id
int64 0
366k
| cite_id
int64 273
459k
| title
stringlengths 1
127
⌀ | cites
stringlengths 1
3.64M
⌀ | round_id
int64 565k
998k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
300 | 380,141 | disclose | email us before round and we down to disclose as long as u do
llayman-22@peddie.org
dliu-22@peddie.org | 905,439 |
301 | 380,146 | Contact Info | Anya Tang/Aaron Joy on Facebook messenger
Text/email 15 min before round for disclosure | 905,444 |
302 | 380,143 | Disclosure | A-Interpretation: Debaters must disclose contact information (email and at least one other source) under the PF NDCA wiki under their own name at least an hour before round.
B-Violation: No contact info on the wiki
C-Standards:
1. Clash: If debaters are prepared, they’ll write specific responses to each position.
Without disclosure, debaters are more likely to be stunned and not respond.
Disclosure’s best for in-round critical thinking because that will never happen if
debaters don’t understand each others args. Clash is key to education because it’s
the constitutive benefit of debate.
2. Strat Skew: It hurts small schools if people don’t disclose contact info because big schools
will get the flows regardless, but small schools won’t get flows. So, they will get
prepped out but won’t have the opportunity to prep out their opponents. Strat is
key to forming a coherent ballots story and winning.
3. Academic Integrity: Disclosure means that we can check to see if debaters have
cut cards correctly. Even if we can get cites from them, my interp is always
better because everyone will be able to check. Academic integrity is key to
education because the ability to cheat disincentivizes research and reading the
topic lit.
D. Voter. Fairness. Unfair arguments arbitrarily skew your evaluation of the
round. Education’s a voter—it’s a core value of debate. Academic integrity is an
independent voter because any academic community needs honest
communication to exist. Use competing interps because a) reasonability is
arbitrary—everyone has their own BS meter. B) Reasonability creates a race to
the bottom and greater abuse. C) Reasonability collapses to competing interps.
We have to give offensive reasons to prefer a paradigm. CI is an extension of
argumentation so it should apply to theory. Drop the debater a) Deterrence.
Aprioris have empirically decreased because theory being drop the debater. B)
Round is skewed- I invested time and altered my strat which is supercharged by
1AR constraints. C) There’s no argument to drop since the violation was the
omission to disclose. | 905,441 |
303 | 380,147 | AC DiplomacyOil | AC – Diplomacy/Oil
We affirm
Resolved: The United States should end its economic sanctions against Venezuela.
Our First Contention is a Diplomatic Solution.
Benjamin explains in 2019 that targeted sanctions have only led to political change in 5 out of 115 cases studied. That is why Rodriguez finds in 2018 that even with Trump’s hardline stance against, Nicolas Maduro, Venezuela’s authoritarian ruler, he is more entrenched in power than ever and peace talks have failed.
Sanctions have prevented successful negotiations and political change in Venezuela for 2 reasons.
First, by emboldening hardliners.
Kurmanaev finds in 2019 that President Trump’s strengthening of sanctions just last year emboldened hardline opponents of peace talks within Maduro’s administration. This is crucial as Polga finds in 2019 that government liberalization would require a split from hardliners in the regime. DW News furthers in 2019 that Maduro walked away from brokered talks with the country’s opposition specifically to protest increased sanctions.
This put an end to what many analysts had considered the country’s best chance to end the crisis.
Second, by providing the government a scapegoat.
Ward explains in 2019 that sanctions have given Maduro ammunition to paint the US as a big, mean bully who is trying to make the Venezuelan people suffer. This has allowed him to regain favor among the military which is crucial to maintaining his power.
Overall, Polga finds in 2019 that the US can use negotiations to encourage a top-down liberalization of the Venezuelan government to encourage fair elections and free-market economics.
Our Second Contention is Reviving the Oil Industry.
Beeton finds in 2019 that while the Venezuelan economy had declined before US sanctions began, the sanctions had the impact of preventing a recovery. Sanctions have had the impact of locking the Venezuelan economy in a box.
Specifically, the reason for this decline is due to sanctioning the oil industry as Morgenstern finds in 2019 that oil sales constituted 98 of Venezuela’s export revenues.
Sanctions have caused a decline in oil production in two ways.
First, by blocking sales.
Rodriguez writes in 2019 that financial sanctions are associated with a loss of 16.9 billion dollars per year in forgone oil revenues. This is because as Kumar explains in 2019, prior to oil sanctions, 75 of the cash Venezuela received from shipments of crude oil came from the United States. Furthermore, Fox explains in 2019 that the US has blocked international trade by threatening sanctions on foreign companies for doing business with Venezuela, further restricting oil sales.
Second, by preventing access to needed supplies.
Egan explains in 2019 that the United States was Venezuela’s main source of naphtha, the hydrocarbon mixture needed to dilute and transport heavy crude for export. However, because of US sanctions, Venezuela is unable to gain access to this critical chemical which is why Parraga finds in 2019 that Venezuelan imports of naphtha and other necessary fuels decreased from 300,000 bpd to 140,000 bpd. On top of this, Constable explains in 2018 that US sanctions mean extraction equipment is hard to come by in the country as drill bits and metal pipes quickly get worn out in the oil business because oil is highly corrosive. Without replacement parts the wells cannot operate.
Overall, Kurmanaev explains in 2019 that US sanctions will cut Venezuela’s oil exports by two-thirds and led to a 26 reduction in the economy’s size. So far Rodriguez writes in 2019 that because of sanctions, oil production has decreased by 37.
There are two impacts.
The first is solving the country’s economic problems.
Martin and Laya explain in 2019 that shrinking oil revenues have prevented Venezuela from paying off its debt of $157 billion. This high debt has effectively prevented Venezuela from controlling its inflation. Allowing the oil industry to rebound, will ensure Venezuela can solve its economic crisis.
Second is allowing access to food and medicine.
Wyss explains in 2019 that decreasing oil revenues through sanctions has the effect of limiting the country’s ability to import necessities like food and medicine. Because of this, Herbst explains in 2019 that more than 80 of Venezuelan households are food insecure and 3.7 million Venezuelans are malnourished. Fox adds in 2019 that more than 300,000 people are at risk due to lack of access to medicines because of sanctions. Crucially, Camilleri explains in 2019 that Venezuelan society must be able to eat to resist Maduro.
Without access to food and medicine a popular uprising is impossible.
Thus, we affirm.
CARDS
C1 Diplomacy
Intro
Remedios ‘19
Remedios, Jesse. May 7 2019. “Sanctions against Venezuela: diplomatic tool or indiscriminate weapon?” National Catholic Reporter. https://www.ncronline.org/news/world/sanctions-against-venezuela-diplomatic-tool-or-indiscriminate-weapon
When the Trump administration announced in January it would back Juan Guaidó's claim as the rightful president of Venezuela, it instituted a series of harsh economic sanctions against the country's authoritarian leader Nicolás Maduro in hopes of overthrowing his regime. When Guaidó's April 30 "military uprising" failed to amount to much, some analysts questioned what U.S. sanctions, the anti-Maduro strategy going back to 2017, were accomplishing. One report from a prominent think tank argued the results are nothing short of a worsening humanitarian crisis, evident in the form of 40,000 excess deaths researchers found in one year alone.
Benjamin ’19
Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J S Davies, Common Dreams, 17 June 2019, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/06/17/us-sanctions-economic-sabotage-deadly-illegal-and-ineffective
There is one more critical reason for sparing the people of Iran, Venezuela and other targeted countries from the deadly and illegal impacts of U.S. economic sanctions: they don’t work. Twenty years ago, as economic sanctions slashed Iraq’s GDP by 48 over 5 years and serious studies documented their genocidal human cost, they still failed to remove the government of Saddam Hussein from power. Two UN Assistant Secretaries General, Denis Halliday and Hans Von Sponeck, resigned in protest from senior positions at the UN rather than enforce these murderous sanctions. In 1997, Robert Pape, then a professor at Dartmouth College, tried to resolve the most basic questions about the use of economic sanctions to achieve political change in other countries by collecting and analyzing the historical data on 115 cases where this was tried between 1914 and 1990. In his study, titled “Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work,” he concluded that sanctions had only been successful in 5 out of 115 cases. Pape also posed an important and provocative question: “If economic sanctions are rarely effective, why do states keep using them?” He suggested three possible answers: “Decision makers who impose sanctions systematically overestimate the prospects of coercive success of sanctions.” “Leaders contemplating ultimate resort to force often expect that imposing sanctions first will enhance the credibility of subsequent military threats.” “Imposing sanctions usually yields leaders greater domestic political benefits than does refusing calls for sanctions or resorting to force.” We think that the answer is probably a combination of “all of the above.” But we firmly believe that no combination of these or any other rationale can ever justify the genocidal human cost of economic sanctions in Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela or anywhere else.
Rodriguez ‘18
Francisco Rodriguez, Foreign Policy, 12 January 2018, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/12/why-more-sanctions-wont-help-venezuela/
During the first year of his administration, U.S. President Donald Trump has taken an increasingly hard line against the government of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro. Washington has tightened sanctions on Caracas and even suggested a military intervention to remove the Venezuelan leader from office. Twelve months into Trump’s term, Maduro seems even more entrenched in power, and Venezuela’s opposition is more fractured than ever.
1 – Hardliners
Kurmanaev ‘19
Kurmanaev, Anatoly. Aug 8 2019. “Venezuela’s Leader Suspends Talks With Opposition.” New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/world/americas/venezuela-maduro-opposition-talks-barbados.html
President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela has suspended mediated talks with his country’s opposition movement, to protest the Trump administration’s latest sanctions. The move threatens what many analysts and diplomats consider to be the country’s best chance of ending a crippling political and economic crisis. Accusing the administration of “grave and brutal aggression,” Mr. Maduro recalled his envoys late Wednesday night, hours before they were to board a plane to rejoin opposition negotiators and Norwegian mediators on the Caribbean island of Barbados. On Monday, President Trump signed an executive order freezing all Venezuelan state assets in the United States, and his national security adviser, John R. Bolton, threatened to impose sanctions on Mr. Maduro’s remaining trade partners. Venezuela has been in an ongoing recession since Mr. Maduro took office in 2013 and initially doubled down on his predecessor’s disastrous policies of currency and price controls and expropriations. As his popularity tanked, he has increasingly relied on repression and electoral machinations to stay in power. The United States has progressively cut off Mr. Maduro’s access to international finance since January, when it recognized the head of Venezuela’s opposition, Juan Guaidó, as the country’s legitimate leader. The latest executive order is intended to scare off Mr. Maduro’s remaining trading partners in Russia and Asia from doing business in Venezuela. It was unclear whether Mr. Maduro would rejoin the talks at a later date. Both sides have benefited from appearing to seek a negotiated resolution to the crisis, but the latest American sanctions have emboldened hardline opponents of the talks within Mr. Maduro’s administration. “The Barbados dialogue is a dialogue with extremists,” Mr. Maduro said on state television Wednesday after suspending the talks. “Many ask me why you’re talking with those who want to kill you.”
DW News ’19
8 August 2019, “Nicolas Maduro halts talks with opposition over US sanctions”, https://www.dw.com/en/venezuela-nicolas-maduro-halts-talks-with-opposition-over-us-sanctions/a-49938617
Venezuela's information ministry said on Wednesday that the government would not attend a planned round of talks, brokered by Norway, with the opposition in Barbados this week. The move came in response to Washington's decision to freeze all assets held by Venezuela's government in the US and blocking US citizens from conducting business with Maduro's government. "President Nicolas Maduro has decided to not send the Venezuelan delegation on this occasion, due to the serious and brutal aggression, perpetrated continuously and cunningly, by the Trump administration against Venezuela,” the statement read.
Polga ‘19
John Polga-Hecimovich, 30 August 2019, https://www.georgetownjournalofinternationalaffairs.org/online-edition/2019/8/28/a-transition-from-above-or-from-below-in-venezuela
Venezuela continues to buckle under the autocratic rule of Nicolás Maduro. Street protests and social pressure, however, have not succeeded in dislodging the president or bringing about the democratic change so many Venezuelans desire. Instead, the political opposition and international allies have bet on a transition “from above,” or a combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches, and hope to effect change by encouraging a split in Maduro’s governing coalition. Indeed, this appears to be one of the strategies the United States is using in its recently revealed negotiations with members of the Venezuelan government to encourage free and fair elections and the exit of Maduro. Existing scholarly research suggests that a lack of prominent pro-government political moderates makes a transition from above unlikely. Instead, re-democratization depends on finding and courting moderate members of the government—in this case, moderate supporters of ex-president Hugo Chávez, known as Chavistas. However, if press reports are accurate, the United States is in contact with Diosdado Cabello and other pro-Maduro hardliners
Given the unlikelihood of transition from below, Venezuela’s political opposition, the Lima Group, and other international actors have set their sights on inducing top-down change through a combination of sticks and a few carrots. This type of transition characteristically stems from self-imposed government liberalization, carried out by a government which seeks to reinforce itself and in doing so may inadvertently bring about democratization. This strategic miscalculation from autocrats is more common than it might first appear. Latin American history is replete with examples of top-down liberalization in which dictators relaxed repression, allowed some civil liberties, and began negotiations with pro-democratic opposition elites. This includes the re-democratization of Ecuador (1976-1979), Brazil (1982-1985), Uruguay (1983-1984), and Chile throughout the 1980s. Similar processes occurred in Poland and with the reunification of Germany in 1989. Liberalization often results from a split in the authoritarian regime between “hard-liners” (in this case Nicolás Maduro, Jorge and Delcy Rodríguez, Tareck El Aissami, Diosdado Cabello) and moderate “soft-liners” (Héctor Rodríguez, Aristóbulo Isturiz). In most cases, the hardline authoritarian leader faces pressure due to declining economic conditions or social unrest, and soft-liners rise to prominence. Whereas hard-liners tend to be satisfied with the status quo, moderates may prefer to liberalize and broaden the social base of the dictatorship in order to gain allies and strengthen their position vis-à-vis the hardliners.
2 – Scapegoat
Ward ‘19
Alex Ward, Vox, 3 May 2019, https://www.vox.com/world/2019/5/3/18528083/venezuela-guaido-maduro-trump-bolton-fail
What’s more, a US official told me in January that sanctions on PdVSA essentially gives Maduro even more ammunition to paint the US as a big, mean bully trying to destroy Venezuela and make its people suffer. If the economy tanks even further than it already has, the Venezuelan leader can blame the US sanctions and perhaps regain some favor among both the elites — particularly the military leadership — whose support Maduro needs to remain in power, as well as everyday Venezuelans who are the most vulnerable to economic pressures. Maduro needs a good scapegoat: Millions have fled the country due to the crippling economic crisis gripping the country. Inflation is through the roof. Hunger rates have skyrocketed. And diseases once thought eradicated from Venezuela have sparked a new health crisis.
Reuters ‘17
2 October 2017, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/venezuelas-maduro-approval-rises-to-23-percent-after-trump-sanctions-poll-idUSKCN1C8037
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s approval rating rose to 23 percent in September, up 6 percentage points from 17 percent in July, according to a poll by local firm Datanalisis. The rebound followed several rounds of sanctions by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration as well as a sharp drop-off in four months of violent anti-government protests. Nearly 52 percent of respondents opposed the Trump administration sanctions that came in response to the creation of a legislative superbody called the Constituent Assembly, which critics call the consolidation of a dictatorship.
Impact
Rapoza ‘19
Kenneth Rapoza, Senior Contributor to Forbes, May 3, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2019/05/03/no-u-s-sanctions-are-not-killing-venezuela-maduro-is/#659c9f8e4343
But Venezuela is not the Middle East. U.S. policies are not the reason why Venezuela is a mess, as Omar said this week on the Democracy Now! radio program. The U.S. is not making Venezuela any worse than it is or will become under existing leadership. Her view mimics many left-of-center voices critical of the regime change policies that began under Bush and Cheney. The ruling Socialists United of Venezuela is, point blank, the only reason why Venezuela is a mess. And president Nicolas Maduro is its leader. Maduro governs a failed state. Fifty other countries, including Colombia, Brazil, the U.K. and Spain, all agree. Brazil and Colombia are currently catering to around one million Venezuelans who have fled the country. Some have preferred taking their children out of school and living in United Nations tents in Colombia instead of Maduro's Venezuela. Maduro's incompetence, of which the Socialists United rallies around, is killing Venezuela. Not Trump. Not Elliot Abrams. Not Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. This is not a pre-emptive strike, searching for terrorists under beds and weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. The economy began its deep decline years ago, in the Obama years. It has been in an economic depression for three years. Obama first sanctioned members of the Maduro Administration in 2015. Trump later sanctioned Maduro's Vice President Tareck El Aissami for drug trafficking in February 2017. Later that year, U.S. companies were banned from providing financial assistance (as in loans) to one company only, oil firm PdVSA.
C2 Oil
Intro
Beeton ‘19
March 25, 2019, “Venezuela’s Oil Production Plummets in February Due to New US Sanctions Sales to US Also Disappear for the First Time,” http://cepr.net/press-center/press-releases/venezuela-s-oil-production-plummets-in-february-due-to-new-us-sanctions kegs
While the Venezuelan economy was already in bad shape before US sanctions began, due to a collapse in oil prices and mistakes in macroeconomic policy, the sanctions especially since August 2017 have prevented the government from taking measures that could get rid of hyperinflation and allow for an economic recovery from a long depression.
Weisbrot and Sachs ‘19
Mark Weisbrot and Jeffrey Sachs. April 2019. CEPR. http://cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
Thus one of the most important impacts of the sanctions, in terms of its effects on human life and health, is to lock Venezuela into a downward economic spiral. For this reason, it is important to note that when we look at, for example, the estimated more than 40,000 excess deaths that occurred just from 2017 to 2018, the counterfactual possibility in the absence of sanctions is not just zero excess deaths, but actually a reduction in mortality and other improvements in health indicators. That is because an economic recovery could have already begun in the absence of economic sanctions. And conversely, the death toll going forward this year, if the sanctions remain in place, is almost certainly going to be vastly higher than anything we have seen previously, given the highly accelerated rate of decline of oil production and therefore the availability of essential imports, and also the accelerated decline of income per person.
Links
Fox ’19
DW News, 10 January 2019, https://www.dw.com/en/the-human-cost-of-the-us-sanctions-on-venezuela/a-50647399
President Donald Trump intensified sanctions in 2017 and this year imposed an oil embargo that blocked the purchase of petroleum from Venezuela's state oil company, PDVSA. It also confiscated Venezuela's US subsidiary CITGO, worth $8 billion. It was a huge blow for Venezuela, which received 90 of government revenue from the oil industry. The U.S. government has also frozen $5.5 billion of Venezuelan funds in international accounts in at least 50 banks and financial institutions. Even if Venezuela could get money abroad, the United States has long blocked international trade by threatening sanctions on foreign companies for doing business with the country.
Rodriguez ‘19
Francisco Rodriguez 06-24-2019. Torino Economics. https://torinocap.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Sanctions-and-Vzlan-Economy-June-2019.pdf.
This paper considers the evidence on the effect of financial and oil sanctions in the 2017-19 period on Venezuelan oil production and broader socio-economic indicators. Using a panel of countries covering 95 of the word’s oil production, we show that Venezuela’s acceleration in the rate of decline in oil output after the imposition of financial sanctions in 2017 was more rapid than that of all other oil-producing economies in the world except for those undergoing armed conflict at the time. Using synthetic control methods, we estimate that financial sanctions were associated with a decline in production of 797tbd, which at today’s oil prices would represent USD 16.9bn a year in foregone oil revenues.
Run on a four-year pre-trend window (2013-2017), all but 1 of the 36 regressions produce a negative estimate of ?1. The exception is the pairwise comparison with Yemen, to which we return below. Chart 4 shows the distribution of these estimates. The median coefficient estimate is -.46, which indicates that sanctions lead to a 46 log point decline in oil output. Taking the August 2017 level of oil production as the starting point, this estimate would imply that sanctions are associated with a 37.1 decline in Venezuela’s oil production, or of 689 thousand barrels per day or USD15.2bn in export revenue at current prices. 5
Morgenstern ‘19
Scott Morgenstern and John Polga-Hecimovich, The Coversation, 8 February 2019, https://theconversation.com/why-venezuelas-oil-money-could-keep-undermining-its-economy-and-democracy-111013
Oil money, in short, can sustain whatever government is in power, be it dictatorship or democracy. But when crude prices fall, the loss of revenue polarizes politics as the wealthy and the poor fight over the reduced proceeds. And when these countries not only rely on one export but also very limited markets, that adds to their vulnerability. Oil sales constituted 98 percent of Venezuela’s export earnings in 2017, with the U.S. buying nearly half of the country’s exported crude.
Wyss ‘19
Jim Wyss, 11 March 2019, Miami Herald, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article227416389.html
In particular, financial sanctions rolled out in 2017 made it difficult for Venezuela to refinance loans and get fresh funding. Then, in January, Washington used “the nuclear option” and blocked money from Venezuela’s U.S. oil sales from going to Maduro’s coffers — effectively costing the country billions. Venezuela imports 80 to 90 percent of all its goods — including food and medicine — and asphyxiating PDVSA the state run oil company limits the country’s ability to bring in necessities. Venezuela’s imports in 2018 fell to an estimated $11.7 billion down from $66 billion in 2012, according to Torino Capital. And the firm expects imports to fall to about $7 billion this year.
Center for Economic and Policy Research ‘19
Center for Economic and Policy Research, http://cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
It is important to emphasize that nearly all of the foreign exchange that is needed to import medicine, food, medical equipment, spare parts and equipment needed for electricity generation, water systems, or transportation, is received by the Venezuelan economy through the government’s revenue from the export of oil. Thus, any sanctions that reduce export earnings, and therefore government revenue, thereby reduce the imports of these essential and, in many cases, life-saving goods. The August 2017 sanctions adversely impacted oil production in Venezuela. But following the August 2017 executive order, oil production crashed, falling at more than three times the rate of the previous twenty months. This would be expected from the loss of credit and therefore the ability to cover maintenance and operations and carry out new investments necessary to maintain production levels. This acceleration in the rate of decline of oil production would imply a loss of $6 billion in oil revenue over the ensuing year. This by itself is an enormous loss of foreign exchange, relative to the country’s need for essential imports. Imports of food and medicine for 2018 were just $2.6 billion. Total imports of goods for 2018 were about $10 billion. The loss of so many billions of dollars of foreign exchange and government revenues was very likely the main shock that pushed the economy from its high inflation, when the August 2017 sanctions were implemented, into the hyperinflation that followed. Other executive decisions made by the Trump administration resulted in the closure of Venezuelan accounts in financial institutions, loss of access to credit, and other financial restrictions that have had severe negative impacts on oil production as well as the economy, as detailed in this paper.
Even more costly to the economy and the population, the August 2017 sanctions adversely impacted oil production in Venezuela. Figure 1 shows oil production in Venezuela and Colombia, in thousands of barrels per day, from 2013–18. Both countries’ production declined at about the same rate from the beginning of 2016, after a sharp fall in oil prices. But following the August 2017 executive order, oil production crashed, falling at more than three times the rate of the previous twenty months. This would be expected from the loss of credit and therefore the ability to cover maintenance and operations and carry out new investments necessary to maintain production levels. This acceleration in the rate of decline of oil production would imply a loss of $6 billion in oil revenue over the ensuing year. This by itself is an enormous loss of foreign exchange, relative to the country’s need for essential imports. Imports of food and medicine for 2018 were just $2.6 billion. Total imports of goods for 2018 were about $10 billion. Annual oil production fell by 30.1 percent in 2018, as compared with 11.5 percent in 2017.8 The difference in this rate of decline implies a loss of approximately $8.4 billion in foreign exchange that was increasingly desperately needed for essential imports such as medicine and food. It is important to emphasize that nearly all of the foreign exchange that is needed to import medicine, food, medical equipment, spare parts and equipment needed for electricity generation, water systems, or transportation, is received by the Venezuelan economy through the government’s revenue from the export of oil. Thus, any sanctions that reduce export earnings, and therefore government revenue, thereby reduce the imports of these essential and, in many cases, life-saving goods. The loss of so many billions of dollars of foreign exchange and government revenues was very likely the main shock that pushed the economy from its high inflation, when the August 2017 sanctions were implemented, into the hyperinflation that followed. It is common in the history of hyperinflations that they are triggered by a large external shock to government revenues and the balance of payments, as happened to Venezuela following the implementation of these sanctions.
If we look at the combined impact of all of these actions, we find that they drastically reduced the ability of Venezuela to produce and sell oil and to sell any foreign assets of the government, the most important of which were frozen and/or confiscated; and also to use whatever foreign exchange that the country is still able to earn to buy essential imports. For these reasons, a baseline projection of Venezuela’s real GDP shows an astounding and unprecedented decline of 37.4 percent in 2019, as compared to 16.7 percent in 2018.12 Imports of goods are projected to fall by 39.4 percent, from $10 billion to $6.1 billion.13 More than 1.9 million people are expected to leave the country, 14 and the impacts on human life and health (described below) are expected to be even more severe than what happened last year. The most immediate impact of the January sanctions was to cut off Venezuela from its largest oil market, the United States, which had bought 35.6 percent of Venezuela’s oil exports in 2018,15 or about 586,000 barrels per day on average.16 In the week of March 15, imports of Venezuelan oil fell to zero for the first time, and they remained there for another two weeks before there was a rebound for one week to 139,000 barrels per day, then 71,000 barrels per day. 17 The Trump administration also intervened to pressure other countries, including India, not to buy the oil that had been previously imported by the US. It is important to note that these threats are effective because the US government can sanction foreign financial institutions who disobey its instructions. Thus in February even Gazprom, which is majority owned by the Russian government, froze the accounts of PDVSA and cut off transactions with the company, under threat of sanctions from the Trump administration.19 Reuters also noted that “Washington is particularly keen to end deliveries of gasoline and refined products used to dilute Venezuela’s heavy crude oil to make it suitable for export.”20 This could impact another 300,000 barrels per day of Venezuelan oil production.21 As a result of these efforts, oil that Venezuela was producing piled up, filling storage facilities and then tankers. The resulting lack of markets and available space to store oil seems to be the main cause of a sharp drop in oil production in February.22 As can be seen in Figure 2, Venezuela’s oil production declined by 130,000 barrels per day from January to February. In the six months prior, it was declining by an average of 20,500 barrels per day. Then in March it fell another 289,000 barrels per day, for a total of 431,000 barrels per day
Egan ‘19
Matt Egan, CNN Business, 19 February 2019, https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/19/investing/venezuela-oil-sanctions-pdvsa/index.html
US sanctions are a double-whammy for Venezuela. Not only was the United States Venezuela's No. 1 customer, but it was the country's main source of naphtha, the liquid hydrocarbon mixture used to dilute crude. Without it, Venezuela's heavy crude can't be readily transported. Rystad Energy forecasts that some operators in Venezuela will run out of diluent by March. US oil prices are up almost 5 since the sanctions were announced. Brent, the global benchmark, is up 8. But analysts don't believe Venezuela is the main reason for the run-up in crude. Instead, they point to OPEC's deeper-than-expected production cuts, turmoil in Libya and the bullish tone in global financial markets as recession fears fade.
Constable ‘18
Simon Constable, 14 June 2018, Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/simonconstable/2018/06/14/venezuelas-latest-desperate-plan/#417cf4a844fe
Hyperinflation makes it hard for any business to run efficiently. Inflation in the country is now a staggering 34,458, according to the latest estimate (June 14, 2018) from Steve Hanke, professor of applied economics at the Johns Hopkins University. That's down from more than 37,000 earlier this month. Hanke uses the prices of goods inside the country to estimate the rate of inflation. U.S. sanctions mean critical oil extraction equipment is hard to come by in the country. Drill bits and metal pipes quickly get worn out in the oil business because the oil itself is highly corrosive. Without replacement parts, the wells cannot operate.
Kurmanaev ‘19
Anatoly Kurmanaev and Clifford Krauss, NYT, 8 February 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/world/americas/venezuela-sanctions-maduro.html
Now the new American sanctions could cut Venezuela’s oil exports by two-thirds, to just $14 billion this year, and lead to a 26 percent reduction in the economy’s size, according to Mr. Rodríguez, the economist. Mr. Trump said the oil sanctions were meant to punish Mr. Maduro for human rights violations and force him to cede power to Juan Guaidó, the opposition leader whom the United States and many other countries have recognized as the rightful Venezuelan president. The sanctions announced by the Treasury Department on Jan. 28 banned United States companies and individuals from dealing with Venezuela’s state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, or Pdvsa, which provides about 90 percent of the country’s hard currency. The sanctions essentially shut Venezuelan oil out of the American market.
Kumar ‘19
Krishna Kumar and Collin Eaton, Reuters, 23 January 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-usa-oil-graphic/u-s-sanctions-on-venezuela-would-reroute-crude-leave-refiners-short-idUSKCN1PH2GU
Those deliveries are being made largely through oil-for-debt repayment structures as output from state-run oil company Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., known as PDVSA, has slumped to near 70-year lows in a nationwide economic crisis. Venezuela’s output has been cut in half since 2016 to less than 1.2 million bpd, according to figures from OPEC secondary sources. Shipments to the United States account for about 75 percent of the cash Venezuela gets for crude shipments, according to a Barclays research note published last week.
Parraga ’19
Marianna Parraga and Natalia Chumakova and Ron Bousso, Reuters, 21 February 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-oil-supplies/venezuela-gets-fuel-from-russia-europe-but-the-bill-soars-idUSKCN1QA0H9
The South American nation exports crude but its refineries are in poor condition - hence the need to import gasoline and diesel for petrol stations and power plants, as well as naphtha to dilute its heavy oil. Since the United States imposed fresh sanctions on Venezuela on Jan. 28, products supplies have mainly come from Russian state oil major Rosneft, Spain’s Repsol, India’s Reliance Industries and trading houses Vitol and Trafigura, according to sources and vessel-tracking data. Russia has been a traditional political backer of Caracas, while India and Spain also have long-standing trade ties. But supplies even from those allies are coming at a cost. “The prices they are charging us are horrifying,” said an executive at Venezuelan state-run oil firm PDVSA who is familiar with recent purchases. The executive said the heavy premiums were partially due to the fact that single cargoes passed through several hands before reaching Venezuelan ports and also involved complex and expensive ship-to-ship transfers. A trader involved in one fixture said shipowners were now charging a fee of up to 50 cents per barrel to Venezuela versus 15-20 cents before sanctions. Last year, Venezuela imported most products from the United States with the main providers being PDVSA’s own U.S. subsidiary Citgo Petroleum and a U.S. unit of India’s Reliance. Monthly supplies fluctuated but in December alone PDVSA imported almost 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) of fuel as its domestic refineries worked at just below a third of its 1.3-million-bpd capacity, according to PDVSA data. Imports have fallen to some 140,000 bpd of gasoline, diesel, naphtha and other fuels since the end of January, Refinitiv Eikon data shows.
Impacts
Martin and Laya ‘19
Eric Martin and Patricia Laya, Bloomberg Businessweek, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-09/what-broke-venezuela-s-economy-and-what-could-fix-it-quicktake
Shrinking oil revenue means Venezuela’s external debt has continued to pile up, reaching $157 billion last year, or about 150 percent of gross domestic product. The country defaulted on a portion of its debt in 2017, and creditors are demanding more than $9 billion in overdue payments. In addition, Venezuela owes billions of dollars to companies including Canadian miner Crystallex International Corp. and U.S. oil giant ConocoPhillips to settle disputes over the government’s nationalization of their assets.
Among the top priorities is reducing the budget deficit. No plan will get inflation under control unless this is accomplished. Because the government stopped providing statistics several years ago, no one knows the true size of the deficit. Estimates range, but the CIA put it at 46 percent of gross domestic product in 2017. Venezuelan economist Ricardo Hausmann of Harvard University, an informal adviser to Guaido, has proposed that the IMF loan Venezuela more than $60 billion over three years. A loan of that magnitude would allow the central bank to stop printing bolivars. To restore incentives for saving and investment, one approach would be to replace the bolivar with the U.S. dollar or another stable, widely convertible currency. So-called dollarization is currently employed in Ecuador. Another option is for Venezuela to peg its currency to the dollar, as Brazil did in the mid-1990s, in order to both stabilize the currency and stem hyperinflation.
Reuters ‘18
Reuters. June 2018. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-debt/venezuelas-creditors-working-on-eventual-debt-restructuring-source-idUSKBN1JG3CA
Venezuela’s public and private creditors are working on how to one day restructure its debt, though U.S. sanctions make that impossible for now, a source close to the Paris Club of government creditors said on Wednesday. Crippled by a hyperinflationary economic crisis, the cash-strapped Venezuelan government and state oil company PDVSA are in default on most of their $60 billion in outstanding bonds. Including debt owed to other governments and official lenders, the OPEC member’s foreign debt is estimated to stand at $140 billion, with China owed $20-25 billion and Paris Club creditors $5.8 billion, the source said.
Herbst ‘19
John E. Herbst and Jason Marczak, September 2019, Atlantic Council, “Russia’s intervention in Venezuela: What’s at stake?,” https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/russias-intervention-in-venezuela-whats-at-stake/
Meanwhile, day-to-day life in Venezuela continues to deteriorate. Food insecurity and malnutrition are at sky-high levels. As noted in the Bachelet report, in April 2019 the Venezuelan minimum wage, which sits around $7 per month, only covers 4.7 percent of the basic food basket. More than 80 percent of households in Venezuela are food insecure, with the majority of those interviewed as part of the Bachelet investigation consuming only one meal per day.39 The report highlights that, as a result of hyperinflation and the disintegration of Venezuelan food production, an estimated 3.7 million Venezuelans are malnourished. Children and pregnant women are the demographics most likely to suffer from malnutrition in Venezuela. Survival is a struggle. As a result, Venezuelan refugees filed more asylum claims globally in 2018 than citizens of any other country, including Syria.40 If the situation does not improve, the number of Venezuelan migrants and refugees is expected to reach around 8 million in 2020, surpassing total Syrian migration numbers by more than 3 million.
Fox ’19
DW News, 10 January 2019, https://www.dw.com/en/the-human-cost-of-the-us-sanctions-on-venezuela/a-50647399
Jenjerlys is just one of more than 300,000 people who are estimated to be at risk because of lack of access to medicines or treatment because of sanctions on the country. That includes 16,000 people who need dialysis, 16,000 cancer patients and roughly 80,000 people with HIV, according to a report published in April by the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research. The situation is poised to get worse, with the total US embargo of the country, announced in August, and new EU sanctions levied last week.
Camilleri ‘19
Michael Camilleri, Foreign Affairs, 3 Sept 2019, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2019-09-03/plan-b-venezuela
Without question, the Maduro regime is itself responsible for the single largest economic collapse outside a war zone in at least 45 years. But U.S. actions are aggravating the consequences of this collapse while handing Maduro an easy scapegoat. The Trump administration might argue that economic sanctions need time to take full effect. But sanctions have a poor record of producing regime change, and the administration’s waiting game comes at a terrible human price. For Venezuelan society to resist Maduro, it must be able to eat. By one estimate, more than eight in ten Venezuelans now rely on food handouts from Maduro that are conditioned on political loyalty—hardly ripe conditions for a popular uprising.
FRONTLINES
F/L Russia Selling Refining Chemical/Naphtha
1) It’s way more expensive though – it isn’t profitable and Venezuela can’t buy enough so oil sales are still way down. Charging 15 cents per barrel before sanctions, now it’s 50 cents – makes it so much more expensive and not profitable.
Parraga ’19, Marianna Parraga and Natalia Chumakova and Ron Bousso, Reuters, 21 February 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-oil-supplies/venezuela-gets-fuel-from-russia-europe-but-the-bill-soars-idUSKCN1QA0H9
The South American nation exports crude but its refineries are in poor condition - hence the need to import gasoline and diesel for petrol stations and power plants, as well as naphtha to dilute its heavy oil. Since the United States imposed fresh sanctions on Venezuela on Jan. 28, products supplies have mainly come from Russian state oil major Rosneft, Spain’s Repsol, India’s Reliance Industries and trading houses Vitol and Trafigura, according to sources and vessel-tracking data. Russia has been a traditional political backer of Caracas, while India and Spain also have long-standing trade ties. But supplies even from those allies are coming at a cost. “The prices they are charging us are horrifying,” said an executive at Venezuelan state-run oil firm PDVSA who is familiar with recent purchases. The executive said the heavy premiums were partially due to the fact that single cargoes passed through several hands before reaching Venezuelan ports and also involved complex and expensive ship-to-ship transfers. A trader involved in one fixture said shipowners were now charging a fee of up to 50 cents per barrel to Venezuela versus 15-20 cents before sanctions. Last year, Venezuela imported most products from the United States with the main providers being PDVSA’s own U.S. subsidiary Citgo Petroleum and a U.S. unit of India’s Reliance. Monthly supplies fluctuated but in December alone PDVSA imported almost 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) of fuel as its domestic refineries worked at just below a third of its 1.3-million-bpd capacity, according to PDVSA data. Imports have fallen to some 140,000 bpd of gasoline, diesel, naphtha and other fuels since the end of January, Refinitiv Eikon data shows.
F/L Sell to Russia/China Instead
1) China, which is the biggest consumer of Venezuelan oil currently, only buys oil as repayments for debt, so Venezuela doesn’t make revenue off of it.
Johnson ’18, Keith Johnson, 16 July 2018, Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/16/how-venezuela-struck-it-poor-oil-energy-chavez/
The one relative bright spot in Venezuela’s oil industry today is the superheavy Orinoco fields, jointly operated with foreign firms since the 1990s-era opening of the sector. Crude production in the Orinoco actually grew during the first half of this decade, and even now production declines have been modest. That’s a sharp contrast to steep output declines at traditional oil fields solely operated by PDVSA. But even the superheavy fields are struggling to keep production levels close to steady. Before it can export the heavy bitumen, PDVSA needs to blend it with light oil, and since at least 2010, Venezuela’s own light oil production has been falling. That forces the state energy company to spend much-needed cash importing light oil. Venezuela also imports gasoline — which it gives away to consumers for a paltry 4 cents a gallon. And it loses money when purchasers reject its cargoes of crude oil for their poor quality, an increasingly common problem. In other cases, it doesn’t even get paid: While the country now sends China 400,000-odd barrels a day, for example, Beijing considers them repayment for Caracas’s debts. Meanwhile, despite the collapse of its oil industry, Venezuela continues to buy foreign oil to ship, at a loss, to the regime’s ideological cousins in Cuba — a bitter legacy of Chávez’s plan to use Venezuela’s oil riches to buy friends in the neighborhood.
Russia is the same
Yagova ‘19
Olga Yagova. Aug 22 2019. “Rosneft becomes top Venezuelan oil trader, helping offset U.S. pressure.” Reuaters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-venezuela-oil/rosneft-becomes-top-venezuelan-oil-trader-helping-offset-u-s-pressure-idUSKCN1VC1PF
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian state oil major Rosneft has become the main trader of Venezuelan crude, shipping oil to buyers in China and India and helping Caracas offset the loss of traditional dealers who are avoiding it for fear of breaching U.S. sanctions. Trading sources and Refinitiv Eikon data showed Rosneft became the biggest buyer of Venezuelan crude in July and the first half of August. It took 40 of state oil company PDVSA’s exports in July and 66 so far in August, according to the firm’s export programs and the Refinitiv Eikon data, double the purchases before sanctions. Three industry sources said Rosneft, which produces around five percent of the world’s oil, is now taking care of shipping and marketing operations for the bulk of Venezuelan oil exports, ensuring that PDVSA can continue to supply buyers. Rosneft used to resell volumes it bought from PDVSA to trading firms and was less involved in marketing. Now it has started supplying some PDVSA clients - Chinese and Indian refineries - while trading houses such as Swiss-based Trafigura and Vitol have walked away because they fear they could breach secondary U.S. sanctions, according to six trade sources. Moscow is one of Maduro’s closest allies and has provided military support to his government as well as billions of dollars in loans and equipment. “Rosneft has been dealing with Venezuela’s crude directly, fixing vessels and offering it to end users”, a source with an oil trading firm said. Rosneft is not in breach of U.S. sanctions, because it takes oil as part of debt servicing agreements after lending Caracas money in previous years.
F/L Maduro fired PDVSA Employees
1) While this may have had an impact, there’s no reason oil production should have declined this rapidly. The fact that Venezuela is seeing up to 67 decreases can only be because of sanctions. And this makes sense, if your largest customer stops buying oil and threatens other countries and businesses from buying your oil, production and revenues are going to decrease.
2) The sanctions have prevented oil industry from ever rebounding. Even with PDVSA being controlled by military officials, they can’t ever come back because sanctions prevent it. Can’t expect them to do anything without cash or staff or materials to fix their pipes or chemicals to make their oil exportable.
3) Oil industry execs were replaced in 2017 and while we did see a decrease in oil production the largest decrease was seen when PDVSA was sanctioned last year.
F/L Privatization
1) Privatization doesn’t matter because US sanctions any oil sales coming out of Venezuela because the goal is to remove Maduro from power by preventing revenue streams to his government. Privatization doesn’t increase oil sales.
2) But if privatization has really happened and free-markets are opening up, then this is the perfect time to end sanctions because it means that sanctions have accomplished their goal so now sanctions should end. Then revenue streams would go to the people and the workers.
F/L Wildfires Caused Blackouts
Hetland ’19, The Nation, 13 March 2019, https://www.thenation.com/article/venezuela-blackout-us-sanctions-maduro/
For US officials, most of the mainstream media, and opposition leaders in Venezuela, this is the end of the story. Yet things are not so simple. Over the past 10 years blackouts have become a regular occurrence. The current blackout is significantly worse, however, in both its breadth and duration. A key reason is the lack of diesel and gasoline, which are needed to fuel backup generators. As The New York Times notes, “Not one of more than a dozen diesel- and natural gas-powered backup plants built by the government in the last decade came online to compensate for the Guri outage.” Buried at the end of this story, the Times says that US “sanctions have affected Venezuela’s ability to import and produce the fuel required by the thermal power plants that could have backed up the Guri plant once it failed.” | 905,445 |
304 | 380,160 | 1 - March NEG | Open Sourced for Convenience | 905,462 |
305 | 380,216 | January Aff - Food, Water, and Medicine | paraphrased/cut-card case open-sourced under "Plano West-Chen-Kumar-Aff-Plano East-Round2.docx" | 905,524 |
306 | 380,222 | Septober Neg - Tariffs and Coal | paraphrased/cut-card case open-sourced under "Plano West-Chen-Kumar-Neg-Bellaire-Round1.docx" | 905,530 |
307 | 380,180 | Broken Interps | == MAKE SURE TO CHECK BOTH AFF AND NEG FOR INTERPS ==
Interpretation: At all TFA IQT points distributing tournaments, debaters must disclose all broken positions on the NDCA PF wiki. The disclosure must include tags, complete citations, and the FIRST and LAST three words of each piece of evidence. The disclosure must occur within 30 minutes of the round. | 905,479 |
308 | 380,182 | SEPTOCT ~-~- Caste | Shah 16 Welcome to the underworld – Dalits are a constructed class-not-class both under and outside of a globalized caste or varna system that is rooted in colorism, placing bodies on a scale from white to black where blackened bodies, such as Dalits, become impure, monstrous, and inhuman, rendering them fungible and subject to disappearing violence. Shah 16
Shah, Ekta. (Masters in South Asian Literature from Northwestern University, Debate Coach, English teacher, pioneered the Quarry Lane Womxn’s Tournament, and dope baller) "Remnants of Caste in Casting: Cast Aside Untouchables in India and Hollywood." Selected Works. Northwestern University, 17 June 2016. Web. 9 Jan. 2017. (https://works.bepress.com/ekta-shah/1/) SK
There is another class of individuals, a fifth caste that ranks below the Sudras: the Dalits. I use the words “fifth” and “caste” loosely because the Dalit class is ostracized from the varna system, seen as too lowly to be considered in the same category as the other castes. “The word ‘Dalit’ comes from the Sanskrit root dal- and means ‘broken, ground-down, downtrodden, or oppressed’” (National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights). The term was first used in a journal entry in 1931 and elucidated on in social reformer B. R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste (1936) and The Untouchables: Who were They and Why They Became Untouchables? (1948) (NCDHR; Michael 2). They are cast aside, “considered impure and polluting and are therefore physically and socially excluded and isolated from the rest of society” (NCDHR). They perform undesirable, unclean work such as removing excrement, corpses, and dirt from public latrines, scavengers, and streets. Because people from other castes do not wish to associate with Dalits, many are still excluded from the caste system with the label “untouchable”—they are forbidden from touching or being touched by members of other castes, from being literate or attending school, and from entering public or religious areas (Pruthi 167-85). If a member of the Dalit class happens to mistakenly make physical contact with a member of another caste—even a slight graze of the hand—they risk the possibility of being beaten with objects and verbally berated because the other individual would have to bathe in order to wash away the Dalit’s filthiness. Dalits’ lives revolve around exclusion, to the extent that they cannot bathe in the Gunga or directly purchase store items in order to avoid desecrating persons of higher-castes with their presence (Hutton 78- 80). The Dalit’s occupation, based on Vedic Hindu traditionalism, labels Dalits not only as impure, but also as people who are fulfilling their destiny based on the cycle of karmic reincarnation. It is generally assumed by Hindus that Dalits are born into an oppressed family to do penance for past wrong-doings in attempts to appease their ancestors and gods. So in the justification of Hindu ritualization and hereditary birth-right, many people turn a blind eye and cast aside upwards of 166,635,700 Dalits (International Dalit Solitary Network). They are the marginalized, oppressed “Other” with no place in society because they are untouchable outcastes—their entire lives condemned and predetermined, revolving around caste and color.
Soundararajan 12 To be a Dalit American is to be a fugitive that founds conceptions of criminality in communities – institutionalized casteism engenders a requirement to aspire for upper caste privilege foreclosed to Dalits always subject to violence by virtue of being “untouchables,” which engenders a racializing norm where deviance from whiteness and civility marks one for liberation from abjection to justify imperialism. Stories and songs told in the recesses and margins of civil society are essential to survival for those Dalits to resist whiteness guised as military aid. Soundararajan 12
Soundararajan, Thenmozhi. “ The Black Indians: Growing up Dalit in the US, Finding Your Roots, Fighting for Your Identity.” Outlook India, 20 Aug. 2012. SK
Running, passing, hiding. This is the litany of the Dalit American. Growing up in southern California, my family was one of the first Tamil families to immigrate to Los Angeles. Representatives of the Indian brain drain that started in the 1970s, we were part of the first wave of Indian immigrants whose functions, sangams and religious communities helped establish the little India enclave in the now-famous Artesia. We were also Dalits living underground. Caste exists wherever Indians exist and it manifests itself in a myriad of ways. The Indian diaspora thrives on caste because it is the atom that animates the molecule of their existence. In the face of xenophobia and racism abroad, many become more fundamentalist in their traditions and caste is part of that reactionary package. So, what does caste look like in the US? Quite like in India, it is the smooth subtext beneath questions between uncles, like, “Oh! Where is your family from?” It is part of the cliques and divisions within those cultural associations where Indians self-segregate into linguistic and caste associations. It continues when aunties begin to discuss marriage prospects. They cluck their tongues softly, remark about your complexion, and pray for a good match from “our community”. For second-generation NRIs, flashing caste becomes a part of their cultural street cred with other communities. Some do it intentionally to elevate their identity while others operate from a misunderstanding of their own roots and blindly accept the symbols of their culture. Punjabi rappers throw down lyrics about being proud Jats. Tam- Brahms show off their sacred thread, recreate Thiruvayur in Cleveland, and learn Bharatanatyam while using their powerful networks to connect and succeed in the diaspora. Ultimately, we trade and calcify what is seen as proper Indian culture. But hidden within that idea of ‘proper’ lies the code for what is aspirational and ultimately upper caste. It’s dangerous, this culture of caste-based intolerance in the diaspora for it extends beyond individual relationships. Individuals build institutions and institutions are steeped in caste. From Hindu temples to gurudwaras, there is a separate yet unspoken policy of worship for those that are Dalit. Furthermore, in the over fifty south Asian and Asian studies departments in North America, there are less than a handful of tenured Dalit faculty. And, crucially, as the Campaign to Stop Funding Hate has shown, NRIs in the US have directly funded and fuelled communal violence in India by supporting cultural and aid programmes that are fronts for local Hindutva organisations. Through it all, Dalits Run. Pass. Hide. For while caste is everywhere in the diaspora, there is a damning silence about naming caste. And in the silence there is violence. I know because my family passed for many years. It was confusing, painful and lonely. We could never truly unpack the memories that my parents fled in India, nor could we confront the same infrastructure being rebuilt here in the shining land of the American Dream. Many Americans and Indians can’t imagine what it looks like to pass. For my family it was finding ever clever ways to sidestep the ‘jati’ question, attending temple functions and never speaking about “our community” in public functions ever. We got away with it because there were so few of us in the beginning, and every Tamil was a valuable connection while learning to navigate this new country. The leverage of our new lifestyle however allowed my family to support Dalit causes back home and work underground through a network of uncles who debated caste issues over phone calls, meetings and conferences. And, of course, while the men were active in this way, the women, like my mom, would pass on Dalit songs and stories holding on to that space—which was important even if we could not share it. For though it has been almost 100 years since Ambedkar came to study at Columbia University, Dalits like my family are still struggling to find a foothold that is uniquely our own. Unlike other Indians, Dalits do not have their own public institutions within the diaspora. There is no way to go into any city and find and connect with local Dalits unless you are already plugged in to the unofficial Dalit underground communities held together by mailing lists, Facebook groups and phone trees that help us survive the double whammy of racism of being part of such an incredible line of creators, survivors and leaders. And there have been repercussions. I have been served by Indian friends in ‘different utensils’, curses and even death threats have been hurled at me. But I have never regretted coming out. I sing the Dalit history of resilience, resistance, revolution.
Nayar 12Thus we negate. This is simultaneously an affirmation of melancholia as a terrifying deconstruction of the United States and civil society’s hold on power itself – we embrace the terrorist. Embodying the affect of the trauma narrative is an act of testimony that connects politics and emotions and reclaims the corporeal pain suffered by the being. These testimonies blur the lines between what can and cannot be said – dispelling the myth of the promise of happiness. Nayar 12
Pramod K. Nayar 2012 – (“The Poetics of Postcolonial Atrocity: Dalit Life Writing, Testimonio, and Human Rights” ; ariel: a review of international English literature ISSN 0004-1327 Vol. 42 No. 3-4 Pages 237–264 Copyright © 2012 ; PhD; Nayar is a teacher at the University of Hyderabad who teaches M.A. courses in Literary Theory, the English Romantics, the 17th Century, Cultural Studies and has interests in English colonial writings on India, travel writing, Human Rights and narratives, posthumanism, postcolonial literature, literary and cultural theory) RKS – AA, DA, RN, SK. **bracketed for gendered language**
“Performance” is here taken to mean a fuller representation of a situation (in fact etymologically “performance” originally meant “bringing to completion”) (Turner). Dalit “performance” underscores the human nature of the “actors” (Dalit protagonists) and their contexts so that viewers/readers become fully aware of the complete set of horrific conditions in which the narrator lives/lived. Dalit narrators perform the conscious physical acts or emotional moments with full awareness of the audiences they address or face. The “embodied subjectivity” noted above is performance par excellence because the Dalit does not narrate a story as evidence: instead, he offers himself themselves, as Jacques Derrida has said of testimony (38). The representation of his brutalized body is in itself the act of testimony. A corporeal act of testimony and the representation of corporeal pain is an integral part of the Dalit narrative’s performance because it emphasizes the human—a being who suffers pain because of an unjust social structure. In addition to this “embodied subjectivity,” the Dalit text, like a trauma narrative, forges a connection between politics and emotions. The Dalit protagonist-narrator selects elements in her/his story and projects or emphasizes an emotional component for the sake of the audience. This is not false representation or pretension, but rather a fuller representation of the nature of the oppressive incident that the audience is cued to register. Performance here is the display, via narrative, of emotions when recalling the past. For instance, Limbale describes his constant hunger: “We had just pieces of dry bhakari which were hardly enough to satisfy the cave of hunger” and “I was ashamed of my food and felt guilty eating it.” Limbale underscores the significance of food when he describes how the upper-caste chil- dren gave the Dalit students their leftovers. Later, his mother asks him angrily, “Why didn’t you get at least a small portion of it for me? Leftover food is nectar.” Limbale reproduces his extreme emotion at his mother’s anger: “her words made . . . the feast . . . quiver in my stomach” (2–3). Gaikwad opens with a description of policemen beat- ing his grandfather and molesting his grandmother (1–2) and then records his own reactions: “Whenever the police visited our hut, I panicked. . . . As the police entered and began to search the hut and thrash and kick the inmates, I often pissed and shat in my shorts” (3). When he speaks at school programmes, he is threatened by the other students: “I was terribly afraid of them. Frightened that anyone of them might beat me” (81). The recording of emotional responses—affect—is the narrative’s “traumatic realism” that demonstrates how bodily injury folds into emotional trauma. As in the case of autobiographical narratives, emotional content is central to Dalit life writing’s staging of past events (Bauer et al). A dramatic performance of personal trauma serves the important public-political purpose of reiterating the human nature of the body that suffers.***Begin Footnote Here*** There is, of course, considerable risk involved in representing poverty and suffering. Such narratives have been accused on a regular basis in mainstream Indian newspapers of using Indian/Asian/African poverty as a saleable commodity, as an exotic form of pornography (commonly referred to as “poverty porn”) catering to elite (Western) audiences. How does one distinguish the Dalit’s self-representation of authentic suffering from the sensationalized “poverty porn” of, say, Danny Boyle (whose lm Slumdog Millionaire, much reviled in India, won eight Oscars)? Whose politics and what politics (emancipation? commodification for profit?) are served by the representations? ***End Footnote Here*** The Dalit narrator’s performance is the interplay of aesthetic and social drama: Limbale’s or Mane’s emotionally charged description (the aesthetic drama of the narrative) of their very individual hunger is linked with the processes that produce hunger in particular castes (the socio-political drama of the narrative). This element of Dalit performance—which I argue is coded into the corporeal trauma and the affective component of the narrative—emphasizes the humanity of the protagonist. The emotional “performance” by the Dalit testimonio moves to an- other level when the individual enmeshes his/her story (the “perform- ance”) with that of the caste or community. The Dalit narrative’s role as a document about human rights demands that the protagonist of the narrative functions as a witness rather than an individual “hero” or “heroine.” Personal testimony functions doubly as the historical and socio-political witnessing of national structures of oppression. Indeed, the term “witness” derives its force from a performative: the capacity to provide evidence because of a first-hand experience. The autobiography, while foregrounding individual pain, suffering, and trauma, always ges- tures at something beyond. The testimonios of Bama, Mane, Gaikwad and Limbale give voice not only to their own suffering but also to that of other victims who might otherwise remain voiceless. Dalit life writ- ing has two components in its role as testimonio: its character as a col- lective biography (Nayar, “Bama’s Karukku”) and the very structure of witnessing. Bama has stated that “ The story told in Karukku was not my story alone. It was the depiction of a collective trauma—of my community. . . . I just tried to freeze it forever in one book so that there will be something physical to remind people of the atrocities committed on a section of the society for ages” (Bama, “Recognition”). Her testimonio acts as a collective biography rather than simply her own life story. Like Bama, Mane declares in his preface: “Upara is not alone. . . .Upara’s suc- cess is not the success of one man, it’s the success of a social movement” (14). Similarly, Limbale asserts that his work represents “the pain of millions in India” (Outcaste x). In Dalit life writing, unlike in a conven- tional autobiography, the focus is not on the individual. And, unlike novels, which contain “problematic heros,” testimonios contain what Beverley terms “problematic collective situations” (95)– in this case of caste, community and class. Dalit life writing places the individual life in the public domain. It takes highly personal experiences and makes them public, blurring the line between what can and cannot be said. Thus, life inside the home— generally regarded as a safe haven for children or as a private space—is revealed as brutal, unjust and oppressive. The narrator moves the pain outward from the individual body to the community body, revealing the dangers, injustices, and cruelties of the “private” space of home or the “secure” space of the democratic state. Limbale, for instance, locates his awed family life, parentage and up- bringing within the social system. He reveals what ought to be a shame- ful secret (his problematic individual situation as an illegitimate son) by using it as a critique of the social structure. He notes that his father belongs to the upper caste Lingayat community but that his mother’s side of the family is Mahar. He admits that he is illegitimate before concluding: “Half of me belongs to the village, whereas the other half is excommunicated. Who am I? To whom is my umbilical cord connected?” (Outcaste 38–9). Limbale discovers that he is a border-crosser through no fault of his own. This personal secret becomes a public document of atrocity, exploitation, and caste-linked gender oppression. Limbale converts the story of his shame into statements that sound like aphorisms. He declares that “to be born beautiful among Dalits is a curse,” and states that his mother “was beautiful and suffered for it” (Outcaste 37–8). Limbale converts personal experiences of suffering into truisms that capture the condition of an entire community’s shame. The revelation of such secrets defines Dalit life writing as collective biography. By breaking down the barrier between private and public, the Dalit protagonist serves as a witness. Thus, the Dalit autobiographical narrative works as a testimonio through a process of narrating a collective biography, by rendering public what is private, and by locating the private within the public. The Dalit narrator is, like the narrator of a trauma memoir, a witness who recounts his/her personal trauma as well as that of the community. Contextually, such narratives must be located as witnesses within the dynamics of rights discourses and atrocity inquiries.
Nayar 11 Folkloric language is fundamental to Dalit subjectivity – the rational and real fall away as the mythic realm is brought to bear upon the material and the quotidian. Misreading signifiers is necessary for Dalit performativity and narrativization. Our model of debate is competing methods for the liberation within the topic area. The role of the ballot is thus to endorse the best embodied survival strategy to poetically disrupt dominant structures that militarize against subject formation. Nayar 11
Pramod K. Nayar 2011 – (“The Politics of Form in Dalit Fiction: Bama’s Sangati and Sivakami’s The Grip of Change ; Nayar s affiliated with the Department of English, University of Hyderabad ; Indian Journal of Gender Studies 18(3) 365–380 © 2011 CWDS SAGE Publications) DA, SK.
New forms of the political demand new forms of writing. In keeping with such demands, this radicalisation of form in Dalit fiction is achieved through the intrusion of and contamination by the language of rights and dignity. In Bama’s novel, while the narrator discusses marriage and its pro- spects with older women, her mother says to her: Haven’t you heard the words the priest speaks at the time of the tali-tying? ... He says ‘What God puts together, let no man put asunder’ ... The nuns say that the promise we make to the priest is as good as the promise we make to God ... We have to live our lives according to the promise we made to God, in front of four, five people. (p. 94) In this extended treatise on the sanctity of marriage, the narrator’s mother runs what Melissa Dinverno (2004, p. 51) terms ‘the ventriloqu- ism of regime rhetoric’. The voice of scriptural, patriarchal authority speaks through the mother. The mother here is simply the medium of articulation minus subjective agency—she frames her identity and existence within this voice of scriptural and social authority. It is in opposition to this ventriloquism of regime rhetoric that the narrator sets up her own agential story, and therefore her own subjectivity. The nar- rator responds to the comment: ‘Go on, Ma. It’s by calling on all this stuff about God, the promises made to him, our sins and our good deeds, and Heaven and everlasting Hell, that priests and nuns frighten the life out of us’ (pp. 94–95). What the narrator is subverting is not only the scriptural injunctions (regime rhetoric) about marriage but her mother’s ‘stories’. By placing the mother’s stories under the interrogative, she effectively alters the narrative context. She continues this narrative in a different fashion: ‘I am sure God doesn’t want us to be living like slaves to the day we die, with- out any rights or status, just because of a cord around the neck’ (p. 95). By turning to the language of rights and dignity, Bama’s narrator has changed the course and nature of the debate. It is no more within the realm of the scriptural-theological but within the domain of politics and the law. Despite (or maybe because of) the context being a personal rather than a public or communitarian conversation, the shift of registers within the narrator’s response is, I suggest, a significant one. While the mother deploys the register of scriptural authority, the daughter appro- priates that of human rights and the law. Yet another incident serves this argument about narrative inversion and appropriation. The general elections are on in Bama’s Sangati. The narrator reports a conversation between her grandmother and their neigh- bours about voting. A woman says: ‘I stamped the picture of the man ploughing. See, it’s only because of the plough and bullock that our stomachs are going to be filled. Without them our lives are nothing but dust. That’s why I chose that picture.’ To this the narrator’s grandmother responds: ‘Anyway you stamped just one picture. God alone knows how many people did it my way and stamped four or five pictures’ (pp. 98–99). Here the entire edifice of democracy comes crashing down: the Dalits, Bama suggests, do not have a ‘rational’ approach to the electoral process. But what is signi- ficant about this incident is the way it foregrounds questions of meaning-making. The meaning of symbols is, Bama suggests, rooted in lived experience. The ‘misreading’ of the signifiers of the electoral process is, in fact, a contestation of the signifier: does the sign make the same sense to a Dalit woman? The woman who stamps the picture of a man ploughing does so with absolutely no knowledge of the candidate’s politics or ideology. She responds to the man’s symbol in precisely the way she knows—by connecting it with the centralities of her life: food, labour, hunger. Here the narrative of politics is subverted when it meets another language altogether, constructing a meaning and launching an interpretive act that is at odds with the democratic process. Bama suggests here that the ‘external’ narrative of the candidate’s sign language is far away from the ‘centre’ of Dalit life. The external language makes no sense to the Dalit way of life, in which labour, food and hunger constitute the ever- present signs. The interpretive act of the woman voter gestures at this dissonant narrative of the post-Independence Indian democratic process. Bama’s brilliant textual metaphor must be seen as an act of contestatory reading of the signs of political processes that do not take into account the lived experience of the Dalits. The final comment on this resilient and independent interpretive act comes from the narrator’s grandmother, who declares: ‘Whether it is Rama who rules or Ravana, what does it matter? Our situation is always the same’ (p. 99). When she invokes mythic-historical figures to describe contemporary statesmen and the political process, she achieves a radicalisation of, one, the mythic realm, as she aligns it with the democratic process of contemporary India; and two, the folkloric, as she conflates contemporary politicians with the mythic-scriptural. It is this hybrid- isation, this messy merger of registers and discourses—of the law, socio- historical, personal—that marks generic radicalisation in both authors. The rationale of electoral processes might be based on ideas of deliberative democracy and rational debate, but Bama’s protagonist works from what can be thought of as a ‘folkloric’ approach to the processes where signifiers are misread. In this instance, the folklore as well as the rational process is transformed: the former is revitalised within the infusion of the democratic project, even as the democratic project’s universal claims are subverted by new and unforeseen interpretative schemes. Bama shows how Dalit narratives of loss and suffering appropriate a new register, language and discourse. Gowri, Kathamuthu’s daughter, is asked to draw up a petition-complaint to the police. Kathamuthu dictates and Gowri writes. What follows illustrates my narrative-appropriation argument. Kathamuthu dictates the complaint in archaic diction and register: ‘In the said zilla ... said taluq ... said village’ (p. 11). Gowri, writes Sivakami, ‘enjoyed having her slight revenge on him, drawing attention to his outdated language’ (p. 11). And later: ‘Gowri wrote “deceased” in place of “late”, and glowed at the change’ (p. 11). Kathamuthu retells the story of Thangam’s abuse and Thangam corrects him: ‘It wasn’t in the upper caste street. It was in our street, and in front of my house’ (p. 12). Kathamuthu shouts at her: ‘You are such a stupid bitch. I’ve changed the whole story ... If you say anything different from what’s written in the petition, you’ll be jailed’ (p. 12). The incident is worth examining in some detail. First, Kathamuthu has repurposed the Thangam story to maximise its effect. Sivakami indicates storytelling’s role as a resistance narrative: the Dalits, in order to gain some leverage from the law (which is otherwise controlled by the upper castes), retell the facts. Second, the language of the law—‘said zilla ... said taluq’—is appropriated by Kathamuthu in order to gain some advantage for the Dalits. Third, Kathamuthu’s own language of petitioning is archaic and he can also be abusive (swearing at his wife, daughter and Thangam). Significantly, his own daughter modifies and modernises it, thus marking a feminine appropriation of the patriarch’s language. The three women together constitute a creative appropriation— of the languages of law, of patriarchal power and their cumulative effect. What Sivakami’s opening moments reveal is a careful balancing out of the historical (law), the personal (Thangam, Kathamuthu) and the mythic. The Dalit narrative develops its cultural centre—the horrific structural contexts that enable the men to abuse Thangam and deprive her of her rights—precisely through the appropriation of many languages and voices. There is no attempt to construct a simple oppressed–victim narrative. Rather, Sivakami’s proto-feminist attempt is to show how a young girl is able to subvert both the language of the law and that of patriarchy. We see another instance in The Grip of Change when Sekaran declares: ‘Unlike some men we know, I am not into collecting wives or hoodwinking the world reciting stories from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata’ (p. 125), thus once again foregrounding the theme of storytelling and its social power. That Sivakami chooses to open with the theme of narrative and lan- guage is in itself significant—for it underscores the centrality of nar- rative to the creation of identities, both individual and communitarian. Sivakami refuses to privilege any specific register, such as: the personal (Thangam’s rantings), which would have made it a woman’s confessional tale; the social-historical (Gowri’s rewriting), which would have rendered it a social document about postcolonial legal and social structures; the mythic (the references to gods), which would have situated the novel as a quasi-spiritual account. What she does, instead, is to merge the mythic, the personal and the socio-historical, and thus overrun the borders of each form of the novel. We read at once the confessional, the social document and the quasi- spiritual tale. This mixing of registers is the narrative appropriation of forms and voices that define resistance in Sivakami. Gowri in The Grip of Change and the unnamed narrator in Sangati generate contestatory narratives that upset the ‘dictating fictions’ (as Melissa Dinverno calls them) mouthed by the senior generation of women in both texts. Where the older women mourn their lot, we see the younger ones arguing, via feminism and Ambedkar, in a whole register of rights. Following Ralph Rodriguez, I propose that Gowri’s utterances, the older woman’s misreading of the electoral sheet and the narrator’s arguments in Bama represent the ‘contestatory capacity of a particular utterance’ (Rodriguez, 2000, pp. 67–68). This contestatory capacity is made possible through citationality. Kathamuthu’s hold over the illiterate villagers, notes Sivakami, rests on his ability, after a few drinks, to cite extensively from the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and Gandhi’s My Experiments with Truth (p. 33). Gowri is almost always immersed in books. Storytelling wields enormous power as Thangam’s story is given to ‘the latest interpretation’ with each narration (p. 37). The citation of Ambedkar and the rights discourse within the frame of Bama’s novel disturb the narrative effectively. By presenting protagonists with human-rights literacy, Bama and Sivakami achieve several things. First, both authors deliver protagonists who are self-aware, and thus agential subjects. ‘Voice’ is the ability to represent oneself, to tell one’s story, and agency is about voice and narration (Slaughter, 1997). Here, citationality is what empowers the subject with a voice. Second, the citation enables the fiction itself to become self-reflexive. Bama and Sivakami, I propose, transform folkloric and local-mythic language and narrative by infusing into it the language of rights, Ambedkarite philosophy, dignity and the law. The language of the law and rights becomes a radical move. In order to understand the signifi- cance of this move I turn to the writings of Antonio Gramsci via Green and Ives (2009).
Nayar 12 A surrender to the aesthetics of the performance is an “imaginative entry” that is demanded to realize the constituency between Dalit text and Dalit life, reorienting notions of fiat. This rhetorical listening is a form of second witnessing where the listener must imagine and accept the trauma narrated as beyond the text. The role of the judge is to be the empathetically unsettled witness to the Dalit testimony to understand the political act of survival that is occurring through the performance of the 1AC. Nayar 12
Pramod K. Nayar 2012 – (“The Poetics of Postcolonial Atrocity: Dalit Life Writing, Testimonio, and Human Rights” ; ariel: a review of international English literature ISSN 0004-1327 Vol. 42 No. 3-4 Pages 237–264 Copyright © 2012 ; PhD; Nayar is a teacher at the University of Hyderabad who teaches M.A. courses in Literary Theory, the English Romantics, the 17th Century, Cultural Studies and has interests in English colonial writings on India, travel writing, Human Rights and narratives, posthumanism, postcolonial literature, literary and cultural theory) **bracketed for gendered language** RKS – AA, DA, RN, SK.
Lakshmi Holstro?m, Bama’s translator, suggests, “What is demanded of the reader is, in Gayatri Spivak’s term ‘a surrender to the special call of the text’. . . . And as readers of her Bama’s work, we are asked for nothing less than an imaginative entry into that different world of experience and its po- litical struggle” (Karukku vii). The suggestion of an “imaginative entry” is actually a demand that readers respond sympathetically, as humans, to the narrative’s trauma. In her introduction to Joothan, Mukherjee also insists that Joothan “demands a radical shift from the upper caste and upper class reader by insisting that such a reader not forget his/her caste or class privilege” (xxxvii). What is underlined here, as Holstro?m’s introduction emphasizes, is the difference to which readers must respond compassionately as humans; that is, readers must situate themselves imaginatively in the contexts described within the texts. It is in this response that the listeners define their humanity—this is the ethics of listening to Dalit life testimony. But it is also in this dimension of listen- ing that the crisis of witnessing arises: how are listeners to respond to the sheer singularity of the suffering in the Dalit text? The Dalit text, to adopt Shoshana Felman’s description of testimonial narrative, must be treated as a “point of conflation between text and life, a textual testimony which can penetrate us like an actual life” (Felman 2). It must, that is, possess the power of something greater than a mere text. One way of experiencing this textual power would be to relate to the text with what Dominick LaCapra has termed “empathetic unsettlement” (699). The listener respects the sheer otherness of the victim; one cannot, under any circumstances, incorporate the Other into ourselves, or stand in for the victim. In LaCapra’s terms, one cannot identify with the victim but can register and reflect upon, for oneself as well as others, the trauma and the unsettlement. The contract between the Dalit text and its readers, then, presents an ethics of witnessing. “Secondary witnessing,” as LaCapra terms the process, means paying attention to the irreducible heterogeneity of Dalit space, empathizing with it, never standing in for the Dalit, but seeing the narrative’s performance as an aesthetic and social drama that entails particular forms of reading (699). Or, to borrow Wendy Hesford’s phrase, the text calls for a process of “rhetorical listening.” “Rhetorical listening” demands that readers hear voices such as Limbale’s or Bama’s alongside those of the other, silent Dalits.6 Narrators of Dalit gesture towards both witnessing and “rhetorical listening.” Bama has admitted that “ There were many significant things that she chose not to recall in Karukku” (Bama, “Recognition”). Similarly, Valmiki states, “In the process of writing these words, a lot has remained unsaid. I did not manage to put it all down. It was beyond my power” (viii). Both statements implicitly argue that trauma exists beyond what is represented in the text. This absence at the heart of testimonio may in fact constitute its true value (Agamben 34, 145, 158). Testimony’s “truth,” argues Anne Cubilie?, is an interplay of consciousness, memory and community, of the narrator’s physical experiences, the sights she or he they saw, and the actions she or he they took as part of a larger group (242–43). The reiteration by the survivor of her or his their inability to speak and bear witness to all that has happened emphasizes the traumatic valence of the narrative. The silences that Bama and Valmiki discuss gesture toward the many Dalits whose pain can only be staged through their particular sur- vivor’s narratives and to whose suffering the readers must somehow bear witness. “Rhetorical listening” asks readers to imagine, through their consumption of the narrative, a trauma beyond textual representation. Bama engages with this aspect of witnessing when she asks: “Are Dalits not human beings? Do they not have common sense? Do they not have such attributes as a sense of honour and self respect? Are they without wisdom, beauty, dignity? What do we lack?” (Karukku 24). Bama transitions from describing Dalits to a broader description of humanity in which Dalits share the attributes inventoried. She asks readers to be attentive to the conditions in which some members of the human species are denied human attributes; it is this traumatic context that readers must consciously witness. Secondary witnessing thus complicates the process of reading Dalit texts. On the one hand, secondary witnessing asks that readers pay attention to it as a singular event of trauma. On the other, it asks that readers move beyond it, to see the text as a metonym for something that is—and can only be—presented through this particular text. In other words, an act of ethical listening would be to understand that Bama constitutes only one voice in the midst of many Dalit silences. Testimony of trauma always includes the hearer (Laub). The bodily “distress” of the Dalit would mean nothing without our commitment as hearers and secondary witnesses, to keep the event “open,” to adapt Lauren Berlant’s argument about trauma narratives (Berlant). Keeping the event open means that it must be transmitted outward in order to gather more secondary witnesses of the event. Thus Arun Prabha Mukherjee hopes that her translation of Joothan will arouse the reader’s “empathy” (Valmiki xl). What she calls for, I suggest, is a process of engagement with both textual and extra-textual contexts of a Dalit narrative in which the reader functions as a secondary witness.
witnesses within the dynamics of rights discourses and atrocity inquiries. | 905,481 |
309 | 380,202 | Noc marines v1 | C1: Marine Mammal Matter
Sonar is offensive!!!
XAP Corporation, "CFWV.com - Career Profile", https://secure.cfwv.com/Career_Planning/Career_Profile/Career_Profile.aspx?id=8tO4G2sCYk6q8RDhPQwmeQXAP3DPAXXAP3DPAX
All submarines and… in the electronics field.
Sonar used for cybersecurity
Sceller, Research Gate, "(PDF) SONAR: Automatic Detection of Cyber Security Events over the Twitter Stream", August 2017 , https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319048233_SONAR_Automatic_Detection_of_Cyber_Security_Events_over_the_Twitter_Stream
Everyday, security experts …. that experts are interested in.
Sonar uses computer technology as well
n/a, NOAA, "NOAA Ocean Explorer: Technology: Observation Tools: SONAR", 2013, https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/technology/tools/sonar/sonar.html
Sound navigation and Ranging …. full coverage of an area.
They are bad for the whales :
Potenza, The Verge, "Navy sonar that harms whales and dolphins was improperly approved, US court finds - The Verge", July 2016, https://www.theverge.com/2016/7/18/12213780/low-frequency-sonar-navy-whales-dolphins-marine-mammals-us-court
The US Navy is now …. Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Ocean friends have bleeding ears.
Hickok, Science Magazine, "Whales and dolphins can naturally muffle loud sounds, potentially protecting them from sonar and other dangers | Science | AAAS", 12/11/2017, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/12/whales-and-dolphins-can-naturally-muffle-loud-sounds-potentially-protecting-them-sonar
Instead of wearing earplugs …. the ocean noise problems.”
The Navy even admits they kill them!
Malakoff, Science Mag, "Navy Admits Sonar Killed Whales | Science | AAAS", 1/7/2002, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2002/01/navy-admits-sonar-killed-whales
In a landmark study … nearby Navy training mission.
Dolphins are washed up
Sheridan, Phys Org, "Dead dolphins, diseased seals wash up on US shores", Aug 31, 2018, https://phys.org/news/2018-08-dead-dolphins-diseased-shores.html
Over the past … officials said Friday.
12 million of them in peril
Dahr Jamail, PRN FM, "Dahr Jamail - Navy Allowed to Kill or Injure Nearly 12 Million Whales, Dolphins, Other Marine Mammals in Pacific - Progressive Radio Network", n.d., https://prn.fm/dahr-jamail-navy-allowed-to-kill-or-injure-nearly-12-million-whales-dolphins-other-marine-mammals-in-pacific/
What if you... to their survival.
Whales are crucial to oxygen.
Paul Watson, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, "Human Lives Are Not More Important Than Animal Lives – The Outdoor Journal", 06/08/2016, https://www.outdoorjournal.com/slider/human-lives-are-not-more-important-than-animal-lives/
One person asked... planet without them.
C2:
Russia and US OCOs cause retaliation on each other
Joe Cheravitch, Telecrunch, "Cyber threats from the US and Russia are now focusing on civilian infrastructure | TechCrunch", 07/22/2019, https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/22/cyber-threats-from-the-u-s-and-russia-are-now-focusing-on-civilian-infrastructure/
The report drew… deter the other.
Russia views US influence as existential threat
Nadiya Kostyuk, Army Cyber Institute, "Determinants of the Cyber Escalation Ladder", 04/26/2018, https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26427380.pdf?refreqid=excelsior3A4d5cb1f794e74a2d4aab6d6265d8bd56
Potential adversaries such... on this topic.
Russia placing incursions on US grid right now to prove can hack back
Steve LeVine, AXIOS, "Russia has infiltrated the United States' electric grid, but only as a warning - Axios", 08/05/2018, https://www.axios.com/russia-united-states-cyber-war-electric-power-grid-cb71f036-1ccc-47a2-93b7-fe4220e36622.html
Since 2015... doing something back.
Russia doesn’t have capability for devastating attack yet
Joe Cheravitch, Telecrunch, "Cyber threats from the US and Russia are now focusing on civilian infrastructure | TechCrunch", 07/22/2019, https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/22/cyber-threats-from-the-u-s-and-russia-are-now-focusing-on-civilian-infrastructure/
Whatever their similarities... test in 1949.
Grid attack being planned by Russia right now
Peter Navarro, Globalist, "China's State-Sponsored Cyber Attacks Must Stop - The Globalist", 05/30/2016, https://www.theglobalist.com/china-united-states-cyber-crime-politics/
Of course, it's... will to fight.
9/10 americans die
Peter Vincent Pry, Task Force on National and Homeland Security, "Terrorism–An Existential Threat | EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security", 02/28/2015, http://www.emptaskforcenhs.com/uncategorized/terrorism-an-existential-threat/
Terrorists do not... infrastructures, perhaps permanently.
Russia will attack!!!
Andy Greenberg, WIRED, "How Not To Prevent a Cyberwar With Russia | WIRED", 06/18/2018, https://www.wired.com/story/russia-cyberwar-escalation-power-grid/
In the short… want to be.
US will go respond and kaboom
Ewen MacAskill, The Guardian, "Cyber-attack risk on nuclear weapons systems 'relatively high' – thinktank | Technology | The Guardian", 01/10/2018, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/11/cyber-attack-risk-on-nuclear-weapons-systems-relatively-high-thinktank
US, British, other… May last year.
90 mil ppl die smh
Jon Lindsay, "CYBER OPERATIONS AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS", NAPSNet Special Reports, June 20, 2019, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/cyber-operations-and-nuclear-weapons/
The basic paradox… through strategic action. | 905,510 |
310 | 380,207 | 0 - Contact Info | msg us: Angela Yi/Alyssa Nie on messenger
or text: 9565367042 (but phone might be dead)
we both use she/her pronouns | 905,515 |
311 | 380,232 | 3 - February AFF - Unions, Welfare Trap, Climate Change, and Small Businesses | Paraphrased and cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,540 |
312 | 380,234 | 0 - General Information | Contact Information:
Andy Shufer (1st Speaker)
- Facebook Messenger
- andyshufer@gmail.com
Rohan Kamalakantha (2nd Speaker)
- Facebook Messenger
- rkamalakantha@gmail.com
Disclosure Information:
We will disclose cases after we have broken them at a tournament on this wiki. If you need a email chain or have questions about our disclosure, just ask us. | 905,542 |
313 | 380,191 | SeptOct - StimulusMiddle Income Trap | We affirm.
Contention One is Revitalizing the EU.
Markets Insider ‘19 explains that the EU’s economy is currently faltering as Germany feels the ripple effects of the US-China trade war, no-deal Brexit threatens Britain, and Italy’s debt-to-GDP ratio skyrockets. Unfortunately, the European Central Bank has already instituted negative interest rates, meaning there is little room for further economic stimulus.
As a result, Horobin ‘19 of Bloomberg finds that Europe increasingly looks to be the biggest threat to global economic growth.
Critically, EU involvement in the BRI may be the only solution, as Rowley ‘18 of the South China Morning Post finds it to be the only project providing an opportunity for increased international investment and trade into Europe.
Gebauer ‘16 of EJI furthers that by joining the BRI, the EU economy will receive critical capital inflows through expanded access to the largest consumer market in the world along with Chinese FDI and mergers and acquisitions.
Holzner ‘18 of WII quantifies that joining the BRI would result in 3.5 GDP growth or $13 billion at a minimum, and up to 7 million jobs created across Europe. Holzner finds these effects to be particularly significant during economic downswings, with public investments in infrastructure creating 5 times more growth than in economic upswings.
The impact of infrastructure investments on economic growth is empirically proven. Sheets ‘12 of IBT reports that Poland’s economy managed to grow despite the 2008 recession because of its major investments in infrastructure in the years prior.
Such cushioning is critical for Europe and in turn the global economy, as Bradford ‘13 of Huffington Post finds that the next global economic shock would push 900 million people into poverty.
Contention Two is Ensuring Chinese Growth.
Despite its economic success in the past decade, China’s fortunes could soon come to a halt. Asia Society writes that China is entering an economic phenomenon called the “middle-income trap” in which growth in an economy stagnates and reverses before it can attain the innovative capability to produce high-end goods.
Indeed, Dieter ‘16 of EWC writes that China’s “factory economy” isn’t sufficient to create long-term economic growth because of constraints on environmental, human, and financial resources. Coupled with rising wages and a declining labor force, China’s international competitiveness is rapidly declining. Thus, Cai ‘12 of the IPLE writes that China has a “comparative advantage vacuum” where it can’t compete with countries in low-manufacturing or high-technology exports. Unfortunately, Nagy ‘18 of WCR writes that the rate of China’s current industrial transition isn’t enough to save it from the middle-income trap.
Fortunately, the Belt and Road Initiative would reverse this trend and shift China’s economy to high-value industry for two reasons.
First. New Trade.
Arduino ‘18 of the University of Piemonte writes that because major EU-China trade routes are inefficient, the BRI can be a game-changer in increasing trade volume through advanced railways. Trade with the EU is key. Bohman ‘18 of SIA writes by connecting to the Western EU via the BRI, China gains access to affluent markets where it can export high-end goods.
Moreover, Blasingame ‘18 of Palantir warrants that new high-speed rails built in the BRI will facilitate the switch to high-end industries by reducing shipping costs and stopping companies from shipping heavy low-end goods like coal and steel, forcing firms to shift to new production.
Second. Mergers and Acquisitions.
Unfortunately, Graupner ‘19 of Deutsche writes that Chinese mergers and acquisitions in Europe has decreased 21 percent because of increasing regulations.
However, Du ‘17 of CER writes that the BRI facilitates greater business activity in participating countries because political coordination between countries reduces risk and regulation against Chinese firms. Thus, Deloitte ‘19 writes that extending the BRI into Western Europe will reverse the dip in mergers in acquisitions by removing EU regulation.
This business activity is crucial for advancing the Chinese economy. Wong ‘17 of Baker McKenzie writes that the BRI will accelerate Chinese acquisitions of European industrial technologies and companies. Wright ‘18 of Brooking concludes that Beijing needs European assets to upgrade its industry and attain technological leadership.
Thus, Blasingame concludes that the Belt and Road will push China out of the middle-income trap.
The impact is destroying growth.
Huang ‘15 of the East Asia Forum impacts that: Whether China makes the transition to high income status is probably one of the most important economic questions facing the world today. Success can lift the living standards of 1.4 billion people, while failure will lead to economic and social instability in China and the world would lose one-third of economic growth. | 905,488 |
314 | 380,120 | neg | Norton 20 indicates, Brazil’s far right presidency has made ousting Maduro a priority, recruiting military deserters in coup efforts.
Norton 20
Brazil’s far-right government helped support military attacks on Venezuela in hopes of inciting a coup and violently overthrowing the country’s leftist government. This plan was revealed by a major pro-government newspaper in Brazil. And yet the shocking story was not covered by any mainstream paper in the US or Europe. Outside a lone report by Venezuela’s state-backed teleSUR — which Washington-backed coup plotters are now trying to usurp – the story was completely ignored in Anglophone media. The United States has supported a series of coup attempts against Venezuela’s elected government since 2002, which accelerated in 2019. But the details of Brazil’s role in the latest plot is a novel revelation. On December 31, the Brazilian newspaper O Globo disclosed the putsch plans in an article titled “Attack on barracks by soldiers who took refuge in Brazil was part of larger plan against Maduro.” The subtitle added, “Deserters intended to initiate large-scale military uprising, but failed.” O Globo is one of Brazil’s most widely circulated outlets. It has a staunch right-wing editorial line and is infamous for supporting Brazil’s fascist military dictatorship between the 1960s and ’80s. The paper maintains close ties to Brazil’s political and military establishment. And it consulted with numerous sources to reconstruct the plans for the latest attacks on Venezuela. Trilogy: 3 planned attacks on Venezuela, with help from foreign countries With the support of neighboring right-wing countries, Venezuelan military defectors planned to launch three military uprisings against the Venezuelan government on or around Christmas Eve, according to O Globo. The official name of the operation was Trilogia (Trilogy). One attack targeted Venezuela’s Bolívar state on the southeastern border with Brazil; a second attack was planned as an amphibious invasion; and a third was to take place near Colombia’s border. Two of these three planned attacks failed, as only one of the groups carried out the orders as planned. Brazil-backed insurgents crossed into Venezuelan territory and, on December 22, attacked the 513 Selva Mariano Montilla infantry battalion in Venezuela’s Bolívar state, located roughly 230 kilometers from Brazil’s northern-most state Roraima, near the border of the two countries. A total of 16 Venezuelan military deserters participated in the attack on the Mariano Montilla barracks, killing a Venezuelan soldier and wounding another.
Thankfully Lima 19 continues, Brazil will not currently invade, because of the belief sanctions are working to oust Maduro.
Lima 19
While Bolsonaro has upended Brazil’s foreign policy by abandoning neutrality for a pro-Washington stance, the policy of non-intervention has been sacrosanct for so long in Latin America that any covert mission by intelligence or military officials would be hard to swallow for many Brazilians. Mourao, a four star general who was himself a military attache in Venezuela, believes it’s only a matter of time before the Maduro administration crumbles under economic sanctions and political pressure. “The Maduro government is strangled. It’s like a house of cards, the same as the Berlin Wall," Mourao said. "At some point a group of military officials will stand up and the whole shebang will collapse."
AFP 20 furthers, a Brazilian invasion involves the US as they are looking for any excuse to invade.
AFP 20
US administration, in collaboration with Venezuela’s opposition figure Juan Guaido and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, is hatching a “plan for war” against Caracas. “From the White House, a plan has been decided to bring war to Venezuela... to escalate a violent and armed conflict and justify an invasion,” Maduro said during a televised speech at his presidential palace in the capital late on Friday. Maduro accused Washington of forging plans against his government and said US President “Donald Trump has given the order to fill Venezuela with violence” with the support of Guaido, who he once again called “puppet.” The 57-year-old president said the United States was at the head of more than 50 countries that rejected Maduro’s second term, considering him “illegitimate,” and instead recognizing Guaido as president in charge. “And now, Jair Bolsonaro was quoted in the Donald Trump’s mansion in Miami, the only issue is pushing Brazil into an armed conflict with Venezuela, that is the only issue he has with Jair Bolsonaro, and from Venezuela we denounce him,” Maduro added. He went on to say that “we are asking the democratic and humanitarian circles, the people of Brazil and the armed forces of that country to stop any adventures against Venezuela by Trump-backed Jair Bolsonaro.” The White House announced earlier in the day that Trump was to meet with the Brazilian president — dubbed the “Trump of the Tropics” — on Saturday to discuss the crisis in Venezuela, among other issues. In a move to further downgrade relations with Venezuela, Brazil’s far-right government of Bolsonaro, which is allied with the US, has begun pulling out all its diplomats from Caracas, and has called on Maduro to recall his country’s representatives from Brasilia.
L2- Columbia
Wyss 19 writes, Columbia sees Venezuela as an existential threat due to Maduro’s support of destabilizing guerilla groups.
Jim Wyss, 10-24-2019, "Colombian ambassador to U.S. says Venezuela is an ‘existential’ threat to his country," miamiherald, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/colombia/article236560518.html
Not only are Venezuelans fleeing to Colombia in record numbers, but Colombia says its hostile neighbor is providing a safe haven to guerrillas bent on destabilizing the Iván Duque administration in Bogotá. “The threat of Venezuela — and the instability that Maduro wants to create in Colombia — are very clear,” Francisco Santos, Colombia’s ambassador to the United States, told the Miami Herald. “It’s an existential issue for Colombia.” Speaking from his office in Washington on a recent weekday, Santos, a longtime diplomat and former vice president, said one of his key roles is to keep Washington focused on Venezuela as a threat to the region. And he regularly leads U.S. delegations to the chaotic Venezuela-Colombia border, where tens of thousands of Venezuelans cross every day looking for food, medicine and a way out. During the United Nations General Assembly earlier this month, Santos was part of the team circulating a classified report that purportedly details the connections between the Maduro government and Colombia’s two main guerrilla groups: the National Liberation Army (ELN) and factions of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) that didn’t comply with a 2016 peace deal. Santos said the dossier provides details about where the guerrillas are operating deep in Venezuelan territory “and a lot of evidence of how Maduro is using the ELN and using the FARC there.”
Worryingly Santos 19 continues, absent sanctions on Maduro, plan B is military intervention
NPR, March 29, 2019, Time To Act’: Venezuelans Who Fled To Colombia Are Eager To Oust Maduro, CPR News, https://www.cpr.org/2019/03/29/time-to-act-venezuelans-who-fled-to-colombia-are-eager-to-oust-maduro/?fbclid=IwAR3mSX2pVRXSp_BBvq-9i6-FKWF1yUsPoESbc11vG_TBvb-BvzHUEPLnO0E //ASJ
Williams Cancino fled his post as a Venezuelan special forces official to neighboring Colombia last month. Now he is restless to get back to his home country to help overthrow the government of Nicolás Maduro. “I think it’s time to act,” says Cancino, 27, at a park in the Colombian border town of Villa del Rosario. “It’s time to organize ourselves, the soldiers that know how to fight.” He is with three fellow Venezuelans who deserted the security forces of the crisis-stricken country and turned over their guns to the Colombian authorities. He says he has no weapons, no money and no organized rebellion, but he shares a growing frustration with many of the millions of Venezuelans now taking refuge abroad. Pent-up anger and despair are leading some of those who fled to Colombia’s border zone to see violence as the way to break the political stalemate and humanitarian crisis back home. Many of them pledge support for U.S.-backed opposition leader Juan Guaidó in his quest to replace Maduro. On Wednesday, Guaidó announced the launch of “Operation Freedom,” calling for supporters to mobilize in the streets on Saturday and to take “tactical action” on April 6. He did not specify what the action would entail. Analysts say it could mean another large demonstration — or even some form of violence. Officials across Latin America fear the prospect of armed conflict in Venezuela. It is a country with deep oil reserves where world powers have staked out rival sides in the tense standoff: The United States joins more than 50 other nations that recognize Guaidó as the country’s legitimate leader; Maduro has support from countries including Russia, China and Iran. “Venezuela can become sort of a Syria,” Francisco Santos, the Colombian ambassador to the U.S., recently told NPR’s All Things Considered. He insisted there’s still time for international pressure and sanctions to force out Maduro. But if that plan fails, “a Plan B would involve violence,” he said. “I don’t want the continent to have a Plan B option. I’m very scared of what might happen.” In an NPR interview on Thursday in Bogotá, U.S. Ambassador to Colombia Kevin Whitaker said “strategic patience” is needed. “Even as frustrated as we are at the lack of immediate change on this, change will come.” But in the Colombian border area, Venezuelan emigres’ patience is wearing thin. Cancino says he and more than 200 other former Venezuelan forces are cooped up in a hotel in Villa del Rosario. They are some of the 1,000 Venezuelan forces who, since February, have fled Maduro’s rule, crossed into Colombia and turned over their weapons and uniforms to the authorities, according to Colombia’s Foreign Ministry. Inside Venezuela, most military leaders and pro-government armed gangs continue to pledge loyalty to Maduro. Emigres who want to return and fight tell NPR their only hope is if they receive help from the U.S. military. While the Trump administration has made threats, U.S. officials have not said publicly they want an invasion. The administration says it is using political, diplomatic and economic pressure to squeeze out the Maduro government, but “all options are on the table.” Venezuela’s opposition has so far called for its followers to remain peaceful in demanding Maduro’s resignation. Last month, the U.S. and Venezuelan opposition leaders staged an operation to carry humanitarian aid into Venezuela. They promised it would land a major blow against Maduro. But the move failed, with Venezuelan armed forces and pro-government gangs violently blocking the convoy and some anti-Maduro activists throwing homemade bombs at the security forces. The launch this week of “Operation Freedom” is seen as the opposition’s first call to action since that mission’s failure. “If all options are exhausted, we will start to see increasing interest in armed insurrection against the Maduro government,” says Geoff Ramsey, a Venezuela researcher at the Washington Office on Latin America. “The U.S. arming dissident forces within Venezuelan would be, I think, a complete nightmare.” Luis Vargas, a 58-year-old construction worker from just over the Venezuelan border, says people in his home state of Táchira are organizing to confront the government. “There are arms, but the government doesn’t know that the people are armed,” he says over lunch at a charity kitchen that feeds thousands of Venezuelans in the Colombian border zone. “We wouldn’t want blood in the country, but at times we think that those things would be necessary to get out the government.” He says people have no other choice. The Maduro government refuses to abdicate, despite presiding over years of spiraling crisis that has left millions of people like Vargas unable to feed themselves or their families at home. At a nearby table, 72-year-old Ligia Blanco sits holding a cane. She begins to cry when she imagines what lies in store for her native Venezuela. Blanco says she, too, wants Maduro out. She still lives in Venezuela but walks across the border to this Colombian charity kitchen for meals. She fears that Venezuela’s problems would get much worse before they get better, especially if foreign powers invade. “I don’t even know what to think about it,” she says through tears. “People say they’re going to come launching bombs and it will go like when they killed Gadhafi and the Arabs.” “It’s the people who will suffer,” she says. Venezuela’s population is suffering from deep hunger and disease amid hyperinflation and shortages of food, medicine and other supplies. The United Nations Refugee Agency says 3.4 million people have fled Venezuela, overwhelming Colombia and other countries of the region. The agency estimated that last year 5,000 Venezuelans were moving into Colombia each day. Colombian towns have struggled to cope. Pepe Ruíz Paredes, the mayor of Villa del Rosario, says local authorities have tried to swiftly suppress outbreaks of violence at protests along the border. He vows not to allow Venezuelan security force deserters to stir up more trouble in his region. “If they want to present some kind of military pressure, they’ll have to do it in Caracas. We are very far away,” he says. The Colombian Foreign Ministry said the former security forces are in the custody of Colombian authorities. That hasn’t stopped Cancino and his companions from posting social media videos calling for people to take up arms, or urging opposition leaders to issue orders for a confrontation. If no politician supports their cause, they say, they will have to act on their own, in whatever way they can. “We’ll do everything possible so that innocent people don’t fall,” Cancino says. “There will always be collateral damage in war.”
which Monroy 19 finds would involve the US as Trump has assured Columbia of his support.
Louis Monroy-Santander, 10-11-2018, "Tensions rise between Colombia, US and Venezuela amid rumours of a military intervention," Conversation, https://theconversation.com/tensions-rise-between-colombia-us-and-venezuela-amid-rumours-of-a-military-intervention-104340,
Consequently, Duque’s foreign policy approach is being closely monitored – particularly how it tallies with that of?the Trump administration?in the US. Closer ties between the US and Colombia were evident during Duque’s intervention at the United Nations General Assembly and his?encounter with president Donald Trump, where both drug trafficking and the Venezuelan crisis were discussed.?President Duque’s intervention insisted on the need to combat drug trafficking as a global threat, the need to combat the evident increase in illicit crop plantations, his commitment to fighting corruption, and the need to work with the international community in dealing with the most difficult migratory and humanitarian problem in the region: the Venezuelan crisis Colombia’s alignment with American foreign policy has increased tensions between Bogota, Washington and Caracas,?leading to speculation?about a possible military intervention into Venezuela to topple the regime of?Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s president. Meanwhile, Trump has?expressed publicly?his support for Colombia as an ally in the war on drugs and offered support for Colombia in the event of a military clash with Venezuela. The US administration?also announced sanctions?against Cilia Flores, Maduro’s wife, and Diosdado Cabello, Maduro’s top political ally.?For his part,?Duque has insisted?that Colombia will not support a military intervention into Venezuela, and has instead called on the international community to support sanctions that bring an end to Maduro’s regime.
L3- Guyana
L4- Trump
Even moreso, Telesur 17 explains that Trump’s financial sanctions are a crucial alternative to military intervention.
Telesur ‘17
29 August 2017, https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Venezuela-Constituent-Assembly-Debates-Response-to-US-Sanctions-20170829-0009.html
The president of the assembly, Delcy Rodriguez, recalled that opposition leaders had issued a communique at the weekend, "calling for and justifying all these actions and calling on other governments to apply similar sanctions." She explained that U.S. President Donald Trump’s financial sanctions are an alternative to military intervention, which was met with rejection even from U.S.-allied regional right-wing governments. Rodriquez stated that the purpose of these attacks' was to further destabilize the country and “intensify the economic aggression against the Venezuelan people.”
1- Election
Smiley 19 finds, democrats have regained the rust belt which means Trump has to win Florida.
Smiley 19
“The path to victory is through Florida,” said 2016 Trump Florida campaign co-chairman Joe Gruters, now the head of the Republican Party of Florida. “There’s so much at stake.” It’s been 95 years since a Republican won a presidential election without picking up Florida. And Trump doesn’t intend to break that record. This month alone, he reversed course and agreed to fully fund a $200 million budget request for Everglades restoration projects and announced a 90 percent federal cost-share for disaster recovery efforts in the hurricane-ravaged Panhandle. He’s made further inroads in South Florida’s diverse Hispanic community by increasing financial pressures against leftist regimes in Venezuela and Cuba. And according to the L.A. Times, Trump now plans to roll out his 2020 campaign with an event located along the Interstate-4 corridor, which cuts across battleground Central Florida
Groppe 19 writes, foreign policy is a key voter for hispanic groups in Florida, thus, all options are on the table when considering what hardline stance to take against Venezuela.
Groppe 19
“These are all linked and so for the administration to act tough and talk tough (on Venezuela) is popular in South Florida,” said Mora, who served as deputy assistant defense secretary for the Western Hemisphere during the Obama administration. “And South Florida is one of the few areas or regions of the country in which foreign policy is a domestic political factor in how people vote.”
Embattled Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro might not have been listening Friday when Vice President Mike Pence gave a microphone to exiled Venezuelans living in South Florida. But Pence's trip to Miami, to showcase the administration's hard-line efforts to oust Maduro, is likely to resonate with an all-important bloc of Latino voters in the nation's largest swing state. And that could help another embattled president: Donald Trump. No Republican presidential candidate has won the White House in nearly a century without carrying Florida – a state also known for its razor-thin election margins. "It’s very hard to see a scenario where the president gets re-elected without winning Florida," said Democratic strategist Steve Schale who ran Barack Obama's 2008 campaign in Florida. Trump's tough stance on Maduro is very popular in Florida among that state’s Cuban and Venezuelan populations, which account for more than 1.5 million of the state's 21 million residents. It also resonates with the Colombian community, which is growing in political importance in Florida's most populous county: Miami-Dade.
2- Oil
Additionally, Warburg 19 finds that oil reserves are the motivation for a military intervention in Venezuela
Warburg 19
In how many oil-rich regions must the United States pose as the champion of democracy, only to fan the flames of bloody civil war? Options for military intervention in Venezuela may not be “fleshed out in detail,” but clearly there are those inside and outside the Trump administration who are seriously considering that prospect. Venezuela isn’t just another Latin American country in turmoil. It has the world’s largest supply of proven oil reserves. That’s what makes it such a tempting prospect for American military intervention. Remember Libya? Or Iraq? Or Afghanistan, long seen as the critical pipeline pathway for getting oil and natural gas out of Turkmenistan?
which is why, Ward 19 finds, prior to sanctions, Trump threatened a military option because Trump perceptually believes Venezuela has an abundant amount of easy to access oil.
Ward 19
The Trump administration keeps saying “all options are on the table” when it comes to Venezuela, meaning a military option is still feasible. While it’s unlikely, it sure seems that war with Venezuela has been on the president’s mind for years — and it may be because he wants the oil.
War Bad
Mora 19 reports that an intervention would kill thousands of civilians, destroy vital infrastructure, and force millions to flee resulting in anarchy
Frank O. Mora, March 19 2019, "What a Military Intervention in Venezuela Would Look Like," Foreign Affairs, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2019-03-19/what-military-intervention-venezuela-would-look
In the worst-case scenario, a precision strike operation would last for months, killing possibly thousands of civilians, destroying much of what remains of Venezuela’s economy, and wiping out the state security forces. The result would be anarchy. Militias and other armed criminal groups would roam the streets of major cities unchecked, wreaking havoc. More than eight million Venezuelans would likely flee. The chaos would likely lead the United States to send in ground troops in order either to finally dislodge the regime and its security forces or to provide security once the dictatorship had collapsed. Such a scenario is not improbable. Indeed, the most likely outcome of a campaign of air strikes is that the Venezuelan armed forces would disintegrate. The United States, perhaps with international partners, would then have no option but to send troops to neutralize Venezuela’s irregular armed groups and restore order while a new government and security apparatus established themselves. How long such a peacekeeping occupation would last is hard to say, but the difficulty of the project and the complexity of the country's geography suggest that troops would stay in Venezuela for a lot longer than the few months for which they might initially be sent. The United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, for example, lasted 13 years in a much smaller country. GROUND INVASION Rather than launching precision strikes and getting sucked into a ground war later, the United States might choose to go all-in from the beginning. That would mean a major intervention, including both air strikes and the deployment of at least 150,000 ground troops to secure or destroy airfields, ports, oil fields, power stations, command and control centers, communications infrastructure, and other important government facilities, including the president’s residence, Miraflores Palace. The invading army would face 160,000 regular Venezuelan troops and more than 100,000 paramilitaries. The most recent large-scale U.S.-led military interventions, in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003, both required U.S. troops to remain after the initial invasion for nearly 20 years. By 2017, the two interventions had involved more than two million U.S. military personnel and cost more than $1.8 trillion. More than 7,000 U.S. service members have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. The costs of an intervention in Venezuela, which is free of the kind of sectarian divides that plague Afghanistan and Iraq, would likely not come near those numbers, but they would likely be significant. There’s no such thing as risk-free military action. But in this case, the social, economic, and security costs of intervening far outweigh the benefits. Whether the United States launched limited air strikes or a full ground invasion, it would almost certainly get sucked in to a long, difficult campaign to stabilize Venezuela after the initial fighting was over. Such an engagement would cost American lives and money and hurt the United States’ standing in Latin America. An extended occupation would reignite anti-Americanism in the region, particularly if U.S. soldiers committed real or perceived abuses, and it would damage U.S. relations with countries outside the region, too. Finally, a war-weary American public is unlikely to stand for yet another extended military campaign
Iran prolif-
Dudley 18
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/03/01/iran-clamps-down-dollar-trading/#565c061854d1
According to local media reports, as of February 28 any purchase orders or other import documentation based on US dollars will not be processed by customs officials. The move comes as a result of a directive from the Ministry of Industry, Mines and Trade to the Central Bank of Iran.Mehdi Kasraeipour, the central bank’s director of foreign exchange rules and policies affairs, was quoted by local news agencies as saying the new rules should not cause too much disruption, given the limited share of the dollar in Iranian trade. US sanctions mean that, in most circumstances, banks cannot clear US dollar transactions involving Iran. “Considering that the use of the dollar is banned for Iran and traders are literally using alternative currencies in their transactions, there is no longer any reason to proceed with invoices that use the dollar as the base rate,” Kasraeipour was quoted as saying.
American Foreign Policy Council 12
https://outline.com/kBxdtt
Iran's formal political and economic contacts with regional states are reinforced by a broad web of asymmetric activities throughout the Americas. Illicit financial transactions figure prominently in this regard. Over the past several years, Iran's economic ties to Venezuela have helped it skirt the sanctions being levied by the international community, as well as to continue to operate in an increasingly inhospitable global financial system. It has done so through the establishment of joint companies and financial entities, as well as the formation of wholly Iranian-owned financial entities in Venezuela and the entrenchment of Iranian commercial banks there.\20\ Experts note that this financial activity exploits an ``existing loophole'' in the current sanctions regime against Iran~-~-one that leverages the freedom of action of Venezuelan banks to provide the Islamic Republic with ``an ancillary avenue through which it can access the international
financial system despite Western pressure.''
Morgenthau
https://gfintegrity.org/press-release/link-iran-venezuela-crisis-making/
In Venezuela, Ahmadinejad and the hard-line Mullahs have found an ally who has stood by them as they crushed political freedoms and defied world consensus on its nuclear program. Both countries have pledged mutual scientific, technical and financial support. There is little reason to doubt Venezuela’s support for Ahmadinejad’s most important agenda, the development of a nuclear program and long-range missiles, and the destabilization of the region. For Iran, the lifeblood of their nuclear and weapons programs is the ability to use the international banking system to make payments for banned missile and nuclear materials. The opening of Venezuela’s banks to the Iranians guarantees the continued development of nuclear technology and long-range missiles. The mysterious manufacturing plants, controlled by Iran, deep in the interior of Venezuela, give even greater concern.
BBC 18
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43419673
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told US network CBS News his country did not want to acquire nuclear weapons. "But without a doubt, if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we would follow suit as soon as possible," he added. Iran limited its nuclear programme under a 2015 deal with several world powers - but US President Donald Trump has threatened to withdraw from it. Saudi Arabia and Iran have long been rivals in the Middle East. Each is dominated by different branches of Islam - Sunni for Saudi Arabia, Shia for Iran - and they have historically supported opposing powers in regional conflicts.
Nuke escalation cuz preemptive strikes existential threat
Kroenig 15
The greatest threat posed by the spread of nuclear weapons is nuclear war. The more states in possession of nuclear weapons, the greater the probability that somewhere, someday, there will be a catastrophic nuclear war. To date, nuclear weapons have only been used in warfare once. In 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, bringing World War II to a close. Many analysts point to the 65-plus year tradition of nuclear non-use as evidence that nuclear weapons are unusable, but it would be naïve to think that nuclear weapons will never be used again simply because they have not been used for some time. After all, analysts in the 1990s argued that worldwide economic downturns like the Great Depression were a thing of the past, only to be surprised by the dotcom bubble bursting later in the decade and the Great Recession of the late 2000s.48 This author, for one, would be surprised if nuclear weapons are not used again sometime in his lifetime. Before reaching a state of MAD, new nuclear states go through a transition period in which they lack a secure-second strike capability. In this context, one or both states might believe that it has an incentive to use nuclear weapons first. For example, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, neither Iran, nor its nuclear-armed rival, Israel, will have a secure, second-strike capability. Even though it is believed to have a large arsenal, given its small size and lack of strategic depth, Israel might not be confident that it could absorb a nuclear strike and respond with a devastating counterstrike. Similarly, Iran might eventually be able to build a large and survivable nuclear arsenal, but, when it first crosses the nuclear threshold, Tehran will have a small and vulnerable nuclear force. In these pre-MAD situations, there are at least three ways that nuclear war could occur. First, the state with the nuclear advantage might believe it has a splendid first strike capability. In a crisis, Israel might, therefore, decide to launch a preventive nuclear strike to disarm Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Indeed, this incentive might be further increased by Israel’s aggressive strategic culture that emphasizes preemptive action. Second, the state with a small and vulnerable nuclear arsenal, in this case Iran, might feel use them or lose them pressures. That is, in a crisis, Iran might decide to strike first rather than risk having its entire nuclear arsenal destroyed. Third, as Thomas Schelling has argued, nuclear war could result due to the reciprocal fear of surprise attack.49 If there are advantages to striking first, one state might start a nuclear war in the belief that war is inevitable and that it would be better to go first than to go second. Fortunately, there is no historic evidence of this dynamic occurring in a nuclear context, but it is still possible. In an Israeli–Iranian crisis, for example, Israel and Iran might both prefer to avoid a nuclear war, but decide to strike first rather than suffer a devastating first attack from an opponent.
Nuke War = Extinction
Starr 14 Steven Starr, ““The Lethality of Nuclear Weapons,” PaulCraigRoberts.org (May 30, 2014). Starr is the Senior Scientist for Physicians for Social Responsibility and Director of the Clinical Laboratory Science Program at the University of Missouri.
Nuclear war has no winner. Beginning in 2006, several of the world’s leading climatologists (at Rutgers, UCLA, John Hopkins University, and the University of Colorado-Boulder) published a series of studies that evaluated the long-term environmental consequences of a nuclear war, including baseline scenarios fought with merely 1 of the explosive power in the US and/or Russian launch-ready nuclear arsenals. They concluded that the consequences of even a “small” nuclear war would include catastrophic disruptions of global climatei and massive destruction of Earth’s protective ozone layerii. These and more recent studies predict that global agriculture would be so negatively affected by such a war, a global famine would result, which would cause up to 2 billion people to starve to death. iii These peer-reviewed studies – which were analyzed by the best scientists in the world and found to be without error – also predict that a war fought with less than half of US or Russian strategic nuclear weapons would destroy the human race.iv In other words, a US-Russian nuclear war would create such extreme long-term damage to the global environment that it would leave the Earth uninhabitable for humans and most animal forms of life. A recent article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, “Self-assured destruction: The climate impacts of nuclear war”,v begins by stating: “A nuclear war between Russia and the United States, even after the arsenal reductions planned under New START, could produce a nuclear winter. Hence, an attack by either side could be suicidal, resulting in self-assured destruction.” In 2009, I wrote an articlevi for the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament that summarizes the findings of these studies. It explains that nuclear firestorms would produce millions of tons of smoke, which would rise above cloud level and form a global stratospheric smoke layer that would rapidly encircle the Earth. The smoke layer would remain for at least a decade, and it would act to destroy the protective ozone layer (vastly increasing the UV-B reaching Earthvii) as well as block warming sunlight, thus creating Ice Age weather conditions that would last 10 years or longer. Following a US-Russian nuclear war, temperatures in the central US and Eurasia would fall below freezing every day for one to three years; the intense cold would completely eliminate growing seasons for a decade or longer. No crops could be grown, leading to a famine that would kill most humans and large animal populations. Electromagnetic pulse from high-altitude nuclear detonations would destroy the integrated circuits in all modern electronic devicesviii, including those in commercial nuclear power plants. Every nuclear reactor would almost instantly meltdown; every nuclear spent fuel pool (which contain many times more radioactivity than found in the reactors) would boil-off, releasing vast amounts of long-lived radioactivity. The fallout would make most of the US and Europe uninhabitable. Of course, the survivors of the nuclear war would be starving to death anyway. Once nuclear weapons were introduced into a US-Russian conflict, there would be little chance that a nuclear holocaust could be avoided. Theories of “limited nuclear war” and “nuclear de-escalation” are unrealistic.ix In 2002 the Bush administration modified US strategic doctrine from a retaliatory role to permit preemptive nuclear attack; in 2010, the Obama administration made only incremental and miniscule changes to this doctrine, leaving it essentially unchanged. Furthermore, Counterforce doctrinex – used by both the US and Russian military – emphasizes the need for preemptive strikes once nuclear war begins Both sides would be under immense pressure to launch a preemptive nuclear first-strike once military hostilities had commenced, especially if nuclear weapons had already been used on the battlefield. Both the US and Russia each have 400 to 500 launch-ready ballistic missiles armed with a total of at least 1800 strategic nuclear warheads,xi which can be launched with only a few minutes warning.xii Both the US and Russian Presidents are accompanied 24/7 by military officers carrying a “nuclear briefcase”, which allows them to transmit the permission order to launch in a matter of seconds. Yet top political leaders and policymakers of both the US and Russia seem to be unaware that their launch-ready nuclear weapons represent a self-destruct mechanism for the human race. For example, in 2010, I was able to publicly question the chief negotiators of the New START treaty, Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov and (then) US Assistant Secretary of State, Rose Gottemoeller, during their joint briefing at the UN (during the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference). I asked them if they were familiar with the recent peer-reviewed studies that predicted the detonation of less than 1 of the explosive power contained in the operational and deployed U.S. and Russian nuclear forces would cause catastrophic changes in the global climate, and that a nuclear war fought with their strategic nuclear weapons would kill most people on Earth. They both answered “no.” More recently, on April 20, 2014, I asked the same question and received the same answer from the US officials sent to brief representatives of the NGOS at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee meeting at the UN. None of the US officials at the briefing were aware of the studies. Those present included top officials of the National Security Council. It is frightening that President Obama and his administration appear unaware that the world’s leading scientists have for years predicted that a nuclear war fought with the US and/or Russian strategic nuclear arsenal means the end of human history. Do they not know of the existential threat these arsenals pose to the human race . . . or do they choose to remain silent because this fact doesn’t fit into their official narratives? We hear only about terrorist threats that could destroy a city with an atomic bomb, while the threat of human extinction from nuclear war is never mentioned – even when the US and Russia are each running huge nuclear war games in preparation for a US-Russian war. Even more frightening is the fact that the neocons running US foreign policy believe that the US has “nuclear primacy” over Russia; that is, the US could successfully launch a nuclear sneak attack against Russian (and Chinese) nuclear forces and completely destroy them. This theory was articulated in 2006 in “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy”, which was published in Foreign Affairs by the Council on Foreign Relations.xiii By concluding that the Russians and Chinese would be unable to retaliate, or if some small part of their forces remained, would not risk a second US attack by retaliating, the article invites nuclear war. Colonel Valery Yarynich (who was in charge of security of the Soviet/Russian nuclear command and control systems for 7 years) asked me to help him write a rebuttal, which was titled “Nuclear Primacy is a Fallacy”.xiv Colonel Yarynich, who was on the Soviet General Staff and did war planning for the USSR, concluded that the “Primacy” article used faulty methodology and erroneous assumptions, thus invalidating its conclusions. My contribution lay in my knowledge of the recently published (in 2006) studies, which predicted even a “successful” nuclear first-strike, which destroyed 100 of the opposing sides nuclear weapons, would cause the citizens of the side that “won” the nuclear war to perish from nuclear famine, just as would the rest of humanity. Although the nuclear primacy article created quite a backlash in Russia, leading to a public speech by the Russian Foreign Minister, the story was essentially not covered in the US press. We were unable to get our rebuttal published by US media. The question remains as to whether the US nuclear primacy asserted in the article has been accepted as a fact by the US political and military establishment. Such acceptance would explain the recklessness of US policy toward Russia and China. Thus we find ourselves in a situation in which those who are in charge of our nuclear arsenal seem not to understand that they can end human history if they choose to push the button. Most of the American public also remains completely unaware of this deadly threat. The uninformed are leading the uninformed toward the abyss of extinction. US public schools have not taught students about nuclear weapons for more than 20 years. The last time nuclear war was discussed or debated in a US Presidential election was sometime in the last century. Thus, most people do not know that a single strategic nuclear weapon can easily ignite a massive firestorm over 100 square miles, and that the US and Russia each have many thousands of these weapons ready for immediate use. Meanwhile, neoconservative ideology has kept the US at war during the entire 21st century. It has led to the expansion of US/NATO forces to the very borders of Russia, a huge mistake that has consequently revived the Cold War. A hallmark of neconservatism is that America is the “indispensable nation”, as evidenced by the neoconservative belief in “American exceptionalism”, which essentially asserts that Americans are superior to all other peoples, that American interests and values should reign supreme in the world. At his West Point speech on May 28, President Obama said, “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.” Obama stated his bottom line is that “America must always lead on the world stage,” and “the backbone of that leadership always will be the military.” American exceptionalism based on might, not diplomacy, on hard power, not soft, is precisely the hubris and arrogance that could lead to the termination of human life. Washington’s determination to prevent the rise of Russia and China, as set out in the Brzezinski and Wolfowitz doctrines, is a recipe for nuclear war. The need is dire for the president of the US, Russia, or China to state in a highly public forum that the existence of nuclear weapons creates the possibility of their use and that their use in war would likely mean human extinction. As nuclear war has no winners, the weapons should be banned and destroyed before they destroy all of us.
Reforms
Sanctions are not the root cause of Venezuela’s economic crisis
Rendon 19 of csis writes
Sanctions did not cause the economic or humanitarian crisis in Venezuela as dire conditions in Venezuela preceded the implementation of sanctions. By 2016, a year before any financial or sectoral sanctions hit the country, Venezuela’s economy was already enduring severe hyperinflation, which surpassed a rate of 800 percent. Between 2013 and 2016, food imports fell 71 percent and medicine and medical equipment imports dropped 68 percent. Over the same period, infant mortality increased by 44 percent. By the time sanctions were introduced, Venezuelans earning the minimum wage could only afford 56 percent of the calories necessary for a family of five. Over two million Venezuelans had already fled the country at this point. The extent of the humanitarian damage suffered before sectoral sanctions indicates that the blame cannot be placed on the sanctions themselves. As an example, Venezuela’s Central Bank confirmed in 2014 that plummeting oil prices had triggered a severe economic contraction with simultaneous hyperinflation. Under the guise of austerity, Maduro announced cuts to major social services upon which millions of citizens relied.
The real cause is decades of failed policy
Bahar 19 of Brookings indicates
Thus, it is clear from our analysis that the further deterioration observed since 2017—whether caused by the sanctions, management incompetence, or whatever it was—by no means constitutes the bulk of the collapse that has caused widespread suffering, death, and displacement to millions of Venezuelans. The weight of evidence seems to indicates that much of the suffering and devastation in Venezuela has been, in line with most accounts, inflicted by those in power for more than 20 years already. Ignoring this and blaming the damage on agents other than Maduro and the Chavista governments after decades of failed policies is, to put it mildly, highly misleading.
L1- power consol
However, sanctions have limited Maduro’s ability to consolidate power at the top.
Rendon 19 continus
There is significant evidence of the impact of sanctions on Maduro’s power. Not only have targeted economic sanctions limited his ability to finance his regime’s antidemocratic activities and human rights abuses by reducing oil and illegal mining earnings, but they have also strained his inner circle. His control over state institutions and assets is slipping along with public confidence in his regime. The United States has instituted a strategy of risk; the current administration’s interminable threat to impose further sanctions leaves Maduro and his accomplices unsure as to how far it will go, forcing them to fear the worst. Most recently, sanctions have increased leverage for democratic forces within Venezuela. Maduro recently agreed to send a delegation to Barbados to reopen talks with the opposition after dialogues stalled earlier this year. The increased pressure of sanctions was a key factor in his decision to negotiate with political adversaries, as he and his inner circle are more limited than ever in their capacity to travel and engage with financial assets. That said, there are areas for improvement in sanctions strategy. The first important step is to encourage multilateral adoption of currently targeted sanctions. Unilateral sanctions, even from the most powerful economy in the world, have limited results.
Armas ‘19
Armas, Vaela and Pons, Corina, Reuters, “Venezuela's Maduro loosens private sector, currency red tape-sources,” 1.31.19. https://www.reuters.com/article/venezuela-politics-business/venezuelas-maduro-loosens-private-sector-currency-red-tape-sources-idUSL1N1ZV1IS
As Venezuela grapples with U.S. sanctions on its vital oil industry, socialist President Nicolas Maduro has made plans to lift some price and foreign exchange controls in a bid to revive the country’s battered economy, sources said. Since 2014, Maduro’s government has directly imported and distributed raw material for industries like food processing and construction. But the government has now informed some companies in private meetings that they can buy their own foreign currency to import what they need, five industrial and financial industry sources said. Until now they have had to go through the government’s complex system of exchange controls to obtain scarce foreign currency. But business leaders said the shift may have limited impact with Venezuela deep in hyperinflation after five years of recession. “This has come too late,” said Jorge Botti, a former leader of Venezuela’s largest industry group, Fedecamaras. “Even the most optimistic people, who for months held out for a shift in economic policy, are now betting on a change in government.” Venezuela’s central bank said on Tuesday that starting in February, banks would be able to sell euros to private companies in “strategic sectors.” The banks would be assigned euros each Monday depending on how much local currency they had deposited in central bank coffers. The change comes as Maduro is facing the boldest challenge since taking office in 2013. Opposition leader Juan Guaido has claimed the presidency, arguing that Maduro’s May 2018 re-election was fraudulent. He has won support from the United States and many Latin American countries. The United States imposed sanctions this week that will likely halt exports of crude oil from state oil company PDVSA to U.S. refineries, cutting off a key source of the OPEC nation’s revenue in order to pressure Maduro into leaving office and allowing Guaido to call elections. Years of heavy government intervention have prompted several multinational companies to abandon Venezuela. The walk back of regulations comes as the government has allowed the bolivar to depreciate to the parallel rate, after years of controls created a black market for foreign currency. The changes come after sanctions from the United States and European Union have made it difficult for the government to move money abroad since banks are wary of dealing with it.
L2- econ pressure
As a result, he has had to implement profound reforms to ensure public support
The Economist 19 explains
The sanctions have had unintended consequences. Officials whose travel is restricted and whose foreign bank accounts are frozen spend more of their time and money at home, one explanation for the Humboldt blowout. More important, the oil sanctions were enough of a shock to force the government to retreat from socialism. Mr Maduro has lifted nearly all the economic controls first imposed by Hugo Chávez, the charismatic leader of the “Bolivarian revolution”, who died in 2013. Sanctions have “made the government more flexible”, says Luis Oliveros, an economist. It has stopped trying to dictate the exchange rate and control prices. Private firms can now import whatever they choose and set their own prices. Supermarkets in Caracas, nearly empty for much of 2017 and 2018, are again stocked with food. It is not just the rich who can afford it. Perhaps a third of Venezuelans have direct access to remittances from relatives living abroad. Since Mr Maduro took office in 2013 at least 4m people, 12 of the population, have left the country. Venezuelans abroad send back $4bn a year, roughly 3 of gdp, according to Econoanalitica, a consultancy. This supplements the government’s distribution of food, disproportionately to its supporters, and a discreet aid programme managed by foreign ngos.
L3
Maduro has even more reasons to reform –Alvarez 19
VíCtor Alvarez R. – Costa Del Sol 93.1 Fm, xx-xx-xxxx, "2020: Parliamentary Elections to Stimulate Economic Illusions," Venezuelanalysis, https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/14756
So far in Venezuela, political changes have been a condition for the economic changes that the country needs. But in 2020, a year of crucial parliamentary elections, the sequence is set to be the other way around: the likelihood of economic change grows with the political-electoral scenario. Chavismo is determined to reap the electoral rewards of an atmosphere of economic improvement which is currently being felt in the country. To that end, we can expect the government to extend policies of?currency and price control liberalisation, and to open the economy to domestic and foreign private investment. The government has also virtually liberalised foreign trade with the elimination. Coupled with the destruction of the national currency, it has?allowed?dollarisation to?advance?so as not to block transactions due to a lack of liquidity. In this new environment, trade reflects a sign of improvement, and, if liberalisation continues, it is quite likely that in 2020 the Venezuelan economy will stabilise and start growing. To continue dollarising the economy, the government will surely authorise the opening of foreign currency accounts in local banks so transfers which are currently made through overseas accounts can be made through domestic ones. This will lead to larger amounts of foreign currency entering national circulation rather than being passed from one account to another within the international banking system. Once commercial loans are pegged to the evolution of the official exchange rate, the next step will be to authorise the granting of foreign currency credit, including credit cards. The free movement of foreign currency in the national banking system will allow residents in Venezuela to receive deposits, wire money, issue checks, and make ATM withdrawals. Maduro's government wants to use the lobbying leverage of large foreign oil companies to loosen sanctions against Venezuela’s state-run oil company PDVSA, thus increasing the extraction of crude oil. The incentives offered to foreign investors translate into increased pressure on the Trump administration to loosen and moderate?financial?and?trade sanctions. To alleviate the weight of public debt, the government can stimulate the conversion of debt into investment, delivering a percentage of the shares it owns in joint and public companies, to be managed by the private investor, as part payment. Through the Law of Concessions, it can also offer the operation of hotels, ports, airports, highways, etc to private companies. In 2020, Venezuela may enter a process of China-ification of the economy, in which the government ratifies its socialist character and stimulates private investment with incentives in taxes, exchange rate, tariffs amongst others, which contribute to the economic revival. This revival will generate new sources of employment and foreign currency income for the country, expanding the spaces for a market economy where property rights and business profits are respected. PDVSA’s transnational partner corporations in the Orinoco Oil Belt joint ventures have complained about the Venezuelan firm’s tight control over oil field operations, an issue that results in?bottlenecks?affecting production. Proper operation of oil fields requires a lot of efficiency when exploring, drilling and extracting, including decisions that require hiring suppliers, acquiring equipment and building infrastructure. These issues are hampered by the web of controls that govern public enterprises, which become a breeding ground for influence-peddling and?corruption. Lacking qualified staff, key decisions are left in inexperienced hands that make the wrong choices and affect the smooth running of the oil industry. If that were not enough, due to US?sanctions, these purchasing and contracting operations become even more complicated. One way to manoeuvre around such obstacles would be to transfer the handling of these operations to private partners, but this would have to be done through granting them majority shareholder status. In a context where PDVSA’s accounts are heavily constrained by sanctions, reducing state participation would result in private partners having greater flexibility to mobilise resources in the international banking system. For this reason, the government is evaluating the desirability and feasibility of advancing with a reform of the legal and regulatory framework of the oil industry. Some proposals focus on reforming the 2001?Hydrocarbons Law to allow majority stakes for private investors, while for others argue for modifying the terms and conditions of the contracts of the joint ventures to remove the clause preventing PDVSA from "transferring its role as an operator" in oil fields. The crux of the issue is that foreign investors demand that contracts be approved by the opposition controlled?National Assembly?and not the government controlled?National Constituent Assembly, which adds pressure to lift the illegal?status?in which the Venezuelan National Assembly finds itself in. In this context, there is a scenario conducive to the achievement of political agreements that would strengthen the international lobbying in favour of loosening sanctions against PDVSA. In Chavismo there is wind blowing in favour of this openness and liberalisation. The motivation for this is that by the end of 2019 - right before parliamentary elections - the?recovery of oil production, economic revival, overcoming of shortages, the impression of abundance and the?taming of hyperinflation?are the best credentials that may allow pro-government candidates greater chances of winning seats in their respective circuits, and thus lead the government to regain control of the National Assembly. With the opposition worn down and divided by its?internal struggles, any mirage of economic improvement increases the chances of Maduro’s candidates to regain control of the legislative power. This would be the end of Juan Guaido as president of the National Assembly and the strategy that led him to the?interim presidency?with the recognition of more than 50 countries.?Undoubtedly, this sanctions is a powerful incentive for the Maduro government to deepen the liberalisation and opening up of the oil industry and the national economy.
Zerpa 19 of bloomberg reports
Venezuela’s economy is increasingly dollarized, with more than half of retail transactions now being carried out in U.S. currency, a study found. An estimated 54 of all sales in Venezuela last month were in dollars, according to a survey by Econoalitica, a Caracas-based research firm. More than four million Venezuelans have migrated in recent years to escape the economic crisis, and many of their families back home now survive on the remittances they send back. This has caused a breach in living standards between those with access to hard currency, and those without, said Asdrubal Oliveros, director of Ecoanalitica. “Venezuela lives in an economy dominated by dollar transactions,” Oliveros told reporters. “This excludes those who only have access to bolivars, whose ability to buy things is severely restricted.” A recent loosening of price controls has led to a boom of product imports ~-~- from Nutella to Heineken ~-~- sold in foreign currency. But the products are sold at prices that few people dependent on local currency salaries can afford, in a country where the monthly minimum salary is about $6.
Argus 19 furthers
US sanctions have failed to dislodge Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro so far, but they have compelled the government to ease economic controls this year, modestly improving the Opec country's 2020 economic outlook. The sanctions "have forced the Maduro government throughout this year to erase most price controls, loosen capital controls, tighten controls on commercial bank loan operations and accept informal dollarization as it seeks to capture new hard currency streams and reduce hyperinflationary pressures," a Venezuelan central bank economist tells Argus. Maduro's biggest economic achievement this year has been to curbed hyperinflation, the economist said. Opposition-controlled National Assembly advisers acknowledge the slowing inflation, but caution that inflationary pressures persist on years of structural distortions. The advisers they estimate cumulative inflation from January through November at over 5,500 percent pc compared with the central bank's 2018 inflation estimate of 130,000pc. They now believe it is likely that 2019 inflation could average about 7,000pc, a marked improvement over end-2018 forecasts from entities such as the International Monetary Fund that anticipated 10mn pc million percent inflation in 2019. In October the IMF reduced its 2019 inflation forecast to 200,000pc, rising to 500,000pc in 2020.
Thus, Argus 19 concludes
Dollarization is a necessary "pressure release valve" that is allowing private-sector companies to secure hard currency to finance imports, Maduro said in October, adding "thank God for dollarization." Food and medicine imports have rebounded, benefiting about 15pc percent of the population with access to dollars. The other 85pc scrape by on the equivalent of $1-$2/day. Venezuelan business chamber Fedecamaras said this week the private sector will account for the first time in decades for up to 25pc of GDP in 2019 and likely more in 2020.
Sanchez 19 continues
Shock therapy measures, based on recent economic history, can include ending price controls and government subsidies, instituting higher tax rates and lower government spending to reduce budget deficits, devaluing the currency to boost foreign investments and selling state-owned industries to the private sector. Venezuela will have to transform its current scheme of restricting foreign investment in order to fund the restoration of the energy sector, as well as its infrastructure, including the country’s roads and bridges and the power grid.
Agriculture 1.2 billion
Rivas 18
Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has unrolled a new plan to tackle the agricultural crisis. He said the government will invest 1.2 billion dollars toward agricultural projects. “ It is important to create a special and specific fund for the entire agricultural sector, a fund exclusively dedicated to the purchase of the necessary seeds, which will allow Venezuela to grow what we need from 2018 to 2019.
Presna Latina ‘19
PrensaLatina, Venezuela and Russia consolidate agricultural agreements, 12.18.19.
https://www.plenglish.com/index.php?o=rnandid=50108andSEO=venezuela-and-russia-consolidate-agricultural-agreements
Caracas, Dec 18 (Prensa Latina) Venezuela and Russia are now consolidating bilateral agreements in the agricultural sector, government sources reported. According to reports from the state of Guarico, on Wednesday an international memorandum of understanding was signed with Russian investors in the region as part of the new 2020 sowing cycle. The agreement establishes the terms for an alliance based on the production that the territory will have next year, opening a new opportunity to promote planting throughout the state, which will allow at least 30,000,000 hectares to be planted. The agreement will also benefit farmers with high-end seeds and machinery to boost the productive system of the Guarani region and increase planting throughout the country. The Venezuelan government promotes the agro-industrial sector as an alternative to diversify the economy and overcome with national initiatives the deficiencies and limitations imposed by the U.S. blockade against the nation.
Washington Post ‘19
Faiola, Anthony, Washington Post, “A fake Walmart, cases of Dom Pérignon and the almighty dollar: Inside socialist Venezuela’s chaotic embrace of the free market,” 12.25.19. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/a-fake-walmart-cases-of-dom-perignon-and-the-almighty-dollar-inside-socialist-venezuelas-chaotic-embrace-of-the-free-market/2019/12/23/ca4f2072-21c3-11ea-b034-de7dc2b5199b_story.html
“There were things you just couldn’t get — dishes you just couldn’t make,” said Pablo Gianni, manager of Anonimo, a lavish new Caracas eatery that opened this month complete with a glass-walled wine cellar stocked with shelves of four-figure vintages of Dom Pérignon. “But now, it’s like legal contraband,” he said. “They’re letting everything in.” The changes taking shape here are the product of a combination of factors. For years, the government strictly limited the use of the U.S. dollar, long portrayed as an instrument of Yanqui imperialism. But last year, the government freed the exchange rate and more broadly legalized dollar transactions. It also eliminated massive import taxes on a host of goods. But those measures have begun to work through the economy really only in recent months, as the government has taken the further step of abandoning attempts to control retail prices. Stocks of bread, chicken and beef that once sold for nearly nothing are now being sold at market rates, at least partly normalizing farm production and sales through supply chains.
Food and medicine imports are at the highest point since the crisis started, because of diversification.
Reuters 19
But in the first three months of 2019, non-oil, public-sector imports rose to $955 million, up 16.5 from the same period last year and the highest quarterly figure since 2017, according to the data released earlier this month by the central bank, which does not regularly publish economic figures. To be sure, that does not suggest the South American country’s humanitarian crisis - which has prompted some 4.5 million people to flee since 2015 - is coming to an end. The same data showed the economy contracted 26.8 year-on-year in the first quarter, and inflation hit 52.2 in September. Still, the rise came as Washington sanctioned state oil company PDVSA - whose crude exports provide the bulk of the government’s foreign exchange - as part of its effort to oust Maduro, who is accused of corruption and rights violations. Maduro blames the sanctions for Venezuela’s economic problems. “Every time there’s a new sanction, they look for a way to get around it,” said economist Asdrubal Oliveros, director of the Caracas-based Ecoanalitica consultancy. The central bank data did not show where the additional imports came from, but figures from import-export database Import Genius show goods like flour, tuna and beans have arrived from Mexico and as far afield as Turkey and China, two of Maduro’s diplomatic allies. The import increase was partly financed by a 155 gain in public sector non-oil exports to $2.3 billion, by far the largest in a central bank series going back to 1997.
Break oil curse by investment in other industries, especially agriculture
HARRY NITZBERG 18 of American University
Once inflation has been decreased and government revenues have been refilled by reinvigorated oil production, the Venezuelan government will not have much time to celebrate their short-term victory, they must focus on sustainability. Under the umbrella of sustainable economic growth is one necessity, economic diversification. In the case of Venezuela, economic diversification would entail a decrease in the percentage of GDP that can be tied back to the oil sector. To put the dependence of the Venezuelan oil exports in perspective, 95 percent of Venezuela’s export earnings and 25 percent of Venezuela’s GDP are from oil and gas exports.70 With Venezuela’s large amount of oil reserves, should oil prices continue to steadily rise, Maduro’s government may be tempted to just ride the wave of growth that would surely follow— directly into an economic trough when prices fall again. This is what economists call a “resource curse” or stagnation in economic development that accompanies booms and busts in the price of the product that an economy overly depends on.71 When the price of the main export is high, the value of the country’s currency rises. When a country’s currency becomes stronger, that country’s exports become more expensive. As the other industries’ prices rise, their ability to compete in international markets is decreased.72 Without the ability to compete, these firms die off.73 When the domestic firms that are needed for technological development die off, economic development is hindered. Rather than wholeheartedly throwing the percentage of oil revenue that the government would receive on social programs and in oil production investment (extraction related machines/labor or land surveying), the Venezuelan government can attempt to counteract the “resource curse” by reinvesting a portion of the revenue in what economists call “infant industries.” An infant industry is a group of new companies in a country that cannot sell their product at a price that is competitive in the international market for that good. To help these infant industries compete and grow, governments often give them some sort of help, whether it be in the form of subsidies, tax credits, money to foreign firms to buy domestic goods (as the American Import/Export Bank does), tariffs on imports of the good that the foreign firm is selling, etc. The use of any of these strategies is called “protectionism.” In the case of Venezuela, the temptation to rely on oil is so great that government protectionism is necessary to develop infant industries. Without the aforementioned protectionist measures, Venezuelans will continue to rely on the import of basic necessities, which become scarce in times of crisis. The main industry to be developed in the meanwhile is agriculture, an industry that former president Hugo Chavez passively attempted to grow during his presidency.75 As the current crisis in Venezuela is showing, food production infrastructure is vital to sustain the Venezuelan population during sustained periods of low oil prices. With protectionist policies to protect the infant agricultural industry and removal of price controls on food, Venezuela may be able to better sustain downturns in oil prices in the future and become less reliant on oil revenue at the same time.
Lopez 19
Unlike various other countries in the region, Venezuela’s economy appears to be stabilizing for several reasons. There have also been several economic measures taken by Maduro, such as the derogation of the Illicit Exchange Law, the de facto elimination of price controls, and allowing the free circulation of dollars. All this has opened up new economic scenarios going into 2020, including the end of shortages of essential goods – the bane of the 2012-2016 period –, the creation of new business opportunities, as well as the repatriation of some capitals, however marginal, which are stimulating some commercial activity in a terribly impoverished economy. At the end of November, Reuters revealed that oil production in Venezuela had increased 20 percent relative to the month before, which could indicate a definitive reversal of the free fall experienced during the first half of the year. This news raises positive expectations for 2020 with the possibility of increasing Venezuelan crude exports in the coming year. Indeed, according to Venezuelan economist Francisco Rodriguez, Venezuela’s economy could even grow by 4 percent in 2020.
Harvard 19
Venezuela has seen a remarkable reduction in poverty since the first quarter of 2003. In the ensuing four years, from 2003 to 2007, the poverty rate was cut in half, from 54 percent of households to 27.5 percent. (See Table 1). This is measured from the first half of 2003 to the first half of 2007. As can be seen in the table, the poverty rate rose very slightly by one percentage point in the second half of 2007, most likely due to rising food prices. Extreme poverty fell even more, by 70 percent—from 25.1 percent of households to 7.6 percent. These poverty rates measure only cash income; as will be discussed below, they do not include non-cash benefits to the poor such as access to health care or education. If Venezuela were almost any other country, such a large reduction of poverty in a relatively short time would be noticed as a significant achievement. However, since the Venezuelan government, and especially its president, Hugo Chavez Frias, are consistently disparaged in major media, government, and most policy and intellectual circles, this has not happened. Instead, the reduction in poverty was for quite some time denied. Until the Center for Economic and Policy Research published a paper correcting the record in May 2006, (“Poverty Rates in Venezuela: Getting the Numbers Right”) publications such as Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Financial Times, theMiami Herald, and many others all published articles falsely asserting that poverty had increased under the Chavez government. A few of these publications eventually ran corrections. While poverty did in fact rise sharply in 2002-2003 (see Table 1), the publications cited above all printed false statements about the poverty rate after it had dropped back down and the new data were publicly available. When it could no longer be denied, the government's opponents—who have a near-monopoly of the debate about Venezuela outside the country—then tried to put a negative spin on it. An article in the March/April issue of Foreign Affairsby Francisco Rodriguez (2008), attempts to argue that “a close look at the evidence reveals just how much Chávez's 'revolution' has hurt Venezuela's economy—and that the poor are hurting most of all.” I have dealt with these assertions in detail elsewhere and will only treat some of them briefly here. As can be seen from Table 1, the poverty rate fell from 1999-2001, and then rose sharply in 2002-2003. This is to be expected, since the economy was devastated in 2002-2003 by an oil strike (joined by business owners), losing 24 percent of GDP from the third quarter of 2002 to the first quarter of 2003. In terms of lost income, this is comparable to the U.S. economy in some of the worst years of the Great Depression. It would not seem logical to hold the government responsible for the economic impact of the oil strike and business lockout, since that was carried out by its opponents. Indeed, a strong case can be made that the government could not do much at all about poverty for its first four years (1999-2003). During this time it did not have control over the national oil company—Petroleos de Venezuela, or PDVSA—and there was considerable instability, including a military coup (April 2002) and the strike. For example, Teodoro Petkoff (2008), currently one of the most prominent and respected leaders of the Venezuelan opposition, describes the opposition as having a “strategy that overtly sought a military takeover” from 1999-2003, and having used its control of the oil industry during that period for purposes of overthrowing the government. Once the government got control over the oil industry and the major opposition groups agreed to pursue their goal of removing Chavez through a referendum (May 2003), the economy began to grow rapidly and poverty was sharply reduced. (See Figure 1). In the five years from the bottom of the recession in the first quarter of 2003, to the first quarter of 2008, the economy grew by a remarkable 88.3 percent.
Maduro’s reforms aren’t law yet, so he could revert quickly – Bristow 19
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2019/oct/20/venezuela-ditches-price-controls-201910/ //CCD
Not all the businesses in Valencia's industrial zone closed during Venezuela's economic crisis. About two-thirds did. Survivors among the rusting factories of the nation's former manufacturing heartland, two hours from Caracas, are enjoying a truce in the government's war on capitalism. Without publicly acknowledging it, President Nicolas Maduro's socialist government has ditched a decade and a half of price controls. It's hard to put a precise date on the liberalization, because it never officially happened. However, in recent months supermarket shelves have been restocked and severe shortages of goods such as toothpaste and toilet paper have eased. Valencia, a city of perhaps 1 million residents, bore the brunt of the government's ruinous industrial policy. Today, business people there are making the most of the new atmosphere ~-~- as long as it lasts. "In today's Venezuela, there are still opportunities," said Ernesto Abbass, a Valencia industrialist with a metallurgical factory and investments in pharmacies. "There are some businesses that have managed to surf the waves of poor economic policymaking. We've had to become creative." The roots of the deepest slump in the history of the Americas stretch back two decades. After coming to power in 1999, President Hugo Chavez's government gradually tried to move to a Cuba-style command economy. As it introduced price controls on staples such as beans and milk, these grew scarce, while uncontrolled goods, such as Scotch, remained on the shelves. There were frequent crackdowns on people the government called "speculators" who sold goods for more than the legal price. They risked not only fines but also a cell in a gang-ridden prison. Business people in Valencia who spoke with Bloomberg weren't clear whether the new state of affairs represents a real change in philosophy or a brief respite ahead of a new wave of attacks by the price-control agency. Either way, they can make a profit ~-~- not legally, but in practice. They can even do business in dollars. In March, the country suffered widespread power blackouts that lasted three days in the capital, Caracas, and even longer elsewhere. With credit-card readers out of action, people began paying for things in hoarded greenbacks. The government turned a blind eye, and it suddenly became normal to quote prices in foreign currency. In one Valencia store, a jar of Nutella was on sale last week for $8, the same as a box of Froot Loops breakfast cereal. In its heyday, Valencia produced washing machines, bicycles, pharmaceuticals, textiles, animal feed and plastics, among other things. Above all, it was Venezuela's motor city. Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all had assembly operations there, as well as the big tire manufacturers and dozens of local parts suppliers. The industrial zone, which used to pulsate with hundreds of commuter buses, is now largely quiet and abandoned. One shuttered auto-parts factory was still full of inventory stamped with the official prices that made it unprofitable to stay in business. Companies that survived now have the market to themselves. Most competitors have gone under, and the border is shut to Colombian industry. Rents, labor costs and utility bills are all low. There is pent-up demand for goods such as car parts that were unavailable for a long time. It is, just about, possible to turn a profit. One Valencia-based business that sells radiators said that sales are up nearly 30 from last year. Traffic jams have made a comeback in Valencia, as well as in Caracas, after a long period when the shortage of parts kept much nation's aging vehicle fleet off the roads. Even in the permissive new atmosphere, doing business remains an extreme sport, with blackouts, shakedowns by officials and out-of-control crime. As about 4 million Venezuelans have fled, the country has lost much of its skilled labor force. U.S. sanctions mean that many foreign firms are afraid to do business with any Venezuelans, in case they turn out to be tied to the Maduro government. The nation's industry is running at only 19 of capacity, according to Conindustria, a trade organization, compared with 81 in Colombia. In Valencia, some companies stopped investing and reduced operations to a fraction of what they had been. General Motors shut down its Valencia operation in 2017 after authorities seized its plant and inventory. Ford is sticking around, waiting for better days. "Ford is working systematically to maintain operative conditions at the Valencia plant to resume production whenever enabled by industry conditions and financial viability," the company said in reply to emailed questions. "Ford has been operating in Venezuela for 57 years and has no plans to leave the country." A recent survey by Caracas pollster Datanalisis found that the high cost of living is now the biggest concern for Venezuelans, ahead of corruption, crime and food scarcity. Even some opponents of the government complain that the price-control agency isn't doing more. The cost of living has roughly tripled in dollar terms since the start of the year, according to Ecoanalitica, a Caracas-based economic consultancy. In this environment, the authorities may calculate that yet another attack on private businesses would be popular. Valencia's industrialists are highly aware of this threat and are reluctant to invest more or ramp up production until it is lifted. "This continues to be a business in survival mode," said Christian Palmisano, one of the partners in a factory that produces the soles for shoes, and rubber boots. "Over the last two years, we stopped evaluating whether we make a profit or a loss. It's a question of who survives the crisis and who dies."
Sanctions on Venezuela are a geopolitical litmus test due to how bad the crisis is, if US intervention thru sanctions isn’t continued it will lead to autocratic waves
Copley 17
Venezuela’s Demise Is A Geopolitical Litmus Test For The U.S.Is Venezuela’s 2017 transformation symptomatic of the growing global polarization? And does it show how the collapse of globalism is resulting in the re-emergence of a range of governmental forms which no longer even need to acknowledge “Western-style” democracy? Are we seeing the revival of a bloc of pre-Westphalian nation-states1 with major power support? Some trends are emerging which show how different the 21st Century global strategic architecture will be from the 20th. The present Venezuelan Government has abandoned even a pretense of adherence to what the West calls democracy. For some states, a return to autocracy is seen as the only avenue to escape total loss of power by governing élites, even though history has demonstrated how fragile and vulnerable such power structures can quickly become. Venezuelan Pres. Nicolás Maduro’s stage-managed July 30, 2017, “election” of a new National Constituent Assembly may have set the paradigm for how governments in the emerging post-democratic world can sustain nation-states which owe nothing to the global order. It is not a new model, and it may not endure. But it is a model which has some chance of survival (with little economic success) in a world in which major powers find it inconvenient or difficult to intervene against such states. Or if there are no pressures to overturn major power disinterest. In this instance, the declining power of Venezuela’s petroleum exports not only damage the internal economy (given that 95 percent of the nation’s foreign exchange is earned from oil), it limits Venezuela’s importance as either partner or target for foreign powers. The Venezuelan election swept away any pretense that Mr. Maduro’s Government would now be recognized internationally on any other grounds than the fact that it physically controlled the territory of the Venezuelan State. The July 30, 2017, “election” — the “near-final act” in dispensing with a National Assembly controlled by opponents of Pres. Maduro’s United Socialist Party (PSUV: Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela) — was contrived to return all power, but not necessarily legitimacy, to the PSUV. This was foreseeable when the Supr
Maduro has historically used socialist policies to concentrate power at the top – Powell 18
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/democratic-socialists-really-need-to-learn-more-about-socialism //CCD
The reason is simple. Centrally planned socialist economic systems necessarily concentrate economic power in the hands of government officials and planners. Without such power they can’t hope to “run things.” Yet this same power limits citizens’ ability to freely exercise their power when they become dissatisfied with the government. That’s because the government can punish them financially if they choose to oppose those in power. Venezuela started off as a democratic socialist state when Hugo Chavez was freely elected in 1998. Then, with economic power centralized, his successor, Nicolas Maduro, tightened the screws in the predictable fashion of socialism. He took care of those who supported him, ignoring, jailing, harassing the rest, as the economy crumbled with falling oil prices. Now, the democratic portion of “democratic socialism” is no more in Venezuela — it is merely socialist. Some Americans think socialism is the answer for problems in our country. But the reality is that it would only make the problems worse. America’s democratic socialists need to learn more about the system they would have us embrace.
Signal – Peterson 13
Peterson, T. M. (2013). Sending a Message: The Reputation Effect of US Sanction Threat Behavior1. International Studies Quarterly, 57(4), 672–682. doi:10.1111/isqu.12017, sci-hub.tw/10.1111/isqu.12017
I draw three conclusions from my statistical tests. First, I find strong evidence that the decision made by targets of US sanction threats whether to acquiesce to US demands depends on past US response to resistant targets. Second, I find that transmission of reputation is strongest when the context of the current case is similar to that of past US cases. Third, I find generally that reputation effects appear stronger when excluding trade disputes from my models. Specifically, in seven of eight models, I find that a recent example of the United States backing down against a resistant target is associated with a lower likelihood that current targets acquiesce to US pressure. I find somewhat weaker evidence that previously imposed US sanctions are associated with a higher likelihood that the current target acquiesces; however, support for this expectation is strong when controlling for context in terms of target regime type and wealth. The target-specific history models (Models 7 and 8) show the strongest support for both of my hypotheses. Indeed, even when including trade threats, the coefficients for both US threat history variables are significant in the predicted direction. The coefficient for US backed is negative and significant in the acquiescence equation in both of these models (p £ 0.03 in Model 7 and p £ 0.04 in Model 8). Again, the substantive probability changes are considerable. Specifically, recent US capitulation is associated with a decline in the probability of target acquiescence of 47 (from 0.31 to 0.16) and 91 (from 0.03 to 0.003) in Models 7 and 8, respectively. The coefficient for US imposed sanctionst)1 is positive and significant in the acquiescence equation in both models 7 and 8 (p £ .03 and p £ .02, respectively), suggesting that previously imposed sanctions do convince targets to acquiesce when the United States specifically imposed sanctions against targets with a similar regime type and income status to the current target. Recent US impositions of sanctions are associated with increases in the probability that the target acquiesces, from 0.31 to 0.50 (57) in Model 7 and from 0.03 to 0.17 (392) in Model 8. Conclusion I find strong evidence that target response to US sanction threats depends on how the United States responded when previous targets refused to give in to past demands. These results suggest that the consequences of US sanction threat episodes extend beyond the particular case to affect the outcome of future instances in which the United States seeks to coerce policy change in other states. My results imply that scholars should extend the domain of ‘‘effectiveness’’ to account for the message sent by previous sender response to resistant targets. Although one could argue that sanctions failing to coerce target acquiescence in the threat stage should be abandoned because imposition would be costly to the sender and unlikely to achieve its policy objective, my results show that such seemingly prudent behavior invites resistance from future targets, undermining the ability of senders to engage in economic coercion successfully. Conversely, imposed sanctions—even those failing to coerce policy change—could signal to third parties that resistance is costly. They may signal ‘‘toughness’’ on part of the sender or demonstrate the consequences associated with violating widely accepted international norms: in the words of Galtung (1967, 412), a ‘‘highly dramatic (and costly) way of reinforcing international morality.’’ Alternatively, sanction imposition could inform future targets that the sender’s citizens are attentive and willing to punish perceived weakness by political leaders. Future work could extend the examination of how similarity of context across cases conditions the impact of reputation. Attention to relative similarity would be particularly important in the promising albeit challenging next step of examining whether sender behavior during sanction threat episodes influences third-party behavior before the sender threatens them with future sanctions. For example, does respect for human rights increase in states similar to those the United States has sanctioned for human rights violations? Conversely, what is the consequence for human rights broadly when the United States backs down from imposing sanctions against violators? Ultimately, sanction threat behavior may have consequences for ‘‘general deterrence,’’39 a proposition suggesting that sanctions—and failures to sanction—could affect the behavior of third parties throughout the international system
Presence of Sanction increases chance of the War Ending by 97 – Hasan
Md. Didarul Hasan Department of Economics, Asian University for Women, Chittagong, Bangladesh. and Sajal Lahiri Department of Economics, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Carbondale, IL 62901, U.S.A.
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2181andcontext=dissertations
To begin with, we examine the effects of all sanctions in aggregate on the expected duration of civil wars. We estimate the hazard rate of conflict termination using Weibull parameterization, with the unit of analysis being the conflict year. The coefficients of hazard rate are presented to see whether hazard rate increases or decreases with a covariate.14 Table 3a reports the estimated coefficients of hazard rate for different regression functions. We see that even without controlling for other covariates, the coefficient of sanction variable is positive and statistically significant (model 1), which implies that sanctions increase the hazard rate of war termination. As we add more and more relevant control variables, the magnitude of sanction coefficient increases and become more significant. Our reference model (# 8) suggests that international sanctions significantly reduce the expected duration of conflict. This result is robust to the inclusions of other control variables, like Gini-coefficient, external intervention, mountain, forests, ethnic and religious fractionalizations, ethnic war, and polity2 (Table 4). The result is also robust to the use of alternative measure of natural resource abundance (Table 5). Thus, contrary to the findings of most other studies, our findings suggest that sanctions do reduce the war duration. Note that Table 3a shows only the direction of change in hazard rate, it does not show the estimated hazard rates. Table 3b reports the estimated hazard rates for the corresponding models of Table 3a. The reference model 8 in Table 3b shows that sanctions increase the hazard rate of war termination by 97 after controlling for all other relevant variables. Figure 2 shows the estimated hazard functions for the Weibull regression with sanctions and without sanctions. We see that, for each year, the hazard rate is significantly higher under sanction than without sanction.
Every Month a Conflict Extends, 24000 soldiers will die; that’s only a fraction of total deaths – Bennett 96
Bennett, D. S., and Stam, A. C. (1996). The Duration of Interstate Wars, 1816–1985. American Political Science Review, 90(02), 239–257. doi:10.2307/2082882,?https://sci-hub.se/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2082882?seq=1
Answering these questions and understanding the duration of interstate war is important for several reasons. War duration is a key factor influencing the costs of war. A simple regression of war duration on battle deaths using the Small and Singer (1982) list of interstate wars since 1816 reveals that 24,000 soldiers die (on average) every month a war continues. In a more political vein, wars and their duration have important effects on leaders' popularity (Russett 1990) and on the stability of national regimes (Bueno de Mesquita, Siverson, and Woller 1992). Anticipating the outcome, duration, and costs of
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zGQmvheeGU6-PK4ntsRaN6PFGBaytMZ_BF6QUZsSHhM/edit?usp=sharing
(open source) | 905,417 |
315 | 380,257 | 1AC - TOC - R1 v Horace Mann GS | ====We Affirm.====
====One Observation:====
====John Woollard and Janet Cooke ‘6 argue:====
John Woollard and Janet Cooke, 2006 “VISUAL LITERACY AND PAINTING WITH TECHNOLOGY: OBSERVATIONS IN THE EARLY YEARS CLASSROOM,” https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/55253/, accessed 4-3-2020 BH
The following words
AND
is available at http:// www.cblt.soton.ac.uk/painting (see also Table 7.1).
====Prefer this interpretation of “nearly all.” Anything less is insufficient and refers to a majority, rather than nearly all. Thus, we observe the affirmative may defend the continuation of any permutations of military presence in the Arab States of the Persian Gulf, so long as it stays below the 10 threshold. With that,====
====Contention One is Oman:====
====Oman represents a tangible path to continue beneficial US military presence, for two reasons:====
====First, resolving anti-American sentiment. Unsurprisingly, Dimant et. al ‘17 of the Hoover Institute find:====
Eugen Dimant , Tim Krieger and Daniel Meierrieks, HOOVER INSTITUTION, September 2017 “Negative Returns: U.S. Military Policy and Anti-American Terrorism” https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/17106-diman-krieger-meierrieks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0bxqHBpveoh3437r3oQyJnaaE4AFW27UzTvpAqYyosSFbZ-ngEyg7O4w4, accessed 4-16-2020 BH/max
We study the
AND
from transnational terrorism.
====Fortunately, per the Heritage Foundation ‘19:====
No Author Listed, in The Heritage Foundation, 10-30-2019 "Middle East", https://www.heritage.org/military-strength/assessing-the-global-operating-environment/middle-east, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
UAE. About 5,000
AND
U.S. aircraft carriers.
====Second, negotiations. Schanzer and Salter ‘19 of the FDD note that:====
Jonathan Schanzer and Nicole Salter, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, 5-9-2019 "Oman in the Middle", https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2019/05/09/oman-in-the-middle/, accessed 4-15-2020 BH
The Obama administration
AND
politically and economically.
====The impact is special operations. Long ‘17 of the Center for Strategic Studies argues:====
Austin Long, Center for Security Studies, 1-30-2017 “The Limits of Special Operations Forces” https://css.ethz.ch/en/services/digital-library/articles/article.html/97e57ac8-2c3c-4941-9377-1802b4033450/pdf, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
Patience and a willingness
AND
were both unlikely
====Past success of these special operations justify their continuation. Moreover, Heitz ‘18 of Columbia contends:====
Michael Paul Heitz, Columbia University, June 2018 “Special Operations Forces: Guardians of Human Rights and Our Constitutional Legitimacy” https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8J11M5D, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
Given this idea
AND
importantly innocent people.
====The end game of a terrorist attack would be unacceptable. Arguello and Buis ‘18 contextualize that:====
Irma Arguello (founder and chair of the NPS Global Foundation, and head of the secretariat of the Latin American and Caribbean Leadership Network) and Emiliano J. Buis (a lawyer specializing in international law. He holds a PhD from the University of Buenos Aires (UBA), a Master’s in Human and Social Sciences from the University of Paris/Panthéon-Sorbonne, and a postgraduate diploma in national defense from the National Defense School. Currently he is a professor in international law at UBA, and co-director of the UNICEN Center for Human Rights in Azul) , Taylor and Francis, 2-21-2018 "The global impacts of a terrorist nuclear attack: What would happen? What should we do?", https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00963402.2018.1436812?journalCode=rbul20, accessed 1-9-2019 BH
Though hard to
AND
trade of materials
====Contention Two is Yemen:====
====Yemen is currently engulfed in an atrocious US-supported humanitarian crisis. Thrall and Dorminey ‘18 of Defense One elaborate:====
A. Trevor Thrall and Caroline Dorminey, Defense One, 3-21-2018 "Yemen Shows Why US Needs to Change Its Arms Sales Policy?", https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/03/yemen-shows-why-us-needs-change-its-arms-sales-policy/146845/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
This approach to
AND
prolong those conflicts.
====US presence is vital to the continuation of these airstrikes. Ridel ‘18 of Brookings explains:====
Bruce Riedel, Brookings, 10-10-2018 "After Khashoggi, US arms sales to the Saudis are essential leverage", https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/10/after-khashoggi-us-arms-sales-to-the-saudis-are-essential-leverage/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
In June 2017,
AND
his arms deals.
====This would save lives. Feltman ‘18 of Foreign Affairs asserts:====
Jeffery Feltman, Foreign Affairs, 11-26-2018 "The Only Way to End the War in Yemen", https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/yemen/2018-11-26/only-way-end-war-yemen, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
However belatedly, in
AND
war rages on.
====Removing the US military is crucial, as Bazzi ‘18 of the Atlantic contends:====
Mohamad Bazzi, Atlantic, 9-30-2018 "The United States Could End the War in Yemen If It Wanted To", https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/iran-yemen-saudi-arabia/571465/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
Saudi and Emirati
AND
worst humanitarian crisis.
====Altogether, Parsi ‘20 of Foreign Policy concludes:====
Trita Parsi, Foreign Policy, 1-6-2020 "The Middle East Is More Stable When the United States Stays Away", https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/06/the-middle-east-is-more-stable-when-the-united-states-stays-away/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
Assertions about the
AND
New York Times.
====Thus, we affirm.==== | 905,565 |
316 | 380,274 | disclosure theory | we have the contact info
Sorry our team policy changed :( not allowed to disclose anymore | 905,592 |
317 | 380,066 | 0 - Contact information, URL issue | Hello! We're two debaters from a public school in Northern Virginia. On this wiki, we'll disclose contentions, tags, cites, and the first and last few words of every card we cite. We'll also disclose open source at the end of each topic. If we're missing something, please let us know.
The point of the wiki is to spread the best arguments on the topic and encourage better engagement in the round. To that end, feel free to copy whatever evidence you find here or prep out these arguments. We encourage you to disclose as well!
Questions or just want to talk about debate? Message Lawrence Zhu or Nathaniel Yoon on facebook, or email us at ljwzhu@gmail.com or ndy155@gmail.com (will probably not get a timely response by email).
ISSUE WITH URLS: I think there's an issue where the cite creator format messes up the URLs, if you delete the parenthesis at the end of the link it should work just fine. Sorry for any inconvenience! | 905,313 |
318 | 380,083 | 1 - Bronx Doubles - NEG Unity | =NEG 3.7 Scary China=
===Alliance===
====Alliances are pretty complicated, I guess====
**SHI JINGTAO 19 of the South China Morning Post **(5-29-2019, "China or the US? Europe's 'impossible choice' in trade war", doa 10-15-2019, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3012205/china-or-us-europes-impossible-choice-trade-war) NY
Growing tensions between China and the United States over the escalating trade dispute – and
AND
the US to pay closer attention to Europe as a field of competition."
====Uh oh!====
**THOMAS CAVANNA 18 of the Diplomat **(6-5-2018, "What Does China's Belt and Road Initiative Mean for US Grand Strategy?", doa 10-1-2019, https://thediplomat.com/2018/06/what-does-chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-mean-for-us-grand-strategy/) NY
The United States' response to a rising China has largely focused on bolstering military capabilities
AND
- and long-term benefits for the American people and the West.
====Western countries joining would be strategic shift====
**CHARLES STEVENS 18 of the NSR **(3-13-2018, "New Silk Road Project founder: Developments in Azerbaijan are significant", doa 10-11-2019, https://www.azernews.az/business/128676.html) NY
Q.: What would it mean for Western European countries to join the Belt and
AND
if these concerns were more satisfactorily addressed Western European countries maybe less reticent.
====Tariff justification under protecting national security – placed some on steel and aluminum, but may expand to cars, uranium, titanium====
**HUAN ZHU 19 of the Cato Institute **(6-25-2019, "Closing Pandora's Box: The Growing Abuse of the National Security Rationale for Restricting Trade", doa 10-15-2019, https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/closing-pandoras-box-growing-abuse-national-security-rationale) NY
The Trump administration has raised tariffs under a variety of pretenses, but one of
AND
impact of imports and on the justification of the Section 232 actions.17
====Tariffs happen lmao====
**VASILIS TRIGKAS 18 of the South China Morning Post **(7-6-2018, "NATO, China summits a chance for Europe to assert itself", doa 10-2-2019, https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/united-states/article/2153948/nato-and-china-summits-give-europe-chance) NY
In Beijing, EU leaders may have a seemingly easier task negotiating with the Chinese
AND
conflict with China, without undermining his image as an "artful negotiator".
====Recession!====
**KEITH JOHNSON 19 of Foreign Policy **(10-4-2019, "Rumblings of Recession Get Louder", doa 10-11-2019, https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ylOdlxxDwboJ:https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/02/rumblings-of-recession-get-louder-purchasing-managers-index-pmi-manufacturing-tariffs/+andamp;cd=2andamp;hl=enandamp;ct=clnkandamp;gl=us) NY
What appeared as distant rumblings of economic trouble have in recent weeks turned into a
AND
, or, like in 2015-16, it remains more localized."
===Geopolitics===
====ONE BELT, ONE ROAD, ONE BIG MISTAKE====
**TANNER GREER 18 of Foreign Policy **(12-6-2018, "One Belt, One Road, One Big Mistake", doa 10-7-2019, https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eOqbBcvM61sJ:https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/06/bri-china-belt-road-initiative-blunder/+andamp;cd=1andamp;hl=enandamp;ct=clnkandamp;gl=us) NY
The headlines coming out of this year's APEC conference in Papua New Guinea focused on
AND
is the favored brainchild of an authoritarian leader living in an echo chamber.
====I fear China. They are scary.====
**NICOLA CASARINI 15 of the Institute for International Affairs **(10-2015, "Is Europe to Benefit from China's Belt and Road Initiative?", doa 10-10-2019, https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaiwp1540.pdf) NY
The question of reciprocity is closely linked to what may be the thorniest issue in
AND
US – may be tempted to resist granting China "market economy status."
====Isn't this investment nice====
**ANDREW SMALL 18 of Oxford **(Andrew Small is a senior transatlantic fellow with GMF's Asia Program, which he established in 2006. His research focuses on U.S.–China relations, Europe–China relations, Chinese policy in South Asia, and broader developments in China's foreign and economic policy. Before that, he was a visiting fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and an ESU scholar in the office of Senator Edward M. Kennedy. Small was educated at Balliol College, University of Oxford. 12-5-2018, "The Final Link: The Future of the Belt and Road Initiative in Europe – Project 2049 Institute", doa 10-10-2019, https://project2049.net/2018/12/05/the-final-link-the-future-of-the-belt-and-road-initiative-in-europe/) NY
The recent EU-China summit was lauded as a success. Along with affirming
AND
has been pushing for in this specific area over the last few years.
====Gimme====
**MALGORZATA JAKIMOW 17 of the University of Sheffield **(Lecturer in Chinese Politics, School of East Asian Studies, University of Sheffield, 7-10-2017, "Is China's Belt and Road Initiative dividing Europe?", doa 10-8-2019, http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2017/07/10/is-chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-dividing-europe/) NY
Whereas the 16+1 initiative was presented as a unifying force for the region
AND
do better if they form their own bilateral ties with Beijing. Why?
====The EU's gonna get smacked up and down, left and right, back and forth!====
**TOM HOLLAND 19 of the SCMP **(4-15-2019, "In Europe, China's economic cold war with the West is over before it's begun", doa 9-5-2019, https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/3005986/europe-chinas-economic-cold-war-west-over-its-begun) NY
THERE HAS BEEN an enormous amount of nonsense reported in the last couple of months
AND
war between the West and China is over almost before it has begun.
====I am afraid====
**ROBERT SCOTT 15 of the Economic Policy Institute **(9-18-2015, "UNILATERAL GRANT OF MARKET ECONOMY STATUS TO CHINA WOULD PUT MILLIONS OF EU JOBS AT RISK", doa 10-1-2019, https://www.epi.org/files/pdf/92370.pdf) NY
The European Union is considering whether to formally recognize China as a "market economy
AND
suppliers, and the companies that depend on the wages of displaced workers.
====Kiss the BRI goodbye====
**STEPHEN JOSKE 19 of War on the Rocks **(10-6-2019, "China's Coming Financial Crisis and the National Security Connection", doa 10-7-2019, https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gtok4nzCo0QJ:https://warontherocks.com/2018/10/chinas-coming-financial-crisis-and-the-national-security-connection/+andamp;cd=1andamp;hl=enandamp;ct=clnkandamp;gl=us) NY
Minxin Pei has documented the activities of China's powerful corruption networks. These networks,
AND
no clear resolution that would quickly draw in Japan and the United States. | 905,358 |
319 | 380,061 | 1 - UK R1 - AFF Infrastructure | =AFF 3.1 Infrastructure=
===Uniqueness===
====Squo harms of infrastructure under-investment====
**BRUCE BARNARD 19 of the Journal of Commerce **(2-8-2019, "Europe infrastructure underinvestment hits shippers", doa 8-15-2019, https://www.joc.com/regulation-policy/europe-infrastructure-underinvestment-hits-shippers_20180208.html) NY
LONDON – Europe is a major player in global trade. It is home to
AND
are unlikely to place any bets on these figures and dates being met.
====Need BRI – main source of China's developmental finance which is key source of infrastructure funding====
**AUSTIN STRANGE 17 of Harvard University **(10-2017, "Aid, China, and Growth: Evidence from a New Global Development Finance Dataset", doa 8-27-2019, http://docs.aiddata.org/ad4/pdfs/WPS46_Aid_China_and_Growth.pdf) NY
Evidence on the effects of aid on economic growth is mixed.1 Some studies
AND
on the effectiveness of financial support from more established donors and lenders. 9
====EU needs BRI – increased infrastructure investment, trade facilitation====
**SEBASTIAN GEBAUER 17 of the Polish Studies of East Asia **(1-2017, "China Heads West: "One Belt, One Road" Initiative", doa 8-28-2019, file:///C:/Users/ndy15/Documents/Debate/2019-2020/PF/Septober/PDFs/no20idea.pdf) NY
The OBOR initiative's objectives also greatly impact upon the economic model of the European Union
AND
process will be more likely to continue growing as OBOR develops further.21
===Recession===
====BRI only solution to coming recession====
**ANTHONY ROWLEY 19 of the South China Morning Post **(3-31-2019, "Belt and Road may be the nearest help for the world's ailing economy", doa 9-6-2019, https://www.scmp.com/business/banking-finance/article/3003964/chinas-belt-and-road-may-be-closest-world-has-stimulus) NY
They seem to keep coming, these stock market mini-meltdowns, and flash
AND
a crash in Shanghai to observe a potential renaissance on their own doorsteps.
====Increased accessibility in Europe increases new businesses and employment====
**STEPHEN GIBBONS 19 of the Journal of Urban Economics **(3-2019, "New road infrastructure: The effects on firms", doa 8-15-2019, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119019300105) NY
The ward-level regressions provide strong evidence that road improvement schemes increase the number
AND
the number of destinations, are all highly correlated and yield similar results.
====Economic growth effect of infrastructure 5x greater during recessions due to economic underutilization – 1 infrastructure investment creates 7 growth====
**MARIO HOLZNER 18 of the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies **(7-2018, "A 'European Silk Road'", doa 8-29-2019, https://wiiw.ac.at/a-european-silk-road—dlp-4608.pdf) NY
The estimates contained in Figure 14 illustrate the average effect of a change in public
AND
Abiad et al., 2015; Gechert, 2015; Heimberger, 2017).
====Empirics prove – infrastructure investment allowed Poland to escape economic harms of Great Recession====
**CONNOR SHEETS 12 of the International Business Times **(9-29-2012, "The East European Miracle: How Did Poland Avoid The Global Recession?", doa 9-5-2019, https://www.ibtimes.com/east-european-miracle-how-did-poland-avoid-global-recession-795799) NY
As the European Union fell into the global recession that began in 2008, only
AND
major overhauls of the nation's highway system and of the Warsaw subway system.
====Growth in Europe specifically decreases poverty====
**ASAD ALAM 05 of the World Bank **(2005, "Growth, Poverty, and Inequality", doa 8-27-2019, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTMACEDONIA/Resources/Growth_Poverty_and_Inequality.pdf) NY
Table 2.1 presents simple averages of the elasticity of poverty reduction to growth
AND
growth has lowered poverty by 1.3–1.4 percent.
===Trade===
====Time-sensitivity in EU-China trade====
**JOANNA KONINGS 18 of Durham University **(Joanna Konings is a senior economist working on international trade issues and joined ING in 2017 from the Bank of England. She studied Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Durham University and holds an MSc in Economics from Birkbeck, University of London. 6-6-2018, "Trade impacts of the Belt and Road Initiative", doa 8-29-2019, https://think.ing.com/uploads/reports/Tradebelt_final2.pdf) NY
Rail transport is only used for a small share of trade between the EU and
AND
greener alternative to air transport for the most time-sensitive trade flows.
====High trade barriers now – travel times, transportation costs, general inefficiency====
**ALESSIA AMIGHINI 18 of the University of Milan **(2018, "Beyond Ports and Transport Infrastructure: The Geo-Economic Impact of the BRI on the European Union", doa 8-28-2019, http://sci-hub.tw/10.1007/978-981-10-7116-4_14) NY
What has been partly overlooked in the design of the EU TEN-T corridors
AND
times and improve the interconnectedness between the ports and the inland railway network.
====Great potential for trade====
**WEINAN HU 16 of the Center for European Policy Studies **(2016, "Tomorrow's Silk Road: Addressing an EU-China Free Trade Agreement", doa 8-29-2019, https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/EUCHINA_FTA_Final.pdf) NY
FTA between China and the EU is worthwhile for a host of reasons. The
AND
sequel' in its trade policy vis-á-vis dynamic East Asia.
====Limited EU BRI participation now – greater cooperation can generate wide-scale cooperation and integration====
**JOEL RUET 17 of the Institute for International Political Studies **(2017, "New Belts and Roads: Redrawing EU-China Relations", doa 8-28-2019, https://www.ispionline.it/it/EBook/Rapporto_Cina_2017/China_Belt_Road_Game_Changer.pdf~~#page=98) NY
The context of EU-China relations has dramatically changed over the past five years
AND
catalyst for deeper Eurasian trans-continental economic integration and greater regional security.
====Increased trade with BRI connections====
**ANNA KNACK 18 of the RAND Corporation **(2018, "China Belt and Road Initiative: Measuring the impact of improving transportation connectivity on trade in the region", doa 8-28-2019, https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2600/RR2625/RAND_RR2625.pdf, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/25088/9781464809910.pdf) NY
With regard to transport connectivity, we find that a lack of rail connection between
AND
infrastructure indices, which may absorb some effect of the trade variation among countries
====Trade reduces poverty====
**DEVASHISH MITRA 16 of Syracuse University **(2016, "Trade liberalization and poverty reduction", doa 8-31-2019, https://wol.iza.org/uploads/articles/272/pdfs/trade-liberalization-and-poverty-reduction.pdf) NY
While earlier cross-country work was unable to find any effect of trade or
AND
rate is associated with a 0.4 percentage point decline in poverty.
====Lots of poverty now====
**EU 18 **(12-8-2014, "Special Eurobarometer 355: Poverty and Social Exclusion", doa 8-16-2019, https://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/S888_74_1_EBS355) NY
Over 80 million people in the EU are still living at risk of poverty and
AND
social exclusion; Combating poverty and social exclusion; Access to social services. | 905,292 |
320 | 380,096 | 6 - TOC R2 - NEG Strategy | =NEG 1.0 Strategy=
====This card is great====
**DAVID ROBERTS 20 of Washington Post **(1-30-2020, "For decades, Gulf leaders counted on U.S. protection. Here's what changed.", doa 4-17-2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/30/decades-gulf-leaders-counted-us-protection-heres-what-changed/) NY
Gulf leaders have long encouraged the vast U.S. military presence in the
AND
likely to continue to behave as if this offers an effective security guarantee.
====Iran expanding against US conventional power====
**ROBERT ASHLEY 19 of the Defense Intelligence Agency **(2019, "Iran Military Power", doa 4-17-2020, https://www.dia.mil/Portals/27/Documents/News/Military20Power20Publications/Iran_Military_Power_LR.pdf) NY
Throughout its 40-year history, the Islamic Republic of Iran has remained implacably
AND
it poses to our interests, our allies, and our own security.
====Conventional dominance forces Iran to adopt asymmetrical warfare====
**BRETT DAVIS 14 of Center for International Maritime Security **(8-14-2014, "Learning Curve: Iranian Asymmetrical Warfare and Millennium Challenge 2002", doa 4-17-2020, http://cimsec.org/learning-curve-iranian-asymmetrical-warfare-millennium-challenge-2002-2/11640) NY
Tension between U.S. and Iranian military assets in the Arabian Gulf are
AND
needs more gaming and training in order to cope with the nonlinear threat.
====Uh oh!====
**GARY ROUGHEAD 19 of Foreign Policy **(10-31-2019, "A U.S. Withdrawal Will Cause a Power Struggle in the Middle East", doa 4-17-2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/17/us-withdrawal-power-struggle-middle-east-china-russia-iran/) NY
Nonstate forces will continue to play a crucial role in the strategic balance. The
AND
-round access over the Arctic, diminishing the importance of the Mediterranean.
====Presence good====
**MICHAEL HUNZEKER 16 of George Mason University **(2016, "Landpower and American Credibility", doa 4-17-2020, https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/15415/1/) NY
American security guarantees only work when allies and adversaries believe them. Unfortunately, the
AND
an American retaliatory campaign means adversaries must hold troops and equipment in reserve.
====CONTAIN GANG====
**STEVEN COOK 20 of the Council on Foreign Relations **(Steven A. Cook is the Eni Enrico Mattei senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. His latest book is False Dawn: Protest, Democracy, and Violence in the New Middle East. 1-29-2020, "The Only Sensible Iran Strategy Is Containment", doa 4-17-2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/29/iran-strategy-containment-suleimani-trump-nuclear-deal/) NY
Returning to the JCPOA or negotiating a new nuclear deal that addresses some of the
AND
expensive. It would be foreign-policy malpractice not to embrace it.
====Uh oh====
**ALEX WARD 20 of Vox **(1-13-2020, "9 questions about the US-Iran crisis you were too embarrassed to ask", doa 4-17-2020, https://www.vox.com/world/2020/1/13/21051794/us-iran-soleimani-ukraine-airline-questions) NY
Since then, the US and Iran have been locked in a deadly strategic competition
AND
Yemen to Afghanistan and beyond. And then came the Iran nuclear deal.
====We good lmao====
**ANNALISA MERELLI 20 of Quartz **(1-3-2020, "One thing unites Americans and Iranians: Nobody wants a war", doa 4-17-2020, https://qz.com/1778828/one-thing-unites-americans-and-iranians-nobody-wants-a-war/) NY
US president Donald Trump's critics spent the decade's end worrying a presidential tweet could trigger
AND
But, ultimately, a war is probably not in either leader's interests.
====Impacting?====
**JOHN HANNAH 13 of Foreign Policy **(11-29-2013, "Fear and Loathing in the Kingdom", doa 4-17-2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/11/29/fear-and-loathing-in-the-kingdom/) NY
An atmosphere this poisonous is dangerous, to say the least. The incentive for
AND
on a barrel of oil? Can anyone say "instant global recession"? | 905,384 |
321 | 380,110 | aff v4 | It is striking that the second change in trend in Venezuela’s production numbers occurs at the time at which the United States decided to impose financial sanctions on Venezuela. Executive Order 13.808, issued on August 25 of 2017, barred U.S. persons from providing new financing to the Venezuelan government or PDVSA. Although the order carved out allowances for commercial credit of less than 90 days, it stopped the country from issuing new debt or selling previously issued debt currently in its possession. The Executive Order is part of a broader process of what one could term the “toxification” of financial dealings with Venezuela. During 2017, it became increasingly clear that institutions who decided to enter into financial arrangements with Venezuela would have to be willing to pay high reputational and regulatory costs. This was partly the result of a strategic decision by the Venezuelan opposition, in itself a response to the growing authoritarianism of the Maduro government. It’s not just the the media’s apparent amnesia with regard to those 2017 sanctions and their impact on the oil industry that is the problem here. In fact, the impact of those sanctions was even larger. As my colleague, Mark Weisbrot has previously explained, and as Rodríguez notes in the same article linked above, the sanctions made it virtually impossible for the Venezuela government to take the measures necessary to eliminate hyperinflation or recover from a deep depression. Such measures would include debt restructuring, and creating a new exchange rate system (Exchange Rate Bases Stabilization), in which the currency would normally be pegged to the dollar. But it actually gets worse. When the US first announced its recognition of Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela on January 23, the decision was met largely with applause within the foreign policy establishment. It seemed like nobody bothered to think about what, practically and economically, the decision would mean. Since Trump’s election, and his increasingly threatening rhetoric in relation to Venezuela, there has been wide agreement that a full-scale oil embargo would be terrible, both for Venezuela and the US.
Sanctions are bad but don’t affect average Venezuelans
“US sanctions squeezed Venezuela's Chavismo elites. This time, it's oil.”
Laura Vidal - January 31 2019 https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-01-31/us-sanctions-squeezed-venezuelas-chavismo-elites-time-its-oil
Sanctions against PDVSA are likely to yield stronger and more direct economic consequences, given Venezuela’s dependency on oil exports and the importance of diluent imports from the US used to process the country’s heavy crude oil. PDVSA and its US subsidiary, Citgo, has been described as Maduro's "lifeline" — Venezuela exported more than 1 million barrels per day to the US in 2018, a significant drop from last year, according to Refinitiv via Reuters. “Many of these high officials have fortunes in foreign banks and properties in foreign countries,” Smolansky says. “The sanctions have debilitated their possibility to move around internationally as well as their financial possibilities abroad. These sanctions have not hurt Venezuelans, they are individual sanctions coming from multilateral efforts of not only the United States, but also Canada, the European Union, and other Latin American countries.” While “Chavismo” (socialist) elites were hit with a variety of sanctions over the last three years, they’ve done little to make an impact on ordinary Venezuelans, whose lives have spiraled into a humanitarian crisis as hyperinflation has driven nearly 3 million to flee. “The sanctions have nothing to do with hyperinflation (projected to reach a 10 million percent this year), with the fall in oil production, or the food and medicine shortage that has generated a humanitarian and a migrant crisis. The only person responsible for that is Nicolás Maduro,” Smolansky adds.
Sanctions are bad, don’t do more - Democracy Warranting and Justice
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/12/why-more-sanctions-wont-help-venezuela/
Francisco Rodriguez - January 12 2018
During the first year of his administration, U.S. President Donald Trump has taken an increasingly hard line against the government of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro. Washington has tightened sanctions on Caracas and even suggested a military intervention to remove the Venezuelan leader from office. Twelve months into Trump’s term, Maduro seems even more entrenched in power, and Venezuela’s opposition is more fractured than ever. U.S. foreign policy toward Venezuela is premised on a series of misconceptions. Perhaps the most widespread and serious one is the idea that Venezuela is a totalitarian dictatorship. While Maduro has certainly done many things to undermine democracy, Venezuela is no North Korea. Venezuela is not a tyrannical autocracy; it is a deeply divided and polarized society. Public opinion research shows strong and deep-seated support for Chavismo the movement created by the late populist leader Hugo Chávez, among large swathes of the population. Many voters continue to credit Chavismo with redistributing the country’s oil wealth through its social programs and giving the poor a voice in Venezuelan politics. Around 25 percent of Venezuelans support Chávez’s successor, Maduro — a remarkably high number given the state of the economy — and about 50 percent believe that Chávez was a good president. Recent regional elections have shown that the government coalition is able to mobilize close to 6 million voters to support its candidates — nearly one-third of the country’s adult population, and more than enough to win a low-turnout election. In addition to misreading the country’s political mood, American policymakers also seem convinced that the country’s authoritarian leader will only leave power by force. Economic sanctions are ostensibly intended to raise costs for the military and are expected to somehow spur a rebellion against Maduro. This misguided approach stems from a poor understanding of the government’s internal dynamics and an excessive faith in the effectiveness of sanctions as a tool for bringing about regime change. Extensive academic research has shown that economic sanctions are rarely effective. When they work, it is because they offer the sanctioned regime incentives along with a way out by altering the conduct that led to the sanctions being imposed (such as the rollback of Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for access to international trade). By contrast, the sanctions against Venezuela have backed the regime into a corner, increasing the costs that the government would face upon leaving power and raising the incentives for Maduro to dig in his heels. An even more problematic idea driving current U.S. policy is the belief that financial sanctions can hurt the Venezuelan government without causing serious harm to ordinary Venezuelans. That’s impossible when 95 percent of Venezuela’s export revenue comes from oil sold by the state-owned oil company. Cutting off the government’s access to dollars will leave the economy without the hard currency needed to pay for imports of food and medicine. Starving the Venezuelan economy of its foreign currency earnings risks turning the country’s current humanitarian crisis into a full-blown humanitarian catastrophe. Ever since the Vietnam War, most American policymakers have understood that foreign policy is not just about outgunning your opponent but also about winning the hearts and minds of the people. But 56 percent of Venezuelans oppose U.S. financial sanctions; only 32 percent support them. When it comes to foreign military intervention in Venezuela, 57 percent of those surveyed were opposed, while 58 percent support dialogue between the government and the opposition — and 71 percent believe that those talks should focus on seeking solutions to the country’s economic problems. Venezuelans have good reason to be concerned that ordinary people will ultimately pay the price for sanctions. Recent data show that in the two months after Trump imposed financial sanctions, imports tumbled an additional 24 percent, deepening the scarcity of basic goods and lending credibility to the government’s argument that U.S. policies are directly harming Venezuelans. Instead of undermining Maduro, sanctions are making it increasingly difficult for the country’s opposition to convince voters that the welfare of Venezuelans — rather than driving Maduro from power — is its real priority. It is not the first time the opposition has made this mistake. Back in 2002, opponents of then-President Chávez called for a massive strike in the country’s oil sector. The strike brought oil production to a standstill and caused a double-digit recession in an attempt to get Chávez to resign. This event single-handedly convinced Venezuelans that they could not trust a political movement that was willing to destroy the economy in order to attain power. In a recall referendum held two years later, voters resoundingly backed Chávez. The United States and the anti-Maduro opposition will not win the hearts and minds of Venezuelans by helping drive the country’s economy into the ground. If Washington wants to show it cares about Venezuelans, it could start by providing help to those most affected by the crisis. Extending protected migrant status for Venezuelans in the United States and providing support for neighboring countries dealing with an upsurge of Venezuelan immigration would be a start, as would support for apolitical organizations, such as the United Nations Development Programme, that have managed to channel aid to the country. The U.S. should also support negotiations aimed at creating institutions that make the coexistence of the country’s feuding political factions possible — rather than encouraging the wholesale replacement of one by the other. I, as much as anyone else, would like to see Maduro go. His government’s gross mismanagement of the economy is the primary (but not the only) cause of the deepest economic crisis in Latin American history. The annulment of the opposition’s two-thirds majority in the National Assembly through trumped-up and unsupported charges of vote-buying was an assault on the country’s constitution and the catalyst for the political tensions that led to more than 100 deaths in last year’s protests. There is abundant evidence of serious human rights abuses during those protests, which merit an international investigation to determine the potential complicity of high-ranking members of government. But for the same reasons that I oppose Maduro, I also vehemently disagree with the call voiced by President Trump and some opposition commentators for foreign military intervention in Venezuela. Whether we like it or not, Maduro is serving as president of Venezuela because he won an election recognized by the international community. Even if Maduro were impeached, he would then be replaced by his vice president, who could in turn appoint another vice president to serve in case he himself were impeached. Even a cursory look at the Venezuelan constitution shows that it does not entitle the National Assembly to name a new president. Conducting a military intervention to replace a constitutionally elected president with an unconstitutionally appointed one would be an even worse violation of Venezuelan law than anything that the Chávez and Maduro regimes have ever been accused of. Maduro must leave office the same way he arrived: through the votes of Venezuelans. Venezuela is scheduled to hold a presidential election this year. Rather than encouraging the pipe dreams of military invasions and coups, the overriding priority of Venezuela’s opposition should be to convince voters that it would do a better job of leading the country. Trump and his administration must not continue to make that task harder.
Sanctions are not responsible for damage + removing them won’t do ANYTHING 3 WARRANTS
Moises Rendon - September 3 2019
https://www.csis.org/analysis/are-sanctions-working-venezuela
“Are sanctions working in Venezuela?”
By 2016, one year before financial sanctions were first implemented by the United States, the Venezuelan bolívar had already hit an inflation rate of 255 percent . Inflation has now surpassed 1 million percent and is projected to be 10 million percent by year end. Oil production in Venezuela dropped from roughly 2.4 million barrels per day in 2015 to about 1 million barrels per day at the end of 2018 before broad sanctions against PdVSA were implemented. Venezuelans lost an average of 24 pounds between 2016 and 2017. Over the same period, severe child malnutrition reached 15.5 percent. In addition to the European Union, five countries (the United States, Canada, Switzerland, Mexico, and Panama) have issued sanctions to address the Venezuelan crisis. Sanctions did not cause the economic or humanitarian crisis in Venezuela as dire conditions in Venezuela preceded the implementation of sanctions. By 2016, a year before any financial or sectoral sanctions hit the country, Venezuela’s economy was already enduring severe hyperinflation, which surpassed a rate of 800 percent. Between 2013 and 2016, food imports fell 71 percent and medicine and medical equipment imports dropped 68 percent. Over the same period, infant mortality increased by 44 percent. By the time sanctions were introduced, Venezuelans earning the minimum wage could only afford 56 percent of the calories necessary for a family of five. Over two million Venezuelans had already fled the country at this point. The extent of the humanitarian damage suffered before sectoral sanctions indicates that the blame cannot be placed on the sanctions themselves. As an example, Venezuela’s Central Bank confirmed in 2014 that plummeting oil prices had triggered a severe economic contraction with simultaneous hyperinflation. Under the guise of austerity, Maduro announced cuts to major social services upon which millions of citizens relied. Sanctions are undoubtedly cutting off financing to the Maduro regime, limiting the government’s ability to import food and medicine amid economic freefall. However, reversing sanctions against Maduro and giving the regime access to revenues will not fix the humanitarian crisis for three main reasons: 1 Although government revenues have been used in the past to bankroll social programs, Maduro’s regime has neglected to provide food and medicine to the Venezuelan people. Instead, they have directly profited from these revenues, funding illicit projects and buying the loyalty of military officials. Sanctions are designed to choke off these earnings, weakening Maduro’s grasp on power and therefore accelerating the restoration of democracy. 2According to the Venezuelan constitution, Maduro has not been the legitimate president of the country since January 10th, 2019. Over 50 countries have denounced his regime and recognized Juan Guaidó as interim president until free and fair elections can be held. Granting financial access to Maduro only serves to undermine calls for free and fair elections. Instead, the legitimate government of Venezuela should be given authority over the nation’s resources and institutions. 3Alternative approaches to the humanitarian crisis can more effectively relieve the suffering of Venezuelans without empowering Maduro with the state’s assets and resources. Sectoral sanctions may be causing harm to vulnerable civilians who are already suffering under hyperinflation and crumbling job prospects. Therefore, any medium- to long-term sanctions strategy must be combined with a plan to provide aid to the Venezuelan population, 90 percent of whom cannot afford necessities. Maduro has shut out foreign aid from abroad, including the United States, Canada, and the European Union, describing their contributions as a violation of sovereignty. Under his command, Venezuela’s borders with former allies Brazil and Colombia have been shuttered, bringing the delivery of crucial humanitarian aid to a near halt. Additionally, Maduro has abused Venezuela’s subsidized food program CLAP to punish political dissenters; 83 percent of Maduro’s supporters receive benefits, as opposed to 14 percent of independents. New methods are in order to address this challenge.
Juan Guaido acts as an Embargo (Nonunique on most args?)
Joshua Cho - May 6 2019
https://fair.org/home/the-atlantic-illustrates-everything-thats-wrong-with-media-coverage-of-venezuela-sanctions/
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (2/4/19) has pointed out how recognition of Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela effectively functions as an oil embargo on Venezuela. This is devastating, since Venezuela’s economy depends almost entirely on oil export revenues for essential imports like food, medicine and medical equipment (New York Times, 2/8/19). Newer US sanctions that have caused Venezuela’s crude oil production to plummet even further are expected to reduce revenues over the coming year by $2.5 billion, almost as much as the country spent last year ($2.6 billion) to import food and medicine (CEPR, 3/25/19).
Petro Information cryptocurrency
https://cointelegraph.com/news/venezuelan-petro-against-us-sanctions-history-and-use-of-the-crypto
Samuel Haig - July 17 2019
In a bid to circumvent the economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro announced plans to launch a cryptocurrency backed by the nation’s oil, gasoline, gold and diamond reserves during December 2017. The president claimed that the digital currency, named Petro (PTR), would allow the country to access “new forms of international financing.” At the start of January 2018, President Maduro ordered the issuance of the first 100 million Petros, announcing that each Petro will be pegged to the value of one barrel of Venezuelan oil — equating the cryptocurrency’s capitalization to roughly $5.9 billion. Several days later, the opposition-run National Assembly criticized Petro, calling the digital currency “null and void.” Parliamentary Deputy Jorge Millan described Petro as fraudulent, stating: “This is not a cryptocurrency, this is a forward sale of Venezuelan oil. It is tailor-made for corruption.” He went on: “We find ourselves before a new kind of fraud, disguised as a solution the (financial) crisis. This incompetent government wants to compensate for lack of oil production with these virtual barrels.” At the end of January 2018, Maduro announced that cryptocurrency mining was a “perfectly legal” activity. The president also announced that citizens targeted during the prior year’s police crackdown on mining operations would have any related charges dismissed. On Jan. 30, 2018, Maduro’s administration published the white paper for the cryptocurrency. On Feb. 8, 2018, Jose Vielma Mora, Venezuela’s minister of foreign trade and international investment, told the state-sponsored news outlet TeleSur that foreign investors would be willing to conduct trade in exchange for Petro, claiming that Poland, Denmark, Honduras, Norway, Canada and Vietnam were among the trading partners preparing to accept the controversial cryptocurrency as a means of payment. Venezuela launched the presale for Petro on Feb. 20, 2018. 82.4 million Petros were made available in exchange for select fiat currencies and cryptocurrencies. Three days later, Venezuelan media claimed that the presale had raised $1 billion. On Feb. 24, the Venezuelan government launched a free cryptocurrency training course aimed at improving digital currency literacy for ordinary citizens. On March 19, President Trump barred American citizens from purchasing Petro by executive order. Venezuela’s Ministry of Economy announced that Petro had been made available for purchase on Oct. 29, 2018. In an infographic published on Twitter, the token could be purchased from the Venezuelan Treasury from either the coin’s official website or from six government-authorized cryptocurrency exchanges: Bancar, Afx Trae, Cave Blockchain, Amberes Coin, Cryptia and Criptolago. The official Twitter account of the Petro indicated that investors were able to purchase the cryptocurrency using U.S. dollars, euros and Chinese yuan, in addition to Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ether and Dash. During November 2018, the National Assembly of Venezuela approved a bill containing new cryptocurrency regulation. The bill sought to legitimate Petro as a unit of commercial exchange within the country. The same month saw the National Assembly pass amendments to Anti-Money Laundering (AML) laws to pave the way for Venezuelan cryptocurrency exchanges to conduct foreign exchange operations using Petro. Venezuelan government official Andres Eloy Mendez described the amendments as being intended to combat the “financial and commercial blockade” being maintained by the U.S. government, adding that the cryptocurrency would allow the evasion of sanctions and facilitate new transnational business relationships.
US Sanctions aren’t hurting Venezuelans
Kenneth Rapoza May 2 2019
https://outline.com/2d3CTH
But Venezuela is not the Middle East. U.S. policies are not the reason why Venezuela is a mess, as Omar said this week on the Democracy Now! radio program. The U.S. is not making Venezuela any worse than it is or will become under existing leadership. Her view mimics many left-of-center voices critical of the regime change policies that began under Bush and Cheney. The ruling Socialists United of Venezuela is, point blank, the only reason why Venezuela is a mess. And president Nicolas Maduro is its leader. Maduro governs a failed state. Fifty other countries, including Colombia, Brazil, the U.K. and Spain, all agree. Brazil and Colombia are currently catering to around one million Venezuelans who have fled the country. Some have preferred taking their children out of school and living in United Nations tents in Colombia instead of Maduro's Venezuela.
Maduro's incompetence, of which the Socialists United rallies around, is killing Venezuela. Not Trump. Not Elliot Abrams. Not Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. This is not a pre-emptive strike, searching for terrorists under beds and weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. The economy began its deep decline years ago, in the Obama years. It has been in an economic depression for three years. Obama first sanctioned members of the Maduro Administration in 2015. Trump later sanctioned Maduro's Vice President Tareck El Aissami for drug trafficking in February 2017. Later that year, U.S. companies were banned from providing financial assistance (as in loans) to one company only, oil firm PdVSA. Talk of the U.S. banning food and medicine shipments to Venezuela is not entirely true. So long as those shipments are not going to sanctioned individuals, it's not breaking sanctions law.
Currency is the problem with the economy link this with crypto and pegging to the dollar
Kenneth Rapoza May 2 2019
https://outline.com/2d3CTH
Worth pondering, if the U.S. sanctions, of which the most serious were only enacted this year, were driving Venezuela to the poor house, why are even worse economic sanctions against Russia not hurting that country just as bad? "Without hard currency exports to the U.S., the Venezuelan regime is under extreme duress," says Agathe Demarais, global forecasting director for The Economist Intelligence Unit. She says it is hard to quantify the impact of sanctions on an economy unless there is a total embargo.
Maduro Isn’t Going Out From US Sanctions, no chance of change in govt
Nahal Toosi
March 9 2019
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/09/trump-sanctions-iran-venezuela-1213496
The Trump administration has imposed sanctions on both Iran and Venezuela, aiming to speed up the ouster of their anti-American governments. But in both instances, President Donald Trump and his advisers are learning that regime change — especially through economic means — is easy to talk about but hard to achieve. “The U.S. has a long history of seeking regime change and a much shorter list of successful endeavors,” said Rob Malley, a senior aide to former President Barack Obama who now leads the International Crisis Group. While Trump has eschewed past American methods of government overthrow — focusing on economic penalties and marshaling international pressure instead of George W. Bush-style military intervention, for instance — his administration must also tread carefully, because too much American involvement can make potential allies nervous. Iran and Venezuela are the two countries where the Trump administration is most clearly and publicly trying to engineer an ouster of the existing government. And the administration’s approaches in the two cases overlap to a large degree, but by no means fully. In the case of Venezuela, the Trump team isn’t masking its goal. The U.S. president has said he no longer recognizes Maduro as the country’s legitimate leader, instead supporting opposition leader Juan Guaidó’s claim to be Venezuela’s interim president. Bolton even continues to float the possibility of the U.S. taking military action to get Maduro out of office. “We have understood that this is a struggle in Venezuela whose length we can’t predict,” Elliott Abrams, the Trump administration’s recently named special envoy for Venezuela, told reporters on Friday. “No one can predict it.” Some analysts say Maduro, who has support from Russia and Cuba, could hang on for years. After all, the U.S. has “been promising regime change to the Cubans in Miami for 60 years,” noted Ted Piccone, a Latin America specialist at the Brookings Institution. “Authoritarian governments don’t give up easily,” added a Senate aide. “They don’t wake up one day and say, ‘Wow, John Bolton’s tweet was so intimidating I’m going to pack up my things and leave the country.’”
Maduro blocking humanitarian aid from entering Venezuela
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/02/08/us-says-maduro-is-blocking-aid-starving-people-venezuelan-says-his-people-arent-beggars/
The Tienditas International Bridge, close to the border between Colombia and Venezuela, is at a standstill this week. It is divided into three parts, and the Venezuelan military has blocked all of them: two with shipping containers and one with a tanker, as well as fencing. The striking scene illustrates the dramatic standoff between Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and self-declared interim president Juan Guaidó. Guaidó insists that humanitarian aid is desperately needed in Venezuela and that it must be allowed in. Maduro, with the help of the military, is refusing to budge. What’s at stake is $60 million worth of humanitarian aid. Venezuela is submerged in a humanitarian and political crisis. Millions of people have fled the country in recent years after hyperinflation made the prices of staple goods soar. Those who are left are dealing with dangerous shortages of medicine, food and other necessities.
Timeline + Venezuela Econ Crisis Not Caused By US Sanctions
https://www.csis.org/analysis/are-sanctions-working-venezuela
Sanctions did not cause the economic or humanitarian crisis in Venezuela as dire conditions in Venezuela preceded the implementation of sanctions. By 2016, a year before any financial or sectoral sanctions hit the country, Venezuela’s economy was already enduring severe hyperinflation, which surpassed a rate of 800 percent. Between 2013 and 2016, food imports fell 71 percent and medicine and medical equipment imports dropped 68 percent. Over the same period, infant mortality increased by 44 percent. By the time sanctions were introduced, Venezuelans earning the minimum wage could only afford 56 percent of the calories necessary for a family of five. Over two million Venezuelans had already fled the country at this point. | 905,408 |
322 | 380,122 | January - Rebuilding Venezuela Aff | Open-source. | 905,419 |
323 | 380,132 | BRI Environment Aff V1 | Our sole contention is the environment.
Stromsta 19 and The world economic forum agree that China is the world’s largest investor in renewable energy development overseas, accounting for 35 percent of global overseas solar installations through 2018. And Hutchins tells us just 3 days ago that as a result of the BRI, chinese investment in solar energy overseas grew 280 percent. That’s because although in the past, China invested in nonrenewable energy because it was cheaper than renewable energy, Dudley 18 tells us that by 2020 renewable technology will be significantly cheaper than fossil fuels. China wants to make a switch to a green BRI, but unfortunately they lack the funding and investment to do so.
Luckily affirming saves the BRI for 2 reasons.
First, is by providing funding.
Evans-Pritchard ‘19 of the Telegraph confirms that, Total Belt and Road investments fell 40 percent last year because China doesn’t have the funding to continue investing. Ciurtin 17 furthers, Without European cash investment it is highly improbable that other actors could feasibly join China in funding the initiative.
By joining the BRI, the EU can fund critical BRI investments.
Second, is by providing legitimacy.
Dodwell 19 tells us that international backlash has halted the expansion of the BRI and countries are cancelling BRI projects and Chandran 19 tells us that many developing nations such as Pakistan, Malaysia, Myanmar, Bangladesh, and Sierra Leone have backed away from previously negotiated BRI projects. Meyer 19 tells us that without the presence of stable institutions like the EU, countries will not remain in the BRI.
By legitimizing BRI, the EU will incentivize outside investment into these green projects.
The EU joining the BRI benefits the environment in 2 ways:
The first is through green tech.
Zhang 19 tells us that China has stated it would like to collaborate with EU through exchanging technology. That matters as Canete 18 tells us that the EU is one of the biggest leaders in renewable energy and european companies hold 40 percent of all patents for renewable technologies.
Aggarwal 19 corroborates that standard solar panels only have a conversion efficiency rate of 15, but Bellini 19 tells us that solar panels in the netherlands contain bifacial tandem solar cells that have a conversion efficiency rate of 30.2 percent or double the efficiency of standard panels.
In addition to expanding more efficient and cost effective green tech throughout the world, the BRI is critical to creating a continent wide super grid.
Smith 18 from the World Economic Forum continues that European firms can create “smart grids” that use machine learning to increase efficiency. Europe has the technological capability to make a 100 percent renewable energy system more viable than nuclear and nonrenewable resources.
Technology and Engineering News furthers just 1 week ago that As a result of streamlining energy usage, the BRI solar panel plan can uniquely solve all the region’s annual energy needs by 2030 by only converting 3.7 percent of the current energy infrastructure to solar panels.
But Chen 19 tells us that all of Europe is key to this grid, so affirming is the only way to ensure its success.
Affirming makes it easier and more efficient for the BRI to implement green tech.
The second is by streamlining trade.
As summarized by Kuester ’17 of the Combined Transport Magazine, the infrastructure projects in the region are increasing the efficiency of trade through more direct transport routes. For example, a study by Arviem ‘17 concluded that, “the New Silk Road train journey...saves 75 percent of the carbon footprint of the ocean route while running only 11,000 km instead 22,000 km on the sea route.”
In terms of environmental impacts, rail freight transport also beats air transport. As Arviem furthers that rail transport only accounts for 4 percent of the CO2 that would result from the use of air transport.
The sole impact is air pollution.
Mood 16 writes in the Journal of Medical Science that greenhouse gas emissions can be deadly for local populations, leading to respiratory or cardiovascular diseases, neuropsychiatric complications, skin diseases, and long-term chronic diseases such as cancer.
This is specifically pronounced in Europe, as Schlanger ‘19 World Economic Forum quantifies that, “...about 800,000 people die...in Europe per year due to air pollution, or roughly 17 percent of the 5 million deaths in Europe annually.”
On a broader scale, Jacobsen 18 furthers that 153 million people will die worldwide from air pollution if our current levels of CO2 emissions continue. | 905,429 |
324 | 380,142 | Contact Info | Albert Chu/Shrayes Upadhyayula on Facebook Messenger
almchu@gmail.com
shrayes.upad2004@gmail.com
Text/email us before round for case | 905,440 |
325 | 380,148 | Bio | Yo its Kendall. here is my contact info and interps.
kendallcarll3@gmail.com
4692474719
Interpretation: Debaters must disclose, on the Wiki or direct contact, at least 30 minutes before the round.
Interp: debaters should read quotes from cut cards not paraphrased evidence
Interpretation: If a debater reads an argument about intimate partner violence, they must ask everyone watching or participating in the debate round if they may do so. | 905,446 |
326 | 380,152 | Heatwave~-~--r1~-~-~-~-M4A | 2 offs(Theory) and case opensources(opensource has the 2 offs) | 905,450 |
327 | 380,157 | 0 - Contact Information | Rohan Kamalakantha
- Facebook Messenger
- rkamalakantha@gmail.com
Aditya Kumar
- Facebook Messenger
- adikumar0306@gmail.com
Disclosure Information:
We will disclose cases as soon as the coinflip happens on this wiki. If you need a email chain or have questions about our disclosure, feel free to contact us.
Rice Purity Test Score:
- Rohan Kamalakantha (93)
- Aditya Kumar (68)
Smash Mains:
- Rohan Kamalakantha (Kirby)
- Aditya Kumar (Kirby)
We think that the race was is real and an important issue that needs to be addressed. We are on the correct side of it. There is no room for shiftiness. | 905,458 |
328 | 380,158 | 0 - Broken Interps | Interpretation: Debaters must use direct quotes when introducing evidence for the first time. To clarify: don’t paraphrase
Interpretation: On the March 2020 Public Forum topic at the stay at home spring classic , debaters must disclose previously-read positions on the National Debate Coaches Association Public Forum wiki. The disclosure must be under their own school, team name, and correct side and must happen at least 30 minutes before the round and must include the author name, taglines, a hyperlink to the evidence, and full-text of all parts of the evidence they cite in context.
interpretation: Teams may not read plans in public forum debate unless they have disclosed the position on the NDCA wiki at least 45 minutes before the round | 905,459 |
329 | 380,215 | Contact and Disclosure Information | Contact Information:
Michael Chen (1st Speaker)
- Facebook Messenger
- michaelc75025@gmail.com
Aditya Kumar (2nd Speaker)
- Facebook Messenger
- adikumar0306@gmail.com
Disclosure Information:
We will disclose cases after we have broken them at a tournament on this wiki. If you need a email chain or have questions about our disclosure, feel free to contact us. | 905,523 |
330 | 380,219 | Potential Interps | Interpretation: On the April 2020 Public Forum topic at National Qualifiers or the Tournament of Champions, debaters must disclose previously-read positions on the National Debate Coaches Association Public Forum wiki. The disclosure must be under their own school, team name, and correct side and must happen at least 30 minutes before the round and must include the author name, taglines, a hyperlink to the evidence, and full-text of all parts of the evidence they cite in context. | 905,527 |
331 | 380,189 | NOVDEC ~-~- Cooperation | Cooperation DA:
The nature of offensive operations undermines alliances and international stability
David Mussington, Center for International Governance Innovation, 4/8/2019, “Strategic Stability, Cyber Operations and International Security,” https://www.cigionline.org/articles/strategic-stability-cyber-operations-and-international-security (David Mussington is a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), and professor of the practice and director, Center for Public Policy and Private Enterprise, University of Maryland, College Park. In 2010, David was senior adviser for cyber policy in the US Department of Defense, later serving on the Obama administration’s National Security Council staff as director for surface transportation security policy.) kegs
Strategic stability at the global level relies on the concept of deterrence — preventing aggression by threatening harsh punishment, or by imposing costs that exceed any benefits from attack. The anonymity granted to actors in cyberspace makes it tough to identify the culprit of a given attack with a high degree of certainty (the origin of a piece of malware is much less obvious than the origin of a missile strike), undermining the effectiveness of deterrence strategies and emboldening attackers (Solomon 2011). While there has been some progress in improving the technical aspect of cyber attack attribution, political difficulties remain. After all, for a deterrence strategy to work, a state must retaliate once an attack is identified, and allies committed to collective defence must come to their aid. Despite traditional rhetoric, such assistance is never automatic, and the added problem of convincingly attributing cyber attacks adds another layer of uncertainty to the political calculus. Honoring commitments to allies can be costly, and states will be reluctant to bear this burden if there remain any doubts about the identity of the attacker. In this way, the cyber-attribution problem can undermine the cohesiveness of alliances and, by extension, international stability.
Institution-based cooperation is key to manage existential threats and preserve great power stability
Graeme P. Herd 10, Head of the International Security Programme, Co-Director of the International Training Course in Security Policy, Geneva Centre for Security Policy, 2010, “Great Powers: Towards a “cooperative competitive” future world order paradigm?,” in Great Powers and Strategic Stability in the 21st Century, p. 197-198
Given the absence of immediate hegemonic challengers to the US (or a global strategic catastrophe that could trigger US precipitous decline), and the need to cooperate to address pressing strategic threats - the real question is what will be the nature of relations between these Great Powers? Will global order be characterized as a predictable interdependent one-world system, in which shared strategic threats create interest-based incentives and functional benefits which drive cooperation between Great Powers? This pathway would be evidenced by the emergence of a global security agenda based on nascent similarity across national policy agendas. In addition. Great Powers would seek to cooperate by strengthening multilateral partnerships in institutions (such as the UN, G20 and regional variants), regimes (e.g., arms control, climate and trade), and shared global norms, including international law. Alternatively, Great Powers may rely less on institutions, regimes and shared norms, and more on increasing their order-producing managerial role through geopolitical-bloc formation within their near neighborhoods. Under such circumstances, a re-division of the world into a competing mercantilist nineteenth-century regional order emerges 17 World order would be characterized more by hierarchy and balance of power and zero-sum principles than by interdependence. Relative power shifts that allow a return to multipolarity - with three or more evenly matched powers - occur gradually. The transition from a bipolar in the Cold War to a unipolar moment in the post-Cold War has been crowned, according to Haass, by an era of non-polarity, where power is diffuse — "a world dominated not by one or two or even several states but rather by dozens of actors possessing and exercising various kinds of power"18 Multilateralism is on the rise, characterized by a combination of stales and international organizations, both influential and talking shops, formal and informal ("multilateralism light"). A dual system of global governance has evolved. An embryonic division of labor emerges, as groups with no formal rules or permanent structures coordinate policies and immediate reactions to crises, while formal treaty-based institutions then legitimize the results.'9 As powerfully advocated by Wolfgang Schauble: Global cooperation is the only way to master the new, asymmetric global challenges of the twenty-first century. No nation can manage these tasks on its own, nor can the entire international community do so without the help of non-state, civil society actors. We must work together to find appropriate security policy responses to the realities of the twenty-first century.20 Highlighting the emergence of what he terms an "interpolar" world - defined as "multipolarity in an age of interdependence" — Grevi suggests that managing existential interdependence in an unstable multipolar world is the key.21 Such complex interdependence generates shared interest in cooperative solutions, meanwhile driving convergence, consensus and accommodation between Great Powers.22 As a result, the multilateral system is being adjusted to reflect the realities of a global age - the rise of emerging powers and relative decline of the West: "The new priority is to maintain a complex balance between multiple states."23 The G20 meeting in London in April 2009 suggested that great and rising powers will reform global financial architecture so that it regulates and supervises global markets in a more participative, transparent and responsive manner: all countries have contributed to the crisis; all will be involved in the solution.24 | 905,485 |
332 | 380,179 | MAR ~-~- Carbon Bubble | ===Adv===
====Fossil fuels are prone to the overvaluation trap – the industry invests trillions in risky reserves right now. These investments are stranded - companies are forced to continue investing because if they stop, valuations would tank.====
Carbon bubble is existent because corporations spend lots of money on capital expenditures to find more fossil fuel reserves which is extremely risky.
Companies aren’t becoming more innovative or profitable but are reliant on reserves. This leads to gross overvaluation and they further this overvaluation by funneling more money into finding reserves because investors will leave if they don’t
**Lee, 17** (Thomas Lee, founder of a private equity firm, Wharton’s Public Policy Initiative, 04-12-17, FOSSIL FUEL STRANDED ASSETS: EFFICIENT MARKET OR CARBON BUBBLE?, https://publicpolicy.wharton.upenn.edu/live/news/1807-fossil-fuel-stranded-assets-efficient-market-or)
A Growing Carbon Bubble All proven reserves today already exceed the carbon budget, so pouring more money into more reserves further jeopardizes the ability to fully extract. Yet the industry spends massive capital expenditures to continually grow the reserve base. For example, global upstream capex is expected to increase by 5 in 2017 ~~22~~. Heede and Oreskes’s peer-reviewed carbon budget analysis shows that the "core climate threat" for investor-owned entities "is capital investment in finding and developing new reserves." ~~23~~ About $2.2 trillion~~is~~ of capex over the next 10 years would be unneeded (thus potentially stranded) under the IEA 450 scenario of limited climate change ~~24~~. In other words, even if the market prices accurately reflect intrinsic value of the proven reserves today (i.e. even if most of the IHS "10 to 15 years" of reserve NPV is safely monetized), any additional cap~~ital~~ex is convert~~ed~~ing shareholder value into more risky reserves. Consider an analogy: being able to extract current proven reserves is like surviving one round of Russian roulette; using the generated cash to continually acquire and develop new reserves is like spinning the barrel and pulling the trigger over and over. Why are companies growing the carbon bubble through capex? In general, corporate net income can be returned to shareholders (as dividends or buybacks) or plowed back to expand business activity. A Harvard Business Review article analyzes fossil fuel investments using the framework of the "overvaluation trap," which "occurs when the capital markets overvalue a company’s equity—and especially when stock overvaluation is common in a particular sector." ~~25~~ The HBR article explains that in order to keep the valuations "propped up, executives running big oil invest aggressively in finding more reserves; should they stop spending on new exploration and development, it would signal to investors that their current reserves aren’t worth as much." Thus a principal-agent problem emerges: fossil fuel reserve managers need to maintain reserve-to-production ratios to maintain extant stock valuations. This conflict also arises because of compensation structure. For example, executives at the world’s largest 5 oil companies received $1 trillion in bonus compensation, over a period of 9 years, linked to activity in the exploration and development of new reserves ~~26~~. Managers of fossil fuel reserves are paid to perpetuate the carbon bubble
====The carbon bubble will pop – fossil fuel investments are becoming increasingly less profitable====
Financial statements
Bill **McKibben**, Author and Schumann Distinguished Scholar in environmental studies at Middlebury College, **18**
Guardian, 06-21-18, "Some rare good climate news: the fossil fuel industry is weaker than ever", https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/21/climate-change-fossil-fuel-industry-never-been-weaker
And from Wall Street came welcome word that market perceptions haven’t really changed: even in the age of Trump, the fossil fuel industry~~is~~ has gone from the world’s surest bet to an increasingly challenged enterprise. Researchers at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis minced no words: "In the past several years, oil industry financial statements have revealed significant signs of strain: Profits have dropped, cash flow is down, balance sheets are deteriorating and capital spending is falling. The stock market has recognized the sector’s overall weakness, punishing oil and gas shares over the past five years even as the market as a whole has soared." The IEEFA report labeled the industry "weaker than it has been in decades" and laid out its basic frailties, the first of which is paradoxical. Fracking has produced a sudden surge of gas and oil into the market, lowering prices – which means many older investments (Canada’s tar sands, for instance) no longer make economic sense. Fossil fuel has been transformed into a pure commodity business, and since the margins on fracking are narrow at best, its financial performance has been woeful. The IEEFA describes investors as "shell-shocked" by poor returns. The second weakness is more obvious: the sudden rise of a competitor that seems able to deliver the same product – energy – with cheaper, cleaner, better technologies. Tesla, sure – but Volkswagen, having come clean about the dirtiness of diesel, is going to spend $84bn on electric drivetrains. China seems bent on ~~is~~ converting its entire bus fleet to electric power. Every week seems to bring a new record-low price for clean energy: the most recent being a Nevada solar plant clocking in at 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour, even with Trump’s tariffs on Chinese panels. And the third problem for the fossil fuel industry? According to IEEFA, that would be the climate movement – a material financial risk to oil and gas companies. "In addition to traditional lobbying and direct-action campaigns, climate activists have joined with an increasingly diverse set of allies – particularly the indigenous-rights movement – to put financial pressure on oil and gas companies through divestment campaigns, ~~and~~corporate accountability efforts, and targeting of banks and financial institutions. These campaigns threaten not only to undercut financing for particular projects, but also to raise financing costs for oil and gas companies across the board." Hey, the movement against Kinder Morgan’s pipeline got so big, the Canadian government had to literally buy the thing in order to try and ram it through. Protesters will die, a former Bank of Canada governor predicted this week – though he added the country will have to muster the "fortitude" to kill them and get the pipeline built. For activists, the best part of the IEEFA report is a series of recommendations for precisely how to hurt the industry the most, from creating delays that "turn a marginal project into a cancelled one" to "strategic litigation" to "changing the narrative". The report’s authors write: "The financial world is just beginning to understand the fundamental weakness of the fossil fuel sector, and barely acknowledges the global climate movement’s growing power and reach. This has created a powerful opportunity to develop and foster a new storyline on Wall Street: that the oil and gas industry is an unstable financial partner just as it faces its greatest test." That’s work we’re capable of. If a few years of campaigning is enough to convince the pope we need to keep fossil fuels in the ground, a few more quarters might finally persuade the suits that there’s more money to be made elsewhere. But speed is clearly of the essence. If massive losses of money loom over Wall Street, massive losses of polar ice loom over us all.
====Collapse is coming soon – collapse causes a domino effect leading to financial upheaval of fossil fuel economies – shifting to renewables now is uniquely key.====
**Deaton, 18** (Jeremy Deaton, Senior Editorial Content Manager, 09-28-18, "The fossil fuel industry’s dirty secret: Climate action or not, things look bad", https://www.greenbiz.com/article/fossil-fuel-industrys-dirty-secret-climate-action-or-not-things-look-bad)
Ten years ago Blockbuster CEO Jim Keyes said he wasn’t worried about digital streaming. "I’ve been frankly confused by this fascination that everybody has with Netflix," he said. Blockbuster’s head of digital strategy echoed this sentiment, asserting the company was "strategically better positioned than almost anybody out there." Not long after, Blockbuster went the way of the butter churn, while Netflix became a household fixture. Today, the movie streaming service is worth almost as much as Disney. To most people, that’s a funny story about the hubris of a technological dinosaur. Imagine, however, if Blockbuster had been a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, that millions of people had been employed in the manufacture and sales of "Jurassic Park" DVDs, that there were hundreds of cities dotting the South and Midwest where brick-and-mortar video rental was the only job in town. Then, the collapse of Blockbuster wouldn’t be so funny. It would be a catastrophe. This, experts warn, could be the future of fossil fuels. Wind turbines, ~~and~~solar panels and electric vehicles are getting cheaper and more abundant by the day, which is hurting demand for coal, oil and natural gas. As demand falls for conventional fuels, so will prices. Companies that laid claim to coal mines or oil wells won’t be able to turn a profit by digging up that fuel. They will default on their loans, pushing banks to the brink of failure. Prices are likely to crash before 2035, costing the global economy as much as $4 trillion, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change. "Traditionally, fossil fuel companies have been considered very safe and very profitable industries with high returns, if you were to invest in their shares. Now, this may be changing," said Jean-Francois Mercure, professor of energy, climate and innovation at Radboud University in the Netherlands and lead author of the study. "It requires institutions to properly reassess the risk in their portfolios," he said. "This transparency needs to start to happen, because they need to know what their money is ultimately invested in. This really reminds us a lot of what happened in 2008 with the financial crisis, where there was a lot of repackaging of assets, and people didn’t really know what they owned until they realized those assets weren’t paying off." Mercure and an international team of economists and policy analysts modeled the future of fossil fuels under a variety of scenarios, examining what will happen if countries hew closely to targets of the Paris Climate Agreement, and what will happen if they don’t. What’s remarkable is that fossil fuels are likely to go bust regardless whether countries take climate change seriously. The rapid pace of technological progress will transform the energy sector. Researchers say the only way to guard against the impending collapse in the price of conventional fuels is to accelerate the transition to clean energy, ensuring investors and fossil fuel firms aren’t caught flat-footed when oil, gas and coal bottom out. If this seems hard to believe, consider that renewables will drive down the price of fossil fuels long before they become our primary source of energy. By taking over a small, but significant share of the market, they will force producers to slash costs to stay competitive. People will buy electric vehicles, meaning they will no longer need gasoline to fuel their cars. They will buy electric heat pumps, meaning they will no longer need natural gas to heat their homes. They will buy solar panels and home batteries, meaning they will no longer need to buy power from a coal- or gas-fired power plants. As with everything, there will be winners and losers. Countries that import large volumes of fossil fuels — namely China, Japan and much of Europe — likely would be better off, having transitioned to cheap, renewable power and electric cars. They likely also would be spending more money on clean technology produced at home and sending less money to fossil fuel producers overseas. On the other hand, countries that produce and export a lot of oil, coal or gas — namely the United States, Canada, Russia and much of the Middle East — would face economic upheaval. Canadian tar sands and American shale oil operations, which produce the most expensive oil, would be hardest hit. Middle Eastern countries, which produce the cheapest oil, likely would fare best. Mercure expects OPEC countries would meet most of the remaining demand for oil. A sudden and dramatic drop in the price of fossil fuels would lead to mass unemployment. Jorge Viñuales, a professor of law and environmental policy at the University of Cambridge and co-author of the study, warns this could fuel "public disenchantment and populist politics." He pointed to U.S. coal companies, which have struggled to compete with wind, solar and natural gas. Many coal workers have thrown their support behind President Donald Trump, who has tried to keep the industry afloat, most recently by moving to stay the shutdown of coal-fired power plants. Researchers caution against subsidizing fossil fuels — a strategy akin to forcing Netflix users to rent movies from Blockbuster. The only viable strategy, they say, is to reduce the systemic importance of fossil fuels by accelerating the transition to clean energy. Mercure recommends retraining coal, oil and gas workers for jobs in clean energy. Viñuales laid out five goals for investors and policymakers. "First, don’t invest more resources in fossils," he said. "Second, if you have fossil fuels already invested, try to divest them, at least significantly. Third, if you’re a fossil fuel company, try to diversify as much as you can while you’re still alive. Fourth, if you’re a policymaker, don’t adopt policies that are conducive to more investment in fossil fuels, because that is going to be bad for your country. Fifth, if you are in the geopolitical game, you have to consider what could happen to you." Viñuales said a collapse in the price of fossil fuels likely would strengthen China and weaken the United States. China has a lot of incentive to ramp up renewables. It wants to create jobs and cut pollution, but it also wants to gain an edge over its chief rivals, Russia and the United States. Driving down the cost of renewables would undercut the U.S. fossil fuel sector. "The only thing that the United States could do would~~have~~ be to massively invest in renewable ~~clean~~ energy to be a competitor in the economy of the future," Viñuales said. Continuing to invest in fossil fuels will only make the United States more vulnerable. "There is no walking out from the energy transition," he said. Notably, predictions of this study stand at odds with the forecasts of the International Energy Agency (IEA), which has been more bullish on fossil fuels, predicting the price of oil will peak in 2040 at the earliest. However, the IEA consistently has underestimated wind and solar historically, and many leading financial experts long have warned of fossil fuels going bust. In a 2015 speech (PDF), Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England, warned that meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement would require leaving as much as 80 percent of the world’s proven reserves of oil, gas and coal underground, which would alter the economics of fossil fuels. Now, it seems that in the absence of ambitious climate policies, the growth of renewables will have a similar effect. There is, however, a bright side. As Carney noted, the shift to clean energy "is a major opportunity for insurers as long-term investors. ... The more we invest with foresight; the less we will regret in hindsight."
====Fossil Fuel collapsing would leave us without electricity – the development of nuclear needs to happen NOW. ====
Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 1-11-2019, "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet," WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Climate scientists tell us that the world must drastically cut its fossil fuel use in the next 30 years to stave off a potentially catastrophic tipping point for the planet. Confronting this challenge is a moral issue, but it’s also a math problem—and a big part of the solution has to be nuclear power. Today, more than 80 of the world’s energy comes from fossil fuels, which are used to generate electricity, to heat buildings and to power car and airplane engines. Worse for the planet, the consumption of fossil fuels is growing quickly as poorer countries climb out of poverty and increase their energy use. Improving energy efficiency can reduce some of the burden, but it’s not nearly enough to offset growing demand. Any serious effort to decarbonize the world economy will require, then, a great deal more clean energy, on the order of 100 trillion kilowatt-hours per year, by our calculations—roughly equivalent to today’s entire annual fossil-fuel usage. A key variable is speed. To reach the target within three decades, the world would have to add about 3.3 trillion more kilowatt-hours of clean energy every year.
====Fossil fuel exporting economies would collapse unless they transition. ====
**IRENA, 19** (Global Commission of the Geopolitics of Energy Transformation, comprises a diverse group of distinguished leaders from the worlds of politics, energy, economics, trade, environment and development, International Renewable Energy Agency, 2019, "A New World: The Geopolitics of the Energy Transformation", https://geopoliticsofrenewables.org/assets/geopolitics/Reports/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Global'commission'renewable'energy'2019.pdf)
The vulnerability of fossil fuel exporters Countries that have historically enjoyed geopolitical influence because~~of~~ they supply fossil fuels are likely to see a decline in their global reach and influence unless they can reinvent their economy for a new energy era. Many fossil fuel-rich countries are able to project considerable international power. They can employ their fossil fuel rents (the difference between cost of production and market price of fossil fuels) to finance socio-economic development and economic diversification, significantly strengthen their military capabilities, or invest in foreign assets such as US securities. The energy transformation is expected to put pressure on fossil fuel prices and related rents.50 If fossil fuel revenues decline, these countries will need to rethink their national priorities and strategies. Figure 6 lists countries that derive much of their GDP from fossil fuel rents. three: Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Trinidad and Tobago. In just one country, Mongolia, coal rents are the highest fraction. In all other countries, including large gas exporters such as Russia, oil rents dominate. A decline in fossil fuel rents has the potential to profoundly destabilize countries that have not prepared their economies sufficiently for the consequences. The loss of oil rents in countries with weak governance could lead to fractures in society and political instability. The drop in oil price in the 1980s was one of the factors that contributed to the decline and eventual fall of the Soviet Union, which in turn led to the end of the Cold War, arguably the biggest geopolitical shift since the end of the Second World War. Figure 7 shows fossil fuel exporters’ preparedness, based on exposure and resilience.51 Exposure captures the degree to which countries rely on rents from fossil fuels.52 Resilience measures income in relation to population in order to capture how robustly an economy can respond to the risks posed by the energy transition.5
====Bradford 13^^ ^^ explains that Current economic interconnectedness means a US recession push 900 million into poverty.====
===Solvency===
====First, is reliability, the Wall Street Journal^^ ^^ in 2019 explains that solar and wind are not a reliable replacement because they don’t produce energy absent sunlight or strong winds.====
Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 1-11-2019, "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet," WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Solar and wind power alone can’t scale up fast enough to generate the vast amounts of electricity that will be needed by midcentury, especially as we convert car engines and the like from fossil fuels to carbon-free energy sources. Even Germany’s concerted recent effort to add renewables—the most ambitious national effort so far—was nowhere near fast enough. A global increase in renewables at a rate matching Germany’s peak success would add about 0.7 trillion kilowatt-hours of clean electricity every year. That’s just over a fifth of the necessary 3.3 trillion annual target. " Most countries’ policies are shaped not by hard facts but by long-standing and widely shared phobias about radiation. " To put it another way, even if the world were as enthusiastic and technically capable as Germany at the height of its renewables buildup—and neither of these is even close to true in the great majority of countries—decarbonizing the world at that rate would take nearly 150 years. Even if we could develop renewables much faster, huge problems would remain. Although costs have dropped dramatically for solar and wind energy, they are not a direct, reliable replacement for coal and gas. When the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow, little or no energy is collected. And when nature does cooperate, the energy is sometimes wasted because it can’t be stored affordably.
====Second is battery technology. Goldstein^^ ^^explains that the rate of development of battery tech is too slow to enable other renewables.====
^^ ^^ Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 1-11-2019, "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet," WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Bill Gates, who has invested $1 billion in renewables, notes that "there’s no battery technology that’s even close to allowing us to take all of our energy from renewables." If substantially expanded, wind, solar and hydropower also would destroy vast tracts of farmland and forest.
====Third is Construction times: Qvist^^ ^^ explains that empirically reactors were able to increase energy production 5x faster than renewables in Europe.====
Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 1-11-2019, "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet," WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Fosmark is one of Sweden’s eight nuclear power reactors. The country repealed a ban on building new ones in 2010.Photo: Hans Blomberg/Handout/REUTERS What the world needs is a carbon-free source of electricity that can be ramped up to massive scale very quickly and provide power reliably around the clock, regardless of weather conditions—all without expanding the total acreage devoted to electric generation. Nuclear power meets all of those requirements. When Sweden and France built nuclear reactors to replace fossil fuel in the 1970s and 1980s, they were able to add new electricity production relative to their GDPs at five times Germany’s speed for renewables.
^^ ^^ Sweden’s carbon emissions dropped in half even as its electricity production doubled. Electricity prices in nuclear-powered France today are 55 of those in Germany.
====Fourth is affordability. Qvist^^ ^^ furthers that as a result of nuclear development, energy prices are 55 of those in renewable powered regions.====
^^ ^^ Nuclear power is the safest form of energy by far, especially compared with coal, which continues to cause hundreds of thousands of premature deaths a year from air pollution in addition to contributing to climate change." Reasons put forward to oppose nuclear power in no way stack up to the real dangers facing humanity from climate change. "Over six decades, nuclear power has experienced only one fatal accident, Chernobyl in 1986, which directly caused about 60 deaths and is blamed for thousands more over time from low-level radiation. That’s a serious accident, but other nonnuclear industrial accidents have been worse. A hydroelectric dam failure in China in 1975 killed tens of thousands, and the 1984 Bhopal gas leak at a Union Carbide plant in India killed 4,000 initially and an estimated 15,000 more over time. We don’t stigmatize those entire industries as a result.
====Fifth is Safety: Goldstein^^ ^^ quantifies that over six decades nuclear power produced one accident in Chernobyl killing 60 people directly. However, other power accidents have been worse such as the killing of 19,000 in a single gas leak in India and tens of thousands in a hydroelectric dam failure. They further that during Fukushima no civilians experienced radiation greater than 50mSv which is insignificant as normal levels of exposure can be as high as 200mSv^^ ^^====
^^ ^^ Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 1-11-2019, "Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet," WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Nuclear power is regulated as though any amount of radiation is extremely dangerous. Yet we all walk around in a soup of background radiation, giving us an average of about 3 millisieverts (mSv) per year but ranging up to 200~~mSv~~ in some places, with no demonstrated harm. The occupational and medical recommendations are to stay below 50 per year. At Fukushima, only 12 individuals at the plant received more than 200 mSv, and nobody outside the plant exceeded 50~~mSv of exposure~~. It’s possible to measure and track very low levels of radiation, but those levels are harmless. Nor is nuclear waste the insurmountable problem that the public has been led to believe. The volumes are tiny, unlike the vast quantities of equally toxic waste from coal and other fuels. An American’s entire lifetime of electricity use powered by nuclear energy would produce an amount of long-term waste that fits in a soda can. All spent | 905,478 |
333 | 380,205 | MAR - AFF Fossil Fuels, Carbon Capture | We affirm.
C1: Save the Turtles
1. Displacing Fossil Fuels
Fossil fuels are still used - hurts fight against climate change
Anjli Raval, 19, 8-2-2019, Renewable energy push barely dents fossil fuel dependence, Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/4c77a13a-b50b-11e9-8cb2-799a3a8cf37b
A new report forecasts that coal, oil and gas will still contribute about 85 per cent of primary energy supply by 2040, compared with 90 per cent today, jeopardising efforts to contain the worst impacts of climate change. Energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie said 1 terawatt of installed solar and wind capacity makes up around 8 per cent of total power generation as of 2019. This equates to just a fraction of total energy consumption. “The world risks relying on fossil fuels for decades to come,” the report said. It forecasts carbon emissions will continue to rise, with their growth only slowing in the 2030s. This will put the world far off course in meeting the Paris climate goals, to limit global warming to well below 2C, despite growing political momentum to prevent climate change.Energy demand, led by swelling populations in emerging economies in Asia and Africa, will increase by at least 25 per cent by 2040. Yet carbon emissions would need to halve over the same period to comply with the Paris accord, posing a huge challenge for energy systems.“This is a wake-up call for governments and the energy industry,” said David Brown, one of the authors of the report, adding that policymakers needed to work more closely together despite some world governments such as the US moving away from multilateral diplomacy.
Over entire fuel cycle, nuclear emits less than every other source
No Author, 10, 7-27-2010, Everything you want to know about Nuclear Power, NuclearInfo, http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower
This website was developed by a group of Physicists from the School of Physics at the University of Melbourne in Australia. The aim is to provide authoritative information about Nuclear Power. The group has no particular vested interest in Nuclear Power other than to ensure that people fully understand the risks and benefits of both employing or not employing Nuclear Power for energy generation. The information has been obtained with quantitative analysis and has been subject to peer-review following the Scientific Method. To this end Scientists and Professionals from different fields were invited to review the site. We have strived to make our conclusions as transparent as possible and have made sure that readers can obtain the source materials and can repeat the calculations that underlie our text. This site is under continuous revision and is updated as more information becomes available. There is world-wide concern over the prospect of Global Warming primarily caused by the emission of Carbon Dioxide gas (CO2) from the burning of fossil fuels. Although the processes of running a Nuclear Power plant generates no CO2, some CO2 emissions arise from the construction of the plant, the mining of the Uranium, the enrichment of the Uranium, its conversion into Nuclear Fuel, its final disposal and the final plant decommissioning. The amount of CO2 generated by these secondary processes primarily depends on the method used to enrich the Uranium (the gaseous diffusion enrichment process uses about 50 times more electricity than the gaseous centrifuge method) and the source of electricity used for the enrichment process. It has been the subject of some controversy. To estimate the total CO2 emissions from Nuclear Power we take the work of the Swedish Energy Utility, Vattenfall, which produces electricity via Nuclear, Hydro, Coal, Gas, Solar Cell, Peat and Wind energy sources and has produced credited Environment Product Declarations for all these processes. Vattenfall finds that averaged over the entire lifecycle of their Nuclear Plant including Uranium mining, milling, enrichment, plant construction, operating, decommissioning and waste disposal, the total amount CO2 emitted per KW-Hr of electricity produced is 3.3 grams per KW-Hr of produced power. Vattenfall measures its CO2 output from Natural Gas to be 400 grams per KW-Hr and from coal to be 700 grams per KW-Hr. Thus nuclear power generated by Vattenfall, which may constitute World's best practice, emits less than one hundredth the CO2 of Fossil-Fuel based generation. In fact Vattenfall finds its Nuclear Plants to emit less CO2 than any of its other energy production mechanisms including Hydro, Wind, Solar and Biomass although all of these processes emit much less than fossil fuel generation of electricity.
Nuclear displaces fossil fuels - empirics prove
Caroline Delbert, 20, 1-27-2020, Nuclear Power Plants, Popular Mechanics, https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a30676167/nuclear-development-public-fear/
The research team from Carnegie Mellon University, led by Edson Severnini, says its study is the first to synthesize data from the entire U.S.. The “event” in the event study was when a nuclear power plant opened in the '70s and '80s. The team looked at the electric grid before and in the year after a nuclear plant went online, comparing how much fossil fuel electricity was displaced by nuclear power in the local grid. For each gigawatt hour (GWh) of nuclear power, the researchers found a corresponding 0.8 GWh reduction in fossil fuel power. Although the replacement isn’t a clean 1:1 ratio of nuclear for fossil, the effect is still dramatic. “Solely by displacing coal-fired electricity generation, the average nuclear plant opening results in nearly 2 million metric tons less CO2 emissions, 5,200 metric tons less SO2, and 2,200 metric tons less NOx within the first year,” the researchers write. As a second project, the team looked at output data from forced closures between 1999 and 2014. (Anyone who grew up near a nuclear plant knows the spooky feeling when cooling towers on the horizon are offline.) The researchers found that fossil fuel power then re-replaced nuclear at the same average rate, and this was the same for the calendar month and the utility bill month.
Even with renewables, CO2 still persists - renewables only work 30 of the time
Ken Schultz, 6-20-2010, Why use nuclear power? Cheap fossil fuels won’t last forever, San Diego Union-Tribune, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/commentary/sd-utbg-nuclear-power-schultz-20170428-story.html
The fuel would be reprocessed and the residual uranium, plutonium and other trans-uranics would be recycled into the next fuel load and the fission products would be separated out and put into monitored, retrievable storage for about 300 years as they decay to innocuous levels before they would be disposed of by burial, possible in the uranium mine where the ore first came from 300 years earlier. To keep an electrical supply grid functioning and stable, it must have sources of electricity — power plants — that can respond to changes in the supply of and demand for electricity. Wind and solar electric generators must follow the dictates of the weather and generally have an availability of about 30 percent. During the 70 percent of the time when renewable energy is not available, it must be replaced with something. Currently, electricity from coal or natural gas is used when renewables are not available, releasing carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Nuclear power could provide that electricity and help stabilize the electrical grid, without production of carbon dioxide. Global climate change due to the buildup of anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is widely recognized as a serious threat to humankind. The U.S. produces and releases to the atmosphere about 5,900 million tons of carbon dioxide each year. Of this, 38 percent is from burning of fossil fuels — coal and natural gas — to generate electricity. These fossil fuels provide 64 percent of our electricity with nuclear providing 22 percent and wind and solar 6 percent. Replacing fossil fuels for generation of electricity with nuclear and renewables would avoid release of 2,250 million tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Germany proves that renewables don’t work; France proves that nuclear works
Joshua S. Goldstein, Staffan A. Qvist and Steven Pinker, 19, 4-6-2019, Opinion, New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/opinion/sunday/climate-change-nuclear-power.html
Germany, which went all-in for renewables, has seen little reduction in carbon emissions, and, according to our calculations, at Germany’s rate of adding clean energy relative to gross domestic product, it would take the world more than a century to decarbonize, even if the country wasn’t also retiring nuclear plants early. A few lucky countries with abundant hydroelectricity, like Norway and New Zealand, have decarbonized their electric grids, but their success cannot be scaled up elsewhere: The world’s best hydro sites are already dammed. But we actually have proven models for rapid decarbonization with economic and energy growth: France and Sweden. They decarbonized their grids decades ago and now emit less than a tenth of the world average of carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour. They remain among the world’s most pleasant places to live and enjoy much cheaper electricity than Germany to boot. They did this with nuclear power. And they did it fast, taking advantage of nuclear power’s intense concentration of energy per pound of fuel. France replaced almost all of its fossil-fueled electricity with nuclear power nationwide in just 15 years; Sweden, in about 20 years. In fact, most of the fastest additions of clean electricity historically are countries rolling out nuclear power.
Nuclear power has reduced emissions - empirics prove
Pushker Kharecha and James Hansen — April 2013, NASA GISS: Science Brief: Coal and Gas are Far More Harmful than Nuclear Power, No Publication, https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/kharecha_02/
Using historical electricity production data and mortality and emission factors from the peer-reviewed scientific literature, we found that despite the three major nuclear accidents the world has experienced, nuclear power prevented an average of over 1.8 million net deaths worldwide between 1971-2009 (see Fig. 1). This amounts to at least hundreds and more likely thousands of times more deaths than it caused. An average of 76,000 deaths per year were avoided annually between 2000-2009 (see Fig. 2), with a range of 19,000-300,000 per year. Likewise, we calculated that nuclear power prevented an average of 64 gigatonnes of CO2-equivalent (GtCO2-eq) net GHG emissions globally between 1971-2009 (see Fig. 3). This is about 15 times more emissions than it caused. It is equivalent to the past 35 years of CO2 emissions from coal burning in the U.S. or 17 years in China (ref. 3) — i.e., historical nuclear energy production has prevented the building of hundreds of large coal-fired power plants. To compute potential future effects, we started with the projected nuclear energy supply for 2010-2050 from an assessment made by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency that takes into account the effects of the Fukushima accident (ref. 4). We assume that the projected nuclear energy is canceled and replaced entirely by energy from either coal or natural gas. We calculate that this nuclear phaseout scenario leads to an average of 420,000-7 million deaths and 80-240 GtCO2-eq emissions globally (the high-end values reflect the all coal case; see Figs. 1 and 3). This emissions range corresponds to 16-48 of the "allowable" cumulative CO2 emissions between 2012-2050 if the world chooses to aim for a target atmospheric CO2 concentration of 350 ppm by around the end of this century (ref. 5). In other words, projected nuclear power could reduce the CO2 mitigation burden for meeting this target by as much as 16-48.
2. Facilitating Carbon Capture
Direct air capture is financially viable in 10 years
Elizabeth Kolbert, 09/15/2018, Climate Solutions: Is It Feasible to Remove Enough CO2 from the Air?, Yale E360, https://e360.yale.edu/features/negative-emissions-is-it-feasible-to-remove-co2-from-the-air
Pacala: I think that afforestation, reforestation, changes in forest management, rebuilding the carbon backbone that maintains the fertility in our agricultural soils, and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage using waste biomass can supply material gains. With the direct air capture technologies, 10 years ago you would have said that’s just like a fairy tale. But because of diligent activity by a small number of technical people, there’s been very rapid progress, so much so that knowledgeable people who are not starry-eyed, but just hard-headed, believe that there is a very high probability that a research effort within 10 years would produce direct air capture at less than a dollar a gallon of gasoline. That’s $100 a ton of captured CO2. Imagine a scenario where you fly over to Germany and burn aviation gas on the way over, but we have a direct air capture machine that for $100 a ton takes CO2 out of the atmosphere and puts it in the ground to compensate. And the question is, how much did that cleansing of the atmosphere cost in terms of the fuel? The answer is an extra dollar a gallon. So it’s going from say, $2.50 to $3.50 a gallon. Now, aviation biogas, which is the alternative, costs way more than that, and it takes land away from other uses that we need. If you could get the carbon capture price down to 50 cents a gallon to solve the carbon and climate problem, how great is that? Our panel thinks direct air capture could be brought into the marketplace in a heavy way within 10 years’ time.
Carbon Capture only way for negative emissions
Brad Page, 3-22-2019, "Why carbon capture could be the game-changer the world needs," World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/03/why-carbon-capture-could-be-the-game-changer-the-world-needs/
One of the key technologies that is off-track in the IEA’s clean energy monitor is carbon capture and storage (CCS), a set of technologies that prevents carbon dioxide emissions from entering the atmosphere and safely stores them deep underground in dedicated geological storage. CCS first started to gain recognition in the 2000s as a means of capturing emissions from the dirtiest source of energy: coal-fired generation. This perception, that CCS is about delivering ‘clean coal’, coupled with the fact that its deployment globally has been slower than predicted has hung an albatross around its neck. The truth is that CCS has much wider applications. It remains the only technology that can deliver deep emissions reductions in hard-to-abate industrial sectors such as steel, fertiliser and cement. Decarbonising these sectors is not simply about electrifying them with zero-carbon power; most of these processes require either carbon in their chemistry or high heat input, neither of which electricity is able to provide. As global emissions continue to rise we are likely to overshoot our climate goals, and therefore carbon dioxide will need to be permanently removed from the atmosphere and used or stored. In fact, all four scenarios outlined in the IPCC SR15 report rely on carbon removal, with three of the four scenarios foreseeing significant amounts of carbon capture and storage. CCS can also have a role to play in generating power, as most emissions linked to energy infrastructure are already essentially locked-in. Coal-fired power plants, which account for one-third of energy-related CO2 emissions today, represent more than a third of cumulative locked-in emissions to 2040. Most of these plants are in Asia, where average coal plant is just 11 years old with decades left to operate. Looking ahead, more than 200 GW of coal capacity is under construction globally with 300 new plants to come online in the next few years in India and China alone. CCS is the only technology that can truly decarbonise these facilities.
Carbon capture uses a lot of energy
Michael Barnard, 1-19-2016, Carbon Capture Is Expensive Because Physics, CleanTechnica, https://cleantechnica.com/2016/01/19/carbon-capture-expensive-physics/
Typically, sorbents are dropped into a hot liquid bath to release the captured CO2. Heating the water up requires energy, and heating water takes a lot of energy. There’s lots of waste heat in coal and gas plants because most of the energy from burning coal and gas is wasted as heat, so this isn’t as big a problem, but that heat has to be directed to the correct place in the right amounts. Once again, more duct work, more processing, more fans and more controls. More expense. CO2 when captured is a gas. It’s very diffuse. In order to store it, it must be compressed or liquified. Compressing and liquifying via cooling are both highly energy-consuming processes. More expense. CO2 must typically be stored onsite in preparation for shipping. Given that the weight of the CO2 is 1.87 time the weight of coal and that CO2 must be stored in compressed or liquified form, this requires very large pressure vessels or very large pressure and insulated vessels. By comparison, coal can be piled on the ground before use. This means that the effluent requires a much greater expense for storage and handing than the feedstock.
Energy use is the biggest challenge to carbon capture
Carbon Brief, xx, xx-xx-xxxx, Direct CO2 capture machines could use ‘a quarter of global energy’ in 2100, https://www.carbonbrief.org/direct-co2-capture-machines-could-use-quarter-global-energy-in-2100
It also means the models see pathways to meeting climate goals that include DAC as having lower costs overall (“reduced… by between 60 to more than 90”). Gambhir tells Carbon Brief: “Deploying DAC means less of a steep mitigation pathway in the near-term, and lowers policy costs, according to the modelled scenarios we use in this study.” However, the paper also points to the significant challenges associated with such a large-scale, rapid deployment of DAC, in terms of energy use and the need for raw materials.The energy needed to run direct air capture machines in 2100 is up to 300 exajoules each year, according to the paper. This is more than half of overall global demand today, from all sources, and despite rising demand this century, it would still be a quarter of expected demand in 2100. To put it another way, it would be equivalent to the current annual energy demand of China, the US, the EU and Japan combined – or the global supply of energy from coal and gas in 2018.
Nuclear energy solves - 1 million times greater than alternatives
No Author, 9-25-2018, "3 Reasons Why Nuclear is Clean and Sustainable," Department of Nuclear Energy, https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/3-reasons-why-nuclear-clean-and-sustainable
A typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear facility in the United States needs a little more than 1 square mile to operate. NEI says wind farms require 360 times more land area to produce the same amount of electricity and solar photovoltaic plants require 75 times more space. To put that in perspective, you would need more than 3 million solar panels to produce the same amount of power as a typical commercial reactor or more than 430 wind turbines (capacity factor not included). See more comparisons here. 3. Nuclear energy produces minimal waste. Nuclear fuel is extremely dense. It’s about 1 million times greater than that of other traditional energy sources and because of this, the amount of used nuclear fuel is not as big as you might think. All of the used nuclear fuel produced by the U.S. nuclear energy industry over the last 60 years could fit on a football field at a depth of less than 10 yards! That waste can also be reprocessed and recycled, although the United States does not currently do this. However, some advanced reactors designs being developed could operate on used fuel.
Only nuclear can ramp up to large scale reliably and quickly
Joshua S. Goldstein and Staffan A. Qvist, 20, 3-7-2020, Only Nuclear Energy Can Save the Planet, WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/only-nuclear-energy-can-save-the-planet-11547225861
Even if we could develop renewables much faster, huge problems would remain. Although costs have dropped dramatically for solar and wind energy, they are not a direct, reliable replacement for coal and gas. When the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow, little or no energy is collected. And when nature does cooperate, the energy is sometimes wasted because it can’t be stored affordably. Bill Gates, who has invested $1 billion in renewables, notes that “there’s no battery technology that’s even close to allowing us to take all of our energy from renewables.” If substantially expanded, wind, solar and hydropower also would destroy vast tracts of farmland and forest. What the world needs is a carbon-free source of electricity that can be ramped up to massive scale very quickly and provide power reliably around the clock, regardless of weather conditions—all without expanding the total acreage devoted to electric generation. Nuclear power meets all of those requirements. When Sweden and France built nuclear reactors to replace fossil fuel in the 1970s and 1980s, they were able to add new electricity production relative to their GDPs at five times Germany’s speed for renewables. Sweden’s carbon emissions dropped in half even as its electricity production doubled. Electricity prices in nuclear-powered France today are 55 of those in Germany.
Nuclear is the only possible source to powering carbon capture
Bret Kugelmass, 1-22-2020, Want to stop climate change? Embrace the nuclear option., USA TODAY, https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/22/climate-change-solution-nuclear-energy-our-best-hope-column/2821183001/?fbclid=IwAR28oZLkmvrMBqkCBgn963lLkzPP9fZPAPLDf4XdVQ4JzV3hrtJwax7y1iI
Natural, biological methods of greenhouse gas removal can only work so fast — maybe a few billion tons a year — so it will take technological processes to achieve thermal balance in a meaningful time frame. These technological processes all require energy, a lot of energy. Consider how much energy it takes to move a ton of anything, then think about a trillion tons of carbon dioxide. And, because dioxide is very dilute, we also must move quadrillions of tons of the gas it is mixed with and then chemically process a trillion tons on top of that. Every energy source has a carbon footprint. Even renewables require energy and chemicals to move and transform raw materials into energy production systems. (To make solar panels, burning coal is necessary to transform silicon dioxide into the requisite purified silicon.) Here’s the crux: Since it takes energy to remove carbon and carbon is released in making energy, being "low-carbon" isn’t good enough! The energy source used needs to have such an extremely low carbon footprint that it can effectively power the capture and transformation of carbon dioxide. Regardless of cost and considering only the carbon math, the only possible energy source capable of powering atmospheric carbon dioxide removal — true negative emissions — is nuclear energy. This becomes obvious considering that any power source’s carbon footprint is a function of materials required to produce this energy. Using nuclear forces (the energy inside an atom), instead of chemical forces (the energy between atoms), we produce 3 million times as much power for the same amount of material. There’s still plenty of room for debate over values, adaptation, speed of change and robustness of scientific models. But when one side can’t imagine how the other side can be so wrong, it’s important to remember: Everyone ignores the science when it doesn’t support their values.
Carbon capture key to removing emissions - removes 37 gigatons CO2 a year
Neil Yeoh, 19, 12-9-2019, Removing CO2 depends on these 3 conditions, World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/12/climate-change-carbon-capture-conditions/
Similarly to how solar power requires sunshine, carbon removal solutions also require certain conditions to work effectively. If certain conditions are not met, the full carbon capture capacity of these technologies cannot be realized.A 2017 Michigan study optimistically suggests that carbon removal solutions have the potential to mitigate 37 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year, where annual emissions are roughly 38 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year. However, even if this were the case, reaching this storage potential would require a portfolio of solutions with carbon capture costs lower than traditional storage or emissions. Technological solutions are making progress - but investment and time are still required to reduce carbon removal costs and to scale-up the adoption of these solutions. A Swiss-company, Climeworks, has constructed a plant which extracts carbon dioxide directly from the air using a filter and chemical process, storing carbon dioxide as a concentrate. Technologies like these are known as Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS). Despite the novelty of this idea, Climeworks’ plant in Italy can only capture up to 150 tons of carbon dioxide per year from the atmosphere, equivalent to taking just 32 cars off the road. Combined with high capital and carbon removal costs, solutions like these alone are not sufficient.
Comprehensive IPCC study with over 6000 peer reviewed studies and 100 authors find every pathway to limiting climate change to 1.5°C requires carbon capture
IPCC, 18, 10-2018, Summary for Policymakers. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Shukla,
A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.). World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp, https://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf
C.2.7 Modelled pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot project a wide range of global average discounted marginal abatement costs over the 21st century. They are roughly 3-4 times higher than in pathways limiting global warming to below 2°C (high confidence). The economic literature distinguishes marginal abatement costs from total
mitigation costs in the economy. The literature on total mitigation costs of 1.5°C mitigation pathways is limited and was not assessed in this Report. Knowledge gaps remain in the integrated assessment of the economy-wide costs and benefits of mitigation in line with pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C. {2.5.2; 2.6; Figure 2.26} C.3 All pathways that limit global warming to 1.5°C with limited or no overshoot project the use of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) on the order of 100–1000 GtCO2 over the 21st century. CDR would be used to compensate for residual emissions and, in most cases, achieve net negative emissions to return global warming to 1.5°C following a peak (high confidence). CDR deployment of several hundreds of GtCO2 is subject to multiple feasibility and sustainability constraints (high confidence). Significant near-term emissions reductions and measures to lower energy and land demand can limit CDR deployment to a few hundred GtCO2 without reliance on bioenergy with carbon capture. and storage (BECCS) (high confidence). {2.3, 2.4, 3.6.2, 4.3, 5.4}
The first impact is air pollution.
Reduction of 180 gigatons CO2 by end of century saves 150 million lives
Drew Shindell, 3-19-2018, "Quantified, localized health benefits of accelerated carbon dioxide emissions reductions," Nature Climate Change, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0108-y
Societal risks increase as Earth warms, and increase further for emissions trajectories accepting relatively high levels of near-term emissions while assuming future negative emissions will compensate, even if they lead to identical warming as trajectories with reduced near-term emissions1. Accelerating carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reductions, including as a substitute for negative emissions, hence reduces long-term risks but requires dramatic near-term societal transformations2. A major barrier to emissions reductions is the difficulty of reconciling immediate, localized costs with global, long-term benefits3,4. However, 2?°C trajectories not relying on negative emissions or 1.5?°C trajectories require elimination of most fossil-fuel-related emissions. This generally reduces co-emissions that cause ambient air pollution, resulting in near-term, localized health benefits. We therefore examine the human health benefits of increasing 21st-century CO2 reductions by 180?GtC, an amount that would shift a ‘standard’ 2?°C scenario to 1.5?°C or could achieve 2?°C without negative emissions. The decreased air pollution leads to 153?±?43 million fewer premature deaths worldwide, with 40 occurring during the next 40 years, and minimal climate disbenefits. More than a million premature deaths would be prevented in many metropolitan areas in Asia and Africa, and 200,000 in individual urban areas on every inhabited continent except Australia.
The second impact is climate change.
Umair Irfan, 19, 4-24-2019, Why the US bears the most responsibility for climate change, in one chart, Vox,https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/4/24/18512804/climate-change-united-states-china-emissions/
Back in April, the wonderful folks at Carbon Brief put together a great visual of how different countries have contributed to climate change since 1750. The animation shows the cumulative carbon dioxide emissions of the top emitters and how they’ve changed over time. Take a look: What’s abundantly clear is that the United States of America is the all-time biggest, baddest greenhouse gas emitter on the planet. That’s true, despite recent gains in energy efficiency and cuts in emissions. These relatively small steps now cannot offset more than a century of reckless emissions that have built up in the atmosphere. Much more drastic steps are now needed to slow climate change. And as the top cumulative emitter, the US bears a greater imperative for curbing its carbon dioxide output and a greater moral responsibility for the impacts of global warming. Yet the US is now the only country aiming to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. China now emits more than the US, and India’s emissions are rapidly rising. But these countries have a much smaller share of cumulative global emissions. Their populations are also much bigger than the US and other wealthier countries, so the amount that India and China emit per person is vastly smaller than the United States or the United Kingdom.
We are headed towards 4 degrees - nuclear is the only way to keep global temperatures rises below 2 degrees
Mark Lynas, 12, 9-14-2012, Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost, Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/14/nuclear-global-warming?newsfeed=true A madness is taking hold. In the same week as Arctic ice cover is recorded at its lowest ever extent, two major countries decide to reduce or eliminate their use of the only proven source of low-carbon power that can be deployed at sufficient scale to tackle our climate crisis. Japan plans to phase out nuclear entirely by 2030, its prime minister announced today. The French president has just revealed a plan to dramatically reduce the country's reliance on nuclear, which currently gives France some of the cleanest electricity in the world. Let me be very clear. Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost. Even many greens now admit this in private moments. We are already witnessing the first signs of the collapse in the biosphere this entails – with the Arctic in full-scale meltdown, more solar radiation is being captured by the dark ocean surface, and the weather systems of the entire northern hemisphere are being thrown into chaos. With nuclear, there is a chance that global warming this century can be limited to 2C; without nuclear, I would guess we are heading for 4C or above. That will devastate ecosystems and societies worldwide on a scale which is unimaginable. Given the trauma the Japanese people have suffered since the earthquake and tsunami of 11 March 2011, it is understandable that major questions are asked of domestic politicians. But we must never forget that Fukushima has killed no one. More people in Japan recently died from an E coli outbreak due to eating contaminated pickles. Scientists also agree there will never be an observable cancer increase in the Japanese population attributable to Fukushima.
4 degrees is really really really really really bad - change in policy is key
Gaia Vince, 19, 5-18-2019, The heat is on over the climate crisis. Only radical measures will work, Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/18/climate-crisis-heat-is-on-global-heating-four-degrees-2100-change-way-we-live
All of nature will be affected by the change in climate, ecosystems and hydrology and there will be plenty of extinctions as species struggle to migrate and adapt to an utterly changed world. Daniel Rothman, co-director of MIT’s Lorenz Center, calculates that 2100 will herald the beginning of Earth’s sixth mass extinction event. But what about us? This is undoubtedly a more hostile, dangerous world for humanity, which by 2100 will number around 11 billion, all of whom will need food, water, power and somewhere to live. It will be, in a giant understatement, problematic. The good news is that humans won’t become extinct – the species can survive with just a few hundred individuals; the bad news is, we risk great loss of life and perhaps the end of our civilisations. Many of the places where people live and grow food will no longer be suitable for either. Higher sea levels will make today’s low-lying islands and many coastal regions, where nearly half the global population live, uninhabitable, generating an estimated 2 billion refugees by 2100. Bangladesh alone will lose one-third of its land area, including its main breadbasket. From 2030, more than half the population will live in the tropics, an area that makes up a third of the planet and already struggles with climate impacts. Yet by 2100, most of the low and mid latitudes will be uninhabitable because of heat stress or drought; despite stronger precipitation, the hotter soils will lead to faster evaporation and most populations will struggle for fresh water. We will have to live on a smaller land surface with a larger population. Indeed, the consequences of a 4C warmer world are so terrifying that most scientists would rather not contemplate them, let alone work out a survival strategy.
wE cAn lEave oUr gRAndChildRen a bRigHT fUTurE oF cliMAte sTabiLity aND aBUnDanT eNerGy
Joshua S. Goldstein, Staffan A. Qvist and Steven Pinker, 19, 4-6-2019, Opinion, No Publication, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/opinion/sunday/climate-change-nuclear-power.html
Despite these challenges, psychology and politics can change quickly. As the enormity of the climate crisis sinks in and the hoped-for carbon savings from renewables don’t add up, nuclear can become the new green. Protecting the environment and lifting the developing world out of poverty are progressive causes. And the millennials and Gen Z’s might rethink the sacred values their boomer parents have left unexamined since the Doobie Brothers sang at the 1979 No Nukes concert. If the American public and politicians can face real threats and overcome unfounded fears, we can solve humanity’s most pressing challenge and leave our grandchildren a bright future of climate stability and abundant energy. We can dispatch, once and for all, the self-fulfilling prophesy that we’re cooked. | 905,513 |
334 | 380,230 | 2 - Nocember AFF - ISIS, Iran, and North Korea | Paraphrased and cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,538 |
335 | 380,237 | 5 - April AFF v1 - Saudi-Iran, US-Iran war, and Yemen | Tensions high - conflict about to escalate
Jose Clavijo, 7-11-2019, "Middle Eastern Conflict Scenarios: How Wars Between Iran and the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia Play Out," The Geopolitics, https://thegeopolitics.com/middle-eastern-conflict-scenarios-how-wars-between-iran-and-the-us-israel-and-saudi-arabia-play-out/
Due to its dependency on Iranian and Shiite militias for its survival, it’s likely that the Syrian regime will also get involved. Outside powers might also intervene. The US has contingency plans for a joint US-Israeli military response to an Iranian missile attack on Israeli territory. Russia will probably use its considerable regional influence – even though it supports the Syrian regime and is allied with Iran, it also maintains good relations with Turkey and Israel – to broker a ceasefire. The prospect of war between the two regional powers was in the spotlight in late 2017. Even though it has since subsided, tensions remain high and could erupt at any moment. The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia is partially sectarian, but mostly geopolitical. Teheran wants to expand its influence in the Middle East and acquire strategic depth; Riyadh is intent on containing it and preserve its position as the status quo power. Both are already involved in proxy wars that span the Shiite Crescent and Yemen. Teheran’s comparatively advantageous position vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia in these localized conflicts would preclude it from initiating a direct military confrontation. By developing nimble strategies that exploit the regions’ inherent turmoil and sectarian tensions, the Islamic Republic has obtained high returns with minimal investments both in matériel and personnel. But were there to be an open confrontation, it would probably be due to an escalation of tensions, and not an unwarranted attack by either one. An Iranian-provided missile launched by the Houthis successfully hitting a major Saudi city and causing high casualties, say, or continued Iranian meddling in the monarchy’s oil rich and strategic Eastern Province – whose population is majority Shiite – could serve as triggers. Still, the impetuous conduct of the young Saudi Crown Prince is also of concern, as can be seen in the kingdoms’ adventurism in Yemen and Qatar.
US withdrawal causes Saudi negotiations
Kristian Coates, 2-2-2020, “REBALANCING REGIONAL SECURITY IN THE PERSIAN GULF,” Center for the Middle East, https://www.bakerinstitute.org/media/files/files/de9f09e6/cme-pub-persiangulf-022420.pdf
Most spectacular of all—and the most cathartic for U.S. partners in the Persian Gulf—was the drone and missile strike on Saudi oil infrastructure on September 14 that targeted Aramco’s giant oil-processing facility at Abqaiq as well as the Khurais oilfield. The swarm of drones and cruise missiles fired from an (as-yet) unknown location evaded Saudi missile defense systems and knocked out, albeit only temporarily, 5.7 million barrels of Saudi Arabia’s total of 9.8 million barrels of oil produced per day.44 The scale and the success of the attacks underscored the vulnerability of the expensively procured defensive systems in Saudi Arabia and other GCC states to guard against asymmetric rather than conventional threats.45 A “Saudi security analyst,” speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, captured the sense of shock in the kingdom when s/he stated that “The attack is like September 11th for Saudi Arabia, it is a game changer (…) Where are the air defense systems and the U.S. weaponry for which we spent billions of dollars to protect the kingdom and its oil facilities? If they did this with such precision, they can also hit the desalination plants and more targets.” Just as shocking to leaders in Saudi Arabia and the UAE as the need to urgently reassess threat perceptions and defense capabilities was the Trump administration’s reactions to the pattern of attacks between May and September 2019. The lack of a visible U.S. response to the May and September attacks on shipping or to the assault on the nerve center of the Saudi economy made the Saudis and other American partners in GCC states reassess the nature of the U.S. security guarantee they had until then (largely) taken for granted.47 Trump denied he had offered the Saudis any pledge of protection after the Aramco attacks and added pointedly that “That was an attack on Saudi Arabia, and that wasn’t an attack on us.”48 Resulitng from The inaction from the U.S. was all the more pronounced when compared with Trump’s response to the downing of the U.S. drone in June 2019, when the U.S. launched a cyber attack against Iran’s electronic warfare capabilities, 49 or after the killing of an American contractor and the storming of the U.S. embassy compound in Iraq in December, when Trump ordered the drone attack that killed Qassim Soleimani on January 3, 2020.50 Statements by officials and prominent commentators in late 2019 and early 2020 illustrated the concerns many in GCC states felt at U.S. decision-making and prompted policymakers in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi to re-examine their own hitherto assertive approaches to regional affairs. A delegation from the UAE traveled to Iran in late July 2019 to discuss coast guard and related maritime security issues, shortly after the UAE had announced a troop redeployment and drawdown in Yemen as well.51 In the weeks after the Saudi attacks in September, the Saudi leadership made discreet approaches to their counterparts in Pakistan and Iraq in a bid to open back-channels of dialogue with Iran to de-escalate tension. Iraq’s prime minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, stated in late September that “There is a big response from Saudi Arabia and from Iran and even from Yemen, and I think these endeavors will have a good effect.”52 Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, appeared to endorse such sentiment, telling Al Jazeera that “Iran is open to starting a dialogue with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region.”53 Pronouncements in GCC states increasingly began to diverge from the U.S. approach in the final months of 2019 and later evolved into different reactions to the sharp escalation in U.S.-Iran tension that accompanied the killing of Soleimani and the Iranian retaliation against U.S. military targets in Iraq. Abulkhaleq Abdulla, a retired Emirati academic often described as an advisor to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, blasted Trump after the Saudi attacks, stating that “in his response to Iran, he is even worse than Obama (…) Now an Arab Gulf strategic partner has been massively attacked by Iran—which was provoked by Trump, not by us—and we hear Americans saying to us, ‘you need to defend yourselves’!”54 After the U.S. decision to kill Soleimani in January 2020, attitudes hardened, with a “Gulf diplomatic source” voicing (anonymously) a concern felt across the GCC that “Our most important ally, a world power who is here on the pretense of stabilizing the region, is destabilizing the region and taking all of us with them without a second thought.”55
Saudi Arabia would lose a war without the US
Jeremy Shapiro and Richard Sokolsky, 5-4-2016, "How America enables its allies’ bad behavior," Brookings, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2016/05/04/how-america-enables-its-allies-bad-behavior/
Alas, 35 years into that experiment, in July 2013, the Egyptian officer corps overthrew the democratically elected Egyptian government and has since brutally suppressed all opposition to their rule. A U.S.-trained former Army general is now Egypt’s dictator, but he shows little special inclination toward democracy or Western interests. Saudi Arabia is yet another example. The Saudi regime is totally dependent on US military, logistics, training, and intelligence support. The Kingdom has no strategic alternative to U.S. protection, and its leaders know it. Yet Saudi frequently acts against US interests in the region: trying to stop the Iran nuclear deal, funding Islamic extremist causes across the region, and undermining U.S. efforts to negotiate an end to the war in Syria. So why do successive administrations continue to provide massive handouts to America’s clients when we often get little—and sometimes worse—in return
US presence ends diplomacy
Trita Parsi, 1-6-2020, "The Middle East Is More Stable When the United States Stays Away," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/06/the-middle-east-is-more-stable-when-the-united-states-stays-away/
It has been a mantra of U.S. foreign policy for a decade or more that, without the United States, the Middle East would descend into chaos. Or even worse, Iran would resurrect the Persian Empire and swallow the region whole. Yet when U.S. President Donald Trump opted not to go to war with Iran after a series of Iranian-attributed attacks on Saudi Arabia last year and declared his intentions to pull troops out of the region, it wasn’t chaos or conquest that ensued. Rather, nascent regional diplomacy—particularly among Iran and, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—and de-escalation followed. However, To be sure, the cards were reshuffled again in January, when Trump ordered the assassination of Qassem Suleimani, one of Iran’s most important military figures. Courtesy of Trump, the region is once more moving toward conflict, and the early signs of diplomatic progress achieved during the preceding months have vanished. It is thus time for Washington to answer a crucial question that it has long evaded: Has America’s military dominance in the Middle East prevented regional actors from peacefully resolving conflicts on their own? And in that way, has it been an impediment to stability rather than the guarantor of it? Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, U.S. President Jimmy Carter proclaimed a new doctrine: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region,” he stated, “will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.” In the context of the Cold War, preventing the Soviets—the main outside force Carter was worried about—from gaining control over the energy-rich region had a strategic logic.
Lack of diplomacy triggers war
Jose Clavijo, 7-11-2019, "Middle Eastern Conflict Scenarios: How Wars Between Iran and the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia Play Out," The Geopolitics, https://thegeopolitics.com/middle-eastern-conflict-scenarios-how-wars-between-iran-and-the-us-israel-and-saudi-arabia-play-out/
The prospect of war between the two regional powers was in the spotlight in late 2017. Even though it has since subsided, tensions remain and could erupt at any moment. The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia is partially sectarian, but mostly geopolitical. Teheran wants to expand its influence in the Middle East and acquire strategic depth; Riyadh is intent on containing it and preserve its position as the status quo power. Both are already involved in proxy wars that span the Shiite Crescent and Yemen. Teheran’s comparatively advantageous position vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia in these localized conflicts would preclude it from initiating a direct military confrontation. By developing nimble strategies that exploit the regions’ inherent turmoil and sectarian tensions, the Islamic Republic has obtained high returns with minimal investments both in matériel and personnel.But were there to be an open confrontation, it would probably be due to an escalation of tensions, and not an unwarranted attack by either one. An Iranian-provided missile launched by the Houthis successfully hitting a major Saudi city and causing high casualties, say, or continued Iranian meddling in the monarchy’s oil rich and strategic Eastern Province – whose population is majority Shiite – could serve as triggers. Still, the impetuous conduct of the young Saudi Crown Prince is also of concern, as can be seen in the kingdoms’ adventurism in Yemen and Qatar.
Regional war draws in other actors
Jeremi Suri, 1-3-2017, "Blustering Toward Armageddon," American Prospect, https://prospect.org/world/blustering-toward-armageddon/
Here is how the danger could unfold. Trump promises at the start of his administration to tear up the Iranian nuclear agreement, possibly leading Tehran to resume its nuclear weapons program and become a nuclear power in a few months. With that prospect in view, Israel will likely do what it has advocated for at least eight years: It will take preventive military action-a combination of air strikes and covert sabotage programs-to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. At the same time, if not before, Israeli leaders are likely to press the United States to recognize Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv, as their official capital, and initiate a new set of settlements in the occupied territories. Trump will likely approve of all of these belligerent actions. The fighting in the Middle East between these states could rapidly escalatinge the conflict and affecting American assets, forcing a response in Washington. President Trump will initially side with Israel and Saudi Arabia, as all presidents have in the recent past, which could bring the United States to the brink of war with Iran and its allies, including Iraq. By the second half of Trump's first term, if this scenario plays out, we should expect a large American ground presence again in the Middle East, more terrorism sponsored from the region reaching the United States and western Europe, and the possibility of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel. We will long for the days of contained conflict in the region and sub-state threats, including al-Qaeda and ISIS. State-to-state conflict in the region will be much worse, and very difficult to resolve.
Countries have geopolitical interests in the Middle East
Anna Forostenko, 4-22-2011, "Worst Case Scenario: Will Ongoing Conflicts Lead To a World War?," Global Research, https://www.globalresearch.ca/worst-case-scenario-will-ongoing-conflicts-lead-to-a-world-war/24453
This is happening not so roughly and blankly like during the colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics. Clearly, the coordinators of these processes have learned to assess the specifics of each country creatively. At present, all is done skillfully, delicately, and accurately using various aspects of information technology for each country by taking into account local specifics.”
-According to several experts, Syria is becoming the battlefield where the interests of Saudi Arabia and Iran clash. Most likely, Saudi Arabia has a country to lean on, the United States. This means the entire region will face a serious conflict and world powers will be involved. The conflicts in the Middle East and Africa are growing. An opinion poll conducted among experts by the Voice of Russia shows that they believe that in a worst-case scenario, these conflicts could lead to a world war. The outcome of presidential election triggered clashes in Nigeria. According to official reports, incumbent president Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian from the south, won 60 percent of votes, while his opponent, Muhammadu Buhari won only little more than 30 percent. The opposition is dissatisfied with the results. As a result, Buhari’s supporters launched attacks on Christians and even set fire to several churches. In response, young Christians attacked mosques. Some experts draw a parallel between Nigeria and Cote d’Ivoire, disintegration of which into North and South was averted only after the interference of the UN peacekeepers and the French forces. This means that Nigeria may experience a similar fate. It will have to get foreign assistance or it will disintegrate. Meanwhile, the foreign factor could trigger disintegration of Libya, says a senior lecture of the political science faculty of the St. Petersburg University, Gumer Isaev. “Libya will disintegrate only in case its situation is deadlocked. This will depend on whether there will be foreign interference or not. If foreign countries interfere, Libya will be divided into at least two parts,” Gumer Isaev said. The head of the department of Central Asia and Kazakhstan of the Institute of the CIS countries, Andrei Grozin disagrees with him. The historical borders of Libya were established artificially after colonial rule, and consequently, the country will hardly remain within these borders in the future, says the expert. It’s a different case that ongoing uprisings in several countries have been triggered only by internal problems such as unemployment, poor income, dissatisfied young people and privileges to a small group of people. Lately, a third force has been backing these uprisings, says Andrei Grozin. “This is happening not so roughly and blankly like during the colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics. Clearly, the coordinators of these processes have learned to assess the specifics of each country creatively. At present, all is done skillfully, delicately, and accurately using various aspects of information technology for each country by taking into account local specifics, Andrei Grozin said. Possibly, Salafis could be such a group in Syria. According to Syrian authorities, they are behind the unrest in Homs and Baniyas. However, this could only be the tip of the iceberg. According to several experts, Syria is becoming the battlefield where the interests of Saudi Arabia and Iran clash.Most likely, Saudi Arabia has a country to lean on, the United States. This means the entire region will face a serious conflict and world powers will be involved. This will be a conflict between various political orientations. Saudi Arabia will be backed by the U.S. and several countries of the European Union, while Iran will be supported by third world nations and perhaps China. However, neither the U.S nor the EU tries to think about such a scenario. At present, the process is almost unnoticeable but if it goes out of control, emergency steps should be taken.
US-Iran tensions are also high
Nader Entessar, 7-2-2019, "A nuclear war in the Persian Gulf?," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/07/a-nuclear-war-in-the-persian-gulf/
Tensions between the United States and Iran are spiraling toward a military confrontation that carries a real possibility that the United States will use nuclear weapons. Iran’s assortment of asymmetrical capabilities—all constructed to be effective against the United States—nearly assures such a confrontation. The current US nuclear posture leaves the Trump administration at least open to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters. Some in the current administration may well think it to be in the best interest of the United States to seek a quick and decisive victory in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf—and to do so by using its nuclear arsenal. We believe there is a heightened possibility of a US-Iran war triggering a US nuclear strike for the following reasons: The sanction regime set against the Iranian economy is so brutal that it is likely to force Iran to take an action that will require a US military response. Unless the United States backs down from its present self-declared “economic warfare” against Iran, this will likely escalate to an open warfare between the two countries. In response to a White House request to draw up an Iran war plan, the Pentagon proposed sending 120,000 soldiers to the Persian Gulf. This force would augment the several thousands of troops already stationed in Iran’s vicinity. President Trump has also hinted that if need be, he will be sending “a lot more” troops. Defeating Iran through conventional military means would likely require a half million US forces and US preparedness for many casualties. The US nuclear posture review is worded in such a way that the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters is envisaged, foreshadowing the concern that in a showdown with a menacing foe like Iran, the nuclear option is on the table. The United States could once again justify using nuclear force for the sake of a decisive victory and casualty-prevention, the logic used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If the US doesn’t withdraw, war will be triggered
Ahmed Aboudouh, 4-1-2020, "Ahmed Aboudouh: Iraq faces all-out military conflict if US troops don’t leave soon," Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/us-troops-military-conflict-iraq-iran-trump-a9460496.html
But any news about withdrawing US troops from Iraq means utter dismay for the Sunnis and the Kurds. The presence of US forces is for them an insurance policy against a comeback by Isis and, more importantly, it strikes a delicate balance between all Iraqi religious sects and political powers. The government of Kurdistan (an autonomous region in the north) was determined to maintain the American presence. Allawi told me: “I felt the Kurds were more than ready to grant the US troops alternative military bases if they are to be driven out by the central government in Baghdad.” This means, he says, “Iraq’s political rupture for good”. The escalation by US troops and the Iran-backed militias is putting Iraq at risk of an all-out military conflict. This trims down the possible scenarios for the US future in Iraq to only two: all-out war or a departure sooner rather than later. As ambassador Tueller told Allawi in their meeting: “We are not planning to stay here forever.” An Iranian success in forcing the US out of Iraq might now seem more feasible.
War goes nuclear
Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, 7-2-2019, "A nuclear war in the Persian Gulf?," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/07/a-nuclear-war-in-the-persian-gulf/
In response to a White House request to draw up an Iran war plan, the Pentagon proposed sending 120,000 soldiers to the Persian Gulf. This force would augment the several thousands of troops already stationed in Iran’s vicinity. President Trump has also hinted that if need be, he will be sending “a lot more” troops. Defeating Iran through conventional military means would likely require a half million US forces and US preparedness for many casualties. The US nuclear posture review is worded in such a way that the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters is envisaged, foreshadowing the concern that in a showdown with a menacing foe like Iran, the nuclear option is on the table. The United States could once again justify using nuclear force as for the sake of a decisive victory and casualty-prevention, the logic used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Trump’s cavalier attitude toward nuclear weapons, trigger-happy penchant, and utter disdain for Iran, show that he would likely have no moral qualm about issuing an order to launch a limited nuclear strike, especially in a US-Iran showdown, one in which the oil transit from the Gulf would be imperiled, impacting the global economy and necessitating a speedy end to such a war. If the United States were to commit a limited nuclear strike against Iran, it would minimize risks to its forces in the region, defang the Iranian military, divest the latter of preeminence in the Strait of Hormuz, and thus reassert US power in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf. Oil flowing through the Strait of Hormuz is critical to a rising China. US control over this merchant waterway would grant the United States significant leverage in negotiations. A limited US nuclear strike could cause a ‘regime change’ among Iranian leadership, representing a strategic setback for Russia, in light of their recent foray in the Middle East with Iranian backing.
Miscalculation can trigger war in the Middle East
Yevgeny Primakov, 5-9-2009, "The Fundamental Conflict," Russia in Global Affairs, https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/the-fundamental-conflict/
After the end of the Cold War, some scholars and political observers concluded that a real threat of the Arab-Israeli conflict going beyond regional frameworks ceased to exist. However, in the 21st century this conclusion no longer conforms to the reality. The U.S. military operation in Iraq has changed the balance of forces in the Middle East. The disappearance of the Iraqi counterbalance has brought Iran to the fore as a regional power claiming a direct role in various Middle East processes. I do not belong to those who believe that the Iranian leadership has already made a political decision to create nuclear weapons of its own. Yet Tehran seems to have set itself the goal of achieving a technological level that would let it make such a decision (the “Japanese model”) under unfavorable circumstances. Israel already possesses nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. In such circumstances, the absence of a Middle East settlement opens a dangerous prospect of a nuclear collision in the region, which would have catastrophic consequences for the whole world. The transition to a multipolar world has objectively strengthened the role of states and organizations that are directly involved in regional conflicts, which increases the latter’s danger and reduces the possibility of controlling them. This refers, above all, to the Middle East conflict. The coming of Barack Obama to the presicdency has allayed fears that the United States could deliver a preventive strike against Iran (under George W. Bush, it was one of the most discussed topics in the United States). However, fears have increased that such a strike can be launched by Israel, which would have unpredictable consequences for the region and beyond. It seems that President Obama’s position does not completely rule out
Nuke war causes extinction
Steven Starr, 5-30-2014, "The Lethality of Nuclear Weapons," Institute for Political Economy, https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/05/30/lethality-nuclear-weapons/
Nuclear war has no winner. Beginning in 2006, several of the world’s leading climatologists (at Rutgers, UCLA, John Hopkins University, and the University of Colorado-Boulder) published a series of studiesthat evaluated the long-term environmental consequences of a nuclear war, including baseline scenarios fought with merely 1 of the explosive power in the US and/or Russian launch-ready nuclear arsenals. They concluded that the consequences of even a “small” nuclear war would include catastrophic disruptions of global climatei and massive destruction of Earth’s protective ozone layerii. These and
more recent studies predict that global agriculture would be so negatively affected by such a war, a global famine that would result, which would cause up to 2 billion people to starve to death. iii These peer-reviewed studies – which were analyzed by the best scientists in the world and found to be without error – also predict that a war fought with less than half of US or Russian strategic nuclear weapons would destroy the human race.
Arms sales are military presence
Shimon Arad, 9-28-2018, "Trump’s Arms Exports Policy: Debunking Key Assumptions," War on the Rocks, https://warontherocks.com/2018/09/trumps-arms-exports-policy-debunking-key-assumptions/
The Trump administration recently released its new Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) policy designed to increase the already well-established U.S. dominance of the global arms market. Increasing arms exports is seen as an important part of the administration’s aim to strengthen America’s economy and security. Traditionally, U.S. arms exports have been used as tools of power and influence, giving it political leverage over clients. Paradoxically, however, the emphasis placed on the economic utility of arms sales by the Trump administration is increasing the bargaining power of clients, thereby reducing U.S. political sway. The leverage of client states and the U.S. arms industry is leading the administration to release advanced military capabilities earlier than it would have done otherwise and to play down human rights considerations raised by Congress.
Ironically, additional economic and security steps being taken by the Trump administration may be undermining some of the intended benefits of the new CAT policy. The president’s economic protectionist agenda, including the imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminum supposedly because of national security considerations, could undermine U.S. defense sales by driving up prices or by prompting retaliation from affected arms clients.
Political tensions between Washington and some its allies and partners – especially in NATO — may also be encouraging them to find ways to decrease their dependence on American-made subsystems and to increase defense industrial cooperation between them to the exclusion of the United States. This could potentially reduce future U.S. arms and subsystem sales to these countries and increase competition with them for global markets.
Trump’s Conventional Arms Transfer Policy
The first CAT policy was introduced by President Jimmy Carter on May 19, 1977. Its underlying principle was that arms transfers were to be treated with a strong presumption of denial “as an exceptional foreign policy implement” with “the burden of persuasion … on those who favor a particular sale, rather than those who oppose it.”
To further this policy of self-imposed restraint, Carter instituted a ceiling on the total dollar value of American arms transfers to all but a few traditional allies. He pledged that the United States would not be the first supplier to introduce into Third World areas “newly developed, advanced weapons systems which could create a new or significantly higher combat capability.” In implementing this policy, Carter issued the so-called “leprosy letter,” instructing American diplomats abroad to refrain from assisting the U.S. arms industry in its efforts to secure foreign buyers.
In April, the Trump administration launched the fifth iteration of the CAT policy, designed to increase the exports of U.S. arms as an integral part of its “America First” policy agenda. The present version of the CAT policy prioritizes arms transfers as an important tool of American foreign policy and, in stark contrast to the vision of Carter, is predicated on a strong assumption of approval and the active advocacy of the U.S. government and its diplomats with foreign leaders and governments to buy American-made arms.
Saudi Arabia needs US arms for the war in yemen
Ali Harb, 3-1-2019, "Saudi Arabia would end Yemen war without US support, experts say," Middle East Eye, https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/saudi-arabia-would-end-yemen-war-without-us-support-experts-say
Ending American assistance to the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen would curtail Riyadh's war efforts and hasten the end of what the United Nations describes as the world's worst humanitarian crisis, experts says A push by US lawmakers to end support for the war once appeared largely symbolic, with only a few Democrats in the Republican-controlled Congress putting forward a proposal, but now legislators may be set to pass a measure that would halt US assistance to Saudi-led forces in Yemen.
That would have a critical impact, said Robert Jordan, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia in the early 2000s, who described US support asis crucial to Riyadh's military capabilities. "If we suspend providing spare parts for their F-15s, their air force would be grounded in two weeks," Jordan told Middle East Eye last week. "So I think there is every prospect that, if that occurs, they will find it more appealing to go to the peace table and negotiate than they currently do."
The proposed US legislation cleared the House of Representatives last month, and the Senate, which approved a similar motion late last year, is expected to vote on it again in the near future.
The bill invokes the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which prohibits the involvement in a foreign conflict without congressional authorisation. President Donald Trump has vowed to veto the legislation, which would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate to override.
'Extremely important'
Khalil Jahshan, executive director of the Arab Center Washington DC, said both Washington and Riyadh would like to downplay the impact of American involvement in Yemen, but the US role in the war remains "extremely important" logistically and politically.
Beyond helping with military assistance, Washington provides "psychological and strategic cover" to Saudi war efforts, he said.
"If it weren't for American support, if that were to be withdrawn in the future ... I think Saudi Arabia would feel compelled to end that war faster than they would like," Jahshan said.
While Trump is often criticised for his cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia's rulers, the conflict in Yemen started under his predecessor, Barack Obama.
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates started a massive bombing campaign in Yemen in 2015 to restore the government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi after Houthi rebels captured the capital, Sanaa.
US support enables peace talks
Mohamad Bazzi, 9-30-2018, "The United States Could End the War in Yemen If It Wanted To," Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/iran-yemen-saudi-arabia/571465/
As public anger over America’s role in the Saudi-led war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen has grown, Congress has slowly tried to exert pressure on America’s longtime allies to reduce civilian casualties. Last month, a bipartisan group of lawmakers included a provision in the defense-spending bill requiring the Trump administration to certify that Saudi Arabia and the UAE are taking “demonstrable actions” to avoid harming civilians and making a “good faith” effort to reach a political settlement to end the war. Congress required the administration to make this certification a prerequisite for the Pentagon to continue providing military assistance to the coalition. This assistance, much of which began under the Obama administration, includes the mid-air refueling of Saudi and Emirati jets, intelligence assistance, and billions of dollars worth of missiles, bombs, and spare parts for the Saudi air force.
On September 12, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo assured Congress that the coalition was trying to minimize civilian casualties and enable deliveries of humanitarian aid to Yemen. Yet his claim contradicted virtually every other independent assessment of the war, including a recent report by a group of United Nations experts and several Human Rights Watch investigations that alleged the coalition had committed war crimes. Meanwhile, in a memo Pompeo sent to Congress, he noted another reason for continued U.S. support for the coalition: containing Iran and its influence on the Houthis.
Like the Saudis and Emiratis, the Trump administration sees in the Houthis the same sort of threat as other Iranian-backed groups such as Hezbollah, which has sent thousands of fighters to help Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. In late August, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations tweeted a photo that had circulated in the Arab press of a meeting in Beirut between the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Houthi officials. U.S. officials claimed it showed “the nature of the regional terrorist threat,” and added: “Iranian proxies in Lebanon and Yemen pose major dangers to peace and stability in the entire Middle East.” But beyond recent missile attacks on Saudi Arabia—in retaliation for Saudi air strikes—the Houthis have displayed little regional ambition. Ironically, as the war drags on, the Houthis will grow more dependent on support from Iran and its allies.
By accepting the coalition’s cosmetic attempts to minimize civilian casualties, the Trump administration is signaling to Saudi and Emirati leaders its apparent belief that a clear military victory in Yemen remains possible. And as long as the coalition believes it can crush the Houthis, there’s little incentive for it to negotiate. Trump, then, has bought into Saudi Arabia’s zero-sum calculation: that a military win in Yemen for the kingdom and its allies would be a defeat for Iran, while a negotiated settlement with the Houthis would be a victory for Tehran. Blinded by its obsession with Iran, the Trump administration is perpetuating an unwinnable war and undermining the likelihood of a political settlement. Saudi and Emirati leaders want a clear-cut victory in their regional rivalry with Iran, and they have been emboldened by the Trump administration’s unconditional support to stall negotiations. A recent UN effort to hold peace talks between the Houthis, Hadi’s government, and the Saudi-led coalition collapsed in early September, after the Houthi delegation did not show up in Geneva. Houthi leaders said the Saudis, who control Yemen’s airspace, would not guarantee their safe travel. Days later, Yemeni forces loyal to the Saudi-UAE alliance launched a new offensive aimed at forcing the Houthis out of Hodeidah port, which is the major conduit for humanitarian aid in Yemen. UN officials warn that a prolonged battle for the port and its surroundings could lead to the death of 250,000 people, mainly from mass starvation. After the Trump administration’s endorsement this month, the Saudi-UAE alliance has even less incentive to prevent civilian casualties and new humanitarian disasters. Saudi Arabia and its allies are more likely to accept a peace process if it is clear that the United States won’t support an open-ended war in Yemen and won’t provide the military assistance required to keep the war apparatus going.
US withdrawal causes Chinese fill-in
Alice Su, 12-17-2019, "China deepens ties to Middle East as Trump downsizes U.S. role," Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-12-17/china-pivots-to-middle-east-as-trump-downsizes-u-s-role?fbclid=IwAR3oVRncog7HkgOQW7spEK4K-Pxh_yiarDVw9EFcwbVz5hnW16RWk0O-fHI
As President Trump eyes the exit in the Middle East, his critics have excoriated him for abdicating a strong U.S. role in the region and clearing a path for Russia’s dominance. Yet in their scramble to find new allies, regional states have also turned to a quieter but no less powerful U.S. rival: China. All this comes against the backdrop of a rising U.S.-China rivalry, exemplified by a yearlong trade war, saber-rattling in the western Pacific and a race for influence in Latin America and Africa. Flying largely under the radar, Beijing who has had great success in drawing Middle Eastern nations into its orbit at a time when President Trump is seen region-wide as a mercurial ally, if one at all. “The United States has become consistently inconsistent.… Regional players, including friends of the United States, increasingly view Washington as an unreliable partner,” said Anubhav Gupta, associate director of the Asia Society Policy Institute. “They are forming stronger ties with other major powers because they sense both an uncertainty about U.S. commitment to the region as well as a lack of clarity as to what position the U.S. will take from one moment to the next.” By contrast, there has been little question of Beijing’s commitment. Chinese foreign direct investment has steadily increased over the last 10 years, with Beijing emerging as a major player in energy purchases, with the region meeting more than 40 of the Asian giant’s energy needs. “Just buying oil, shifting the supplies of oil, would have huge impact on the economy of the gulf and the region,” said Andrea Ghiselli, coordinator of ChinaMed, an Italian-Chinese research project focusing on China’s role in the Mediterranean region.
US withdrawal causes China to ramp up economic agreements
Anand Toprani, 5-15-2019, "Oil and the Future of U.S. Strategy in the Persian Gulf," War on the Rocks, https://warontherocks.com/2019/05/oil-and-the-future-of-u-s-strategy-in-the-persian-gulf/
Moral hazard is something no policymaker should ignore, but policymakers must (in proper Clausewitzian fashion) evaluate the risks entailed in relation to the alternatives. Reducing moral hazard by limiting the U.S. presence in the Gulf to naval and counter-terrorist forces requires two assumptions: first, that the primary threats to regional security are of the nonstate variety; and second, that Russia and China’s ambitions in the Gulf do not threaten U.S. national interests. Neither assumption appears warranted: Russia and China’s relationship to Iran appears to be fraying, but both countries are nonetheless deepening their ties to other actors in the region. Russia has longstanding strategic interests throughout the Middle East. While Russia’s relations with the Arab world suffered due to Moscow’s support for the Assad regime during the Syrian civil war, the Russians have repaired some of the damage recently. Today, Russia plays an indispensable role in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries — which still controls 80 percent of global oil reserves — despite the fact that it is not even a member, by mediating disputes between the Gulf Arabs and Iran. While Russia is eventually going to have to make some tradeoffs, in the short run, its “transactional” approach to foreign policy makes it, like China, an attractive source of military and technical assistance for countries frustrated by what they perceive to be an unreliable United States. As for China, Beijing expects that the Gulf will play a vital role in the mission of the Belt and Road Initiative — sustaining China’s export-driven growth model through overseas infrastructure development while perhaps creating the foundations for an alternative global economic system to the Anglo-American liberal maritime order. Bearing all of this in mind, if containing China is truly in the U.S. national interest, why would that make the Gulf less significant considering its importance as a supplier of oil to Asia? Conclusion The fact that the United States is again energy “independent” does not change the underlying rationale for the U.S. presence in the Gulf. The region’s oil remains as vital today as it was after World War II. If we accept the proposition that America’s security is tied to the welfare of its allies and partners, the United States cannot afford to discard the Carter Doctrine, for there is no substitute for the security that U.S. military force provides. If anythingThus, a U.S. withdrawal from the Gulf could encourage China to accelerate the growth of its military capabilities there. U.S. allies such as Japan and South Korea could theoretically redeploy naval assets to the Gulf to protect their oil lifelines, but this would tilt the military balance in the Far East further in China’s favor, thereby undermining the U.S. “rebalance” to Asia.
China is a good mediator
Alice Su, 12-17-2019, "China deepens ties to Middle East as Trump downsizes U.S. role," Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-12-17/china-pivots-to-middle-east-as-trump-downsizes-u-s-role?fbclid=IwAR3oVRncog7HkgOQW7spEK4K-Pxh_yiarDVw9EFcwbVz5hnW16RWk0O-fHI
China has also had success presenting itself as a pragmatic partner, one whose foreign policy is characterized by a self-avowed commitment to national sovereignty and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. The attitude squares well with authoritarian governments in the region, which can do business with China without Beijing criticizing their human rights records or undemocratic systems. That stance has also enabled Beijing to maintaining relationships on all sides of long-standing Middle Eastern rifts, such as those between Iran and Saudi Arabia; Israel and the Palestinian territories; and one pitting Turkey and Qatar against a number of other Persian Gulf nations. As part of its engagement, Beijing has made inroads in supplying weapons to the region. The area is awash with older, Chinese-made light weapons that have found their way across the Middle East, with Beijing supplying bullets and rockets to various governments. China’s overall arms exports to the region are still minuscule in comparison with those of the United States and Russia, especially when it comes to heavier weapons and defense systems.
China wants a stable Yemen
Alican Tekingunduz, 12-13-2019, "What is China doing in Yemen?," What is China doing in Yemen?, https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/what-is-china-doing-in-yemen-32183
"Much of China’s trade with Europe passes through the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea, while Chinese imports of Middle Eastern and African oil transit through Bab el Mandeb and the Strait of Hormuz," I-wei Jennifer Chang, Research Fellow at the Global Taiwan Institute in Washington, DC told TRT World. Chang said although Yemen is "not of direct importance to China’s overall foreign policy goals", the country still occupies a geostrategic position straddling the international shipping lanes. "The Chinese would like to see peace and stability restored in Yemen so that Chinese companies could resume pre-2011 investments and trade and potentially play major roles in Yemen’s post-war reconstruction. The Chinese would also like Yemen to be stable in order to make Yemen play a more economically active role in Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative," Chang added. China has historically had good relations with Yemen. In 1956, both countries created formal diplomatic relations which makes Yemen the first Arabian Peninsula country to recognise the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the legitimate representative of the country.
Saudi airstrikes cause Yemen famine
Radhya Almutawakel, Abdulrasheed Alfaqih, 8-11-2016, "Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates Are Starving Yemenis to Death," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/08/saudi-arabia-and-the-united-arab-emirates-are-starving-yemenis-to-death-mbs-khashoggi-famine-yemen-blockade-houthis/
Saudi crimes in Yemen are not limited to regular and intentional bombing of civilians in violation of international humanitarian law. By escalating the war and destroying essential civilian infrastructure, Saudi Arabia is also responsible for the tens of thousands of Yemeni civilians who have died from preventable disease and starvation brought on by the war. The United Nations concluded that blockades have had “devastating effects on the civilian population” in Yemen, as Saudi and Emirati airstrikes have targeted Yemen’s food production and distribution, including the agricultural sector and the fishing industry. Meanwhile, the collapse of Yemen’s currency due to the war has prevented millions of civilians from purchasing the food that exists in markets. Food prices have skyrocketed, but civil servants haven’t received regular salaries in two years. Yemenis are being starved to death on purpose, with starvation of civilians used by Saudi Arabia as a weapon of war.
Millions die without US withdrawal
William J. Burns, 11-4-2019, "Opinion, This is a war Trump can end" Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/04/this-is-war-trump-can-end/
There is, however, one war that Trump can still help end. The war in Yemen may seem distant to most Americans, but its humanitarian and strategic consequences are enormous. The United Nations has called the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. More than 3 million Yemenis have been displaced, nearly a quarter of a million have been killed and more than 15 million are at risk of famine. The conflict has contributed to the worst cholera outbreak in modern history, and it’s getting worse by the day. The strategic implications are just as grave. Yemen’s U.N.-recognized government sits in exile, the Iranian-supported Houthis control the capital, and Islamic State and al-Qaeda affiliates are growing in the eastern part of the country, where they continue to plot against the West. | 905,545 |
336 | 380,197 | 0-Contact Info | What's up homies! It's ya bois from Plano Senior Ritvik Mahendra and Aryan Jasani. If you want to contact us at tournament, email us at plano.speechdocs@gmail.com or FB Messenger. | 905,505 |
337 | 380,262 | Interps | A- interpretation: They need to tell us before round, with enough time for us to meet their standard, what theory shell they may run on our pre-round actions. | 905,571 |
338 | 380,265 | Afropess Neg | = 2020 Afropessimism Neg
==Framing==
====-Our opponent’s advocacy relies on the politics of hope. Policies geared towards "solving" problems only entrench anti-black sentiments as cruel optimism pushes black folk to fantasize about temporal solutions to their problems that will allegedly occur in the "near future". ====
Warren 15 (Calvin L., Black Nihilism and the Politics of Hope; Surce: CR: The New Centennial Review, Vol. 15, No. 1, Derrida and French Hegelianism (Spring 2015), XMT, pp. 215-248 Published by: Michigan State University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.14321/crnewcentrevi.15.1.0215. Accessed: 30/03/2015).
The politics of hope, then, constitutes what Lauren Berlant would call "cruel
AND
politics is the only "hope" for blackness in an antiblack world.
==Links==
====-While the enslavement of blacks is traditionally associated with the United States. The Shattering effects of the African Diaspora can Be seen Far and wide. The impact of the middle passage on Afro Venezuelans can still be felt today. Many of these inequities mirror those of our own nation.====
**=====Minority Rights Group**, "Afro-Venezuelans," https://minorityrights.org/minorities/afro-venezuelans/ Historical context Enslaved Africans were transported to Venezuela mostly in the eighteenth century to work on the numerous cocoa plantations. Despite proposals by Simón Bolívar, ‘The Liberator’, slavery was not abolished upon independence in 1811, but rather some forty years later with the Law of Abolition of Slavery of 1854. By that time the enslaved population had substantially declined due both to economic factors and the common practice of manumission. Profile Because until 2011 Venezuela had not collected data on its black population since 1920, is estimated to be 7 to 60 per cent of the total population. While the 2011 census allowed community members to self-identify for the first time, the reported figures – 0.7 per cent of the total population identified themselves as Afro-descendant and 2.9 per cent as black, compared to 51. their identity and culture. Despite the existence of some notable Afro-Venezuelans in high-level positions in the government and private sector, Afro-Venezuelans continue to be the victims of discrimination and racial prejudice. This discrimination can be especially violent in poorer areas where police forces still often act with impunity and racial profiling is rampant. Moreover, nearly 40 per cent of Venezuelans live under the poverty line and the concentration of people of African descent in poorer regions and neighbourhoods suggest that poverty rates are higher among this population. Furthermore, the community struggles for acceptance and recognition: many Venezuelans do not regard Afro-Venezuelans as a distinct group and the government still has no official data on their numbers. However, music and other cultural forms of expression have helped the community gain some visibility in recent years. An important milestone for the community came in 2011 when for the first time the community were able to self-identify as Afro-descendant in the national census. Until then, there had been no official classification for the community.6 per cent as brown and 43.6 per cent as white – were far lower than the likely actual proportion. Afro-Venezuelans have traditionally lived in the rural coastal zones of the country, but have begun to migrate to urban centres like Caracas in large numbers. Although Afro-Venezuelans have contributed to and are largely assimilated into mainstream Venezuelan or Creole culture, this population has still retained some of its own cultural heritage. The use of traditional drums in Afro-Venezuelan music, as well as dance and African-based spirituality demonstrate this. Current issues Historically, urban and rural Afro-Venezuelans have not identified themselves in ethnic terms, but rather according to their class and geographic position. This may be due to a general lack of consciousness, but may also be an explicit denial of blackness because it is devalued in this society. Due to increased mobilization by local NGOs, Afro-Venezuelans, and youth in particular, are beginning to reaffirm =====
====-Our opponents advocating for governmental action further promotes the politics of hope in perpetuity, promising solutions and reform that only strengthen the anti-black system. This does nothing to solve the underlying issues regarding antiblackness.====
Wilderson 03, Frank, award-winning author of Incognegro: A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. He is one of two Americans to hold elected office in the African National Congress and is a former insurgent in the ANC’s armed wing, 2003 (Frank B. III "Introduction: Unspeakable Ethics" Red, White, and Black: Cinema and the Strucure of U.S. Antagonisms, Pg 15-16) GG
Regarding the Black position, some might ask why, after claims successfully made on
AND
occur? The woman at the gates of Columbia University awaits an answer.
==Alt==
====~~1~~ The only possible demand is one that calls for the end of the world itself—the affirmative represents a conflict within the paradigm of America but refuses to challenge the foundational antagonism that produces the violence that undergirds the same.====
Wilderson ’10 ~~{Frank; Associate Professor of African-American Studies at UC Irvine and has a Ph.D. from UC Berkeley; "Red, White andamp; Black: Cinema and the Structure of U.S. Antagonisms," p. ~~}/MR
Leaving aside for the moment their state of mind, it would seem that the
AND
nonetheless, the foundation of the close reading of feature films and political theory
==Extensions== | 905,576 |
339 | 380,269 | Possible Interps | Disclosure
All debaters must disclose all previously read positions on the topic on their PF NDCA wiki page 30 minutes prior to the round
Black Author Theory
Debaters in case must read evidence from at least one black author and flag that they are black in the citation.
Spec
The affirmative constructive must specify a comprehensive list of what “economic sanctions” they defend ending
Paraphrase
Debaters must use direct quotes when introducing evidence for the first time in constructive | 905,579 |
340 | 380,271 | Rampo CH Disclosure Policy | We will disclose previously broken cases to teams that contact us at least 20 minutes before the round.
Contact Info -
E-mail:
hameedami22@student.westboroughk12.org
chinthapattan22@student.westboroughk12.org
Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/amir.hameed.520900
https://www.facebook.com/tanav.chinthapatla | 905,589 |
341 | 380,278 | Disclosure Policy | If you want us to disclose, feel free to contact us!
Carina Guo
Facebook: Carina Guo
Text: 301-658-8451
Email: guo.carina@gmail.com
Jennifer Lin
Facebook: Jennifer Lin
Text: 202-815-7826
Email: jenniferyuxin18@gmail.com | 905,596 |
342 | 380,277 | Disclosure Contact Info | If you want to disclose, contact us!
Facebook Messenger:
Either one of us is cool
Text:
+1 (240) 702-6459 (Amanda)
+1 (240) 778-4609 (Johnathan)
Email:
amandaxy200@gmail.com
johnathanlusun@gmail.com | 905,595 |
343 | 380,312 | Septober - Middle Income Trap and EU Stimulus | too many cards, open-source, cards at the bottom | 905,655 |
344 | 380,130 | OCO Voter Suppression Contention | Contention 1 is voter suppression
Russian misinformation in the 2016 election primarily targeted black voters. Davidson 2019 quantified last month that up to 96 percent of Russian misinformation on social media platforms contained terms related to race. This dramatically reduced turnout of black voters. This dramatically reduced turnout of black voters – Riccardi wrote last month that 1.6 million African Americans who cast a ballot in 2012 didn’t vote in 2016 because of Russian intervention. Korgstad 17 writes that African American voter turnout declined for the first time in 20 years in 2016. The impact is dire: people who don’t vote aren’t represented, leading policy makers to ignore their needs. Rodriguez 15 from Stanford writes, 1 in 3 deaths African American deaths between 1970 and 2004 would have been prevented if they had the same access to education, healthcare, and public services as whites. Rodriguez writes, “there is a range of problems that could be addressed by public policy, but altering public policy requires voting.” If they voted at the same rate as whites, he quantifies that 2.7 million people who are black would still be alive today.
Offensive cyber operations can protect voters who are black from Russian attempts to suppress their votes in two ways.
The first is by turning the power off.
Brattberg 18 writes for the Carnegie Endowment that most of Russia’s efforts to reduce turnout of people who are black occur on election day. Fortunately, Greenberg 2019 writes that cyber command launched a cyberattack on Russia’ Internet Research Agency on election day in 2018, preventing a last-minute flood of disinformation designed to dramatically decrease turnout.
The second is by sliding into the DMs.
Nakashima 18 writes in the Washington Post, Offensive Cyber Operations helped the US deanonymize Russian hackers, allowing us to email, text, or digitally message threats to expose their identities. She concludes that the chilling effect from these operations allows the US to halt Russian disinformation campaigns without any physical damage whatsoever.
Ultimately, Akin 18 writes for Roll Call that turnout of people who are black doubled in 2018. She concludes that Offensive Cyber Ops reduced misinformation, and prevented Russia from quote “producing a new Jim Crow.” | 905,427 |
345 | 380,153 | Contact | Hey yall,
Arnav, 1st speaker, aggarwalarnav2007@gmail.com
Darrell, 2nd speaker, brazilismyteam@icloud.com
Please disclose on the wiki or dm me or darrell on discord other wise we will run disclosure theory lol
Happy debating! | 905,451 |
346 | 380,161 | 1 - March NEG v2 | Open sourced for convenience | 905,463 |
347 | 380,156 | 1 - Jan AFF - Caste | Shah 16 Welcome to the underworld – Dalits are a constructed class-not-class both under and outside of a globalized caste or varna system that is rooted in colorism, placing bodies on a scale from white to black where blackened bodies, such as Dalits, become impure, monstrous, and inhuman, rendering them fungible and subject to disappearing violence. Shah 16
Shah, Ekta. (Masters in South Asian Literature from Northwestern University, Debate Coach, English teacher, pioneered the Quarry Lane Womxn’s Tournament, and dope baller) "Remnants of Caste in Casting: Cast Aside Untouchables in India and Hollywood." Selected Works. Northwestern University, 17 June 2016. Web. 9 Jan. 2017. (https://works.bepress.com/ekta-shah/1/) SK
There is another class of individuals, a fifth caste that ranks below the Sudras: the Dalits. I use the words “fifth” and “caste” loosely because the Dalit class is ostracized from the varna system, seen as too lowly to be considered in the same category as the other castes. “The word ‘Dalit’ comes from the Sanskrit root dal- and means ‘broken, ground-down, downtrodden, or oppressed’” (National Campaign on Dalit Human Rights). The term was first used in a journal entry in 1931 and elucidated on in social reformer B. R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste (1936) and The Untouchables: Who were They and Why They Became Untouchables? (1948) (NCDHR; Michael 2). They are cast aside, “considered impure and polluting and are therefore physically and socially excluded and isolated from the rest of society” (NCDHR). They perform undesirable, unclean work such as removing excrement, corpses, and dirt from public latrines, scavengers, and streets. Because people from other castes do not wish to associate with Dalits, many are still excluded from the caste system with the label “untouchable”—they are forbidden from touching or being touched by members of other castes, from being literate or attending school, and from entering public or religious areas (Pruthi 167-85). If a member of the Dalit class happens to mistakenly make physical contact with a member of another caste—even a slight graze of the hand—they risk the possibility of being beaten with objects and verbally berated because the other individual would have to bathe in order to wash away the Dalit’s filthiness. Dalits’ lives revolve around exclusion, to the extent that they cannot bathe in the Gunga or directly purchase store items in order to avoid desecrating persons of higher-castes with their presence (Hutton 78- 80). The Dalit’s occupation, based on Vedic Hindu traditionalism, labels Dalits not only as impure, but also as people who are fulfilling their destiny based on the cycle of karmic reincarnation. It is generally assumed by Hindus that Dalits are born into an oppressed family to do penance for past wrong-doings in attempts to appease their ancestors and gods. So in the justification of Hindu ritualization and hereditary birth-right, many people turn a blind eye and cast aside upwards of 166,635,700 Dalits (International Dalit Solitary Network). They are the marginalized, oppressed “Other” with no place in society because they are untouchable outcastes—their entire lives condemned and predetermined, revolving around caste and color.
Soundararajan 12 To be a Dalit American is to be a fugitive that founds conceptions of criminality in communities – institutionalized casteism engenders a requirement to aspire for upper caste privilege foreclosed to Dalits always subject to violence by virtue of being “untouchables,” which engenders a racializing norm where deviance from whiteness and civility marks one for liberation from abjection to justify imperialism. Stories and songs told in the recesses and margins of civil society are essential to survival for those Dalits to resist whiteness guised as military aid.
Soundararajan 12
Soundararajan, Thenmozhi. “ The Black Indians: Growing up Dalit in the US, Finding Your Roots, Fighting for Your Identity.” Outlook India, 20 Aug. 2012. SK
Running, passing, hiding. This is the litany of the Dalit American. Growing up in southern California, my family was one of the first Tamil families to immigrate to Los Angeles. Representatives of the Indian brain drain that started in the 1970s, we were part of the first wave of Indian immigrants whose functions, sangams and religious communities helped establish the little India enclave in the now-famous Artesia. We were also Dalits living underground. Caste exists wherever Indians exist and it manifests itself in a myriad of ways. The Indian diaspora thrives on caste because it is the atom that animates the molecule of their existence. In the face of xenophobia and racism abroad, many become more fundamentalist in their traditions and caste is part of that reactionary package. So, what does caste look like in the US? Quite like in India, it is the smooth subtext beneath questions between uncles, like, “Oh! Where is your family from?” It is part of the cliques and divisions within those cultural associations where Indians self-segregate into linguistic and caste associations. It continues when aunties begin to discuss marriage prospects. They cluck their tongues softly, remark about your complexion, and pray for a good match from “our community”. For second-generation NRIs, flashing caste becomes a part of their cultural street cred with other communities. Some do it intentionally to elevate their identity while others operate from a misunderstanding of their own roots and blindly accept the symbols of their culture. Punjabi rappers throw down lyrics about being proud Jats. Tam- Brahms show off their sacred thread, recreate Thiruvayur in Cleveland, and learn Bharatanatyam while using their powerful networks to connect and succeed in the diaspora. Ultimately, we trade and calcify what is seen as proper Indian culture. But hidden within that idea of ‘proper’ lies the code for what is aspirational and ultimately upper caste. It’s dangerous, this culture of caste-based intolerance in the diaspora for it extends beyond individual relationships. Individuals build institutions and institutions are steeped in caste. From Hindu temples to gurudwaras, there is a separate yet unspoken policy of worship for those that are Dalit. Furthermore, in the over fifty south Asian and Asian studies departments in North America, there are less than a handful of tenured Dalit faculty. And, crucially, as the Campaign to Stop Funding Hate has shown, NRIs in the US have directly funded and fuelled communal violence in India by supporting cultural and aid programmes that are fronts for local Hindutva organisations. Through it all, Dalits Run. Pass. Hide. For while caste is everywhere in the diaspora, there is a damning silence about naming caste. And in the silence there is violence. I know because my family passed for many years. It was confusing, painful and lonely. We could never truly unpack the memories that my parents fled in India, nor could we confront the same infrastructure being rebuilt here in the shining land of the American Dream. Many Americans and Indians can’t imagine what it looks like to pass. For my family it was finding ever clever ways to sidestep the ‘jati’ question, attending temple functions and never speaking about “our community” in public functions ever. We got away with it because there were so few of us in the beginning, and every Tamil was a valuable connection while learning to navigate this new country. The leverage of our new lifestyle however allowed my family to support Dalit causes back home and work underground through a network of uncles who debated caste issues over phone calls, meetings and conferences. And, of course, while the men were active in this way, the women, like my mom, would pass on Dalit songs and stories holding on to that space—which was important even if we could not share it. For though it has been almost 100 years since Ambedkar came to study at Columbia University, Dalits like my family are still struggling to find a foothold that is uniquely our own. Unlike other Indians, Dalits do not have their own public institutions within the diaspora. There is no way to go into any city and find and connect with local Dalits unless you are already plugged in to the unofficial Dalit underground communities held together by mailing lists, Facebook groups and phone trees that help us survive the double whammy of racism of being part of such an incredible line of creators, survivors and leaders. And there have been repercussions. I have been served by Indian friends in ‘different utensils’, curses and even death threats have been hurled at me. But I have never regretted coming out. I sing the Dalit history of resilience, resistance, revolution.
Nayar 12 Thus we affirm. This is simultaneously an affirmation of melancholia as a terrifying deconstruction of the United States and civil society’s hold on power itself – we embrace the terrorist. Embodying the affect of the trauma narrative is an act of testimony that connects politics and emotions and reclaims the corporeal pain suffered by the being. These testimonies blur the lines between what can and cannot be said – dispelling the myth of the promise of happiness.
Nayar 12
Pramod K. Nayar 2012 – (“The Poetics of Postcolonial Atrocity: Dalit Life Writing, Testimonio, and Human Rights” ; ariel: a review of international English literature ISSN 0004-1327 Vol. 42 No. 3-4 Pages 237–264 Copyright © 2012 ; PhD; Nayar is a teacher at the University of Hyderabad who teaches M.A. courses in Literary Theory, the English Romantics, the 17th Century, Cultural Studies and has interests in English colonial writings on India, travel writing, Human Rights and narratives, posthumanism, postcolonial literature, literary and cultural theory) RKS – AA, DA, RN, SK. bracketed for gendered language
“Performance” is here taken to mean a fuller representation of a situation (in fact etymologically “performance” originally meant “bringing to completion”) (Turner). Dalit “performance” underscores the human nature of the “actors” (Dalit protagonists) and their contexts so that viewers/readers become fully aware of the complete set of horrific conditions in which the narrator lives/lived. Dalit narrators perform the conscious physical acts or emotional moments with full awareness of the audiences they address or face. The “embodied subjectivity” noted above is performance par excellence because the Dalit does not narrate a story as evidence: instead, he offers himself themselves, as Jacques Derrida has said of testimony (38). The representation of his brutalized body is in itself the act of testimony. A corporeal act of testimony and the representation of corporeal pain is an integral part of the Dalit narrative’s performance because it emphasizes the human—a being who suffers pain because of an unjust social structure. In addition to this “embodied subjectivity,” the Dalit text, like a trauma narrative, forges a connection between politics and emotions. The Dalit protagonist-narrator selects elements in her/his story and projects or emphasizes an emotional component for the sake of the audience. This is not false representation or pretension, but rather a fuller representation of the nature of the oppressive incident that the audience is cued to register. Performance here is the display, via narrative, of emotions when recalling the past. For instance, Limbale describes his constant hunger: “We had just pieces of dry bhakari which were hardly enough to satisfy the cave of hunger” and “I was ashamed of my food and felt guilty eating it.” Limbale underscores the significance of food when he describes how the upper-caste chil- dren gave the Dalit students their leftovers. Later, his mother asks him angrily, “Why didn’t you get at least a small portion of it for me? Leftover food is nectar.” Limbale reproduces his extreme emotion at his mother’s anger: “her words made . . . the feast . . . quiver in my stomach” (2–3). Gaikwad opens with a description of policemen beat- ing his grandfather and molesting his grandmother (1–2) and then records his own reactions: “Whenever the police visited our hut, I panicked. . . . As the police entered and began to search the hut and thrash and kick the inmates, I often pissed and shat in my shorts” (3). When he speaks at school programmes, he is threatened by the other students: “I was terribly afraid of them. Frightened that anyone of them might beat me” (81). The recording of emotional responses—affect—is the narrative’s “traumatic realism” that demonstrates how bodily injury folds into emotional trauma. As in the case of autobiographical narratives, emotional content is central to Dalit life writing’s staging of past events (Bauer et al). A dramatic performance of personal trauma serves the important public-political purpose of reiterating the human nature of the body that suffers.*Begin Footnote Here* There is, of course, considerable risk involved in representing poverty and suffering. Such narratives have been accused on a regular basis in mainstream Indian newspapers of using Indian/Asian/African poverty as a saleable commodity, as an exotic form of pornography (commonly referred to as “poverty porn”) catering to elite (Western) audiences. How does one distinguish the Dalit’s self-representation of authentic suffering from the sensationalized “poverty porn” of, say, Danny Boyle (whose lm Slumdog Millionaire, much reviled in India, won eight Oscars)? Whose politics and what politics (emancipation? commodification for profit?) are served by the representations? *End Footnote Here* The Dalit narrator’s performance is the interplay of aesthetic and social drama: Limbale’s or Mane’s emotionally charged description (the aesthetic drama of the narrative) of their very individual hunger is linked with the processes that produce hunger in particular castes (the socio-political drama of the narrative). This element of Dalit performance—which I argue is coded into the corporeal trauma and the affective component of the narrative—emphasizes the humanity of the protagonist. The emotional “performance” by the Dalit testimonio moves to an- other level when the individual enmeshes his/her story (the “perform- ance”) with that of the caste or community. The Dalit narrative’s role as a document about human rights demands that the protagonist of the narrative functions as a witness rather than an individual “hero” or “heroine.” Personal testimony functions doubly as the historical and socio-political witnessing of national structures of oppression. Indeed, the term “witness” derives its force from a performative: the capacity to provide evidence because of a first-hand experience. The autobiography, while foregrounding individual pain, suffering, and trauma, always ges- tures at something beyond. The testimonios of Bama, Mane, Gaikwad and Limbale give voice not only to their own suffering but also to that of other victims who might otherwise remain voiceless. Dalit life writ- ing has two components in its role as testimonio: its character as a col- lective biography (Nayar, “Bama’s Karukku”) and the very structure of witnessing. Bama has stated that “ The story told in Karukku was not my story alone. It was the depiction of a collective trauma—of my community. . . . I just tried to freeze it forever in one book so that there will be something physical to remind people of the atrocities committed on a section of the society for ages” (Bama, “Recognition”). Her testimonio acts as a collective biography rather than simply her own life story. Like Bama, Mane declares in his preface: “Upara is not alone. . . .Upara’s suc- cess is not the success of one man, it’s the success of a social movement” (14). Similarly, Limbale asserts that his work represents “the pain of millions in India” (Outcaste x). In Dalit life writing, unlike in a conven- tional autobiography, the focus is not on the individual. And, unlike novels, which contain “problematic heros,” testimonios contain what Beverley terms “problematic collective situations” (95)– in this case of caste, community and class. Dalit life writing places the individual life in the public domain. It takes highly personal experiences and makes them public, blurring the line between what can and cannot be said. Thus, life inside the home— generally regarded as a safe haven for children or as a private space—is revealed as brutal, unjust and oppressive. The narrator moves the pain outward from the individual body to the community body, revealing the dangers, injustices, and cruelties of the “private” space of home or the “secure” space of the democratic state. Limbale, for instance, locates his awed family life, parentage and up- bringing within the social system. He reveals what ought to be a shame- ful secret (his problematic individual situation as an illegitimate son) by using it as a critique of the social structure. He notes that his father belongs to the upper caste Lingayat community but that his mother’s side of the family is Mahar. He admits that he is illegitimate before concluding: “Half of me belongs to the village, whereas the other half is excommunicated. Who am I? To whom is my umbilical cord connected?” (Outcaste 38–9). Limbale discovers that he is a border-crosser through no fault of his own. This personal secret becomes a public document of atrocity, exploitation, and caste-linked gender oppression. Limbale converts the story of his shame into statements that sound like aphorisms. He declares that “to be born beautiful among Dalits is a curse,” and states that his mother “was beautiful and suffered for it” (Outcaste 37–8). Limbale converts personal experiences of suffering into truisms that capture the condition of an entire community’s shame. The revelation of such secrets defines Dalit life writing as collective biography. By breaking down the barrier between private and public, the Dalit protagonist serves as a witness. Thus, the Dalit autobiographical narrative works as a testimonio through a process of narrating a collective biography, by rendering public what is private, and by locating the private within the public. The Dalit narrator is, like the narrator of a trauma memoir, a witness who recounts his/her personal trauma as well as that of the community. Contextually, such narratives must be located as witnesses within the dynamics of rights discourses and atrocity inquiries.
Nayar 11 Folkloric language is fundamental to Dalit subjectivity – the rational and real fall away as the mythic realm is brought to bear upon the material and the quotidian. Misreading signifiers is necessary for Dalit performativity and narrativization. Our model of debate is competing methods for the liberation within the topic area. The role of the ballot is thus to endorse the best embodied survival strategy to poetically disrupt dominant structures that militarize against subject formation.
Nayar 11
Pramod K. Nayar 2011 – (“The Politics of Form in Dalit Fiction: Bama’s Sangati and Sivakami’s The Grip of Change ; Nayar s affiliated with the Department of English, University of Hyderabad ; Indian Journal of Gender Studies 18(3) 365–380 © 2011 CWDS SAGE Publications) DA, SK.
New forms of the political demand new forms of writing. In keeping with such demands, this radicalisation of form in Dalit fiction is achieved through the intrusion of and contamination by the language of rights and dignity. In Bama’s novel, while the narrator discusses marriage and its pro- spects with older women, her mother says to her: Haven’t you heard the words the priest speaks at the time of the tali-tying? ... He says ‘What God puts together, let no man put asunder’ ... The nuns say that the promise we make to the priest is as good as the promise we make to God ... We have to live our lives according to the promise we made to God, in front of four, five people. (p. 94) In this extended treatise on the sanctity of marriage, the narrator’s mother runs what Melissa Dinverno (2004, p. 51) terms ‘the ventriloqu- ism of regime rhetoric’. The voice of scriptural, patriarchal authority speaks through the mother. The mother here is simply the medium of articulation minus subjective agency—she frames her identity and existence within this voice of scriptural and social authority. It is in opposition to this ventriloquism of regime rhetoric that the narrator sets up her own agential story, and therefore her own subjectivity. The nar- rator responds to the comment: ‘Go on, Ma. It’s by calling on all this stuff about God, the promises made to him, our sins and our good deeds, and Heaven and everlasting Hell, that priests and nuns frighten the life out of us’ (pp. 94–95). What the narrator is subverting is not only the scriptural injunctions (regime rhetoric) about marriage but her mother’s ‘stories’. By placing the mother’s stories under the interrogative, she effectively alters the narrative context. She continues this narrative in a different fashion: ‘I am sure God doesn’t want us to be living like slaves to the day we die, with- out any rights or status, just because of a cord around the neck’ (p. 95). By turning to the language of rights and dignity, Bama’s narrator has changed the course and nature of the debate. It is no more within the realm of the scriptural-theological but within the domain of politics and the law. Despite (or maybe because of) the context being a personal rather than a public or communitarian conversation, the shift of registers within the narrator’s response is, I suggest, a significant one. While the mother deploys the register of scriptural authority, the daughter appro- priates that of human rights and the law. Yet another incident serves this argument about narrative inversion and appropriation. The general elections are on in Bama’s Sangati. The narrator reports a conversation between her grandmother and their neigh- bours about voting. A woman says: ‘I stamped the picture of the man ploughing. See, it’s only because of the plough and bullock that our stomachs are going to be filled. Without them our lives are nothing but dust. That’s why I chose that picture.’ To this the narrator’s grandmother responds: ‘Anyway you stamped just one picture. God alone knows how many people did it my way and stamped four or five pictures’ (pp. 98–99). Here the entire edifice of democracy comes crashing down: the Dalits, Bama suggests, do not have a ‘rational’ approach to the electoral process. But what is signi- ficant about this incident is the way it foregrounds questions of meaning-making. The meaning of symbols is, Bama suggests, rooted in lived experience. The ‘misreading’ of the signifiers of the electoral process is, in fact, a contestation of the signifier: does the sign make the same sense to a Dalit woman? The woman who stamps the picture of a man ploughing does so with absolutely no knowledge of the candidate’s politics or ideology. She responds to the man’s symbol in precisely the way she knows—by connecting it with the centralities of her life: food, labour, hunger. Here the narrative of politics is subverted when it meets another language altogether, constructing a meaning and launching an interpretive act that is at odds with the democratic process. Bama suggests here that the ‘external’ narrative of the candidate’s sign language is far away from the ‘centre’ of Dalit life. The external language makes no sense to the Dalit way of life, in which labour, food and hunger constitute the ever- present signs. The interpretive act of the woman voter gestures at this dissonant narrative of the post-Independence Indian democratic process. Bama’s brilliant textual metaphor must be seen as an act of contestatory reading of the signs of political processes that do not take into account the lived experience of the Dalits. The final comment on this resilient and independent interpretive act comes from the narrator’s grandmother, who declares: ‘Whether it is Rama who rules or Ravana, what does it matter? Our situation is always the same’ (p. 99). When she invokes mythic-historical figures to describe contemporary statesmen and the political process, she achieves a radicalisation of, one, the mythic realm, as she aligns it with the democratic process of contemporary India; and two, the folkloric, as she conflates contemporary politicians with the mythic-scriptural. It is this hybrid- isation, this messy merger of registers and discourses—of the law, socio- historical, personal—that marks generic radicalisation in both authors. The rationale of electoral processes might be based on ideas of deliberative democracy and rational debate, but Bama’s protagonist works from what can be thought of as a ‘folkloric’ approach to the processes where signifiers are misread. In this instance, the folklore as well as the rational process is transformed: the former is revitalised within the infusion of the democratic project, even as the democratic project’s universal claims are subverted by new and unforeseen interpretative schemes. Bama shows how Dalit narratives of loss and suffering appropriate a new register, language and discourse. Gowri, Kathamuthu’s daughter, is asked to draw up a petition-complaint to the police. Kathamuthu dictates and Gowri writes. What follows illustrates my narrative-appropriation argument. Kathamuthu dictates the complaint in archaic diction and register: ‘In the said zilla ... said taluq ... said village’ (p. 11). Gowri, writes Sivakami, ‘enjoyed having her slight revenge on him, drawing attention to his outdated language’ (p. 11). And later: ‘Gowri wrote “deceased” in place of “late”, and glowed at the change’ (p. 11). Kathamuthu retells the story of Thangam’s abuse and Thangam corrects him: ‘It wasn’t in the upper caste street. It was in our street, and in front of my house’ (p. 12). Kathamuthu shouts at her: ‘You are such a stupid bitch. I’ve changed the whole story ... If you say anything different from what’s written in the petition, you’ll be jailed’ (p. 12). The incident is worth examining in some detail. First, Kathamuthu has repurposed the Thangam story to maximise its effect. Sivakami indicates storytelling’s role as a resistance narrative: the Dalits, in order to gain some leverage from the law (which is otherwise controlled by the upper castes), retell the facts. Second, the language of the law—‘said zilla ... said taluq’—is appropriated by Kathamuthu in order to gain some advantage for the Dalits. Third, Kathamuthu’s own language of petitioning is archaic and he can also be abusive (swearing at his wife, daughter and Thangam). Significantly, his own daughter modifies and modernises it, thus marking a feminine appropriation of the patriarch’s language. The three women together constitute a creative appropriation— of the languages of law, of patriarchal power and their cumulative effect. What Sivakami’s opening moments reveal is a careful balancing out of the historical (law), the personal (Thangam, Kathamuthu) and the mythic. The Dalit narrative develops its cultural centre—the horrific structural contexts that enable the men to abuse Thangam and deprive her of her rights—precisely through the appropriation of many languages and voices. There is no attempt to construct a simple oppressed–victim narrative. Rather, Sivakami’s proto-feminist attempt is to show how a young girl is able to subvert both the language of the law and that of patriarchy. We see another instance in The Grip of Change when Sekaran declares: ‘Unlike some men we know, I am not into collecting wives or hoodwinking the world reciting stories from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata’ (p. 125), thus once again foregrounding the theme of storytelling and its social power. That Sivakami chooses to open with the theme of narrative and lan- guage is in itself significant—for it underscores the centrality of nar- rative to the creation of identities, both individual and communitarian. Sivakami refuses to privilege any specific register, such as: the personal (Thangam’s rantings), which would have made it a woman’s confessional tale; the social-historical (Gowri’s rewriting), which would have rendered it a social document about postcolonial legal and social structures; the mythic (the references to gods), which would have situated the novel as a quasi-spiritual account. What she does, instead, is to merge the mythic, the personal and the socio-historical, and thus overrun the borders of each form of the novel. We read at once the confessional, the social document and the quasi- spiritual tale. This mixing of registers is the narrative appropriation of forms and voices that define resistance in Sivakami. Gowri in The Grip of Change and the unnamed narrator in Sangati generate contestatory narratives that upset the ‘dictating fictions’ (as Melissa Dinverno calls them) mouthed by the senior generation of women in both texts. Where the older women mourn their lot, we see the younger ones arguing, via feminism and Ambedkar, in a whole register of rights. Following Ralph Rodriguez, I propose that Gowri’s utterances, the older woman’s misreading of the electoral sheet and the narrator’s arguments in Bama represent the ‘contestatory capacity of a particular utterance’ (Rodriguez, 2000, pp. 67–68). This contestatory capacity is made possible through citationality. Kathamuthu’s hold over the illiterate villagers, notes Sivakami, rests on his ability, after a few drinks, to cite extensively from the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and Gandhi’s My Experiments with Truth (p. 33). Gowri is almost always immersed in books. Storytelling wields enormous power as Thangam’s story is given to ‘the latest interpretation’ with each narration (p. 37). The citation of Ambedkar and the rights discourse within the frame of Bama’s novel disturb the narrative effectively. By presenting protagonists with human-rights literacy, Bama and Sivakami achieve several things. First, both authors deliver protagonists who are self-aware, and thus agential subjects. ‘Voice’ is the ability to represent oneself, to tell one’s story, and agency is about voice and narration (Slaughter, 1997). Here, citationality is what empowers the subject with a voice. Second, the citation enables the fiction itself to become self-reflexive. Bama and Sivakami, I propose, transform folkloric and local-mythic language and narrative by infusing into it the language of rights, Ambedkarite philosophy, dignity and the law. The language of the law and rights becomes a radical move. In order to understand the signifi- cance of this move I turn to the writings of Antonio Gramsci via Green and Ives (2009).
Nayar 12 A surrender to the aesthetics of the performance is an “imaginative entry” that is demanded to realize the constituency between Dalit text and Dalit life, reorienting notions of fiat. This rhetorical listening is a form of second witnessing where the listener must imagine and accept the trauma narrated as beyond the text. The role of the judge is to be the empathetically unsettled witness to the Dalit testimony to understand the political act of survival that is occurring through the performance of the 1AC.
Nayar 12
Pramod K. Nayar 2012 – (“The Poetics of Postcolonial Atrocity: Dalit Life Writing, Testimonio, and Human Rights” ; ariel: a review of international English literature ISSN 0004-1327 Vol. 42 No. 3-4 Pages 237–264 Copyright © 2012 ; PhD; Nayar is a teacher at the University of Hyderabad who teaches M.A. courses in Literary Theory, the English Romantics, the 17th Century, Cultural Studies and has interests in English colonial writings on India, travel writing, Human Rights and narratives, posthumanism, postcolonial literature, literary and cultural theory) bracketed for gendered language RKS – AA, DA, RN, SK.
Lakshmi Holstro?m, Bama’s translator, suggests, “What is demanded of the reader is, in Gayatri Spivak’s term ‘a surrender to the special call of the text’. . . . And as readers of her Bama’s work, we are asked for nothing less than an imaginative entry into that different world of experience and its po- litical struggle” (Karukku vii). The suggestion of an “imaginative entry” is actually a demand that readers respond sympathetically, as humans, to the narrative’s trauma. In her introduction to Joothan, Mukherjee also insists that Joothan “demands a radical shift from the upper caste and upper class reader by insisting that such a reader not forget his/her caste or class privilege” (xxxvii). What is underlined here, as Holstro?m’s introduction emphasizes, is the difference to which readers must respond compassionately as humans; that is, readers must situate themselves imaginatively in the contexts described within the texts. It is in this response that the listeners define their humanity—this is the ethics of listening to Dalit life testimony. But it is also in this dimension of listen- ing that the crisis of witnessing arises: how are listeners to respond to the sheer singularity of the suffering in the Dalit text? The Dalit text, to adopt Shoshana Felman’s description of testimonial narrative, must be treated as a “point of conflation between text and life, a textual testimony which can penetrate us like an actual life” (Felman 2). It must, that is, possess the power of something greater than a mere text. One way of experiencing this textual power would be to relate to the text with what Dominick LaCapra has termed “empathetic unsettlement” (699). The listener respects the sheer otherness of the victim; one cannot, under any circumstances, incorporate the Other into ourselves, or stand in for the victim. In LaCapra’s terms, one cannot identify with the victim but can register and reflect upon, for oneself as well as others, the trauma and the unsettlement. The contract between the Dalit text and its readers, then, presents an ethics of witnessing. “Secondary witnessing,” as LaCapra terms the process, means paying attention to the irreducible heterogeneity of Dalit space, empathizing with it, never standing in for the Dalit, but seeing the narrative’s performance as an aesthetic and social drama that entails particular forms of reading (699). Or, to borrow Wendy Hesford’s phrase, the text calls for a process of “rhetorical listening.” “Rhetorical listening” demands that readers hear voices such as Limbale’s or Bama’s alongside those of the other, silent Dalits.6 Narrators of Dalit gesture towards both witnessing and “rhetorical listening.” Bama has admitted that “ There were many significant things that she chose not to recall in Karukku” (Bama, “Recognition”). Similarly, Valmiki states, “In the process of writing these words, a lot has remained unsaid. I did not manage to put it all down. It was beyond my power” (viii). Both statements implicitly argue that trauma exists beyond what is represented in the text. This absence at the heart of testimonio may in fact constitute its true value (Agamben 34, 145, 158). Testimony’s “truth,” argues Anne Cubilie?, is an interplay of consciousness, memory and community, of the narrator’s physical experiences, the sights she or he they saw, and the actions she or he they took as part of a larger group (242–43). The reiteration by the survivor of her or his their inability to speak and bear witness to all that has happened emphasizes the traumatic valence of the narrative. The silences that Bama and Valmiki discuss gesture toward the many Dalits whose pain can only be staged through their particular sur- vivor’s narratives and to whose suffering the readers must somehow bear witness. “Rhetorical listening” asks readers to imagine, through their consumption of the narrative, a trauma beyond textual representation. Bama engages with this aspect of witnessing when she asks: “Are Dalits not human beings? Do they not have common sense? Do they not have such attributes as a sense of honour and self respect? Are they without wisdom, beauty, dignity? What do we lack?” (Karukku 24). Bama transitions from describing Dalits to a broader description of humanity in which Dalits share the attributes inventoried. She asks readers to be attentive to the conditions in which some members of the human species are denied human attributes; it is this traumatic context that readers must consciously witness. Secondary witnessing thus complicates the process of reading Dalit texts. On the one hand, secondary witnessing asks that readers pay attention to it as a singular event of trauma. On the other, it asks that readers move beyond it, to see the text as a metonym for something that is—and can only be—presented through this particular text. In other words, an act of ethical listening would be to understand that Bama constitutes only one voice in the midst of many Dalit silences. Testimony of trauma always includes the hearer (Laub). The bodily “distress” of the Dalit would mean nothing without our commitment as hearers and secondary witnesses, to keep the event “open,” to adapt Lauren Berlant’s argument about trauma narratives (Berlant). Keeping the event open means that it must be transmitted outward in order to gather more secondary witnesses of the event. Thus Arun Prabha Mukherjee hopes that her translation of Joothan will arouse the reader’s “empathy” (Valmiki xl). What she calls for, I suggest, is a process of engagement with both textual and extra-textual contexts of a Dalit narrative in which the reader functions as a secondary witness. witnesses within the dynamics of rights discourses and atrocity inquiries. | 905,457 |
348 | 380,220 | April Aff - SA-Iran and Yemen | Tensions high - conflict about to escalate
Jose Clavijo, 7-11-2019, "Middle Eastern Conflict Scenarios: How Wars Between Iran and the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia Play Out," The Geopolitics, https://thegeopolitics.com/middle-eastern-conflict-scenarios-how-wars-between-iran-and-the-us-israel-and-saudi-arabia-play-out/
Due to its dependency on Iranian and Shiite militias for its survival, it’s likely that the Syrian regime will also get involved. Outside powers might also intervene. The US has contingency plans for a joint US-Israeli military response to an Iranian missile attack on Israeli territory. Russia will probably use its considerable regional influence – even though it supports the Syrian regime and is allied with Iran, it also maintains good relations with Turkey and Israel – to broker a ceasefire. The prospect of war between the two regional powers was in the spotlight in late 2017. Even though it has since subsided, tensions remain high and could erupt at any moment. The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia is partially sectarian, but mostly geopolitical. Teheran wants to expand its influence in the Middle East and acquire strategic depth; Riyadh is intent on containing it and preserve its position as the status quo power. Both are already involved in proxy wars that span the Shiite Crescent and Yemen. Teheran’s comparatively advantageous position vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia in these localized conflicts would preclude it from initiating a direct military confrontation. By developing nimble strategies that exploit the regions’ inherent turmoil and sectarian tensions, the Islamic Republic has obtained high returns with minimal investments both in matériel and personnel. But were there to be an open confrontation, it would probably be due to an escalation of tensions, and not an unwarranted attack by either one. An Iranian-provided missile launched by the Houthis successfully hitting a major Saudi city and causing high casualties, say, or continued Iranian meddling in the monarchy’s oil rich and strategic Eastern Province – whose population is majority Shiite – could serve as triggers. Still, the impetuous conduct of the young Saudi Crown Prince is also of concern, as can be seen in the kingdoms’ adventurism in Yemen and Qatar.
US withdrawal causes Saudi negotiations
Kristian Coates, 2-2-2020, “REBALANCING REGIONAL SECURITY IN THE PERSIAN GULF,” Center for the Middle East, https://www.bakerinstitute.org/media/files/files/de9f09e6/cme-pub-persiangulf-022420.pdf
Most spectacular of all—and the most cathartic for U.S. partners in the Persian Gulf—was the drone and missile strike on Saudi oil infrastructure on September 14 that targeted Aramco’s giant oil-processing facility at Abqaiq as well as the Khurais oilfield. The swarm of drones and cruise missiles fired from an (as-yet) unknown location evaded Saudi missile defense systems and knocked out, albeit only temporarily, 5.7 million barrels of Saudi Arabia’s total of 9.8 million barrels of oil produced per day.44 The scale and the success of the attacks underscored the vulnerability of the expensively procured defensive systems in Saudi Arabia and other GCC states to guard against asymmetric rather than conventional threats.45 A “Saudi security analyst,” speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, captured the sense of shock in the kingdom when s/he stated that “The attack is like September 11th for Saudi Arabia, it is a game changer (…) Where are the air defense systems and the U.S. weaponry for which we spent billions of dollars to protect the kingdom and its oil facilities? If they did this with such precision, they can also hit the desalination plants and more targets.” Just as shocking to leaders in Saudi Arabia and the UAE as the need to urgently reassess threat perceptions and defense capabilities was the Trump administration’s reactions to the pattern of attacks between May and September 2019. The lack of a visible U.S. response to the May and September attacks on shipping or to the assault on the nerve center of the Saudi economy made the Saudis and other American partners in GCC states reassess the nature of the U.S. security guarantee they had until then (largely) taken for granted.47 Trump denied he had offered the Saudis any pledge of protection after the Aramco attacks and added pointedly that “That was an attack on Saudi Arabia, and that wasn’t an attack on us.”48 Resulitng from The inaction from the U.S. was all the more pronounced when compared with Trump’s response to the downing of the U.S. drone in June 2019, when the U.S. launched a cyber attack against Iran’s electronic warfare capabilities, 49 or after the killing of an American contractor and the storming of the U.S. embassy compound in Iraq in December, when Trump ordered the drone attack that killed Qassim Soleimani on January 3, 2020.50 Statements by officials and prominent commentators in late 2019 and early 2020 illustrated the concerns many in GCC states felt at U.S. decision-making and prompted policymakers in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi to re-examine their own hitherto assertive approaches to regional affairs. A delegation from the UAE traveled to Iran in late July 2019 to discuss coast guard and related maritime security issues, shortly after the UAE had announced a troop redeployment and drawdown in Yemen as well.51 In the weeks after the Saudi attacks in September, the Saudi leadership made discreet approaches to their counterparts in Pakistan and Iraq in a bid to open back-channels of dialogue with Iran to de-escalate tension. Iraq’s prime minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, stated in late September that “There is a big response from Saudi Arabia and from Iran and even from Yemen, and I think these endeavors will have a good effect.”52 Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, appeared to endorse such sentiment, telling Al Jazeera that “Iran is open to starting a dialogue with Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region.”53 Pronouncements in GCC states increasingly began to diverge from the U.S. approach in the final months of 2019 and later evolved into different reactions to the sharp escalation in U.S.-Iran tension that accompanied the killing of Soleimani and the Iranian retaliation against U.S. military targets in Iraq. Abulkhaleq Abdulla, a retired Emirati academic often described as an advisor to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, blasted Trump after the Saudi attacks, stating that “in his response to Iran, he is even worse than Obama (…) Now an Arab Gulf strategic partner has been massively attacked by Iran—which was provoked by Trump, not by us—and we hear Americans saying to us, ‘you need to defend yourselves’!”54 After the U.S. decision to kill Soleimani in January 2020, attitudes hardened, with a “Gulf diplomatic source” voicing (anonymously) a concern felt across the GCC that “Our most important ally, a world power who is here on the pretense of stabilizing the region, is destabilizing the region and taking all of us with them without a second thought.”55
Saudi Arabia would lose a war without the US
Jeremy Shapiro and Richard Sokolsky, 5-4-2016, "How America enables its allies’ bad behavior," Brookings, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2016/05/04/how-america-enables-its-allies-bad-behavior/
Alas, 35 years into that experiment, in July 2013, the Egyptian officer corps overthrew the democratically elected Egyptian government and has since brutally suppressed all opposition to their rule. A U.S.-trained former Army general is now Egypt’s dictator, but he shows little special inclination toward democracy or Western interests. Saudi Arabia is yet another example. The Saudi regime is totally dependent on US military, logistics, training, and intelligence support. The Kingdom has no strategic alternative to U.S. protection, and its leaders know it. Yet Saudi frequently acts against US interests in the region: trying to stop the Iran nuclear deal, funding Islamic extremist causes across the region, and undermining U.S. efforts to negotiate an end to the war in Syria. So why do successive administrations continue to provide massive handouts to America’s clients when we often get little—and sometimes worse—in return
US presence ends diplomacy
Trita Parsi, 1-6-2020, "The Middle East Is More Stable When the United States Stays Away," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/06/the-middle-east-is-more-stable-when-the-united-states-stays-away/
It has been a mantra of U.S. foreign policy for a decade or more that, without the United States, the Middle East would descend into chaos. Or even worse, Iran would resurrect the Persian Empire and swallow the region whole. Yet when U.S. President Donald Trump opted not to go to war with Iran after a series of Iranian-attributed attacks on Saudi Arabia last year and declared his intentions to pull troops out of the region, it wasn’t chaos or conquest that ensued. Rather, nascent regional diplomacy—particularly among Iran and, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—and de-escalation followed. However, To be sure, the cards were reshuffled again in January, when Trump ordered the assassination of Qassem Suleimani, one of Iran’s most important military figures. Courtesy of Trump, the region is once more moving toward conflict, and the early signs of diplomatic progress achieved during the preceding months have vanished. It is thus time for Washington to answer a crucial question that it has long evaded: Has America’s military dominance in the Middle East prevented regional actors from peacefully resolving conflicts on their own? And in that way, has it been an impediment to stability rather than the guarantor of it? Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, U.S. President Jimmy Carter proclaimed a new doctrine: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region,” he stated, “will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.” In the context of the Cold War, preventing the Soviets—the main outside force Carter was worried about—from gaining control over the energy-rich region had a strategic logic.
Lack of diplomacy triggers war
Jose Clavijo, 7-11-2019, "Middle Eastern Conflict Scenarios: How Wars Between Iran and the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia Play Out," The Geopolitics, https://thegeopolitics.com/middle-eastern-conflict-scenarios-how-wars-between-iran-and-the-us-israel-and-saudi-arabia-play-out/
The prospect of war between the two regional powers was in the spotlight in late 2017. Even though it has since subsided, tensions remain and could erupt at any moment. The rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia is partially sectarian, but mostly geopolitical. Teheran wants to expand its influence in the Middle East and acquire strategic depth; Riyadh is intent on containing it and preserve its position as the status quo power. Both are already involved in proxy wars that span the Shiite Crescent and Yemen. Teheran’s comparatively advantageous position vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia in these localized conflicts would preclude it from initiating a direct military confrontation. By developing nimble strategies that exploit the regions’ inherent turmoil and sectarian tensions, the Islamic Republic has obtained high returns with minimal investments both in matériel and personnel.But were there to be an open confrontation, it would probably be due to an escalation of tensions, and not an unwarranted attack by either one. An Iranian-provided missile launched by the Houthis successfully hitting a major Saudi city and causing high casualties, say, or continued Iranian meddling in the monarchy’s oil rich and strategic Eastern Province – whose population is majority Shiite – could serve as triggers. Still, the impetuous conduct of the young Saudi Crown Prince is also of concern, as can be seen in the kingdoms’ adventurism in Yemen and Qatar.
Regional war draws in other actors
Jeremi Suri, 1-3-2017, "Blustering Toward Armageddon," American Prospect, https://prospect.org/world/blustering-toward-armageddon/
Here is how the danger could unfold. Trump promises at the start of his administration to tear up the Iranian nuclear agreement, possibly leading Tehran to resume its nuclear weapons program and become a nuclear power in a few months. With that prospect in view, Israel will likely do what it has advocated for at least eight years: It will take preventive military action-a combination of air strikes and covert sabotage programs-to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. At the same time, if not before, Israeli leaders are likely to press the United States to recognize Jerusalem, not Tel Aviv, as their official capital, and initiate a new set of settlements in the occupied territories. Trump will likely approve of all of these belligerent actions. The fighting in the Middle East between these states could rapidly escalatinge the conflict and affecting American assets, forcing a response in Washington. President Trump will initially side with Israel and Saudi Arabia, as all presidents have in the recent past, which could bring the United States to the brink of war with Iran and its allies, including Iraq. By the second half of Trump's first term, if this scenario plays out, we should expect a large American ground presence again in the Middle East, more terrorism sponsored from the region reaching the United States and western Europe, and the possibility of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel. We will long for the days of contained conflict in the region and sub-state threats, including al-Qaeda and ISIS. State-to-state conflict in the region will be much worse, and very difficult to resolve.
Countries have geopolitical interests in the Middle East
Anna Forostenko, 4-22-2011, "Worst Case Scenario: Will Ongoing Conflicts Lead To a World War?," Global Research, https://www.globalresearch.ca/worst-case-scenario-will-ongoing-conflicts-lead-to-a-world-war/24453
This is happening not so roughly and blankly like during the colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics. Clearly, the coordinators of these processes have learned to assess the specifics of each country creatively. At present, all is done skillfully, delicately, and accurately using various aspects of information technology for each country by taking into account local specifics.”
-According to several experts, Syria is becoming the battlefield where the interests of Saudi Arabia and Iran clash. Most likely, Saudi Arabia has a country to lean on, the United States. This means the entire region will face a serious conflict and world powers will be involved. The conflicts in the Middle East and Africa are growing. An opinion poll conducted among experts by the Voice of Russia shows that they believe that in a worst-case scenario, these conflicts could lead to a world war. The outcome of presidential election triggered clashes in Nigeria. According to official reports, incumbent president Goodluck Jonathan, a Christian from the south, won 60 percent of votes, while his opponent, Muhammadu Buhari won only little more than 30 percent. The opposition is dissatisfied with the results. As a result, Buhari’s supporters launched attacks on Christians and even set fire to several churches. In response, young Christians attacked mosques. Some experts draw a parallel between Nigeria and Cote d’Ivoire, disintegration of which into North and South was averted only after the interference of the UN peacekeepers and the French forces. This means that Nigeria may experience a similar fate. It will have to get foreign assistance or it will disintegrate. Meanwhile, the foreign factor could trigger disintegration of Libya, says a senior lecture of the political science faculty of the St. Petersburg University, Gumer Isaev. “Libya will disintegrate only in case its situation is deadlocked. This will depend on whether there will be foreign interference or not. If foreign countries interfere, Libya will be divided into at least two parts,” Gumer Isaev said. The head of the department of Central Asia and Kazakhstan of the Institute of the CIS countries, Andrei Grozin disagrees with him. The historical borders of Libya were established artificially after colonial rule, and consequently, the country will hardly remain within these borders in the future, says the expert. It’s a different case that ongoing uprisings in several countries have been triggered only by internal problems such as unemployment, poor income, dissatisfied young people and privileges to a small group of people. Lately, a third force has been backing these uprisings, says Andrei Grozin. “This is happening not so roughly and blankly like during the colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics. Clearly, the coordinators of these processes have learned to assess the specifics of each country creatively. At present, all is done skillfully, delicately, and accurately using various aspects of information technology for each country by taking into account local specifics, Andrei Grozin said. Possibly, Salafis could be such a group in Syria. According to Syrian authorities, they are behind the unrest in Homs and Baniyas. However, this could only be the tip of the iceberg. According to several experts, Syria is becoming the battlefield where the interests of Saudi Arabia and Iran clash.Most likely, Saudi Arabia has a country to lean on, the United States. This means the entire region will face a serious conflict and world powers will be involved. This will be a conflict between various political orientations. Saudi Arabia will be backed by the U.S. and several countries of the European Union, while Iran will be supported by third world nations and perhaps China. However, neither the U.S nor the EU tries to think about such a scenario. At present, the process is almost unnoticeable but if it goes out of control, emergency steps should be taken.
US-Iran tensions are also high
Nader Entessar, 7-2-2019, "A nuclear war in the Persian Gulf?," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/07/a-nuclear-war-in-the-persian-gulf/
Tensions between the United States and Iran are spiraling toward a military confrontation that carries a real possibility that the United States will use nuclear weapons. Iran’s assortment of asymmetrical capabilities—all constructed to be effective against the United States—nearly assures such a confrontation. The current US nuclear posture leaves the Trump administration at least open to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters. Some in the current administration may well think it to be in the best interest of the United States to seek a quick and decisive victory in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf—and to do so by using its nuclear arsenal. We believe there is a heightened possibility of a US-Iran war triggering a US nuclear strike for the following reasons: The sanction regime set against the Iranian economy is so brutal that it is likely to force Iran to take an action that will require a US military response. Unless the United States backs down from its present self-declared “economic warfare” against Iran, this will likely escalate to an open warfare between the two countries. In response to a White House request to draw up an Iran war plan, the Pentagon proposed sending 120,000 soldiers to the Persian Gulf. This force would augment the several thousands of troops already stationed in Iran’s vicinity. President Trump has also hinted that if need be, he will be sending “a lot more” troops. Defeating Iran through conventional military means would likely require a half million US forces and US preparedness for many casualties. The US nuclear posture review is worded in such a way that the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters is envisaged, foreshadowing the concern that in a showdown with a menacing foe like Iran, the nuclear option is on the table. The United States could once again justify using nuclear force for the sake of a decisive victory and casualty-prevention, the logic used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If the US doesn’t withdraw, war will be triggered
Ahmed Aboudouh, 4-1-2020, "Ahmed Aboudouh: Iraq faces all-out military conflict if US troops don’t leave soon," Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/us-troops-military-conflict-iraq-iran-trump-a9460496.html
But any news about withdrawing US troops from Iraq means utter dismay for the Sunnis and the Kurds. The presence of US forces is for them an insurance policy against a comeback by Isis and, more importantly, it strikes a delicate balance between all Iraqi religious sects and political powers. The government of Kurdistan (an autonomous region in the north) was determined to maintain the American presence. Allawi told me: “I felt the Kurds were more than ready to grant the US troops alternative military bases if they are to be driven out by the central government in Baghdad.” This means, he says, “Iraq’s political rupture for good”. The escalation by US troops and the Iran-backed militias is putting Iraq at risk of an all-out military conflict. This trims down the possible scenarios for the US future in Iraq to only two: all-out war or a departure sooner rather than later. As ambassador Tueller told Allawi in their meeting: “We are not planning to stay here forever.” An Iranian success in forcing the US out of Iraq might now seem more feasible.
War goes nuclear
Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, 7-2-2019, "A nuclear war in the Persian Gulf?," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/07/a-nuclear-war-in-the-persian-gulf/
In response to a White House request to draw up an Iran war plan, the Pentagon proposed sending 120,000 soldiers to the Persian Gulf. This force would augment the several thousands of troops already stationed in Iran’s vicinity. President Trump has also hinted that if need be, he will be sending “a lot more” troops. Defeating Iran through conventional military means would likely require a half million US forces and US preparedness for many casualties. The US nuclear posture review is worded in such a way that the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters is envisaged, foreshadowing the concern that in a showdown with a menacing foe like Iran, the nuclear option is on the table. The United States could once again justify using nuclear force as for the sake of a decisive victory and casualty-prevention, the logic used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Trump’s cavalier attitude toward nuclear weapons, trigger-happy penchant, and utter disdain for Iran, show that he would likely have no moral qualm about issuing an order to launch a limited nuclear strike, especially in a US-Iran showdown, one in which the oil transit from the Gulf would be imperiled, impacting the global economy and necessitating a speedy end to such a war. If the United States were to commit a limited nuclear strike against Iran, it would minimize risks to its forces in the region, defang the Iranian military, divest the latter of preeminence in the Strait of Hormuz, and thus reassert US power in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf. Oil flowing through the Strait of Hormuz is critical to a rising China. US control over this merchant waterway would grant the United States significant leverage in negotiations. A limited US nuclear strike could cause a ‘regime change’ among Iranian leadership, representing a strategic setback for Russia, in light of their recent foray in the Middle East with Iranian backing.
Miscalculation can trigger war in the Middle East
Yevgeny Primakov, 5-9-2009, "The Fundamental Conflict," Russia in Global Affairs, https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/the-fundamental-conflict/
After the end of the Cold War, some scholars and political observers concluded that a real threat of the Arab-Israeli conflict going beyond regional frameworks ceased to exist. However, in the 21st century this conclusion no longer conforms to the reality. The U.S. military operation in Iraq has changed the balance of forces in the Middle East. The disappearance of the Iraqi counterbalance has brought Iran to the fore as a regional power claiming a direct role in various Middle East processes. I do not belong to those who believe that the Iranian leadership has already made a political decision to create nuclear weapons of its own. Yet Tehran seems to have set itself the goal of achieving a technological level that would let it make such a decision (the “Japanese model”) under unfavorable circumstances. Israel already possesses nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. In such circumstances, the absence of a Middle East settlement opens a dangerous prospect of a nuclear collision in the region, which would have catastrophic consequences for the whole world. The transition to a multipolar world has objectively strengthened the role of states and organizations that are directly involved in regional conflicts, which increases the latter’s danger and reduces the possibility of controlling them. This refers, above all, to the Middle East conflict. The coming of Barack Obama to the presicdency has allayed fears that the United States could deliver a preventive strike against Iran (under George W. Bush, it was one of the most discussed topics in the United States). However, fears have increased that such a strike can be launched by Israel, which would have unpredictable consequences for the region and beyond. It seems that President Obama’s position does not completely rule out
Nuke war causes extinction
Steven Starr, 5-30-2014, "The Lethality of Nuclear Weapons," Institute for Political Economy, https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/05/30/lethality-nuclear-weapons/
Nuclear war has no winner. Beginning in 2006, several of the world’s leading climatologists (at Rutgers, UCLA, John Hopkins University, and the University of Colorado-Boulder) published a series of studiesthat evaluated the long-term environmental consequences of a nuclear war, including baseline scenarios fought with merely 1 of the explosive power in the US and/or Russian launch-ready nuclear arsenals. They concluded that the consequences of even a “small” nuclear war would include catastrophic disruptions of global climatei and massive destruction of Earth’s protective ozone layerii. These and
more recent studies predict that global agriculture would be so negatively affected by such a war, a global famine that would result, which would cause up to 2 billion people to starve to death. iii These peer-reviewed studies – which were analyzed by the best scientists in the world and found to be without error – also predict that a war fought with less than half of US or Russian strategic nuclear weapons would destroy the human race.
Arms sales are military presence
Shimon Arad, 9-28-2018, "Trump’s Arms Exports Policy: Debunking Key Assumptions," War on the Rocks, https://warontherocks.com/2018/09/trumps-arms-exports-policy-debunking-key-assumptions/
The Trump administration recently released its new Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) policy designed to increase the already well-established U.S. dominance of the global arms market. Increasing arms exports is seen as an important part of the administration’s aim to strengthen America’s economy and security. Traditionally, U.S. arms exports have been used as tools of power and influence, giving it political leverage over clients. Paradoxically, however, the emphasis placed on the economic utility of arms sales by the Trump administration is increasing the bargaining power of clients, thereby reducing U.S. political sway. The leverage of client states and the U.S. arms industry is leading the administration to release advanced military capabilities earlier than it would have done otherwise and to play down human rights considerations raised by Congress. Ironically, additional economic and security steps being taken by the Trump administration may be undermining some of the intended benefits of the new CAT policy. The president’s economic protectionist agenda, including the imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminum supposedly because of national security considerations, could undermine U.S. defense sales by driving up prices or by prompting retaliation from affected arms clients. Political tensions between Washington and some its allies and partners – especially in NATO — may also be encouraging them to find ways to decrease their dependence on American-made subsystems and to increase defense industrial cooperation between them to the exclusion of the United States. This could potentially reduce future U.S. arms and subsystem sales to these countries and increase competition with them for global markets. Trump’s Conventional Arms Transfer Policy The first CAT policy was introduced by President Jimmy Carter on May 19, 1977. Its underlying principle was that arms transfers were to be treated with a strong presumption of denial “as an exceptional foreign policy implement” with “the burden of persuasion … on those who favor a particular sale, rather than those who oppose it.” To further this policy of self-imposed restraint, Carter instituted a ceiling on the total dollar value of American arms transfers to all but a few traditional allies. He pledged that the United States would not be the first supplier to introduce into Third World areas “newly developed, advanced weapons systems which could create a new or significantly higher combat capability.” In implementing this policy, Carter issued the so-called “leprosy letter,” instructing American diplomats abroad to refrain from assisting the U.S. arms industry in its efforts to secure foreign buyers. In April, the Trump administration launched the fifth iteration of the CAT policy, designed to increase the exports of U.S. arms as an integral part of its “America First” policy agenda. The present version of the CAT policy prioritizes arms transfers as an important tool of American foreign policy and, in stark contrast to the vision of Carter, is predicated on a strong assumption of approval and the active advocacy of the U.S. government and its diplomats with foreign leaders and governments to buy American-made arms.
Saudi Arabia needs US arms for the war in yemen
Ali Harb, 3-1-2019, "Saudi Arabia would end Yemen war without US support, experts say," Middle East Eye, https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/saudi-arabia-would-end-yemen-war-without-us-support-experts-say
Ending American assistance to the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen would curtail Riyadh's war efforts and hasten the end of what the United Nations describes as the world's worst humanitarian crisis, experts says A push by US lawmakers to end support for the war once appeared largely symbolic, with only a few Democrats in the Republican-controlled Congress putting forward a proposal, but now legislators may be set to pass a measure that would halt US assistance to Saudi-led forces in Yemen.That would have a critical impact, said Robert Jordan, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia in the early 2000s, who described US support asis crucial to Riyadh's military capabilities. "If we suspend providing spare parts for their F-15s, their air force would be grounded in two weeks," Jordan told Middle East Eye last week. "So I think there is every prospect that, if that occurs, they will find it more appealing to go to the peace table and negotiate than they currently do." The proposed US legislation cleared the House of Representatives last month, and the Senate, which approved a similar motion late last year, is expected to vote on it again in the near future. The bill invokes the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which prohibits the involvement in a foreign conflict without congressional authorisation. President Donald Trump has vowed to veto the legislation, which would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate to override.'Extremely important'Khalil Jahshan, executive director of the Arab Center Washington DC, said both Washington and Riyadh would like to downplay the impact of American involvement in Yemen, but the US role in the war remains "extremely important" logistically and politically. Beyond helping with military assistance, Washington provides "psychological and strategic cover" to Saudi war efforts, he said. "If it weren't for American support, if that were to be withdrawn in the future ... I think Saudi Arabia would feel compelled to end that war faster than they would like," Jahshan said. While Trump is often criticised for his cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia's rulers, the conflict in Yemen started under his predecessor, Barack Obama. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates started a massive bombing campaign in Yemen in 2015 to restore the government of President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi after Houthi rebels captured the capital, Sanaa.
US support enables peace talks
Mohamad Bazzi, 9-30-2018, "The United States Could End the War in Yemen If It Wanted To," Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/iran-yemen-saudi-arabia/571465/
As public anger over America’s role in the Saudi-led war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen has grown, Congress has slowly tried to exert pressure on America’s longtime allies to reduce civilian casualties. Last month, a bipartisan group of lawmakers included a provision in the defense-spending bill requiring the Trump administration to certify that Saudi Arabia and the UAE are taking “demonstrable actions” to avoid harming civilians and making a “good faith” effort to reach a political settlement to end the war. Congress required the administration to make this certification a prerequisite for the Pentagon to continue providing military assistance to the coalition. This assistance, much of which began under the Obama administration, includes the mid-air refueling of Saudi and Emirati jets, intelligence assistance, and billions of dollars worth of missiles, bombs, and spare parts for the Saudi air force. On September 12, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo assured Congress that the coalition was trying to minimize civilian casualties and enable deliveries of humanitarian aid to Yemen. Yet his claim contradicted virtually every other independent assessment of the war, including a recent report by a group of United Nations experts and several Human Rights Watch investigations that alleged the coalition had committed war crimes. Meanwhile, in a memo Pompeo sent to Congress, he noted another reason for continued U.S. support for the coalition: containing Iran and its influence on the Houthis. Like the Saudis and Emiratis, the Trump administration sees in the Houthis the same sort of threat as other Iranian-backed groups such as Hezbollah, which has sent thousands of fighters to help Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. In late August, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations tweeted a photo that had circulated in the Arab press of a meeting in Beirut between the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Houthi officials. U.S. officials claimed it showed “the nature of the regional terrorist threat,” and added: “Iranian proxies in Lebanon and Yemen pose major dangers to peace and stability in the entire Middle East.” But beyond recent missile attacks on Saudi Arabia—in retaliation for Saudi air strikes—the Houthis have displayed little regional ambition. Ironically, as the war drags on, the Houthis will grow more dependent on support from Iran and its allies. By accepting the coalition’s cosmetic attempts to minimize civilian casualties, the Trump administration is signaling to Saudi and Emirati leaders its apparent belief that a clear military victory in Yemen remains possible. And as long as the coalition believes it can crush the Houthis, there’s little incentive for it to negotiate. Trump, then, has bought into Saudi Arabia’s zero-sum calculation: that a military win in Yemen for the kingdom and its allies would be a defeat for Iran, while a negotiated settlement with the Houthis would be a victory for Tehran. Blinded by its obsession with Iran, the Trump administration is perpetuating an unwinnable war and undermining the likelihood of a political settlement. Saudi and Emirati leaders want a clear-cut victory in their regional rivalry with Iran, and they have been emboldened by the Trump administration’s unconditional support to stall negotiations. A recent UN effort to hold peace talks between the Houthis, Hadi’s government, and the Saudi-led coalition collapsed in early September, after the Houthi delegation did not show up in Geneva. Houthi leaders said the Saudis, who control Yemen’s airspace, would not guarantee their safe travel. Days later, Yemeni forces loyal to the Saudi-UAE alliance launched a new offensive aimed at forcing the Houthis out of Hodeidah port, which is the major conduit for humanitarian aid in Yemen. UN officials warn that a prolonged battle for the port and its surroundings could lead to the death of 250,000 people, mainly from mass starvation. After the Trump administration’s endorsement this month, the Saudi-UAE alliance has even less incentive to prevent civilian casualties and new humanitarian disasters. Saudi Arabia and its allies are more likely to accept a peace process if it is clear that the United States won’t support an open-ended war in Yemen and won’t provide the military assistance required to keep the war apparatus going.
US withdrawal causes Chinese fill-in
Alice Su, 12-17-2019, "China deepens ties to Middle East as Trump downsizes U.S. role," Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-12-17/china-pivots-to-middle-east-as-trump-downsizes-u-s-role?fbclid=IwAR3oVRncog7HkgOQW7spEK4K-Pxh_yiarDVw9EFcwbVz5hnW16RWk0O-fHI
As President Trump eyes the exit in the Middle East, his critics have excoriated him for abdicating a strong U.S. role in the region and clearing a path for Russia’s dominance. Yet in their scramble to find new allies, regional states have also turned to a quieter but no less powerful U.S. rival: China. All this comes against the backdrop of a rising U.S.-China rivalry, exemplified by a yearlong trade war, saber-rattling in the western Pacific and a race for influence in Latin America and Africa. Flying largely under the radar, Beijing who has had great success in drawing Middle Eastern nations into its orbit at a time when President Trump is seen region-wide as a mercurial ally, if one at all. “The United States has become consistently inconsistent.… Regional players, including friends of the United States, increasingly view Washington as an unreliable partner,” said Anubhav Gupta, associate director of the Asia Society Policy Institute. “They are forming stronger ties with other major powers because they sense both an uncertainty about U.S. commitment to the region as well as a lack of clarity as to what position the U.S. will take from one moment to the next.” By contrast, there has been little question of Beijing’s commitment. Chinese foreign direct investment has steadily increased over the last 10 years, with Beijing emerging as a major player in energy purchases, with the region meeting more than 40 of the Asian giant’s energy needs. “Just buying oil, shifting the supplies of oil, would have huge impact on the economy of the gulf and the region,” said Andrea Ghiselli, coordinator of ChinaMed, an Italian-Chinese research project focusing on China’s role in the Mediterranean region.
US withdrawal causes China to ramp up economic agreements
Anand Toprani, 5-15-2019, "Oil and the Future of U.S. Strategy in the Persian Gulf," War on the Rocks, https://warontherocks.com/2019/05/oil-and-the-future-of-u-s-strategy-in-the-persian-gulf/
Moral hazard is something no policymaker should ignore, but policymakers must (in proper Clausewitzian fashion) evaluate the risks entailed in relation to the alternatives. Reducing moral hazard by limiting the U.S. presence in the Gulf to naval and counter-terrorist forces requires two assumptions: first, that the primary threats to regional security are of the nonstate variety; and second, that Russia and China’s ambitions in the Gulf do not threaten U.S. national interests. Neither assumption appears warranted: Russia and China’s relationship to Iran appears to be fraying, but both countries are nonetheless deepening their ties to other actors in the region. Russia has longstanding strategic interests throughout the Middle East. While Russia’s relations with the Arab world suffered due to Moscow’s support for the Assad regime during the Syrian civil war, the Russians have repaired some of the damage recently. Today, Russia plays an indispensable role in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries — which still controls 80 percent of global oil reserves — despite the fact that it is not even a member, by mediating disputes between the Gulf Arabs and Iran. While Russia is eventually going to have to make some tradeoffs, in the short run, its “transactional” approach to foreign policy makes it, like China, an attractive source of military and technical assistance for countries frustrated by what they perceive to be an unreliable United States. As for China, Beijing expects that the Gulf will play a vital role in the mission of the Belt and Road Initiative — sustaining China’s export-driven growth model through overseas infrastructure development while perhaps creating the foundations for an alternative global economic system to the Anglo-American liberal maritime order. Bearing all of this in mind, if containing China is truly in the U.S. national interest, why would that make the Gulf less significant considering its importance as a supplier of oil to Asia? Conclusion The fact that the United States is again energy “independent” does not change the underlying rationale for the U.S. presence in the Gulf. The region’s oil remains as vital today as it was after World War II. If we accept the proposition that America’s security is tied to the welfare of its allies and partners, the United States cannot afford to discard the Carter Doctrine, for there is no substitute for the security that U.S. military force provides. If anythingThus, a U.S. withdrawal from the Gulf could encourage China to accelerate the growth of its military capabilities there. U.S. allies such as Japan and South Korea could theoretically redeploy naval assets to the Gulf to protect their oil lifelines, but this would tilt the military balance in the Far East further in China’s favor, thereby undermining the U.S. “rebalance” to Asia.
China is a good mediator
Alice Su, 12-17-2019, "China deepens ties to Middle East as Trump downsizes U.S. role," Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-12-17/china-pivots-to-middle-east-as-trump-downsizes-u-s-role?fbclid=IwAR3oVRncog7HkgOQW7spEK4K-Pxh_yiarDVw9EFcwbVz5hnW16RWk0O-fHI
China has also had success presenting itself as a pragmatic partner, one whose foreign policy is characterized by a self-avowed commitment to national sovereignty and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. The attitude squares well with authoritarian governments in the region, which can do business with China without Beijing criticizing their human rights records or undemocratic systems. That stance has also enabled Beijing to maintaining relationships on all sides of long-standing Middle Eastern rifts, such as those between Iran and Saudi Arabia; Israel and the Palestinian territories; and one pitting Turkey and Qatar against a number of other Persian Gulf nations. As part of its engagement, Beijing has made inroads in supplying weapons to the region. The area is awash with older, Chinese-made light weapons that have found their way across the Middle East, with Beijing supplying bullets and rockets to various governments. China’s overall arms exports to the region are still minuscule in comparison with those of the United States and Russia, especially when it comes to heavier weapons and defense systems.
China wants a stable Yemen
Alican Tekingunduz, 12-13-2019, "What is China doing in Yemen?," What is China doing in Yemen?, https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/what-is-china-doing-in-yemen-32183
"Much of China’s trade with Europe passes through the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea, while Chinese imports of Middle Eastern and African oil transit through Bab el Mandeb and the Strait of Hormuz," I-wei Jennifer Chang, Research Fellow at the Global Taiwan Institute in Washington, DC told TRT World. Chang said although Yemen is "not of direct importance to China’s overall foreign policy goals", the country still occupies a geostrategic position straddling the international shipping lanes. "The Chinese would like to see peace and stability restored in Yemen so that Chinese companies could resume pre-2011 investments and trade and potentially play major roles in Yemen’s post-war reconstruction. The Chinese would also like Yemen to be stable in order to make Yemen play a more economically active role in Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative," Chang added. China has historically had good relations with Yemen. In 1956, both countries created formal diplomatic relations which makes Yemen the first Arabian Peninsula country to recognise the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the legitimate representative of the country.
Saudi airstrikes cause Yemen famine
Radhya Almutawakel, Abdulrasheed Alfaqih, 8-11-2016, "Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates Are Starving Yemenis to Death," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/08/saudi-arabia-and-the-united-arab-emirates-are-starving-yemenis-to-death-mbs-khashoggi-famine-yemen-blockade-houthis/
Saudi crimes in Yemen are not limited to regular and intentional bombing of civilians in violation of international humanitarian law. By escalating the war and destroying essential civilian infrastructure, Saudi Arabia is also responsible for the tens of thousands of Yemeni civilians who have died from preventable disease and starvation brought on by the war. The United Nations concluded that blockades have had “devastating effects on the civilian population” in Yemen, as Saudi and Emirati airstrikes have targeted Yemen’s food production and distribution, including the agricultural sector and the fishing industry. Meanwhile, the collapse of Yemen’s currency due to the war has prevented millions of civilians from purchasing the food that exists in markets. Food prices have skyrocketed, but civil servants haven’t received regular salaries in two years. Yemenis are being starved to death on purpose, with starvation of civilians used by Saudi Arabia as a weapon of war.
Millions die without US withdrawal
William J. Burns, 11-4-2019, "Opinion, This is a war Trump can end" Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/04/this-is-war-trump-can-end/
There is, however, one war that Trump can still help end. The war in Yemen may seem distant to most Americans, but its humanitarian and strategic consequences are enormous. The United Nations has called the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. More than 3 million Yemenis have been displaced, nearly a quarter of a million have been killed and more than 15 million are at risk of famine. The conflict has contributed to the worst cholera outbreak in modern history, and it’s getting worse by the day. The strategic implications are just as grave. Yemen’s U.N.-recognized government sits in exile, the Iranian-supported Houthis control the capital, and Islamic State and al-Qaeda affiliates are growing in the eastern part of the country, where they continue to plot against the West. | 905,528 |
349 | 380,228 | Potential Interps | Interpretation: On the March 2020 Public Forum topic at TFA state, debaters must disclose previously-read positions on the National Debate Coaches Association Public Forum wiki. The disclosure must be under their own school, team name, and correct side and must happen at least 30 minutes before the round and must include the author name, taglines, a hyperlink to the evidence, and full-text of all parts of the evidence they cite in context. | 905,536 |
350 | 380,181 | 0 - Contact Info | Hi, we're Neel and Jay! We will be disclosing cites this year. If there are any positions which aren't disclosed contact us and ask us to disclose them.
neel -
email: neel.kanamangala@gmail.com
fb - Neel Kanamangala
ig - @neelkanamangala
# - 4693959480
jay -
email - jaynamdhari1@gmail.com
fb - Jayant Namdhari
# - 4695730268
neel - best way to reach is is prob via text or ig
jay - Please try email and FB first, If I don't respond in 15 minutes then text. | 905,480 |
351 | 380,172 | NOVDEC ~-~- ISIS | isis uses the internet to continue to wreak havoc and spread terror
Ben Makuch In Tech, 8-6-2019, "ISIS Is Using Internet Propaganda to Maintain a 'Virtual Caliphate,' UN Report Says," Vice, https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/gyzx3j/isis-is-using-internet-propaganda-to-maintain-a-virtual-caliphate-un-report-says
According to the ... network of propaganda.
offensive cyber operations are used in conjunction with traditional attacks to destroy isis
Shannon Vavra, 8-3-2019, "U.S. cyber-offensive against ISIS continues, and eyes are now on Afghanistan, general says," CyberScoop, https://www.cyberscoop.com/isis-jtf-ares-cyber-offensive-afghanistan/
As loyalties among ... The Washington Post.
ocos are working against isis; we’ve killed their leader and seized all their land
Rukmini Callimachi and Eric Schmitt, 10-31-2019, "ISIS Names New Leader and Confirms al-Baghdadi’s Death," The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/world/middleeast/isis-al-baghdadi-dead.html
Days after the ... Syria and Iraq.
the impact is preventing terror
Dominic Dudley, xx-xx-xxxx, "Terrorism In Decline: Number Of Deaths By Terrorist Groups Falls For Third Year In A Row," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/12/05/terrorism-in-decline/#39ebb2b4203c
Is the world ... fell by 23.
It also devastates the economy
Dominic Dudley, xx-xx-xxxx, "Terrorism In Decline: Number Of Deaths By Terrorist Groups Falls For Third Year In A Row," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/12/05/terrorism-in-decline/#39ebb2b4203c
The economic impact ... terrorism,” says Killelea. | 905,473 |
352 | 380,183 | NOVDEC ~-~- Defense | Cyberattacks are skyrocketing
Garrett, Gregory. “Cyberattacks Skyrocketed in 2018: Are you ready 2019?” 12/13/18 Industry Week Magizine https://www.industryweek.com/technology-and-iiot/cyberattacks-skyrocketed-2018-are-you-ready-2019?fbclid=IwAR13dGWlGQAGbVy0cZ0LheYhHFTUenOP9NAVsMtnxUajPatJkqVv1JMLeeM
Board directors continue... and trade secrets).
Current preemptive OCO policy creates priority confusion and drains cyber-defense resources
Healey ’13 Jason Healey is director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council finds. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/08/clandestine-american-strategy-on-cyberwarfare-will-backfire
America's generals and ... priorities as well.
Focus on preemptive cyber-attack capability trades off with fixing critical cyber vulnerabilities
Rid 2013 Thomas Rid is a reader at the Department of War Studies, King's College London finds. 2013, http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112314/obama-administrations-lousy-record-cyber-security#
But the rhetoric ... in the Senate.
Defense solves cybercrime
McGraw 13 Gary McGraw, PhD is Chief Technology Of?cer of Cigital, and author of¶ Software Security (AWL 2006) along with ten other software security¶ books. He also produces the monthly Silver Bullet Security Podcast for¶ IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine (syndicated by SearchSecurity), Cyber War is Inevitable (Unless We Build Security In), Journal of Strategic Studies - Volume 36, Issue 1, 2013, pages 109-119, http://www.tandfonline.com.proxy.library.cornell.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/01402390.2012.742013
The conceptual con?ation ... at the same time.
The Impact is stopping IP theft
Caroline Jornier, 2008, (Caroline Joiner is executive director, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Intellectual Property Center.), “The Global Intellectual Property Center, US Chamber of Commerce
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT,” http://industrytoday.com/article/intellectual-property-theft/ dpet
Intellectual Property (IP) protection ... of its workforce.
That causes mass poverty
Harry Bradford, 04/05/13, (Former Associate Business Editor, The Huffington Post,) “Economic Shock Could Throw 900 Million People Into Poverty, IMF Study Warns,” Huffington Post, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/global-poverty-900-million-economic-shock_n_3022420 dpet
Hundreds of millions ... jobs in March. | 905,482 |
353 | 380,248 | March AFF - Emissions and Africa | Contention 1: Emissions
Solar and wind don’t always work, coal is used instead
Michael Shellenberger, 5-15-2018, "Solar And Wind Lock-In Fossil Fuels, And That Makes Saving The Climate Harder And More Expensive," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/15/solar-and-wind-lock-in-fossil-fuels-that-makes-saving-the-climate-harder-slower-more-expensive/#68f50f0421d4
The cognitive dissonance between my private beliefs and public position worsened as it became clear that, had France tried to decarbonize using a “clean energy mix” that included implementing solar and wind, it would have had to increase oil or gas-burning in order to maintain electric reliability. That’s because the electric system requires fast-ramping energy sources like oil and natural gas when the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing. As a result, had France increased solar and wind as part of a “clean energy mix,” it would have locked-in fossil fuels for decades and slowed decarbonization. Some solar and wind advocates suggest that batteries will play the role of fossil fuels and prevent that from happening, but consider that the calculations done by my colleagues Mark Nelson and Madison Czerwinski: Tesla’s much-hyped 100 MW lithium battery storage center in Australia can only provide enough backup power for 7,500 homes for four hours; The largest lithium battery storage center in the U.S. (in Escondido, California) can only provide enough power for 20,000 homes for four hours; Are a few hours of battery backup sufficient to integrate solar and wind onto the grid? Not in the slightest. Solar and wind are unreliable over months and years, not just hours. That means unfathomable quantities of electricity would need to be stored over months or years. Consider that: It would take 696 storage centers the size of Tesla’s in Australia to provide just four hours of backup power for the Australian grid — and cost $50 billion; It would require 15,280 storage centers the size of Escondido to provide just four hours of backup power for the U.S. grid — at an estimated cost of $764 billion.
Nuclear combines with renewables
William Budinger, 5-10-2019, "A Very Inconvenient Truth," Democracy Journal, https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/a-very-inconvenient-truth/
Yes, wind and solar generate carbon-free electricity. But because they require backups, renewables they lock in fossil fuel power plants as an essential apart of the electricity system. So what are the carbon-free options available to help and backup wind and solar? Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology (CCS), at this point, looks to be essential. Considering the fleet of new coal and gas plants currently being built around the world, with lifetimes of 40 to 60 years or more, retrofitting with CCS is probably an economic as well as environmental necessity. Unfortunately, we do not yet have the technology to make CCS even close to being economical. We also haven’t figured out how to handle the massive quantity of CO2 that would be captured. It is an area that deserves much more RandD than it’s getting. All of this brings us to that very inconvenient truth: As much as I hate to admit it, nuclear power is the only “shovel ready” technology we presently know of that can provide all the new electric power we’ll need as fast as we need it. In contrast to Germany, the countries such as France and Sweden that got rid of fossil-fuel electric generation did it with nuclear power. And they did it in less than 15 years. Nuclear can run 24/7 at nearly full power, so they don’t it doesn’t need fossil fuel backups. It is also an incredibly concentrated energy source, so generation capacity can be built out fast with much less land required. And despite my visceral fears of all things nuclear in the 1970s, data from decades of operation have shown that nuclear is the safest energy source available, producing less waste even than solar, producing power at a cost competitive or better than anything else, and harming thousands of times fewer people in its worst accidents than coal does in daily operation. France and Sweden’s nuclear programs have saved thousands of lives from the effects of burning fossil fuels. Gen IV nuclear promises to be even better. So although renewables will play an increasingly essential and important part on the path to deep decarbonization, without nuclear in the mix we will never be able to get there in time. As we now understand the urgency of climate change, I and many others have moved from a position of deep distrust of nuclear power to an acknowledgement that in combination with wind, and solar, and CCS, nuclear must play a serious role in climate solutions.
Vermont proves that no nuclear means fossil fuels
James Conca, 11-25-2019, "Nuclear Power Does Slow Climate Change," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/11/25/nuclear-power-does-slow-climate-change/#7006fdd27202
There a number of examples. The unnecessary closing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of 2014 led to an increase in fossil fuel use, specifically natural gas, that completely filled the gap. Same with San Onofre in California. In a report on the impact of shutting down Indian Point Nuclear Plant, the NYISO said three natural gas plants would replace the lost nuclear power when Indian Point completely shuts down in 2021.
Energy sector emits and pollutes
Union Of Concerned Scientists, 12-20-2017, "Benefits of Renewable Energy Use," Union of Concerned Scientists, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy-use#references
Human activity is overloading our atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other global warming emissions. These gases act like a blanket, trapping heat. The result is a web of significant and harmful impacts, from stronger, more frequent storms, to drought, sea level rise, and extinction. In the United States, about 29 percent of global warming emissions come from our electricity sector. Most of those emissions come from fossil fuels like coal and natural gas 1, 2.In contrast, most renewable energy sources produce little to no global warming emissions. Even when including “life cycle” emissions of clean energy (ie, the emissions from each stage of a technology’s life—manufacturing, installation, operation, decommissioning), the global warming emissions associated with renewable energy are minimal.
Energy sector emits - causes deaths
Sarah Mcquate-Washington, 11-21-2019, "Air pollution from power plants is killing people," Futurity, https://www.futurity.org/air-pollution-electricity-generation-early-deaths-2217302/
Air pollution from electricity generation emissions in 2014 led to about 16,000 premature deaths in the continental US, according to new research.In many states, the majority of the health impacts came from emissions originating in other states. The team also found that exposures were higher for black and white non-Latino Americans than for other groups, and that this disparity held even after accounting for differences in income.
Nuclear key to solving warming - 1.5 degree mark
No Author, 2018, "Nuclear energy and climate change," World Nuclear Association, https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/how-can-nuclear-combat-climate-change.aspx
In its 2018 report, Global Warming of 1.5°C8, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that the planet is likely to breach the 1.5°C threshold by as early as 2030. In most of the pathways consistent with keeping global temperatures below 1.5°C set out by the IPCC, nuclear power’s share of electricity generation increases significantly. Almost all proposed pathways to achieving for deep decarbonisation suggest an increased role for nuclear power, including those published by the International Energy Agency5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative9, US Energy Information Administration10, and World Energy Council11.
We need nuclear to keep under 4 degrees warming
Mark Lynas, 9-14-2012, "Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/14/nuclear-global-warming?newsfeed=true
Let me be very clear. Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost. Even many greens now admit this in private moments. We are already witnessing the first signs of the collapse in the biosphere this entails – with the Arctic in full-scale meltdown, more solar radiation is being captured by the dark ocean surface, and the weather systems of the entire northern hemisphere are being thrown into chaos. With nuclear, there is a chance that global warming this century can be limited to 2C; without nuclear, I would guess we are heading for 4C or above. That will devastate ecosystems and societies worldwide on a scale which is unimaginable.
Warming kills millions - we must take action
Sean Illing, 2-22-2019, "It is absolutely time to panic about climate change," Vox, https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/2/22/18188562/climate-change-david-wallace-wells-the-uninhabitable-earth
The UN says we’re on track to get to about 4 degrees or 4.3 degrees of warming by the end of the century if we continue as we are. I don’t think that we’ll get there, this century at least. I think that we’ll take enough action to avert that. But I think it’s really important to know what it would mean to land there, because that is a much more reasonable anchor for our expectations. “Our best-case scenario is basically one in which we lose the equivalent of 25 Holocausts — and that’s just from air pollution alone” Part of the problem when discussing climate threats is that so much of it feels abstract or distant. But as soon as you begin to quantify the damage, it’s pretty harrowing. For instance, you cite a recent study showing that we could avoid 150 million excess deaths from air pollution by end of century if we could limit warming to 1.5 degrees or hold warming at 2 degrees without relying on negative emissions.
C2: Africa
Squo fails, africa doesn’t have energy
Serusha Govender, 2-25-2020, "Africa grapples with clean energy conundrum," BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51615647?fbclid=IwAR2XR6HJpR_tPsjXyYxruWgrhnRFragla-u5xvBryScc8gl1EC_mGkRgmdA
More than two thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa, more than 600 million people, lack access to electricity. But electrification on the continent is still growing more slowly than anywhere else in the world, despite pledges to light up Africa in the next few decades.
People won’t get electricity, grids stalled
Carolyn Logan, 1-7-2020, "Progress in rolling out of national power grids has stalled across Africa," Conversation, https://theconversation.com/progress-in-rolling-out-of-national-power-grids-has-stalled-across-africa-128492
But on-the-ground observation and interviews throughout Africa suggest that the United Nations’ development goal of providing “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” remains a distant dream for many. Survey teams from the African research network Afrobarometer, asked people in 34 countries on the continent about access to electricity, and recorded the presence of an accessible grid. They found that because expansion of national electric grids appeared to have largely stalled in recent years. And even in areas where an electric grid was accessible, service often remained unreliable. Thus, About four in 10 Africans (42) lack an electricity connection in their homes. This is either because they are in zones not served by an electric grid or because they are not connected to an existing grid. In 16 countries, more than half of respondents had no electricity connection. This included more than three quarters of citizens in Burkina Faso (81), Uganda (80), Liberia (78), and Madagascar (76).
Nuclear can go overseas - trump wants to do it
Tom Dichristopher, 10-10-2018, “The US is losing the nuclear energy export race to China and Russia. Here’s the Trump team’s plan to turn the tide,” CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/21/trump-aims-to-beat-china-and-russia-in-nuclear-energy-export-race.html
The Trump administration is preparing a new push to help American companies compete in the race to build the next generation of nuclear power plants around the world — a competition the U.S. is currently losing. In doing so, the administration also aims to push back on the growing dominance of Russia and China in the space, preventing them from expanding their international influence by forging long-lasting nuclear ties with foreign powers. The State Department plans to expand cooperation with countries pursuing atomic energy long before those nations eve r purchase a nuclear reactor. By facilitating early stage talks, the U.S. intends to put American companies first in line to build tomorrow's fleet of nuclear power plants overseas. We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation. Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. To be sure, the Energy and Commerce departments actively facilitate U.S. nuclear cooperation with their foreign counterparts. But the State Department now intends to push the issue in talks at the highest levels of government, making it clear that Washington believes cooperation in the nuclear realm is central to its strategic relationships. But even with the State Department lending its diplomatic heft, winning nuclear energy contracts won't be easy. ...New plan takes shape During the address, Ford outlined State's plan to help American companies compete with Chinese and Russian firms. The department will more closely coordinate nuclear cooperation efforts across agencies and ramp up informal, non-binding talks with nations that might pursue nuclear energy technology. The goal is to expand the number of countries engaged in ongoing communication with U.S. government agencies, nuclear energy companies and researchers. The State Department will do this by signing nuclear cooperation memorandums of understanding with the countries. Under the MOUs, American experts would help foreign nations develop the apparatus necessary to accommodate a nuclear energy industry. That includes creating safety, security and non-proliferation protocols, as well as an independent regulatory system. That will make more countries "fully prepared to take advantage of the emerging technologies and coming innovations in reactor design and other areas that are being pioneered in the United States," Ford said. That marks a change from the past, said Ted Jones, director for national security and international programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's main trade group. "We've long urged greater coordination among the many agencies involved in U.S. nuclear exports and a genuinely strategic approach to U.S. nuclear cooperation," he said. "The State Department's plans for nuclear cooperation MOUs indicate that this Administration is moving in the right direction." There has long been an instinct within U.S. foreign policy circles to limit nuclear energy exports, if only to reduce the risk that those transfers will open the door to nuclear weapons proliferation. But if the U.S. continues to lose sales to other countries, its ability to set strong nonproliferation standards around the world will fade. Primary coolant pumps assembled by St Petersburg's Central Mechanical Engineering Design Bureau, a member of the Atomenergomash company group, and shipped to the Belarusian nuclear power plant. The State Department now plans to address nuclear energy cooperation in high-level meetings with presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers, a senior State Department official told CNBC. The department is currently drawing up priorities with two major considerations in mind, the official said. First, the State Department is identifying geostrategic opportunities, with a focus on the parts of the world where the U.S. is at risk of losing bids to rivals like Russia and China. Second, the government will consult nuclear energy companies about where they see the brightest opportunities and the best chances of closing deals. Next generation technology The industry is already on board with State's new initiative. The Nuclear Energy Institute regularly polls members on where they see opportunities overseas. In the survey that went out a few weeks ago, NEI asked members to identify their long-term market opportunities, a question that is consistent with Specifically, the State Department initiative. State's focus is on teeing up sales of a new generation of nuclear technology expected to come online in the next five to 10 years, the official said. Those include small modular reactors that can be bolted together to form larger units, Terrapower's traveling wave reactor backed by Bill Gates and microreactors meant to provide enough power for a few thousand homes. Altogether, there are about two dozen serious designs for advanced nuclear reactors trying to break into the market, said McGinnis. Under McGinnis and Secretary Rick Perry, one of the Energy Department's top priorities is facilitating the development of these new technologies. "We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation," he said. "Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. That's been our challenge." On Tuesday, NuScale Energy signed a memorandum to explore deploying its small modular reactors in Romania, after signing similar agreements with Canada and Jordan. The U.S. will still have to reach so-called 123 Agreements with foreign countries before American firms can sell nuclear reactors overseas. These agreements place limits on the use of nuclear technology and must be approved by Congress.
Microreactors solve the problem
Hannah Daly, 6-20-2018, "1.1 billion people still lack electricity. This could be the solution," World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/1-billion-people-lack-electricity-solution-mini-grid-iea/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Microreactors are safe, small, and don’t need much maintenance
Cory Hatch, 8-1-2019, "Experts explore options for microreactors in Alaska," Idaho National Laboratory, https://inl.gov/article/experts-explore-options-for-microreactors-in-alaska/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Dying nuclear industry - exports failing in squo
Jennifer T. Gordon, 1-9-2020, "International co-financing of nuclear reactors between the United States and its allies," Atlantic Council, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/international-co-financing-of-nuclear-reactors-between-the-united-states-and-its-allies/
It is critically important for global safety standards, nonproliferation agreements, and geopolitics that the United States play a leading role in the export of nuclear energy technologies. However, the domestic reactor fleet has struggled due to the deregulated US electricity market, inexpensive gas, and subsidies for renewables, which—in turn—has hampered US nuclear exports, since it is challenging to export a product that lacks a domestic market. However, building new reactors and bringing first-of-a-kind reactors to demonstration involve high capital costs and financial risk, for the purchasing party as well as the vendor. If the United States is to play a role at all in building new nuclear plants, it must address the challenges inherent in financing new nuclear builds; one mechanism to do this is through partnering with close US allies to co-finance new nuclear projects. If the United States and its allies fail to make their nuclear exports competitive, they will likely cede the mantle of global leadership in that area to Russia and China, where nuclear companies are state owned, easily able to finance nuclear exports, and already exploring emerging markets for nuclear exports..
Big market in africa for microgrids
Lili Francklyn, 2-12-2019, "Improving Energy Access in Rural Africa Depends on Renewable Energy Microgrids," HOMER Microgrid News and Insight, https://microgridnews.com/improving-energy-access-in-rural-africa-depends-on-renewable-energy-microgrids/
According to a 2018 Navigant report, the Middle East and Africa is forecast to be the world’s fastest growing market for microgrids – or minigrids as they are commonly known in Africa – at a Compound Annual Growth rate of 27, representing almost 1,145 MW by 2027. African governments are beginning to recognize the negative financial and environmental impacts of reliance on fossil fuels or biomass for energy, so forward-looking countries are shifting their policies to prioritize distributed renewable energy. “Africa doesn’t have a generation problem, it has a distribution problem,” says Aaron Leopold, Executive Director of the African Minigrid Developers Association (AMDA). He notes that because construction of transmission lines to scattered rural populations is prohibitively expensive and the cost of renewable energy equipment is declining, “minigrids can now deliver electricity to new users more cheaply than the central grid in many parts of Africa.” Leopold points out that while upfront costs to connect to the utility grid in Kenya might run $1,000 – or as much as $2,000 in Tanzania – AMDA reports an average minigrid connection cost of $938, which is continuing to fall. To conclude, the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that energy access in sub-Saharan Africa will improve steadily through 2030, and that many Africans – upwards of 200 million – will gain access to electricity through the deployment of microgrids. The agency says that decentralized solutions such as microgrids will be the most cost effective solution for more than 70 of people who gain energy access in rural areas. And by 2030 over 60 of that new access will be powered by renewable energy. 4
Big market provides the incentive for companies to go overseas with nuclear
Sara Stefanini, 3-13-2019, "Energy and oil majors turn to rural Africa in grab for world's next billion customers," Climate Home News, https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/03/13/energy-oil-majors-turn-rural-africa-grab-worlds-next-billion-customers/
The first step is to set up tiny renewable generators independent of main power grids, often sold on pay-as-you-go schemes like mobile phones. Once that basic energy supply is established – to charge phones, home lighting and other small appliances – it’s expected to fuel demand for a slew of new products and services, such as internet access, mobile banking, water pumps, mills, fridges, home batteries and cooking stoves. The reams of data on how these new customers use and pay for their energy will help companies decide their next moves. It’s a the potential bonanza that is drawing electricity, oil and gas, equipment-making and technology companies to invest in rural projects they once deemed too small and risky, especially in Africa. The interest is part of the industry’s broadening from large, centralised power plants and fossil fuels towards flexible, off-grid renewables. Just under 1 billion people worldwide lacked access to electricity as of 2017, with around 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa, according to the International Energy Agency.
Nuclear is key to solving africa's energy deficit
Jack Little, 3-5-2019, "Can Nuclear Power Solve Africa's Energy Problem?," Stanford University, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2019/ph241/little-j1/
Africa's increasing demand for energy comes at a time where much of the world is looking for renewable alternatives to carbon intensive energy sources. Nuclear power has the ability to both satisfy Africa's energy demand while also reducing their carbon footprint. Additionally, this energy source has the capability of solving the africa’scontinent's energy deficit issue. Many sub-Saharan countries are not well developed in their power sectors, which places the region in a $90 billion annual power infrastructural deficit. 2 Also, fossil fuel power sources require continuous transportation of fuel, which is challenging in Africa due to lacking pipeline and transportation infrastructure. 2 However, nuclear power plants impose fewer constraints on location because of denser fuel and lesser size, allowing them to be more strategically placed in order to reduce transportation and transmission costs. 2 Nuclear energy can therefore serve as a solution to Africa's energy deficit as well as their energy infrastructure issues while also providing the population with a carbon-free source of reliable energy.
People use biomass in africa
Kitty Stecher, 2013, ","International Renewable Energy Agency, https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/archive/hub/publications/115608/biomass-potential-africa.pdf
Despite an increase in energy use, many poor households in Africa have no access to modern energy sources. Worldwide, SSA and India have the greatest proportion of population dependent on traditional biomass use. In Africa, a total of 657 million people (80 of the population) rely on the traditional use of biomass for cooking (IEA, 2010). It is important given this scale of biomass use that modern bioenergy systems are able to provide an important contribution to future energy systems and to the development of sustainable energy supplies (Berndes, Hoogwijk and Broek, 2003)
Biomass is unsafe and kills
No Author, 5-8-2018, "Household air pollution and health,” World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
Around 3 billion people still cook using solid fuels (such as wood, crop wastes, charcoal, coal and dung) and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves. Most of these people are poor, and live in low- and middle-income countries. These cooking practices are inefficient, and use fuels and technologies that produce high levels of household air pollution with a range of health-damaging pollutants, including small soot particles that penetrate deep into the lungs. In poorly ventilated dwellings, indoor smoke can be 100 times higher than acceptable levels for fine particles. Exposure is particularly high among women and young children, who spend the most time near the domestic hearth. 3.8 million people a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels and kerosene for cooking.
Energy poverty means that people stay in poverty
Sri Mulyani Indrawati, 7-28-2015, "What you need to know about energy and poverty," World Bank Blogs, https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/what-you-need-know-about-energy-and-poverty
We find that energy poverty means two things: Poor people are the least likely to have access to power. And they are more likely to remain poor if they stay unconnected. Around one in seven, or 1.1 billion people, don’t have access to electricity, and almost 3 billion still cook with polluting fuels like kerosene, wood, charcoal, and dung. In Africa, the electricity challenge remains daunting. In Liberia, for example, just 2 of the population has regular access to electricity. Even countries with access often have highly unreliable service. One in three developing countries experiences at least 20 hours of power outages a month. When power is available, it can be expensive: In many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, consumers pay as much as 20-50 cents per kilowatt-hour against a global average close to 10 cents. Inclusive economic growth is the single most effective means of reducing poverty and boosting prosperity. Yet most economic activity is impossible without adequate, reliable and competitively priced modern energy. This is why access to energy is so important in the fight against poverty. | 905,556 |
354 | 380,210 | APR - NEG Mines, Bahrain, Prolif | We negate
C1: Minesweeper
The greatest threat to sea is mines
Norman Fiedman, SLDInfo, "On the Cusp of an Undersea Revolution: Shaping New Ways to Deal with the Threat from Mines", 9-7-16, https://sldinfo.com/2016/09/on-the-cusp-of-an-undersea-revolution-shaping-new-ways-to-deal-with-the-threat-from-mines/
A new epoch––autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs)––promises a radical change in undersea warfare at just the time when conventional technology is becoming less and less affordable throughout the naval world. The greatest threat to warships and commercial shipping is not anti-ship missiles or torpedoes, but rather mines. Potential adversary navies have on the order of 386,000 naval mines––China 80,000; Iran 6,000; North Korea 50,000; and Russia 250,000––facilitating anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) strategies, while U.S. Navy assessments indicate that a million mines are in the inventories of more than 50 navies world wide.
The nub of the problem is keeping up with the global threat, which today includes weapons of some 300 different types, from rudimentary but still-dangerous World War I-era contact mines to highly sophisticated, multiple-influence, programmable weapons, many available on the open market.
Mines are easily dumped into the straights
Tyler Rogoway, The Drive, "Naval Mines Are A Growing Threat Near The Mandeb Strait", MAY 12, 2017, https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10235/naval-mines-are-a-growing-threat-near-the-mandeb-strait
Although missile and drone boat attacks garner big news, a threat just as deadly quietly looms in the form of sea mines that have been persistently deployed by Houthi rebels. These weapons have already struck local ships with devastating effects. On March 11th a Yemeni Coastguard vessel struck one of these mines, killing two and wounding eight of its crew. The strike resulted in Yemeni forces executing a rudimentary anti-mine warfare operation in the area, in which multiple mines were found and disarmed. But more mines can easily be dumped into the water, and those already floating in the waterway can travel great distances via ocean currents. Other barely reported mine strikes around the strait have occurred in recent months. Major General Ahmed Al-Assiri, the spokesman for the Saudi Arabian military, stated the following late last March:
Blake Stilwell, Military.com, “How the Navy is Taking Divers Out Of Minesweeping, “ 4 Feb 2020
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/02/04/how-navy-taking-divers-out-minesweeping.html
Naval mines are...seismic, pressure, and magnetic
US navy solves by taking out the mines
Neal Ungerleider, Fast Company, "Why Energy Companies And The Military Want Underwater Drones", 08-06-13, https://www.fastcompany.com/2682715/why-energy-companies-and-the-military-want-underwater-drones
Von Alt explains that the United States Navy routinely uses AUVs for mine countermeasure operations in the Persian Gulf. The Navy’s Fifth Fleet, based in the troubled island nation of Bahrain, has to detect potential or existing mines in the Persian Gulf; Iran has threatened to mine the Persian Gulf if armed hostilities commence with the United States. Hydroid’s Remus (Remote Environmental Measuring Units) line of AUVs were used in a recent war games-like exercise alongside other anti-mine drones such as the SeaFox unmanned submarine. As Von Alt puts it, his company’s Remus drones are “free-swimming vehicles programmed with a laptop that dive underwater and operate without human intervention. They’re different from other drones not only because they’re underwater, but because they have very little communication bandwidth. While they are capable limited amounts of information while they are underwater, operators have to wait until they are recovered to analyze the high resolution data they collect while submerged.”
There are many chokepoints - bad for stability
Johanna Lehne, Resource Trade, "Chokepoints and vulnerabilities in global food trade", 2017 , https://resourcetrade.earth/stories/chokepoints-and-vulnerabilities-in-global-food-trade#section-131
Countries depend on chokepoints to different degrees. The importance of a chokepoint to a particular country depends not only on the share of that country’s imports that pass through it, but also on how easily alternative supply routes or sources of the commodity in question can be found. Another key factor is the vulnerability of a given country. The more food-insecure or fragile a state is, the larger the impact of a chokepoint disruption is likely to be. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries are especially exposed to chokepoint disruption. The region has some of the most food import-dependent countries in the world. These consumer markets rely heavily on grain exports from the Black Sea region, transported via a succession of chokepoints: the Russian and Ukrainian railways and ports, through the Turkish Straits and down through the Suez Canal. Gulf importers also rely on shipments coming northwards through the Strait of Hormuz and Strait of Bab al-Mandab. Over a third of GCC food imports pass through at least one chokepoint for which no alternative route exists. Historical links between food insecurity and political and social instability make the region’s high dependence on chokepoints a cause for concern.
90 of food consumption reliant
Lichtfouse, Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, "Sustainable Agriculture Reviews", 2017, https://sci-hub.tw/https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-58679-3_3
There are suggestions (Fader et al. 2013; Alcott 2010, 2012) that we cannot count on food production to keep pace with population growth indefinitely for a number of reasons: (i) the land suitable to be converted into agricultural production is shrinking; (ii) land conversion often incurs high environmental and social costs; (iii) soil degradation and water scarcity curtail production capacity, especially in arid, hot regions like the gulf and the wider middle East. The food security of the Arabian Gulf States relies almost entirely upon food import, with imports typically accounting on average for 80–90 of food consumption (Bailey and Willoughby 2013; The Economist 2012). This means importing countries depend on the political, environmental, and economic situations prevailing in the exporting countries that might choose or be forced to alter the supply of food available to the market (Fader et al. 2013). For example, following drought and wildfires in 2010, Russia imposed a temporary ban on wheat exports (Welton 2011; Trostle et al. 2011). Similar situations have also emerged during more recent food crisis of 2007/2008, when food price spiked caused governments of major exporting countries to impose restrictions and/or bans on exports for fear of food shortages (Trostle et al. 2011; Maetz et al. 2011). For net food importing countries, such episodes represent an existential threat to national food security. In addition, there are genuine concerns that import routes can become vulnerable to disruption if the current violence in the Middle East escalates to a level of instability (Bailey and Willoughby 2013). Oil-rich Gulf States were able to afford food import. However, due to rapid changes in the region and declining oil prices, there are potential risks associated with the complete reliance on food import.
Millions are in hunger across the ME
Zeina Karam, Business Insider, "Millions of people are being starved to death as food is used as a weapon across the Middle East", 2-1-16, https://www.businessinsider.com/millions-are-being-starved-to-death-across-the-middle-east-2016-2
Millions of people across countries like Syria, Yemen and Iraq are gripped by hunger, struggling to survive with little help from the outside world. Children suffer from severe malnutrition, their parents often having to beg or sell possessions to get basic commodities including water, medicine and fuel. The biggest humanitarian catastrophe by far is Syria, where a ruinous five-year civil war has killed a quarter of a million people and displaced half the population. All sides in the conflict have used punishing blockades to force submission and surrender from the other side — a tactic that has proved effective particularly for government forces seeking to pacify opposition-held areas around the capital Damascus.
C2: Bahrain
Bahrain is an area of proxy competition
SImon Mabon , Middle East Policy Council , "The Battle for Bahrain: Iranian-Saudi Rivalry", 2012, https://mepc.org/battle-bahrain-iranian-saudi-rivalry
Bahrain offers rich scope for analysing the relationship between Tehran and Riyadh on both ideological and geopolitical grounds. First, the Kingdom of Bahrain is perceived to be the epicentre of the peninsula's "sectarian disenfranchisement."1 Indeed, within Bahrain, 70-75 percent of the population is Shia, who are perceived to have ties with Iran. In contrast, the ruling Al Khalifa family is Sunni and possesses strong ties to Saudi Arabia. Secondly, Bahrain's geographic location provides opportunity to analyse geopolitical competition within the bilateral relationship.This article argues that Bahrain has provided a proxy arena of competition between Tehran and Riyadh that possesses key strategic value for both states. Given the fractious nature of identity incongruence within Bahrain, notably between the Sunni ruling family and the much larger Shia population, it is undeniable that the kingdom faces serious internal-security challenges. These challenges then leave Bahrain open to the influence of other actors, for whom the stability of the country is strategically important. The article suggests that, although the veracity of claims detailing the Iranian influence in supporting the Shia of Bahrain is uncertain, the strategic importance of the Al Khalifa for Saudi Arabia, coupled with a history of Iranian action in Bahrain, clerical ties and Iranian rhetoric, means that Riyadh has to act under the assumption that these claims are valid.
US withdrawal would promote instability b/c Iran angry + topple government
Brent Nagtegaal , The Trumpet, "United States Withdrawal Threatens Bahrain", 6/14/2016, https://www.thetrumpet.com/14049-united-states-withdrawal-threatens-bahrain
The Saudis, however, cannot allow Bahrain to fall under Iranian influence. Should the Shiites gain power in Bahrain, it could stir up the Shiites only 16 miles away in Saudi Arabia’s eastern province. While Saudi Arabia has a large Sunni majority, 10 to 15 percent of its population is Shiite—and virtually all of them live on the coast next to Bahrain. These Shiite-populated areas live atop Saudi Arabia’s most important and lucrative oil fields. Revolution there could undermine Saudi Arabia’s revenue streams and security. Because of these factors, Saudi Arabia cannot allow a Iranian-aligned nation on the western side of the Persian Gulf. Iran also understands Saudi Arabia’s vulnerability, which is why it has been trying to topple the Bahraini monarchy and replace it with an Iran-friendly Shiite “democracy.” Within two years after the shah of Iran was booted from office, the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, a virtual proxy of Iran, attempted a coup d’etat in Bahrain. The takeover was unsuccessful, yet it provided the needed motivation for Saudi Arabia and Bahrain to finish the bridge quickly. It was now obvious that if the regime in Bahrain was to survive further uprisings, easier access to the Saudi mainland was needed. This would make it possible for the Saudi military to speedily reinforce the Bahraini government by sending forces over the causeway when necessary. Fast-forward to the start of 2011 and the beginning of the Arab Spring: Long-standing dictatorships across the Middle East and North Africa were starting to crumble in the wake of massive internal uprisings. Conditions in Bahrain were heating up. When 75 percent of a country’s citizens are not allowed to participate in the military, do not have easy access to government jobs, and have experienced years of countless other instances of prejudice, it is not difficult to see that Bahrain was primed for a revolt.
US fifth fleet protects Bahrain from invasion
Aymenn Al-Tamimi, American Thinker, "Bahrain: Can The U.S. Do Anything?", 6-19-2011, http://www.aymennjawad.org/9786/bahrain-can-the-us-do-anything
Indeed, fears of Iranian designs on Bahrain are not at all irrational, for Iran most recently made a claim to the island in 2005, as it has done so many times before. The idea that Bahrain really belongs to Iran dates from before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. For instance, under the preceding Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, a resolution was passed in November 1957, declaring Bahrain to be Iran's fourteenth province. Of course, given Iran's efforts to achieve regional hegemony, a gradual takeover of Bahrain is crucial for the Islamic Republic's ambition to dominate the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Thus, the presence of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet in Bahrain is important for preventing Iran from realizing such goals.
If Bahrain falls, then the Saudi Coalition will come and invade
Brent Nagtegaal , The Trumpet, "United States Withdrawal Threatens Bahrain", 6/14/2016, https://www.thetrumpet.com/14049-united-states-withdrawal-threatens-bahrain
Then, as now, Bahrain’s Sunni Khalifa monarchy feared that Iran would use its command of the Shia sect of Islam to influence and motivate Bahrain’s Shiite majority to rebel against the king. The Bahrain Islands are only 16 miles from Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province. The Saudis, however, cannot allow Bahrain to fall under Iranian influence. Should the Shiites gain power in Bahrain, it could stir up the Shiites only 16 miles away in Saudi Arabia’s eastern province. While Saudi Arabia has a large Sunni majority, 10 to 15 percent of its population is Shiite—and virtually all of them live on the coast next to Bahrain. These Shiite-populated areas live atop Saudi Arabia’s most important and lucrative oil fields. Revolution there could undermine Saudi Arabia’s revenue streams and security. Because of these factors, Saudi Arabia cannot allow a Iranian-aligned nation on the western side of the Persian Gulf. Iran also understands Saudi Arabia’s vulnerability, which is why it has been trying to topple the Bahraini monarchy and replace it with an Iran-friendly Shiite “democracy.” Within two years after the shah of Iran was booted from office, the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, a virtual proxy of Iran, attempted a coup d’etat in Bahrain. The takeover was unsuccessful, yet it provided the needed motivation for Saudi Arabia and Bahrain to finish the bridge quickly. It was now obvious that if the regime in Bahrain was to survive further uprisings, easier access to the Saudi mainland was needed. This would make it possible for the Saudi military to speedily reinforce the Bahraini government by sending forces over the causeway when necessary.
CIvil wars are absolutely a humanitarian disaster
Candace Rondeaux, New America, "TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY PROXY WARFARE", Febuary 2019 , https://d1y8sb8igg2f8e.cloudfront.net/documents/Twenty-First_Century_Proxy_Warfare_Final.pdf
Proxy warfare will shape twenty-first century conflicts for the foreseeable future. Cold War norms, however, no longer apply in a highly networked, multipolar world. The erosion of state power, rise of transnational social movements, and proliferation of advanced military and communications technology are shifting the horizons of strategic surprise. The enhanced military capacity of former Cold War client states to engage either covertly or overtly in conflicts is erasing front lines, transforming alliances, and reshaping battlefield dynamics. Whereas Moscow and Washington once set the rules of the game, the number of state and non-state sponsors of proxy forces is growing in today’s globalized market. Today a complex mesh of partnerships among states, corporations, mercenaries, and militias is changing the way wars are fought and won. The devastating impact of proxy war is keenly felt in the Greater Middle East and its periphery. While conflicts in Ukraine and Afghanistan appear stuck, for the moment, in a precarious status quo, Syria, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen stand out as ground zero in multi-sided proxy wars that are testing international norms. From U.S.-backed Kurdish forces and Russian private military security contractors in Syria, to Iranian-backed Houthi rebels and UAE-supported militias in Yemen, proxy fighters today play an outsized role in the grand strategy of multiple states. They have developed relationships with a diverse range of sponsors for their own, often divergent, ends—at times apocalyptic and revolutionary—while creating their own networks of sub-state proxies. U.S. policy—in flux since the Arab Spring—has yet to integrate this new reality. Unable and unwilling to commit to direct military intervention after long, costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. national security establishment is doubling down on proxy warfare, gambling on a strategy that advances U.S. interests “by, with, and through” local partners. This is a risky wager and it is still unclear whether it is a winning bet. Civil wars raging in the so-called “arc of instability” spanning littoral zones of the Mediterranean Middle East, Black Sea, and Persian Gulf regions today remain among the greatest threats to international security. Conflict there has displaced tens of millions of people, killed hundreds of thousands, and devastated large swaths of the region’s economy and infrastructure. Competition among Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel for regional primacy and renewed rivalry with Russia and China are forcing Washington to reconfigure its grand strategy. Current conceptions of proxy warfare do not account for the paradigm shift underway.
Indirect deaths up to 4 times
Florence Gaub, Brief Issue, "Arab wars: calculating the costs", 2017, https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/Brief202520Arab20wars.pdf
Conflict does not end, however, with victories or losses on the battlefield. Indirect deaths, injuries and psychological traumas continue to affect states and societies long after the fighting has ceased. Indirect deaths from war are, however, much harder to calculate than direct ones. By some estimates, per direct death, there are on average four indirect ones from various causes such as lack of access to clean water or medi- cal care, disease, exposure to harmful materials (for example, metals or chemicals) or famine. In Iraq, for instance, indirect deaths from political violence in the period 2003-2007 claimed the lives of at least 200,000 Iraqis – three times the number of direct deaths. The ratio is even higher for the first Gulf war: 77 of all victims were indirect deaths as the conflict destroyed crucial infrastructure, leading to water pollution and electricity shortfalls. As with indirect deaths, data regarding injuries is scarce. Nevertheless, there are some statis- tics which indicate that at least as many peo- ple were injured in Iraq post-2003 as were killed. According to other estimates which only count those injured in terrorist incidents, some 110,000 individuals were affected between 2004-2010, while for every person killed in a suicide attack, 2.5 were wounded. In Syria, the number of injured victims stands at 1.9 million – four times higher than the number of people killed. It is noteworthy that the majority (60) of these victims were injured by bombing or shelling rather than firearms; as a result, many suffered from fractures. As this type of complex injury requires urgent treatment by specialists (which Iraq lacks), a quarter of these victims had to undergo amputation.
C3: Saudi Arabia Proliferation
Saudi Arabia will get nukes without the US
Yoel Guzansky, Institute for National Security Studies, "Toward a Nuclear Middle East", January 2013, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324415961_Toward_a_Nuclear_Middle_East
For Saudi Arabia, the American nuclear umbrella seemed preferable over the years to an independent effort to obtain a nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, the consequences of nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran for Saudi Arabia’s security and the rising doubt in Riyadh regarding the willingness of the US to continue providing it with a defense guarantee are likely to tip the balance of Saudi considerations. If Riyadh feels that it may have to contend alone with a nuclear Iran, it may be the first to acquire nuclear capability. More than any other Middle East country, Saudi Arabia has an ideological and strategic motive for obtaining nuclear weapons, and also possesses the economic ability to do so. Former senior advisor to President Barack Obama on the Middle East Dennis Ross revealed that Saudi Arabian King Abdullah explicitly warned the US President that if Iran obtains nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia would follow suit.
Event of withdrawal, Saudi will buy from Pakistan
Seth Cropsey, Foreign Policy, "A U.S. Withdrawal Will Cause a Power Struggle in the Middle East", 12/17/2019, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/17/us-withdrawal-power-struggle-middle-east-china-russia-iran/
The unique mix of political forces in the Middle East suggests three possibilities in the event of U.S. naval withdrawal from the region, and none favor U.S. interests.
First, Russia may broker a political arrangement among Turkey, Israel, and Iran, or, alternatively, support a coalition pitting some of those states against another in an effort to manufacture a manageable regional balance of power and allowing it to shift its attention back to Europe. The final shape of this strategy would depend on several variables: Turkey’s approach to Syria, Israel’s posture against Iran (and its proxies), the outcome of Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen, the Kurdish question, and the possibility of the Islamic State’s resurgence.
Regardless of these factors, Russia will still bid for control of the Mediterranean Sea, which the United States will be hard-pressed to counter, particularly if China can manipulate its European economic partners into limiting or expelling the U.S. Navy from its Mediterranean bases. If that happens, Washington will have to fight its way back into the region for the first time since World War II. In the second scenario, Iran defeats Saudi Arabia in a regional confrontation, thereby taking the top leadership spot in the Islamic world, making it a great power in its own right. Control of Middle Eastern oil exports would give Iran the ability to coerce and bully the United States’ European and Pacific allies, and it would deny the United States any peaceful access to the Levantine Basin. The balancing dynamics against this new great power are difficult to project, but regardless, the United States’ ability to control the strategic environment would be hampered markedly. Third, a long-term regional war between Tehran and a fluctuating anti-Iran coalition composed of Saudi Arabia, other Sunni Gulf states, and Israel would cause widespread bloodshed. As the 1980s Iran-Iraq War demonstrated, both Iran and Saudi Arabia would be likely to attempt nuclear breakout. With Iran, this would mean closing the small technological gap that now exists between its low-enriched uranium to the higher level of enrichment needed for a nuclear weapon. The Saudis could pay scientists from a sympathetic Sunni nuclear state—such as Pakistan—or simply buy nuclear weapons from Islamabad. An increasingly fractured and war-ravaged Middle East would spawn more jihadist organizations, and the West would be their primary target. Absent a reliable U.S. presence, Saudi Arabia and perhaps even Israel would increasingly turn to Russia and China as great-power guarantors, leaving U.S. officials in the unfortunate position of hoping polar ice will melt quickly enough to allow unrestricted year-round access over the Arctic, diminishing the importance of the Mediterranean. But hope can only go so far, and the United States needs a more concrete, long-term approach to the Middle East. Despite modest increases in U.S. defense spending in recent years, peer and near-peer competition increasingly puts the predominance of the U.S. military at risk. In testimony before the Senate last year, Adm. Philip S. Davidson, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, noted that China is “approaching military parity” with the United States “in a number of critical areas,” and that “there is no guarantee that the United States would win a future conflict with China.”
Saudi Arabia already bought some nukes from Pakistan
Julian Borger, The Guardian , "Pakistan's bomb and Saudi Arabia", 5/11/2010, https://www.theguardian.com/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2010/may/11/pakistan-saudiarabia
Putting it briefly: Turkey would not jeopardise the Nato umbrella by going nuclear unilaterally. Egypt has considered its options and decided it cannot afford to go nuclear and risk losing its annual US grant. The biggest worry is Saudi Arabia, which cannot rely on a US nuclear umbrella for reasons of domestic and regional politics.
According to western intelligence sources (the meeting was under Chatham House rules so I am not allowed to be more specific) the Saudi monarchy paid for up to 60 of the Pakistani nuclear programme, and in return has the option to buy a small nuclear arsenal ('five to six warheads) off the shelf if things got tough in the neighbourhood.
There has been much reporting about this alleged deal over recent years, notably by The Guardian back in 2003, when Ewen MacAskill and Ian Traynor wrote about a Saudi strategic review to weigh the kingdom's nuclear options.
A report by Mark Fitzpatrick at the IISS in 2008 on Nuclear Programmes in the Middle East, found the Guardian article was "an accurate representation of what had emerged from the Saudi side during discussions" at a symposium in Britain attended by several members of the Saudi royal family.
Saudi Arabia could get a nuke in a matter of hours
Peter A. Wilson, National interest, "Will the Saudis Go Nuclear?", Oct 16, 2019 , https://nationalinterest.org/feature/will-saudis-go-nuclear-88706?page=02C1
Critics at home have taken notice of this apparent inability to produce results. MbS and his domestic allies, now on the defensive, may conclude that the rapid acquisition of a nuclear arsenal would be the most effective way of transforming Saudi Arabia’s current circumstances. A similar rationale was employed by Charles de Gaulle during the late 1950s and early 1960s. In de Gaulle’s view, France should acquire the bomb on the basis that it resided in what was then a dangerous neighborhood; could not afford a large, technologically-advanced, combined-arms force; and could not afford to trust others (namely, the United States) to provide a reliable extended deterrent. De Gaulle was further motivated by the idea of enhancing France’s international prestige and that of her armed forces. Pakistan’s national security elite employed a similar logic behind their own decision to develop a nuclear deterrent in the late 1990s. ALTHOUGH NORTH Korea might at some future date be prepared to sell nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia for the right price, it is much more likely that Pakistan would be the source of Saudi Arabia’s rapid acquisition of nuclear weapons capability. At this point in time, Prime Minister Imran Khan and his government face a full-blown balance of payments crisis precipitated by the previous administration of Nawaz Sharif. Seeking to elevate Pakistan’s economic profile, Sharif “bet the farm” on a massive injection of Chinese capital to rapidly modernize Pakistan’s transportation and energy production infrastructures under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Hopes for rapid success have come up short though, due to corruption, internal resistance from within the key province of Balochistan and the rising interest costs of acquiring Chinese debt. Currently, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are negotiating a five-year, $6–11 billion financial assistance package for Pakistan. More recently, during a summit in Islamabad with Pakistan’s political and military leadership, MbS concluded $20 billion worth of investments in Pakistan’s energy and minerals sectors. Despite these new investments though, the Khan administration is hard-pressed for cash. It has had to negotiate for another financial bailout by the International Monetary Fund to the tune of $6 billion at the cost of limiting economic sovereignty. Yet even that isn’t enough to pay down the current crisis.
The Khan administration and its military allies, therefore, will soon search for an additional source of loans from the international community. Might there not be an opportunity for a much more massive cash injection if Pakistan could provide MbS with a nearly instant operational nuclear arsenal? In fact, is it not possible that this very idea was considered and discussed in secret during the Islamabad summit? Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have an enduring security relationship that goes back decades. Examples include Pakistani military training provided for the Saudi National Guard, or when Islamabad dispatched a battalion-sized security force to Saudi Arabia to help pacify the domestic turmoil unleashed by the 1979 militant attacks on Mecca. There have also been reports that it was Saudi Arabia that provided Pakistan with the financial assistance necessary for the latter to develop its nuclear weapons program. That Riyadh might turn to Islamabad for assistance in acquiring the bomb is actually rather plausible.
The middle east would see escalation and miscalc
Edelman 2011, Foreign Affairs https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/persian-gulf/2011-01-01/dangers-nuclear-iran
Were Saudi Arabia to acquire nuclear weapons, the Middle East would count three nuclear-armed states, and perhaps more before long. It is unclear how such an n-player competition would unfold because most analyses of nuclear deterrence are based on the U.S.-Soviet rivalry during the Cold War. It seems likely, however, that the interaction among three or more nuclear-armed powers would be more prone to miscalculation and escalation
A regional arms race would light up when Saudi gets anuke.
Bowman, The Middle East, "U.S. Interest in Reducing Weapons and Terrorism", 2012, https://www.vashonsd.org/cms/lib8/WA01919522/Centricity/Domain/120/USMilitaryMidEastNO.pdf
The second highly important interest of the United States in the Middle East is to ensure that state and non-state actors in the region do not develop, obtain, or use weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Although the threats posed by biological and chemical weapons also warrant the attention of policy makers, nuclear weapons are unique in their ability to inflict casualties on a catastrophic scale. In the Middle East today, Iran presents the most serious threat to U.S. efforts to stop nuclear weapons proliferation. At worst, Tehran the capital of Iran could use its nuclear weapons to launch a first strike against Israel or could deliberately and covertly give nuclear weapons-related technology or materials to terrorist groups such as Hizballah to strike Israel and U.S. interests while minimizing the obvious fingerprints that would invite retaliation. Although these concerns should not be prematurely discounted, little evidence exists to suggest that Iran would take such steps that would virtually guarantee Iran's destruction. Iranian development of nuclear weapons, however, would most likely lead to a more aggressive Iranian foreign policy, could potentially spark a regional nuclear arms race, and would increase the likelihood that nuclear technology or materials could inadvertently end up in the hands of terrorist groups such as Hizballah or al Qaeda. Given the nature of the Iranian political and military establishment, it is entirely plausible that a disenchanted, corrupt, or ideologically motivated group of actors could transfer key nuclear technology, materials, or weapons without the knowledge of the Iranian leaders, similar to nuclear scientist A. Q. Adbul Qadeer Khan's behavior in Pakistan. As more states obtain nuclear weapons and as nuclear technology and expertise become increasingly available, the chance that a nuclear transfer could lead to a successful attack against the United States and its friends increases. The United States' third vital interest is fostering a region that does not spawn, suffer from, or export violent Islamist extremism. Al Qaeda and its associated terrorist movements represent the most serious threat facing the U.S. homeland and U.S. interests in the Middle East. The United States must therefore work with its regional partners to capture or kill violent Islamist extremists who threaten U.S. interests while addressing the causes of radicalization in the Middle East that are creating the next generation of Islamist terrorists
MAD doesn't exist in the middle east
Bar, Standpoint, "A Mad Call to Arms", 2009, https://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/september-2009/a-mad-call-to-arms-features-september-09-middle-east-nuclear-weapons/
The Cold War was in essence a bilateral struggle between American and Soviet blocs, which simplified the signaling of intentions and prevention of misunderstandings. Scott Sagan, in The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed, has pointed out that the early stages of the Cold War were far less stable than our selective memories would like to believe. Stability was achieved only after crisis after crisis convinced the two sides to install measures to prevent inadvertent catastrophe. The Cold War paradigm was based on a broad spectrum of means of communication: diplomatic relations and hotlines on the strategic level and means to convey urgent messages on tactical levels, confidence of both sides in their ability to maintain escalation dominance in case of tension.
A “polynuclear” Middle East will be fundamentally different and less stable. Between Israel and the two key candidates for nuclearisation — Iran and Saudi Arabia — diplomatic relations do not exist. This will make hotlines and the sending of calming signals much more difficult. In these circumstances, no party will have escalation dominance and the potential for the spiralling of tensions leading to nuclear confrontation is greater than ever in the Cold War. Nuclear alerts by one party will not be interpreted only by the party it was intended for but by all other parties, which may react accordingly, contributing to spiralling multilateral escalation.
Furthermore, the essence of MAD was the existence of a credible “secondstrike” capability. This was based on large stockpiles in both superpowers and the deployment of delivery capabilities that could survive a first strike (either due to their protection or their offshore deployment) and assure mutual destruction. Indeed, the first years of the Cold War, before the two superpowers developed the capabilities for mutual destruction and the command and control mechanism to prevent such a catastrophe, were the most dangerous and held the highest risk of both nuclear war and local conflicts under the “umbrella” of nuclear deterrence.
Hence, for the foreseeable future, there will be no balance of MAD in the Middle East. Even assuming the maximum rate of acquisition of weapons grade fissile material for building nuclear weapons, the new nuclear nations will not reach a level of MAD for some decades. For some time, the new nuclear powers will also not have a credible second-strike capability based on a large enough stockpile of nuclear weapons and the ability to deploy them and their delivery systems in places (e.g. submarines or well-protected silos) and in amounts large enough to mete out a fatal blow to the enemy, even after the country is attacked. Even if a regional nuclear power were able to retaliate effectively against one adversary, there would remain the possibility of retaliation by one of the allies of the attacked country. This will increase the inclination of a country that sees itself threatened to deliver the first strike.
During the Cold War, none of the nuclear powers provided their client states or proxy organisations with weapons of mass destruction. In the absence of a credible second-strike capability in the first stages of a nuclear Middle East, delay of the enemy second strike will be paramount. Since the origin of a nuclear attack with air-delivery systems (aircraft or missiles) would be easily identifiable, a country may attempt to obfuscate its direct responsibility for an attack by launching a weapon from inside a neighbouring country or providing a trusted surrogate, such as Hizbollah or Shia groups in Iraq, with a nuclear weapon and short-range delivery means.
Nuclear war will kill hundreds of millions
Shifferd, War Prevention Initative, "What might have prevented the wars of the twentieth century?", 2015, http://warpreventioninitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/peace-briefing-what-might-have-prevented-wars-of-20th-century.pdf
If the leaders had known that the war was going to last 4 years and that 8-10 million would die, would they have not gone forward? I don’t know. Given the fact that we now know, that hundreds of millions would die in a nuclear war, we have none the less not given up nuclear weapons and they are slowly spreading to more and more nations. But we are inured to much greater levels of violence than were the leaders and masses at that time (having been through World War II and the prospect of nuclear holocaust.) They might have found a diplomatic solution had they know the cost ahead of time, but that doesn’t do us much good at this time. What if the masses had not been subject to the jingoistic nationalism that was whipped into a frenzy by the irresponsible press? How do we strengthen the “other voice” in today’s press, get the critique of war and the alternatives of nonviolence and international war-control institutions into the popular mind? | 905,518 |
355 | 380,240 | 2 - Nocember NEG - Russia and Kashmir | Paraphrased and cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,548 |
356 | 380,241 | 3 - February NEG - Housing, Education, Medicaid, and EITC | Paraphrased and cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,549 |
357 | 380,198 | 0-Disclosure | Interpretation: Debaters must, on the page with their name and the school they attend, disclose all taglines, full citations, and the first and last three words of the pieces of evidence read in their cases on the NDCA wiki at least 1 hour before the round if they have read that case before. | 905,506 |
358 | 380,324 | Team Information | Lillian Albrecht(She/Her)-813073@mystma.org
Cobin Szymanski(He/Him)-Cobinszymanski1@gmail.
Email us with any questions.
We will orally disclose thirty minutes before the round to anyone that will reciprocate/is already disclosed.
We don't usually spread, but if we do, we will let you know so that you can opt-out. | 905,671 |
359 | 380,288 | FLEX AFF | =We Negate the Resolved: The United States Should End Economic Sanctions against Venezuela.=
=FW Structural Violence=
====We begin this round by offering a framework of structural violence. Whichever team can best prevent structural violence should win this round.====
=Contention ~~~~: Drug Trafficking=
==Links==
===Historic Precedence Proves sanctions have led to drug trafficking===
====Robert A. Pape writes in 1997 that====
**Pape '97:** Robert A. Pape, 1997, "Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work," MIT Press, https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539368?seq=1
In December 1982 the United States and the Netherlands suspended economic aid to Suriname to
AND
military or Dutch-supported guerrilla pressure, not by economic pressure.76
===Sanctions Increase Drug Trafficking because the harm oil revenue===
====Sanctions have decreased oil revenue. José R. Cárdenas writes in 2019 that====
**Cárdenas '19:** José R. Cárdenas, 7-8-2019, "Trump Should Not Forget Venezuela," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/07/08/trump-should-not-forget-venezuela/
Step up counternarcotics operations Venezuela under chavismo has become a major transshipment point for illicit
AND
circumstances, that should not prevent its reconsideration for confirmed Venezuelan drug flights.
====Nora Gamez Torres quantifies this, reporting in 2019 that====
**Torres '19:** Nora Gamez Torres, 11-14-2019, "Drug trafficking through Venezuela has skyrocketed, says U.S. military chief," miamiherald, https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article237365559.html
Drug trafficking through Venezuela has increased dramatically and constitutes a threat to the security of
AND
over the last year, according to U.S. intelligence sources.
===Economic Harm caused by sanctions leads to Drug Trafficking===
====US sanctions against Venezuela harm the Venezuelan economy. Michael Selby-Green writes in 2019 that====
**Selby-Green '19:** Michael Selby-Green, 1-26-2019, "US sanctions are killing Venezuelans, says former UN rapporteur," Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/venezuela-us-sanctions-united-nations-oil-pdvsa-a8748201.html
The first UN rapporteur to visit Venezuela for 21 years has told The Independent the
AND
rights and are aimed at coercing economic change in a "sister democracy".
====Clifford Krauss quantifies this economic harm reporting in 2019 that====
**Krauss '19:** Anatoly Kurmanaev and Clifford Krauss, 2-8-2019, "U.S. Sanctions Are Aimed at Venezuela's Oil. Its Citizens May Suffer First.," No Publication, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/world/americas/venezuela-sanctions-maduro.html
Venezuela's economy has already shrunk by about half since Mr. Maduro came to power
AND
in the economy's size, according to Mr. Rodríguez, the economist.
====This economic distress is disastrous in itself, but Sibylla Brodzinsky concludes that the economic distress caused by US sanctions has led to the state turning to drug trafficking for income. She writes in 2017 that====
**Brodzinsky '17:** Sibylla Brodzinsky, 2-17-2017, "Venezuelan VP claims show there's no separation of drugs and state," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/17/venezuelan-vice-president-just-latest-to-be-called-drug-trafficker
The allegations against Venezuela's vice-president could not have been more serious. Announcing
AND
successful recall of Maduro would see El Aissami take over as Venezuela's president.
==The Impact of this is ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact Is That Drugs Keep Maduro in Power===
====John Otis reports for NPR in 2019 that ====
**Otis '19:** John Otis, 1-25-2019, "Why Venezuela's Military May Be Standing By Maduro, For Now," NPR.org, https://www.npr.org/2019/01/25/688576099/tense-political-standoff-continues-in-crisis-wracked-venezuela
In Venezuela's tense standoff in which two men are claiming to be the legitimate head
AND
seek to stay in power and violently crush those who are challenging him."
====Ivo Daalder corroborates this, arguing in 2019 that====
**Daalder '19:** Ivo Daalder, 5-9-2019, "In Venezuela, U.S. military intervention is not the answer," chicagotribune, https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-venezuela-maduro-guaido-russia-china-cuba-daalder-20190509-story.html
The failure of international recognition, economic sanctions and clandestine plotting to oust Maduro leaves
AND
, smuggling and drug trafficking — and will not give this up easily.
====This proves that sanctions do nothing to weaken Maduro's support from the military, but actually strengthens it. This is critical because as long as the military supports Maduro, he will remain in power. Therefore, sanctions actually help Maduro remain in power.====
===The ~~~~ Impact is that Drugs Kill Americans===
====Many Americans use cocaine. The CDC reports in 2019 that====
**CDC '19:** CDC, 8-12-2019, "Other Drugs," https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/otherdrugs.html
Cocaine is a type of psychostimulant that was involved in nearly 1 in 5 overdose deaths during 2017. Almost 5 million Americans reported current cocaine use in 2016, which is almost 2 percent of the population. This percentage has shown little change since 2007.1
===The ~~~~ Impact is Terrorism===
====Drug trafficking has led the terrorist group Hezbollah to have a strong presence in Venezuela. Colin Clarke explains in 2019 that====
**Clarke '19:** Colin P. Clarke, 2-9-2019, "Hezbollah Is in Venezuela to Stay," Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/02/09/hezbollah-is-in-venezuela-to-stay/
Responding to a question on current instability in Venezuela and the presence of terrorist groups
AND
" aimed at helping that country rebuild critical government institutions may be unfeasible.
====Troublingly, however, Hezbollah uses profits from drug trafficking to fund its terrorist efforts in the Middle East. Joel Gehrke writes in 2019 that====
**Gehrke '19:** Joel Gehrke, 12-29-2019, "Pompeo: Hezbollah using Venezuela drug trafficking to 'make payroll'," Washington Examiner, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/pompeo-hezbollah-using-venezuela-drug-trafficking-to-make-payroll
A major Iranian-backed terrorist group is using drug trafficking operations in Venezuela to
AND
networks and work on them in places that surround Venezuela," Pompeo said.
===Extra Cards===
====The majority of US cocaine comes from Columbia. This is the cocaine which Venezuela traffics.====
**OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY '17:** OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY, 1-3-2017, "Global Cocaine Trafficking," https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/ondcp/global_cocaine_trafficking.pdf.
The United States remains the largest consumer of cocaine and consistently has been responsible for
AND
outside of North America most likely rely primarily on Peruvian and Bolivian production.
=Contention ~~ ~~: Imperialism=
==Links==
===Sanctions against Venezuela Are Imperialist===
====The United States is using sanctions to further their imperialist power in Venezuela. Jimena Vergara argues in 2019 that====
**Vergara '19:** Jimena Vergara, 2-7-2019, "The Imperialist Plot Against Venezuela," Left Voice, https://www.leftvoice.org/the-imperialist-plot-against-venezuela
Oil production went from 3 million barrels per day in 2014 to barely 1,
AND
the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair."
====The US' intent in employing sanctions is to strengthen their imperial presence in Venezuela. Jesús Faría writes in 2019 that====
Faría '19: Jesús Faría, 5-29-2019, "MR Online," Orinoco Tribune, https://mronline.org/2019/05/29/revolutions-and-imperialist-aggression/~~#lightbox/0/
Throughout history, revolutions for national liberation and socialism, even progressive governments, have
AND
, have become essential tasks for the Bolivarian Revolution in the current moment.
==The Impacts of these are ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact is World War===
====Sy Landy, the National Secretary of the LRP, warns that====
**Landy:** Sy Landy, xx-xx-xxxx, "Marxism, Interracialism, and the Black Struggle," No Publication, http://lrp-cofi.org/pamphlets/interrac_iii.html
Dying capitalism means more, not less, rivalry between capitals. The emergence of
AND
future. Indeed it is! And now, not only in France.
===The ~~~~ Impact is Racism===
====US imperialism weakens the fight against white supremacy in Venezuela. Glen Ford writes in 2019 that====
**Ford '19:** Glen Ford, 1-31-2019, "The Racist, Imperialist War on Venezuela," Black Agenda Report, https://www.blackagendareport.com/racist-imperialist-war-venezuela
Venezuela is a predominantly indigenous, Black and mixed race country, while the core
AND
sponsored coups or any intervention on the side of the counter-revolution."
====More Importantly, however, imperialism creates racism. Sy Landy writes that====
**Landy:** Sy Landy, xx-xx-xxxx, "Marxism, Interracialism, and the Black Struggle," No Publication, http://lrp-cofi.org/pamphlets/interrac_iii.html
Generalized racism was created by early expansive capitalism. It was deepened by slavery and
AND
system. Race thus became ingrained as a decisive coloration for worldwide imperialism.
===The ~~~~ Impact is Structural Violence===
====Imperialism acts as a structure. Robert Burrowes writes in 2019 that====
**Burrowes '19:** Robert Burrowes, the author of 'Why Violence?', 11-15-2019, "Ending Violence, Exploitation, Ecological Destruction and War: Creating a Culture of Peace," Pressenza, https://www.pressenza.com/2019/11/ending-violence-exploitation-ecological-destruction-and-war-creating-a-culture-of-peace/
Structural violence which Mohandas K. Gandhi originally identified when making his observation that '
AND
who live in Africa, Asia and Central/South America. And,
====Nicholas Onuf furthers in 2017 that====
**Onuf '17:** Nicholas Onuf, 1-4-2017, "All Azimuth," Florida International University, http://www.allazimuth.com/2017/07/19/center-periphery-relations-what-kind-of-rule-and-does-it-matter/
Galtung proceeded to identify two mechanisms and five types of imperialism. In his 1969
AND
Structural Theory of Imperialism,? and not „A Theory of Structural Imperialism.?
=Contention ~~~~: Sanctions Strengthen Maduro=
==Links==
===Sanctions are historically counterproductive and ineffective===
====Peter Beinart explains in 2018 that====
**Beinart '18:** Peter Beinart, 6-5-2018, "How Sanctions Feed Authoritarianism," Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/06/iran-sanctions-nuclear/562043/
The United States has a long history of intervening overseas to solve one problem and
AND
it impossible. And the Trump administration either doesn't know or doesn't care.
====Medea Benjamin adds that====
**Benjamin '19:** Medea Benjamin, 6-17-2019, "U.S. Sanctions: Economic Sabotage That Is Deadly, Illegal, and Ineffective," Common Dreams, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/06/17/us-sanctions-economic-sabotage-deadly-illegal-and-ineffective
There is one more critical reason for sparing the people of Iran, Venezuela and
AND
ineffective economic warfare at the heart of this crisis: the United States.
===Further, sanctions against Venezuela actually strengthen the regime===
**Kirby '19:** Jen Kirby, 8-6-2019, "The Trump administration adds even more sanctions to try to push out Venezuela's Maduro," Vox, https://www.vox.com/world/2019/8/6/20757044/venezuela-sanctions-trump-administration-bolton
Trump's hawkish national security adviser, John Bolton, who has been heavily involved in crafting the administration's policy toward the country, has classified Venezuela as a member of what he terms a "troika of tyranny" in the Western Hemisphere, along with Cuba and Nicaragua. Advertisement Speaking in Lima, Peru, on Tuesday, at a gathering of members of the Lima Group, a consortium of countries seeking a resolution to the crisis in Venezuela, Bolton discussed the new sanctions, proclaiming that "this is the first time in 30 years that we are imposing an asset freeze against a government in this hemisphere." Bolton was likely referring to US actions in the 1980s, including freezing the assets of Panama's government under Manuel Noriega in 1988 and a trade embargo against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. "The Maduro dictatorship is on notice," Bolton added. He also warned Russia and China against their continued "intolerable" support for the Maduro regime. "We say again to Russia, and especially to those who control its finances: Do not double down on a bad bet," Bolton said. "To China, which is already desperate to recoup its financial losses ~~from the billions of dollars it has loaned Venezuela~~ the quickest route to getting repaid is to support a new legitimate government." The Trump administration seems to be betting that piling additional sanctions on the Maduro regime and penalizing those that do business with it will eventually convince those countries still backing Maduro — most notably Russia and China — to decide he's not worth it and abandon him. Of course, this strategy, especially when applied unilaterally by the United States, hasn't proven to be all that successful in the past, despite what the Trump administration, and Bolton in particular, may be selling. Advertisement "It worked in Panama, it worked in Nicaragua once, and it will work there again, and it will work in Venezuela and Cuba," Bolton said of sweeping economic pressure, putting a remarkably optimistic spin on a more than half-century-old Cuba embargo that definitely hasn't worked. John Polga-Hecimovich, a Venezuela expert at the US Naval Academy, told Vox that the "potential problems" with the Trump administration's strategy "are manifold": First, as the Trump administration's experience with Iran shows, there is no guarantee that Venezuela's allies would comply with secondary sanctions. Second, in terms of bringing about change, ~~sanctions~~ may actually backfire, since it is likely to alienate Lima Group and EU allies who oppose this type of policy response. Third, it allows Maduro and his administration to credibly blame the US for any worsening of economic and humanitarian conditions since general sanctions tend to exacerbate existing problems and simultaneously strengthen the authoritarian governments already in power. In other words, these latest measures don't seem likely to change the status quo in Venezuela. Guaidó hasn't been able to usher enough support from the military or intelligence services to seize power, and Maduro continues to hold on to support, using the US's imperialistic meddling as a frequent talking point. Meanwhile, the Venezuelan people continue to suffer from a prolonged political and economic meltdown. Millions of refugees have fled to neighboring countries, including Colombia, which just this week granted citizenship to 24,000 babies born to Venezuelan refugees who've fled their homeland since 2015.
====Therefore, sanctions are incredibly counter productive and simply waste taxpayer money and harm the innocent people of Venezuela.====
=Contention ~~~~: Displacement of Venezuelans=
==Links==
===Sanctions cause migration===
====Continuing sanctions increases the number of Venezuelans who flee the country. Amnesty International reports in 2019 that====
**Amnesty '19:** Amnesty, 8-9-2018, "NEW SANCTIONS BY THE UNITED STATES PUT VENEZUELAN POPULATION AT GREATER RISK OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS," Amnesty International, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/AMR5308642019ENGLISH.PDF
Amnesty International expresses its concern over the newest sanctions imposed upon Venezuelan governmental entities by
AND
Maduro's government has the obligation to seek and accept international aid and cooperation.
====Telesur quantifies these numbers, writing in 2019 that====
**Telesur '19:** Telesur, 4-25-2019, "US Sanctions Killed Over 40,000 Venezuelans Since 2017," No Publication, https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/US-Sanctions-Killed-Over-40000-Venezuelans-Since-2017-20190425-0015.html
"The sanctions reduced the public's caloric intake, increased disease and mortality (for
AND
the poorest and most vulnerable Venezuelans," the Weisbrot and Sachs study denounces.
====The Financial Times furthers in 2020 that====
**The Financial Times '20:** FT, 1-2-2020, "Venezuela's refugee crisis needs a proper response," Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/af000cac-2d51-11ea-bc77-65e4aa615551
The seriousness of the situation is not in dispute. Around 4.8m
AND
have reached intolerable levels under the brutal revolutionary socialist regime of Nicolás Maduro.
==The impacts of this are ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact is the effect of migration on children===
====Daniella Silva writes in 2019 that====
**Silva '19:** Daniella Silva, 12-28-2019, "Children's lives at risk as economic crisis in Venezuela deepens," NBC News, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/venezuela-s-ongoing-crisis-leaves-children-caught-life-or-death-n1058676
Janeth Márquez, director of the Catholic aid organization Cáritas in Venezuela, said ~~
AND
the country to find work to be able to send money back home.
====Sarah Ferguson explains the implications of separating children from their families, writing that====
**Ferguson '18:** Sarah Ferguson, 6-18-2018, "Separating Migrant Children From Their Families Is Wrong," UNICEF USA, https://www.unicefusa.org/stories/separating-migrant-children-their-families-wrong/34425
UNICEF USA is calling on America to revise its strategies for protecting children at the
AND
only in the event they are being trafficked or abused by their parents.
===The ~~~~ Impact is the lack of International aid===
====Cynthia Arnson reports in 2019 that====
**Arnson '19:** Cynthia J. Arnson, 7-26-2019, "The Venezuelan Refugee Crisis Is Not Just a Regional Problem," Foreign Affairs, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2019-07-26/venezuelan-refugee-crisis-not-just-regional-problem
Yet only a fraction of the international assistance dedicated to other major crises has been
AND
senior Bogotá-based aid worker, is a "recipe for disaster."
====She continues by explaining the severity of the situation====
**Arnson '19:** Cynthia J. Arnson, 7-26-2019, "The Venezuelan Refugee Crisis Is Not Just a Regional Problem," Foreign Affairs, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2019-07-26/venezuelan-refugee-crisis-not-just-regional-problem
Eduardo Stein, the UN special representative for Venezuelan refugees and migrants, pointed out
AND
and education are already overextended and underresourced in many of the receiving countries,
===The ~~~~ Impact is Xenophobia===
**Financial Times '20:** FT, 1-2-2020, "Venezuela's refugee crisis needs a proper response," Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/af000cac-2d51-11ea-bc77-65e4aa615551
For 2020, the Venezuelan crisis shows no signs of improving. The Maduro government is clinging to power. There has been no visible progress towards a negotiated political settlement. Large numbers continue to leave and the strain on regional host nations is rising. The attendant risks of instability deserve attention: several of the Andean countries suffered violent mass protests last year and while these were not directly related to the Venezuelan influx, continued economic difficulties in host nations could easily provoke xenophobia and division ~~against migrants~~.
===The ~~~~ Impact is spillover===
====Meagan Dooley reports in 2019 that====
**Dooley '19:** Dany Bahar and Meagan Dooley, 12-9-2019, "Venezuela refugee crisis to become the largest and most underfunded in modern history," Brookings, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/12/09/venezuela-refugee-crisis-to-become-the-largest-and-most-underfunded-in-modern-history/
The international community has largely been able to ignore this escalating catastrophe by labeling it
AND
, further adding to xenophobic sentiments that continue to arise in the region.
===The ~~~~ Impact is structural violence===
====Ales Bucar Rucman writes in 2016 that====
**Rucman '16:** Ales Bucar Rucman, 9-10-2016, "Structural Violence and Migration: Explaining Global and Local Total Institutions," University of Maribor, https://journal.hass.tsukuba.ac.jp/interfaculty/article/view/106
International migration and structural violence are interconnected on the global and the local level.
AND
people are seen as a "waste population" and are not welcome.
==Bonus Cards==
**Arnson '19:** Cynthia J. Arnson, 7-26-2019, "The Venezuelan Refugee Crisis Is Not Just a Regional Problem," Foreign Affairs, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/venezuela/2019-07-26/venezuelan-refugee-crisis-not-just-regional-problem
Venezuela's refugee crisis is the largest in Latin American history. Worldwide, it is now second only to that of Syria. A staggering four million Venezuelans have fled their homeland, the majority since 2015. This number constitutes more than 12 percent of the country's total population. Leaving behind a collapsed economy and mounting repression, over one million Venezuelans have fled since last November. The UN projects that the number of ~~Venezuelan~~ refugees will climb to 5.4 million by the end of 2019, while other researchers have predicted several hundred thousand more.
**Barrios '18:** Dany Bahar and Douglas Barrios, 12-10-2018, "How many more migrants and refugees can we expect out of Venezuela?" Brookings, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/12/10/how-many-more-migrants-and-refugees-can-we-expect-out-of-venezuela/
Venezuelans who have fled the country already surpass the 3 million mark, with over one million in Colombia. Colombian authorities have stated that they expect the amount of Venezuelans in the country to double over the next 12 months. Venezuela appears to be tragically stuck in a perverse modern-day "Malthusian trap", where lack of access to food is an important determinant of the emigration rate. The current conditions are so bad that even if the government were to put all of its net income from oil—Venezuela's main and almost only export, which is publicly owned—to feed the poorest of the poor, there would still be a substantial portion of the population whose basic caloric needs wouldn't be covered.©
**Financial Times '20:** FT, 1-2-2020, "Venezuela's refugee crisis needs a proper response," Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/af000cac-2d51-11ea-bc77-65e4aa615551
All these nations have received far less help than they deserve from the international community. Only just over half of 2019's total Venezuelan humanitarian aid requirement of $738m had been funded with two weeks of the year left to run, according to UN figures. An international solidarity conference on Venezuela in Brussels in October elicited pledges of €120m from donor nations, but most were re-announcements of existing promises. Four years into the crisis, the international community has spent just $580m on assistance, according to the Washington-based Brookings Institution. By comparison, donors pledged $7.4bn to help Syrian refugees in the first four years of that emergency.
=Contention ~~~~: Water Shortage=
===Sanctions have led to water shortages in Venezuela===
====Chevige Gonzalez writes in 2019 that====
**Gonzalez '19:** Chevige Gonzalez, 4-18-2019, "Interview: U.S.-led sanctions erode Venezuela's potable water system, says expert," No Publication, http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-04/18/c_137987679.htm
CARACAS, April 18 (Xinhua) — U.S.-led economic sanctions
AND
, which would in turn activate the water pumping systems," said Hitcher.
====Further, the sanctions weaken the effectiveness of water shipments. Michael Fox writes in 2019 that====
**Fox '19:** Michael Fox, 1-10-2019, "The human cost of the US sanctions on Venezuela," DW, https://www.dw.com/en/the-human-cost-of-the-us-sanctions-on-venezuela/a-50647399
According to representatives from Hidrocapital, the state water agency for the capital, Caracas
AND
over the last three years, to now only a handful of trucks.
====Additionally, the US has used sanctions to manufacture water crisises before. ====
**Progressive Magazine '7:** Progressive Magazine, 7-18-2007, "Pentagon Documents Show U.S. Intentionally Used Sanctions to Destroy Iraq's Water Supply.," Progressive.org, https://progressive.org/dispatches/pentagon-documents-show-u.s.-intentionally-used-sanctions-destroy-iraq-s-water-supply./
Madison, Wisconsin — The U.S. government intentionally used sanctions against Iraq
AND
intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water Supply," is available on The Progressive's website here.
==The Impacts of this are ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact is water riots===
====Water shortages lead to water riots. Marlene Cimons writes in 2017 that====
**Cimons '17: **Marlene Cimons, 10-6-2017, "Water shortages amplify the potential for violence," Popular Science, https://www.popsci.com/water-shortages-fuel-conflict/
Human survival depends on access to water. It sustains living bodies and nourishes the
AND
as setting up redistribution systems in areas affected by drought," Lucchetti said.
====And Venezuela has experienced water riots. Deisy Buitrago writes for Reuters in 2019 that====
**Buitrago '19:** Deisy Buitrago, 4-1-2019, "Venezuelans set up burning barricades over lack of power, water," Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/venezuelans-set-up-burning-barricades-over-lack-of-power-water-idUSKCN1RC0U0
CARACAS (Reuters) - Angry Venezuelans set up burning barricades near the presidential palace
AND
on in large part thanks to the continued loyalty of top military commanders.
===The ~~~~ Impact is water rationing===
**Van '19:** Oriana Van, 9-13-2019, "Understanding the Venezuelan Refugee Crisis," Wilson Center, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/understanding-the-venezuelan-refugee-crisis
The impact of the economic crisis has been magnified by a generalized collapse of the country's public infrastructure and services. The national electricity system has been experiencing problems since 2017, which grew more severe in 2019: a nongovernmental group recorded 23,860 power failures nationwide between January and May, an average of 158 a day. The year 2019 has also seen four major national blackouts, the latest of which took place in July, in which the majority of the country was left without electricity for several days. The government implemented a rationing plan in response to the blackouts; it mandates daily power cuts of three hours and affects an estimated 18 million Venezuelans as well as hundreds of hospitals and schools. However, the actual cuts tend to be longer and more frequent than what is outlined in the plan, sometimes lasting more than a week. Access to water is also a serious problem. An analysis of state and regional hydrological plans by the news site Prodavinci found that 9.78 million people had their water rationed during 2016 and 2017, receiving it an average of two days a week. The situation continued to worsen in 2018: 38 percent of households received water a few days a week in 2018, up from 31 percent the previous year, while 33 percent received it once a week or less, compared to 23 percent the previous year. Moreover, 23 percent of the households did not have access to potable water
===The ~~~~ Impact is structural violence===
====Water shortages present the problem of structural violence. Jason Gehrig writes in 2009 that====
**Gerhig '09:** Jason Gehrig, 2009, "Water and Conflict," https://www.crs.org/sites/default/files/tools-research/water-and-conflict.pdf
The most widespread manifestation of water-related violence is the deprivation of access to
AND
may subside and a renewed sense of communal dignity and cooperation may reign.
=Contention ~~~~: Hegemony=
==Links==
===Maduro Poses a Threat to US Hegemony===
====Alison Bodine writes in 2019 that====
**Bodine '19:** Alison Bodine, 7-23-2019, "Venezuela And Imperialist Confrontation In Latin America," Canadian Dimension, a class="vglnk" href="https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/venezuela-and-imperialist-confrontation-in-latin-america" rel="nofollow"spanhttps/spanspan:///spanspancanadiandimension/spanspan./spanspancom/spanspan//spanspanarticles/spanspan//spanspanview/spanspan//spanspanvenezuela/spanspan-/spanspanand/spanspan-/spanspanimperialist/spanspan-/spanspanconfrontation/spanspan-/spanspanin/spanspan-/spanspanlatin/spanspan-/spanspanamerica/span/a
President Hugo Chavez said these words at a civic-military parade in Caracas,
AND
biggest threat to the hegemony of the United States in the Western Hemisphere.
===Therefore, the US imposes sanctions because Venezuela resists US hegemony===
====Sanctions serve to spread US hegemony to Venezuela. Reuters reports in 2018 that====
**Reuters '18:** Reuters, 3-9-2018, "High-profile activists slam U.S., Canadian sanctions on Venezuela," U.S., https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics/high-profile-activists-slam-u-s-canadian-sanctions-on-venezuela-idUSKCN1GL1ZY
CARACAS (Reuters) - U.S. philosopher Noam Chomsky and Hollywood star
AND
understanding how its policies have spawned malnutrition, disease, and mass emigration.
====Madeline Roache furthers in 2019 that====
**Roache '19:** Madeline Roache, 2-28-2019, "Sanctions, Venezuela, and US intentions," No Publication, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/sanctions-venezuela-intentions-190226124044497.html
According to Lucas Koerner, an editor and political analyst at Venezuelanalysis.com,
AND
as an "instrument of countering US hegemony" in the Western Hemisphere.
==The Impact of this is ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact is Structural Violence===
====Hegemony is necessary for the continuation of global imperialism. Nicholas Onuf writes in 2017 that====
**Onuf '17:** Nicholas Onuf, 1-4-2017, "All Azimuth," Florida International University, http://www.allazimuth.com/2017/07/19/center-periphery-relations-what-kind-of-rule-and-does-it-matter/
In proposing 'a structural theory of imperialism' nearly half a century ago, Johan
AND
a functionally segmented hegemony, supported by hierarchical coercion against a heteronomous backdrop.
====This is crucial because imperialism causes structural violence. He continues that====
====Nicholas Onuf furthers in 2017 that====
**Onuf '17:** Nicholas Onuf, 1-4-2017, "All Azimuth," Florida International University, http://www.allazimuth.com/2017/07/19/center-periphery-relations-what-kind-of-rule-and-does-it-matter/
Galtung proceeded to identify two mechanisms and five types of imperialism. In his 1969
AND
Structural Theory of Imperialism,? and not „A Theory of Structural Imperialism.?
===The ~~~~ Impact is Genocide===
====Pursuit of hegemony causes mass genocide which kills millions of innocents. Kieran Kelly writes in 2013 that====
**Kelly '13:** (Kieran Kelly, Master's candidate studying history through Aotearoa/New Zealand's Massey University as of 2012, "The United States of Genocide: Putting the US on Trial for Genocide Against the Peoples of Korea, Laos, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Iraq, and Elsewhere," Global Research, September 30, 2013, https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-united-states-of-genocide-putting-the-us-on-trial-for-genocide-against-the-peoples-of-korea-laos-viet-nam-cambodia-iraq-and-elsewhere/5352227)//glen
The United States of America was built on a foundation of genocide against the Indigenous
AND
these were large scale systematic and intentional genocides which you can read.1
===The ~~~~ Impact is Gendered Violence===
====Gender violence and hegemony accompany one another, Jennifer Suchland writes in 2006 that====
**Suchland '06:** (Meghana, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Political Science at NYC, Jennifer, Ph.D. in Political Science and Government from The University of Texas at Austin, Volume 8, 2006 - Issue 4: Gender Violence and Hegemonic Projects, "Gender Violence And Hegemonic Projects," http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14616740600945024?scroll=topandneedAccess=true, Accessed: 7.11.17)VW
For example, current hegemonic practices of neoliberalism and neocolonialism circumscribe what democracy and rights
AND
an understanding that places the constitutive function of gender violence at the forefront.
===The ~~~~ Impact is a US-China War===
**Glaser '15:** John Glaser, 5-28-2015, "The US and China can avoid a collision course – if the US gives up its empire," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/28/conflict-us-china-not-inevitable-empire
To avoid a violent militaristic clash with China, or another cold war rivalry, the United States should pursue a simple solution: give up its empire. Americans fear that China's rapid economic growth will slowly translate into a more expansive and assertive foreign policy that will inevitably result in a war with the US. Harvard Professor Graham Allison has found: "in 12 of 16 cases in the past 500 years when a rising power challenged a ruling power, the outcome was war." Chicago University scholar John Mearsheimer has bluntly argued: "China cannot rise peacefully." But the apparently looming conflict between the US and China is not because of China's rise per se, but rather because the US insists on maintaining military and economic dominance among China's neighbors. Although Americans like to think of their massive overseas military presence as a benign force that's inherently stabilizing, Beijing certainly doesn't see it that way. According to political scientists Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell, Beijing sees America as "the most intrusive outside actor in China's internal affairs, the guarantor of the status quo in Taiwan, the largest naval presence in the East China and South China seas, ~~and~~ the formal or informal military ally of many of China's neighbors." (All of which is true.) They think that the US "seeks to curtail China's political influence and harm China's interests" with a "militaristic, offense-minded, expansionist, and selfish" foreign policy. China's regional ambitions are not uniquely pernicious or aggressive, but they do overlap with America's ambition to be the dominant power in its own region, and in every region of the world. Leaving aside caricatured debates about which nation should get to wave the big "Number 1" foam finger, it's worth asking whether having 50,000 US troops permanently stationed in Japan actually serves US interests and what benefits we derive from keeping almost 30,000 US troops in South Korea and whether Americans will be any safer if the Obama administration manages to reestablish a US military presence in the Philippines to counter China's maritime territorial claims in the South China Sea. Many commentators say yes. Robert Kagan argues not only that US hegemony makes us safer and richer, but also that it bestows peace and prosperity on everybody else. If America doesn't rule, goes his argument, the world becomes less free, less stable and less safe. But a good chunk of the scholarly literature disputes these claims. "There are good theoretical and empirical reasons", wrote political scientist Christopher Fettweis in his book Pathologies of Power, "to doubt that US hegemony is the primary cause of the current stability." The international system, rather than cowering in obedience to American demands for peace, is far more "self-policing", says Fettweis. A combination of economic development and the destructive power of modern militaries serves as a much more satisfying answer for why states increasingly see war as detrimental to their interests. International relations theorist Robert Jervis has written that "the pursuit of primacy was what great power politics was all about in the past" but that, in a world of nuclear weapons with "low security threats and great common interests among the developed countries", primacy does not have the strategic or economic benefits it once had. Nor does US dominance reap much in the way of tangible rewards for most Americans: international relations theorist Daniel Drezner contends that "the economic benefits from military predominance alone seem, at a minimum, to have been exaggerated"; that "There is little evidence that military primacy yields appreciable geoeconomic gains"; and that, therefore, "an overreliance on military preponderance is badly misguided." The struggle for military and economic primacy in Asia is not really about our core national security interests; rather, it's about preserving status, prestige and America's neurotic image of itself. Those are pretty dumb reasons to risk war. There are a host of reasons why the dire predictions of a coming US-China conflict may be wrong, of course. Maybe China's economy will slow or even suffer crashes. Even if it continues to grow, the US's economic and military advantage may remain intact for a few more decades, making China's rise gradual and thus less dangerous. Moreover, both countries are armed with nuclear weapons. And there's little reason to think the mutually assured destruction paradigm that characterized the Cold War between the US and the USSR wouldn't dominate this shift in power as well. But why take the risk, when maintaining US primacy just isn't that important to the safety or prosperity of Americans? Knowing that should at least make the idea of giving up empire a little easier.
====Christopher Layne corroborates this in 2007 when he writes that====
Layne '07: Visiting Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at the Cato Institute (Christopher "American Empire: A Debate" (p 75)~~
So what should the United States do about China? If the United States per¬sists
AND
in the vanguard—in the form of counter-hegemonic balancing. Neverthe
====This is crucial because a war with China would go nuclear. Cheong Ching writes in 2000 that====
**Cheong Ching**, June 25, **2001**, starts on p. 6, https://books.google.com/books?id=TocvXqTwiboCandpg=PA5andlpg=PA5anddq=The+high-intensity+scenario+postulates+a+cross-strait+war+escalating+into+a+full-scale+war+between+the+US+and+China.+If+Washington+were+to+conclude+that+splitting+China+would+better+serve+its+national+interests,+then+a+full-scale+war+becomes+unavoidable.andsource=blandots=UQnsHDWnmHandsig=ACfU3U00U1NhjYnNbFYsfct-3PiU11g8zwandhl=enandsa=Xandved=2ahUKEwj7mo29h_3mAhVUGM0KHSmDAssQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ~~#v=onepageandq=The20high-intensity20scenario20postulates20a20cross-strait20war20escalating20into20a20full-scale20war20between20the20US20and20China.20If20Washington20were20to20conclude20that20splitting20China20would20better20serve20its20national20interests2C20then20a20full-scale20war20becomes20unavoidable.andf=false.
The high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full
AND
cannot be ruled out entirely, for China puts sovereignty above everything else.
====Lawrence Wittner explains the consequences of this, writing in 2011 that====
**Wittner '11:** – (11/28/11, Lawrence, PhD in history from Columbia University, Emeritus Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany, "COMMENTARY: Is a Nuclear War with China Possible?" http://www.huntingtonnews.net/14446)
While nuclear weapons exist, there remains a danger that they will be used.
AND
—destroying agriculture, creating worldwide famine, and generating chaos and destruction.
=Contention ~~~~: Authoritarianism=
==Links==
===Sanctions historically Bolster Authoritarianism===
====Sanctions often have a perverse effect in that they often strengthen authoritarian regimes. Richard Hass of the Brookings Institute writes in 1998 that====
**Haass '98:** Richard N. Haass, 6-1-1998, "Economic Sanctions: Too Much of a Bad Thing," Brookings, https://www.brookings.edu/research/economic-sanctions-too-much-of-a-bad-thing/
Sanctions are blunt instruments that often produce unintended and undesirable consequences. Sanctions increased the
AND
and then moving quickly enough to freeze them, can often prove impossible.
===More importantly, however, Sanctions have strengthened the authoritarian Maduro regime===
====Matt Karp writes in 2019 that====
**Karp '19:** Matt Karp, 9-22-2019, "What the US Sanctions Against Venezuela Have Wrought," No Publication, https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/09/venezuela-sanctions-embargo-caracas-trump-maduro-guaido
Indeed, punitive, unilateral measures such as these tend to have a dampening effect
AND
, there is no time for debate, discussion, and popular participation.
==The Impacts of this are ~~~~-fold==
===The ~~~~ Impact is Racism===
Thomas Edsall writes in 2018 that
**Edsall '18:** Thomas B. Edsall, 4-5-2018, "Opinion," NYT, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/opinion/trump-authoritarianism-republicans-contract.html
~~Karen~~ Stenner developed a universal theory about what causes intolerance of difference in general, which includes racism, political intolerance (e.g. restriction of free speech), moral intolerance (e.g. homophobia, supporting censorship, opposing abortion) and punitiveness. It demonstrates that all these seemingly disparate attitudes are principally caused by just two factors: individuals' innate psychological predispositions to intolerance ("authoritarianism") interacting with changing conditions of societal threat.
====Nicholas Davis further finds that racism and Authoritarianism go hand in hand. He writes that====
**Davis '18:** Nicholas T. Davis, 7-2-2018, "Racism and authoritarianism go hand in hand," Vox, https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2018/7/2/17524960/racism-authoritarianism-hand-in-hand
Using a simulation-based analysis, we estimate that social intolerance increases the odds
AND
of autocratic alternatives than a socially tolerant person 100 percent of the time.
===The ~~~~ Impact is Structural Violence===
====Authoritarianism's patriarchal structure promotes structural violence in the form of gendered violence - Hungary proves====
**McRobie '14** (novelist, journalist, co-editor of openDemocracy 50.50, and editor of the Oxford Human Rights Hub. She is completing a PhD on the 2011 Egyptian revolution at Oxford University and holds an MA focusing on Balkan studies from the University of Sarajevo. Her latest book Literary Freedom: a Cultural Right to Literature was published in December 2013 https://www.opendemocracy.net/5050/heather-mcrobie/it-takes-broken-bones-authoritarianism-and-violence-against-women-in-hungary // 6-26-15 // MC)
Authoritarianism is never good news for women – as citizens or as the structurally more
AND
as if in aftershock, over and over upon the bodies of women.
====Authoritarian governmental practices promote violence against vestiges of its social contract – including minorities, women, and people in poverty. Henry Giroux writes in 2015 that====
**Giroux '15** (Henry A., Global TV Network Chair Professor at McMaster University in the English and Cultural Studies Department and a Distinguished Visiting Professor at Ryerson University www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/30/terrorism-violence-and-the-culture-of-madness/ // 6-26-15 // MC)
George Orwell's nightmarish vision of a totalitarian society casts a dark shadow over the United
AND
to one's side, and without distinguishing between guilty and innocent."~~2~~
===The ~~~~ Impact is Climate Change===
====Authoritarianism has led to the destruction of measures implemented to mitigate climate change. Democracia reports in 2019 that====
**Democracia '19:** Democraciaabierta, 9-18-2019, "Democracy, authoritarianism and the climate emergency," openDemocracy, https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/democracia-autoritarismo-y-emergencia-climC3A1tica-en/
The populist and authoritarian wave that is spreading thorough the world is not directly responsible
AND
stopped with concrete actions, even though it may already be too late. | 905,629 |
360 | 380,316 | January - Scapegoating and Econ Harms | too long, open-sourced | 905,659 |
361 | 380,297 | Septober - Middle Income Trap v2 | open sourced, evidence cut below | 905,638 |
362 | 380,310 | January - Regime Change v2 | Open sourced, all evidence is cut below. I dont condone the center justified formatting of this, I try to change it but everyone freaks out. | 905,653 |
363 | 380,308 | DA - Invasion | open sourced | 905,651 |
364 | 380,326 | 1AC - R1 | AC
My partner and I affirm the resolution: Resolved: The European Union should join the Belt and Road Initiative.
Our value is util, which states that we should maximize benefits for as many people as possible
Our sole contention is new technology
The development of the Belt and Road Initiative is close but needs financial footing.
CNBC 18 finds that
Paid Post By Hsbc, 3-6-2018, "Where is the funding for a $26 trillion initiative coming from?," CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/advertorial/2018/03/06/where-is-the-funding-for-a-26-trillion-initiative-coming-from.html
When adjusted for climate change and adaption costs, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has estimated that the Asia-Pacific region will require on average $1.7 trillion per year of additional infrastructure investment or $26 trillion by 2030 if current economic growth rates are to be there is a major gap in this funding. sustained. However, as traditional infrastructure investors are not able to foot such a massive bill. According to the ADB, this funding deficit amounts to 2.5 percent of the region's GDP a full 5 percent if you remove China from the equation. According to various estimates, the BRI alone is going to requires a quick $4 trillion to $8 trillion to come to fruition.
The EU joining the Belt and Road Initiative would combat climate change in two ways:
First is disaster prevention and mitigation. Velasquez, et al. states
Xian Xu, JC Gaillard, Siquan Yang, Jerry Velasquez, "COOPERATION TOWARDS DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN THE BELT AND ROAD REGION," Emerald Publishing, https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/promo/pdf/policy_briefing_2.pdf
The Chinese government considers that Disaster Risk Reduction DRR capacity building is essential to ensure smooth implementation of the BandR initiative. The National Comprehensive Disaster Prevention and Reduction Plan (2016-2020), issued by the General Office of the State Council on 13 January 2017, states that it is necessary to take into account domestic and international resources for DRR in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. It entails cooperation with the other countries, relevant United Nations agencies and regional organisations to carry out wide-ranging DRR activities. Such cooperation should focus on the monitoring and forecasting natural hazards, early warning and information sharing, risk assessment, humanitarian aid and post-disaster recovery and reconstruction. The plan further outlines tasks for integrated DRR in BandR countries. In 2016, the Bureau of International Cooperation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) launched the International Cooperation Programme for Disaster Risk and Comprehensive Mitigation under the BandR Initiative (2016-2021). This programme focuses on disaster risk assessment and seeks to promoting international cooperation on DRR in the BandRI regions. It also aims to set up mechanisms for information sharing and coordinated DRR across the region. The Earth Observation and Navigation initiative, launched by the Ministry of Science and Technology in 2017, further aims to substantially improve technological support for integrated earth observation and navigation within the BandR region. It particularly focuses on key technologies for monitoring and responding to major disasters through space-air-ground integrated earth observation, including remote sensing and SI applications. On 22 October 2016, the Commission for Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense issued Guidelines on Accelerating the Development and Application of the BandR Spatial Information Corridor. The Corridor is a Spatial Information (SI) service system that integrates remote sensing as well as data transmission, processing and application. The Corridor is expected to provide SI services to the BandR countries and achieve information interconnectivity. Within this corridor, the Guidelines proposed to build a cross-border emergency response mechanism to provide quick access to SI before and in time of disasters within countries of the BandRI regions. Such mechanism would provide remote sensing image collection, emergency communication and navigation and location services for regional disaster monitoring and response. The guidelines also calls for the creation of a China-ASEAN Satellite Application Information Centre and for bringing together marine environment monitoring satellites, high-resolution satellites, weather satellites, navigation satellites and search and rescue satellites facilities. An integrated satellite system would improve SI service capacities in DRR in the BandR region. Ultimately, the Corridor is expected to provide emergency communications, location services, resource assessment, environmental and ecological monitoring as well as disaster monitoring.As a result, Significant progress hasve been made towards enhancing cooperation for DRR in the BandR region. Most initiatives have focused on cross-border cooperation for humanitarian response to disasters through better sharing of resources and scientific advancement. Further attention is now needed to foster risk reduction through long-term vulnerability reduction and strengthening of people’s capacities in facing natural hazards. This requires appropriate institutional frameworks to allow for the integration of both top-down and bottom- up initiatives. In this perspective, the AADMER constitutes a significant step forward that should be expanded to the whole BandR region. Fostering civil society collaboration, so that the needs of those affected are better catered for in cross-border initiatives, is another important area to be considered for improving DRR across the BandR region. Existing networks such as Duryog Nivaran and ADRRN provide an excellent platform to strengthen such collaboration that needs to be formalized within cross-border agreements. Increased collaboration towards risk reduction through greater inclusion of civil society organisations should be supported and facilitated by international organisations such as United Nations agencies and regional organisations such as ASEAN and SAARC. Ultimately, broadening the range of stakeholders to be engaged in DRR initiatives in the BandR region will be essential to foster genuine cooperation and fully address the scope of disaster risk.
Disaster risk management is critical in saving lives as the World Health Organization finds that
WHO, October 2012, "How can Disaster risk Reduction Save Lives?" https://www.who.int/features/qa/disaster risk reduction/en/
Emergencies can happen in any country, at any time. When disaster strikes, it can seriously disrupt the functioning of a community and people will depend on help from the outside. But a lot can be done to prevent and reduce the effects of disasters as well as to strengthen the respon se of communities at risk. Countries with well-developed health systems and a well-trained, well-equipped health workforces in communities are much better prepared for disasters. When a community is many lives can be saved in the first hours after an emergency before external help arrives. The people in the community know local risks and their own needs best.
Second is through allowing the European Union to leverage support for a climate-friendly BRI.
The EU wants to push China to better environmental policy. The European Council on Foreign Relations states that
EU policymakers cling to the dream that China's growth will bring with it the rise of a class of businesspeople and officials keen to Yet engage with Europe and increasingly in tune with its values. El-I-inspired engagement, treaties and dialogues will, they hope to push China towards better social policies, more property rights, improved environmental protection and political liberalisation. the EU aims to persuade the Chinese leadership that it is in its own interest to do Building on this approach, what Europeans ask. whether on market opening, the rule of law or climate change
The only way that the European union will join China is with Chinese concessions. Daly 19 finds that
Tom Daly, 4-27-2019, "Europe wants to deal with China as a group: German minister," U.S.,
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-silkroad-germany/eu rope-wants-to-sign -belt-and -road- mou -as-a-grou p-german-minister-idUSKCNIS
20R3 European countries have generally signaled their willingness to participate in China's program to re-create the old Silk Road joining China with Asia and Europe. But key states like France and Germany have said China must in turn improve access and fair competition for foreign firms. Italy in March became the first major Western government to back China's initiative, even as some EU leaders cautioned Rome against rushing into the arms of Beijing. Nonetheless, Altmaier said Germany, France, Spain and the United Kingdom had shown at the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing on Friday that the EU was "in its great majority" united in its belief that "we can only implement our positions together."
This indicates that the European Union would be able to leverage the BRI and the countries it influences into becoming more green.
Developing countries can leapfrog their development using renewable energy. Noordeh of Stanford in 2017 finds that
Noordeh, 50, 11-5-2017, 'I Leapfrogging Dirty Energy in Developing Nations," Stanford, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph240/noordeh1/
The idea of leapfrogging technology in developing nations is not new. A famous example is Africa leapfrogging over expensive landline telephone infrastructure and directly investing in mobile technologies. Without the considerable human and financial capital necessary for heavy investment in RandD they were able to benefit from stable, low cost telecommunications technology. The same goes for renewable energy. The developed world has invested heavily in advancing renewable energy technology which the developing world can take advantage of renewable energy technology, without having contributing ed to the research and development costs. This frees capital for investment into infrastructure and implementation strategies.= 2 Another advantage of leapfrogging to renewable energy is freedom from artificial distortions in oil and gas markets. While the world oil supply is mostly controlled by a few nations, renewable energy resources are more equally geographically distributed. In particular, solar energy is available in excess in many developing nations. 3
Belt and Road will be green, and that is critical to avoid climate change
Jun in 2019 explains Ma Jun, Chairman, Green Finance Committee of China Society for Finance and Banking, July 2, 2019, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/07/belt-and-road-climate-future-change-green/
Climate change is the battle of the century. According to a 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change special report, the global temperature rise will likely 1.5°C as early as 2030. We may only have 12 years to act decisively in order to avoid catastrophic impacts on the planet and human beings. The focus of most climate action today is on cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by current major emitters in advanced and middle-income countries. However, GHG emissions from lower-income, developing countries, which are still comparatively small today, will likely grow strongly in the coming decades as those countries embark on a trajectory of urbanization and industrialization, just as Europe and the UK head towards net zero emissions. According to a joint study by Tsinghua University and Vivid Economics, the 126 Belt and Road countries, excluding China, currently account for about 20 of global GHG emissions, but this ratio may rise to around two-thirds by 2050 if the carbon intensity of these economies only falls slowly (in line with the historical patterns displayed by developed countries). Have you read? How Asia could be the winner in the US and China's Belt and Road race What you need to know to understand Belt and Road To build a low-carbon future, we need active collaboration between transport and energy professionals The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was proposed by China in 2013 and is expected to mobilize tens of trillions of dollars for much-needed infrastructure development in emerging market economies. According to the World Bank, approximately 70 of global GHG emissions come from construction and operation of infrastructure (including power and transportation) and buildings. As the Belt and Road countries will host most of the world’s new infrastructure projects in the coming decades, it is critical that these projects are green and low-carbon, if the Paris Agreement goals are to be reached. Image: Straits Times Lenders and investors who finance infrastructure projects in the Belt and Road region should therefore bear a major responsibility for the climate future of our world. However, not every lender or investor is aware of the huge negative externalities that they are generating, and many of them are still financing “brown” projects. Part of the reason is that investing in polluting and high-carbon projects still makes profits due to a series of market failures, as carbon pricing mechanisms are not in place and GHG emissions are not regulated in most developing countries. But we do not have the time to wait for such market failures to be slowly fixed. Collective action among those who are motivated to drive green investment in the Belt and Road – a “coalition of the willing” – should lead the way for greening towards Belt and Road and inspire the rest of the global investment community, while seizing massive new sustainable investment opportunities, before more stringent carbon regulations kick in. Launching the Green Investment Principles It is against this backdrop, that the Green Finance Committee, of China Society for Finance and Banking, and the City of London’s Green Finance Initiative jointly launched a set of voluntary principles, the Green Investment Principles for the Belt and Road (GIP), in November 2018. The World Economic Forum, UN-supported Principles for Responsible Investment network, the Belt and Road Bankers Roundtable, the Green Belt and Road Investor Alliance and the Paulson Institute were also major contributors to the drafting of these principles. The document calls for lenders, investors and corporates that invest and operate in the Belt and Road region to ensure their projects are aligned with the requirements of environmental sustainability and the Paris Agreement. The GIP suggested actions on incorporating ESG factors into corporate governance, measuring and disclosing environmental and climate information, utilizing green financial instruments and adopting green supply chain practices. A group of signatories and contributors to the GIP will meet at this year’s WEF Annual Meeting of the New Champions in Dalian, as they did in Davos, and will provide further inputs to the implementation strategy of the principles. A group of signatories and contributors to the GIP will meet at this year’s Annual Meeting of the New Champions in Dalian, as they did in Davos, and will provide further inputs to the implementation strategy of the principles. The Forum will continue to drive the GIP by providing strategic direction as a member of the GIP Steering Committee, and will build an advisory board to support the initiative. The Forum is also playing a key role in increasing the signatories to the GIP. A signing ceremony of the GIP, attended by more than 20 large global lenders and investors, was held during the second Belt and Road Forum in Beijing two months ago. As of the end of June, 29 global institutions have signed up to the GIP. They include all major Chinese banks engaged in the BRI region and some of the largest financial institutions from the UK, France, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, the Emirates and Mongolia. These signatories are (in alphabetical order): Agricultural Bank of China, Agricultural Development Bank of China, Al Hilal Bank, Ant Financial, Astana International Exchange, Bank of China, Bank of East Asia, China Construction Bank, China Development Bank, China International Contractors Association, China International Capital Corporation, Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank, DBS Bank, Deutsche Bank, Export-Import Bank of China, First Abu Dhabi Bank, Habib Bank of Pakistan, Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing, HSBC, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Industrial Bank, Khan Bank, Luxembourg Stock Exchange, Mizuho Bank, Natixis Bank, Silk Road Fund, Standard Chartered, Trade and Development Bank of Mongolia and UBS Group. To facilitate the implementation of the principles and build capacity for green investment, a GIP Secretariat has been established, with one office in Beijing and one office in London. The Secretariat will organize knowledge-sharing of best practices, develop tools for managing environmental and climate risks, produce case studies on green investments and launch a green project database for the Belt and Road region. The database should help bridge the information gap between financiers and project owners, create business opportunities among signatories and other stakeholders, and improve the transparency of BRI investments. By signing up to the GIP, the signatories are making a strong commitment to sustainability and demonstrating their social responsibility for the developing world. The GIP will also bring benefits to its signatories and supporters, by giving them better access to good practices in environmental/climate risk management, innovative green finance products and opportunities for co-financing green projects in the rapidly growing Belt and Road region. We urge more lenders, investors and corporates to join and support the GIP, a platform that will make a meaningful contribution to greening the Belt and Road and to the global climate agenda.
China-European cooperation on the BRI means that funds are invested into clean, sustainable energy technologies that will help meet Paris climate targets
The Thai News Service continues Thai News Service, October 17, 2017, Thai News Service, https://www.eib.org/en/press/news/eu-bank-can-help-make-belt-road-initiative-a-success.htm
China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) aims to connect countries that account for 60 percent of the world's people and 30 percent of global GDP. On Thursday, in the margins of the 2017 World Bank/IMF Annual Meetings in Washington DC, EIB Vice-President responsible for China and climate, Jonathan Taylor joined a group of representatives from the world of business, policy and finance to ask: how can we make sure the BRI produces real and lasting benefits for developing countries that are involved? A key and critical element will be coordination among the multilateral development banks (MDBs) - in particular in identifying good quality bankable projects. Vice-President Taylor said "One of the roles of the MDBs is to catalyse private finance - and a way to complement that is to provide expertise and experience. He added that the EIB can also offer its experience on how to mobilise investments gained from the Investment Plan for Europe. Particularly in managing the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and providing advice and technical help through the European Investment Advisory Hub on getting projects off the ground. The event, Stitching Together the New Silk Road, was jointly hosted by the Centre for Global Development, Reinventing Bretton Woods Committee and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development on the margins of the 2017 WBG/IMF Annual meetings. It homed in on key issues like how governments, international financial institutions and the private sector can work together to ensure the BRI is a sustainable success. Since 1993 the EIB has supported projects in Asia worth some EUR 6.5 billion in sectors like urban transport, clean energy, water and enhancing power interconnections. The EIB Group, including the European Investment Fund is worksing alongside other EU institutions and the Chinese authorities including the Silk Road Fund on concrete ways to ensure effective cooperation and sustainable investmentsnt. One recent outcome of this cooperation was the Memorandum of Understanding signed in June at the EU-China summit in Brussels. Critical for the EIB Group is the opportunity presented by the BRI to support the climate goals outlined in the Paris Agreement as well as the Sustainable Development Goals.
Global Warming is the most serious threat to our continued existence – it will intensify current issues and cause mass suffering worldwide
Bradford and Pappas state in 2017’: Alina Bradford and Stephanie Pappas. 8/12/17. Alina Bradford is a contributing writer for Live Science. Over the past 16 years, Alina has covered everything from Ebola to androids while writing health, science and tech articles for major publications. She has multiple health, safety and lifesaving certifications from Oklahoma State University. Stephanie Pappas is a contributing writer for Live Science. She covers the world of human and animal behavior, as well as paleontology and other science topics. Stephanie has a Bachelor of Arts in psychology from the University of South Carolina and a graduate certificate in science communication from the University of California, Santa Cruz., Effects of Global Warming, Live Science, August 2017. https://www.livescience.com/37057-global-warming-effects.html JW
One of the most immediate and obvious effects of global warming is the increase in temperatures around the world. The average global temperature has increased by about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees Celsius) over the past 100 years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Since record keeping began in 1895, the hottest year on record worldwide was 2016, according to NOAA and NASA data. That year Earth's surface temperature was 1.78 degrees F (0.99 degrees C) warmer than the average across the entire 20th century. Before 2016, 2015 was the warmest year on record, globally. And before 2015? Yep, 2014. In fact, 16 of the 17 warmest years on record have happened since 2001, according to NASA. For the contiguous United States and Alaska, 2016 was the second-warmest year on record and the 20th consecutive year that the annual average surface temperature exceeded the 122-year average since record keeping began, according to NOAA. Extreme weather events Extreme weather is another effect of global warming. While experiencing some of the hottest summers on record, much of the United States has also been experiencing colder-than-normal winters. Changes in climate can cause the polar jet stream — the boundary between the cold North Pole air and the warm equatorial air — to migrate south, bringing with it cold, Arctic air. This is why some states can have a sudden cold snap or colder-than-normal winter, even during the long-term trend of global warming, Werne explained. "Climate is, by definition, the long-term average of weather, over many years. One cold (or warm) year or season has little to do with overall climate. It is when those cold (or warm) years become more and more regular that we start to recognize it as a change in climate rather than simply an anomalous year of weather," he said. Global warming may also lead to extreme weather other than cold or heat extremes. For example, hurricane formations will change. Though this is still a subject of active scientific research, current computer models of the atmosphere indicate that hurricanes are more likely to become less frequent on a global basis, though the hurricanes that do form may become more intense. "And even if they become less frequent globally, hurricanes could still become more frequent in some particular areas," said atmospheric scientist Adam Sobel, author of "Storm Surge: Hurricane Sandy, Our Changing Climate, and Extreme Weather of the Past and Future" (HarperWave, 2014). "Additionally, scientists are confident that hurricanes will become more intense due to climate change." This is because hurricanes get their energy from the temperature difference between the warm tropical ocean and the cold upper atmosphere. Global warming increases that temperature difference. "Since the most damage by far comes from the most intense hurricanes — such as typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in 2013 — this means that hurricanes could become overall more destructive.," said Sobel, a Columbia University professor in the departments of Earth and Environmental Sciences, and Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics. (Hurricanes are called typhoons in the western North Pacific, and they're called cyclones in the South Pacific and Indian oceans.) Lightening is another weather feature that is being affected by global warming. According to a 2014 study, a 50 percent increase in the number of lightning strikes within the United States is expected by 2100 if global temperatures continue to rise. The researchers of the study found a 12 percent increase in lightning activity for every 1.8-degree F (1 degree C) of warming in the atmosphere. NOAA established the U.S. Climate Extremes Index (CEI) in 1996 to track extreme weather events. The number of extreme weather events that are among the most unusual in the historical record, according to the CEI, has been rising over the last four decades. Scientists project that extreme weather events, such as heat waves, droughts, blizzards and rainstorms will continue to occur more often and with greater intensity due to global warming, according to Climate Central. Climate models forecast that global warming will cause climate patterns worldwide to experience significant changes. These changes will likely include major shifts in wind patterns, annual precipitation and seasonal temperatures variations. In addition, because high levels of greenhouse gases are likely to remain in the atmosphere for many years, these changes are expected to last for several decades or longer, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In the northeastern United States, for example, climate change is likely to bring increased annual rainfall, while in the Pacific Northwest, summer rainfall is expected to decrease, the EPA said. Ice melt One of the primary manifestations of climate change so far is ice melt. North America, Europe and Asia have all seen a trend toward less snow cover between 1960 and 2015, according to 2016 research published in the journal Current Climate Change Reports. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, there is now 10 percent less permafrost, or permanently frozen ground, in the Northern Hemisphere than there was in the early 1900s. The thawing of permafrost can cause landslides and other sudden land collapses. It can also and release long-buried microbes, as in a 2016 case when a cache of buried reindeer carcasses thawed and caused an outbreak of anthrax. One of the most dramatic effects of global warming is the reduction in Arctic sea ice. Sea ice hit record-lows, extents in both the fall and winter of 2015 and 2016, meaning that at the time when the ice is supposed to be at its peak, it was lagging. The melt means there is less thick sea ice that persists for multiple years. That means less heat is reflected back into the atmosphere by the shiny surface of the ice and more is absorbed by the comparatively darker ocean, creating a feedback loop that causes even more melt, according to NASA's Operation IceBridge. Glacial retreat, too, is an obvious effect of global warming. Only 25 glaciers bigger than 25 acres are now found in Montana's Glacier National Park, where about 150 glaciers were once found, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. A similar trend is seen in glacial areas worldwide. According to a 2016 study in the journal Nature Geoscience, there is a 99 percent likelihood that this rapid retreat is due to human-caused climate change. Some glaciers retreated up to 15 times as much as they would have without global warming, those researchers found. Sea levels and ocean acidification In general, as ice melts, sea levels rise. In 2014, the World Meteorological Organization reported that sea-level rise accelerated 0.12 inches (3 millimeters) per year on average worldwide. This is around double the average annual rise of 0.07 in. (1.6 mm) in the 20th century. Melting polar ice in the Arctic and Antarctic regions, coupled with melting ice sheets and glaciers across Greenland, North America, South America, Europe and Asia, are expected to raise sea levels significantly. And humans are mostly to blame: In the IPCC report released on Sept. 27, 2013, climate scientists said they are at least 95 percent certain that humans are to blame for warming oceans, rapidly melting ice and rising sea levels, changes that have been observed since the 1950s. Global sea levels have risen about 8 inches since 1870, according to the EPA, and the rate of increase is expected to accelerate in the coming years. If current trends continue, many coastal areas, where roughly half of the Earth's human population lives, will be inundated. Researchers project that by 2100, average sea levels will be 2.3 feet (.7 meters) higher in New York City, 2.9 feet (0.88 m) higher at Hampton Roads, Virginia, and 3.5 feet (1.06 m) higher at Galveston, Texas, the EPA reports. According to an IPCC report, if greenhouse gas emissions remain unchecked, global sea levels could rise by as much as 3 feet (0.9 meters) by 2100. That estimate is an increase from the estimated 0.9 to 2.7 feet (0.3 to 0.8 meters) that was predicted in the 2007 IPCC report for future sea-level rise. Sea level isn't the only thing changing for the oceans due to global warming. As levels of CO2 increase, the oceans absorb some of that gas, which increases the acidity of seawater. Werne explains it this way: "When you dissolved CO2 in water, you get carbonic acid. This is the same exact thing that happens in cans of soda. When you pop the top on a can of Dr Pepper, the pH is 2 — quite acidic." Since the Industrial Revolution began in the early 1700s, the acidity of the oceans has increased about 25 percent, according to the EPA. "This is a problem in the oceans, in large part, because many marine organisms make shells out of calcium carbonate (think corals, oysters), and their shells dissolve in acid solution," said Werne. "So as we add more and more CO2 to the ocean, it gets more and more acidic, dissolving more and more shells of sea creatures. It goes without saying that this is not good for their health." If current ocean acidification trends continue, coral reefs are expected to become increasingly rare in areas where they are now common, including most U.S. waters, the EPA reports. In 2016 and 2017, portions of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia were hit with bleaching, a phenomenon in which coral eject their symbiotic algae. Bleaching is a sign of stress from too-warm waters, unbalanced pH or pollution; coral can recover from bleaching, but back-to-back episodes make recovery less likely. Plants and animals The effects of global warming on the Earth's ecosystems are expected to be profound and widespread. Many species of plants and animals are already moving their range northward or to higher altitudes as a result of warming temperatures, according to a report from the National Academy of Sciences. "They are not just moving north; they are moving from the equator toward the poles. They are quite simply following the range of comfortable temperatures, which is migrating to the poles as the global average temperature warms," Werne said. Ultimately, he said, this becomes a problem when the rate of climate change velocity (how fast a region changes put into a spatial term) is faster than the rate that many organisms can migrate. Because of this, many animals may not be able to compete in the new climate regime and may go extinct. Additionally, migratory birds and insects are now arriving in their summer feeding and nesting grounds several days or weeks earlier than they did in the 20th century, according to the EPA. Warmer temperatures will also expand the range of many disease-causing pathogens that were once confined to tropical and subtropical areas, killing off plant and animal species that formerly were protected from disease. These and other effects of global warming, if left unchecked, will likely contribute to the disappearance of up to one-half of Earth's plants and one-third of animals from their current range by 2080, according to a 2013 report in the journal Nature Climate Change. Social effects As dramatic as the effects of climate change are expected to be on the natural world, tThe projected changes to human society may be even more devastating. Agricultural systems will likely be dealt a crippling blow. Though growing seasons in some areas will expand, these combined impacts of drought, severe weather, lack of accumulated snowmelt, greater number and diversity of pests, lower groundwater tables and a loss of arable land could cause severe crop failures and livestock shortages worldwide. North Carolina State University also notes that carbon dioxide is affecting plant growth. Though CO2 can increase the growth of plants, the plants may become less nutritious. This loss of food security may, in turn, create havoc in international food markets and could spark famines, food riots, political instability, and civil unrest worldwide, according to a number of analyses from sources as diverse as the U.S Department of Defense, the Center for American Progress and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. In addition to less nutritious food, the effect of global warming on human health is also expected to be serious. The American Medical Association has reported an increase in mosquito-borne diseases like malaria and dengue fever, as well as a rise in cases of chronic conditions like asthma, most likely as a direct result of global warming. The 2016 outbreak of Zika virus, a mosquito-borne illness, highlighted the dangers of climate change. The disease causes devastating birth defects in fetuses when pregnant women are infected, and climate change could make higher-latitude areas habitable for the mosquitos that spread the disease, experts said. Longer, hotter summers could also lead to the spread of tick-borne illnesses. | 905,673 |
365 | 380,335 | 1 - Theory Arguments | We don't disclose full shells that we read, but here are interpretations for the shells that I've read this year:
Interp: All case arguments must be answered in the next speech or conceded (Pres Round Robin semifinals and Bronx bubble)
Interp: If the negative defends an advocacy, they must defend it unconditionally (UNLV Finals)
Interp: Teams wishing to read paraphrase theory must inform the other team that they read cut cards prior to the round (Apple Valley Quarters)
Interp: Teams must disclose the contents of their case, at least all links, on the NDCA PF Wiki at least 15 minutes prior to the round (Apple Valley R6) | 905,682 |
366 | 380,354 | Theory - Full Text In Cite Box Bad | Check OS | 905,700 |
367 | 380,145 | Disclosure | A-Interpretation: Debaters must disclose contact information (email and at least one other source) under the PF NDCA wiki under their own name at least an hour before round.
B-Violation: No contact info on the wiki
C-Standards:
1. Clash: If debaters are prepared, they’ll write specific responses to each position.
Without disclosure, debaters are more likely to be stunned and not respond.
Disclosure’s best for in-round critical thinking because that will never happen if
debaters don’t understand each others args. Clash is key to education because it’s
the constitutive benefit of debate.
2. Strat Skew: It hurts small schools if people don’t disclose contact info because big schools
will get the flows regardless, but small schools won’t get flows. So, they will get
prepped out but won’t have the opportunity to prep out their opponents. Strat is
key to forming a coherent ballots story and winning.
3. Academic Integrity: Disclosure means that we can check to see if debaters have
cut cards correctly. Even if we can get cites from them, my interp is always
better because everyone will be able to check. Academic integrity is key to
education because the ability to cheat disincentivizes research and reading the
topic lit.
D. Voter. Fairness. Unfair arguments arbitrarily skew your evaluation of the
round. Education’s a voter—it’s a core value of debate. Academic integrity is an
independent voter because any academic community needs honest
communication to exist. Use competing interps because a) reasonability is
arbitrary—everyone has their own BS meter. B) Reasonability creates a race to
the bottom and greater abuse. C) Reasonability collapses to competing interps.
We have to give offensive reasons to prefer a paradigm. CI is an extension of
argumentation so it should apply to theory. Drop the debater a) Deterrence.
Aprioris have empirically decreased because theory being drop the debater. B)
Round is skewed- I invested time and altered my strat which is supercharged by
1AR constraints. C) There’s no argument to drop since the violation was the
omission to disclose. | 905,443 |
368 | 380,149 | Econ NC | Our sole contention is long term stability
Sanctions are not the root cause of Venezuela’s economic crisis
Moises Rendon wrote for the Center for Strategic and International studies in 9-3-2019, Director, The Future of Venezuela Initiative and Fellow, Americas Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies, “Are Sanctions Working in Venezuela?,” https://www.csis.org/analysis/are-sanctions-working-venezuela kegs
Sanctions did not cause the economic or humanitarian crisis in Venezuela as dire conditions in Venezuela preceded the implementation of sanctions. By 2016, a year before any financial or sectoral sanctions hit the country, Venezuela’s economy was already enduring severe hyperinflation, which surpassed a rate of 800 percent. Between 2013 and 2016, food imports fell 71 percent and medicine and medical equipment imports dropped 68 percent. Over the same period, infant mortality increased by 44 percent. By the time sanctions were introduced, Venezuelans earning the minimum wage could only afford 56 percent of the calories necessary for a family of five. Over two million Venezuelans had already fled the country at this point. The extent of the humanitarian damage suffered before sectoral sanctions indicates that the blame cannot be placed on the sanctions themselves. As an example, Venezuela’s Central Bank confirmed in 2014 that plummeting oil prices had triggered a severe economic contraction with simultaneous hyperinflation. Under the guise of austerity, Maduro announced cuts to major social services upon which millions of citizens relied.
The real cause is decades of failed economic policies
Dany Bahar noted for the Brookings Institute in, May 22, 2019, The Brookings Institute, “Chavismo is the worst of all sanctions: The evidence behind the humanitarian catastrophe in Venezuela,” https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/05/22/chavismo-is-the-worst-of-all-sanctions-the-evidence-behind-the-humanitarian-catastrophe-in-venezuela/ kegs
Thus, it is clear from our analysis that the further deterioration observed since 2017—whether caused by the sanctions, management incompetence, or whatever it was—by no means constitutes the bulk of the collapse that has caused widespread suffering, death, and displacement to millions of Venezuelans. The weight of evidence seems to indicates that much of the suffering and devastation in Venezuela has been, in line with most accounts, inflicted by those in power for more than 20 years already. Ignoring this and blaming the damage on agents other than Maduro and the Chavista governments after decades of failed policies is, to put it mildly, highly misleading.
v
But sanctions have helped correct state-driven mismanagement in 2 ways
First is market liberalization
Analyst Viktor Katona noted in 2019 that
Viktor Katona, 12/31/2019, Oil Price, “Venezuela Is Quietly Ramping Up Oil Production,” Katona is a Group Physical Trader at MOL Group and Expert at the Russian International Affairs Council, currently based in Budapest.https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Venezuela-Is-Quietly-Ramping-Up-Oil-Production.html# kegs
If anyone is to ever write a guidebook on political survival, the skills of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro would certainly top the contemporary charts. This autumn went relatively well for the besieged leader as the political headlines drifted towards the US-China trade wars, OPEC+ production cuts and the US impeachment saga. In fact, the weakening of media attention against the background of a rigid sanction regime nudged the Venezuelan authorities to render their economy a bit more market-based and also to throw more efforts into fighting the nation’s main scourge, hyperinflation. Yet once again elections in Venezuela are around the corner and the fragile stability might be jeopardized again.
Argus elaborated in December that
Argus Media Group, 12/12/2019, Venezuela defies sanctions with dollar-driven upswing, (Argus is an independent media organisation with 1000 staff. It is headquartered in London and has 22 offices in the world’s principal commodity trading and production centres. Argus produces price assessments and analysis of international energy and other commodity markets, and offers bespoke consulting services and industry-leading conferences. Companies in 140 countries around the world use Argus data to index physical trade and as benchmarks in financial derivative markets as well as for analysis and planning purposes. Argus was founded in 1970 and is a privately held UK-registered company. It is owned by employee shareholders and global growth equity firm General Atlantic.) https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2037897-venezuela-defies-sanctions-with-dollardriven-upswing?backToResults=true kegs
US sanctions have failed to dislodge Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro so far, but they have compelled the government to ease economic controls this year, modestly improving the Opec country's 2020 economic outlook. The sanctions "have forced the Maduro government throughout this year to erase most price controls, loosen capital controls, tighten controls on commercial bank loan operations and accept informal dollarization as it seeks to capture new hard currency streams and reduce hyperinflationary pressures," a Venezuelan central bank economist tells Argus. Maduro's biggest economic achievement this year has been to curb hyperinflation, the economist said. Opposition-controlled National Assembly advisers acknowledge the slowing inflation, but caution that inflationary pressures persist on years of structural distortions. The advisers estimate cumulative inflation from January through November at over 5,500 percent pc compared with the central bank's 2018 inflation estimate of 130,000pc. They now believe it is likely that 2019 inflation could average about 7,000pc, a marked improvement over end-2018 forecasts from entities such as the International Monetary Fund that anticipated 10mn pc million percent inflation in 2019. In October the IMF reduced its 2019 inflation forecast to 200,000pc, rising to 500,000pc in 2020.
These reforms will boost foreign investment and allow for critical infrastructure improvements
Valentina Sanchez, 8/3/2019, “Venezuela hyperinflation hits 10 million percent. ‘Shock therapy’ may be only chance to undo the economic damage,” https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/02/venezuela-inflation-at-10-million-percent-its-time-for-shock-therapy.html
Shock therapy measures, based on recent economic history, can include ending price controls and government subsidies, instituting higher tax rates and lower government spending to reduce budget deficits, devaluing the currency to boost foreign investments and selling state-owned industries to the private sector. Venezuela will have to transform its current scheme of restricting foreign investment in order to fund the restoration of the energy sector, as well as its infrastructure, including the country’s roads and bridges and the power grid.
They are also fixing Venezuela’s import crisis and revamping the private sector
Fabiola Zerpa reported on, November 5th that, 2019, 3:51 PM EST, Bloomberg, “Venezuela Is Now More Than 50 Dollarized, Study Finds,” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-05/venezuela-is-now-more-than-50-dollarized-study-finds kegs
Venezuela’s economy is increasingly dollarized, with more than half of retail transactions now being carried out in U.S. currency, a study found. An estimated 54 of all sales in Venezuela last month were in dollars, according to a survey by Econoalitica, a Caracas-based research firm. More than four million Venezuelans have migrated in recent years to escape the economic crisis, and many of their families back home now survive on the remittances they send back. This has caused a breach in living standards between those with access to hard currency, and those without, said Asdrubal Oliveros, director of Ecoanalitica. “Venezuela lives in an economy dominated by dollar transactions,” Oliveros told reporters. “This excludes those who only have access to bolivars, whose ability to buy things is severely restricted.” A recent loosening of price controls has led to a boom of product imports ~-~- from Nutella to Heineken ~-~- sold in foreign currency. But the products are sold at prices that few people dependent on local currency salaries can afford, in a country where the monthly minimum salary is about $6.
Argus Media Group, 12/12/2019, Venezuela defies sanctions with dollar-driven upswing, (Argus is an independent media organisation with 1000 staff. It is headquartered in London and has 22 offices in the world’s principal commodity trading and production centres. Argus produces price assessments and analysis of international energy and other commodity markets, and offers bespoke consulting services and industry-leading conferences. Companies in 140 countries around the world use Argus data to index physical trade and as benchmarks in financial derivative markets as well as for analysis and planning purposes. Argus was founded in 1970 and is a privately held UK-registered company. It is owned by employee shareholders and global growth equity firm General Atlantic.) https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2037897-venezuela-defies-sanctions-with-dollardriven-upswing?backToResults=true kegs
Dollarization is a necessary "pressure release valve" that is allowing private-sector companies to secure hard currency to finance imports, Maduro said in October, adding "thank God for dollarization." Food and medicine imports have rebounded, benefiting about 15pc of the population with access to dollars. The other 85pc scrape by on the equivalent of $1-$2/day. Venezuelan business chamber Fedecamaras said this week the private sector will account for the first time in decades for up to 25pc of GDP in 2019 and likely more in 2020.
Second is oil management
Maduro destroyed the management of oil production in 2017. Reuters noted last week that Rafael Ramirez, a former oil minister and president of Venezuela’s largest oil company
Ramirez blamed the collapse on Maduro’s decision to place the military in charge of Venezuela’s state-owned oil company PDVSA. After jailing two former PDVSA presidents on corruption charges, Maduro in 2017 appointed Manuel Quevedo, a major general from the National Guard with no experience in the energy sector, as PDVSA’s head and oil minister. That year, Maduro and Quevedo promised to add 1 million bpd to Venezuela’s flagging output, but instead crude production and refining have slid to their lowest levels in almost 75 years. Ramirez said some 30,000 employees have left PDVSA in recent years, amid an exodus of experienced workers also described by union leaders and former staff. “It’s been a disaster,” Ramirez said. “The main processes in the industry - human resources, contracts, supply - are in the hands of military officials with no knowledge of oil.”
But sanctions have driven Venezuela’s state-owned oil company towards letting private firms handle operations, fixing mismanagement
Stefanie Eschenbacher, Marianna Parraga, Luc and Cohen reported last Friday that, “Exclusive: Weakened by sanctions, Venezuela's PDVSA cedes oilfield operations to foreign firms,” JANUARY 3, 2020 / 3:00 PM / 2 DAYS AGO https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-oil-ramirez-exclusive/exclusive-weakened-by-sanctions-venezuelas-pdvsa-cedes-oilfield-operations-to-foreign-firms-idUSKBN1Z221R kegs (companies)
(Reuters) - Venezuelan state company PDVSA is letting some joint venture partners take over the day-to-day operation of oilfields as its own capacity dwindles due to sanctions and a lack of cash and staff, according to a former oil minister, an opposition lawmaker and industry sources. Crude production by PDVSA and its joint ventures has fallen to about a third of its peak 20 years ago. The steepest fall has occurred since military officials with no oil industry experience took over PDVSA’s management in late 2017 and Washington imposed sanctions on the state-run company in early 2019 in a bid to oust socialist President Nicolas Maduro. Maduro’s government and the opposition last year discussed allowing partners in PDVSA-led joint ventures to operate the oilfields, which would reverse a legal requirement that PDVSA control the operations.
Stefanie Eschenbacher, Marianna Parraga, Luc and Cohen continue, “Exclusive: Weakened by sanctions, Venezuela's PDVSA cedes oilfield operations to foreign firms,” JANUARY 3, 2020 / 3:00 PM / 2 DAYS AGO https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-oil-ramirez-exclusive/exclusive-weakened-by-sanctions-venezuelas-pdvsa-cedes-oilfield-operations-to-foreign-firms-idUSKBN1Z221R kegs
That could give Maduro more breathing room by encouraging fresh investment in PDVSA’s operations, potentially boosting oil revenues. However, it would be controversial after late President Hugo Chavez, an iconic figure to many Venezuelans, made nationalization a flagship policy. Rafael Ramirez, a former oil minister and PDVSA president who left office after clashing with Maduro in 2014, said the company had already effectively handed control to joint venture partners even though an agreement had not yet been formally reached. Ramirez, an adviser to some international energy firms that have recently worked in Venezuela, said PDVSA had been reduced to little more than an administrator of contracts with oil companies. “PDVSA is no longer producing. It’s signing contracts for others to produce in a de facto privatization,” Ramirez told Reuters during an interview at a location he requested not be disclosed.
Martin ’19, Sabrina Martin, 24 December 2019, “After Collapse of Venezuela’s State Oil Company, Maduro Weighs Privatization,” https://panampost.com/sabrina-martin/2019/12/25/venezuelas-state-oil-compan-maduro/
A BBC Mundo report revealed that sources in the oil sector in Venezuela are betting that Maduro “will end up promoting a change in the Hydrocarbon Law that will allow foreign companies that collaborate with PDVSA to exploit the oil fields.” It is not the first time that this news has come up about the possibility of somehow privatizing the oil fields in Venezuela. On 6th December, the Reuters news agency revealed that both the regime and the opposition “are considering handing over field operations to PDVSA partners”. So far there is no official information on this matter. Meanwhile, Jose Ignacio Hernandez, Special Prosecutor of the interim government of Juan Guaido, described this action as a possible “de facto privatization, a sign of the collapse of the state.” The Reuters report notes that the amendment to the law is being discussed with joint ventures such as , Russia’s Rosneft, and China’s state-owned CNPC. The talks appear to be taking place within the framework of the Boston Group, where officials close to Maduro, opponents, and economists critical of the regime meet to discuss economics and politics. The initiative also arises at a time international sanctions have “strangled” the tyranny and forced it to make some areas of the economy, such as price and exchange control, more flexible. The BBC Mundo report points out that allowing joint ventures to invest in Venezuela “would mean breaking with the statist energy policy that the Bolivarian Revolution has maintained in Venezuela since the time of the late President Hugo Chavez.” The crude oil production that had bottomed out in Venezuela in the middle of a production of 600 thousand barrels per day has increased recently but not thanks to PDVSA but to the partner companies. According to Reuters, oil production averaged 926,000 barrels per day in November, which is 200,000 barrels more than in October. That is a 20 increase. What has happened is that PDVSA delivered production, sales, and collections to the partner companies, even though they were a minority in the partnership scheme. Repsol, Rosneft, Chevron, and Gazprom manage the whole process according to Al Navío. Everything coincides: Maduro will hand over operations to mixed companies and the Venezuelan opposition in the National Assembly will discuss a new Hydrocarbons Law. According to Konzapata, the new regulations would allow multinationals to obtain the majority of mixed companies. Jose Toro Hardy, who until 1999 was a member of the board of directors of the Venezuelan state oil company. An economist who, together with a team of specialists, managed to position the company as the second best in the world, had already pointed out to the PanAm Post that it was the regime that “killed the dream of nationalization”. “If we want to revive the oil industry, which will always be possible because we still have underground oil reserves, it will have to be based on private investment. That’s why I say this regime killed the dream of nationalization,” he said.
The results can already be seen. Reuters reported in December that
Reuters, 12/10/2019, “Venezuela Nov crude output jumps to highest level since U.S. tightened sanctions -sources,” https://www.reuters.com/article/venezuela-oil/venezuela-nov-crude-output-jumps-to-highest-level-since-u-s-tightened-sanctions-sources-idUSL1N28K1YG kegs
CARACAS, Dec 10 (Reuters) - Venezuela’s crude output in November jumped more than 20 from the prior month to the highest level since the United States tightened sanctions on state oil company PDVSA in August, two people with knowledge of PDVSA data said this week. November output averaged between 926,000 barrels-per-day (bpd) and 965,000 bpd, according to the people, compared with the 761,000 bpd average in October that PDVSA reported to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). That increase came as exports jumped to over 1 million bpd. That marked the first time that Venezuela’s output exceeded 900,000 bpd barrels per day since August, when Washington warned foreign firms continuing to work with PDVSA that it could sanction them. The Trump administration first sanctioned PDVSA in January as part of its push to oust socialist President Nicolas Maduro.
The impact is a failed state
Millions are suffering from a food crisis which is driving mass migration
John E. Herbst and Jason Marczak, September 2019, Atlantic Council, “Russia’s intervention in Venezuela: What’s at stake?,” https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/russias-intervention-in-venezuela-whats-at-stake/ kegs
Meanwhile, day-to-day life in Venezuela continues to deteriorate. Food insecurity and malnutrition are at sky-high levels. As noted in the Bachelet report, in April 2019 the Venezuelan minimum wage, which sits around $7 per month, only covers 4.7 percent of the basic food basket. More than 80 percent of households in Venezuela are food insecure, with the majority of those interviewed as part of the Bachelet investigation consuming only one meal per day.39 The report highlights that, as a result of hyperinflation and the disintegration of Venezuelan food production, an estimated 3.7 million Venezuelans are malnourished. Children and pregnant women are the demographics most likely to suffer from malnutrition in Venezuela. Survival is a struggle. As a result, Venezuelan refugees filed more asylum claims globally in 2018 than citizens of any other country, including Syria.40 If the situation does not improve, the number of Venezuelan migrants and refugees is expected to reach around 8 million in 2020, surpassing total Syrian migration numbers by more than 3 million.
If the economy does not go through correction Venezuela will become a failed state
Michael E. O’Hanlon and Juan Carlos Pinzón Tuesday, September 10, 2019, Brookings, “Get ready for the Venezuela refugee crisis,” https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/09/10/get-ready-for-the-venezuela-refugee-crisis/ kegs
With its economy in free fall, after having already contracted by half this decade, and with its future politics completely up in the air as President Nicolas Maduro clings semi-constitutionally to power, Venezuela teeters on the brink. Already one of the world’s most crime-afflicted countries, it risks becoming something closer to a failed state in future months. Think of Somalia or Libya, but several times larger in population and several times closer to the United States. For Colombia, Brazil, Guyana, and Caribbean island nations like Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela and its thirty-one million people are right next door. Refugee crises in North Africa and the Middle East have been getting more of the news coverage, but already the human flows out of Venezuela have reached comparable magnitudes — and, with the U.S. oil embargo kicking in, the scale of the problem may soon get much worse. The United States and Colombia should therefore take the lead in planning for what could become, in a plausible worst case, the collapse of Venezuela. Even if things do not get that bad, it is easy to imagine scenarios in which ten million Venezuelans become refugees — with many millions inside the country struggling just to stay alive as food supplies dwindle and public health conditions deteriorate even further.
Anatoly Kurmanaev, January 14, 2020, New York Times, Rural Venezuela Crumbles as President Shores Up the Capital and His Power, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/13/world/americas/Venezuela-collapse-Maduro.html?auth=login-emailandlogin=email
In Caracas, the private sector — maligned for years under the Socialist government of Mr. Maduro and his popular predecessor, Hugo Chávez — has been allowed to fill some of the gaps in consumer products left by declining state imports. As once sacrosanct economic controls disappeared overnight, the capital filled up with hundreds of new shops and showrooms, offering everything from imported sports cars to American-made seaweed
chips. | 905,447 |
369 | 380,151 | Contact | Hey yall,
Arnav, 1st speaker, aggarwalarnav2007@gmail.com
Darrell, 2nd speaker, brazilismyteam@icloud.com
Please disclose on the wiki or dm me or darrell on discord other wise we will run disclosure theory lol
Happy debating! | 905,449 |
370 | 380,166 | 0 - Contact Information | Rohan Kamalakantha
- Facebook Messenger
- rkamalakantha@gmail.com
Aditya Kumar
- Facebook Messenger
- adikumar0306@gmail.com
Disclosure Information:
We will disclose cases as soon as the coinflip happens on this wiki. If you need a email chain or have questions about our disclosure, feel free to contact us.
Rice Purity Test Score:
- Rohan Kamalakantha (93)
- Aditya Kumar (68)
Smash Mains:
- Rohan Kamalakantha (Kirby)
- Aditya Kumar (Kirby)
We think that the race was is real and an important issue that needs to be addressed. We are on the correct side of it. There is no room for shiftiness. | 905,468 |
371 | 380,225 | January Neg - Terrorism and Maduro Removal | paraphrased/cut-card case open-sourced under "Plano West-Chen-Kumar-Neg-Plano East-Round1.docx" | 905,533 |
372 | 380,227 | March Neg - Mining, Meltdowns, and Trade-off | C1: uranium mining
Nuclear is on tribal land
Curtis Kline, 13, 7-2-2013, Uranium Mining and Native Resistance: The Uranium Exploration and Mining Accountability Act, Intercontinental Cry, https://intercontinentalcry.org/uranium-mining-and-native-resistance-the-uranium-exploration-and-mining-accountability-act/ //RK
Today, in the northern great plains states of Wyoming, Montana and the Dakotas, the memory of that uranium mining exists in the form of 2,885 abandoned open pit uranium mines. All of the abandoned mines can be found on land that is supposed to be for the absolute use of the Great Sioux Nation under the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty with the United States. There are also 1,200 abandoned uranium mines in the Navajo Nation, where cancer rates are also significantly disproportionate. In fact, it is estimated that 60 to 80 percent of all uranium in the United States is located on tribal land, and three fourths of uranium mining worldwide is on Indigenous land. Defenders of the Black Hills, a group whose mission is to preserve, protect, restore, and respect the area of the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaties, is calling the health situation in their own territory America’s Chernobyl.
Natives are exploited in the mines for nuclear
Oluwaseun Adebagbo, 18, 3-26-2018, Environmental Injustice: Racism Behind Nuclear Energy, No Publication, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/adebagbo1/ //RK
Despite the lack of consent from Indigenous peoples, NPP Nuclear Power Plants use their lands for uranium mining/processing. Indigenous people have been harmed by to working in unregulated uranium mines or by exposeure them to uncontrolled uranium wastes on native lands. Uranium mining and milling on reservation lands in the Black Hills and Four Corners regions, are primary examples of nuclear colonialism and racism. 4 In the U.S., Native-American uranium miners, face 14 times the normal lung-cancer risk, mostly caused by their uranium-mining, not smoking. 5 because US nuclear-facility owners are legally allowed to expose workers to annual radiation doses up to 50 times higher than those allowed for members of the public. Radiation workers typically do not receive hazard pay. They often accept dangerous nuclear jobs because of economic necessity. 5
Exploitation is colonial and racist
Oluwaseun Adebagbo, 18, 3-26-2018, Environmental Injustice: Racism Behind Nuclear Energy, No Publication, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/adebagbo1/ //RK
Despite the lack of consent from Indigenous peoples, NPP Nuclear Power Plants use their lands for uranium mining/processing. Indigenous people have been harmed by to working in unregulated uranium mines or by exposeure them to uncontrolled uranium wastes on native lands. Uranium mining and milling on reservation lands in the Black Hills and Four Corners regions, are primary examples of nuclear colonialism and racism. 4 In the U.S., Native-American uranium miners, face 14 times the normal lung-cancer risk, mostly caused by their uranium-mining, not smoking. 5 because US nuclear-facility owners are legally allowed to expose workers to annual radiation doses up to 50 times higher than those allowed for members of the public. Radiation workers typically do not receive hazard pay. They often accept dangerous nuclear jobs because of economic necessity. 5
Millions affected
No Author, 4, 5-5-2004, Native American Living Conditions on Reservations, No Publication, http://www.nativepartnership.org/site/PageServer?pagename=naa_livingconditions //RK
About 22 of our country’s 5.2 million Native Americans live on tribal lands (2010 U.S. Census). Living conditions on the reservations have been cited as "comparable to Third World," (May 5 2004, Gallup Independent). It is impossible to succinctly describe the many factors that have contributed to the challenges that Native America faces today, but the following facts about the most pressing issues of economics, health, and housing give a hint of what life is like for many first Americans.
C2: meltdowns
Accidents likely with nuclear
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, 12, 5-22-2012, Severe nuclear reactor accidents likely every 10 to 20 years, European study suggests, ScienceDaily, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120522134942.htm //RK
Catastrophic nuclear accidents such as the core meltdowns in Chernobyl and Fukushima are more likely to happen than previously assumed. Based on the operating hours of all civil nuclear reactors and the number of nuclear meltdowns that have occurred, scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz have calculated that such events may occur once every 10 to 20 years (based on the current number of reactors) ~-~- some 200 times more often than estimated in the past. The researchers also determined that, in the event of such a major accident, half of the radioactive caesium-137 would be spread over an area of more than 1,000 kilometres away from the nuclear reactor. Their results show that Western Europe is likely to be contaminated about once in 50 years by more than 40 kilobecquerel of caesium-137 per square meter. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, an area is defined as being contaminated with radiation from this amount onwards. In view of their findings, the researchers call for an in-depth analysis and reassessment of the risks associated with nuclear power plants. The reactor accident in Fukushima has fuelled the discussion about nuclear energy and triggered Germany's exit from their nuclear power program. It appears that the global risk of such a catastrophe is higher than previously thought, a result of a study carried out by a research team led by Jos Lelieveld, Director of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz: "After Fukushima, the prospect of such an incident occurring again came into question, and whether we can actually calculate the radioactive fallout using our atmospheric models." According to the results of the study, a nuclear meltdown in one of the reactors in operation worldwide is likely to occur once in 10 to 20
New tech causes accidents
Benjamin Sovacool, 2008, NUCLEAR NONSENSE: WHY NUCLEAR POWER IS NO ANSWER TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE WORLD’S POST-KYOTO ENERGY CHALLENGES, No Publication, https://www.academia.edu/40232917/NUCLEAR_NONSENSE_WHY_NUCLEAR_POWER_IS_NO_ANSWER_TO_CLIMATE_CHANGE_AND_THE_WORLD_S_POST-KYOTO_ENERGY_CHALLENGES //RK
Although the incident at Three Mile Island avoided this nightmare scenario, barely, it brought about sweeping changes to the industry and forced the permanent closure and decommissioning of TMI Unit 2.498 After the accident, emergency response planning, reactor operator training, human factors engineering, radiation protection, and many other areas of nuclear power plant operations in the U.S. were radically reformed. Newer Reactors are the Riskiest Unfortunately, safety risks such as those at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are only amplified with new generations of nuclear systems. Nuclear engineer David Lochbaum has noted that as almost all serious nuclear accidents occurred with recent technology, making newer systems the riskiest.5" In 1959, the Sodium Research Experiment reactor in California experienced a partial meltdown fourteen months after opening." 1 In 1961, the S1-1 Reactor in Idaho was slightly more than two years old before a fatal accident killed everyone at the site.50 2 The Fermi Unit 1 reactor began commercial operation in August 1966, but had a partial meltdown only two months after opening.50 3 The St. Laurent des Eaux Al Reactor in France started in June 1969, but an online refueling machine malfunc- tioned and melted 400 pounds of fuel four months later."4 The Browns Ferry Unit 1 reactor in Alabama began commercial operation in August 1974 but experienced a fire severely damaging control equipment six months later.5 Three Mile Island Unit 2 began commercial operation in December 1978 but had a partial meltdown three months after it started.0 6 Chernobyl Unit 4 started up in August 1984, and suffered the worst nuclear disaster in history on April 26, 1986 before the two-year anniversary of its operation.0 7 Safety risks may be especially acute for new reactors in the U.S. for three reasons. First, the pressure to build new generators on existing sites to avoid complex issues associated with finding new locations only increases the risk of catastrophe, because there is a greater chance that one accident can affect multiple reactors. Second, Generation IV Furthermore, researchers continue to pursue breeder reactor designs that use liquid sodium as coolants.5" Liquid sodium, however, can be dangerous, since it which can immediately catch fire when exposed to water.510 Third, the domestic nuclear industry lacks qualified and experienced staff and is losing much of the expertise that it does have to retirement, attrition and death.5 '
Meltdowns affect millions
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, 12, 5-22-2012, Severe nuclear reactor accidents likely every 10 to 20 years, European study suggests, ScienceDaily, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120522134942.htm //RK
The team in Mainz found that in Western Europe, where the density of reactors is particularly high, the contamination by more than 40 kilobecquerels per square meter is expected to occur once in about every 50 years. It appears that citizens in the densely populated southwestern part of Germany run the worldwide highest risk of radioactive contamination, associated with the numerous nuclear power plants situated near the borders between France, Belgium and Germany, and the dominant westerly wind direction. If a single nuclear meltdown were to occur in Western Europe, around 28 million people on average would be affected by contamination of more than 40 kilobecquerels per square meter. This figure is even higher in southern Asia, due to the dense populations. A major nuclear accident there would affect around 34 million people, while in the eastern USA and in East Asia this would affect be 14 to 21 million people. "Germany's exit from the nuclear energy program will reduce the national risk of radioactive contamination. However, an even stronger reduction would result if Germany's neighbours were to switch off their reactors," says Jos Lelieveld. "Not only do we need an in-depth and public analysis of the actual risks of nuclear accidents. In light of this our findings I believe an internationally coordinated phasing out of nuclear energy should also be considered ," adds the atmospheric chemist.
Millions are killed in meltdowns
Rosalie Bertell,2006, No Publication, http://www.pacificecologist.org/archive/12/behind-the-cover-up.pdf //RK
Any estimate would be increased by including internal contamination from food and water and conversion of energy deposits to effective collective doses. This very conservative estimate of cancer fatalities in Europe attributable to Chernobyl is 889,336 to 1,778,672. Summary of findings Using conservative methodology, I estimate the eventual death toll from the Chernobyl disaster will be: • 253 due to direct radiation damage • 904,763 to 1,809,515 due to fatal cancers or • 905,016 to 1,809,768 in total This estimate of was roughly 1 to 2 million deaths is conservative for several reasons, firstly, because of the failure of the radiation investigation by UNSCEAR to document the radionuclide variety and the extent of radiation contamination of food; and secondly, because of the use of faulty ICRP (International Commission on Radiation Protection) methodology, and the absence of a comprehensive scientific examination of all deaths among emergency and rescue workers, and disaster witnesses.
C3: renewable tradeoff
Renewables are taking over
EIA, 19, 3-19-2019, No Publication, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38752 //RK
Renewable generation provided a new record of 742 million megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity in 2018, nearly double the 382 million MWh produced in 2008. Renewables provided 17.6 of electricity generation in the United States in 2018. Nearly 90 of the increase in U.S. renewable electricity between 2008 and 2018 came from wind and solar generation. Wind generation rose from 55 million MWh in 2008 to 275 million MWh in 2018 (6.5 of total electricity generation), exceeded only by conventional hydroelectric at 292 million MWh (6.9 of total generation).
Nuclear is expensive - crowds out capital
Noel Wauchope, Nikita Karpov, 19, 6-20-2019, Why nuclear power plants cost so much—and what can be done about it, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, https://thebulletin.org/2019/06/why-nuclear-power-plants-cost-so-much-and-what-can-be-done-about-it/ //RK
The cost of nuclear power is often broken down into capital costs and operating costs. Capital costs include site preparation, engineering, manufacturing, construction, commissioning, and financing. Operating costs include fuel costs (from uranium mining to fuel fabrication), maintenance, decommissioning, and waste disposal. The capital costs of a nuclear power plant are much higher than for other energy sources such as coal and natural gas—and the annual cost of repaying the initial investment is substantially higher than the annual operating costs. This is because nuclear power plants are technically complex and must satisfy strict licensing and design requirements. The design and construction of a new nuclear power plant requires many highly qualified specialists and often takes many years, compounding financing costs, which can become significant. Design changes or lawsuits can cause delays that further increase the financing charges, which in some cases exceed the actual construction costs.
Nuclear cost stagnant - causes crowding out
Michael Kanellos, 10, 9-9-2010, Time to End Nuclear Socialism, Says New Study, No Publication, https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/time-to-end-nuclear-socialism-says-new-study //RK
Unlike computers, solar panels,and wind turbines and most other high tech projects, nuclear power plants and projects don't go down in price over time. Instead, the costs escalate, and that's a recipe for a disaster, according to a report released today by Mark Cooper, senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. (Here is a link to the full report.) Rising costs means more expensive energy, he said. It also undermines the purpose of subsidies like government-backed loan guarantees, because the subsidies can't be phased out due to the continuing price increases. Worse, the vast scope of nuclear projects which invariably absorbs the mental energy of utilities and crowd outs investment in other renewables and energy efficiency.
Lobbying by nuclear industry - show it as best
Mark Cooper 14, 05-2014, "THE ECONOMIC FAILURE OF NUCLEAR POWER AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW CARBON ELECTRICITY FUTURE," Vermont Law School, https://www.power-eng.com/wp-content/uploads/content/dam/pe/online-articles/documents/2014/May/Cooper20SMRs20are20Part20of20the20Problem2C20Not20the20Solution20FINAL2.pdf //AS
The ongoing collapse of nuclear power in the U.S. is readily apparent in the failure to launch 90 percent of “nuclear renaissance” reactors, delays and cost overruns for those that got started, the cancellation of projects to increase the capacity of existing reactors, and the early retirement of aging reactors. To reverse its fate, the U.S. nuclear industry has • gone in search of a new technology to champion (small modular reactor SMR), • launched an aggressive campaign to sell nuclear power as the primary solution to climate change, and • sought to slow the growth of alternatives with vigorous attacks on the policies that have enabled renewable resources to grow at record levels. Thus the collapse has lent greater intensity and significance to the 50-year debate over the economic viability and safety of commercial nuclear power: • It is not only the fate of nuclear power at stake, but also the fundamental direction of the policy response to climate change. This paper examines the fundamental choice policymakers are being asked to make. It reviews the prospects for nuclear technology in light of the past and present performance of nuclear power (Section I), assesses the economic and safety challenges that SMR technology faces (Section II) when confronting the alternatives that are ava
Lobbying successful - decreased subsidies for renewables
Kari Lydersen, 15, 2-6-2015, Why the nuclear industry targets renewables instead of gas, Energy News Network,https://energynews.us/2015/02/06/midwest/why-the-nuclear-industry-targets-renewables-instead-of-gas/ //RK
Nuclear generators have successfully fought against renewable and energy efficiency standards on the state level, and lobbied against tax incentives for wind and solar on the federal level. They’re in the process of securing changes in regional capacity markets that would benefit nuclear and harm solar and wind. And as states develop their Clean Power Plans to fulfill the federal mandate to reduce carbon emissions, nuclear is often pitted against renewables. In deregulated states like Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, nuclear generators have found it increasingly difficult to sell their power at a profit on open markets, because of competition primarily from gas but also from wind. Meanwhile, energy efficiency and distributed solar generation have reduced demand for electricity and are being a part of a fundamental shift which could significantly shrink the role offrom large, centralized power plants.
Empirics prove that a trade off happens
Paul Dvorak, 10, 9-22-2010, French “nuclear miracle” crowds out renewables, Windpower Engineering and Development, https://www.windpowerengineering.com/french-E2809Cnuclear-miracleE2809D-plagued-by-fast-rising-costs-crowds-out-renewables/ //RK
With respect to efficiency and renewable energy the “no nuclear plans” U.S. states with no nuclear plans have (in comparison to U.S. “nuclear states”): had three times as much renewable energy and ten times as much non-hydro renewable energy in their 1990 generation mix, set Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) goals for the next decade that are 50 higher; spent three times as much on efficiency in 2006. Furthermore, nonnuclear U.S. states saved over three times as much energy in 1992 to 2006 and have much stronger utility efficiency programs in place.
Takes very long to build nuclear
Mark Z. Jacobson 19, 06-20-2019, "The 7 reasons why nuclear energy is not the answer to solve climate change," Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, https://www.leonardodicaprio.org/the-7-reasons-why-nuclear-energy-is-not-the-answer-to-solve-climate-change/ //AS
There is a small group of scientists that have proposed replacing 100 of the world’s fossil fuel power plants with nuclear reactors as a way to solve climate change. Many others propose nuclear grow to satisfy up to 20 percent of all our energy (not just electricity) needs. They advocate that nuclear is a “clean” carbon-free source of power, but they don’t look at the human impacts of these scenarios. Let’s do the math..One nuclear power plant takes on average about 14-1/2 years to build, from the planning phase all the way to operation. According to the World Health Organization, about 7.1 million people die from air pollution each year, with more than 90 of these deaths from energy-related combustion.
AND
In addition, 10 of the reactors were completed between 1991-2000. As such, the whole planning-to-operation time for these reactors was at least 32 years, not 15. That of any individual reactor was 10 to 19 years. Utility-scale wind and solar farms, on the other hand, which take on average only 2 to 5 years to build, from the planning phase to operation. Rooftop solar PV projects are down to only a 6-month timeline. So transitioning to 100 renewables as soon as possible would result in tens of millions fewer deaths.
AND
According to the World Health Organization, about 7.1 million people die from air pollution each year, with more than 90 of these deaths from energy-related combustion. So switching our energy system to nuclear would result in about 93 million people dying , as we wait for all the new nuclear plants to be built in the all-nuclear scenario. Utility-scale wind and solar farms, on the other hand, take on average only 2 to 5 years, from the planning phase to operation. Rooftop solar PV projects are down to only a 6-month timeline. So transitioning to 100 renewables as soon as possible would result in tens of millions fewer deaths.
Climate change requires immediate action
Brandon Miller and Jay Croft, Cnn 18, 10-8-2018, "Planet has only until 2030 to stem catastrophic climate change, experts warn," CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/07/world/climate-change-new-ipcc-report-wxc/index.html //AS
"This is concerning because we know there are so many more problems if we exceed 1.5 degrees C global warming, including more heatwaves and hot summers, greater sea level rise, and, for many parts of the world, worse droughts and rainfall extremes," Andrew King, a lecturer in climate science at the University of Melbourne, said in a statement. Global net emissions of carbon dioxide would need to fall by 45 from 2010 levels by 2030 and reach "net zero" around 2050 in order to keep the warming around 1.5 degrees C.Lowering emissions to this degree, while technically possible, would require widespread changes in energy, industry, buildings, transportation and cities, the report says."The window on keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees C is closing rapidly and the current emissions pledges made by signatories to the Paris Agreement do not add up to us achieving that goal," added King.
Renewable, not nuclear, key to reducing emissions
Greenpeace Usa, 7, 1-24-2007, "Increasing Renewable Energy in U.S. Can Solve Global Warming," Renewable Energy World, https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/2007/01/24/increasing-renewable-energy-in-u-s-can-solve-global-warming-47208/ //AS
Landmark analysis released by Greenpeace USA, European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) and other climate and energy advocates shows that the United States can indeed address global warming without relying on nuclear power or so-called “clean coal” — as some in the ongoing energy debate claim. The new report, “Energy Revolution: A Blueprint for Solving Global Warming” details a worldwide energy scenario where nearly 80 of U.S. electricity can be produced by renewable energy sources; where and and can reduce carbon dioxide emissions can be reduced by 50 globally and 72 in the U.S. without resorting to an increase in dangerous nuclear power or new coal technologies; and where America’s oil use can be cut by more than 50 by 2050 by using much more efficient cars and trucks (potentially plug-in hybrids), increased use of biofuels and a greater reliance on electricity for transportation. The 92-page report, commissioned by the German Aerospace Center, used input on all technologies of the renewable energy industry, including wind turbines, solar photovoltaic panels, biomass power plants, solar thermal collectors, and biofuels, all of which “are rapidly becoming mainstream.”
Studies prove that renewables key to solving warming
David Roberts 15, 6-9-2015, "Here's what it would take for the US to run on 100 renewable energy," Vox, https://www.vox.com/2015/6/9/8748081/us-100-percent-renewable-energy //AS
It is technically and economically feasible to run the US economy entirely on renewable energy, and to do so by 2050. That is the conclusion of a study last year in the journal Energy and Environmental Science, authored by Stanford scholar Mark Z. Jacobson and nine colleagues. Jacobson is well-known for his ambitious and controversial work on renewable energy. In 2011 he published, with Mark A. Delucchi, a two-part paper (one, two) on "providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power." In 2013 he published a feasibility study on moving New York state entirely to renewables, and in 2014 he created a road map for California to do the same. His team's 2015 paper contains 50 such road maps, one for every state, with detailed modeling on how to get to a US energy system entirely powered by wind, water, and solar (WWS). That means no oil and coal. It also means no natural gas, no nuclear power, no carbon capture and sequestration, and no biofuels. Why exclude those sources? And what does that do to costs? More on that in a minute. The road maps show how 80 to 85 percent of existing energy could be replaced by wind, water, and solar by 2030, with 100 percent by 2050. The result is a substantial savings relative to the status quo baseline, in terms of energy costs, health costs, and climate costs alike. The resulting land footprint of energy is manageable, grid reliability is maintained, and more jobs will be created in renewables than destroyed in fossil fuels. Here's how it looks: Sounds pretty great! So how should we feel about this? Remember when I discussed scenarios that showed humanity limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius? I made a point of saying that the scenarios demonstrated technical and economic feasibility, but represented enormous, heroic assumptions about social and political change.
Nuclear causes emissions and is dirty
Kristin Shrader-Frechette 13, Spring 2013, "Answering “Scientific” Attacks on Ethical Imperatives: Wind and Solar Versus Nuclear Solutions to Climate Change," Indiana University Press, https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.2979/ethicsenviro.18.1.1.pdf?refreqid=excelsior3A45619e676385ee5a7fcb2a9873e04d4b //AS
At all nuclear fuel-cycle stages, except (7), massive carbon releases occur. Yet the nuclear industry routinely calls fission an “emissions free” technology because the industry misleadingly trims greenhouse-emissions data from all but (7) of fourteen fuel-cycle stages (NEI 2007). Stage-(2) milling, for instance, uses mainly fossil fuels and requires roughly 1,000 metric tons of uranium ore to produce one ton of U308, after grinding/leaching/processing (Argonne 2007, Diehl 2004). In stage (4) enrichment, to produce 124 tons of enriched UF6, one must process1000 metric tons UF6, create 876 tons of radioactive waste, and use 951,543 Mwh (Megawatt-hours) of electricity. At stage (4), 8 Mwh electricity (most from fossil fuels) is needed to produce one kilogram of enriched UF6 (WISE 2006). Unsurprisingly, completely independent, peer-reviewed, university analyses in professional, scientific journals throughout the world—from Oxford (UK) to Heerlen (Netherlands) to Singapore, agree about per-kilowatt-hour, carbon-equivalent, full-fuel-cycle emissions: Once full-fuel cycle greenhouse emissions are counted, fission is five to forty times dirtier than wind, three to and ten times dirtier than solar-PV), and roughly as dirty as natural gas (Van Leeuwen 2006; Barnaby and Kemp 2007, 7–14; ShraderFrechette 2011, 35–68). Nuclear thus contributes both to climate change, and to the massive health toll of fossil fuels—including causing up to 40 percent of all cancers (Lashof et al. 1981, 3, 6; Shrader-Frechette, 2007, 3–38, 114–49). Although the Kyoto Protocol “counts” emissions only at the single point of electricity generation, once one includes full-fuel-cycle greenhouse emissions, university scientists agree that greenhouse-emissions ratios, among various energy technologies, are as follows: 112 coal : 49 natural gas : 49 nuclear : 4 solar : 1 wind (Sovacool 2008; Fthenakis and Kim 2007; Barnaby and Kemp 2007, 7–14; Shrader-Frechette 2011, 35–68. ; WWW, 35–68). But if so, there is no low-carbon argument to make in favor of atomic energy over renewables like wind and solar-PV.
Warming hurts grain yields
Ed Yong 18, 8-30-2018, "The Very Hot, Very Hungry Caterpillar," Atlantic, https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/climate-change-insects-crops/568978/ //AS
By looking at how insects will respond to rising temperatures, a team of researchers led by Curtis Deutsch and Joshua Tewksbury have calculated how rice, maize, and wheat—which provide 42 percent of humanity’s calories—will fare as the globe heats up. The results aren’t pretty. They estimate that the portion of these grain yields that’s lost to insects will increase by 10 to 25 percent for every one extra degree Celsius of warming.
Millions are affected by warming - grain consumers and farmers
Joshua J. Tewksbury 18, 8-1-2018, "Increase in crop losses to insect pests in a warming climate," Science Magazine, https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6405/916 //AS
Without wider attention to how climate warming will affect crop breeding and sustainable pest management strategies, insect driven yield losses will result in reduced global grain supplies and higher staple food prices. Poor grain consumers and farming households, who account for a large share of the world’s 800 million people living in chronic hunger, will suffer most. | 905,535 |
373 | 380,185 | SEPTOCT ~-~- Winter is Coming | Araya of Brookings explains in 2018 that
Araya, D. (2019). China’s Belt and Road Initiative is poised to transform the clean energy industry. online Brookings. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2018/11/27/chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-is-poised-to-transform-the-clean-energy-industry/ Accessed 26 Jun. 2019.
As the principal ... global energy equation.
China lacks the ability to develop green energy.
Stanway, D. (2019). China could build 30 'Belt and Road' nuclear reactors by 2030:... Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-nuclearpower/china-could-build-30-belt-and-road-nuclear-reactors-by-2030-official-idUSKCN1TL0HZ
China could build ... costs and technology.
Chinas reactors are unsafe and unsuitable to be spread now.
Green of Wise International 2014
Green 14 (Jim Green, Nuclear Monitor editor, "China's nuclear power plans: safety and security challenges," 12/19/14, pg. online @ https://www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/796/chinas-nuclear-power-plans-safety-and-security-challenges)
Numerous insiders have ... train nuclear personnel.
The EU has the RandD that China needs
Ferrari, M. (2019). Nuclear Research and Development Institutes in Central and Eastern Europe. Retrieved from https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/IAEA-NRDI_web.pdf
The large, well-funded ...the international funding.
Wheatley explains in 2016
Wheatley et al 16 Spencer Wheatley (ETH Zurich, Department of Management, Technology and Economics, Switzerland), Benjamin Sovacool, Didier Sornette, "Of Disasters and Dragon Kings: A Statistical Analysis of Nuclear Power Incidents and Accidents," Risk Analysis, March 2016 AZ
Regarding event severity, ... deadly, killing millions.
Lendman 11
Stephen Lendman (Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization). “Nuclear Meltdown in Japan.” The People’s Voice. March 13th, 2011. http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2011/03/13/nuclear-meltdown-in-japan RAWRXD
For years, Helen ... of South America.
Second is Proliferation:
Access to nuclear energy increases the risk of terror and proliferation. This is extremely significant as the BRI targets developing/unstable regions.
Miller and Sagan 9 - Steven E. Miller, Director, International Security Program; Editor-in-Chief, International Security; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom, Scott Sagan, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 1981-1982; Editorial Board Member, Quarterly Journal: International Security ("Nuclear Power Without Nuclear Proliferation?" Journal Article, Daedalus, volume 138, issue 4, pages 7-18, http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/publication/19850/nuclear_power_without_nuclear_proliferation.html) LADI
Today, the Cold ... nuclear future effectively.
Third, is waste:
The spread of nuclear energy simply adds to the waste problem; there’s no solution
UCS 19
The challenge of ... than reducing it. | 905,484 |
374 | 380,173 | NOVDEC ~-~- Iran | contention 2 is easing iran
iran is using ocos against the us right now
Radio Farda, 08/08/19, “Iran Accused of Interfering With Commercial Shipsand#39;
Navigation System,” https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-accused-of-interfering-with-
commercial-ships-navigation-system/30099771.html
Elsewhere in the ... in the region.
us oco usage stops this in 3 ways
first is deterrence
credible offense means credible deterrence
Jarno Limnéll October 9 2012 “Offensive Cyber Capabilities Need to be Built and Exposed Because of Deterrence”, http://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/22534-Offensive-Cyber-Capabilities-Need-to-be-Built-and-Exposed-Because-of-Deterrence.html
Within the next ... having that capability.
Mark Pomerleau, 04/30/19, (Mark Pomerleau is a reporter for C4ISRNET and Fifth
Domain.) “Is there such a concept as ‘cyber deterrence?,”
https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2019/04/30/is-there-such-a-concept-as-cyber-
deterrence/
A senior Department ... non-nuclear strategic attacks.
second is by preventing retaliation
ocos cripple attack infrastructure
Zak Doffman, 06/23/19, “U.S. Attacks
Iran With Cyber Not Missiles ~-~- A Game Changer, Not A Backtrack,” Forbes,
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/06/23/u-s-attacks-iran-with-cyber-
not-missiles-a-game-changer-not-a-backtrack/#25639b91753f
According to Yahoo ... actors and proxies
third is by disincentivizing violent alternatives
ocos offer a more discrete and less violent option
Smeets, Max “The Strategic Promise of Offensive Cyber Operations.” Strategic Studies Quarterly, Volume 12, Issue 3, Fall 2018, https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/SSQ/documents/Volume-12_Issue-3/Smeets.pdf.
The value of ... will become clear.47 | 905,473 |
375 | 380,177 | FEB ~-~- IPV | =Content warning: This argument has graphic descriptions of domestic violence and sexual assault and abuse. Please let us know if you would like us to refrain from reading this or are triggered by it=
We are not going to publicly disclose this position as the content of this argument is potentially triggering ~-~- if you are comfortable with the content email/contact us and we will send you cites. - East KN | 905,476 |
376 | 380,247 | March AFF - Emissions and Africa | Contention 1: Emissions
Solar and wind don’t always work, coal is used instead
Michael Shellenberger, 5-15-2018, "Solar And Wind Lock-In Fossil Fuels, And That Makes Saving The Climate Harder And More Expensive," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/15/solar-and-wind-lock-in-fossil-fuels-that-makes-saving-the-climate-harder-slower-more-expensive/#68f50f0421d4
The cognitive dissonance between my private beliefs and public position worsened as it became clear that, had France tried to decarbonize using a “clean energy mix” that included implementing solar and wind, it would have had to increase oil or gas-burning in order to maintain electric reliability. That’s because the electric system requires fast-ramping energy sources like oil and natural gas when the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing. As a result, had France increased solar and wind as part of a “clean energy mix,” it would have locked-in fossil fuels for decades and slowed decarbonization. Some solar and wind advocates suggest that batteries will play the role of fossil fuels and prevent that from happening, but consider that the calculations done by my colleagues Mark Nelson and Madison Czerwinski: Tesla’s much-hyped 100 MW lithium battery storage center in Australia can only provide enough backup power for 7,500 homes for four hours; The largest lithium battery storage center in the U.S. (in Escondido, California) can only provide enough power for 20,000 homes for four hours; Are a few hours of battery backup sufficient to integrate solar and wind onto the grid? Not in the slightest. Solar and wind are unreliable over months and years, not just hours. That means unfathomable quantities of electricity would need to be stored over months or years. Consider that: It would take 696 storage centers the size of Tesla’s in Australia to provide just four hours of backup power for the Australian grid — and cost $50 billion; It would require 15,280 storage centers the size of Escondido to provide just four hours of backup power for the U.S. grid — at an estimated cost of $764 billion.
Nuclear combines with renewables
William Budinger, 5-10-2019, "A Very Inconvenient Truth," Democracy Journal, https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/a-very-inconvenient-truth/
Yes, wind and solar generate carbon-free electricity. But because they require backups, renewables they lock in fossil fuel power plants as an essential apart of the electricity system. So what are the carbon-free options available to help and backup wind and solar? Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology (CCS), at this point, looks to be essential. Considering the fleet of new coal and gas plants currently being built around the world, with lifetimes of 40 to 60 years or more, retrofitting with CCS is probably an economic as well as environmental necessity. Unfortunately, we do not yet have the technology to make CCS even close to being economical. We also haven’t figured out how to handle the massive quantity of CO2 that would be captured. It is an area that deserves much more RandD than it’s getting. All of this brings us to that very inconvenient truth: As much as I hate to admit it, nuclear power is the only “shovel ready” technology we presently know of that can provide all the new electric power we’ll need as fast as we need it. In contrast to Germany, the countries such as France and Sweden that got rid of fossil-fuel electric generation did it with nuclear power. And they did it in less than 15 years. Nuclear can run 24/7 at nearly full power, so they don’t it doesn’t need fossil fuel backups. It is also an incredibly concentrated energy source, so generation capacity can be built out fast with much less land required. And despite my visceral fears of all things nuclear in the 1970s, data from decades of operation have shown that nuclear is the safest energy source available, producing less waste even than solar, producing power at a cost competitive or better than anything else, and harming thousands of times fewer people in its worst accidents than coal does in daily operation. France and Sweden’s nuclear programs have saved thousands of lives from the effects of burning fossil fuels. Gen IV nuclear promises to be even better. So although renewables will play an increasingly essential and important part on the path to deep decarbonization, without nuclear in the mix we will never be able to get there in time. As we now understand the urgency of climate change, I and many others have moved from a position of deep distrust of nuclear power to an acknowledgement that in combination with wind, and solar, and CCS, nuclear must play a serious role in climate solutions.
Vermont proves that no nuclear means fossil fuels
James Conca, 11-25-2019, "Nuclear Power Does Slow Climate Change," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/11/25/nuclear-power-does-slow-climate-change/#7006fdd27202
There a number of examples. The unnecessary closing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of 2014 led to an increase in fossil fuel use, specifically natural gas, that completely filled the gap. Same with San Onofre in California. In a report on the impact of shutting down Indian Point Nuclear Plant, the NYISO said three natural gas plants would replace the lost nuclear power when Indian Point completely shuts down in 2021.
Energy sector emits and pollutes
Union Of Concerned Scientists, 12-20-2017, "Benefits of Renewable Energy Use," Union of Concerned Scientists, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy-use#references
Human activity is overloading our atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other global warming emissions. These gases act like a blanket, trapping heat. The result is a web of significant and harmful impacts, from stronger, more frequent storms, to drought, sea level rise, and extinction. In the United States, about 29 percent of global warming emissions come from our electricity sector. Most of those emissions come from fossil fuels like coal and natural gas 1, 2.In contrast, most renewable energy sources produce little to no global warming emissions. Even when including “life cycle” emissions of clean energy (ie, the emissions from each stage of a technology’s life—manufacturing, installation, operation, decommissioning), the global warming emissions associated with renewable energy are minimal.
Energy sector emits - causes deaths
Sarah Mcquate-Washington, 11-21-2019, "Air pollution from power plants is killing people," Futurity, https://www.futurity.org/air-pollution-electricity-generation-early-deaths-2217302/
Air pollution from electricity generation emissions in 2014 led to about 16,000 premature deaths in the continental US, according to new research.In many states, the majority of the health impacts came from emissions originating in other states. The team also found that exposures were higher for black and white non-Latino Americans than for other groups, and that this disparity held even after accounting for differences in income.
Nuclear key to solving warming - 1.5 degree mark
No Author, 2018, "Nuclear energy and climate change," World Nuclear Association, https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/how-can-nuclear-combat-climate-change.aspx
In its 2018 report, Global Warming of 1.5°C8, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that the planet is likely to breach the 1.5°C threshold by as early as 2030. In most of the pathways consistent with keeping global temperatures below 1.5°C set out by the IPCC, nuclear power’s share of electricity generation increases significantly. Almost all proposed pathways to achieving for deep decarbonisation suggest an increased role for nuclear power, including those published by the International Energy Agency5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative9, US Energy Information Administration10, and World Energy Council11.
We need nuclear to keep under 4 degrees warming
Mark Lynas, 9-14-2012, "Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/14/nuclear-global-warming?newsfeed=true
Let me be very clear. Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost. Even many greens now admit this in private moments. We are already witnessing the first signs of the collapse in the biosphere this entails – with the Arctic in full-scale meltdown, more solar radiation is being captured by the dark ocean surface, and the weather systems of the entire northern hemisphere are being thrown into chaos. With nuclear, there is a chance that global warming this century can be limited to 2C; without nuclear, I would guess we are heading for 4C or above. That will devastate ecosystems and societies worldwide on a scale which is unimaginable.
Warming kills millions - we must take action
Sean Illing, 2-22-2019, "It is absolutely time to panic about climate change," Vox, https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/2/22/18188562/climate-change-david-wallace-wells-the-uninhabitable-earth
The UN says we’re on track to get to about 4 degrees or 4.3 degrees of warming by the end of the century if we continue as we are. I don’t think that we’ll get there, this century at least. I think that we’ll take enough action to avert that. But I think it’s really important to know what it would mean to land there, because that is a much more reasonable anchor for our expectations. “Our best-case scenario is basically one in which we lose the equivalent of 25 Holocausts — and that’s just from air pollution alone” Part of the problem when discussing climate threats is that so much of it feels abstract or distant. But as soon as you begin to quantify the damage, it’s pretty harrowing. For instance, you cite a recent study showing that we could avoid 150 million excess deaths from air pollution by end of century if we could limit warming to 1.5 degrees or hold warming at 2 degrees without relying on negative emissions.
C2: Africa
Squo fails, africa doesn’t have energy
Serusha Govender, 2-25-2020, "Africa grapples with clean energy conundrum," BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51615647?fbclid=IwAR2XR6HJpR_tPsjXyYxruWgrhnRFragla-u5xvBryScc8gl1EC_mGkRgmdA
More than two thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa, more than 600 million people, lack access to electricity. But electrification on the continent is still growing more slowly than anywhere else in the world, despite pledges to light up Africa in the next few decades.
People won’t get electricity, grids stalled
Carolyn Logan, 1-7-2020, "Progress in rolling out of national power grids has stalled across Africa," Conversation, https://theconversation.com/progress-in-rolling-out-of-national-power-grids-has-stalled-across-africa-128492
But on-the-ground observation and interviews throughout Africa suggest that the United Nations’ development goal of providing “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” remains a distant dream for many. Survey teams from the African research network Afrobarometer, asked people in 34 countries on the continent about access to electricity, and recorded the presence of an accessible grid. They found that because expansion of national electric grids appeared to have largely stalled in recent years. And even in areas where an electric grid was accessible, service often remained unreliable. Thus, About four in 10 Africans (42) lack an electricity connection in their homes. This is either because they are in zones not served by an electric grid or because they are not connected to an existing grid. In 16 countries, more than half of respondents had no electricity connection. This included more than three quarters of citizens in Burkina Faso (81), Uganda (80), Liberia (78), and Madagascar (76).
Nuclear can go overseas - trump wants to do it
Tom Dichristopher, 10-10-2018, “The US is losing the nuclear energy export race to China and Russia. Here’s the Trump team’s plan to turn the tide,” CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/21/trump-aims-to-beat-china-and-russia-in-nuclear-energy-export-race.html
The Trump administration is preparing a new push to help American companies compete in the race to build the next generation of nuclear power plants around the world — a competition the U.S. is currently losing. In doing so, the administration also aims to push back on the growing dominance of Russia and China in the space, preventing them from expanding their international influence by forging long-lasting nuclear ties with foreign powers. The State Department plans to expand cooperation with countries pursuing atomic energy long before those nations eve r purchase a nuclear reactor. By facilitating early stage talks, the U.S. intends to put American companies first in line to build tomorrow's fleet of nuclear power plants overseas. We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation. Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. To be sure, the Energy and Commerce departments actively facilitate U.S. nuclear cooperation with their foreign counterparts. But the State Department now intends to push the issue in talks at the highest levels of government, making it clear that Washington believes cooperation in the nuclear realm is central to its strategic relationships. But even with the State Department lending its diplomatic heft, winning nuclear energy contracts won't be easy. ...New plan takes shape During the address, Ford outlined State's plan to help American companies compete with Chinese and Russian firms. The department will more closely coordinate nuclear cooperation efforts across agencies and ramp up informal, non-binding talks with nations that might pursue nuclear energy technology. The goal is to expand the number of countries engaged in ongoing communication with U.S. government agencies, nuclear energy companies and researchers. The State Department will do this by signing nuclear cooperation memorandums of understanding with the countries. Under the MOUs, American experts would help foreign nations develop the apparatus necessary to accommodate a nuclear energy industry. That includes creating safety, security and non-proliferation protocols, as well as an independent regulatory system. That will make more countries "fully prepared to take advantage of the emerging technologies and coming innovations in reactor design and other areas that are being pioneered in the United States," Ford said. That marks a change from the past, said Ted Jones, director for national security and international programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's main trade group. "We've long urged greater coordination among the many agencies involved in U.S. nuclear exports and a genuinely strategic approach to U.S. nuclear cooperation," he said. "The State Department's plans for nuclear cooperation MOUs indicate that this Administration is moving in the right direction." There has long been an instinct within U.S. foreign policy circles to limit nuclear energy exports, if only to reduce the risk that those transfers will open the door to nuclear weapons proliferation. But if the U.S. continues to lose sales to other countries, its ability to set strong nonproliferation standards around the world will fade. Primary coolant pumps assembled by St Petersburg's Central Mechanical Engineering Design Bureau, a member of the Atomenergomash company group, and shipped to the Belarusian nuclear power plant. The State Department now plans to address nuclear energy cooperation in high-level meetings with presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers, a senior State Department official told CNBC. The department is currently drawing up priorities with two major considerations in mind, the official said. First, the State Department is identifying geostrategic opportunities, with a focus on the parts of the world where the U.S. is at risk of losing bids to rivals like Russia and China. Second, the government will consult nuclear energy companies about where they see the brightest opportunities and the best chances of closing deals. Next generation technology The industry is already on board with State's new initiative. The Nuclear Energy Institute regularly polls members on where they see opportunities overseas. In the survey that went out a few weeks ago, NEI asked members to identify their long-term market opportunities, a question that is consistent with Specifically, the State Department initiative. State's focus is on teeing up sales of a new generation of nuclear technology expected to come online in the next five to 10 years, the official said. Those include small modular reactors that can be bolted together to form larger units, Terrapower's traveling wave reactor backed by Bill Gates and microreactors meant to provide enough power for a few thousand homes. Altogether, there are about two dozen serious designs for advanced nuclear reactors trying to break into the market, said McGinnis. Under McGinnis and Secretary Rick Perry, one of the Energy Department's top priorities is facilitating the development of these new technologies. "We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation," he said. "Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. That's been our challenge." On Tuesday, NuScale Energy signed a memorandum to explore deploying its small modular reactors in Romania, after signing similar agreements with Canada and Jordan. The U.S. will still have to reach so-called 123 Agreements with foreign countries before American firms can sell nuclear reactors overseas. These agreements place limits on the use of nuclear technology and must be approved by Congress.
Microreactors solve the problem
Hannah Daly, 6-20-2018, "1.1 billion people still lack electricity. This could be the solution," World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/1-billion-people-lack-electricity-solution-mini-grid-iea/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Microreactors are safe, small, and don’t need much maintenance
Cory Hatch, 8-1-2019, "Experts explore options for microreactors in Alaska," Idaho National Laboratory, https://inl.gov/article/experts-explore-options-for-microreactors-in-alaska/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Dying nuclear industry - exports failing in squo
Jennifer T. Gordon, 1-9-2020, "International co-financing of nuclear reactors between the United States and its allies," Atlantic Council, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/international-co-financing-of-nuclear-reactors-between-the-united-states-and-its-allies/
It is critically important for global safety standards, nonproliferation agreements, and geopolitics that the United States play a leading role in the export of nuclear energy technologies. However, the domestic reactor fleet has struggled due to the deregulated US electricity market, inexpensive gas, and subsidies for renewables, which—in turn—has hampered US nuclear exports, since it is challenging to export a product that lacks a domestic market. However, building new reactors and bringing first-of-a-kind reactors to demonstration involve high capital costs and financial risk, for the purchasing party as well as the vendor. If the United States is to play a role at all in building new nuclear plants, it must address the challenges inherent in financing new nuclear builds; one mechanism to do this is through partnering with close US allies to co-finance new nuclear projects. If the United States and its allies fail to make their nuclear exports competitive, they will likely cede the mantle of global leadership in that area to Russia and China, where nuclear companies are state owned, easily able to finance nuclear exports, and already exploring emerging markets for nuclear exports..
Big market in africa for microgrids
Lili Francklyn, 2-12-2019, "Improving Energy Access in Rural Africa Depends on Renewable Energy Microgrids," HOMER Microgrid News and Insight, https://microgridnews.com/improving-energy-access-in-rural-africa-depends-on-renewable-energy-microgrids/
According to a 2018 Navigant report, the Middle East and Africa is forecast to be the world’s fastest growing market for microgrids – or minigrids as they are commonly known in Africa – at a Compound Annual Growth rate of 27, representing almost 1,145 MW by 2027. African governments are beginning to recognize the negative financial and environmental impacts of reliance on fossil fuels or biomass for energy, so forward-looking countries are shifting their policies to prioritize distributed renewable energy. “Africa doesn’t have a generation problem, it has a distribution problem,” says Aaron Leopold, Executive Director of the African Minigrid Developers Association (AMDA). He notes that because construction of transmission lines to scattered rural populations is prohibitively expensive and the cost of renewable energy equipment is declining, “minigrids can now deliver electricity to new users more cheaply than the central grid in many parts of Africa.” Leopold points out that while upfront costs to connect to the utility grid in Kenya might run $1,000 – or as much as $2,000 in Tanzania – AMDA reports an average minigrid connection cost of $938, which is continuing to fall. To conclude, the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that energy access in sub-Saharan Africa will improve steadily through 2030, and that many Africans – upwards of 200 million – will gain access to electricity through the deployment of microgrids. The agency says that decentralized solutions such as microgrids will be the most cost effective solution for more than 70 of people who gain energy access in rural areas. And by 2030 over 60 of that new access will be powered by renewable energy. 4
Big market provides the incentive for companies to go overseas with nuclear
Sara Stefanini, 3-13-2019, "Energy and oil majors turn to rural Africa in grab for world's next billion customers," Climate Home News, https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/03/13/energy-oil-majors-turn-rural-africa-grab-worlds-next-billion-customers/
The first step is to set up tiny renewable generators independent of main power grids, often sold on pay-as-you-go schemes like mobile phones. Once that basic energy supply is established – to charge phones, home lighting and other small appliances – it’s expected to fuel demand for a slew of new products and services, such as internet access, mobile banking, water pumps, mills, fridges, home batteries and cooking stoves. The reams of data on how these new customers use and pay for their energy will help companies decide their next moves. It’s a the potential bonanza that is drawing electricity, oil and gas, equipment-making and technology companies to invest in rural projects they once deemed too small and risky, especially in Africa. The interest is part of the industry’s broadening from large, centralised power plants and fossil fuels towards flexible, off-grid renewables. Just under 1 billion people worldwide lacked access to electricity as of 2017, with around 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa, according to the International Energy Agency.
Nuclear is key to solving africa's energy deficit
Jack Little, 3-5-2019, "Can Nuclear Power Solve Africa's Energy Problem?," Stanford University, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2019/ph241/little-j1/
Africa's increasing demand for energy comes at a time where much of the world is looking for renewable alternatives to carbon intensive energy sources. Nuclear power has the ability to both satisfy Africa's energy demand while also reducing their carbon footprint. Additionally, this energy source has the capability of solving the africa’scontinent's energy deficit issue. Many sub-Saharan countries are not well developed in their power sectors, which places the region in a $90 billion annual power infrastructural deficit. 2 Also, fossil fuel power sources require continuous transportation of fuel, which is challenging in Africa due to lacking pipeline and transportation infrastructure. 2 However, nuclear power plants impose fewer constraints on location because of denser fuel and lesser size, allowing them to be more strategically placed in order to reduce transportation and transmission costs. 2 Nuclear energy can therefore serve as a solution to Africa's energy deficit as well as their energy infrastructure issues while also providing the population with a carbon-free source of reliable energy.
People use biomass in africa
Kitty Stecher, 2013, ","International Renewable Energy Agency, https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/archive/hub/publications/115608/biomass-potential-africa.pdf
Despite an increase in energy use, many poor households in Africa have no access to modern energy sources. Worldwide, SSA and India have the greatest proportion of population dependent on traditional biomass use. In Africa, a total of 657 million people (80 of the population) rely on the traditional use of biomass for cooking (IEA, 2010). It is important given this scale of biomass use that modern bioenergy systems are able to provide an important contribution to future energy systems and to the development of sustainable energy supplies (Berndes, Hoogwijk and Broek, 2003)
Biomass is unsafe and kills
No Author, 5-8-2018, "Household air pollution and health,” World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
Around 3 billion people still cook using solid fuels (such as wood, crop wastes, charcoal, coal and dung) and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves. Most of these people are poor, and live in low- and middle-income countries. These cooking practices are inefficient, and use fuels and technologies that produce high levels of household air pollution with a range of health-damaging pollutants, including small soot particles that penetrate deep into the lungs. In poorly ventilated dwellings, indoor smoke can be 100 times higher than acceptable levels for fine particles. Exposure is particularly high among women and young children, who spend the most time near the domestic hearth. 3.8 million people a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels and kerosene for cooking.
Energy poverty means that people stay in poverty
Sri Mulyani Indrawati, 7-28-2015, "What you need to know about energy and poverty," World Bank Blogs, https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/what-you-need-know-about-energy-and-poverty
We find that energy poverty means two things: Poor people are the least likely to have access to power. And they are more likely to remain poor if they stay unconnected. Around one in seven, or 1.1 billion people, don’t have access to electricity, and almost 3 billion still cook with polluting fuels like kerosene, wood, charcoal, and dung. In Africa, the electricity challenge remains daunting. In Liberia, for example, just 2 of the population has regular access to electricity. Even countries with access often have highly unreliable service. One in three developing countries experiences at least 20 hours of power outages a month. When power is available, it can be expensive: In many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, consumers pay as much as 20-50 cents per kilowatt-hour against a global average close to 10 cents. Inclusive economic growth is the single most effective means of reducing poverty and boosting prosperity. Yet most economic activity is impossible without adequate, reliable and competitively priced modern energy. This is why access to energy is so important in the fight against poverty. | 905,555 |
377 | 380,256 | CircuitDebater | Hey! If you wanna see any of the stuff we ran this year we have posted all of our cases on Circuit Debater. Here's the link: https://pf.circuitdebater.org/w/index.php/Plano_West_KR | 905,564 |
378 | 380,203 | FEB - AFF Working Class, Automation Consumption | We affirm.
UBI is enough to secure basic needs, set above poverty line
Scott Santens, Futurism, "This is Why Experts Think All People Should Have a Universal Basic Income", 03/21/2017, https://futurism.com/why-experts-think-all-people-should-have-universal-basic-income
A promise of equal opportunity… set above the poverty line.
Contention 1: The American Dream
We help working class Americans in two ways.
1. Allowing the poor to rise up
Poverty rate same as 4 decades ago despite $18 trillion spent on welfare
n.a., CATO Institute, "The Failures of Traditional Welfare", n.d., https://www.cato.org/research/welfare
The federal government's antipoverty efforts... financial independence and self sufficiency.
Welfare benefits phase out- earn a dollar from work, lose a dollar in benefits- disincentivizes work
David Floyd, Investopedia, "The Long, Weird History of Basic Income – And Why It’s Back", 06/25/2019, https://www.investopedia.com/news/history-of-universal-basic-income/
The existing welfare model has... work a glaringly irrational choice.
Cliff effect creates anchor into poverty
n.a., National Conference of State Legislatures, "Addressing Benefits Cliffs", 08/20/2019, https://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/addressing-benefits-cliffs.aspx
An anchor or a ladder... dollar-for-dollar value of their earnings.
UBI solves- isn't contingent on staying poor- flattens benefit cliff and lifts people out of poverty
Michael Munger, The Hill, "Universal basic income: a solution to a looming problem | TheHill", 07/20/2018, https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/398022-universal-basic-income-a-solution-to-a-looming-problem
Second, a UBI would be... not everyone agrees with that.
Empirically true- 18 percent of poor who received welfare and 45 percent of poor who did not escaped poverty
Michael D. Tanner, CATO Institute, "Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 202: Ending Welfare as We Know It", 07/07/1994, https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa212.pdf
What has America received in... high levels of welfare benefits.
95 million in poverty today
Salvador Rizo, Washington Post, "Joe Biden’s claim that ‘almost half’ of Americans live in poverty", 06/20/2019, https://outline.com/YNTr8T // https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/20/joe-bidens-claim-that-almost-half-americans-live-poverty/
By the Official Poverty Measure… differences in costs of living.
2. Rising tides that lift all boats
UBI empowers all individuals and provides effective insurance to maximum economic potential
Thomas Straubhaar, Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, "On the Economics of a Universal Basic Income - Intereconomics", Volume 52, 2017, https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2017/number/2/article/on-the-economics-of-a-universal-basic-income.html
The UBI is an adequate... the subsistence minimum for everybody.
UBI creates 13 percent growth, $2.5 trillion dollars, 4.5 million jobs by 2025
Dylan Matthews, Vox, "Study: a universal basic income would grow the economy - Vox", 08/30/2017, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/30/16220134/universal-basic-income-roosevelt-institute-economic-growth
They find that enacting any... 4.5 to 4.7 million people.
Cuts poverty by 40 percent and 84 percent if accounting for benefit cliff
Dylan Matthews, Vox, "A basic income really could end poverty forever - Vox", 07/17/2017, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/17/15364546/universal-basic-income-review-stern-murray-automation
The plan was financed by... larger benefits to adults fared.
Contention 2: The Automation Revolution
Automation Revolution is coming- 38 percent of US jobs at high risk of automation by 2030s
Samantha Masunaga, Los Angeles Times, "Robots could take over 38 of U.S. jobs within about 15 years, report says - Los Angeles Times", 03/24/2017, https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-pwc-robotics-jobs-20170324-story.html
More than a third of... service and transportation and storage.
Even if not all jobs lost, 80 percent of workers will face wage stagnation or displacement
Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, Andrew Schwedel, Bain and Company, "Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality - Bain and Company", 02/07/2018, https://www.bain.com/insights/labor-2030-the-collision-of-demographics-automation-and-inequality/
The full impact of automation... a combination of the two.
Welfare programs strict limits, often unavailable to unemployed
Amy Livingston, Money Crashers, "What Is Universal Basic Income and Could It Work in the U.S.?", 09/23/2019, https://www.moneycrashers.com/universal-basic-income/
Of course, UBI isn't the... for meeting their nutritional needs.
35 percent of unemployed Americans receive means-tested benefits
n.a., Lexington Law, "44 Important Welfare Statistics for 2020 - Lexington Law", 01/03/2020, https://www.lexingtonlaw.com/blog/finance/welfare-statistics.html
Welfare Participation... Source: United States Census Bureau.
Economy depends on money to circulate- automation axes consumption triggering spiral into recession
Brad Stollery, Medium, "Universal Basic Income Is an Inevitable Part of Our Automated Future", 02/21/2018, https://outline.com/53THAX // https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/universal-basic-income-is-an-inevitable-part-of-our-automated-future-3cc181d4778d
Like any market, the labour... venture capital for the people.
Only way to prevent this chronic under-consumption is UBI
Sudipto Mundle, LiveMint, "Universal basic income: an idea whose time has come?", 09/16/2016, https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/6KbaEPNHIpfdpoloXwb69O/Universal-basic-income-an-idea-whose-time-has-come.html
A third strand of thinking... income and work, hence UBI.
Without intervention, consumers curbing spending leads to economy worse than Great Recession by end of decade
Karen Harris, Austin Kimson, Andrew Schwedel, Bain and Company, "Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality - Bain and Company", 02/07/2018, https://www.bain.com/insights/labor-2030-the-collision-of-demographics-automation-and-inequality/
Aftermath of the boom... be pushed toward the floor.
Interconnectivity higher than ever- recession now generates higher spillovers to EMDEs than Great Recession
Wee Chian Koh, Shu Yu, World Bank, "A Decade After the Global Recession", 2019, http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/799211574200483232/Recession-Chapter-3.pdf
Since the 2009 global recession... sector-led, productivity-driven growth.
IMF finds 900 million people fall into poverty in event of economic shock like Great Recession
Harry Bradford, Huffington Post, "Economic Shock Could Throw 900 Million People Into Poverty, IMF Study Warns | HuffPost India", 06/04/2013, https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/global-poverty-900-million-economic-shock_n_3022420
Hundreds of millions of people... size of the U.S. population. | 905,511 |
379 | 380,250 | Contact and Disclosure Info | Contact Info:
Brandon Wang
- Facebook Messenger
- brandon.tx.wang at gmail.com
Nihar Annam
- Facebook Messenger
- nihar.annam at gmail.com
Please contact us if you have any disclosure questions, not doing so grants us an "we meet" to all potential interps. | 905,558 |
380 | 380,245 | 0 - Potential Interps | Interpretation: On the April 2020 Public Forum topic at the Tournament of Champions, debaters must disclose previously-read positions on the National Debate Coaches Association Public Forum wiki. The disclosure must be under their own school, team name, and correct side and must happen at least 30 minutes before the round and must include the author name, taglines, a hyperlink to the evidence, and full-text of all parts of the evidence they cite in context. | 905,553 |
381 | 380,235 | 4 - March AFF - Emissions and Africa | Contention 1: Emissions
Solar and wind don’t always work, coal is used instead
Michael Shellenberger, 5-15-2018, "Solar And Wind Lock-In Fossil Fuels, And That Makes Saving The Climate Harder And More Expensive," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/15/solar-and-wind-lock-in-fossil-fuels-that-makes-saving-the-climate-harder-slower-more-expensive/#68f50f0421d4
The cognitive dissonance between my private beliefs and public position worsened as it became clear that, had France tried to decarbonize using a “clean energy mix” that included implementing solar and wind, it would have had to increase oil or gas-burning in order to maintain electric reliability. That’s because the electric system requires fast-ramping energy sources like oil and natural gas when the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing. As a result, had France increased solar and wind as part of a “clean energy mix,” it would have locked-in fossil fuels for decades and slowed decarbonization. Some solar and wind advocates suggest that batteries will play the role of fossil fuels and prevent that from happening, but consider that the calculations done by my colleagues Mark Nelson and Madison Czerwinski: Tesla’s much-hyped 100 MW lithium battery storage center in Australia can only provide enough backup power for 7,500 homes for four hours; The largest lithium battery storage center in the U.S. (in Escondido, California) can only provide enough power for 20,000 homes for four hours; Are a few hours of battery backup sufficient to integrate solar and wind onto the grid? Not in the slightest. Solar and wind are unreliable over months and years, not just hours. That means unfathomable quantities of electricity would need to be stored over months or years. Consider that: It would take 696 storage centers the size of Tesla’s in Australia to provide just four hours of backup power for the Australian grid — and cost $50 billion; It would require 15,280 storage centers the size of Escondido to provide just four hours of backup power for the U.S. grid — at an estimated cost of $764 billion.
Nuclear combines with renewables
William Budinger, 5-10-2019, "A Very Inconvenient Truth," Democracy Journal, https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/a-very-inconvenient-truth/
Yes, wind and solar generate carbon-free electricity. But because they require backups, renewables they lock in fossil fuel power plants as an essential apart of the electricity system. So what are the carbon-free options available to help and backup wind and solar? Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology (CCS), at this point, looks to be essential. Considering the fleet of new coal and gas plants currently being built around the world, with lifetimes of 40 to 60 years or more, retrofitting with CCS is probably an economic as well as environmental necessity. Unfortunately, we do not yet have the technology to make CCS even close to being economical. We also haven’t figured out how to handle the massive quantity of CO2 that would be captured. It is an area that deserves much more RandD than it’s getting. All of this brings us to that very inconvenient truth: As much as I hate to admit it, nuclear power is the only “shovel ready” technology we presently know of that can provide all the new electric power we’ll need as fast as we need it. In contrast to Germany, the countries such as France and Sweden that got rid of fossil-fuel electric generation did it with nuclear power. And they did it in less than 15 years. Nuclear can run 24/7 at nearly full power, so they don’t it doesn’t need fossil fuel backups. It is also an incredibly concentrated energy source, so generation capacity can be built out fast with much less land required. And despite my visceral fears of all things nuclear in the 1970s, data from decades of operation have shown that nuclear is the safest energy source available, producing less waste even than solar, producing power at a cost competitive or better than anything else, and harming thousands of times fewer people in its worst accidents than coal does in daily operation. France and Sweden’s nuclear programs have saved thousands of lives from the effects of burning fossil fuels. Gen IV nuclear promises to be even better. So although renewables will play an increasingly essential and important part on the path to deep decarbonization, without nuclear in the mix we will never be able to get there in time. As we now understand the urgency of climate change, I and many others have moved from a position of deep distrust of nuclear power to an acknowledgement that in combination with wind, and solar, and CCS, nuclear must play a serious role in climate solutions.
Vermont proves that no nuclear means fossil fuels
James Conca, 11-25-2019, "Nuclear Power Does Slow Climate Change," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/11/25/nuclear-power-does-slow-climate-change/#7006fdd27202
There a number of examples. The unnecessary closing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of 2014 led to an increase in fossil fuel use, specifically natural gas, that completely filled the gap. Same with San Onofre in California. In a report on the impact of shutting down Indian Point Nuclear Plant, the NYISO said three natural gas plants would replace the lost nuclear power when Indian Point completely shuts down in 2021.
Energy sector emits and pollutes
Union Of Concerned Scientists, 12-20-2017, "Benefits of Renewable Energy Use," Union of Concerned Scientists, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy-use#references
Human activity is overloading our atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other global warming emissions. These gases act like a blanket, trapping heat. The result is a web of significant and harmful impacts, from stronger, more frequent storms, to drought, sea level rise, and extinction. In the United States, about 29 percent of global warming emissions come from our electricity sector. Most of those emissions come from fossil fuels like coal and natural gas 1, 2.In contrast, most renewable energy sources produce little to no global warming emissions. Even when including “life cycle” emissions of clean energy (ie, the emissions from each stage of a technology’s life—manufacturing, installation, operation, decommissioning), the global warming emissions associated with renewable energy are minimal.
Energy sector emits - causes deaths
Sarah Mcquate-Washington, 11-21-2019, "Air pollution from power plants is killing people," Futurity, https://www.futurity.org/air-pollution-electricity-generation-early-deaths-2217302/
Air pollution from electricity generation emissions in 2014 led to about 16,000 premature deaths in the continental US, according to new research.In many states, the majority of the health impacts came from emissions originating in other states. The team also found that exposures were higher for black and white non-Latino Americans than for other groups, and that this disparity held even after accounting for differences in income.
Nuclear key to solving warming - 1.5 degree mark
No Author, 2018, "Nuclear energy and climate change," World Nuclear Association, https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/how-can-nuclear-combat-climate-change.aspx
In its 2018 report, Global Warming of 1.5°C8, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that the planet is likely to breach the 1.5°C threshold by as early as 2030. In most of the pathways consistent with keeping global temperatures below 1.5°C set out by the IPCC, nuclear power’s share of electricity generation increases significantly. Almost all proposed pathways to achieving for deep decarbonisation suggest an increased role for nuclear power, including those published by the International Energy Agency5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Energy Initiative9, US Energy Information Administration10, and World Energy Council11.
We need nuclear to keep under 4 degrees warming
Mark Lynas, 9-14-2012, "Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/sep/14/nuclear-global-warming?newsfeed=true
Let me be very clear. Without nuclear, the battle against global warming is as good as lost. Even many greens now admit this in private moments. We are already witnessing the first signs of the collapse in the biosphere this entails – with the Arctic in full-scale meltdown, more solar radiation is being captured by the dark ocean surface, and the weather systems of the entire northern hemisphere are being thrown into chaos. With nuclear, there is a chance that global warming this century can be limited to 2C; without nuclear, I would guess we are heading for 4C or above. That will devastate ecosystems and societies worldwide on a scale which is unimaginable.
Warming kills millions - we must take action
Sean Illing, 2-22-2019, "It is absolutely time to panic about climate change," Vox, https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/2/22/18188562/climate-change-david-wallace-wells-the-uninhabitable-earth
The UN says we’re on track to get to about 4 degrees or 4.3 degrees of warming by the end of the century if we continue as we are. I don’t think that we’ll get there, this century at least. I think that we’ll take enough action to avert that. But I think it’s really important to know what it would mean to land there, because that is a much more reasonable anchor for our expectations. “Our best-case scenario is basically one in which we lose the equivalent of 25 Holocausts — and that’s just from air pollution alone” Part of the problem when discussing climate threats is that so much of it feels abstract or distant. But as soon as you begin to quantify the damage, it’s pretty harrowing. For instance, you cite a recent study showing that we could avoid 150 million excess deaths from air pollution by end of century if we could limit warming to 1.5 degrees or hold warming at 2 degrees without relying on negative emissions.
C2: Africa
Squo fails, africa doesn’t have energy
Serusha Govender, 2-25-2020, "Africa grapples with clean energy conundrum," BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51615647?fbclid=IwAR2XR6HJpR_tPsjXyYxruWgrhnRFragla-u5xvBryScc8gl1EC_mGkRgmdA
More than two thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa, more than 600 million people, lack access to electricity. But electrification on the continent is still growing more slowly than anywhere else in the world, despite pledges to light up Africa in the next few decades.
People won’t get electricity, grids stalled
Carolyn Logan, 1-7-2020, "Progress in rolling out of national power grids has stalled across Africa," Conversation, https://theconversation.com/progress-in-rolling-out-of-national-power-grids-has-stalled-across-africa-128492
But on-the-ground observation and interviews throughout Africa suggest that the United Nations’ development goal of providing “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” remains a distant dream for many. Survey teams from the African research network Afrobarometer, asked people in 34 countries on the continent about access to electricity, and recorded the presence of an accessible grid. They found that because expansion of national electric grids appeared to have largely stalled in recent years. And even in areas where an electric grid was accessible, service often remained unreliable. Thus, About four in 10 Africans (42) lack an electricity connection in their homes. This is either because they are in zones not served by an electric grid or because they are not connected to an existing grid. In 16 countries, more than half of respondents had no electricity connection. This included more than three quarters of citizens in Burkina Faso (81), Uganda (80), Liberia (78), and Madagascar (76).
Nuclear can go overseas - trump wants to do it
Tom Dichristopher, 10-10-2018, “The US is losing the nuclear energy export race to China and Russia. Here’s the Trump team’s plan to turn the tide,” CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/21/trump-aims-to-beat-china-and-russia-in-nuclear-energy-export-race.html
The Trump administration is preparing a new push to help American companies compete in the race to build the next generation of nuclear power plants around the world — a competition the U.S. is currently losing. In doing so, the administration also aims to push back on the growing dominance of Russia and China in the space, preventing them from expanding their international influence by forging long-lasting nuclear ties with foreign powers. The State Department plans to expand cooperation with countries pursuing atomic energy long before those nations eve r purchase a nuclear reactor. By facilitating early stage talks, the U.S. intends to put American companies first in line to build tomorrow's fleet of nuclear power plants overseas. We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation. Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. To be sure, the Energy and Commerce departments actively facilitate U.S. nuclear cooperation with their foreign counterparts. But the State Department now intends to push the issue in talks at the highest levels of government, making it clear that Washington believes cooperation in the nuclear realm is central to its strategic relationships. But even with the State Department lending its diplomatic heft, winning nuclear energy contracts won't be easy. ...New plan takes shape During the address, Ford outlined State's plan to help American companies compete with Chinese and Russian firms. The department will more closely coordinate nuclear cooperation efforts across agencies and ramp up informal, non-binding talks with nations that might pursue nuclear energy technology. The goal is to expand the number of countries engaged in ongoing communication with U.S. government agencies, nuclear energy companies and researchers. The State Department will do this by signing nuclear cooperation memorandums of understanding with the countries. Under the MOUs, American experts would help foreign nations develop the apparatus necessary to accommodate a nuclear energy industry. That includes creating safety, security and non-proliferation protocols, as well as an independent regulatory system. That will make more countries "fully prepared to take advantage of the emerging technologies and coming innovations in reactor design and other areas that are being pioneered in the United States," Ford said. That marks a change from the past, said Ted Jones, director for national security and international programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's main trade group. "We've long urged greater coordination among the many agencies involved in U.S. nuclear exports and a genuinely strategic approach to U.S. nuclear cooperation," he said. "The State Department's plans for nuclear cooperation MOUs indicate that this Administration is moving in the right direction." There has long been an instinct within U.S. foreign policy circles to limit nuclear energy exports, if only to reduce the risk that those transfers will open the door to nuclear weapons proliferation. But if the U.S. continues to lose sales to other countries, its ability to set strong nonproliferation standards around the world will fade. Primary coolant pumps assembled by St Petersburg's Central Mechanical Engineering Design Bureau, a member of the Atomenergomash company group, and shipped to the Belarusian nuclear power plant. The State Department now plans to address nuclear energy cooperation in high-level meetings with presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers, a senior State Department official told CNBC. The department is currently drawing up priorities with two major considerations in mind, the official said. First, the State Department is identifying geostrategic opportunities, with a focus on the parts of the world where the U.S. is at risk of losing bids to rivals like Russia and China. Second, the government will consult nuclear energy companies about where they see the brightest opportunities and the best chances of closing deals. Next generation technology The industry is already on board with State's new initiative. The Nuclear Energy Institute regularly polls members on where they see opportunities overseas. In the survey that went out a few weeks ago, NEI asked members to identify their long-term market opportunities, a question that is consistent with Specifically, the State Department initiative. State's focus is on teeing up sales of a new generation of nuclear technology expected to come online in the next five to 10 years, the official said. Those include small modular reactors that can be bolted together to form larger units, Terrapower's traveling wave reactor backed by Bill Gates and microreactors meant to provide enough power for a few thousand homes. Altogether, there are about two dozen serious designs for advanced nuclear reactors trying to break into the market, said McGinnis. Under McGinnis and Secretary Rick Perry, one of the Energy Department's top priorities is facilitating the development of these new technologies. "We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation," he said. "Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. That's been our challenge." On Tuesday, NuScale Energy signed a memorandum to explore deploying its small modular reactors in Romania, after signing similar agreements with Canada and Jordan. The U.S. will still have to reach so-called 123 Agreements with foreign countries before American firms can sell nuclear reactors overseas. These agreements place limits on the use of nuclear technology and must be approved by Congress.
Microreactors solve the problem
Hannah Daly, 6-20-2018, "1.1 billion people still lack electricity. This could be the solution," World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/1-billion-people-lack-electricity-solution-mini-grid-iea/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Microreactors are safe, small, and don’t need much maintenance
Cory Hatch, 8-1-2019, "Experts explore options for microreactors in Alaska," Idaho National Laboratory, https://inl.gov/article/experts-explore-options-for-microreactors-in-alaska/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Dying nuclear industry - exports failing in squo
Jennifer T. Gordon, 1-9-2020, "International co-financing of nuclear reactors between the United States and its allies," Atlantic Council, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/international-co-financing-of-nuclear-reactors-between-the-united-states-and-its-allies/
It is critically important for global safety standards, nonproliferation agreements, and geopolitics that the United States play a leading role in the export of nuclear energy technologies. However, the domestic reactor fleet has struggled due to the deregulated US electricity market, inexpensive gas, and subsidies for renewables, which—in turn—has hampered US nuclear exports, since it is challenging to export a product that lacks a domestic market. However, building new reactors and bringing first-of-a-kind reactors to demonstration involve high capital costs and financial risk, for the purchasing party as well as the vendor. If the United States is to play a role at all in building new nuclear plants, it must address the challenges inherent in financing new nuclear builds; one mechanism to do this is through partnering with close US allies to co-finance new nuclear projects. If the United States and its allies fail to make their nuclear exports competitive, they will likely cede the mantle of global leadership in that area to Russia and China, where nuclear companies are state owned, easily able to finance nuclear exports, and already exploring emerging markets for nuclear exports..
Big market in africa for microgrids
Lili Francklyn, 2-12-2019, "Improving Energy Access in Rural Africa Depends on Renewable Energy Microgrids," HOMER Microgrid News and Insight, https://microgridnews.com/improving-energy-access-in-rural-africa-depends-on-renewable-energy-microgrids/
According to a 2018 Navigant report, the Middle East and Africa is forecast to be the world’s fastest growing market for microgrids – or minigrids as they are commonly known in Africa – at a Compound Annual Growth rate of 27, representing almost 1,145 MW by 2027. African governments are beginning to recognize the negative financial and environmental impacts of reliance on fossil fuels or biomass for energy, so forward-looking countries are shifting their policies to prioritize distributed renewable energy. “Africa doesn’t have a generation problem, it has a distribution problem,” says Aaron Leopold, Executive Director of the African Minigrid Developers Association (AMDA). He notes that because construction of transmission lines to scattered rural populations is prohibitively expensive and the cost of renewable energy equipment is declining, “minigrids can now deliver electricity to new users more cheaply than the central grid in many parts of Africa.” Leopold points out that while upfront costs to connect to the utility grid in Kenya might run $1,000 – or as much as $2,000 in Tanzania – AMDA reports an average minigrid connection cost of $938, which is continuing to fall. To conclude, the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that energy access in sub-Saharan Africa will improve steadily through 2030, and that many Africans – upwards of 200 million – will gain access to electricity through the deployment of microgrids. The agency says that decentralized solutions such as microgrids will be the most cost effective solution for more than 70 of people who gain energy access in rural areas. And by 2030 over 60 of that new access will be powered by renewable energy. 4
Big market provides the incentive for companies to go overseas with nuclear
Sara Stefanini, 3-13-2019, "Energy and oil majors turn to rural Africa in grab for world's next billion customers," Climate Home News, https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/03/13/energy-oil-majors-turn-rural-africa-grab-worlds-next-billion-customers/
The first step is to set up tiny renewable generators independent of main power grids, often sold on pay-as-you-go schemes like mobile phones. Once that basic energy supply is established – to charge phones, home lighting and other small appliances – it’s expected to fuel demand for a slew of new products and services, such as internet access, mobile banking, water pumps, mills, fridges, home batteries and cooking stoves. The reams of data on how these new customers use and pay for their energy will help companies decide their next moves. It’s a the potential bonanza that is drawing electricity, oil and gas, equipment-making and technology companies to invest in rural projects they once deemed too small and risky, especially in Africa. The interest is part of the industry’s broadening from large, centralised power plants and fossil fuels towards flexible, off-grid renewables. Just under 1 billion people worldwide lacked access to electricity as of 2017, with around 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa, according to the International Energy Agency.
Nuclear is key to solving africa's energy deficit
Jack Little, 3-5-2019, "Can Nuclear Power Solve Africa's Energy Problem?," Stanford University, http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2019/ph241/little-j1/
Africa's increasing demand for energy comes at a time where much of the world is looking for renewable alternatives to carbon intensive energy sources. Nuclear power has the ability to both satisfy Africa's energy demand while also reducing their carbon footprint. Additionally, this energy source has the capability of solving the africa’scontinent's energy deficit issue. Many sub-Saharan countries are not well developed in their power sectors, which places the region in a $90 billion annual power infrastructural deficit. 2 Also, fossil fuel power sources require continuous transportation of fuel, which is challenging in Africa due to lacking pipeline and transportation infrastructure. 2 However, nuclear power plants impose fewer constraints on location because of denser fuel and lesser size, allowing them to be more strategically placed in order to reduce transportation and transmission costs. 2 Nuclear energy can therefore serve as a solution to Africa's energy deficit as well as their energy infrastructure issues while also providing the population with a carbon-free source of reliable energy.
People use biomass in africa
Kitty Stecher, 2013, ","International Renewable Energy Agency, https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/archive/hub/publications/115608/biomass-potential-africa.pdf
Despite an increase in energy use, many poor households in Africa have no access to modern energy sources. Worldwide, SSA and India have the greatest proportion of population dependent on traditional biomass use. In Africa, a total of 657 million people (80 of the population) rely on the traditional use of biomass for cooking (IEA, 2010). It is important given this scale of biomass use that modern bioenergy systems are able to provide an important contribution to future energy systems and to the development of sustainable energy supplies (Berndes, Hoogwijk and Broek, 2003)
Biomass is unsafe and kills
No Author, 5-8-2018, "Household air pollution and health,” World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
Around 3 billion people still cook using solid fuels (such as wood, crop wastes, charcoal, coal and dung) and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves. Most of these people are poor, and live in low- and middle-income countries. These cooking practices are inefficient, and use fuels and technologies that produce high levels of household air pollution with a range of health-damaging pollutants, including small soot particles that penetrate deep into the lungs. In poorly ventilated dwellings, indoor smoke can be 100 times higher than acceptable levels for fine particles. Exposure is particularly high among women and young children, who spend the most time near the domestic hearth. 3.8 million people a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels and kerosene for cooking.
Energy poverty means that people stay in poverty
Sri Mulyani Indrawati, 7-28-2015, "What you need to know about energy and poverty," World Bank Blogs, https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/what-you-need-know-about-energy-and-poverty
We find that energy poverty means two things: Poor people are the least likely to have access to power. And they are more likely to remain poor if they stay unconnected. Around one in seven, or 1.1 billion people, don’t have access to electricity, and almost 3 billion still cook with polluting fuels like kerosene, wood, charcoal, and dung. In Africa, the electricity challenge remains daunting. In Liberia, for example, just 2 of the population has regular access to electricity. Even countries with access often have highly unreliable service. One in three developing countries experiences at least 20 hours of power outages a month. When power is available, it can be expensive: In many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, consumers pay as much as 20-50 cents per kilowatt-hour against a global average close to 10 cents. Inclusive economic growth is the single most effective means of reducing poverty and boosting prosperity. Yet most economic activity is impossible without adequate, reliable and competitively priced modern energy. This is why access to energy is so important in the fight against poverty. | 905,543 |
382 | 380,196 | SeptOct - Uighurs | The BRI is the root cause towards China's treatment towards the uighurs.
Kennedy ‘19 of Minnesota Post observes,
China’s Uyghurs: today’s high-tech genocide. In western China’s Xinjiang province, ethnic Turkic Muslims known as Uyghurs (WEE-gurs) are targeted by the Chinese government in a cultural genocide, the destruction of the entire group by wiping out their religion, language, and ethnic identity. Omer Kanat, the director of the Uyghur Human Rights Watch, calls this “a genocide without the gas chambers.” The Chinese government labels the Uyghurs, about 10 million people in a province of 21.8 million, as a terrorist or security risk for two reasons. First, they are a minority group unwilling to submit to Chinese ideology. Second, and perhaps more significantly, because they are a threat to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in Xinjiang province. What is the BRI? This name derives from the ancient Chinese Silk Road of the Han dynasty 2,000 years ago that linked the civilizations of Rome and China for trade, with China’s silk going to the west and Rome’s wool, gold, and silver traveling to China. In 2013 China’s President Xi Jinping coined the name Belt and Road Initiative, drawing inspiration from the Silk Road. “Belt” refers to the Silk Road Economic Belt, land routes for road and rail transportation; “Road” refers to sea routes, the 21st century Maritime Silk Road. As part of the BRI, China has developed infrastructure in 152 countries across the world: in Asia, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and the Americas, with Chile and Panama the proposed Americas targets. China’s goal is to control access and ownership to natural resources such as oil and gas; distribution via all modes, including ports, railways, and airports; and then extending this economic hegemony to control politics of countries along the BRI through this vast integrated network. China’s plan looks like a giant octopus with tentacles reaching around the planet. The BRI and the Uyghurs. Very simply, the Uyghurs are in China’s way. Xinjiang province is rich in oil and gas, and it is the site of current railroads and future gas pipelines. The Uyghurs resist China’s influence in the province, which upsets China’s ability to manage Xinjiang’s resources. The Chinese government is responding by persecuting the Uyghurs to gain complete control in this vital BRI link.
Oppression of the Uighurs will only intensify as the BRI expands. -Ma of Business Insider ‘19,
Experts point out that China's growing emphasis on BRI projects coincides with Beijing's crackdown in Xinjiang. China has accused militant Uighurs of being terrorists and inciting violence across the country since at least the early 2000s, as many Uighur separatists left China for places like Afghanistan and Syria to become fighters. But its campaign of repression only stepped up in the past two years, under the rule of Chen Quanguo, a Communist Party secretary who previously designed the program of intensive surveillance in Tibet. Normal people in Xinjiang have found themselves disappeared or detained in internment camps for flimsy reasons, like setting their clocks to a different time zone or communicating with people in other countries, even their relatives. Rushan Abbas, a Uighur activist in Virginia, told Business Insider: "This has everything to do with the Xi Jinping's signature project, the Belt and Road Initiative, because the Uighur land is in the heart of the most key point of Xi Jinping's signature project." Abbas is one of many Uighurs abroad currently swept up in China's mission to silence Uighurs. Her sister and aunt went missing in Xinjiang cities six days after Abbas criticized China's human rights record in Washington, DC. She believes her family's disappearance is a direct consequence of her activism.Adrian Zenz, an academic expert on Chinese minority policy, told The New York Times earlier this year: "The role of Xinjiang has changed greatly with the BRI," and that China's ambitions have turned Xinjiang into a "core region" of economic development.
This is because everytime the BRI grows, it becomes even more important. Siddiqui of the New Arab ‘19
The political and practical cost of probing into the Uighur issue would be too high for any of these countries to withstand. Secondly, even otherwise, Muslim solidarity on other issues has often come into question. Be it Syria, Yemen or even the ongoing frictions between the US and Iran; the Muslim world has always come up with a scattered response or just divided itself into two separate lobbies. Thirdly, while China's energy security depends on the GCC countries which are its main suppliers of hydrocarbons, Beijing remains the Arab world's secure long-term consumer base for the next few decades as fluctuating oil prices and the Western demand for alternate energy sources disturbs its economic stability. Lastly, Xinjiang is China's border province and the success of the BRI depends on this region as it is the main land route to the Arabian Sea via Pakistan. Any instability here can hinder Beijing's plans for trade connectivity, endanger its investments and disturb all stakeholders. But ignoring the problem is not the best solution. According to a research study conducted by Graham Fuller from the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, " If the "Xinjiang problem is not resolved, it is bound to affect not only broader developments within the People's Republic of China but also the stability of Xinjiang's neighbours in Central and South Asia and, indeed of the broader world order."
and Kennedy of Minnesota Post ‘19 impacts this out writing that
China’s goal is to erase the Uyghur culture and the Muslim religion through Uyghurs’ forced acculturation to Chinese ideology. China is one of the world’s most technologically advanced countries. In Xinjiang, technology is used to monitor and persecute the Uyghurs with facial recognition devices, smartphone scanners, the mandatory installation of spyware on electronics, DNA testing, and biometric data. These tools target Uyghurs and surveil for activists and dissenters. Police officers have smart glasses to assess distances people have traveled from their registered addresses. Using artificial intelligence, profiles are developed to predict which individuals are significant “threats” to the Chinese authorities and warrant incarceration. It is said that this is the most intense government surveillance in the world today. The United Nations who estimates that up to 2 million Uyghurs have been rounded up and put into “re-education concentration camps.” The millions in detention are tortured, often for years. Unknown numbers are “disappeared.” Forced organ harvesting has been documented. And the children of those who are incarcerated are left behind. Some are placed in situations like American Indian youth who were forced into boarding schools; others are given to Han Chinese to raise, a practice akin to the removal of children from targeted groups during the genocides in Guatemala and Argentina. And untold numbers are on their own, not unlike the migrant infants and children on our own southern border.
The American Uighur Association ‘19 explains that
In prior research, restated in this work, UHRP has asserted how state led economic development merely represents a form of Uyghur displacement. A form that takes place in situ, rather than a process involving mass removal. In situ displacement has arisen due to the promulgation of economic development campaigns that do not contain any measures for control by the titular population of the autonomous region. Such an exclusionary approach has encouraged migration and greater state intrusions into Uyghur life. UHRP believes OBOR exhibits no change in approach from Beijing to stimulating economic development in East Turkestan. Familiar patterns in which Uyghur rights to participation in the development process remain violations under international standards. The redevelopment of Uyghur neighborhoods, particularly in Kashgar, under Chinese development campaigns is a physical manifestation of the compression felt in Uyghur society and cultural life. As the physical appearance and demographics of urban East Turkestan becomes less distinguishable from eastern China, Uyghur residents will occupy the same spaces, but without the organic arrangement the redeveloped areas once embodied. In essence, the tangible aspects of Uyghur culture and civilization are under process of destruction under an unquestioned narrative of “development.” However, it is not only Uyghurs culture, language, traditions and ethnic identity that are is under threat. If OBOR the BRI succeeds, there are minorities in neighboring countries, such as the Balochs in Pakistan, who will face similar challenges. Given such outcomes, UHRP concludes development campaigns serve national and party needs to consolidate territorial control of East Turkestan and assimilate Uyghurs into the dominant culture of China while projecting Chinese influence into the Eurasian continent. UHRP calls on multilateral agencies, such as the United Nations, to recognize in human rights standards the problematic issue of demographic change engineered by state led development campaigns. Governments and private sector entities enticed by the opportunities presented by OBOR, particularly in East Turkestan and other minority regions, should demonstrate their engagement meets international human rights standards and benefits the Uyghur people in the region.
China’s leader Xi Jinping has a grand plan in motion to put his country at the economic and political centre of the world. These ambitions are best summed up by the Belt and Road Initiative, a trillion-dollar project that seeks to connect countries across continents on trade, with China at its centre. The ambitious plan involves creating a 6000km sea route connecting China to South East Asia, Oceania and North Africa (the “Road”), as well as through building railway and road infrastructure to connect China with Central and West Asia, the Middle East and Europe (the “Belt”). The project went into effect in 2013 and has around 65 countries either signed on or in negotiations with Beijing. What does all this have to do with Xinjiang? Well, take a look at this map of the trade routes: Geographically, Urumqi — the capital of Xinjiang — is a crucial intersection point in the “Belt” part of the project. It also shares several international borders: Mongolia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The last thing the Chinese government wants for such a crucial region in this plan is unrest or the loss of control. And that’s where the intense security crackdown comes in. This explainings why the crackdown escalated around five years ago, in line with the Belt and Road Initiative taking off. Dr Anna Hayes, senior lecturer in politics and international relations at James Cook University, has conducted extensive research into the situation at Xinjiang. She told news.com.au the economics of the Belt and Road plan played an important role in the crackdown, noting the surveillance and detainment has intensified in line with the rolling out of the trillion-dollar project. “There’s been more than 7000 police stations put in after 2016 and huge amounts of money spent on surveillance technology,” she said. “(Mr Xi) brought in Chen Quanguo as Xinjiang Party Chief that same year — a strongman like himself who could bring Xinjiang’s Muslim minority under complete control. “The territory of Xinjiang is such an important part of the Belt and Road Initiative, — as all those highways, gas pipelines, railways— they all have to go through Xinjiang, so they China wants it under firm control so there’s no internal threat. “The Belt and Road Initiative is now such a key dynamic of Xi Jinping — it’s his signature policy,” Dr Hayes added. “For the initiative to work, Xinjiang has to fall into line. It has to be made to work because it’s the most important part of the Chinese pivot to Central Asia and Eurasia, so they don’t want any obstacles there.” You might think China’s decision to crack down so heavily on the state is counter-productive. Why detain millions of people and risk a massive global controversy if the rest of the world finds out? Seems like a huge gamble for such an expensive and ambitious project. But Dr Hayes explained the Chinese government had long feared losing control of Xinjiang — a region where, historically, there is a lot of competing powerbrokers. “Their reaction to the fear of losing Xinjiang is to crack down hard so it will be brought under total control,” she said. “When you put fear and repression over the population, they very quickly fall into line. “There have been several missteps by the Chinese Communist Party throughout history,” Dr Hayes added, noting the Tiananmen Square massacre and the Cultural Revolution. “This is an authoritarian state. That’s how they work.”As a result, everyday citizens in Xinjiang can disappear at the drop of a hat. According to Dr Hayes, this can be as simple as making the decision to give up drinking alcohol or smoking, which could spark suspicion as being a way to practice the Islamic faith. | 905,504 |
383 | 380,280 | Disclosure Interp | Debaters must open source disclose all previously read positions on the NDCA wiki under the name of their school at least 30 minutes before the round. | 905,599 |
384 | 380,272 | Mineapple Aff | Too many cards, open source, ev at the bottom | 905,590 |
385 | 380,318 | Contact Info | It's probably better and more efficient to Facebook message either of us, but our emails are 20HernandezS@smhall.org and 20PlanteE@smhall.org
We will try to disclose every new argument/case we run after the round, but this may not be possible with the time constraints at some tournaments, so it may happen at the end of the tournament day. We will also disclose verbally if the other team is willing to do so before any round, especially if we were unable to post on the wiki between rounds. | 905,661 |
386 | 387,483 | K - This is how I disappear | 1NC R1 Gorlok
1NC – BBaud
This is how I disappear – Climate Change, Solar, Tax Credits
Black life is lived in white hyper-reality, a white fiction that establishes itself as fact through the endless repetition of anti-black violence on the physical and virtual plane. The proliferation of simulacra’s of anti-black violence, like the affirmative, blurs the line between viral depictions of black death and the harms perpetuated by the police state, feeding a positive feedback lope of anti-blackness. This process secures white semiotics and assures that there is no outside, so the only option left is to bet on an equally confounding semiotic.
John Gillespie 2017 (On the Prospect of Weaponized Death, Propter, nos 2:1, academia.edu/34839874/On_the_Prospect_of_Weaponized_Death) xx-xx-2017 //pyrex ultra
When the idea for this essay originally came to me, I was at a
AND
the center is, paradoxically, within the structure and outside it.”14
The 1AC is narrative of environmental saviorism that casts Solar Thermochemical Cycles as a hero obscuring the particular political agenda of transnational capital at the heart of energy production that reproduces a hegemonic socioeconomic order and ignores the social and environmental consequences of energy
Gudmundsdottir et al 18 – Hronn, Wimm, Henner, and Vasna, “Modernist dreams and green sagas: The neoliberal politics of Iceland's renewable energy economy,”, Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, xx-xx-2018 //pyrex ultra
Recent social science scholarship has rekindled an interest in the more-than-technological
AND
the future that are made to count, and those that are not.
The plan’s implementation of solar power is based in material-discursive regimes of racialized demattering – solar production exacerbates prison labor, toxification, and e- crises – regulations ignore racial commoditization as the waste core mode of imagining the production of energy
Lennon 17 – Myles, @ the Department of Anthropology and School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, (“Decolonizing energy: Black Lives Matter and technoscientific expertise amid solar transitions,” 06-xx-2017 //pyrex ultra
While antiracist activists endow solar panels with the capacity to upend the fossil fueled order
AND
systems that denigrate people of color – a premise I will now elaborate.
Capitalism requires regimes of racialized accumulation by genocidal dispossession, exemplified by the deployment of Investment as a colonial tool. The 1AC’s retreat into ontological analysis strengthens systems of municipal theft and expropriation that generate violent modes of racial accumulation and financialized capitalism that justifies policing, the prison industrial complex, and infinite modes of exploitation.
Jackie Wang 2018 (“Carceral Capitalism”, writer, poet, musician, and academic whose writing has been published by Lies Journal, HTML Giant, and BOMBlog, PhD African-American Studies @ Harvard, MIT PRESS, p. 112-25) xx-xx-2018 //pyrex ultra
Racial Capitalism and Settler Colonialism Given the dual character of capitalist accumulation identified by both
AND
between which people should be expropriated from and which should be merely exploited.
The Alternative is black terrorism. Black terrorism steals away the meaning black death holds that makes it the very possibility for White Being, it is a semiotic intervention that breaks apart white being by going where words don’t go and disorienting the fundamental structure of the hyper-real.
John Gillespie 2017 (On the Prospect of Weaponized Death, Propter, nos 2:1, academia.edu/34839874/On_the_Prospect_of_Weaponized_Death) xx-xx-2017 //pyrex ultra
That black death and anti-blackness exist in this liminal positionality posits the impossible
AND
globalization which is itself immoral. So, let us be immoral...”26
Revolution can only be understood through the unintelligibility of the end of the world, as blackness structures whiteness control of space and time, revolution can only embody rendering the world unethical. Thus, I embrace the Dance of Death, acting as the (Im)possibility, of white revolutionary praxis where a loss of subjectivity acts as an unintelligible loss where whiteness can’t cohere itself as the world becomes incoherent.
CJ Healy 2016 (“Kill the Boer”: Anti-Blackness and the (Im)possibility of White Revolutionary Praxis, Plan II Honors Program The University of Texas at Austin, https://www.academia.edu/38741425/_Kill_the_Boer_Anti-Blackness_and_the_Im_possibility_of_White_Revolutionary_Praxis) 05-11-2016 //pyrex ultra
Revolution is “destructive and bloody”249; it “reeks of red
AND
but it does mean that you can’t be nonviolent. . . .283
Vote negative to independently reject their extinction framing as complicit with racial capitalism – embracing the possibility of the “end of the world” is the ONLY resistance pathway which can eliminate fossil fuel capitalism
Mirzoeff 16 - Professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University, “It’s not the Anthropocene, it’s the white supremacy scene, or, the geological color line” in After Extinction, Nicholas, University of Minnesota Press, xx-xx-2016 //pyrex ultra
By contrast, to date the Anthropocene from the first atomic weapon is to give
AND
or farce, but as the sequel that is better than the original. | 916,846 |
387 | 380,154 | 0 - Broken Interps | Interpretation: Debaters must use direct quotes when introducing evidence for the first time. To clarify: don’t paraphrase
Interpretation: On the March 2020 Public Forum topic at the stay at home spring classic , debaters must disclose previously-read positions on the National Debate Coaches Association Public Forum wiki. The disclosure must be under their own school, team name, and correct side and must happen at least 30 minutes before the round and must include the author name, taglines, a hyperlink to the evidence, and full-text of all parts of the evidence they cite in context.
interpretation: Teams may not read plans in public forum debate unless they have disclosed the position on the NDCA wiki at least 45 minutes before the round | 905,452 |
388 | 380,218 | March Aff - Emissions, African Energy | Contention 1: Emissions
Solar and wind don’t always work, coal is used instead
Michael Shellenberger, 5-15-2018, "Solar And Wind Lock-In Fossil Fuels, And That Makes Saving The Climate Harder And More Expensive," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/15/solar-and-wind-lock-in-fossil-fuels-that-makes-saving-the-climate-harder-slower-more-expensive/#68f50f0421d4
The cognitive dissonance between my private beliefs and public position worsened as it became clear that, had France tried to decarbonize using a “clean energy mix” that included implementing solar and wind, it would have had to increase oil or gas-burning in order to maintain electric reliability. That’s because the electric system requires fast-ramping energy sources like oil and natural gas when the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing. As a result, had France increased solar and wind as part of a “clean energy mix,” it would have locked-in fossil fuels for decades and slowed decarbonization. Some solar and wind advocates suggest that batteries will play the role of fossil fuels and prevent that from happening, but consider that the calculations done by my colleagues Mark Nelson and Madison Czerwinski: Tesla’s much-hyped 100 MW lithium battery storage center in Australia can only provide enough backup power for 7,500 homes for four hours; The largest lithium battery storage center in the U.S. (in Escondido, California) can only provide enough power for 20,000 homes for four hours; Are a few hours of battery backup sufficient to integrate solar and wind onto the grid? Not in the slightest. Solar and wind are unreliable over months and years, not just hours. That means unfathomable quantities of electricity would need to be stored over months or years. Consider that: It would take 696 storage centers the size of Tesla’s in Australia to provide just four hours of backup power for the Australian grid — and cost $50 billion; It would require 15,280 storage centers the size of Escondido to provide just four hours of backup power for the U.S. grid — at an estimated cost of $764 billion.
Nuclear combines with renewables
William Budinger, 5-10-2019, "A Very Inconvenient Truth," Democracy Journal, https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/a-very-inconvenient-truth/
Yes, wind and solar generate carbon-free electricity. But because they require backups, renewables they lock in fossil fuel power plants as an essential apart of the electricity system. So what are the carbon-free options available to help and backup wind and solar? Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology (CCS), at this point, looks to be essential. Considering the fleet of new coal and gas plants currently being built around the world, with lifetimes of 40 to 60 years or more, retrofitting with CCS is probably an economic as well as environmental necessity. Unfortunately, we do not yet have the technology to make CCS even close to being economical. We also haven’t figured out how to handle the massive quantity of CO2 that would be captured. It is an area that deserves much more RandD than it’s getting. All of this brings us to that very inconvenient truth: As much as I hate to admit it, nuclear power is the only “shovel ready” technology we presently know of that can provide all the new electric power we’ll need as fast as we need it. In contrast to Germany, the countries such as France and Sweden that got rid of fossil-fuel electric generation did it with nuclear power. And they did it in less than 15 years. Nuclear can run 24/7 at nearly full power, so they don’t it doesn’t need fossil fuel backups. It is also an incredibly concentrated energy source, so generation capacity can be built out fast with much less land required. And despite my visceral fears of all things nuclear in the 1970s, data from decades of operation have shown that nuclear is the safest energy source available, producing less waste even than solar, producing power at a cost competitive or better than anything else, and harming thousands of times fewer people in its worst accidents than coal does in daily operation. France and Sweden’s nuclear programs have saved thousands of lives from the effects of burning fossil fuels. Gen IV nuclear promises to be even better. So although renewables will play an increasingly essential and important part on the path to deep decarbonization, without nuclear in the mix we will never be able to get there in time. As we now understand the urgency of climate change, I and many others have moved from a position of deep distrust of nuclear power to an acknowledgement that in combination with wind, and solar, and CCS, nuclear must play a serious role in climate solutions.
Vermont proves that no nuclear means fossil fuels
James Conca, 11-25-2019, "Nuclear Power Does Slow Climate Change," Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/11/25/nuclear-power-does-slow-climate-change/#7006fdd27202
There are a number of examples. The unnecessary closing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of 2014 led to an increase in fossil fuel use, specifically natural gas, that completely filled the gap. Same with San Onofre in California. In a report on the impact of shutting down Indian Point Nuclear Plant, the NYISO said three natural gas plants would replace the lost nuclear power when Indian Point completely shuts down in 2021.
Energy sector emits and pollutes
Union Of Concerned Scientists, 12-20-2017, "Benefits of Renewable Energy Use," Union of Concerned Scientists, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/benefits-renewable-energy-use#references
Human activity is overloading our atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other global warming emissions. These gases act like a blanket, trapping heat. The result is a web of significant and harmful impacts, from stronger, more frequent storms, to drought, sea level rise, and extinction. In the United States, about 29 percent of global warming emissions come from our electricity sector. Most of those emissions come from fossil fuels like coal and natural gas 1, 2.In contrast, most renewable energy sources produce little to no global warming emissions. Even when including “life cycle” emissions of clean energy (ie, the emissions from each stage of a technology’s life—manufacturing, installation, operation, decommissioning), the global warming emissions associated with renewable energy are minimal.
Long term nuclear quantifiably decreases emissions
Sanglim Lee, 8-12-2017, "Analyzing the Impact of Nuclear Power on CO2 Emissions," MDPI, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1428/htm
Although these studies convincingly argue the relationship between nuclear power and CO2 emissions, there are some limitations, in that the ARDL approach is based on individual countries and the PMG approach imposes that the long-run coefficient be homogenous across groups with nonstationary heterogeneous panels. To overcome such limitations, this study uses the panel dynamic ordinary least squares (PDOLS) method by Pedroni 26, which has the advantage of combining cross-sectional and time-series data to secure sufficient data points, and allows for the heterogeneity of coefficients across groups with nonstationary heterogeneous panels. This study aims to examine the relationship between the nuclear power proportion (the ratio of electricity produced from nuclear power to total electricity) and CO2 emissions per capita using the PDOLS method with nonstationary heterogeneous panels. The panel datasets in this study consist of 18 countries with more than four nuclear power plants each as of 2016, which operate 420 reactors, or approximately 95 of the 444 reactors worldwide. The results indicate that a long-term 1 increase in the nuclear power proportion leads to decreases of 0.26–0.32 in CO2 emissions per capita. The main contribution of this study is, with the PDOLS approach, it provides statistical results as to how much nuclear power reduces CO2 emissions per capita for both the group mean and individual countries currently operating most of the nuclear reactors in the world. Additionally, this study compares nuclear power with renewable energy in terms of mitigating CO2 emissions.
Energy sector emits - causes deaths
Sarah Mcquate-Washington, 11-21-2019, "Air pollution from power plants is killing people," Futurity, https://www.futurity.org/air-pollution-electricity-generation-early-deaths-2217302/
Air pollution from electricity generation emissions in 2014 led to about 16,000 premature deaths in the continental US, according to new research.In many states, the majority of the health impacts came from emissions originating in other states. The team also found that exposures were higher for black and white non-Latino Americans than for other groups, and that this disparity held even after accounting for differences in income.
Nuclear key to solving warming - 1.5 degree mark
Sharon Zhang, 5-28-2019, "To Fight Climate Change, We're Going to Need a Lot More Nuclear," Pacific Standard, https://psmag.com/ideas/nuclear-can-help-us-get-to-a-fossil-fuel-free-future
“No, in an ideal world, renewable energy and energy-storage technology would provide enough electricity to sustain us on even the cloudiest, windless days. Ideally, renewable energy will eventually become as stable and consistent as if it came from natural gas and coal; it would just be clean instead. In the future, a 100 percent renewable energy mix could feasibly meet our current needs, and would be far preferable to a renewable-nuclear energy mix. That's mostly because nuclear—while still quite safe—poses certain threats, including public-health risks during the uranium mining process and a lack of safe long-term storage for spent fuel. But that's not the world we live in, and we won't live in it for a while; research suggests that 100 percent renewable energy is possible, but it's still likely a few decades away, and we have an increasingly limited timeline to radically change our energy supply to mitigate climate change. If we hope to achieve 100 percent carbon-free energy within that time frame, then, we need to ramp up nuclear soon if we want to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Indeed, most pathways to doing so, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, include the use of nuclear energy. And to ramp up nuclear, we need robust federal policy to support existing plants—and create pathways to build new ones.”
Warming kills millions - we must take action
Sean Illing, 2-22-2019, "It is absolutely time to panic about climate change," Vox, https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/2/22/18188562/climate-change-david-wallace-wells-the-uninhabitable-earth
The UN says we’re on track to get to about 4 degrees or 4.3 degrees of warming by the end of the century if we continue as we are. I don’t think that we’ll get there, this century at least. I think that we’ll take enough action to avert that. But I think it’s really important to know what it would mean to land there, because that is a much more reasonable anchor for our expectations. “Our best-case scenario is basically one in which we lose the equivalent of 25 Holocausts — and that’s just from air pollution alone” Part of the problem when discussing climate threats is that so much of it feels abstract or distant. But as soon as you begin to quantify the damage, it’s pretty harrowing. For instance, you cite a recent study showing that we could avoid 150 million excess deaths from air pollution by end of century if we could limit warming to 1.5 degrees or hold warming at 2 degrees without relying on negative emissions.
C2: Africa
Squo fails, africa doesn’t have energy
Serusha Govender, 2-25-2020, "Africa grapples with clean energy conundrum," BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51615647?fbclid=IwAR2XR6HJpR_tPsjXyYxruWgrhnRFragla-u5xvBryScc8gl1EC_mGkRgmdA
More than two thirds of the population of sub-Saharan Africa, more than 600 million people, lack access to electricity. But electrification on the continent is still growing more slowly than anywhere else in the world, despite pledges to light up Africa in the next few decades.
People won’t get electricity, grids stalled
Carolyn Logan, 1-7-2020, "Progress in rolling out of national power grids has stalled across Africa," Conversation, https://theconversation.com/progress-in-rolling-out-of-national-power-grids-has-stalled-across-africa-128492
But on-the-ground observation and interviews throughout Africa suggest that the United Nations’ development goal of providing “access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all” remains a distant dream for many. Survey teams from the African research network Afrobarometer, asked people in 34 countries on the continent about access to electricity, and recorded the presence of an accessible grid. They found that because expansion of national electric grids appeared to have largely stalled in recent years. And even in areas where an electric grid was accessible, service often remained unreliable. Thus, About four in 10 Africans (42) lack an electricity connection in their homes. This is either because they are in zones not served by an electric grid or because they are not connected to an existing grid. In 16 countries, more than half of respondents had no electricity connection. This included more than three quarters of citizens in Burkina Faso (81), Uganda (80), Liberia (78), and Madagascar (76).
Nuclear can go overseas - trump wants to do it
Tom Dichristopher, 10-10-2018, “The US is losing the nuclear energy export race to China and Russia. Here’s the Trump team’s plan to turn the tide,” CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/21/trump-aims-to-beat-china-and-russia-in-nuclear-energy-export-race.html
The Trump administration is preparing a new push to help American companies compete in the race to build the next generation of nuclear power plants around the world — a competition the U.S. is currently losing. In doing so, the administration also aims to push back on the growing dominance of Russia and China in the space, preventing them from expanding their international influence by forging long-lasting nuclear ties with foreign powers. The State Department plans to expand cooperation with countries pursuing atomic energy long before those nations eve r purchase a nuclear reactor. By facilitating early stage talks, the U.S. intends to put American companies first in line to build tomorrow's fleet of nuclear power plants overseas. We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation. Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. To be sure, the Energy and Commerce departments actively facilitate U.S. nuclear cooperation with their foreign counterparts. But the State Department now intends to push the issue in talks at the highest levels of government, making it clear that Washington believes cooperation in the nuclear realm is central to its strategic relationships. But even with the State Department lending its diplomatic heft, winning nuclear energy contracts won't be easy. ...New plan takes shape During the address, Ford outlined State's plan to help American companies compete with Chinese and Russian firms. The department will more closely coordinate nuclear cooperation efforts across agencies and ramp up informal, non-binding talks with nations that might pursue nuclear energy technology. The goal is to expand the number of countries engaged in ongoing communication with U.S. government agencies, nuclear energy companies and researchers. The State Department will do this by signing nuclear cooperation memorandums of understanding with the countries. Under the MOUs, American experts would help foreign nations develop the apparatus necessary to accommodate a nuclear energy industry. That includes creating safety, security and non-proliferation protocols, as well as an independent regulatory system. That will make more countries "fully prepared to take advantage of the emerging technologies and coming innovations in reactor design and other areas that are being pioneered in the United States," Ford said. That marks a change from the past, said Ted Jones, director for national security and international programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's main trade group. "We've long urged greater coordination among the many agencies involved in U.S. nuclear exports and a genuinely strategic approach to U.S. nuclear cooperation," he said. "The State Department's plans for nuclear cooperation MOUs indicate that this Administration is moving in the right direction." There has long been an instinct within U.S. foreign policy circles to limit nuclear energy exports, if only to reduce the risk that those transfers will open the door to nuclear weapons proliferation. But if the U.S. continues to lose sales to other countries, its ability to set strong nonproliferation standards around the world will fade. Primary coolant pumps assembled by St Petersburg's Central Mechanical Engineering Design Bureau, a member of the Atomenergomash company group, and shipped to the Belarusian nuclear power plant. The State Department now plans to address nuclear energy cooperation in high-level meetings with presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers, a senior State Department official told CNBC. The department is currently drawing up priorities with two major considerations in mind, the official said. First, the State Department is identifying geostrategic opportunities, with a focus on the parts of the world where the U.S. is at risk of losing bids to rivals like Russia and China. Second, the government will consult nuclear energy companies about where they see the brightest opportunities and the best chances of closing deals. Next generation technology The industry is already on board with State's new initiative. The Nuclear Energy Institute regularly polls members on where they see opportunities overseas. In the survey that went out a few weeks ago, NEI asked members to identify their long-term market opportunities, a question that is consistent with Specifically, the State Department initiative. State's focus is on teeing up sales of a new generation of nuclear technology expected to come online in the next five to 10 years, the official said. Those include small modular reactors that can be bolted together to form larger units, Terrapower's traveling wave reactor backed by Bill Gates and microreactors meant to provide enough power for a few thousand homes. Altogether, there are about two dozen serious designs for advanced nuclear reactors trying to break into the market, said McGinnis. Under McGinnis and Secretary Rick Perry, one of the Energy Department's top priorities is facilitating the development of these new technologies. "We still lead the world in nuclear technology innovation," he said. "Our big challenge is taking that incredible IP and those incredible technological innovative breakthroughs and bringing them to market. That's been our challenge." On Tuesday, NuScale Energy signed a memorandum to explore deploying its small modular reactors in Romania, after signing similar agreements with Canada and Jordan. The U.S. will still have to reach so-called 123 Agreements with foreign countries before American firms can sell nuclear reactors overseas. These agreements place limits on the use of nuclear technology and must be approved by Congress.
Microreactors solve the problem
Hannah Daly, 6-20-2018, "1.1 billion people still lack electricity. This could be the solution," World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/1-billion-people-lack-electricity-solution-mini-grid-iea/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Microreactors are safe, small, and don’t need much maintenance
Cory Hatch, 8-1-2019, "Experts explore options for microreactors in Alaska," Idaho National Laboratory, https://inl.gov/article/experts-explore-options-for-microreactors-in-alaska/
Most microreactor designs would produce less than 50 megawatts (thermal). Engineers envision plugging a microreactor can be integrated into an existing grid with minimal infrastructure upgrades. Their small size and advanced technologies allow the reactors can to operate safely with few workers and on a small footprint with very little maintenance. These advanced microreactor technologies include passive safety systems and advanced, high-performance materials that markedly reduce the chance of an accident.as Most microreactor designs would arrive on site fully sealed with all the fuel needed to operate for the life of the reactor. “You can easily imagine reactors that d4on’t need to be refueled and last for more than 10 years,” said Steven Aumeier, Idaho National Laboratory’s senior adviser for Nuclear Energy Programs.
Dying nuclear industry - exports failing in squo
Jennifer T. Gordon, 1-9-2020, "International co-financing of nuclear reactors between the United States and its allies," Atlantic Council, https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/international-co-financing-of-nuclear-reactors-between-the-united-states-and-its-allies/
It is critically important for global safety standards, nonproliferation agreements, and geopolitics that the United States play a leading role in the export of nuclear energy technologies. However, the domestic reactor fleet has struggled due to the deregulated US electricity market, inexpensive gas, and subsidies for renewables, which—in turn—has hampered US nuclear exports, since it is challenging to export a product that lacks a domestic market. However, building new reactors and bringing first-of-a-kind reactors to demonstration involve high capital costs and financial risk, for the purchasing party as well as the vendor. If the United States is to play a role at all in building new nuclear plants, it must address the challenges inherent in financing new nuclear builds; one mechanism to do this is through partnering with close US allies to co-finance new nuclear projects. If the United States and its allies fail to make their nuclear exports competitive, they will likely cede the mantle of global leadership in that area to Russia and China, where nuclear companies are state owned, easily able to finance nuclear exports, and already exploring emerging markets for nuclear exports..
Big market in africa for microgrids
Lili Francklyn, 2-12-2019, "Improving Energy Access in Rural Africa Depends on Renewable Energy Microgrids," HOMER Microgrid News and Insight, https://microgridnews.com/improving-energy-access-in-rural-africa-depends-on-renewable-energy-microgrids/
According to a 2018 Navigant report, the Middle East and Africa is forecast to be the world’s fastest growing market for microgrids – or minigrids as they are commonly known in Africa – at a Compound Annual Growth rate of 27, representing almost 1,145 MW by 2027. African governments are beginning to recognize the negative financial and environmental impacts of reliance on fossil fuels or biomass for energy, so forward-looking countries are shifting their policies to prioritize distributed renewable energy. “Africa doesn’t have a generation problem, it has a distribution problem,” says Aaron Leopold, Executive Director of the African Minigrid Developers Association (AMDA). He notes that because construction of transmission lines to scattered rural populations is prohibitively expensive and the cost of renewable energy equipment is declining, “minigrids can now deliver electricity to new users more cheaply than the central grid in many parts of Africa.” Leopold points out that while upfront costs to connect to the utility grid in Kenya might run $1,000 – or as much as $2,000 in Tanzania – AMDA reports an average minigrid connection cost of $938, which is continuing to fall. To conclude, the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that energy access in sub-Saharan Africa will improve steadily through 2030, and that many Africans – upwards of 200 million – will gain access to electricity through the deployment of microgrids. The agency says that decentralized solutions such as microgrids will be the most cost effective solution for more than 70 of people who gain energy access in rural areas. And by 2030 over 60 of that new access will be powered by renewable energy. 4
Big market provides the incentive for companies to go overseas with nuclear
Sara Stefanini, 3-13-2019, "Energy and oil majors turn to rural Africa in grab for world's next billion customers," Climate Home News, https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/03/13/energy-oil-majors-turn-rural-africa-grab-worlds-next-billion-customers/
The first step is to set up tiny renewable generators independent of main power grids, often sold on pay-as-you-go schemes like mobile phones. Once that basic energy supply is established – to charge phones, home lighting and other small appliances – it’s expected to fuel demand for a slew of new products and services, such as internet access, mobile banking, water pumps, mills, fridges, home batteries and cooking stoves. The reams of data on how these new customers use and pay for their energy will help companies decide their next moves. It’s a the potential bonanza that is drawing electricity, oil and gas, equipment-making and technology companies to invest in rural projects they once deemed too small and risky, especially in Africa. The interest is part of the industry’s broadening from large, centralised power plants and fossil fuels towards flexible, off-grid renewables. Just under 1 billion people worldwide lacked access to electricity as of 2017, with around 600 million in sub-Saharan Africa, according to the International Energy Agency.
Microreactors solve Africa’s energy poverty problem
No Author, 11-14-2019, "3 Key Intangibles of the U.S. Nuclear Industry," Department of Nuclear Energy, https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/3-key-intangibles-us-nuclear-industry
There are more than a billion people in the world living in energy poverty and the majority of them don’t have access to clean drinking water. As energy demand continues to rise, countries are faced with the challenging task of meeting these needs while lowering emissions at the same time. Nuclear energy can help solve this the energy poverty problem. It stimulates economies, produces reliable clean power, and can open up new opportunities for countries beyond electricity generation. More than 50 reactors are under construction in the world today and that number could grow to more than 400 as countries assess their options. If they do decide to build, the United States should be their first consideration due to three key intangibles that these nations won’t find anywhere else. since The United States has the best technology in the world and our industry is developing a suite of options to meet the needs of any country. These designs run the gamut from large-scale reactors for baseload generation to smaller and more flexible units that can be scaled up over time as energy demand grows. More than 50 U.S. companies are developing new designs, such as small modular reactors and microreactors, that will fundamentally change the way nuclear energy is used. These smaller, simplified systems will be more affordable to build and operate and capable of producing heat, as well as power. This can be used to decarbonize a number of manufacturing processes that currently rely heavily on fossil fuels, in addition to providing clean drinking water to communities or even creating carbon-neutral fuels such as hydrogen for transportation.
People use biomass in africa
Kitty Stecher, 2013, ","International Renewable Energy Agency, https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/archive/hub/publications/115608/biomass-potential-africa.pdf
Despite an increase in energy use, many poor households in Africa have no access to modern energy sources. Worldwide, SSA and India have the greatest proportion of population dependent on traditional biomass use. In Africa, a total of 657 million people (80 of the population) rely on the traditional use of biomass for cooking (IEA, 2010). It is important given this scale of biomass use that modern bioenergy systems are able to provide an important contribution to future energy systems and to the development of sustainable energy supplies (Berndes, Hoogwijk and Broek, 2003)
Biomass is unsafe and kills
No Author, 5-8-2018, "Household air pollution and health,” World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
Around 3 billion people still cook using solid fuels (such as wood, crop wastes, charcoal, coal and dung) and kerosene in open fires and inefficient stoves. Most of these people are poor, and live in low- and middle-income countries. These cooking practices are inefficient, and use fuels and technologies that produce high levels of household air pollution with a range of health-damaging pollutants, including small soot particles that penetrate deep into the lungs. In poorly ventilated dwellings, indoor smoke can be 100 times higher than acceptable levels for fine particles. Exposure is particularly high among women and young children, who spend the most time near the domestic hearth. 3.8 million people a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels and kerosene for cooking.
Energy poverty means that people stay in poverty
Sri Mulyani Indrawati, 7-28-2015, "What you need to know about energy and poverty," World Bank Blogs, https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/what-you-need-know-about-energy-and-poverty
We find that energy poverty means two things: Poor people are the least likely to have access to power. And they are more likely to remain poor if they stay unconnected. Around one in seven, or 1.1 billion people, don’t have access to electricity, and almost 3 billion still cook with polluting fuels like kerosene, wood, charcoal, and dung. In Africa, the electricity challenge remains daunting. In Liberia, for example, just 2 of the population has regular access to electricity. Even countries with access often have highly unreliable service. One in three developing countries experiences at least 20 hours of power outages a month. When power is available, it can be expensive: In many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, consumers pay as much as 20-50 cents per kilowatt-hour against a global average close to 10 cents. Inclusive economic growth is the single most effective means of reducing poverty and boosting prosperity. Yet most economic activity is impossible without adequate, reliable and competitively priced modern energy. This is why access to energy is so important in the fight against poverty. | 905,526 |
389 | 380,169 | SEPTOCT ~-~- Recessions | - china’s infrastructure expansion has racked up debt and put it on the path to recession
ansar 16
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1609/1609.00415.pdf
China’s three-decade infrastructure ... but one to avoid.
voting aff saves china in 2 ways
first, is easing overcapacity
- the bri provides an outlet to excess capacity of raw materials
matthews 19
https://apjjf.org/2019/01/Mathews.html
There are many ... of the BRI.
second, is creating international support
- xi jinpings hostility is slowing chinese growth and killing support
chang 19
https://www.hoover.org/research/china-never-was-superpower-and-it-wont-be-one-anytime-soon
Xi’s top-down system ... rise to power.”
- the eu helps the bri financially and logistically
ciurtin 17
http://ier.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/publicatii/Final_Policy-Brief-5_Horia-Ciurtin-A-Pivot-to-Europe_web.pdf
However impressive the sums ... with Europe’s support
collapse causes extinction: 3 ways
first, is diversionary war
- collapse influences security behavior
norris 17
https://cfrd8-files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/Discussion_Paper_Norris_China_OR.pdf
With China’s ascension ... be felt worldwide.
- that causes diversionary war
norris 2
This outcome is only one ... encourages diversionary nationalism.
- china-taiwan conflict drags the us in
tsang 12
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/as.2012.52.4.777?read-now=1andseq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
The government of the ... Republic of China (PRC).
- us china war goes nuclear
talmadge 17
https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.gwu.edu/dist/b/1590/files/2018/07/Talmadge-IS-2017-y16c9h.pdf
To preview the main ... outline further in this article.
second, is civil war
- economic growth is the only thing keeping social frustrations at bay
pei 11
https://www.ft.com/content/233f88aa-361b-11e0-9b3b-00144feabdc0
The insecurity displayed by ... fast as economic growth.
- chinese civil war causes the worst humanitarian crisis ever and lets nukes loose
yee 02
(msg us for the pdf plz!)
The fourth factor contributing ...neighbours and the world.
third, is economic ties
- the us economy is dependent on china
nath 19
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/091515/chinas-economic-collapse-good-us.asp
While the United States ... mercy of China.
- us and china crash causes global recession
blakeley 19
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2019/03/next-crash-why-world-unprepared-economic-dangers-ahead
But the main impact ... Trump hurls knives at them.” | 905,471 |
390 | 380,187 | NOVDEC ~-~- Polls | We only know ourselves. NAGEL:
Thomas Nagel. The View from Nowhere. 1986.
In the pursuit of this goal, however, even at its most successful, something will inevitably be lost. If we try to understand experience from an objective viewpoint that is distinct from that of the subject of the experience, then even if we continue to credit its perspectival nature, we will not be able to grasp its most specific qualities unless we can imagine them subjectively. We will not know exactly how scrambled eggs taste to a cockroach even if we develop a detailed objective phenomenology of the cockroach sense of taste. When it comes to values, goals and forms of life, the gulf may be even more profound. Since this is so, no objective conception of the mental world can include it all. But in that case it may be asked what the point is of looking for such a conception. The aim was to place perspectives and their contents in a world seen from no particular point of view. It turns out that some aspects of those perspectives cannot be fully understood in terms of an objective concept of mind. But if some aspects of reality can’t be captured in an objective conception, why not forget the ambition of capturing as much of it as possible? The world isn’t the world as it appears to one highly abstracted point of view that can be pursued by all rational beings. And if one can’t have complete objectivity, the goal of capturing as much of reality as one can in an objective net is pointless and unmotivated. I don’t think this follows. The pursuit of a conception of the world that doesn’t put us at the center is an expression of philosophical realism, all the more so if it does not assume that everything real can be reached by such a conception. Reality is not just objective reality, and any objective conception of reality must include an acknowledgement of its own incompleteness.
Even objective moral justifications devolve into agent’s subjective belief. MACINTYRE:
Macintyre, Alasdair. After Virtue. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1981.
An agent can only justify a particular judgment by referring to some universal rule from which it may be logically derivesd, and can only justify that rule in turn by deriving it from some from a more general rule. or principle; but on this view Since every chain of reasoning must be finite, such a process of justificatory reasoning must always terminate with the assertion of some rule or principle for which no further reason can be given. Each individual implicitly or explicitly has to adopts his or her own first principles on the basis of such a choice. The utterance of Any universal principle is in the end an expression of the preferences of an individual will and for that will its principles have and can have only such authority as it chooses to confer upon them by adopting them.
The only solution is to strive towards the omniperspective. HUDGENS:
Jennifer L. Hudgens. “Perspectives on Perspectivism: Nietzsche and His Commentators.” Georgia State University. August 3rd, 2007.
Again, the definition I offered for omniperspectival knowledge was as follows: striving for ‘omniperspectival knowledge’ is what Nietzsche considers to be the only logically possible way we could even approach the inconceivable nonperspectival position. The omniperspective, as the name implies, would include the information available from all perspectives; thus it can serve as a goal for those who seek objectivity, in that it is the closest thing to the God’s eye view (the nonperspective) that we are actually capable of conceiving. For comparison, let me quote Leiter’s plurality claim: “The more perspectives we enjoy – for example, the more interests we employ in knowing the object – the better our conception of what the object is like will be” (Leiter, p. 345). I believe Leiter may go a step too far in asserting that our conception of this object will be “better” to Nietzsche, for Nietzsche says only that our objectivity or conception of this object will be “more complete” (GM III:12). However, given that I claim only that trying to reach the omniperspective can serve as a goal, Leiter’s plurality claim is subsumable under the omniperspectivity claim as part of the spectrum of truth: it is possible that the omniperspective is the best goal, and there are other possibilities also.
Thus, the standard is consistency with the will of the omniperspective. If there’s moral uncertainty, default to my framework – it incorporates many perspectives including that of their framework, minimizing the risk of fallibility.
The omniperspective votes against OCOs. | 905,485 |
391 | 380,190 | FEB ~-~- Inflation | ====A UBI destroys the economy – 2 links====
====First, is via overspending====
====The economy is growing now – spending reverses the trend and pushes us over the brink.====
Heather **Long **, economics correspondent. Before joining The Washington Post's Wonkblog, she was a senior economics reporter at CNN and a columnist and deputy editor at the Patriot-News in Harrisburg, "U.S. Economy to Grow 2.7 Percent in 2018, Boosted by Trump Tax Overhaul." The Washington Post, WP Company, 22 Jan. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/01/22/u-s-economy-to-grow-nearly-3-percent-in-2018-because-of-trump-tax-cuts-imf-says/?utm'term=.2de3ffd9f780.
The United States is projected to grow 2.7 percent in 2018 as President
AND
stock market performance, although the Dot-com bubble burst shortly afterward.
====A UBI causes a huge spending increase. ====
Daron Acemoglu, 6-19-2019, "Why Universal Basic Income is a bad idea," MarketWatch, https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-universal-basic-income-is-a-bad-idea-2019-06-19
But UBI is a flawed idea, not least because it would be prohibitively expensive
AND
permanent UBI could not be financed with government debt or newly printed currency.
====Increased spending drives up interest rates, destroys investor confidence, and harms the value of the dollar.====
**Colburn 6** ("Why Deficits Matter" Melanie Colburn, Economics Commentator June 5, 2006 Mother Jones Magazine http://motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2006/06/deficit'worries.html?welcome=true)
In general, deficits can hamper future economic growth by ensuring that a bulk of
AND
the fiscal and current account deficits are unsettling and demand some sort of response
====Second, is via inflation====
====There are two ways in which a UBI triggers inflation====
====First is micro inflation====
====UBI creates micro-inflation boosting consumerism and decreasing investment leading to perceptions of increased demand that shoot up prices.====
Boyce ’19 Boyce, Paul (Business Economics graduate from the UK and currently an editor at http://boycewire.com). "Universal Basic Income Is a Pandora’s Box." Foundation for Economic Education, 5 May 2019, https://fee.org/articles/universal-basic-income-is-a-pandora-s-box/. ~~Premier~~ recut and tagged
Higher Prices and Inflation A UBI would essentially transfer wealth away from higher earners toward
AND
it is in his interest to increase prices until there is no excess demand
====Second is macroinflation====
====UBI forces an increase in wages and prices, devastating those who didn’t re-enter the labor market and causes a vicious cycle of economic downturn.====
**Kolokotronis et al 17** (Alexander Kolokotronis is a Ph.D. student in political science at Yale University. He is the founder of Student Organization for Democratic Alternatives, and formerly the Student Coordinator of NYC Network of Worker Cooperatives and Worker Cooperative Development Assistant at Make the Road New York. Sam Nakayama is an independent writer based in Torrance, California) http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/40022-why-socialist-job-guarantees-are-better-than-universal-basic-income///NG
Economist Pavlina Tcherneva has argued there could be disastrous results from wide-scale implementation
AND
from an obsession with budget-neutrality), will result in declining output.
====Inflation leads to recession====
Cochrane, 11 - professor of Finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, AQR Capital Management Distinguished Service Professor of Finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute (John H. "Inflation and Debt" http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/Cochrane'Inflation'and'Debt'National'Affairs.pdf)//AH
But these questions miss a grave danger. As a result of the federal government’s
AND
there would be essentially nothing the Federal Reserve could do to stop it.
====The impacts of a recession manifest in two ways====
====First is through poverty====
Harry Bradford, 4-5-2013, "Three Times The Population Of The U.S. Is At Risk Of Falling Into Poverty," HuffPost, span class="skimlinks-unlinked"https://www.huffpost.com/entry/global-poverty-900-million-economic-shock'n'3022420/span
Hundreds of millions of people worldwide are on the brink of poverty. A recent
AND
following the financial crisis, the world is still in a vulnerable situation.
====Second is through diversionary war====
====Economic decline causes diversionary war which goes nuclear killing millions.====
Foster 16, Virginia Military Institute international studies and political science professor, 12-19-16 (Dennis, "Would President Trump go to war to divert attention from problems at home?", http://inhomelandsecurity.com/would-president-trump-go-to-war-to-divert-attention-from-problems-at-home/)
If the U.S. economy tanks, should we expect Donald Trump to
AND
with Trump’s psychological traits would initiate more than one major conflict per quarter.
====Even regional wars causes extinction====
Robock and Toon 10—Toon: chair of the Dept of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences and a member of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado @ Boulder. Robock is a Proff of atmospheric science at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey Local Nuclear War, Global Suffering; January 2010; Scientific American Magazine; 8 Page(s), http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=Products.ViewIssuePreviewandISSUEID'CHAR=944156A6-237D-9F22-E8E572150DCA8E65andARTICLEID'CHAR=97CA0A88-237D-9F22-E861FD76EBEE2611)
Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between
AND
degree C for a year; 1816 became known as "The Year."
====Inflation kills the economy====
Zakaria 9—Editor of Newsweek, BA from Yale, PhD in pol sci, Harvard. He serves on the board of Yale University, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and Shakespeare and Company. Named "one of the 21 most important people of the 21st Century" (Fareed, The Secrets of Stability, 12 December 2009, http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/articles.html)
The second force for stability is the victory—after a decades-long struggle
AND
and governments to plan for the future, a key precondition for stability.
====The higher the deficit, the worse off during a recession we will be.====
Niv Elis, 8-22-2019, "Soaring deficits could put Trump in a corner if there's a recession," TheHill, https://thehill.com/policy/finance/458334-soaring-deficits-could-put-trump-in-a-corner-if-theres-a-recession
"What Trump has done is increase the size of the deficit at a time
AND
Pye, vice president of legislative affairs for FreedomWorks, a conservative group. | 905,486 |
392 | 380,206 | APR - AFF Yemen, Afghanistan | Saudi is blocking aid to Yemeni civilians
Bonnie Kristian, The Hill, "As COVID-19 spreads, ending US support for the Saudi war in Yemen is vital | TheHill", 04/06/20, https://thehill.com/opinion/international/491377-as-covid-19-spreads-ending-us-support-for-the-saudi-war-in-yemen-is
Vital infrastructure isn’t all the Saudi-led intervention has destroyed: The coalition’s airstrikes have a high rate of civilian casualties. The attack on a school bus that killed 40 children in 2018 was merely the most infamous of its genre. The U.S.-backed coalition has also hit hospitals, funerals, weddings, schools, markets, refugee camps, and residential neighborhoods, and it has continued to do so since the bus strike caused global outrage. Just last month, a Saudi strike in northern Yemen killed 31 civilians, 19 of them children, and injured another 18 kids. “It was an attack on a civilian-populated area where children were in the vicinity,” UNICEF reported, which is to say, a tragedy that could have been avoided. The scarcity of food and medical supplies caused by the Saudi coalition’s ongoing air-and-sea blockade has compounded Yemeni deaths by illness and violence alike. The U.N. estimates a Yemeni child under 5 dies every 10 minutes of preventable causes like hunger and infectious disease. Medical workers have gone years without proper equipment or salary, and now they will likely have to grapple with coronavirus, too. “The test of coronavirus is expensive and it is not widely available in Yemen,” Yemeni pharmacist Nasri Abdulaziz told "Middle East Eye," “so I think the cases will appear suddenly all at once and then we will face real trouble.” There is no overnight fix for Yemen’s misery. But the single most effective way to help Yemen now is for Washington to stop supporting the Saudi-led coalition intervention. Without U.S. assistance — which has included weapons provision, naval blockade, refueling planes for airstrikes, drone strikes, and intelligence sharing — the coalition could not continue its fight in Yemen, at least not anywhere near its present scale.
US withdrawal ends capabilities
Bonnie Kristian, The Hill, "As COVID-19 spreads, ending US support for the Saudi war in Yemen is vital | TheHill", 04/06/20, https://thehill.com/opinion/international/491377-as-covid-19-spreads-ending-us-support-for-the-saudi-war-in-yemen-is
There is no overnight fix for Yemen’s misery. But the single most effective way to help Yemen now is for Washington to stop supporting the Saudi-led coalition intervention. Without U.S. assistance — which has included weapons provision, naval blockade, refueling planes for airstrikes, drone strikes, and intelligence sharing — the coalition could not continue its fight in Yemen, at least not anywhere near its present scale. If Washington withdraws, it will give Riyadh a new urgency in its peace talks with the Houthi rebels, which have stalled after a brief period of relative calm devolved into fresh turmoil last month. At the very least, the U.S. exit would make the Saudi stranglehold on much-needed food and medical supplies far more difficult to sustain, giving the Yemeni people a fighting chance against COVID-19. Ending Washington’s support for the coalition intervention would be a win for the United States, too. The U.S. has no vital interests at stake in Yemen — the Houthi rebels have local ambitions and do not pose a threat to America — and insofar as our involvement there affects our security, it is for the worse.
Saudi would accept a peace deal without US backing
Mohamad Bazzi, The Atlantic, "U.S. Support For Saudi Arabia's War in Yemen Will Prevent a Political Settlement - The Atlantic", 09/30/2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/iran-yemen-saudi-arabia/571465/
Saudi and Emirati leaders want a clear-cut victory in their regional rivalry with Iran, and they have been emboldened by the Trump administration’s unconditional support to stall negotiations. A recent UN effort to hold peace talks between the Houthis, Hadi’s government, and the Saudi-led coalition collapsed in early September, after the Houthi delegation did not show up in Geneva. Houthi leaders said the Saudis, who control Yemen’s airspace, would not guarantee their safe travel. Days later, Yemeni forces loyal to the Saudi-UAE alliance launched a new offensive aimed at forcing the Houthis out of Hodeidah port, which is the major conduit for humanitarian aid in Yemen. UN officials warn that a prolonged battle for the port and its surroundings could lead to the death of 250,000 people, mainly from mass starvation. After the Trump administration’s endorsement this month, the Saudi-UAE alliance has even less incentive to prevent civilian casualties and new humanitarian disasters. Saudi Arabia and its allies are more likely to accept a peace process if it is clear that the United States won’t support an open-ended war in Yemen and won’t provide the military assistance required to keep the war apparatus going. But Trump has shown little sign of pressuring his Saudi and Emirati allies, least of all over Yemen. The only realistic check left is in Congress, where more voices are asking why the world’s most powerful country is helping to perpetuate the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
Houthis condition for deescalation is lifting blockade
Ibrahim Jalal, Middle East Institute, "Saudi Arabia eyes the exit in Yemen, but Saudi-Houthi talks alone won’t resolve the conflict | Middle East Institute", 04/15/2020, https://www.mei.edu/publications/saudi-arabia-eyes-exit-yemen-saudi-houthi-talks-alone-wont-resolve-conflict
The Houthis have two consistently clear conditions for engaging in a serious de-escalation: the withdrawal of the coalition’s remaining forces and the lifting of its blockade of Yemen. While the Sudanese drawdown and UAE withdrawal further emboldened the Houthis on the first demand, the U.S., the coalition, and the government all have serious concerns on the second over the scale of the Houthis’ illicit arms smuggling should the blockade be lifted during wartime. In view of this complexity, the two demands are broadly tied to a conflict termination decision whose contours involve the Yemeni government — the basis of the Saudi-led military intervention in the country — and the resumption of a political process that defines the transition. Therefore, the current cease-fire does not meet Houthi maximalist demands, nor can it hold in isolation from serious peace talks, based on the evidence since 2015.
80 population needs humanitarian aid- need to lift blockade
Bruce Riedel, Brookings, "Saudi Arabia wants out of Yemen", 04/13/2020, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/04/13/saudi-arabia-wants-out-of-yemen/
The Saudis announced a unilateral cease-fire last week after months of United Nations-brokered talks and direct contacts between the parties failed to produce a durable truce and a political settlement. The Houthis want a complete lifting of the blockade of Yemen, the “siege,” as they call it. They are right to do so: The country urgently needs to import food and medicine. Roughly 80 of the population — 24 million people — are dependent on humanitarian assistance, and two-thirds are malnourished. Children are especially vulnerable. The Saudi air strikes have targeted hospitals and other civilian sites for five years, according to a new study in the United Kingdom. One-third of all the air strikes have hit civilian targets including hospitals and schools. Only half the country’s hospitals and medical installations are operating because of the bombing and the siege.
15 million at risk of famine
William J. Burns, The Washington Post, "Trump can end the war in Yemen. The Middle East would be grateful. - The Washington Post", 11/04/2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/04/this-is-war-trump-can-end/
There is, however, one war that Trump can still help end. The war in Yemen may seem distant to most Americans, but its humanitarian and strategic consequences are enormous. The United Nations has called the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. More than 3 million Yemenis have been displaced, nearly a quarter of a million have been killed and more than 15 million are at risk of famine. The conflict has contributed to the worst cholera outbreak in modern history, and it’s getting worse by the day. The strategic implications are just as grave. Yemen’s U.N.-recognized government sits in exile, the Iranian-supported Houthis control the capital, and Islamic State and al-Qaeda affiliates are growing in the eastern part of the country, where they continue to plot against the West.
93 could get coronavirus if no permanent truce
Bethan McKernan, The Guardian, "Fighting escalates in Yemen despite coronavirus 'ceasefire' | World news | The Guardian", 04/14/2020, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/14/fighting-escalates-in-yemen-despite-coronavirus-ceasefire#maincontent
In the five years since the coalition of Arab nations intervened in Yemen’s civil war to drive the Iran-backed Houthis from the capital, Sana’a, the conflict has developed into the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. More than half of Yemen’s hospitals and clinics have been destroyed or closed, the majority hit by airstrikes carried out by the UK and US-supported coalition. Health workers have been dreading an outbreak of Covid-19, which the UN says could infect up to 93 of the population. Only one case has been confirmed in Yemen, but testing facilities are almost non-existent. While the coalition said the two-week ceasefire could be extended if conditions were met, few civilians affected by the fighting have any hope that this truce will be any different to other failed attempts.
A single day of delay creates 40 more coronavirus cases, 10x mortality
Tomas Pueyo, Medium, "Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo - Medium", 03/10/2020, https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca
But what about cumulative cases? In this theoretical model that resembles loosely Hubei, waiting one more day creates 40 more cases! So, maybe, if the Hubei authorities had declared the lockdown on 1/22 instead of 1/23, they might have reduced the number of cases by a staggering 20k. And remember, these are just cases. Mortality would be much higher, because not only would there be directly 40 more deaths. There would also be a much higher collapse of the healthcare system, leading to a mortality rate up to 10x higher as we saw before. So a one-day difference in social distancing measures can end exploding the number of deaths in your community by multiplying more cases and higher fatality rate.
A Afghanistan peace deal has finally been reached
Lindsay Maizland, Council on Foreign Relations, "U.S.-Taliban Peace Deal: What to Know | Council on Foreign Relations", 03/02/2020, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-taliban-peace-deal-agreement-afghanistan-war
After more than eighteen years of war in Afghanistan, the United States and the Taliban reached an agreement in what were both sides’ most intensive efforts yet to end the war. Central to the deal is a significant drawdown of U.S. troops and guarantees from the Taliban that the country will not become a safe haven for terrorists.
Its at a breaking point right now
Kathy Gannon, TIME, "Taliban Warns Afghanistan Peace Deal Is Near a Breaking Point | Time", 04/06/2020, https://time.com/5816062/taliban-peace-deal-breaking-point/
(ISLAMABAD, Pakistan) — The Taliban said their peace deal with the United States was nearing a breaking point, accusing Washington of violations that included drone attacks on civilians, while also chastising the Afghan government for delaying the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners promised in the agreement. The Taliban said they had restricted attacks against Afghan security forces to rural outposts, had not attacked international forces and had not attacked Afghan forces in cities or military installations. The Taliban said these limits on their attacks had not been specifically laid out in the agreement with the U.S. signed in February. The Taliban’s statement issued Sunday warned of more violence if the U.S. and the Afghan government continue alleged violations of the deal.
Further airstrikes force Taliban reciprocal actions, ends peace
Sayed Salahuddin, Arab News, "Taliban warn US agreement breach could lead to mistrust", 04/06/2020, https://www.arabnews.com/node/1653821/world
As part of the deal struck in Doha, Qatar in February of this year, Washington was set to facilitate the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners held by President Ashraf Ghani’s government in early March, before the start of the first intra-Afghan dialogue. Contrary to the deal, American and Afghan forces have conducted airstrikes against civilian sites, while the Taliban have avoided staging attacks in cities and organizing significant strikes against government forces, the statement read. “Since we have witnessed repeated violation in this regard, we demand that the American side observe the contents of the agreement and also inform their other colleagues to do so,” it read. The statement added that before issuing their warning, the Taliban had shared their concerns with the US through a communication channel set up by both sides for the purpose. “If these violations go on, an atmosphere of mistrust will be created that will not only damage the deal but will also force the Mujahideen to reciprocal reaction, thus increasing the extent of the fighting,” the statement said. The historic peace deal was signed after nearly a year and a half of intensive talks between the Taliban and Washington, without including Ghani’s government.
US uses gulf bases to conduct airstrikes in Afghanistan
David Des Roches, War On The Rocks, "A Base is More than Buildings: The Military Implications of the Qatar Crisis", 06/08/2017, https://warontherocks.com/2017/06/a-base-is-more-than-buildings-the-military-implications-of-the-qatar-crisis/
Moving such a complex to another country is expensive, and is a matter of more than just money. Some of the infrastructure, such as secure communications facilities, would have to be built by Americans with American money. More important than facilities, however, is the political license granted by the host country to deploy forces from a base. U.S. military bases don’t just act in defense of the host nation. They are used to project power for a variety of American purposes. American bases in Germany (developed and manned for NATO missions) have been used for deployments to Africa entirely unrelated to the NATO mission. U.S. bases in the Gulf have been essential to American operations in Afghanistan, and against ISIL in Syria and Iraq. American planes and ships use the Gulf to refit, rearm, and deploy throughout the Indian Ocean for a range of missions. Consolidating overseas bases in one country risks restricting American freedom of maneuver. Once the United States establishes a base in a country, the host country can restrict or withdraw access if the proposed American action clashes with its foreign policy. For example, in 1973 all the Western European nations except Portugal including NATO members – denied overflight and landing permission to American aircraft resupplying Israel. To consolidate bases in one country is to limit and subordinate American options to the foreign policy of the host country.
Without reduction in violence peace deal will shatter
Laurel Miller, New York Times, "Opinion | Will the U.S.-Taliban Deal End the War? - The New York Times", 02/18/2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/opinion/afghanistan-taliban-deal.html
“Reduction in violence” is a tricky concept — and hinging the finalization of an agreement on it puts the tentative deal on unsteady footing. The phrase is probably being used to skirt the Taliban’s rejection, for now, of a cease-fire, but its meaning is effectively the same as a temporary and limited cease-fire. (The scale and geographic spread of the reduction in violence has not yet been revealed.) Its terms are likely to be ambiguous; compliance may be difficult to verify. Any type of cease-fire early in a negotiating process, when the parties have not yet built any momentum, will be especially vulnerable to violations. If the violence reduction deal falls apart, hopes for a peace process would probably shatter. It’s unlikely the pieces would be picked up any time soon. Time and trust were lost after Mr. Trump called off talks in September. The United States seemed fickle because, in fact, it was. Another round of Trumpian fickleness could be an irredeemable error.
US bombing and Taliban obstruction has led to massive food crisis
n.a., Center for Economic and Social Rights, "Afghanistan: The Right to Food in Conflict | CESR", n.d., https://www.cesr.org/afghanistan-right-food-conflict
As illustrated by the following examples, all parties to the conflict have directly violated the right to food under human rights and humanitarian law by engaging in policies that have caused or contributed to the crisis in Afghanistan: US (and to a lesser degree UK) bombing in major cities and populated areas caused massive civilian flight to areas that are less accessible to food delivery, or to camps for refugees and internally displaced persons whose survival is dependent upon food aid.31 Air strikes have also hit warehouses and food convoys, for example destroying ICRC warehouses in Kabul with food and blankets for 55,000 disabled civilians.32 Under the climate of fear caused by the air campaign, “aid agencies are findingit difficult to secure trucks and driverswilling to enter the war zone to carry the supplies.”33 The Taliban have obstructed food aid on numerous occasions. On 16 October Taliban forces temporarily took over two WFP facilities with 7,000 tons of grain, or 14 of the total food delivery target for November, and one week later occupied and looted an ICRC office in Mazar-i-Sharif.34 Lack of safety for its truckers prompted the WFP to “suspend operations, saying that the military attacks on Afghanistan made it too dangerous and that truck drivers had refused to go inside.”35 Northern Alliance forces have also routinely looted food deliveries since establishing control over most of the country: “Efforts to supply aid to Afghanistan have been severely hit by the return of anarchy on the highways which plagued the country before the Taliban came to power. Haulers who have ferried aid and commercial goods into Afghanistan since the collapse of Taliban rule have decided to cut back operations after being forced to hand over much of their cargo amid fears for their drivers’ safety.”36 By exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan and failing to ensure civilian access to food and other lifesaving supplies that were readily available from international relief agencies, all parties to the conflict are responsible for systematic violations of the right to food. Precise degrees of responsibility cannot be allocated between the parties, but it must be emphasized that the Northern Alliance and US now exercise effective control over most of Afghanistan and its population, including the areas hardest hit by famine. As a result they are legally bound to take all possible steps to guarantee the right to food and prevent starvation.
1/3 Afghans need urgent aid, 10 million brink of famine
n.a., United Nations, "One-third of Afghans need urgent humanitarian aid, millions suffer ‘acute food insecurity’ | UN News", 11/18/2019, https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/11/1051591
Over the last three months (August to October 2019), around one-third of the Afghan population required urgent humanitarian action, according to the latest Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) Alert, released on Monday, which declares that some 10.23 million people are living in a state of “severe acute food insecurity”. The IPC, a coalition of UN agencies and other partners, classifies food insecurity in five distinct phases, from phase 1 (Minimal/ None), to phase 5 (Catastrophic/Famine): around 2.44 million Afghan are believed to be in an Emergency situation (phase 4), and 7.79 million in a Crisis situation (phase 3). Conflict, high prices and unemployment to blame The IPC, which is monitoring a number of key food security indicators in Afghanistan, estimates that the situation is likely to get worse heading into next year, with the numbers of those experiencing severe acute food insecurity set to rise to 11.29 million (with 2.7 million in an Emergency situation, and 8.6 million in a Crisis situation), between November 2019 and March 2020.
Peace will allow China to expand economic ties with region
Farhan Bokhari, Nikkei Asian Review, "Afghanistan peace talks open way for China's Belt and Road - Nikkei Asian Review", 08/27/2019, https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Belt-and-Road/Afghanistan-peace-talks-open-way-for-China-s-Belt-and-Road
"China is taking a longer-term view of Afghanistan, which is based on its economic interests as the U.S. plans to step back," said Qazi Humayun, a former Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan and commentator on defense and regional security. He told Nikkei that a peace settlement will also allow China to expand its economic ties with the landlocked former Soviet republics of Central Asia using new routes via Afghanistan ~-~- bolstering the Belt and Road. Separately, retired Brigadier Farooq Hameed Khan, a Pakistani commentator on foreign policy, added that China's plans will likely include building a new network of highways to link Central Asia with the China Pakistan Economic Corridor via Afghanistan. "As China looks to the future, connectivity from Central Asia to CPEC will be an important priority," Khan told Nikkei. Furthermore, he added, contacts between China and the Taliban will lay the groundwork for closer security cooperation.
increases GDP 18 percent
n.a., The Maritime Executive, "U.S. will be Key Beneficiary of Belt and Road Initiative", 05/30/2019, https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/u-s-will-be-key-beneficiary-of-belt-and-road-initiative
Other than China, which by 2040 will be by far the world’s largest economy and which will therefore benefit from any boost to the world economy, the biggest single potential beneficiary of the BRI is likely to be the U.S. even though it isn’t participating directly in the project. The large size of the U.S. economy means that it gains from the indirect effects of world GDP being boosted. Even though the boost to U.S. GDP is only 1.4 percent (much smaller than most other major economies) the absolute size of the U.S. economy is such that this is more than the absolute boost to any other economy except China. The next largest impact is in Russia, followed by Japan, Indonesia, Korea, U.K., India and the Netherlands. The region of the world that will most be transformed by the BRI is likely to be Central Asia and Russia where the report predicts that GDP in 2040 will be 18 percent higher. GDP is also likely to be boosted in Central Europe (six percent) Western Europe (five percent) and East Asia (five percent). One of the elements of the report, From Silk Road to Silicon Road, is a comparison between the BRI and the network of the roads, dams and aqueducts built by the Romans. The first Roman road was the Via Appia built in 312 BCE. Eventually a network of 382 major roads was completed connecting Britain to Africa and the Middle East and connected with the Persian Royal Road. The network is estimated to make up 400,000 kilometers (250,000 miles) of roads although only 80,000 kilometers (50,000 miles) were paved. Today, a kilometer of non-motorway road costs at least $5 – $10 million,so the 80,000 kilometers of paved roads might have cost up to $800 billion.
Lifts tens of millions out of poverty
Thalif Deen, IPS News, "Asia Leaps Forward in Regional Economic Integration | Inter Press Service", 01/03/2013, http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/01/asia-leaps-forward-in-regional-economic-integration/
At a meeting in Bangkok last November, U.N. Under-Secretary-General Dr. Noeleen Heyzer, executive secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), said “regional economic integration has become ever more important in our quest to find new drivers of regional growth, in support of shared and sustained prosperity”. She said national, and even bilateral approaches, alone are no longer sufficient to address these challenges. “Regional solutions, through regional cooperation, can be the way for us to forge more sustainable economic growth, close development gaps, and help lift tens of millions of people still in poverty,” she said. ESCAP’s work in support of SPECA focuses on trade, transport, water and energy – all key areas which are central to any subregional and regional integration in Central Asia. | 905,514 |
393 | 380,253 | MAR - TFA STATE NEG | see os doc | 905,561 |
394 | 380,231 | 2 - Nocember AFF - ISIS and Saudi Arabia | Paraphrased and cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,539 |
395 | 380,233 | 3 - February AFF - Unions, Welfare Trap, and Small Businesses | Cut-card version open-sourced below | 905,541 |
396 | 380,195 | SeptOct - Climate Change | We negate.
Our sole contention is Confirming Climate Change
The Belt and Road Initiative is stagnating. Garcia ‘17 of the Bruegel Institute writes that, as a whole, China’s economy is slowing and it’s banks are encumbered with doubtful loans, leaving no room for the massive lending needed to finance the BRI. Ciurtin ‘17 of the European Institute of Romania explains that in the status quo, there is a $3 trillion dollar funding gap within the BRI. He furthers that, without European cash, the BRI won’t survive.
Affirming saves the BRI, but unfortunately, this devastates the environment.
There are three reasons why voting aff does this.
The first is a construction crisis.
Zhang ‘17 of the Science Journal writes that the initial construction of infrastructure, like roads or bridges, through the BRI will require substantial energy consumption. Unfortunately, since there is an existing lack of renewable energy in these BRI nations, these projects will be forced to rely on fossil fuels.
Problematically,Jun ‘19 of the World Economic Forum writes that the BRI is the largest source of new infrastructure within the next few decades. However, Jun finalizes that 70 of global emissions come from building and operating infrastructure.
But even after the infrastructure is built, Zhang continues that by streamlining the exports to Belt and Road countries, China’s energy-intensive industries, like manufacturing, will grow, leading to more global emissions.
Unfortunately, the World Bank quantifies that transport infrastructure and trade would increase global emissions by .3. Thus, Klein ‘14 in her book This Changes Everything writes that the construction of electricity grids and transportation even if implemented with renewables will not compensate for the short-term increase in emissions that pushes the world past the climate change brink which is irreversible.
The second is an Arctic disaster
Groffman ‘18 of the SCMP tells us that due to economic sanctions from the West preventing Russia from financing projects specific to arctic exploration, Russia is entirely unable to exploit the resources that lie within its waters.
Unfortunately, the expansion of the BRI removes the barriers preventing Russia from access
Currently, Groffman explains that China has announced the Polar Silk Road as an integral aspect of the BRI, creating the opportunity for China to finance Russia’s arctic drilling projects.
Notably,Hunter ‘18 of the fair observer explains that China provided $12 billion in financing to finish it, giving both Russian and China access to Arctic.
Allowing Russia to drill in the Arctic would have catastrophic impacts globally and would serve as the death blow to developing nations.
Walsh ‘12 of TIME Magazine explains that 1.7 trillion cubic feet of methane are released with arctic drilling, which is devastating because methane has 20 times the warming potential of Carbon Dioxide.
Chestney ‘12 of the Scientific American concludes that the environmental price tag of Arctic Drilling would cost the global economy over $60 trillion over coming decades, with 80 of this effect borne by the world’s poorest.
The third is Coal
Yellen ‘19 of the Atlantic Council writes that because domestic coal in China has died, China is trying to save its industry by pushing coal overseas. Thus, Watts ‘19 of The Guardian continues that China has become a “lender of last resort” for coal as other countries and institutions turn away from dirty energy.
Watts ‘19 furthers that the finance behind China’s coal development abroad is from the Belt and Road Initiative. Vedvarende ‘19 of VEG warrants that because China’s companies are banned from other multilateral institutions, the BRI is the only platform that gives them the funding to expand. In fact, Feng ‘17 of CDI writes that China’s coal investment in foreign markets has picked up because of the BRI, but before it was rapidly slowing. Newly planned projects are now in limbo waiting to be constructed. Indeed, Hilton ‘18 of Yale writes that 80 of China’s BRI projects have gone to fossil fuels.
Kong ‘19 of Boston University confirms that due to unconditional financing, China wins most energy contracts. Andrews ‘19 of NUS explains that the urgency to build new energy infrastructure in support of economic growth leads to a preference for coal in BRI countries.
For example, Sands ‘19 of IEEFA writes that because of factors like lack of technical expertise, immediate energy needs, and sure finance from China, Vietnam has pursued coal-fired plants, despite available cost effective renewable energy.
The impact is a climate disaster.
Zadeck ‘19 of Tsinghua University writes that through these projects, countries with BRI investment alone will lead to 3 degrees of warming on the planet. Wright ‘18 impacts that a 0.5 degrees increase would lead to flooding that displaces 5 million people. Fox ‘18 of NBC explains that for every 1 degree increase, crop yields will decrease 10 to 25 percent. Schindell ‘18 of Duke University concludes that a half degree increase in temperatures would kill 150 million people.
Thus we negate. | 905,503 |
397 | 380,117 | aff | Uq- Venezuela is in crisis, 90 Poverty, millions of refugees
Philips 18 of the Guardian
Almost 10 of Venezuela’s 31 million-strong population have fled overseas; of those who remain, nearly 90 live in poverty. To understand Venezuela’s collapse, the Guardian travelled hundreds of miles across the nation Chávez dreamed of transforming, from the spot in downtown Caracas where he gave his first speech as president-elect to his birthplace in the country’s sun-scorched southwestern plains. On the way, we encountered lingering affection for a charismatic populist still celebrated as a champion of the poor, and a determination among Venezuelans from all walks of life to somehow weather the economic cyclone ravaging their country. But above all, there was deprivation, hunger, profound apprehension and seething anger – even among proud chavistas – at a government now incapable of fulfilling its citizens’ most basic needs, and in denial over a humanitarian crisis unprecedented in modern Latin American history. “People do not understand what is happening in Venezuela because it is too hard to believe,” says Alberto Paniz-Mondolfi, a doctor in the city of Barquisimeto, describing the implosion of a health service that was once the envy of the region. “The most oil-rich country absolutely devastated and turned into a war-torn nation – without a war. “I’m not angry. I’m terribly sad. Because there was absolutely no need to get to this point. They just left the country to die … and it is heartbreaking.”
Uq- inflation up 124, postdates their ev
Reuters 20
CARACAS, April 24 (Reuters) - Venezuela’s government on Friday announced new price controls on food products, the first time it has done so in two years, as the coronavirus outbreak and an acute gasoline shortage cause inflation to accelerate. New figures released on the Venezuelan central bank’s website on Friday showed inflation rose 124 during the first quarter of 2020, and 13.3 in March. The opposition-controlled National Assembly earlier this month said its own data showed March inflation was 21.2.
Uq- CELAG- 60 of crisis due to sanctions
CELAG Economics 19
These results allow us to isolate the percentage of the crisis caused exclusively by the financial and commercial boycott. In effect, we can compare the fall in terms of observed production by the end of 2017 with the fall that would have been reached under each scenario. The difference is the portion of the crisis attributed to the effect of the boycott. According to scenario 1, the boycott explains approximately 60 of the crisis, while under the second scenario it explains 43, and under the last scenario, 30. The remaining percentage can be attributed to the factors not explained by the boycott, i.e. the collapse of oil prices, the oil dependent structure of Venezuela or management inefficiencies, among others.
Link- overcompliance thus Banks unwilling to finance NGOs even with exemptions
Tokar 19 of the Walls Street Journal
The prospect of hefty fines for skirting U.S. sanctions on Venezuela has made some banks skittish about doing business with the humanitarian organizations distributing food and other supplies in the troubled South American country. Independent nonprofit groups in Venezuela have had U.S. bank accounts closed and transactions frozen as financial institutions take precautionary steps to comply with sanctions, according to aid workers. The U.S. has ratcheted up its use of sanctions against Venezuelan officials to put pressure on President Nicolás Maduro’s regime, which the Trump administration considers corrupt and illegitimate. Under the Maduro regime, the country’s economy has collapsed and its residents face food and water shortages. Last week, the U.S. escalated its campaign by imposing an economic embargo against the government of Venezuela. With stronger U.S. sanctions in effect, the United Nations and other groups are concerned the financial sector’s compliance practices could further complicate the work of humanitarian aid organizations, whose work has been caught in the center of rising tensions between the Maduro regime and the international community. The Treasury Department has taken steps to address the issue. The agency’s Office of Foreign Assets Control last week outlined the legal authority aid groups and other firms have to operate in the country. The authorizations and accompanying guidance were intended to send a message to compliance executives: do your part to keep humanitarian assistance flowing. “We want the compliance community to be aware of these authorizations,” Sigal Mandelker, the Treasury department’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said in an interview. “We want to make sure that humanitarian goods continue to flow into the country.” It remains to be seen whether the move by Treasury will help nonprofits maintain access to the international financial system. Meanwhile, nonprofits operating in Venezuela that don’t have the name recognition as the Red Cross and other large international organizations—which were given explicit authorization to continue doing business with the Venezuelan government by OFAC last week—remain especially vulnerable. Carlos Trapani, director of Centros Comunitarios de Aprendizaje, a Venezuelan children’s advocacy group known as Cecodap, said he believed his organization’s bank accounts were closed as a result of the U.S. sanctions on Venezuela. Cecodap had maintained two U.S. bank accounts with Caracas-based Banco Mercantil SA for more than 25 years, Mr. Trapani said. The bank recently spun off its U.S. operations, which were renamed Amerant Bancorp Inc. Last year, Amerant notified Cecodap it was closing the organization’s savings account, and in March said it also would close its remaining checking account. Mr. Trapani said his group wasn’t given an explanation—the bank merely cited a clause in the account contract stating it could unilaterally close the account at any time. Amerant, a community bank with offices in Florida, Texas and New York, declined to comment on the closure of Cecodap’s accounts, citing privacy and confidentiality concerns. “For the past 40 years, we have been committed to serving our customers, while always complying with U.S. laws and regulations as they have evolved for the financial industry,” an Amerant spokeswoman said. Banking issues such as the ones experienced by Mr. Trapani are common and have gotten worse in recent months, according to aid workers in Venezuela and several U.S.-based nonprofits that work with organizations operating in the country. Many nonprofits often are reluctant to speak openly about the problems, for fear of facing further scrutiny by the banks or from the Venezuelan government. Kathryn Striffolino, a senior manager in the humanitarian practice at InterAction, a consortium of about 180 aid organizations, said several of her members have had accounts closed and had issues with prepaid cards, but she declined to provide their names. The OFAC authorizations published last week, known as general licenses, are intended to help aid groups and companies that offer a range of services, including personal remittances, emergency medical supplies and internet services.
Link- Sanctions stopped money that would’ve covered Venezuela’s medical needs for six years
STEPHANIE NEBEHAY 19 of Reuters (5-22-2019, "Venezuela turns to Russia, Cuba, China in health crisis", doa 1-9-2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-health/venezuela-turns-to-russia-cuba-china-in-health-crisis-idUSKCN1SS23Z
Venezuelans have been suffering dire shortages of medicines and health equipment for several years as it has spiraled into economic chaos and political conflict. The opposition blames that on economic incompetence and corruption by the leftist movement in power for two decades, but Maduro says U.S. economic sanctions are the cause. In Geneva for a World Health Organization (WHO) assembly, Health Minister Carlos Alvarado said Western sanctions had led to the freezing of 5 billion euros ($5.6 billion)in assets, including gold in the Bank of England and funds in major institutions like Citibank. That would cover Venezuela’s medical needs for six years, he told a news briefing. “Today we can certainly say that the main health problem is the criminal blockade that we are victims of by the United States,” Alvarado said. “What are we doing in Venezuela to overcome this situation? We do not stay with our hands crossed. We are strengthening our alliances with countries such as Cuba, China, Russia, Turkey, Palestine, and Iran.” Sanctions were hurting the whole population due to insufficient foreign currency for medicine imports, and some diseases including measles had re-emerged, the minister said.
Link- language of sanctions vague and unclear which unintentionally blocks aid
Salama 19, http://archive.is/ksDCL#selection-2029.0-2029.413
“The administration hasn’t been very good at dedicating financial lines that would allow the purchase of food and medicine in sanctioned countries,” said Jeffrey Schott, an economic-sanctions expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank. “In practice, we still block food and medicine because the parties in the targeted regime that want to import it can’t get financing.”
`Link- 10/12 shipments of meds blocked cuz sanctions block transactions
PAUL DOBSON 19 of Edinburgh University (Paul Dobson is an MA graduate specialised in history and philosophy from Edinburgh University. He has lived, worked, and extensively knows nearly every different region of Venezuela, having lived there since 2006. Paul is currently involved in a range of political projects including being an active member of Venezuela's Committee of International Solidarity (COSI) and a number of grassroots collectives ranging from communicational projects to ecological issues as well as his communal council. He is also a specialist on the Venezuelan electoral system. 5-29-2019, "US Hints at Sanctions Against Venezuela CLAP Food Programme as Maduro Incorporates Militia", doa 1-10-2020, https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/14514
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has announced the incorporation of the National Bolivarian Militia into the subsidised CLAP (Local Supply and Production Committees) food programme. The move comes as rumours circulate of upcoming US-led sanctions against the leaders of the programme, which currently benefits six million Venezuelan families according to government sources. Speaking from a CLAP packaging warehouse in Vargas State, Maduro announced that the body will be involved “directly in the tasks and functions of supervising and controlling the food mission (…) in the 1,141 parishes of the country.” “We have to strengthen all of the food distribution mechanisms to make sure that our people are properly fed,” Maduro continued, before adding that the militia is also embarking on food production projects. The Bolivarian Militia is a popular defense organization and the civilian branch of the Venezuelan Armed Forces. Created by Hugo Chavez in 2007, it has been expanded by Maduro to include two million civilians organized into 51,743 Popular Defense Units throughout the country. The government has vowed to extend the militia to three million citizens by December this year. The leader of the Militia, Major General Carlos Leal Tellería, was named Food Minister in April. According to Maduro, one of the reasons behind the measure is to combat “the silent enemy” of corruption in the programme. “The main enemy of the CLAP is North American imperialism and its internal lackees. We will defeat them with more production, better packing and supervision etc. Now there is a silent enemy in the CLAP, which is like a weevil, which is corruption, the people who steal the products from the CLAP boxes for the black market. We must put a stop to this,” he told the nation. Government officials have previously gone on the record stating that over 200 local CLAP leaders have been detained for corruption. Maduro added that CLAP deliveries would be incorporated into the Patria electronic system, through which social benefits and bonuses are delivered. The CLAP programme was created in 2016 as the Venezuelan government looked to shield the most vulnerable sectors from the economic crisis. The boxes contain a range of basic foodstuffs including cornflour, cooking oil, rice, beans, and pasta. According to a recent interview by CLAP chief Freddy Bernal, the boxes, which cost a mere US $0.40, come with a 98 percent subsidy from “regular market” prices. They are distributed by the communal councils and are prioritized by sector. “If it weren’t for the CLAP, millions of families would be in an unsustainable crisis because of the US sanctions,” Bernal explained. While government officials look to increase the coverage of the CLAP programme to 12 million families and the frequency of deliveries to every 15 days, many sectors of the country continue to have irregular, delayed, or non-existent coverage of the scheme. Recent gasoline shortages have exasperated distribution problems in the interior of the country. The attempts to strengthen the CLAP come on the heels of reports that the US Treasury Department is preparing direct sanctions against the food programme for the first time. US authorities accuse the programme of being a front for corruption, money laundering, and “political control” and are considering slapping sanctions against companies and individuals involved. “They know that this program is corrupt, we know it, and we are investigating the details. A lot is to come,” US Special Envoy to Venezuela Elliott Abrams told Efe in an interview on May 22. “We don’t have a date for the sanctions but the (legal) accusations will come in good time,” he went on to say. Abrams is known for his leading role in the Reagan administration’s Central America policy, including the Iran-Contra scandal, and later for advising George W. Bush in the lead up to the war in Iraq. US financial sanctions have hampered both the purchase and payment of the goods which constitute the boxes, most of which come from Mexico, Turkey, or Brazil, while Venezuelan authorities claim that Washington’s measures are also blocking the shipment of the goods. Caracas claims that only 2 of the 12 shipping companies involved in CLAP imports are currently delivering as a result of sanctions. Maduro also mentioned that a number of ships were blocked from leaving their ports on Monday, describing the action as “sabotage”. He did not offer further details. According to a Reuters report, international shippers Hamburg Sud and King Ocean Services have both added a US $1,200 surcharge per cargo container for all shipments from the United States to Venezuela this past May 15. The report adds that this move aggravates prices which are already considerably higher than the corresponding ones for similar journeys to other Latin American ports. The alleged surcharge is accredited to the “risk involved of coming to Venezuela with sanctions.”
Internal Link- 60 basic goods gone
GABRIEL HETLAND 19 of the Nation (Gabriel Hetland is assistant professor of Latin American, Caribbean, and US Latino Studies at University at Albany, SUNY. His writings on Venezuelan politics, participatory democracy, capitalism, labor, and social movements have appeared in Qualitative Sociology, Work, Employment and Society, Latin American Perspectives, Jacobin, The Nation, NACLA, and elsewhere. 8-17-2019, "Why Is Venezuela in Crisis?", doa 1-10-2020, https://www.thenation.com/article/why-is-venezuela-in-crisis/
The second facet of the economic war is the damage to Venezuela’s economy wrought by US government actions. The most visible recent example (but by no means the only one) was President Obama’s March 9, 2015, executive order declaring that “the situation in Venezuela” poses an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” This order, which was renewed this past March, placed sanctions on seven high-ranking Venezuelan government officials accused of human rights abuses and corruption. It is worth pointing out that when this occurred, Venezuela’s anti-government opposition rejected the “extraordinary threat” language and declared, “Venezuela is not a threat to any nation.” There is, of course, a direct economic effect of US sanctions against a country, or officials within a country. More important are the indirect effects, which, as Mark Weisbrot has pointed out, send a message to would-be foreign investors that the country being targeted may not be a safe place to invest in. Weisbrot notes that foreign “financial institutions that wanted to arrange a swap for Venezuela’s gold…a couple years ago, they couldn’t do it.” According to Alex Main, a senior associate for international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, “Contacts in the financial sector have noted that the U.S. Treasury Department has strongly urged investors and bankers to avoid making loans to the Maduro government. Recent U.S. sanctions targeting Venezuelan officials also serve to discourage U.S. and European banks from doing business with Venezuela.” Recent US actions have had a considerable and highly detrimental impact at a time when Venezuela is in desperate need of dollars but is prevented from gaining access to them by Washington, which has made little secret of its support for Venezuela’s anti-government opposition. The third facet of the economic war is the economic and psychological cost of the opposition’s often violent push for regime change. It is difficult to measure the precise extent to which violent protests, such as occurred from February-April 2014, have damaged the economy. In March 2014 the government claimed that opposition blockades “reduced the supply of basic goods by 60 percent.” And in an April 2014 New York Times editorial, President Maduro wrote, “These violent actions have caused many millions of dollars’ worth of damage.” I have not been able to find a reliable independent estimate of economic damage due to the February-April protests. Venezuelan government estimates do not, however, seem implausible. In addition to the direct material costs of violent protests, which have targeted state-run health clinics and other public institutions and undoubtedly led to extensive property damage, there are significant but harder-to-calculate psychological costs borne by the public. The climate of fear and uncertainty prevalent today is in no small part due to the opposition’s actions. This has almost surely contributed to the government’s unwillingness to pursue necessary but new, and thus uncertain, policy measures such as floating the currency, which can only succeed if the government can generate trust among the population.
Internal Link- imports down 40 2020
Zayas 19
In tandem with the Trump administration’s recognition of Juan Guaid?’s unconstitutional declaration of himself as “interim president” of Venezuela, a series of Executive Orders approved swingeing new sanctions on Venezuela, as well as additional sanctions tied in with the US’s recognition of Guaid?’s attempted coup and his concept of a “parallel government”. The net effect of these actions has been to drastically reduce Venezuela’s ability to produce and sell oil, or to sell any foreign assets of the government since its most important foreign assets have been frozen and/or confiscated This has reduced still further foreign exchange earnings that would be used to buy essential imports, such that imports of goods are projected to fall by 39.4, from $10 billion to $6.1 billion. This will undoubtedly have an even more severe impact on the lives and health of ordinary Venezuelans, especially the poorest and most vulnerable.
Impact- UN reports that 7m are in need of aid due to Maduro, but it's flawed; US sanctions have a “tremendous role in Venezuela’s current suffering” and massive shortages of medicine
Hetland 19 of the Nation
Earlier this month, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), headed by former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet, issued a much-anticipated report on human rights in Venezuela. The document is notable for two main reasons. First, it paints a devastating picture of the country’s economic, social, and political situation: 7 million Venezuelans, a quarter of the population, are in need of humanitarian assistance; more than 4 million have recently fled the country; between January 2014 and May 2019, more than 15,000 people were detained for political reasons; between January and May 2019, there were 66 documented deaths of political demonstrators; and, according to the government’s own numbers, 5,287 people were killed in 2018 while “resisting authority” in poor neighborhoods. Second, the report cannot easily be dismissed. The Venezuelan government welcomed Bachelet into the country after she’d come under fire last year for failing to label Nicolás Maduro a dictator. Still, despite its undeniable importance, the report has flaws. While it acknowledges that US sanctions are having an impact, it downplays their tremendous role in Venezuelans’ current suffering. The report also fails to mention the psychological and other damage caused by illegal US threats of war against Venezuela. Third, the report lets the Venezuelan opposition off the hook, making virtually no mention of opposition violence in 2014, 2017, and 2019, which, in addition to causing deaths and suffering, has compounded the challenge of getting both sides to the negotiating table. (To be sure, the government also bears blame on this front.) Mainstream-media coverage of the report also deserves criticism. On July 4, The New York Times ran a story headlined, “Venezuela Forces Killed Thousands, Then Covered It Up, U.N. Says.” The story opens as follows, “Venezuelan special forces have carried out thousands of extrajudicial killings in the past 18 months and then manipulated crime scenes to make it look as if the victims had been resisting arrest, the United Nations said on Thursday in a report detailing wide-ranging government abuses targeting political opponents.” This statement is both technically accurate and misleading. The OHCHR says the government’s Special Action Forces (FAES) killed nearly 7,000 Venezuelans in 2018 and the first half of 2019. Yet the Times story makes it appear as though these deaths were primarily or entirely of political opponents, when the OHCHR documents just six such cases. Even a single instance of state murder for political activity is unacceptable, but six is a far cry from thousands. The report does note that “OHCHR is concerned the authorities may be using FAES and other security forces as an instrument to instill fear in the population and to maintain social control.” No further details are provided. This is an important concern about what the government “may be” doing, but it remains an open question, at least per the evidence presented in the report. To be sure, the deaths of thousands of civilians at the hands of state security forces is appalling, regardless of whether or not many of these killings were political assassinations. WHAT THE REPORT SAYS OHCHR researchers based the report on nine trips to Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Spain to interview Venezuelan migrants and refugees; one visit to Venezuela in March of 2019; and Bachelet’s three-day tour of Venezuela in June. During these visits, OHCHR talked to dozens of state officials, members of the opposition, victims and witnesses of human-rights violations, lawyers, and actors from business, the Catholic Church, nongovernmental organizations, security forces, trade unions, and more. The report begins with economic and social rights. For regular observers of Venezuela, the findings are at once shocking and unsurprising. As of April 2019, Venezuela’s minimum wage was around $7 a month. The report notes that, “Notwithstanding some general government subsidies, people interviewed by OHCHR consistently stressed that their monthly family income was insufficient to meet their basic needs, covering approximately four days of food per month.” According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, 3.7 million Venezuelans suffer from malnourishment, with the NGO Caritas finding “particularly high levels of malnutrition among children and pregnant women.” All this is despite the fact that, according to the government, 75 percent of the state’s budget is allocated to social expenditures. The findings on health care are equally unsettling: There are “severe shortages in basic medical equipment, supplies and medicines. Families of patients have to provide all necessities, including water, gloves, and syringes.” Measles, diphtheria, and other previously controlled and eliminated diseases have reemerged. Contraception is scarce, according to the report, “with several cities facing a 100 percent shortage.” This has resulted in increased risk of contracting HIV, a 65 percent increase in the number of adolescent pregnancies since 2015, and increased maternal deaths, 20 percent of which are “linked to unsafe abortions.” One of the most horrific statistics is that, according to the National Health Survey, “between November 2018 and February 2019, 1,557 people died due to lack of supplies in hospitals.” An additional 40 patients are reported to have died during the March 2019 power outages. The report discusses Venezuelans’ increasing reliance on government economic and social programs through the Bolivarian “missions.” It cites the government’s claim that Local Food Supply and Production Committees (CLAPs) provide 6 million households with food boxes. But OHCHR says it heard accounts of people who didn’t receive their CLAP boxes because they refused to support the Maduro government. Throughout, the report draws attention to the disproportionate harm facing women, many of whom spend an average of 10 hours a day in line waiting for food, and face harassment and reprisals for protesting the lack of necessities and participating in opposition political activity. The report also draws attention to the harm government practices have wrought on indigenous communities in Venezuela. The report places the blame for all of this squarely on the government: “Misallocation of resources, corruption, lack of maintenance of public infrastructure, and severe underinvestment has resulted in violations to the right to an adequate standard of living related to the collapse of public services such as public transportation, access to electricity, water, and natural gas.” OHCHR mentions US sanctions, claiming they amplified but did not cause the situation: “The economy of Venezuela, particularly its oil industry and food production systems, were already in crisis before any sectoral sanctions were imposed.… Nevertheless, the latest economic sanctions are exacerbating further the effects of the economic crisis, and thus the humanitarian situation, given that most of the foreign exchange earnings derive from oil exports, many of which are linked to the U.S. market.” Next, the report moves on to violations of civil and political rights, and points to a decline of independent media. Over the last year, dozens of print outlets closed, the government shut down radio stations and TV channels, and journalists have been detained and expelled from the country. The OHCHR also highlights the government’s clampdown on political activity and work-related protest. “Successive laws and reforms have facilitated the criminalization of the opposition and of anyone critical of the Government,” the report says. Trade union leaders and workers have also been “fired or detained after protesting for decent salaries and working conditions.” In addition, the report notes the government’s violent crackdown on opposition politicians, and the detention, deaths, and treatment of protesters in 2018 and 2019. Arguably the most alarming finding of the report is that thousands of mostly poor citizens have been killed during Special Action Forces (FAES) operations. The report says that state security forces separate men from their families before shooting them, and then routinely manipulate crime scenes to retroactively justify their actions. The skyrocketing number of these extrajudicial killings is deeply frightening. It is important to note that Venezuela is not the only country to suffer from this kind of abuse. Human Rights Watch issued a report in December 2018 titled, “Brazil: Police Killings at Record High in Rio.” The report says that 1,444 people were killed in Rio de Janeiro between January and November 2018. This does not, of course, justify the appalling situation in Venezuela. It does, however, show that the problem of extrajudicial killing of mostly poor black and brown men is not limited to Venezuela. WHAT THE REPORT LEAVES OUT While the report acknowledges that US sanctions are harming Venezuela, it fails to capture the full scope of suffering that the United States has caused. The report wrongly suggests that US actions have hurt Venezuela’s economy only since August 2017. Non-sectoral US sanctions on Venezuela date to 2014. While these sanctions did not produce Venezuela’s crisis by themselves, they undoubtedly contributed to Venezuela’s pariah status on international credit markets. In May 2017, Goldman Sachs faced severe criticism for buying Venezuelan bonds, which points to the pressure financial institutions faced to avoid business with Venezuela before the August 2017 sanctions. And the report fails to mention the damage wrought by the appalling and repeated illegal US threats of war on Venezuela. This threat is, among other things, connected to what the economist Francisco Rodriguez has called the “toxification of Venezuelan debt,” or the reality that international finance has been even less likely to loan money to Venezuela because the United States is targeting it. The report also largely ignores the role that the opposition played in causing and exacerbating Venezuela’s crisis. Juan Guaidó’s ill-fated April 30, 2019, coup attempt is mentioned only in passing. And the report contains nothing on past or current opposition violence. For a document that aims to be comprehensive and accurate, not only in terms of what is happening but why, this omission is glaring. So far the government’s response has not been helpful. Instead of accepting Bachelet’s findings and outlining steps to address the problems, the government has condemned the report and sought to present Bachelet as a US puppet. The opposition, on the other hand, has done a 180. During Bachelet’s June visit to Venezuela, Guaidó suggested the OHCHR would do little to resolve the crisis. But after the report’s release, opposition websites have publicized its findings. In comments to the UN presenting the report, Bachelet called for negotiations to end Venezuela’s crisis. This remains an urgent need. And there is room for some optimism, with the government and opposition set to continue talks in Barbados. It is also critical to end the needless suffering caused by US sanctions. Trump’s former State Department undersecretary of political affairs, Thomas Shannon Jr., recently recognized this point, telling Financial Times, “Keeping these sanctions in place, with no mediating action, will have a profoundly negative impact on the Venezuela people.” He added that the sanctions highlight the US “willingness to cause great damage to Venezuela to drive Maduro from power. Kind of like the fire bombing of Dresden or Tokyo.” It is rare to find myself agreeing more with a former Trump official than with a center-left politician such as Bachelet, but on this point, Shannon is absolutely right.
Impact- 450k diabetics finna die- Sanctions make banks refuse payments for 300k insulin doses, aff solves instantly
Venezuela Analysis 18
https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/14111
Revealing examples are emerging of the cumulative impact that US sanctions against Venezuela are having on the Venezuelan people in the field of health, one of the key priorities of the Bolivarian revolution. In July 2017, the US bank Citibank refused to handle Venezuela’s payment for the import of 300,000 insulin doses to meet the needs of 450,000 registered patients. Three months later, the US blockade prevented Venezuela from depositing funds with the UBS Swiss bank, delaying a purchase of vaccines for months and disrupting the country’s vaccination schedules
Advantage Two- Water
Uq- Water crisis, hospitals are “impossible” to run
Al Jazeera 19
Caracas, Venezuela - Weeks of power cuts in Venezuela have further crippled an already fragile infrastructure, creating widespread water shortages hampering basic services. Power has been restored in many areas but it is being rationed, and without electricity to run pumps there is not enough water in many areas. "Imagine the scenario of a hospital without water, without power. We remain without a water supply. Even though the power has been restored, the water is still an issue," said paediatrician Vietnam Veras Rivas at Caracas' Children's Hospital. "The first blackout hit on March 7, and until a week ago, I was working in this hospital with no water whatsoever," Rivas told Al Jazeera. During the first outage, one of his patients was a 10-day-old baby in an incubator in intensive care. He recalls transporting the child through the dark hospital, "while manually supplying him oxygen with some reanimation bags," he said. "After 24 hours with intermittent power, the patient started decompressing and 48 hours later, he died." The baby had problems when he was born, but the blackout complicated things further, the doctor explained. The hospital was already suffering a chronic shortage of supplies and equipment and the water problems made maintaining sanitary conditions "impossible", he said. "We would wash our hands only when possible, we tried to not drink much water to avoid clogging the toilets."
Link- have the money for Pipes and Pumps but US blocks it + fleet down 75
Fox 19
According to representatives from Hidrocapital, the state water agency for the capital, Caracas, roughly 15-20 of Venezuelans don't have access to potable water in their homes, because the government cannot acquire new foreign-built parts to fix broken pumps and pipes. "With the blockade, we've had situations, where we have the pumps and the motors and they are about to ship and then comes the all-powerful hand of the United States and they block the money in the bank or sanction the company that is working with us, just for selling us this equipment and without seeing that they are affecting people's lives," says Maria Flores, vice president of operations at Hidrocapital. In response, Hidrocapital ships truckloads of water each week to needy communities. But the blockade, and the lack of parts for vehicles, is also impacting the number of water trucks Hidrocapital can keep on the road. Maria Flores says their fleet has been reduced by 75 over the last three years, to now only a handful of trucks.
Link- Additionally sanctions hurt potable water which 90 of ppl got good water from
Xinhua 18
CARACAS, April 18 (Xinhua) ~-~- U.S.-led economic sanctions against Venezuela are damaging the country's potable water system, Venezuelan engineer Alejandro Hitcher warned on Wednesday. Hitcher, who served as environment minister between 2010 and 2012, said the sanctions block access to imported parts and equipment needed to maintain the network. "They have been progressively undermining the water production and distribution system in Venezuela since 2014," when the financial and economic warfare against the South American country first began, Hitcher told Xinhua. Up to 2013, the water network was "stable" in delivering water "to the great majority of the Venezuelan people," Hitcher said. Recent nationwide blackouts that led to water shortages in parts of the country have spotlighted the shortcomings in the system that supplies drinking water, he said. Some 90 percent of Venezuelan cities receive water through a pumping system "that was paralyzed when electricity service went out," said Hitcher.
Internal Link- Contreres 19- water down 20 due to sanctions, govt trying to help, sanctions prevent it
Contreras 19
Here’s the problem. The pump needed to push the water up the hill and into their home. Well, it’s broken. And U.S. sanctions are blocking the country from acquiring new pumps, motors, pipes and replacement parts. In Venezuela, they call it the “blockade”. That’s what it feels like. According to many residents, the Venezuelan government is doing what it can to mitigate the situation. Twice a week, it sends a tanker of potable water to the neighborhood, down the hill from Yolimar’s home. Some residents here say they’ve been without running water for a year and a half. They pour into the streets with their waste-high buckets, to wait their turn for their containers to be filled.
“You can’t blame the Maduro government, but as for the United States, this Donald Trump is mean. He’s mean and he’s blocked a lot of things. We have to support each other and this U.S. blockade has to end.”
President Donald Trump intensified sanctions on Venezuela in August 2017. According to Venezuela, the U.S. government has frozen $5.5 Billion U.S. dollars of Venezuelan funds in international accounts in at least 50 banks and financial institutions. Even if Venezuela could get the money abroad, the United States has threatened to sanction foreign companies for doing business with the country. This is not an isolated reality. According to officials at the state water company Hidroven, as much as 15-20 of the country is facing water shortages due to U.S. sanctions. We’re talking about millions of Venezuelans without potable running water, because of the U.S. government.
Impact- 17 percent access clean water, was at 87 pre crisis, 1 million have waterborne diseases + hospitals shutting down
Kohan 19 of csis
Despite ranking as one of the world’s top 15 countries in renewable fresh water resources, nearly 8 out of 10 Venezuelans do not have continuous access to clean drinking water and basic sanitation. For most citizens, the water they sporadically consume is of dubious quality or not drinkable. Clean water in Venezuela has become a luxury, and even with price controls set in place, a bottle of water is about $3, a significant portion of the country’s minimum wage of approximately $8 a month. Venezuela’s water crisis also impacts wastewater collection, sanitation, control over sewage, and farmer’s access to water for irrigation. Partly as a result, national production in agriculture, including for main crops such as rice, corn, and coffee, has fallen to approximately 60 percent within the last 20 years. This fall in agricultural production is associated with the average nationwide weight loss of 24 pounds in 2017. Those gaps in access, quality, and management of the nation’s water resources are having a devastating long-term effect on the health, education, economy, and dignity of the Venezuelan people. The most vulnerable are children, whose cognitive development is most susceptible to impacts from anemia, chronic malnutrition, and preventable communicable diseases. These appalling conditions are forcing more Venezuelans to flee. About a million Venezuelans are exposed to contaminated supplies, putting the population at risk of contracting waterborne viruses, especially threatening the lives of children and the most vulnerable. The magnitude of the water crisis as shown in Figure 1, which notes that in 1998, 87 percent of the population was estimated to have a continuous and regular supply of clean drinking water. The percentage dropped precipitously in the years after Maduro took power, falling to 18 percent in 2018. The impact of the water crisis has impacted the mortality rate of children under five years of age. Their mortality rate in 2017 was 31 deaths per 1,000 live births, a level higher than in 1990 and that is worse than countries such as Cambodia and Bangladesh. According to the UNICEF report, had the mortality rate for children stayed where it was in 2010, 12,000 fewer children would have died in 2017. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), improving access to water, sanitation, and hygiene can help prevent child mortality in Venezuela.
Impact- warrant for disease- unsafe bacteria in unclean water- have tons of water, just about delivery
Herrera 19 of the NY Times
The brick shack on the outskirts of Venezuela’s capital is crowded with tubs, jugs and buckets. The water they hold must last the family of eight for a week — but it’s not enough for frequent washing or flushing, so the kitchen is filled with greasy pots and the house smells of stale urine. And none of the water is treated, making diarrhea and vomiting a regular occurrence. “We practically live in the bathroom,” said the mother of the family, Yarelis Pinto. Her pregnant daughter, Yarielys, sat nearby, pale and listless, recovering from her latest bout of diarrhea just one month away from childbirth. In Venezuela, a crumbling economy and the collapse of even basic state infrastructure means water comes irregularly — and drinking it is an increasingly risky gamble. Venezuela’s current rate of infant mortality from diarrhea, which is closely related to water quality, is six times higher than 15 years ago, according to the World Health Organization. But the government stopped releasing official public health data years ago. So The New York Times commissioned researchers from the Universidad Central de Venezuela to recreate the water quality study they had conducted regularly for the water utility in Caracas from 1992 until 1999. The scientists found that about a million residents were exposed to contaminated supplies. This puts them at risk of contracting waterborne viruses that could sicken them and threatens the lives of children and the most vulnerable. “This is a potential epidemic,” said Jose María De Viana, who headed Caracas’s water utility, Hidrocapital, until 1999. “It’s very serious. It’s unacceptable.” In the latest study, 40 samples were taken from the capital’s main water systems and tested for bacteria and for chlorine, which keeps water safe. The study also tested alternative water sources used by city residents during supply outages. One third of the samples did not meet national norms. This should have required Hidrocapital to issue a sanitation alert, according to the utility’s own internal regulations. But Venezuela’s government has not issued any alerts at least since President Nicolas Maduro’s Socialist Party took power 20 years ago. “The biggest health risk that we see there right now is water — water and sanitation,” the head of the International Federation of the Red Cross, Francesco Rocca, told foreign reporters this week, referring to Venezuela. Venezuela’s stagnant economy went into a tailspin in 2014, when a collapse in the nation’s oil export revenues exposed the failure of Mr. Maduro’s disastrous policies of price and currency controls. The economy has imploded since, with Venezuela losing two thirds of its gross domestic product and at least 10 percent of its population. Spokesmen for Hidrocapital, Venezuela’s water ministry and the ministry of information did not respond to questions about drinking water quality in the capital. The risks posed by poor water quality are particularly threatening for a population weakened by food and medication shortages. But the problem cuts across the capital’s social, political and geographic divide, affecting wealthy gated communities and shantytowns, areas that support the opposition and those loyal to the government. In Terrazas del Avila, a middle-class neighborhood whose water the study found was tainted with fecal bacteria, residents buy jugs from private companies to cook or drink, said Juan Carlos Castro, a doctor and community leader there. “This is not drinking water,” he said of their tap water. “It’s a public health hazard.” But buying water is a luxury in the neighboring shantytowns, where many survive on Venezuela’s minimum wage of $8 a month. During the regular blackouts and water outages, Aleyda Sabino’s family in the Carapita shantytown walk to a nearby creek to get water. She has a kidney disease and is under doctor’s order to drink a lot of water every day. She tries to, although drinking from the creek often results in fever, vomiting and diarrhea. “I feel I will get sick if I drink the water and sick if I don’t,” she said. Boiling the water requires cooking gas — another luxury that is unaffordable to many. Overall, the new study showed a significant decline in the city’s water quality over the last two decades. Built with oil proceeds by the previous governments, the Caracas public water system was once an engineering feat, pumping 5 million gallons of water per second up thousands feet to the city’s mountain valley through complex aqueducts and hundreds of miles of pipelines. The system was part of a broad investment in public infrastructure. The city’s piped cooking gas, its glitzy metro sprinkled with avant-garde art, its elevated motorways and its skyscrapers of public housing were examples of modernity in the neglected and volatile continent. But while the rest of South America made dramatic improvements in drinking water access in the past two decades, Venezuela’s advances were instead hollowed out by underinvestment, mismanagement and six straight years of a spiraling economy under Mr. Maduro. Outside Caracas, the breakdown of the water infrastructure is even more profound, leaving millions without regular supplies and forcing communities to dig wells and rely on untreated rivers. The collapse of water services has accelerated in the past two years, according to surveys conducted by universities and nongovernmental organizations. During that time, power cuts, pipeline outages, chemicals shortages and the mass exodus of qualified staff shook the state water utilities to their core. Now, the Inter-American Development Bank estimates only 30 percent of Venezuelans have regular access to safe drinking water, compared to 60 percent in 2000. “There hasn’t been a deterioration of this magnitude and duration in the region in recent history,” said Sergio Campos, the development bank’s chief water expert. The water study commissioned by The Times showed the main water supply system, which provides about 60 percent of the capital’s water, was especially compromised. More than half of the samples taken from the main water system had insufficient chlorine; almost two thirds of the samples had levels of bacteria that exceeded regulations. Venezuelan authorities have not published any public health data since at least 2017. But survey-based evidence collected by local health advocacy groups shows a correlation between the country’s declining water supply and the rise of waterborne diseases. The incidence of hepatitis A, a liver infection, rose to 150 times above normal in Terrazas del Avila, the middle-class neighborhood, following a prolonged water outage in March, said Dr. Castro. In the nearby slums, procuring, cleansing and storing enough drinkable water is a daily struggle — and a high-risk game of chance. In March when a major blackout left many without water, hundreds of people took their water jugs to the sewage-filled Guaire River. In the Petare shantytown in the east, residents ambush water trucks to force them to unload in their neighborhoods. In the San Isidro shantytown, water flowed for two days in September for the first time in six months. It came out dark with sludge that accumulated in the empty pipes. The study found excessive bacteria in most of the sampled alternative water sources used by Caracas residents, such as mountainside springs, water sold in shops and water cisterns.
Impact- Risks Transcontinental epidemic spanning across North and South America because of mass refugees
Guardian 19
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/feb/21/venezuela-crisis-threatens-disease-epidemic-across-continent-experts
Experts have warned of an epidemic of diseases such as malaria and dengue on an unprecedented scale in Latin America following the collapse of the healthcare system in Venezuela. Continent-wide public health gains of the last 18 years could be undone if Venezuela does not accept help to control the spreading outbreaks of malaria, Zika, dengue and other illnesses that are afflicting its people, experts have warned in a report published in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases. Venezuela was once a regional leader in malaria control, but as healthcare has collapsed there has been a mass departure of trained medics, the report says, creating a public emergency “of hemispheric concern”. “These diseases have already extended into neighboring Brazil and Colombia, and with increasing air travel and human migration, most of the Latin American and Caribbean region (as well as some US cities hosting the Venezuelan diaspora, including Miami and Houston) is at heightened risk for disease re-emergence,” says the paper.
Impact- additionally hospitals don’t have access to water to treat patients, everyone in Venezuela could die w corona.
Davis 20 of US News
Carrie Filipetti, the deputy assistant secretary for Cuba and Venezuela at the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, said the country is lacking in water, soap and electricity. In a country with an official population around 30 million, there are only 84 ICU hospital beds in the entire country, and 90 of hospitals don't have protocols for respiratory virus care, she added. A March 2019 U.N. review noted that more than 90 of Venezuelans live in poverty, according to Reuters.
David Smolansky, a coordinator for the Working Group on the Crisis of Venezuelan Migrants and Refugees at the Organization of American States, noted concerns for the 5 million people who have fled Venezuela, which he described as the "largest migration in Latin American history." Pregnant Venezuelan women began flooding into Colombia last year to give birth, overwhelming that country's network of hospitals and clinics. Smolansky said that 75 of the migrants are in six neighboring countries, and the "vast majority of borders are closed in the region" due to the spread of the coronavirus. These people are thus "one of the most vulnerable populations in the region," he added. Eric Farnsworth, vice president at the Washington office of the Council of the Americas, said that the migration crisis and the "collapsing" health care system make Venezuela "a particularly fertile ground for devastation." "Every Venezuelan right now is facing the death," added Manuela Bolívar, a politician from the country's Miranda state.
Advantage Three- Trump
Uq- needs to win Florida cuz dems are good in the rust belt. It’s been 95 years since a republican won the presidency w/o Florida
Smiley 19 of the Miami Herald
Donald Trump must win Florida in 2020 if he wants to remain president. And he knows it. The part-time Florida resident has spent more time here than any location outside of Washington since becoming president, and not just because he likes golf. His campaign is dedicating resources to the state and its 29 electoral college votes as if it were an entire region. And this month alone, the president has made repeated overtures to different segments of Florida’s complex electorate through the power of the purse and international policy. So as Democrats divide their attention among the largest field of candidates in modern history, the president’s reelection campaign is already kicking into gear around a massive voter-data operation and a high-profile stable of surrogates. In a complete reversal from 2016, Trump’s team is in sync from the White House down to the local parties, giving him a vast arsenal with which to target a specific number of voters that strategists believe will send him to four more years in office. “The path to victory is through Florida,” said 2016 Trump Florida campaign co-chairman Joe Gruters, now the head of the Republican Party of Florida. “There’s so much at stake.” It’s been 95 years since a Republican won a presidential election without picking up Florida. And Trump doesn’t intend to break that record. This month alone, he reversed course and agreed to fully fund a $200 million budget request for Everglades restoration projects and announced a 90 percent federal cost-share for disaster recovery efforts in the hurricane-ravaged Panhandle. He’s made further inroads in South Florida’s diverse Hispanic community by increasing financial pressures against leftist regimes in Venezuela and Cuba. And according to the L.A. Times, Trump now plans to roll out his 2020 campaign with an event located along the Interstate-4 corridor, which cuts across battleground Central Florida “He’s very clear-eyed about Florida,” said Susie Wiles, who in 2016 led Trump’s Florida campaign. At the same time, the Trump-endorsed Super PAC America First Action is planning to raise $300 million of its own dollars, a “good chunk” of which is slated to be spent in Florida. Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign manager, Brad Parscale, is scheduled to make his fourth public appearance in the state this month when he visits Little Havana Thursday to give a private talk to the Miami Young Republicans. Parscale, who was Trump’s digital guru in 2016, specializes in micro-targeting, a data-based advertising strategy that uses a bevy of data points — like whether you subscribe to Guns and Ammo magazine or drive a MINI Cooper — in order to tailor ads and grassroots efforts directly to specific voters. The Republican National Committee says it has spent nearly $300 million on its operation since Mitt Romney lost in 2012, and credits a successful last-minute push in Florida that put Trump over the top on their ability to target a specific set of 400,000 undecided voters in the state over the final 72 hours of the campaign. The America First Action Super PAC estimates that 10.5 million Florida voters will participate in the 2020 election, and believes the fight for the state will come down to whether the president can pick up another million votes between now and November 2020. “We have to win Florida,” said Rick Gorka, the RNC’s deputy communications director. “And we’re going to put all the resources needed into Florida to make that happen.” Mathematically, Florida was a luxury for Trump in 2016. Despite losing the popular vote, Trump beat Hillary Clinton so soundly in the electoral college that he could have lost the state and still won the presidency. But that seems less likely in 2020, after Democrats rebounded in the rust belt in November. Florida, on the other hand, was one of the few states that seemed immune to the 2018 “blue wave,” making it that much more important to Trump in 2020. Plus, the state and its diverse population of 22 million people is seen as a bellwether for the rest of the country. “If we were to see something where Trump lost Florida it would be indicative of a very bad night for him,” said Rob Schmidt, vice president of strategy and research for McLaughlin and Associates, which polls for Trump’s campaign. “It becomes a domino effect.” Schmidt, who has worked with the Republican Party of Florida and a pro-Trump Super PAC, said he’s not privy to the internal Trump polling data. But public polls and reports detailing internal polling suggest Trump is currently in a dog fight here. Quinnipiac University found in March that 51 percent of voters in the state “definitely” won’t vote to reelect the president. The following month, St. Leo University found that Trump’s approval rating in the state was below 42 percent. And in mid-May Florida Atlantic University found that the president was either in a tie or slightly ahead of the leading Democratic candidates in head-to-head matchups.
Uq- despite corona Trump’s approval rating is the highest ever
CNN 20
(CNN)The narrative seemed set: After a brief surge of public support for President Donald Trump in the early days of America's fight against the coronavirus, his approval numbers had settled back into the low 40s. Right? Right. Except that in Gallup's latest two-week tracking poll, Trump's job approval is back to 49 ~-~- matching the highest it's ever been ~-~- while his disapproval is at 47. That marks a 6-point improvement on Trump's approval number from the last Gallup tracking poll. And that improvement comes exclusively from independents ~-~- 47 of whom now approve of the job Trump is doing, the best he has ever done among that group in Gallup polling. (He was at 38 approval among indies in the last Gallup tracker.)
Link- less popular with latino populations when remove sanctions, key cuz swing vote
Groppe 20 of USA Today
WASHINGTON – Embattled Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro might not have been listening Friday when Vice President Mike Pence gave a microphone to exiled Venezuelans living in South Florida. But Pence's trip to Miami, to showcase the administration's hard-line efforts to oust Maduro, is likely to resonate with an all-important bloc of Latino voters in the nation's largest swing state. And that could help another embattled president: Donald Trump. No Republican presidential candidate has won the White House in nearly a century without carrying Florida – a state also known for its razor-thin election margins. "It’s very hard to see a scenario where the president gets re-elected without winning Florida," said Democratic strategist Steve Schale who ran Barack Obama's 2008 campaign in Florida. Trump's tough stance on Maduro is very popular in Florida among that state’s Cuban and Venezuelan populations, which account for more than 1.5 million of the state's 21 million residents. It also resonates with the Colombian community, which is growing in political importance in Florida's most populous county: Miami-Dade. "Although I don't think this is the primary motivation for the (Trump administration's) policy, it is definitely an advantage," said Dario Moreno, professor of political science at Florida International University and an expert on Florida and Cuban-American politics. In 2016, Trump lost Miami-Dade County by a bigger margin than did GOP Sen. Marco Rubio, who lives in West Miami. Nearly all of the approximately 150,000 voters who split their ticket between Rubio and Hillary Clinton were Latinos, according to Moreno. "And that could easily move to either the Republican column or easily stay in the Democratic column" in 2020, he said. Trump and his top advisers have clearly stated they are considering “all options” to force Maduro out and support opposition leader Juan Guaido, headof Venezuela’s National Assembly, who has declared himself interim president. Venezuelans are suffering from a spiraling economic and humanitarian crisis. The dire conditions have prompted at least 3 million Venezuelans to flee their homeland, creating a refugee crisis in the region. Cuban-Americans are very attuned to the Venezuelan crisis because they see it as a replay in many ways of what they went through with Fidel Castro – a repressive ruler implementing a ruinous economic policy. The close diplomatic relationship between Cuba and Venezuela adds to their ire. "If you’re hitting Cuba hard, you’re also hurting Venezuela and vice versa,” said Frank O. Mora, director of the Kimberly Green Latin American and Caribbean Studies at Florida International University.
Internal Link- Biden good cc policy- electric cars by 2030, the green new deal, a carbon tax, and most importantly diplomatic pressure
Irfan 19 of Vox
Former Vice President Joe Biden: Biden has the distinction of introducing the first climate change bill in the Senate, way back in 1986. His climate proposal is roughly in line with those from other candidates, pegged to the 2050 deadline. The mechanisms for hitting the target include changes to the US tax code; job training and other equity provisions for those most impacted by climate change and the shift away from fossil fuels; and diplomatic pressure on other countries to reduce their emissions. The agenda calls for $1.7 trillion in federal spending over the next decade on these policies. Biden has also pledged to refuse fossil fuel funding, backed the Green New Deal, and supported holding a climate change debate. And in the first primary debate in June, Biden highlighted his commitment to electrifying the US vehicle fleet. “I would immediately insist that we in fact build 500,000 recharging stations throughout the United States of America, working with governors, mayors and others, so that we can go to a full electric vehicle future by the year 2020 — by the year 2030,” he said.
Internal link- US leadership cuts emissions by half and meets Paris 1.5 degree climate goals through diplomatic pressure
Beeler 19 of the PRI
World leaders will meet in New York next week for the United Nations Climate Summit, an event called by the Secretary-General to push for more and faster cuts to global greenhouse gas emissions. Notably missing at the summit: American leadership. Five years ago, a joint climate policy announcement from the US and China paved the way for the Paris climate accord to come to fruition after decades of failed attempts at an international climate pact. Then in June 2017, President Donald Trump announced that he would withdraw the US from the very same agreement his country had helped broker just a few years before. Under the rules of the accord, countries can announce the intention to leave, but must wait two years before being allowed to do so. Two years later, what impact has this policy whiplash had on the climate? Inside the US, that answer is relatively simple to quantify. Across the country, some 4,000 state and local governments, institutions and businesses have declared that, though the federal government intends to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, they’re still on board with cutting emissions. One of those local governments is in Arlington, Massachusetts, where the town hall was illuminated green after Trump’s 2017 Paris withdrawal announcement. “We’ve come to the realization that if the federal government’s not going to do it, it’s going to fall to the local level,” said Adam Chapdelaine, Arlington’s town manager. “Somebody has to step up and be a leader.” Even before the Paris Agreement, the town has long worked to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, from switching its street lights to LED bulbs to buying electric vehicles for its official fleet. Residents can opt-in to 100 renewable energy in their homes and the town is advocating for all-electric heating and cooling systems. Since the US federal government reversed its climate change policies, Arlington has gotten perhaps more ambitious: The town’s new high school is being designed to run on geothermal and solar energy and the whole town aims to go carbon-neutral by 2050. These state and local actions are being highlighted as “answering the global call to combat the climate crisis” by a coalition of sub-national actors formed by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former California Gov. Jerry Brown. But these actions have only partly counteracted sweeping federal changes under the Trump administration. Trump has slashed regulations on emissions from power plants, air conditioners and refrigerators, and oil and gas drilling nationwide. He moved to revoke California’s ability to set its own strict vehicle emission rules on Wednesday, highlighting the limits of state-based action on climate change. So how does the emissions balance sheet tally up today, two years after the US backed away from the Paris agreement? Kate Larsen, a director at the independent research firm the Rhodium Group, said US carbon emissions are a few percentage points higher than they would have been if former President Barack Obama-era policies were in place. Projected forward five years, that gap will just grow. “Under the current set of Trump administration policies, the US is on track to achieve only about 14 to 17 emission reductions below 2005 levels in 2025,” Larsen said. That’s about half of the 26 to 28 emission reductions that the US promised in the climate accord. “It's a long way from the commitment that Obama reached in Paris,” Larsen said. Scientists say that to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius and avoid the worst impacts of climate change, global emissions must be cut nearly in half by 2030. Inside the US, local action is partly, but not wholly, counteracting federal policies. The bigger question is how much global ambition to tackle the climate crisis will flag if the world’s largest historic emitter is no longer leading the push. Will countries, seeing the US doing less on climate change, do the same themselves? Under Obama, the US put its full diplomatic muscle into getting countries signed on to the Paris Agreement. “If you were a head of state from India, from China, or from anywhere and you were going to meet with the United States, you knew that you'd have to be prepared to speak about climate change and the Paris Agreement,” said Elan Strait, a former climate negotiator on the Paris Agreement who now works at the World Wildlife Foundation. By 2020, countries are requested to announce new carbon cuts as part of the Paris process. Those cuts have to be more ambitious if countries hope to meet the Paris Agreement goal of keeping warming “well below” 2 degrees Celsius and pursue efforts to limit warming to the scientist-recommended 1.5 degree Celsius. “I completely believe that the missing ingredient this time around is the United States leadership driving climate as a head-of-state agenda,” Strait said. Only when those 2020 climate pledges start rolling in will the international community start to see the full impact of the US climate policy reversal.
Impact- 153 million people saved if we reach Paris climate goals
Profeta 18 of National Geographic
A new study suggests that premature deaths linked to air pollution would fall across the globe if nations agree to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels rather than postponing emissions cuts and allowing warming to reach 2 degrees Celsius. The research funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), led by scientists at Duke University, and published in the journal Nature Climate Change finds that targeting the more ambitious of the Paris Agreement’s two temperature goals—although more costly—could avoid 153 million premature deaths. “The lowest-cost approach only looks at how much it will cost to transform the energy sector,” said lead author Drew Shindell of Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment. “It ignores the human cost of more than 150 million lost lives, or the fact that slashing emissions in the near term will reduce long-term climate risk and avoid the need to rely on future carbon dioxide removal. That’s a very risky strategy, like buying something on credit and assuming you’ll someday have a big enough income to pay it all back.”
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zGQmvheeGU6-PK4ntsRaN6PFGBaytMZ_BF6QUZsSHhM/edit?usp=sharing
(open source) | 905,415 |
398 | 380,258 | 1AC - TOC - R5 v Hackley YK | ====We Affirm.====
====First off is Theory:====
====A is the Interpretation: Public Forum Debaters should not paraphrase evidence at the 2020 Tournament of Champions.====
====B is the Violation: They’ve paraphrased. They disclosed the neg they said they’d read this round on the wiki and we’ve got screenshots to prove.====
====C is the Standards:====
====Tournament Credibility - The tournament of champions is the pinnacle of online debate. Moving online this year opens pandora's box of bad evidence practices. Use this round to demonstrate the need to eliminate any possibility of this tournament’s reputation being tarnished.====
====Scheduling - Paraphrasing prolongs the duration of online tournaments. Paraphrased evidence takes longer to exchange, lengthening the tournament several extra hours.====
====Reciprocity - Our coaches forbid paraphrasing for this tournament. Any paraphrasing is a negative tradeoff for us that is anti educational and bad for the community as a whole. That gives them a competitive advantage in the round not afforded to us.====
====D is the voters:====
====Fairness. If they’ve made the debate unfair, they should lose. Fairness is a prior question to substance because if the game is rigged why should we play?====
====Education. Paraphrasing in Public Forum distorts the author's intent more times than not. Education is a prior question to substance because why play the game if we get nothing out of it?====
====Evaluate theory through the lenses of competing interpretations and drop-the-debater. Two warrants:====
====Dropping the argument doesn’t solve the abuse because it can’t be undone and we can’t restart the round.====
====Competing Interps is the best paradigm - it removes judge bias and ensures the most equitable model.====
====Now, onto case:====
====One Observation:====
====John Woollard and Janet Cooke ‘6 argue:====
John Woollard and Janet Cooke, 2006 “VISUAL LITERACY AND PAINTING WITH TECHNOLOGY: OBSERVATIONS IN THE EARLY YEARS CLASSROOM,” https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/55253/, accessed 4-3-2020 BH
The following words
AND
is available at http:// www.cblt.soton.ac.uk/painting (see also Table 7.1).
====Prefer this interpretation of “nearly all.” Anything less is insufficient and refers to a majority, rather than nearly all. Thus, we observe the affirmative may defend the continuation of any permutations of military presence in the Arab States of the Persian Gulf, so long as it stays below the 10 threshold. With that,====
====Contention One is Oman:====
====Oman represents a tangible path to continue beneficial US military presence, for two reasons:====
====First, resolving anti-American sentiment. Unsurprisingly, Dimant et. al ‘17 of the Hoover Institute find:====
Eugen Dimant , Tim Krieger and Daniel Meierrieks, HOOVER INSTITUTION, September 2017 “Negative Returns: U.S. Military Policy and Anti-American Terrorism” https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/17106-diman-krieger-meierrieks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0bxqHBpveoh3437r3oQyJnaaE4AFW27UzTvpAqYyosSFbZ-ngEyg7O4w4, accessed 4-16-2020 BH/max
We study the
AND
from transnational terrorism.
====Fortunately, per the Heritage Foundation ‘19:====
No Author Listed, in The Heritage Foundation, 10-30-2019 "Middle East", https://www.heritage.org/military-strength/assessing-the-global-operating-environment/middle-east, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
UAE. About 5,000
AND
U.S. aircraft carriers.
====Second, negotiations. Schanzer and Salter ‘19 of the FDD note that:====
Jonathan Schanzer and Nicole Salter, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, 5-9-2019 "Oman in the Middle", https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2019/05/09/oman-in-the-middle/, accessed 4-15-2020 BH
The Obama administration
AND
politically and economically.
====The impact is special operations. Long ‘17 of the Center for Strategic Studies argues:====
Austin Long, Center for Security Studies, 1-30-2017 “The Limits of Special Operations Forces” https://css.ethz.ch/en/services/digital-library/articles/article.html/97e57ac8-2c3c-4941-9377-1802b4033450/pdf, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
Patience and a willingness
AND
were both unlikely
====Past success of these special operations justify their continuation. Moreover, Heitz ‘18 of Columbia contends:====
Michael Paul Heitz, Columbia University, June 2018 “Special Operations Forces: Guardians of Human Rights and Our Constitutional Legitimacy” https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8J11M5D, accessed 4-16-2020 BH
Given this idea
AND
importantly innocent people.
====The end game of a terrorist attack would be unacceptable. Arguello and Buis ‘18 contextualize that:====
Irma Arguello (founder and chair of the NPS Global Foundation, and head of the secretariat of the Latin American and Caribbean Leadership Network) and Emiliano J. Buis (a lawyer specializing in international law. He holds a PhD from the University of Buenos Aires (UBA), a Master’s in Human and Social Sciences from the University of Paris/Panthéon-Sorbonne, and a postgraduate diploma in national defense from the National Defense School. Currently he is a professor in international law at UBA, and co-director of the UNICEN Center for Human Rights in Azul) , Taylor and Francis, 2-21-2018 "The global impacts of a terrorist nuclear attack: What would happen? What should we do?", https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00963402.2018.1436812?journalCode=rbul20, accessed 1-9-2019 BH
Though hard to
AND
trade of materials
====Contention Two is Yemen:====
====Yemen is currently engulfed in an atrocious US-supported humanitarian crisis. Thrall and Dorminey ‘18 of Defense One elaborate:====
A. Trevor Thrall and Caroline Dorminey, Defense One, 3-21-2018 "Yemen Shows Why US Needs to Change Its Arms Sales Policy?", https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/03/yemen-shows-why-us-needs-change-its-arms-sales-policy/146845/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
This approach to
AND
prolong those conflicts.
====US presence is vital to the continuation of these airstrikes. Ridel ‘18 of Brookings explains:====
Bruce Riedel, Brookings, 10-10-2018 "After Khashoggi, US arms sales to the Saudis are essential leverage", https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/10/10/after-khashoggi-us-arms-sales-to-the-saudis-are-essential-leverage/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
In June 2017,
AND
his arms deals.
====This would save lives. Feltman ‘18 of Foreign Affairs asserts:====
Jeffery Feltman, Foreign Affairs, 11-26-2018 "The Only Way to End the War in Yemen", https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/yemen/2018-11-26/only-way-end-war-yemen, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
However belatedly, in
AND
war rages on.
====Removing the US military is crucial, as Bazzi ‘18 of the Atlantic contends:====
Mohamad Bazzi, Atlantic, 9-30-2018 "The United States Could End the War in Yemen If It Wanted To", https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/iran-yemen-saudi-arabia/571465/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
Saudi and Emirati
AND
worst humanitarian crisis.
====Altogether, Parsi ‘20 of Foreign Policy concludes:====
Trita Parsi, Foreign Policy, 1-6-2020 "The Middle East Is More Stable When the United States Stays Away", https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/06/the-middle-east-is-more-stable-when-the-united-states-stays-away/, accessed 4-16-2020 potomac
Assertions about the
AND
New York Times.
====Thus, we affirm.==== | 905,566 |
399 | 380,260 | Contact Info | hi!
We're not planning to initiate any theory debates this year. w/r/t disclosure (or any other shells abt pre-round actions), we'd rather you tell us, with enough time to meet your standard, what norms to follow before the round begins. If you don't contact us beforehand, we'd consider any theory ran in-round to be abusive.
If you have any questions, concerns, or actions you'd like us to take, contact us on Facebook Messenger or email:
Nicholas Budny (he/him)
nicholas.budny@gmail.com
609-423-5850
Yash Roy (he/him)
yash.v.roy1@gmail.com
thanks! | 905,569 |
Subsets and Splits