History of Foreign and Security Policy

History of Foreign and Security Policy Defining Foreign and Security Policy from the Cold War to Present Today’s increasingly globalised community has seen more diplomatic and social evolution in the past half-century than the civilized world has seen in recent memory. The advent of multinational trade and military alliances such as the North Atlantic Trade Organization has increasingly intertwined security policies with foreign policies, which in turn entail more than just military alliances. Foreign subsidies by way of fiscal aid grants and weapons contracts warrant the need for nations to adopt solid, transparent foreign and security policies as the traditional global threat of warfare changes. The most notable examples for security and foreign policies as well as the need for a national and supranational governmental monitor are the United States and the European Union. The aforementioned two bodies share between them diplomatic ties to most every member of the international community. The onus of foreign and security policies becomes more apparent through examination of dipl omatically fragile and militarily-temperamental regions such as the Middle East, whose international agreements and regional alliances are the basis for subsequent American and EU policy, without which allies and trade partners would find little benefit from trade and security agreements. Foreign policy amounts to little more than a series of political guidelines and rules of engagement by which any country implementing it best gains at a certain point in time. Foreign policies are known to change radically from one year to the next; the Cold War is perhaps the greatest testament to the temporal nature of international relations and foreign policy. Robert John Myers notes in his US Foreign Policy in the Twenty-first Century how quickly Western countries changed their approach to the Soviet Union. Prior to 1945 â€Å"during the savage struggle of World War II, the primacy of the wisdom of political realism seemed to have been learned† by the Allies, who interlocked â€Å"inte rest, power, and morality in the councils of the principal Allied power†[1]; the USSR at the time was an indispensable ally against Germany and Japan. Much to the chagrin of their current political detractors, the Soviets were perhaps the most powerful ally America had in the war against the Axis powers, with borders spanning the heart of the Nazi regime and maritime waters bordering the Imperial Japanese. Foreign policy then had nothing to do with the civil liberties, democracy, and freedom of the press so touted today in the same countries that huddled together in opposition to Moscow during the Cold War. Prior to the partition of Germany at the close of the war, it was easily recognizable that â€Å"wartime cooperation to defeat the Axis was clearly important† and Allied foreign policy toward its Soviet contingent was one of camaraderie and mutual interdependence[2]. Once the war ended, however, the close ties between the powers dissipated and politically malignant a ntipathy filled the void. With a barely nascent United Nations absent as policy moderator, the US and the USSR led a series of proxy wars starting with â€Å"the attack by North Korea on South Korea on 25 June 1950,† marking â€Å"the limited cooperation [and mediation] that came to be expected from the UN in the security field†[3]. International mediation, which should have taken place given the alliance that transpired between the US, USSR, and Europe during WWII was all but gone in the years of reconstruction and the escalation of the Cold War. There are two points of speculation given the rise of the Cold War: the first is that the United Nations failed as an international mediator, and the second is that the United Nations was obsolete, serving only to keep other countries out of the periphery of the Soviet-American struggle for dominance. The difference between foreign and security policy during the Cold War was elementary. The American foreign policy toward the Soviet Union was one of mutual trade and sales, the development of which was speculated by many to be a financial insurance policy; if the two superpowers intertwined economically, the idea of armed struggle would be so financially devastating that neither side would be willing to continue along the path to war. American security policy was markedly different given the proxy wars fought in Korea, Vietnam, and the Middle East. Foreign policy essentially existed in the case of the Cold War to ensure that security policy would never be employed. The Cold War was a fascinating case of how foreign policy and security policy could run completely contrarian to each other. Any two given nations can foster amicable foreign policies in their approach to each other independent of a covertly hostile security policy as evidenced by the oft-shifting approach of successive American administrations to the Soviet behemoth. Jimmy Carter, for example, â€Å"forbade grain sales to the Soviet Union following the nation’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979,† while â€Å"Ronald Reagan made the unpopular embargo an issue in the 1980 elections, reversing the policy after his election†[4]. The Reagan policy shift did not predicate a change in security policy, as the administration continued its support of Afghan mujahideen forces through arms sales and finance while continuing its agricultural trade with Moscow. It is now well-known that the UN was inconsequential in international mediation throughout the Cold War. This is not to say that an international or supranational regulatory body is not needed; in the case of the US and USSR, the absent (and perhaps powerless) UN was perceived as such because their collective power was dwarfed by the two superpowers. With no military or financial incentive, the question of the relevance of a supranational regulatory body in foreign and security policy is moot. Even today, American foreign policies often contravene UN resolutions with little or no repercussion due to the immense economic, political, and military might of Washington. While the Cold War ended relatively peacefully without UN intervention, the concept of an international body was not scorned by the US, which partnered with various countries to create the North Atlantic Trade Organization (NATO). It should be noted, however, that the US was an open advocate of NATO for the very reason tha t the UN was not potent enough a body to act on American will or on behalf of American aspirations. International mediation in this sense is needed for the monitoring of foreign and security policy; whether or not mediation will be effective in both sectors is quite another issue. Foreign policy can be monitored, policed, and even dictated by a supranational body as evidenced in the partition of Germany and the formation of the Eastern Bloc post-WWII. Security policy, however, is a point of major contention with any nation faced with the prospect of supranational control. Any nation with major investment (diplomatic or financial) abroad would be reluctant to cede jurisdiction of its own soldiers and sovereignty to an outside body, especially one such as the UN whose member list consists of nations antagonistic to one another. The irony here is that a multi-national group could have foreign and security policy power over a nation whose security policy is antagonistic to one or more members of the same international group. Israel, for example, would embark on an unprecedented leap of faith if it allowed the UN and its Arab members to mediate its security policy, all despite the fact that from the first years of its inception (1948-1967) the Jewish state relied o n the UN to justify its existence to the international community. The multi-faceted Arab-Israeli conflict is just one example of how unchecked world superpowers exerted their influence unchecked by the vigil of an international body. Prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, foreign policy was a much simpler venture as the world found itself functioning under the umbrella of just two superpowers, led by and acting under the auspices of either Washington or Moscow. The fall of Communism left a vacuum in the Middle East, as the now-extinct USSR had no allegiances to the Middle East in which it fought a series of proxy wars and conflicts with the United States. What transpired following the end of Moscow’s reign as a world superpower was the creation of several diplomatically independent states in the Middle East. Where Moscow once supported Syria, Egypt, and Iraq while arming said nations’ leaders, they found themselves increasingly dependent on other sources for trade and international subsidy such as the EU and the United States. The foreign policy then drove the security policy, baited by American and EU sponsorship acting independently of the UN. Today, Egypt, once the sworn enemy of Israel (whose cl osest international ally is Washington), receives America’s second-largest international aid package. This of course is contingent upon the maintenance of a lasting peace as well as other conditions detailed in the Camp David Accords of 1978. The UN and the EU’s parts in the conflict were minimal, as security policies of the two comprised of a minimal militaristic component and a far larger foreign policy component. Pinar Bilgin observes in Regional Security in the Middle East how the fragile Mediterranean â€Å"as an alternative spatial representation began to take shape from the 1970s onward largely in line with the development and changing security conception and practices of the European Union,† a group whose policies toward the region â€Å"have been shaped around three major concerns: energy security (understood as the sustained flow of oil and natural gas at reasonable prices); regional stability (understood as domestic stability especially in countries in geographically North Africa); and the cessation of the Israel/Palestine conflict†[5]. Unlike the US and USSR, whose motives will be examined later, the EU was interested solely in the protection of their economic preservation and the prevention of any armed conflict from spilling into their geographic vicinity. In addition to the Arab-Israeli crisis, EU Member States such as Italy, France, and Spain faced growing resentment in the Maghreb (Arab North Africa) as a corollary of imperial European rule. The EU’s policies were hence different from â€Å"non-EU actors [who] encouraged and supported the search for security within a Euro-Mediterranean framework†; the EU has almost â€Å"single-handedly sought to construct a Euro-Mediterranean Region to meet its own domestic economic, societal, and, to a much lesser extent, military security interests†[6]. The American and Soviet interest in the region was also one of economic, political, and security nature, bu t on a much larger scale. Buzan and Waever note in their Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security how: â€Å"The United States and the Soviet Union were latecomers as major players in Middle Eastern regional security, though the former had long-standing oil interests there. The two superpowers were drawn into a pattern of regional turbulence that was already strongly active. Their interest in the region was heightened by the fact that, like Europe, the Middle East sat on the boundary between the spheres of communism and ‘free’ worlds. Stalin’s aggressive policy after 1945 had pushed Turkey and Iran into the arms of the West. Turkey became a member of NATO, and was thus fixed into the main European front of the Cold War. Until the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran fell increasingly under American sway, not only through corporate oil interests, but also as part of the loose alliance arrangements that connected American containment clients in Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan. To counter this US success right on its borders, the Soviet Union tried to play in the Arab world b ehind this front line, by establishing political and military links to the radical regimes and movements that sprang up in the Middle East during the 1950s and 1960s (Syria, PLO, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Yemen)†[7] The entire Middle East, ranging from Egypt to Iran, became what Buzan and Waever describe as a â€Å"third front in the Cold War, after Europe and Asia, and its oil resources tied it powerfully into the global economy†[8]. The Camp David Accords were especially important; while Israeli security policies remained virtually unchanged (the Israeli-Egyptian peace is frequently described as â€Å"cool† in comparison to Israeli-Turkish relations), their foreign policies shifted. The two acted under the auspices of the United States, signalling a significant achievement in the Cold War. Though the â€Å"crosscutting complexities of internal alignments in the Middle East† make it â€Å"difficult to trace a clear Cold War pattern of great power intervention,† the small gains and losses in war and political action were of huge consequence. With the 1978 signing of the Camp David Accords, the United States shifted its foreign policy in the Arab world successfully, sp litting allegiances in the Middle East to one drawn along Arab lines to one drawn along foreign policy lines. With Turkey and Iran (at least until Tehran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution) securely in the American camp, the Middle East was thus left only with Syria and Iraq in alliance with the USSR. Conflict in the Middle East was hence capitalized upon by the United States by way of foreign policy, which existed independently of the nations’ security policies. Foreign policies always shift more easily than security policies, as the former serve the interest of a nation’s economy and the latter are charged with the military protection of a nation’s sovereignty, diplomatic or otherwise. As evidenced by the Cold War, American policies in Iraq alone have shifted dramatically. Prior to 1979, for example, American foreign and security policies were in place to secure its interests (Saudi Arabia and Israel) from Baghdad. From 1979 to 1991, American foreign policies toward Iraq remained the same, but its security policies shifted to accommodate Iraqi military suppression of post-revolutionary Iran. From 1991 to 2003, both foreign and security policies shifted to those of aggression and financial seclusion. It should be noted that until 1991, these foreign policy shifts were executed at the whim of three American presidents. Iran followed the same path, with pre-1979 Tehran under Reza Shah Pahlavi serving as a vital blockage to Soviet expansionism. Following the Islamic Revolution of 1979, security policy was hostile toward and sought to exclude Tehran by funding Saddam Hussein. Foreign policy changed during the Contra Scandal, wherein American military leaders sold Tehran various munitions and weapons in direct subterfuge of Washington’s official military support of Baghdad; weapons were sold to a lesser evil (Iran) in order to fund covert operations in support of Nicaraguan right-wing guerrillas. Managua’s leftist-government was thought to be the latest expansion of Soviet influence and was hence a closer threat in physical proximity than the rise of the radical Islamic government of Tehran which was equally opposed to the Soviets at the time. All this transpired, again, without minimal monitoring by an international body. The greatest irony of the aforementioned events, however, is the perception of their respective successes and failures. America succeeded without international intervention in the pacification and dismantlement of the Soviet Union; however, today’s chaotic Middle East was a corollary, including the 9/11 attacks that changed forever the security and foreign policies of the United States. The current wars waged by America and what allies remain are again largely conducted without the support or monitoring by the UN or any other international body, and it remains to be seen how the future will unfold. BIBLIOGRAPHY Bilgin, Pinar. (2005) Regional Security in the Middle East: A Critical Perspective.London: Taylor Francis Routledge. Buzan, Barry and Ole Waever. (2003) Regions and Powers: The Structure ofInternational Security. Cambridge: Cambridge U P. Myers, Robert John. (1999) US Foreign Policy in the Twenty-first Century: TheRelevance of Realism. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State U P. Wilson, Ernest J. (2004) Diversity and US Foreign Policy: A Reader. New York:Taylor Francis Routledge. 1 Footnotes [1] Myers 1999, p. 98 [2] Ibid [3] Myers 1999, p. 98 [4] Wilson 2004, p. 127 [5] Bilgin 2005, p. 140 [6] Bilgin 2005, p. 140 [7] Buzan and Waever 2003, p. 198 [8] Buzan and Waever 2003, p. 197

Behaviorism-reinforcement

It is difficult if not possible to measure what’s going on in a student’s mind at a specific moment. The students appeared to be paying attention were actually thinking non-academic issues, is not interested, is not motivated, is preoccupied with himself, among many other reason for non participation at school. Reinforcement rooted in the classic work of James Watson and B. F. Skinner. My discussion will include techniques, for increasing, decreasing, and maintaining behavior. There are many things to consider in the application of reinforcement so as to elicit behavior or the desired behavior.To give into consideration is that, reinforcement is more effective when it is immediate. If a response of a student is no longer reinforced, as in ignoring a given answer of a student every time a teacher throws a question or unintentionally took it for granted, the learner if again called his attention to give his answer will eventually given up the response. Another is, desired action are encouraged by a reinforcement specifically social reinforcement, which typically include attention can be verbal or nonverbal. For example, the expression on your face can carry an unmistakable message to a student.Usually, however, social reinforcers are verbal either accompanying some other form of reinforcement (â€Å"John, you can act as class monitor because of the way you behave in gym†) or taking the forms of words or phrase that signal your pleasure about the specific behavior. Social reinforcers expression, contact, proximity, privileges, and words. Giving positive remarks as the reinforcement every time the student performed better, finished a task or cooperate in the school activities are helpful in strengthening the students behavior or the possibilities of the repetition of the same positive behavior.A very shy child may find it difficult to join into classroom activities, specially if the school experience is new to her. The teacher’s role is to involve the child in the classroom activities. The child’s behavior should only be recognized when she is at the activity, though not necessarily participating. For example, when the child sits with the group at circle time, sits at a table where manipulative games or arts projects are provided.An activity within easy reach, when she is within easy reach of an activity, reinforce her, by praising and recognizing her behavior. Provide a reinforcement for every involvement in classroom activities as you notice it. A good reinforcement starts out with continuous reinforcement at the beginning stage of learning. Tangible reinforcers such as cookies and badges for young students or notes to parents or certificates for older students are just few examples which are necessary in the appliance of reinforcement so as to achieved desired outcome.In giving reinforcement, as progress in the skill or behavior develops, less emphasis should be placed on tangible reinforcers, such as foo d and tokens, while more emphasis should be given to social reinforcers, such as praise and attention. Reinforcement is given only after the learner gains sufficient skill at a task, be it participating in group work or writing, that later be strengthened or reinforced that later becomes automatic and habitual. Constant reinforcement means reinforcing the behavior of the student every time he participates.Applying a continuous reinforcement produces best results especially in new learning or conditioning situations. In education, we invoke behaviorism by awarding grades for various levels of performance that the more a student manifests interest in school/ classroom the more the behavior is reinforced so as to expect the same responses or behavior. If you wish to use positive reinforcers, and we all do, deliberately or otherwise, then you must be aware of how you use them. The following should put into consideration first; consider the age, interest, and needs of the students.Pieces of candy are not too motivating for adolescents, but they must be great for first-graders; know precisely the behavior you wish to strengthen and make your reinforcers sufficiently desirable; list potential reinforcers that you think would be desirable; vary your reinforcers and keep record of the effectiveness of various reinforcers on individual students. Positive reinforcement is a powerful principle and can be applied to great advantage in the classroom. All of us who teach, from the preschool to the doctoral level, use positive reinforcement.We must avoid, however, making students too dependent on the reinforcement we provide, particularly if we have initiated structured programs for students. We want them to work for those reinforcers that are natural to them. Punishment is a stimulus that follows a behavior and decreases the likelihood that the behavior will be repeated. It can be use to reduced inappropriate behavior but should be done sparingly as even psychologists advice it’s application in moderation. For instance, giving deductions or minuses on the accumulated grade in assignment every time a student misbehave e.g. shouting while the class in going on, decreases the likelihood of the behavior to be repeated. But when a student is not rewarded for appropriate or adaptive behavior, inappropriate or maladaptive behavior may become increasingly dominant, then punishment sinks in to eliminate such undesirable behavior. Sometimes, however, when the goal is to reduce or eliminate misbehavior, teachers consider using punishment (aversive procedures). A word of warning. Don’t fall into the trap of relying punishment.It’s easy; it frequently works for a short time (although not as well with the secondary school students); and gives you a feeling of having established control. Punishment can destroy rapport with the students if excessively used, it produces a ripple effect that touches all students and affects one’s teaching and it may have side effects of which a teacher is unaware. In general, reinforcing alternative behavior is a far better method than punishment. Sources: Elliot et al. ,(2004). Educational psychology 3rd ed. USA: McGrawHill. Essa,V. (1999). A practical guide to solving preschool behavior problems. New York:Delm

Essay on Lord of the Flies-Piggy - 1247 Words

â€Å"Sucks To Your Ass-mar!† The conch, glasses, and brains are all symbols in Lord of the Flies by William Golding. In this novel, a group of school kids crash into a deserted island and fight wilderness, fear, and themselves to survive. Piggy, being one of the most vital characters in their survival, is often disrespected and overlooked. This is persistent throughout the novel, and can be attributed to his weight and nerdy appearance. Generally, Piggy means well, and tries to help the boy’s survival on the island. Piggy, an extremely complex and intelligent character, contributes to the boy’s survival by using logic and brains. Piggy, along with being the brains of the island, is also a very complex and misunderstood boy. â€Å"Piggy is a†¦show more content†¦Without Piggy’s horrible eye sight, and him needing to wear glasses, the boys would never have been able to start a fire, a fire that ultimately led to their rescue. This is very ironic considering Piggy was killed before he would ever see rescue†¦ a rescue that without him would never have happened. Golding did this to reinforce the importance of Piggy in the novel. It showed that no matter how useless he may have seemed, he still was the one that helped the most, in the long run. He was the most important boy to be on that island. He, in reality, saved Jack, an abusive boy who harassed him ever since they crashed, and Roger, the boy who threw stones, and the boy who murdered the innocent Piggy. â€Å"Though Piggy reaches his greatest stature at the moment of his death, it is also the moment of his greatest blindness, rendered for us at a level far deeper than his lost spectacles†. (Kinead-Weekes. Mark. 43). Piggy was completely blindsided from Rogers’s boulder. This moment in the novel makes readers realize the tragedy of Piggy’s death. The shattering of the glasses represents his knowledge and insight turning to dust, all in front of th e very people he saves, from the cage that is the island. The conch was also with him at the moment of his death. This is significant because it symbolizes the shattering of all that Piggy believed in. He truly believed the conch would save him from anything on the island, and in the end it simply did notShow MoreRelatedEssay on The Character Piggy in Lord of the Flies1368 Words   |  6 PagesPiggy saw the smile and misinterpreted it as friendliness. There had grown up tacitly among the biguns the opinion that Piggy was an outsider, not only by accent, which did not matter, but by fat, and ass-mar, and specs, and a certain disinclination for manual labour. (Golding 68) The character Piggy in William Goldings novel Lord of the Flies serves as the intellectual balance to the emotional leaders of a group of shipwrecked British boys. Ironically, their new society values physical qualitiesRead More lord of the flies piggy analysis Essay562 Words   |  3 Pages Piggy Character Analysis nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Piggy in the beginning of the book was using his common sense, he was intelligent, he knew what was right from wrong, and he could condone things that made him angry easily. In the beginning of the book, (pg. ) Ralph told everyone his name was Piggy even though Piggy specifically told Ralph that he didnt like to be called that name Piggy later condoned Ralphs action with great ease. Piggys actions and behavior depended on his glasses.Read MorePiggy Character Analysis - Lord of the Flies Essay985 Words   |  4 Pagesare the weak, unpopular, failure types. In the book â€Å"Lord of the Flies† by William Golding the character that stood out to me most was Piggy. He was the boy whose real name was never mentioned, but his real name wouldn’t be as symbolic as the nickname he had throughout the book. Throughout the earlier chapters I pictured Piggy as the run of the mill loser that wasn’t cool enough to share snacks with in school even if he had the tastiest ones. Piggy is a very obedient character that always followed hisRead MoreLord Of The Flies Symbolism Essay1080 Words   |  5 PagesLord of the Flies Essay â€Å"Maybe there is a beast†¦ maybe its only us.†(Golding [Page 50]) The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding, is a novel that goes much deeper than a group of 12 year old boys stranded on an island. Throughout the book Golding portrays symbols and constant themes which show how he feels about the human race; that there is an inner beast inside everyone and no matter who you are, it will eventually get exposed. Golding also shows symbols throughout the book which represent theRead MoreThe Lord Of The Flies By William Golding1065 Words   |  5 PagesThe Lord of the Flies Essay The Lord of the Flies written by William Golding and published on September 17, 1954 is a story told about a group of stranded boys and their fight for survival against the wilderness and themselves. In this story many signs of symbolism are used by Golding to point out certain aspects of society that Golding thought strongly of. This story on first read may just seem to be a survival- esque piece of literature but, on a deeper look one can find Golding’s true motiveRead MoreLord of The Flies Essay1673 Words   |  7 PagesLord of the Flies was published in 1954 by William Golding. Today Lord of the Flies is a well known literary criticism. Many schools require their students to read Lord of the Flies because of the literary criticisms in the book. In this paper three themes or literary criticisms are talked about: good vs. evil, symbolism of characters, and maturity of characters. Another topic in Goldings Lord of the Flies is the battle of good vs. evil. Everything seems to start out just fine on the island; theRead MoreLord Of The Flies Symbolism Analysis733 Words   |  3 Pages Lord of the Flies Lord of the Flies has symbols throughout the story, each character brings a different point of view. Piggy, Ralph, and Jack take a leading role with all the boys, although they vote Ralph in charge both of the other boys take a leadership position. Goulding uses the boys to show the faults of mankind and the roots of all evil. Four symbols Goulding used in the novel were: Piggy’s glasses, the Conch Shell, The Beast, and Simon’s hiding place. Therefore, the symbols show the trueRead MoreLord of the Flies: World War IIs Impact Essay1064 Words   |  5 PagesLord of the Flies: World War II’s Impact Lord of the Flies by William Golding was influenced strongly by his experiences as a naval officer during World War II. Golding’s wartime service gave him a darker and more realistic look on life, and contributed to the novel’s imagery. As Golding described, World War II woke him up from his falsified beliefs about human nature by showing him the true human condition (â€Å"Lord of the Flies,† Novels 175). Lord of the Flies, as Golding explained, is â€Å"an attemptRead MoreSimilarities and Differences Between Romeo and Juliet and Lord of the Flies1676 Words   |  7 PagesJack goes from hesitating to kill a pig to being able to viciously kill them †¢ Jack rejects Ralph’s authority and does not respect him †¢ Ralph talks to Piggy and Simon and tells them of their need for adults †¢ One of the â€Å"littuns†, Phil, die in a big fire †¢ Fighting and Arguing gets worse between Ralph and Jack who has form a â€Å"gang† of hunters †¢ Piggy is killed – Stone rolling and knocking him off a cliff †¢ Simon is killed – when he is mistaken for the â€Å"beast† †¢ Ralph was about to be hunted and killedRead MoreEssay On The Conch Shell In Lord Of The Flies946 Words   |  4 PagesSymbolism Essay Some actions made my individuals not only has an effect on the people around them, but the objects close by as well. This important object or sign, can all be based upon the people using it, and also be in relation to its environment and surroundings. In the novel, The Lord of the Flies, the author, William Golding uses a conch shell to represent different meanings throughout his novel. The message in each of the different meanings of the conch, show how a group of young, British

Relevant Audit Procedures and Evidences in Verifying the Transaction Accounting in Auto World Free Essay Example, 2000 words

There are, however, two conditions Auto World must meet before accounting for Pit Stop as a separate component and these are the conditions on whether Pit Stop shall be reported as a discontinued operations (SFAS No. 144, Par. 42) or not. These two conditions, according to Par. 42 of SFAS No. 144, are that Pit Stop s operations and cash flows will be significantly eliminated after the sale and that Auto World will have no significant influence on Pit Stop s future operations. The second condition was already met based on the declaration of Auto World that the royalty agreement does not give Auto World significant influence over the operations of Pit Stop. As to the first condition on the elimination of operations and cash flows, we use here as a basis the contents of EITF Issue No. 3 13. According to EITF Issue No. 3 13, if the cash flows will be considered direct and significant to the total operations of Auto World as per its definition, the sold operations will not be consider ed a discontinued one. In Auto World s case, the royalty fees that it will receive after the disposition of Pit Stop are not direct cash flows as these are not the same as those generated by Pit Stop prior to its disposal. We will write a custom essay sample on Relevant Audit Procedures and Evidences in Verifying the Transaction Accounting in Auto World or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page This can be done through the following: (1) inquire from management the business purpose of Pit Stop, how Pit Stop relates to the rest of the operations of Auto World and how management analyzes the operations and financial results of Pit Stop.