Most of the urgent problems can only be solved with international cooperation. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Whether or not international cooperation should tackle to the alarming issues has been a matter of debate since the beginning of the twenty-

first

century. While there are a lot of benefits of the international organization, I would argue that it is better to address some difficulties in its own country by the national cooperation. In the

first

place, there are some reasons to believe that global collaboration has responsibility for finding a solution to emerge.

For instance

, global warming, natural disaster, infectious disease may have a negative impact on the global scale.

Therefore

, they usually require a lot of money from financial resource of worldwide organizations.

In addition

to that, fossil fuels like oil and gas are running out, people are cutting down enormous areas of rainforest and destroying wildlife habitats. The international cooperation should introduce laws to limit emissions from factories, invest in renewable energy from solar, wind and water power and natural areas and wild animals should be protected. In the

second

place, many kinds of urgent matters cannot be solved by international association but

also

by national assistances.

For example

, educational issues do not need action from other areas. If government can solve important problems like building educational system, having a good quality education, individuals will

also

trust in the government and have an obligation to themselves. The other reason is the distinct conditions of every country. As each nation has own difficulties related to culture, climate, politics which can only tackle by their government. In conclusion,

although

international collaboration brings a great number of benefits to solve immediate matters on global scales, I believe that national organization should

also

contribute their efforts to improving these problems on the national scale.