Sponsored

IELTS WRITING CONTEST - WEEK 2

Discussion in 'IELTS WRITING CONTEST - IWC' started by Anh Ngữ ZIM, Jul 17, 2016.

Follow IELTS Forum để cập nhật những bài học và tài liệu mới:

  1. Anh Ngữ ZIM

    Anh Ngữ ZIM Master Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2016
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    1,281

    Tham khảo

    IELTS WRITING CONTEST - WEEK 2

    You should spend about 60 minutes on this task.

    Topic: Many people think the interference of outside forces is necessary to settle territorial disputes which have sparked great controversy in the past year. Others consistently hold an opinion that this is the matter between the countries within the disputed area, and that they should deal with their problems themselves. Discuss both of these views and give your personal view.

    You should write at least 270 words.

    Start at: 21h40 - End at: 22h40

    2015-11-24-1448368360-6308649-chinaterritorialdisputes.png
     

    Share This Page

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016
    Belcooo likes this.
  2. td7122004

    td7122004 Master

    Joined:
    May 22, 2016
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    9

    Tham khảo

  3. Anh Ngữ ZIM

    Anh Ngữ ZIM Master Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2016
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    1,281

    Tham khảo

    Cộng thêm thời gian cho cả nhà rồi nha, tại mạng bị rớt quá :p
     

    Share This Page

  4. nhuquynh0308

    nhuquynh0308 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1

    Tham khảo

    Within the past year, there has been many international conflicts regarding territorial matters. While many people believe forces from other nations are of paramount importance in settling these disagreements, others share the view that only countries within the disputed area should be involved. Both of these views have their valid arguments which will be further discussed.

    On the one hand, it is evident that each nation has their rights to solve their problems without being interfered by other forces. To specify, these rights allow these countries to maintain their independence and sovereignty, as well as preventing other nations to use their power to influence and control the world. Moreover, as outsiders, other parties may not have enough knowledge or information regarding the conflict, which may prevent them from making an impartial deliverance.

    On the other hand, outside forces should play a role in settling these disputes. First of all, conflicts between a few nations can affect the rest of the world. For example, many countries import and export goods from other nations, thus the downfall of one can inflict negative effects on the economy of others. Also, there is a high risk that war may break out if the countries involved fail to reach an agreement. This may lead to other international issues such as terrorism or border-crossing. As a result, pressure from other parties in the world is vital to prevent these menaces.

    In conclusion, I believe that even though it is important for the insiders to take care of their matters, outside forces should also play a role in settling the disagreements between these countries.

    (267 words)
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  5. Nguyễn Trường An

    Nguyễn Trường An Master

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2016
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    12

    Tham khảo

    It is true that that territorial disputes between countries are inevitable. While some people insist that countries should deal with their problems themselves , I tend towards the viewpoint that countries should wield the influence of external forces to settle these problems.

    On the one hand, it is obvious that countries are able to to deal with problems without the involvement of foreign countries. The first point worthy of note is that countries which are involved in disputes might understand the situation better than other countries, which means effective measures and solutions are likely to be proposed by them. Another reason is that countries within disputed area have the capability to negotiate with each other and settle things in peace as they have talented diplomats and historians to address those problems. For example, conflicts between America and Mexico in terms of disputed area in the 19th century are tackled by themselves.

    On the other hand, it is undeniable that the interference of foreign forces is of paramount importance. The main reason is that foreign countries might have more powerful military forces than countries which are involved in disputes. For example, some developed countries such as America and England to interfere with affairs of many countries in the world. Secondly,international laws are needed to give support to countries within disputed area of dealing with there problems as some rich countries might wield their power and influences for the purpose of occupying that area. For example, disputes between Vietnam and China might be unable to be settled without international laws and external forces as China may use their power to force VIetnam to yield South China Sea for it. Finally, outside impacts may make the situation more objective, while alleviating conflicts between countries

    In conclusion, it is convenient for countries to deal with their problems themselves. However, it is obvious that the outside interference is the most effective way to solve those problems
     

    Share This Page

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016
    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  6. Anh Ngữ ZIM

    Anh Ngữ ZIM Master Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2016
    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    1,281

    Tham khảo

    Nhanh dữ dội :D
     

    Share This Page

  7. Junjan1995

    Junjan1995 Master

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    2

    Tham khảo

    Many people believe that the external intervention of other nations to the problem of territorial conflicts between two countries is of indispensable necessity. By contrast, some may think that it would be better for the involved parties to handle the disputes themselves. As far as i am concerned, there should be a combination of the two mentioned methods to solve the problem smartly.

    On the one hand, the interference of the outside parties can be absolutely important. That the speeches from other countries are the most subjective is probably undebatable since they are not in favour of any of the countries which are in the struggle. They would rather tend to advise the involved countries to respect and utilize the agreed international laws to cope with the conflicts than urge wars to happen. This is mainly because the outside people are usually judicious than the ones who are inside the problem. This can be clearly illustrated by the fact that international public opinion protested the Chinese action of resorting violence to solve the problems in the East Sea with Vietnamese counterpart.

    On the other hand, it seems true that the struggle of the inner nations is of the same importance. Each country is supposed to work out their evidence to prove the sovereignty over the conflicted areas, which no one can assist it to carry out. Besides, the relevant ones must make effort regarding gaining the endorsement of other uninvolved ones to facilitate the process of demanding justice.That only by using the above approaches can the relevant parties get their triumpth is an undeniable fact.

    In short, the governments whose countries are stuck in the national land disputes are advised to take advantage of the outside supporters as well as strive themselves to experience the final victory.
     

    Share This Page

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016
    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  8. haanh9

    haanh9 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2

    Tham khảo

    Territorial conflicts are now of the utmost concern to several countries as it entails the survival of the involved ones. While some people opine that the matters should be resolved within those countries with a void of external involvement, others gainsay. From my perspective, I strongly approve of international intervention for the two primary reasons.

    International aid should not be woefully neglected since it affects the area directly. More often than not, territorial dissent involves more than two countries, which have negative implications on not only two countries’ economy state but also surrounding ones. To illustrate the point, Phillipines has just claimed their privilege over some islands against China’s will. The contentious case between both countries has sparked a campaign which Chineses boycott Philippines’ produce such as mangoes, and bananas. As The US stayed by Phillipine side, Chinese is also calling for an abnomination of iPhone from America companies. The turbulent relationship has made economy staggering. In such cases, there should be a country step in and play the role of a synthesizer to help diminish the effects from such outcry.

    Meanwhile, outside forces are also required as a means of justice. Having said that, China, though having been denied its control over the Paracels and the Spratlys by the international court of justice, still refuse to follow their judgements. The situation now needs other countries stand by the just side to guarantee the judgement is implemented thoroughly and properly. If several goverments exert pressure on China, there is no alternative for China but to accept the court’s decision.

    To sum up, external intervention should not be considered as superfluous for the aforementioned reasons. Personally, I suppose outside forces in most cases is unavoidable because disputes do not only affect the sake of two countries and the consequences are sometimes global.
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  9. Emily Bay

    Emily Bay New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2016
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    3

    Tham khảo

    Bai cua ban Giang Hai Chau a (ban ay khong dang nhap duoc vao forum):

    Whether international intervention is justifiable in territorial conflicts has been a cause of concern for our world recently. While the opposing countries may be primarily responsible for their disargreement over land and sea sovereignty, the involvement of other parties is necessary as this promotes equality, objectivity and provides other support for countries in need.
    On the one hand, it is claimed by some that territorial disagreements should be addressed within the directly involved parties alone. This is because they have the major responsibility over their own dispute, and probably adequate evidence and policies to claim their sovereignty over the disputed region. Furthermore, requirement for support from outside parties can result in disruptive effects on the security and prosperity of the helpers. Allowing local disputes to threaten other countries, apparently, is unethical and unfair on many levels. Many European countries, for example, have had their security seriously threatened after admitting asylum seekers from Southeast Asia, a region on war.
    On the other hand, international support can be of vital importance in many cases. Generally, an objective perspective from a party that has little benefit in a dispute can introduce an element of justice, rather than biased opinions from insiders. Additionally, an international body can also provide reasonable financial, mental and judical support for weak sides in a territorial dispute. For instance, in July 2016, Court of Arbitration made a historic decision about the disputed land between Philippines and China, thus protecting the sovereignty over the land of the former and debunking the unfounded territorial claim of the latter. This decision has been vehemently hailed by most people all over the world as the momental decision over the disagreement on the East Sea.
    To conclude, while some maintain that land and sea disputes should be solved within involving countries alone, international assistance can play an essential role, ensuring justice and equality in the outcome of such disagreements. Personally, I believe that the whole world should lend support to righteous countries in such a dispute for the sake of peace and equality. Giang Hải Châu
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  10. tramchip

    tramchip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    3

    Tham khảo

    Throughout human history, there are constantly disputes and conflicts between countries over certain territories. Therefore, it is important to have a neutral force that acts as a mediator to avoid conflict escalations and maintain peace within the area. However, this viewpoint also raises a number of opposed opinions because a solution that acceptable for all concerned parties is still virtually impossible. In this essay these both viewpoints will be discussed.

    Over the past decades, international laws and judicial processes have been continuously developed and strongly fortified to ensure world peace. In the recent maritime arbitration case between China and Philippine, the water conflict issue has been going on for years and provoked several aggressive and violence actions that posed as threats to marine traffic within the dispute area. After numerous of political negotiations, both of the parties failed to reach an agreement and therefore it is crucial for the International Court of Justice to impose a judicial way of settlement.

    In other hand, in case such as Hans island which is the territory status disagreement of both Canada and Denmark for the past decades, even though each party dismissed the other side claim, there is no violent action recorded. Therefore, in such case there is no need of third party involvement and the issue should be left for concerned parties to address.

    In conclusion, the option of whether there is a necessary for a third party mediator or arbitrator to involve relies upon the concerned countries in dispute regions. The utmost important goal of a third party involvement is to be a peace keeper and therefore, such involvement have to come from concern party's request.
     

    Share This Page

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016
    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  11. Phongbella

    Phongbella Master

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1

    Tham khảo

    Recently, people have been privy to the fact that East Sea's peace is shattered and there is little gainsaying that immediate measures must be implemented against this problem. However, whereas many individuals endorse the encroachment of external forces to put an end to the issue, the opponent of this idea state that only nations within the disputed area should take actions. The following essay will give an analysis of the aforementioned viewpoints, prior to giving the author's opinions.
    On the one hand, it is widely believed to be arguably a good way to alleviate the East Sea disputes with the help of outside countries. as regards military and armed forces, some countries in the disputed area pale into insignificance compared to their rivals, thereby the situation necessitates the presence of strong and wealthy nations supporting the weaker. also, the interference of outside countries will preclude the possibility of war, which might otherwise be triggered off by the insatiable desire to possess the East Sea of each country involved, instead come up with a way to reconcile both side of arguments and wise, positive solutions. Hence, it is to some extent rational to seek help from outside country to tackle the current problem.
    On the other hand, the standpoint of having the area problems internally resolved can be justified. first and foremost, the intrusion of external factors into private affairs of countries bordering the East Sea might give rise to political intrigues of invasion from nations with a view to colonising South East Asia. Equally important, it should be noted that the dependence on stronger countries to stand in defense of smaller counterparts like Vietnam will ensue our over-reliance on those countries in the future as we are accustomed to being rendered assistance and gradually lose our identity inasmuch as we are strong and proud enough to stand our feet and having things solved of our accord. either of the aforesaid negative implications, if becoming real, would pose threats to the political existence of small countries in the East Sea area.
    All things considered, I am in favoured the latter standpoint, which aims at solving the problems on own our rather than resort to beseech help. Small though we may seem as country, we can still try our best to prove our possession over the East Sea in a way that we take pride in.
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  12. vuuyen11693

    vuuyen11693 Master

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3

    Tham khảo

    In the recent years, the territorial disputes are very vehement between countries. For example, there are disputes concerning both the Spratly and the Paracel islands between China and Viet Nam. Also, there is a further dispute in the waters near the Indonesian Natuna Islands. All of them concern with territorial sovereignty. The interference of outside or the dispute of between the countries is both necessary.

    First of all, that is the problem between the countries within the disputed area. That is a personal matter, so they should resolve and deal themselves. Territorial sovereignty is matters extremely sacred to all peoples. Sometimes, the disputes are very complex and require review carefully. Relevant countries should consider in a spirit of mutual respect and resolve the issue through negotiations. However, normally, these disputes is extremely difficult to resolve. Sometimes, the relevant countries can not solve satisfactorily. Therefore, they need the help from outside. That is the interference of outside.

    The interference of outside, it actually is necessary for the weak country. The powerful countries can help about their proclamation or pronouncement about territorial sovereignty. The trigger-happy countries that dispute the area not themselves, maybe, apprehend the powerful countries. Furthermore, the international law will be stand by the countries are right, the powerful countries can protect this.

    In my opinion, I agree on both. First, I agree that is a personal problem, they should deal with their problems themselves. But, whenever, they can resolve the dispute they should depend upon the powerful countries. Because I think that a weak country can not protect itself in front of a trigger-happy country. Thus, they need help from stronger countries.

    Overall, both of opinions are right, this depends on each person's viewpoint. The law, however, will always agree with the right things.
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  13. Lương Nguyên Hoàng Anh

    Lương Nguyên Hoàng Anh Master

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1

    Tham khảo

    In the current days, the sovereign conflicts are becoming more and more severe that they can lead to a lot of risks for world peace. Therefore, it is widely believed that all those problems should be solved in an equal circumstance under sober considerations of neutralists while some people think that related nations can cope with their struggles together instead of outside forces. In this essay, I totally concur that we need an equal sentence from international community with huge affair as territorial disputes.

    From one standpoint, I consider that some problems can be dealt with by diplomatic path as internal secrets for several reasons. Firstly, a domestic debate to find the way to cope with all problems of a nation can mitigate the potential worrying of civilians. In fact, when facing an accident affair that has negative impacts on their stable life, people usually make a force on their government so that leads to more confused consequences. Secondly, another countries can take advantage of the difficulties of their next-door neighbors to trigger arguments or earn profits. For instance, they increase the cost of some essential goods as rice, electricity that their next-door neighbors have cooperated to trade. Therefore, there are some significant infrastructures in not only economy but also the safe society when making a fuss.

    On the other hand, with severe problems as territorial disputes, we should take an interference of outside forces to solve those struggles more efficiently . The main reasons is that the smaller nations always encounter numberous obstacles to face up with rich countries. For instance, China usually shows off their brazen attitude in arguments about sovereignty of East-Sea with Vietnam and Philippines. Furthermore, the application of the international law proves that all countries want to fight to put the end to inequalities in the world. In fact, although a huge and affected nation such as China is objecting the sentence of PCA, the union of others show the power of equal rights movements when requiring strongly China to keep the respect with international rules.


    For many reasons mentioned above, I highly appreciate that all nations had better promote the help of the interference of international community to protect their precious territory.
     

    Share This Page

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016
    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  14. Khanhhuyen

    Khanhhuyen New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1

    Tham khảo

    It is no doubt that the more the world develops, the more complicated it is, especially in politics. As a result, many people hold the belief that the interference of outside forces is necessary to settle territorial disputes which have sparked great controversy in the past year. However, others suppose that this is the matter between the countries within the disputed area, and that they should deal with their problems themselves. It seems to me that the first opinion is right in now world situation.
    In 2016, there are a lot of serious attacks and disputes taking place in many countries. We can refer to civil war in Syria, North Korea Crisis and so on. As far as we are concerned, both of internal and external factors lead to this. However, dealing with them perfectly is a difficult thing for two sides. For example, tensions between Japan and China over the contested Senkaku islands in the East China Sea have subsided in recent months as a result of high-level political discussions organized to prevent a dangerous escalation. However, close interactions between air and maritime forces of both countries continue. Rising nationalist sentiments and growing political mistrust heighten the potential for conflict and hinders the capacity for peaceful resolution of the dispute. Though Chinese and Japanese leaders have refrained from forcibly establishing control over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, unauthorized action by local commanders could result in the unintended escalation of hostilities. Through treaty commitments with Japan, a military confrontation could involve the United States. To preserve relations with China and continue cooperation on various issues, the United States has an interest in de-escalating tensions. Through this, it is easy to see the Americian interference, which takes an inevitable step to improve the relationship between China and Japan, which are these two powerhouses in the world. With the considerable support of Americia government in mitigating the conflict in Asia, consequently, world situation can be in peace, in general. Without it, the Third World War could break out.
    In conclusion, the interference of outside forces is necessary to settle territorial disputes which have sparked great controversy under any now circumstances. However, the government should be as sober as a judge when one country or another are related to its nearly all aspects. If possible and not serious, they should deal with their problems themselves within the disputed area.
     

    Share This Page

    Anh Ngữ ZIM likes this.
  15. Willienguyen06

    Willienguyen06 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1

    Tham khảo

    Despite being a considerably peaceful time in human history, the second decade of the twentieth century still witnesses several territorial conflicts that threat to disrupt world peace. One of the most heated issue is the territorial dispute in the South China Sea between China and other countries of South East Asia. While various people claim that foreign intervention is vital to calm the situation, others argue that this regional problem only require related countries’ participation.

    To begin with, it is believed that Non Governmental Organization like the United Nations and influential countries such as the United State, Russia or Japan should interfere politically and militarily since the dispute is beyond present countries’ capability to handle. For instance, the United State made a statement to deploy armed ships and aircrafts into the South China Sea to challenge China’s breach of South East Asia countries’ right. While the claim may seem to be a generous promise on first glance, it can be seen that the US may take advantage of this situation to secure a permanent militarily spot in the area. To sum up, the world revolves around the notion of ‘give and take’, though global intervention is needed at crucial times, it can also be an excuse to sabotage disputing countries’ vulnerable states.

    On the other hand, opponents of the previous idea assert that a solution to salvage peace in this area can only be achieved internally. They rely on Philippine’s recent win in an arbitration case against China to deduce that regardless of the country’s size and political power, it can still achieve victory itself if it fight righteously and persistently. In another words, contrary to its fellow country Vietnam who fought weakly against China’s great influence, Philippine choose to make this a litigious case and win with global support. In a nut shell, each countries should be a lone fighter in its way to protect its sovereignty.

    To my mind, I am on the side of those who wish to solve conflict internally because external conflict proves greater threat in already conflicted area. Regardless of how complicated the circumstances, it is wiser to end the problem quietly between involving parties to maintain world peace.
     

    Share This Page

    anh chau likes this.

Share This Page