JACOB HORSTKAMP

**** ******* *****, *******, ********, 21113

Ph: +1-443-***-****

adhlxz@r.postjobfree.com

Professional Summary

A First-Class Honours/Summa Cum Laude International Relations graduate from the University of Birmingham (UK) with experience performing extensive research on global security issues including, nuclear proliferation, climate change, and non-state violence. A results-driven team player with excellent writing abilities and capable of managing multiple priorities around tight deadlines. Skills

• Strong and engaging communicator and

experienced public speaker/presenter.

• Highly competent in planning, setting objectives and targets, and determining courses of action.

• Proven ability to build and maintain positive

relationships with external stakeholder groups.

• IT literate in Microsoft Office and G-suite

software products.

• Demonstratable interest in current events, the

news, and national/global politics.

• Proficient user of multiple social media platforms

(Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and etc.)

Related Experience

Summer Intern/Contracting Coordinator – Medical-Surgical Team 07/ 2019 12/ 2019 HealthTrust Europe Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK

• Initially a summer internship, but my role was extended for an additional 3 months on a part-time basis alongside my university studies in recognition of my strong contribution to the company.

• Monitored department financial activities to identify areas of risk and recovered over 75k in missing revenue with an excess of 45k of ABI retained by the business.

• Researched individual National Health Service (NHS) Trust Care Quality Commission (CQC) ratings and developments in UK healthcare policy to advise staff on new developments/business opportunities within the sector.

• Compiled appropriate data and documentation towards developing a series of framework agreements to support staff in launching several new categories and similar new business leads. Student Board Member 07/ 2015 07/2016

Anne Arundel County Public Schools Riva, Maryland, USA

• Elected official student representative on the Anne Arundel County Public Schools (AACPS) Board of Education serving as a member of the executive and judicial council for the county schools district.

• Lobbied local and state officials to secure funding to equip every classroom with up-to-date learning equipment (i.e. Smartboards, documents cameras, etc.).

• Served as a liaison between students, stakeholders, and outside organizations by attending a variety of networking, school-related, and charity events, in addition to bi-weekly board meetings.

• Co-Chair of the Board Policy Committee where I reviewed and analysed educational policy with multiple local interest groups and relevant stakeholders to recommend changes to these policies that support the interests of the ~80,000 students and ~10,000 employees of AACPS. Student Page – House of Representatives 01/2016 04/ 2016 Maryland General Assembly Annapolis, Maryland, USA

• Scheduled and confirmed appointments for members of the Maryland House of Representatives with interest groups and non-governmental organisations.

• Monitored and managed paper or electronic filing systems, recording information, and maintaining documents, such as bill books, delegate correspondence, or other material delegates require during General Assembly sessions.

• Researched and analysed legislation on several subnational/local educational and environmental policy issues and compiled findings into concise memos for House Delegates. Other Experience

Sales Assistant/Lead Cashier (Seasonal) 04/ 2016 12/ 2018 American Eagle Outfitters – Annapolis, Maryland, USA

• Facilitated in resolving customer enquiries while maintaining a high degree of customer service, recognised by management through progression to lead cashier role.

• Cooperated with fellow staff members with duties in other areas of the store, such as monitoring fitting rooms or replenishing inventory.

English Language Teacher 06/2018 08/2018

Richwood Foreign Language School Dongguan Guangdong, China

• Primary-level English Language teacher where key duties comprised of designing and leading activities intended to develop the English language skills of non-English speaking primary school-level students.

• Responsibility for preparation of assigned classes and lessons in-line with review timetable of supervising staff and other significant deadlines. Education

BA International Relations – 1st Class Honours/Summa Cum Laude 09/2016 – 07/2020 University of Birmingham West Midlands, England

• Undergraduate Thesis (Final Grade: 72% / A)

• Thesis assessing the institutional effectiveness of the 2016 Paris Agreement and its ability to pressure member countries into adopting the sufficient climate mitigation policies to mitigate the effects of global climate change.

• Sovereignty, Statehood, and Violence (Final Grade: 75%/ A).

• Module examining the concept of sovereignty and the importance of recognition in the international system and in regions prone to civil conflict.

High School Diploma 08/2012 – 06/ 2016

North County High School Glen Burnie, Maryland, USA

• Grade Point Average (GPA) 3.9/4.0. (Top 10 percentile of graduating class).

• Member of the NCHS Varsity Swim Team, National Honor Society, and STEM Magnet Program. Personal Interests

• Enjoy going on hike with friends/family and improving my French language skills. References

• References can be supplied upon request.

Writing Sample

This paper will argue that Britain should continue to have nuclear weapons for the sake of its security. Although the rationale behind owning nuclear weapons has changed since the end of the Cold War, the debate on whether or not states should continue to possess nuclear weapons is essential towards understanding contemporary security concerns and the importance nuclear weapons have in today’s international relations. Therefore, the discussion on whether or not the United Kingdom (UK) should continue to have nuclear weapons will significantly influence Britain’s future position in global politics and its relationship with other states. Thus, this paper will present three key arguments in favour of retaining Britain’s nuclear arsenal in support of strengthening Britain’s security against external threats. First, this essay will define security in the context of this paper and Britain’s possession of nuclear weapons. Next, I will explain how nuclear weapons provide states considerable influence and legitimacy within the international system. Then, I will discuss how the disarmament of Britain’s nuclear weapons would be detrimental to Britain’s security interest and how it would discourage other nuclear weapons states (NWSs) from disarming their nuclear weapons as well. Furthermore, I will explain how the UK’s relationship with the United States (US) would weaken if it no longer possessed a nuclear arsenal. Lastly, I will explain how nuclear weapons are still relevant in world politics despite being ineffective in addressing emerging security threats such as non-state terrorism and rogue regimes. It is essential to define what security is in the context of this paper to understand how it relates to Britain’s security interest and its possession of nuclear weapons. This paper will define security as when a state is free from external threats that may inhibit its capacity to operate within the international system. Therefore, a threat to a state’s security is any action from an external actor that would weaken a state’s power or influence in the international system. This paper will only examine external threats to Britain’s security as it seeks to address how the possession of nuclear weapons affects Britain’s security and its relationship with other states in global politics. Thus, the arguments presented in this paper will identify and explain how Britain’s possession of nuclear weapons maintains or improves its security from external threats.

States continue to possess nuclear weapons as it grants them greater legitimacy and influence within the international system. Since the end of the Cold War, states have continued to maintain or expand their nuclear weapons programmes despite there no longer being a specific target for these weapons to be used against. States continue to develop nuclear arsenals as they possess a legitimizing effect on any that state that successfully develops nuclear weapons. The UK, Russia, United States, France, and China all possess nuclear weapons and are also the permanent five members to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) thus, supporting the argument that powerful states own nuclear weapons. If a state wants to obtain greater legitimacy in the international system, then they need to possess nuclear weapons. Therefore, it is considerably important for the UK to continue to possess nuclear weapons. By disarming its nuclear arsenal, Britain may severely limit its ability to leverage other states and influence global politics to align with its security interests. The political influence of countries that do not possess nuclear weapons is overwhelmingly weak, whereas states that possess nuclear weapons can manipulate and influence international agendas, norms, and procedures. Thus, Britain’s power and influence with the UNSC would severely dimish if it were to disarm its nuclear weaponry. Previous arguments claim that states such as Germany have been successful in having strong diplomatic voices within international politics despite not having nuclear weapons. Therefore, if Britain no longer possesses nuclear weapons, its legitimacy in global politics would not be affected. This argument presents a broad assumption that nuclear weapons do not grant a state legitimacy within international politics and that the argument does not provide sufficient evidence to support its claims. Although Germany may have a strong position in international relations it has never been a permanent member of the UNSC. This claim would only be valid if another permanent member of the UNSC were to give up possession of nuclear weapons and their legitimacy within the international system would remain unchanged. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence supporting the argument that Britain should maintain its nuclear arsenal as it ensures the UK’s legitimacy within the UNSC and strengthen its security against external security threats.

Furthermore, Britain’s disarmament of its nuclear weapons would not encourage other NWSs to follow in their footsteps. Since the end of the Cold War, the UK has the smallest nuclear stockpiles among all other NWSs, and yet no other state has shown to dramatically reduce their nuclear stockpiles because the UK has chosen to do so. Several academics argue that if the UK were to give up all of their nuclear weapons, then it would encourage other states to disarm as well. Given the insufficient evidence to support this claim, it is highly unlikely for this situation to occur. Thus, Britain’s security interest would not benefit from disarming its nuclear weapons as it will not encourage other NWSs continue to possess nuclear weapons. Also, if the UK were to give up their nuclear weapons, it would potentially have an adverse effect on global politics and lead to greater uncertainty among states. Britain has the knowledge and expertise to develop nuclear weapons in which, there is no way to guarantee that Britain might change their mind and begin to develop nuclear weapons again in secrecy. Disarmament of the UK’s nuclear weapons may potentially lead to an increase in external security threats as it would create mistrust between Britain and other states. Several academics maintain the argument that future advancements in technology may allow states to detect when an entity is developing nuclear weapons eliminating the suspicion of whether or not it is developing nuclear weapons. This argument is valid to an extent as it would reduce the suspicion among former nuclear states developing nuclear weapons but, there is no official guarantee that the knowledge and expertise of developing nuclear weapons will never be used again within the state. Thus, Britain should continue to possess nuclear weapons as it fails to encourage other NWSs to disarm their nuclear weapons and it ensures trust among the international community as states are fully aware that Britain possesses nuclear weapons. Next, Britain needs to maintain its nuclear arsenal to preserve its relationship with the United States. As the UK is one of the US’ closest allies within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is it necessary for the UK to maintain this relationship. By having such a strong relationship with the US, the UK is the ability to have political and military influence in Washington to align with Britain’s greater security interests. The United States benefits from this relationship as it would be able to maintain its security in Europe through its relationship with Britain. Therefore, if Britain no longer possessed nuclear weapons, it may severely affect its relationship with the United States. The US may no longer see Britain as its most reliable ally, and it may encourage the US to enhance its relationship with France as it would be the only NWS and permanent member of the UNSC in Europe. Several academics have argued that the US/UK relationship would still thrive even if the UK were to no longer possess nuclear weapons as Britain would still be under the US/NATO nuclear ‘umbrella’. Although that is true, this claim does not guarantee that the United States would still protect the UK in the event of nuclear devastation. It is highly unlikely that the UK would sacrifice Washington or New York to protect London in the event of a nuclear missile being launched. Therefore, is it vital to the UK’s security interest that it maintain a nuclear arsenal as it protects the UK from significant external security threats. Also, the UK provides NATO with a second base of nuclear deterrence located outside of the US and within Europe thus, enhancing NATO’s deterrence capabilities against any potential nuclear threats. The UK must continue to possess nuclear weapons to enhance NATO’s deterrence capabilities and maintain its relationship with the US as it would strengthen the UK’s security from external threats. This paper has presented several key arguments to support the debate that Britain should continue to possess nuclear weapons for the sake of its security. The UK requires weapons to ensure its legitimacy within the international system and maintain authority and influence as a permanent member of the UNSC. There is insufficient evidence to prove that if Britain were to give up its nuclear weapons that other states would do the same and that by disarming its nuclear arsenal Britain may encourage greater uncertainty among the international system. Furthermore, the UK maintains a strong relationship with the US because of its nuclear capabilities, where disarmament would lead the US to strengthen its relationship with other nuclear states instead of the UK. Today, the number of states seeking to obtain nuclear weapons continues to increase and states that possess nuclear arsenals show no sign of relinquishing their stockpiles. Rising tensions between NATO and Russia is contributing to greater uncertainty among the future of global politics and deterrence. Therefore, Britain should continue to possess nuclear weapons as it would be highly disadvantageous if it were to give up its nuclear arsenal during a time of significant uncertainty within the international system.

Contact this candidate