopian. Most accounts have the saints performing the transplant in the fourth century A.D., decades after their death; some accounts have them only instructing living surgeons who performed the procedure. More likely accounts exist in the area of skin transplantation. The first reasonable account is of the Indian surgeon Sushruta in the second century B.C., who used autografted skin transplantation in nose reconstruction rhinoplasty. Success or failure of these procedures is not well documented. Centuries later, the Italian surgeon Gaspare Tagliacozzi performed successful skin autografts; he also failed consistently with allografts, offering the first suggestion of rejection centuries before that mechanism could possibly be understood. He attributed it to the "force and power of individuality" in his 1596 work De Curtorum Chirurgia per Insitionem. Transplants #3 The first successful corneal allograft transplant was performed in 1837 in a gazelle model; the first successful human corneal transplant, a keratoplastic operation, was performed by Eduard Zirm in Austria in 1905. Pioneering work in the surgical technique of transplantation was made in the early 1900s by the French surgeon Alexis Carrel, with Charles Guthrie, with the transplantation of arteries or veins. Their skillful anastomosis operations, the new suturing techniques, laid the groundwork for later transplant surgery and won Carrel the 1912 Nobel Prize for Medicine or Physiology. From 1902 Carrel performed transplant experiments on dogs. Surgically successful in moving kidneys, hearts and spleens, he was one of the first to identify the problem of rejection, which remained insurmountable for decades. Major steps in skin transplantation occurred during WW I, notably in the work of Harold Gillies at Aldershot. Among his advances was the tubed pedicle graft, maintaining a flesh connection from the donor site until the graft established its own blood flow. Gillies' assistant, Archibald McIndoe, carried on the work into WW II as reconstructive surgery. In 1962 the first successful replantation surgery was performed - re-attaching a severed limb and restoring (limited) functioning and feeling. The first attempted human deceased-donor transplant was performed by the Ukrainian surgeon Yu Yu Voronoy in the 1930s; rejection resulted in failure. Joseph Murray performed the first successful transplant, a kidney transplant between identical twins, in 1954, successful because no immunosuppression was necessary in genetically identical twins. In the late 1940s Peter Medawar, working for the National Institute for Medical Research, improved the understanding of rejection. Identifying the immune reactions in 1951 Medawar suggested that immunosuppressive drugs could be used. Cortisone had

Revelation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Revelation - Essay Example The comprehension of Flannery O’Connor’s battle with lupus, as well as her belief in Roman Catholic ideologies, adds to the appreciation of her writing. This paper will use the biographical theory to critique O’Connor’s short story Revelation. O’Connor’s background influenced her writing of Revelation. The plot centers on O’Connor’s experiences and thoughts, for instance, a notable inspiration of her story is her Southern upbringing. In her lifetime, Southerners were prejudicial towards people on account of their races and lifestyles. Southerners believed that people less fortunate than them were inferior to them, thereby, labeling people as different things. Southerners offered O’Connor necessary images to construct the characters, for instance, in Revelation, character identification occurs on the basis of their physical features and race. For example, Mrs. Turpin makes racially prejudicial statements referring to chara cters such as a classy woman as â€Å"well-dressed and pleasant†, a teenager as â€Å"ugly†, a poor woman as â€Å"white trash† and her black workers as â€Å"niggers†. The characteristics that Mrs. Turpin uses to label characters exemplify O’Connor’s Southern lifestyle. ... However, the most substantial influence on Revelation is O’Connor’s religion. Religion is one of the most prominent themes of the story. O’Connor’s Catholic heritage is the main influencer of this theme. Similar to other authors, O’Connor appears fascinated by the subject of the actuality of sin, as well as its effects on humans. Through the story, O’Connor demonstrates reality and personal qualities as determinants of people’s destiny and fate, which ultimately uncovers social truths. This background, a plausible plot, convincing characterization and viable literary devices, enable O’Connor to develop themes such as religion and the essence appreciating people for their deeds rather than exterior. In order to develop these themes, O’Connor establishes a credible plot using social conflict, an unhappy ending and the element of surprise. Revelation has both minor and serious social conflicts, for instance; the minor confli ct is essentially between Mrs. Turpin and the woman dubbed white-trash. This conflict emanates from Mrs. Turpin’s belief that she is of a superior socioeconomic rank than the other woman. The story’s serious conflict is between the teenage girl and Mrs. Turpin, which accelerates in the story, particularly through Mrs. Turpin’s facial expressions and rude gestures and remarks towards the teenager. For instance, Mrs. Turpin considers the teenager’s face as the â€Å"ugliest face she has ever seen anyone make† (O’Connor 394). In order to develop the story’s themes further, O’Connor uses clear motivation, plausibility and unswerving behavior to fortify the story’s convincing characterizations. Mrs. Turpin is always curious and observant of those around and victimizes other characters. Mrs. Turpin gains her

Impact of Brexit and US on NATO

Impact of Brexit and US on NATO NATO Origin, membership, roles The Brussels Treaty of 1948 marked the first step in the creation of the North Atlantic Alliance, culminating in April 1949[1] with the signature of the Treaty of Washington. The outcome of that Treaty was a joint security system among 12 countries: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States. NATO is an intergovernmental political and military alliance of collective defence, through which its 28 member states agree to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party. Moreover, 23 other countries cooperate through NATO Partnership for Peace program which began in 1991. Seeking to stabilize the Middle East, in 1994 The Alliance launched the Mediterranean Dialogue with Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia. In 2004 NATO began the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative with four countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Ar ab Emirates. Finally, NATO cooperates in joint security issues with five countries in Asia, Australia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mongolia and New Zealand, and two in the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Until the Korean War, NATO was predominantly a political organization. Following the war an integrated military framework was established under the command of two US supreme commanders. To prevent a nuclear war, the Alliance expanded its mission and adopted the Massive Retaliation policy. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it conducted a series of military interventions in Bosnia in 1992 and later in 1999 in Kosovo. Politically, the organization sought better relations with former Warsaw Pact countries, several of which joined the alliance in 1999, 2004 and 2009. Since then the Alliance has performed a variety of additional roles, such as providing trainers to Iraq and Afghanistan, assisting in counter-piracy operations[2] as well as imposing a non-fly zone over Libya based on UNSC Resolution 1973. Member states’ view of the institution, impact of BREXIT and US pivot Member states’ view of the institution ‟Support for NATO is widespread among member nations†, is the conclusion of the Spring 2016 Global Attitudes Survey.[3] This survey, held by Pew Research Center included nine EU countries such as the Netherland, Poland, UK, Italy, Germany, Hungary, France, Spain and Greece, as well as the U.S. and Canada, finds mostly positive views of the Organization. Around 57% of them expressed positive opinions of the Alliance, with only 27% of them voicing negative views. The strongest support for the alliance comes from the Netherland and Poland while Greece appears to be the most critical NATO member. Even though Mr. Trump the Republican presidential nominee at that time, has regarded NATO as being obsolete, when asked if being a member of the post-World War II security alliance was good or bad for the U.S., 77% responded yes, while only 16% expressed negative views. However, regardless of increasing security threats, most member states surveyed remain reluctant to increase their countries’ defense spending. Around 32% of the members surveyed say their country’s military spending should be boosted, nearly 47% of them favor continuing with the same spending and only 14% say their military spending should decrease. Notwithstanding, growing tensions with Russia over the conflict in Ukraine, the alliance members polled remain divided on ‟whether their countries should provide military support to an ally if it got into a military conflict with Russia†.[4] Approximately 48% among eight NATO countries favored their country providing military support to defend allies, and 42% across the eight members opposed the use of force. Impact of BREXIT and US pivot Although we have heard much about the political and economic consequences from BREXIT, there are insufficient arguments about its security and geopolitical fallout. Even though in the short run there might not be any negative impact, there are reasonable concerns about Brexit’s impact on NATO in the long run. Among many convinced Europeanists there is a group of far-right parties, in France, Slovakia, the Netherlands, Denmark, Italy and elsewhere which not only are anti-European, xenophobic and profoundly anti-American, but they are great sympathizers of Putin’s authoritarian regime. If those parties come into power, it might fluctuate the politics of their countries against NATO, and destruct the alliance from providing security within and beyond its borders. Another reason for concern might be the emerging prospect of Scotland’s secession and an uncertain future of Northern Ireland which might cause the UK to be more isolationists and less militarily engaged. Brexit might impact the future of military cooperation between France and Britain, two European NATO members with the largest military firepower, regarded as the engine of Common Security and Defense Policy of the European Union. With the UK leaving the Union, if not impossible it will become distant, and in the coming years the responsibility for European security will immensely rest on NATO. On the other hand, maintaining NATO’s coherence and operational effectiveness lies to a great degree on America. Recently, Washington has made it clear that it expects member countries to spend more in defense and is urging the European Union to take a leading role in crisis management and decrease its dependence on the U.S. During his electoral campaign president Donald Trump dismissed NATO as ‟obsolete†, while his Secretary of State James Mattis told NATO defence ministers in Brussels that ‟Americans cannot care more for your children’s future security than you do†[5]. However, at the Security Conference, held from 17-19 February 2017 in Munich, the US Vice President, Michael   Pence seemed to reaffirm Alliance members that the US would remain committed to â€Å"continue to hold Russia accountable†[6] for its illegal actions in Crimea and Ukraine. Approach to the risks and effectiveness of that approach: Russia NATO began to interact with Russia in 1991, when Russia became member of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council and later in 1994 member of the Partnership for Peace programme. However it was NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997 which defined the formal foundation for future relations. For more than 25 five years, NATO has attempted to develop a partnership with Russia, building dialogue and reasonable cooperation in fields of common interest. Such dialogue and cooperation culminated with the foundation of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) in 2002, which served as a consultation forum for security issues and cooperation in a wide span of fields. Formal meetings of the NRC and cooperation have been suspended until spring 2009, in response to Russia’s military intervention in August 2008 in Georgia. The Alliance persistently has required from Russia to reverse its recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. Russian aggression in Ukraine led to suspension of all civilian and military cooperation of the NRC in April 2014. However, channels of political dialogue and military communication remain open. During the Wales Summit in September 2014, NATO leaders condemned Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine and demanded that Russia comply with international law and its international obligations and responsibilities.[7] NATO remains concerned about Russia’s increased and destabilizing pattern of military activities along NATO borders as well as aggressive rhetoric, which make the security environment unstable and unpredictable. The Alliance and Russia have deep and continuous discrepancies; yet, NATO does not strive for confrontation and does not represent threat to Russia. Terrorism International terrorism we currently face, presents a complex, perpetual threat that demands for an all-inclusive, multidimensional strategic approach which encompasses NATO as well. The early debate on NATOs proper counterterrorism roles and missions mirrored two approaches: the war approach adopted predominantly by the United States and the risk-management approach, supported by many European Allies. These Allies see the war approach as unsuitable, because terrorism cannot be defeated unless its root causes are being addressed; which for them cannot be done by military means. The war approach has the tendency to employ a strategy that stresses offensive and preventive measures, while the risk-management approach has the tendency to call for more defensive measures. Therefore, an effective counter-terrorism approach must encompass elements of both strategies. Regardless of these discrepancies all allies are in unison about the danger posed by terrorism and have decided to face it. Following the attacks on the Twin Towers, the NATO allies for the first time invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty; the collective defense clause[8] by deploying troops in Afghanistan under the NATO-led ISAF. Meanwhile, immediately after 11 September 2001, NATO changed almost in a radical manner its strategic priorities and geopolitical vision, in order to adapt the organization and its member states to the nature of the threat. The fundamental approach, defined in NATOs military concept for defence against terrorism, encompasses four components: anti terrorism defensive measures; consequence management; counter terrorism offensive measures; and military co-operation to include partners, and international organizations such as the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the European Union.[9] Through its programme of exercises, NATO play a key role in training for fighting terrorism which offers unique opportunities for integrated civil-military operations to counter terrorist attacks. Alliance also plays a substantial early warning role through. Operation Active Endeavour[10], with its unique capabilities for aircraft and missile early warning. In terms of consequence management, NATO provides unique support capabilities to face the consequences of a terrorist attack, through its Euro-Disaster Response Coordination Centre[11]. Moreover, Alliance is well-suited to play a preventive role by providing its assets such as AWACS aircraft, maritime patrols and CBRN defence capabilities. A good example to be mentioned is the support given to Greece during the Olympic and Paralympics Games. Contribution to the global approach by the Alliance on fighting against terrorism was articulated openly in the NATO CT Policy Guidelines, endorsed at the Chicago Summit of 2012.[12] Two years later, on May 2014, NATO approved an Action Plan which defines the tasks and assigns responsibilities based on the policy guidance.[13] Refugees ⠁„ illegal migration The refugee and migrant crisis of the recent years is by all means the worst humanitarian crisis Europe has faced after the World War Two. Challenges in the European neighborhoods coming simultaneously from both the Eastern Flank by Russia and the Southern Flank, by refugees, migration and terrorism, have imposed NATO to reshape its capabilities. In addition to its commitment to reassurance measures in the Eastern Flank as well as its contribution to transatlantic intelligence coordination against terrorism, NATO is participating in the international endeavor to hold back illegal migration and trafficking in the Aegean. The Alliance is closely cooperating with national coastguards, and Frontex, the border management agency of the EU, in order to monitor the illegal crossings in the Aegean Sea and combat human trafficking. Following the NATO Defence Ministers’ meeting on 26 and 27 October last year   ÃŒ ¶Ã‚   in the context of the implementation of Resolution 2292 UNSCR on the situation in Libya   ÃŒ ¶Ã‚  Ã‚   the Alliance agreed to support the EU-led Operation Sophia in the central Mediterranean. This commitment includes a scale of capabilities such as Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, logistics support as well as contribution to capacity building of the Libyan coastguard and navy, if requested. In that context on 9 November 2016, NATO launched Operation Sea Guardian with an extensive scope in response to a wide- ranging maritime security threats.[14] Inter-institutional cooperation, coordination and integration The gravity of challenges posed by the Balkan conflicts since 1991, and NATO’s commitment in Afghanistan a decade later, have been the key drivers of its progressively immense cooperation with other international organizations. Such organizations posses mandate and capabilities which the Alliance lacks, but that are vital to meeting international security challenges. NATO and the United Nations The Alliance needs the UNSC resolutions as a legal foundation for non-Article 5 operations as well as to justify the legitimacy for such operations. On the other hand, the UN needs NATO for its expertise, resources, and unmatched capabilities to provide far-reaching support and to sustain an extended commitment. Coordination between the two organizations has occasionally been dissatisfactory, particularly in Bosnia and Herzegovina where NATO and UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR) failed to defend Srebrenica designated as â€Å"safe area† by UN. This flawed experience has been contributing to better formulation and renewal of UNSC resolutions mandating operations, especially in the field of command and control arrangements. In September 2005 a NATO UN framework agreement was proposed, designed to provide a structure for continuous cooperation at all levels rather than crisis situations collaboration. Such cooperation could help the UN and many of its member states -which perceive NATO as a Cold War military organization to better understand the Alliance’s consensual decision-making processes. In the Comprehensive Political Guidance endorsed at the Riga summit of November 2006, NATO members agreed that, â€Å"As in Afghanistan, success in Kosovo will depend on a concerted effort. Accordingly, NATO activity to provide a secure environment will continue to be coordinated with the activities of the UN, the EU and the OSCE to build governance and support reform.†[15] NATO and the European Union NATO-EU cooperation dates back to the Cold War. However an important step towards an effective cooperation was marked at the Washington Summit in April 1999[16], where the cooperation principles of the June 1996 agreements in Berlin ÃŒ ¶ known as â€Å"Berlin Plus† ÃŒ ¶ where approved. It took the two organizations from April 1999 to December 2002 to formalize this agreement, in order to allow NATO to support EU-led operations. Operation Concordia from March to December 2003, in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was the first EU-led peacekeeping operation, commanded by a NATO operational commander, where Alliance’s assets were provided to the EU. Comparably, in December 2004 the NATO-led operation Stabilization Force (SFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, began to transition to an EU-led operation named Althea under the â€Å"Berlin Plus† framework. Once again, the commander responsible for this Operation was NATO’s DSACEUR. In addition, KFOR, NATO’s peacekeeping force in Kosovo, cooperates closely with EULEX, the EU’s Rule of Law Mission quite alike as NATO-led ISAF and RSM missions in Afghanistan have cooperated with EUPOL, the EU’s Rule of Law Mission. NATO’s Ocean Shield and the EU’s EUNAVFOR Atalanta naval forces are cooperating closely for anti-piracy missions, since September 2008, in Somalia. At the strategic level, NATO and the EU meet on a regular basis at the level of foreign ministers, ambassadors, military representatives and defence advisors. Regular meetings also take place for staff-to-staff talks at all levels between Alliance’s International Staff and International Military Staff, and their EU counterparts. For mutual cooperation at the operational level, in 2005 NATO established a Permanent Liaison Team at the EU Military Staff. Similarly, an EU Cell was set up in 2006 at Alliance’s strategic command for operations in Mons, Belgium. NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Distinctly from the UN, NATO, and the EU, the OSCE is based on political commitments not on treaty arrangements. Generally speaking, Alliance has not been directly engaged in OSCE operations, it has only been providing support for planning, information, and communications, security and logistics, of OSCE activities in places where NATO forces have already been deployed. The first notable cooperation of this kind was the operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1990s. Few years later, in order to support OSCE’s verification mission on the ground in Kosovo, NATO conducted an air reconnaissance mission named Operation Eagle Eye from October 1998 to March 1999. During the same period the Alliance organized an Extraction Force prepared to evacuate OSCE personnel from Kosovo in an emergency. NATO has also cooperated with the OSCE and the EU during the 2001 crisis in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Apart from NATO-OSCE cooperation during Balkan crisis, the two organizations have interacted in other areas such as border security issues, anti-terrorism, combating human trafficking, regional cooperation, etc., mainly in Central Asia, SE Europe and the south Caucasus. It is worth mentioning that there has been little mission competition between NATO and the OSCE due to the fact that the later is particularly focused on specific domains. References North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟The North Atlantic Treaty†, Washington D.C. 4 April 1949, NATO e-Library, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Counter piracy operations†, NATO Newsroom, 19 December 2016, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_48815.htm. Charter, David and Wright, Oliver, US gives ultimatum over NATO spending, February 16 2017, The Sunday Times, accessed at: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-delivers-ultimatum-over-nato-spending-rg55vrrbv Thomas,   Ken, Rising, David and Moulson, Geir, ‟Mike Pence Says US To Hold Russia Accountable, Stand With Nato†, The Independent, accessed at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mike-pence-nato-hold-russia-accountable-munich-angela-merkel-vladimir-putin-a7587891.html North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Wales Summit Declaration, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_112964.htm. Cuddington, Danielle ‟Support for NATO is widespread among member nations†, July 2016, Spring Global Attitude Survey, Pew Research Center, accessed at: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/06/support-for-nato-is-widespread-among-member-nations Cuddington, Danielle ‟Support for NATO is widespread among member nations†, July 2016, Spring 2015 Global Attitude Survey, pew Research Center, accessed at: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/06/support-for-nato-is-widespread-among-member-nations North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟NATO’s military concept for defence against terrorism†, 21November 2002, accessed at: http://www.fransamaltingvongeusau.com/documents/dl2/h3/2.3.25.pdf North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Operation Active Endeavour†, 27 October 2016, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_7932.htm?selectedLocale=en North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre†, 7 April 2016, NATO e-Library, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52057.htm?selectedLocale=en North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟NATO’s Policy Guidelines on Counter-Terrorism†, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/ct-policy-guidelines.pdf Argano, M. Elena, ‟A stronger NATO means a stronger Europe. Sea Guardian and Operation Sophia  together†, 15 November 2016, accessed at: https://europe-liberte-securite-justice.org/2016/11/15/a-stronger-nato-means-a-stronger-europe-sea-guardian-and-operation-sophia-together/. North Atlantic Council, ‟Riga Summit Declaration†, 29 November 2006, par. 9,accessed at:http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_37920.htm. North Atlantic Council, ‟Washington Summit Communiquà ©Ã¢â‚¬ , 24 April 1999, par. 10, accessed at: http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/1999/p99-064e.htm. [1] Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟The North Atlantic Treaty†, Washington D.C. 4 April 1949, http://www.nato.int, (Accessed on 04 March 2017). [2] North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Counter piracy operations†, NATO Newsroom, 19 December 2016, http://www.nato.int, (Accessed on 04 March 2017). [3] Cuddington, Danielle ‟Support for NATO is widespread among member nations†, July 2016, Spring Global Attitude Survey, Pew Research Center, http://www.pewglobal.org (Accessed on 04 March 2017). [4] Cuddington, Danielle ‟Support for NATO is widespread among member nations†, July 2016, Spring 2015 Global Attitude Survey, pew Research Center, http://www.pewglobal.org/, (Accessed on 04 March 2017). [5]Charter, David and Wright, Oliver, ‟US gives ultimatum over Nato spending†, February 16 2017, The Sunday Times, http://www.thetimes.co.uk, accessed on 12 March 2017. [6] Thomas,   Ken, Rising, David and Moulson, Geir, ‟Mike Pence says US to hold Russia accountable, stand with Nato†, The Indipendent, http://www.independent.co.uk, accessed on 12 March 2017. [7]Wales Summit Declaration, North Atlantic Treaty Organization http://www.nato.int (Accessed on 04 March 2017). [8]North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟The North Atlantic Treaty†, Washington D.C. 4 April 1949, NATO e-Library, http://www.nato.int (accessed on 3 April 2017). [9] North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟NATO’s military concept for defence against terrorism†, 21November 2002, http://www.fransamaltingvongeusau.com (accessed on 4 April 2017). [10] North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Operation Active Endeavour†, 27 October 2016, NATO e-Library http://www.nato.int (accessed on 4 April 2017). [11] North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre†, 7 April 2016, NATO e-Library, http://www.nato.int (accessed on 4 April 2017). [12] North Atlantic Treaty Organization, ‟NATOÊ ¼s policy Guidelines on Counter Terrorism†, 20-21 May 2014, http://www.nato.int/nato (accessed on 4 April 2017). [13] This is a classified document, not for public release. [14] Argano, M. Elena, ‟A stronger NATO means a stronger Europe. Sea Guardian and Operation Sophia  together†, 15 November 2016, https://europe-liberte-securite-justice.org, (accessed on 12 April 2017). [15] North Atlantic Council, ‟Riga Summit Declaration†, 29 November 2006, http://www.nato.int, (accessed on 4 April 2017). [16] North Atlantic Council, ‟Washington Summit Communiquà ©Ã¢â‚¬ , 24 April 1999, http://www.nato.int, (accessed on 4 April 2017).