west coast debate - wcdebate.com · web viewthe word “development” should be rejected262. ......

West Coast 12013 Neg Handbook

WEST COAST DEBATE

LATIN AMERICA 2013-2014NEGATIVE HANDBOOK

Edited by Aaron Hardy and Jim Hanson

Researched by:Athena Murray, Greta Stahl, Matt Stannard, James Taylor

Articles by:Jim Hanson and Aaron Hardy


WEST COAST DEBATE

LATIN AMERICA 2013-2014NEGATIVE HANDBOOK

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic engagement toward Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela.

Finding Arguments in this FileUse the table of contents on the next pages to find the evidence you need or the navigation bar on the left. We have tried to make the table of contents as easy to use as possible. You’ll find affirmatives, disadvantages, counterplans, and kritiks listed alphabetically in their categories.

Using the arguments in this FileWe encourage you to be familiar with the evidence you use. Highlight (underline) the key lines you will use in the evidence. Cut evidence from our files, incorporate your and others’ research and make new files. File the evidence so that you can easily retrieve it when you need it in debate rounds. Practice reading the evidence out-loud; Practice applying the arguments to your opponents’ positions; Practice defending your evidence in rebuttal speeches.

Use West Coast Evidence as a BeginningWe hope you enjoy our evidence files and find them useful. In saying this, we want to make a strong statement that we make when we coach and that we believe is vitally important to your success: DO NOT USE THIS EVIDENCE AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR YOUR OWN RESEARCH. Instead, let it serve as a beginning. Let it inform you of important arguments, of how to tag and organize your arguments, and to offer citations for further research. Don’t stagnate in these files--build upon them by doing your own research for updates, new strategies, and arguments that specifically apply to your opponents. In doing so, you’ll use our evidence to become a better debater.

Copying West Coast EvidenceOur policy gives you the freedom to use our evidence for educational purposes without violating our hard work.

You may print and copy this evidence for those on your team. You may not electronically share nor distribute this evidence with anyone other than those on your team

unless you very substantially change each page that of material that you share.For unusual situations, you can e-mail us at [email protected] and seek our consent.

Ordering West Coast Materials1. Visit the West Coast Web Page at www.wcdebate.com2. E-mail us at [email protected] can also call us at 888-255-9133; fax us at 877-781-5058; or write to West Coast Publishing; 2344 Hawk Drive; Walla Walla WA 99362Copyright 2013. West Coast Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

Visit our web page!

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Table Of Contents WEST COAST DEBATE_________________________________________________________________2

Table Of Contents__________________________________________________________________________3Arguing Negative On The Latin America Topic____________________________________________________9

Topicality_________________________________________________________________________12The_____________________________________________________________________________________13United States_____________________________________________________________________________14Federal Government_______________________________________________________________________15Should__________________________________________________________________________________16Substantially_____________________________________________________________________________17Increase_________________________________________________________________________________18Its______________________________________________________________________________________19Economic Engagement_____________________________________________________________________20Economic/Engagement_____________________________________________________________________21Toward_________________________________________________________________________________22Cuba/Mexico/Venezuela____________________________________________________________________23

Cuba Embargo Neg__________________________________________________________________24Inherency – Embargo Will Be Lifted Now_______________________________________________________25Inherency – Lifting Embargo Inevitable________________________________________________________26AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Yes US-Cuba________________________________________________________27AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Terrorism Answers___________________________________________________28AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Drug Trafficking Answers______________________________________________29AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Environment Answers_________________________________________________30AT: Obama Cred Advantage – SQ Solves_______________________________________________________31AT: Obama Cred Advantage – No Cuba Reforms Now_____________________________________________32AT: Economy Advantage – Cuba Not Key_______________________________________________________33AT: Economy Advantage – US/Cuban Economy Alt-Causes_________________________________________34AT: Economy Advantage – SQ Solves Ag Exports_________________________________________________35AT: Economy Advantage – AT: Agriculture Impact________________________________________________36Politics Link – Lifting Embargo Unpopular______________________________________________________37Politics Link – AT: Link Turns_________________________________________________________________38Democracy DA – Uniqueness – Yes Cuba Reforms________________________________________________39Democracy DA – Embargo Links______________________________________________________________40Democracy DA – AT: Link Turn_______________________________________________________________41

Cuba Joint Ventures Neg_____________________________________________________________42Inherency – Oil Exploration Now_____________________________________________________________43Inherency – Oil Spill Exceptions Now__________________________________________________________44AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – China Impact Answers___________________________________45AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – Russia Impact Answers___________________________________46AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – Brazil Prolif Impact Answers_______________________________47AT: Oil Spills Advantage – SQ Solves Spills______________________________________________________48AT: Oil Spills Advantage – Impact Defense______________________________________________________49AT: Oil Spills Advantage – Alt-Causes__________________________________________________________50AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – US Not Key Cuban Oil________________________________________________51AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – No Drilling Now_____________________________________________________52AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – AT: Ethanol Impact__________________________________________________53Solvency – Cuba Says No____________________________________________________________________54Solvency – Long Timeframe For Drilling________________________________________________________55


Oil DA Links______________________________________________________________________________56Politics Link – Joint Oil Unpopular_____________________________________________________________57Politics Link – AT: Anti-Spills Plan Popular______________________________________________________58Cellulose DA 1NC__________________________________________________________________________59

Mexico Guest Workers Neg___________________________________________________________60Inherency – Yes Guest Worker Program________________________________________________________61AT: Agriculture Advantage – No Farm Labor Shortage_____________________________________________62AT: Agriculture Advantage – Agriculture Alt-Causes______________________________________________63AT: Agriculture Advantage – Ag Not Key Economy________________________________________________64AT: Agriculture Advantage – AT: Small Farms Impact_____________________________________________65AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – Illegal Immigration Down______________________________________66AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – AT: Terrorism Impact_________________________________________67AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – Link Turn___________________________________________________68AT: US-Mexico Advantage – Yes US-Mexico Relations_____________________________________________69AT: US-Mexico Advantage – Alt-Causes To Relations______________________________________________70AT: US-Mexico Advantage – AT: Drug Trafficking Impact___________________________________________71Solvency – Guest Worker Programs Fail________________________________________________________72Solvency – Empirics Prove Guest Worker Programs Don’t Work_____________________________________73Politics Link – Plan Unpopular With Labor Unions________________________________________________74Politics Link – Obama Gets Blame For Plan______________________________________________________75Worker Abuse DA Link_____________________________________________________________________76Comprehensive Immigration Reform DA Link___________________________________________________77

Mexico Trade Bloc Neg______________________________________________________________78Status Quo Solves US Economy______________________________________________________________79No Economy I/L – Decoupling________________________________________________________________80Economy Resilient_________________________________________________________________________81No Economy impact_______________________________________________________________________82Competitiveness Collapse Inevitable__________________________________________________________83Competitiveness Resilient___________________________________________________________________84Competitiveness Not Key To Heg_____________________________________________________________85Hegemony Resilient_______________________________________________________________________86No Impact To Hegemonic Decline_____________________________________________________________87No Impact – Protectionism__________________________________________________________________88TPP Failure Inevitable______________________________________________________________________89TPP Bad_________________________________________________________________________________90Politics Links_____________________________________________________________________________91LNG Exports CP 1NC 1/2____________________________________________________________________92LNG Exports CP 1NC 2/2____________________________________________________________________93LNG CP – Politics Net Benefit________________________________________________________________94LNG CP – Economy Solvency_________________________________________________________________95LNG CP – Asian Leadership Solvency__________________________________________________________96

Venezuela Neg_____________________________________________________________________97SQ Solves Latin America Engagement__________________________________________________________98China Solves Economic Engagement__________________________________________________________99Venezuela Prefers China___________________________________________________________________100Yes China-Venezuela Arms Sales____________________________________________________________101Politics – Plan Popular With GOP____________________________________________________________102Conditions CP Solvency____________________________________________________________________103Solvency – Venezuela Says No______________________________________________________________104Solvency – Madero Says No________________________________________________________________105


Solvency – AT: Maduro Isn’t Chavez__________________________________________________________106US Engagement Doesn’t Solve US influence____________________________________________________107Economic Engagement Alt-Causes___________________________________________________________108Latin American Engagement Fails____________________________________________________________109AT: Iran Advantage – Not A Threat___________________________________________________________110AT: Iran Advantage – Latin America Not Key___________________________________________________111AT: Iran Nuclearization Impact______________________________________________________________112US Sanctions On Venezuela Good____________________________________________________________113US Should Not Lift Sanctions On Venezuela____________________________________________________114

Politics DA________________________________________________________________________115Immigration Reform DA 1NC 1/2____________________________________________________________116Immigration Reform DA 1NC 2/2____________________________________________________________117Yes Immigration Reform – General___________________________________________________________118Yes Immigration Reform – AT: Uniqueness Overwhelms Link______________________________________119Yes Immigration Reform – AT: Thumpers______________________________________________________120Immigration Reform Is Top of Docket_________________________________________________________121Obama Pushing Immigration Reform_________________________________________________________122Politics Link – Mexico – General_____________________________________________________________123Politics Link – Mexico – Guest Workers_______________________________________________________124Politics Link – Mexico – Piecemeal Immigration Reform__________________________________________125Politics Link – Cuba – Embargo______________________________________________________________126Politics Link – Cuba – Embargo Exceptions_____________________________________________________127Politics Link – Cuba – General_______________________________________________________________128Politics Link – Venezuela – General__________________________________________________________129Political Capital Key Immigration Reform______________________________________________________130AT: Winners Win_________________________________________________________________________131Immigration Reform Good – Economy________________________________________________________132Immigration Reform Good – US-Latin America Relations_________________________________________133Immigration Reform Good – China/India Growth_______________________________________________134Immigration Reform Good – Cyberterrorism___________________________________________________135

Midterms DA_____________________________________________________________________136Midterms DA 1NC 1/2_____________________________________________________________________137Midterms DA 1NC 2/2_____________________________________________________________________138Yes GOP Win Midterms____________________________________________________________________139Yes GOP Win Midterms – AT: Gun Control Thumper_____________________________________________140AT: Uniqueness Overwhelms Link____________________________________________________________141AT: GOP Senate Impossible_________________________________________________________________142Link – Mexico – Guest Workers Popular – Public________________________________________________143Link – Mexico – Guest Works Popular – Farm Lobby_____________________________________________144Link – Mexico – Immigration Reform Popular Public_____________________________________________145Link – Cuba – Engagement Popular With Public_________________________________________________146Link – Cuba – Popular With Cuban-Americans__________________________________________________147Coattails Key Midterms____________________________________________________________________148Turnout Key Midterms____________________________________________________________________149Latinos Key Midterms_____________________________________________________________________150Midterms Not Too Far Off__________________________________________________________________151Internal Link – GOP Win Stops Obama Agenda_________________________________________________152Ext – Democrat Win = Carbon Tax___________________________________________________________153Carbon Tax Bad – Economy_________________________________________________________________154Carbon Tax Bad – AT: Solves Warming________________________________________________________155Carbon Tax Bad – AT: Solves Warming Cont…__________________________________________________156


GOP Win Good – Gun Control Bad Impact_____________________________________________________157

China DA_________________________________________________________________________158China DA 1NC 1/2________________________________________________________________________159China DA 1NC 2/2________________________________________________________________________160Yes Chinese Influence In LA_________________________________________________________________161Yes Chinese Economy_____________________________________________________________________162Yes Chinese Economy – AT: Overheat________________________________________________________163Link – Engagement Increases US Influence_____________________________________________________164Link – Engagement Zero Sum_______________________________________________________________165Link – Energy Competition_________________________________________________________________166Link – Cuba_____________________________________________________________________________167Link – Cuba Oil___________________________________________________________________________168Link – Mexico___________________________________________________________________________169Link – Venezuela_________________________________________________________________________170Link – Venezuela Oil______________________________________________________________________171Chinese Influence Key Chinese Economy______________________________________________________172Chinese Economy Good – Nuclear War/Lashout________________________________________________173Chinese Economy Good – Impact Calculus_____________________________________________________174Chinese Economy Good – Key Global Economy_________________________________________________175AT: Chinese Economy Bad – Environment_____________________________________________________176AT: Chinese Economy Bad – Warming________________________________________________________177AT: Chinese Influence Bad – Hegemony_______________________________________________________178AT: Chinese Influence Bad – Latin American Economy___________________________________________179

Russia DA________________________________________________________________________180Russia DA 1NC___________________________________________________________________________181Uniqueness – Relations High________________________________________________________________182Uniqueness – AT: Magnitsky/Adoption_______________________________________________________183Uniqueness – AT: Syria____________________________________________________________________184Uniqueness – Sphere of Influence___________________________________________________________185Link – Venezuela – Sphere of Influence_______________________________________________________186Link Booster – Venezuelan Importance to Russia________________________________________________187Link – Cuba – Sphere of Influence____________________________________________________________188Link Booster – Cuban Importance to Russia____________________________________________________189Internal Link – Sphere of Influence – Relations_________________________________________________190Internal Link – Sphere of Influence – Conflict___________________________________________________191Impact – Relations – Laundry List____________________________________________________________192Impact – Relations – Laundry List Cont…______________________________________________________193Impact – Relations – Arms Control___________________________________________________________194Impact – Relations – Terrorism______________________________________________________________195Impact – Relations – Iran__________________________________________________________________196Impact – Relations – Europe________________________________________________________________197Impact – Relations – Central Asia____________________________________________________________198Impact – Relations – Central Asia Cont…______________________________________________________199Impact – Relations – China_________________________________________________________________200Impact – Relations – Hegemony_____________________________________________________________201Impact – Relations – Prolif_________________________________________________________________202

China CP_________________________________________________________________________203China Solves Cuba—Economic Engagement____________________________________________________204China Solves Cuba—Laundry List____________________________________________________________205China Solves Cuba—Oil____________________________________________________________________206


China Solves Mexico—Economic Engagement__________________________________________________207China Solves Mexico—Laundry List__________________________________________________________208China Solves Mexico—Oil__________________________________________________________________209China Solves Venezuela—Economic Engagement_______________________________________________210China Solves Venezuela—Laundry List________________________________________________________211China Solves Venezuela—Oil_______________________________________________________________212China Solves Venezuela Better______________________________________________________________213AT: Chavez’s Death Means No Cooperation____________________________________________________214China Solves Latin America_________________________________________________________________215China Solves Better—Economic Model________________________________________________________216China Solves Better—Trust_________________________________________________________________217AT: Perm_______________________________________________________________________________218AT: China Bad DAs________________________________________________________________________219China Sphere of Influence Net-Benefit________________________________________________________220

European Union CP________________________________________________________________221EU Solves Cuba—Economic Engagement______________________________________________________222EU Solves Cuba—Democracy_______________________________________________________________223EU Solves Cuba Better_____________________________________________________________________224AT: EU Common Position__________________________________________________________________225EU Solves Mexico—Economic Engagement____________________________________________________226EU Solves Mexico—Drugs__________________________________________________________________227EU Solves Venezuela—Economic Engagement__________________________________________________228EU Solves Venezuela—Oil__________________________________________________________________229EU Solves Latin America___________________________________________________________________230EU Solves Better—Influence________________________________________________________________231EU Solves Better—Trade___________________________________________________________________232AT: Perm_______________________________________________________________________________233AT: EU Not Unified/Lack of Cohesion_________________________________________________________234EU-Latin American Relations Net Benefit______________________________________________________235EU-Latin American Relations Net Benefit Extensions_____________________________________________236EU Soft Power Net Benefit_________________________________________________________________237EU Soft Power Net Benefit Extensions________________________________________________________238

Capitalism K______________________________________________________________________2391NC Capitalism Kritik 1/2__________________________________________________________________2401NC Capitalism Kritik 2/2__________________________________________________________________241Link – Economic Engagement_______________________________________________________________242Link – Engagement = Assimilation___________________________________________________________243Link – Engagement = Assimilation Cont…______________________________________________________244Link – Cuba_____________________________________________________________________________245Link – Mexico___________________________________________________________________________246Link – Venezuela_________________________________________________________________________247Capitalism Bad – Totalitarianism____________________________________________________________248Capitalism Bad – War_____________________________________________________________________249Capitalism Bad – Environment______________________________________________________________250Capitalism Bad – Climate/Environment_______________________________________________________251Capitalism Bad – Democracy________________________________________________________________252Alternative Solves – Rejection Key___________________________________________________________253Alternative Solves – Every Act Key___________________________________________________________254AT: Permutation_________________________________________________________________________255AT: Human Nature = Capitalism_____________________________________________________________256AT: Growth Good________________________________________________________________________257


Development K____________________________________________________________________258Development K Shell 1/2__________________________________________________________________259Development K Shell 2/2__________________________________________________________________260Economic Engagement Embodies Development Discourse________________________________________261The Word “Development” Should Be Rejected_________________________________________________262Poverty Reduction Is A Development Buzzword________________________________________________263Technical Assistance Presumes A Development Mentality________________________________________264Participatory Development Has The Same Problems As Traditional_________________________________265Appeals To “Experts” Are Colonialist_________________________________________________________266“Sustainable Development” Represents Development Discourse___________________________________267Biodiversity Claims Are Rooted In Development Discourse________________________________________268Empowerment Is Code For Development______________________________________________________269Development Is Eurocentric________________________________________________________________270Development Is Colonialist_________________________________________________________________271Development Embodies Racism_____________________________________________________________272The Alternative Solves_____________________________________________________________________273Challenging Development Solves____________________________________________________________274Discourse Analysis Good___________________________________________________________________275


Arguing Negative On The Latin America Topic

Aaron Hardy and Jim Hanson, Whitman College

Below you will find a general overview of the negative side of the 2013-2014 Latin America topic, as well as specific descriptions of responses to affirmative cases, disadvantages, counterplans, and critiques. You can argue that current plans to engage Latin America are sufficient and should not be expanded. You can argue that increases in engagement are actively harmful and would actually make problems worse. You can argue that the disadvantages of increasing engagement, such as the cost or the political backlash would outweigh the benefits of the affirmative plan. You can argue that different agents could better implement plans. Use this topic overview as a starting point for your research into the negative side of the Latin America topic.

Case Responses

Be prepared to defend the present approach of US Latin America policy. Research evidence and arguments that refute the harms that affirmatives are likely to present. Use the affirmative topic analysis included in this handbook to prepare for likely affirmative cases and research attacks against their solvency. Here are some of the many possible negative responses you can make to affirmative cases:• Current plans for US engagement are adequate – the Obama administration is refocusing efforts on boosting ties with the region, and many members of Congress are calling for steps to engage the countries in the region or fix problems with US immigration policy. The negative could also argue that private industry will ensure solving the affirmative harms in the future, for example by going through third countries to engage the topic countries.• Focusing on Latin America is the wrong focus – there are many problems with US foreign policy and relations with other countries, and time and resources devoted to Latin America may take decades to see effects. Those resources may be better spent on engaging other countries or taking steps to improve US relations with other areas.• Be prepared to really go after the solvency of affirmative plans. Remember, the topic only allows affirmatives to increase economic engagement – not guarantee that the results of that engagement will be productive. The affirmative must defend that their plan will actually work or succeed at reducing the harms. To win that they solve many of the largest impacts, this will require the affirmative to win that the target country agrees to the affirmative plan, that the economics will work out in favor of their plan, and that it is even possible to improve the situation in the topic countries. If any of these programs were simple or guaranteed, we likely would have done them by now. This also means that many of the problems with current Latin America policy are also potential solvency attacks against affirmative plans. Failed past policies and things which politicians have failed to support as too “pie-in-the-sky” are just two examples of the types of evidence you can use to support your solvency arguments. Remember, you should both show why the affirmative proposal won’t work and why it will make things worse. This will make your solvency arguments as strong as possible. As the year progresses, new affirmatives will emerge and you will need to research and strategize to defeat them. Use the arguments presented here to jumpstart your research. Against any new affirmative, be sure to defend the status quo, attack the significance of the affirmative’s harms, and attack the affirmative’s solvency. This strategy is sure to put you in a good position to win a debate over the affirmative’s case.


Disadvantages

Here are disadvantages you and others might prepare against increasing economic engagement:

• Appeasement disadvantage: Since at least two of the countries in the topic (Cuba and Venezuela) have recently been adversarial in their relations with the United States, rewarding their behavior with economic engagement may send the wrong signal to the rest of the world about the United States’ willingness to appease “rogue” actors. This could undermine the US negotiating stance in other areas, for example with Iran or North Korea. Weakening US credibility could make those conflicts more intractable, and spur war or nuclear proliferation. • Politics disadvantage: The plan could be argued to either help or hurt Obama’s political agenda. Economic engagement policies are frequently unpopular because they are perceived as too expensive, or because they spread the cost to many while only benefiting a few. On the other hand, engagement programs can be very popular when they benefit specific constituencies, or when they are perceived as very necessary. Passing popular or unpopular programs could give President Obama increased or decreased ability to pursue other, potentially harmful policies. • Midterm Elections disadvantage: The 2014 midterm elections are shaping up to be extremely important politically, as they could impact whether Obama can pursue his agenda with a sympathetic Congress or whether he will be considered a “lame duck” for the remainder of his presidency. For many of the same reasons mentioned above, the plan could have important political effects in how the electorate views Obama and the Democrats more broadly. • Spending disadvantage: Some forms of economic engagement, such as foreign aid, could be extremely costly. The scale of spending necessary to fix some problems in Latin America, such as poverty, could cost billions of dollars. The US is already running huge fiscal deficits – and spending a great deal of money which the US doesn’t currently have could have negative effects on the US economy. • Sphere of Influence disadvantage: Some people argue that a lack of US engagement in Latin America is allowing other countries, such as China or Russia, to increase their investments and ties to Latin America. The affirmative could reverse this perception, encroaching onto those countries “sphere of influence” in the hemisphere. That could in turn undermine the political or economic goals of China or Russia, causing economic collapse or competitive wars over resources and investment.

Counterplans

Here are counterplans on the Latin America topic:

• Political Engagement counterplan: instead of doing economic engagement, this counterplan mandates doing other forms of political engagement instead. This could take the form of diplomacy, negotiations, or non-economic incentives to the topic country. This counterplan has the benefit of avoiding certain politics and economic arguments, and might argue that political engagement is a necessary prerequisite to the effectiveness of economic engagement with Latin America.• International counterplan: Many affirmatives will lack a good reason why only the United States can enact the plan. This counterplan argues instead that another country should implement the plan, such as Canada or the European Union. This has the advantage of avoiding downsides to US action, such as the politics disadvantage or reasons why US engagement would be harmful. This is likely to be one of the most popular counterplans on the topic, due to its general applicability.


• Advantage counterplans: since so many affirmatives on the topic share the same goals – improving US relations with the region or boosting the economy, for example, there will be many affirmative ideas which could be re-used as counterplans when debating a different case. For example, against a case which engaged Cuba, the negative might read a counterplan to engage Venezuela instead, and argue that engaging Cuba would be detrimental.• Plan-inclusive counterplans: this is an entire category of counterplans, rather than one specific plan. These counterplans advocate part of the affirmative plan, while excluding the rest and claiming the benefit of excluding the parts of the plan that link to disadvantages. For example, a plan-inclusive counterplan against an affirmative which lifted the embargo on Cuba could advocate only lifting restrictions on agricultural trade, and claim that lifting the embargo in other areas would only strengthen the Cuban regime.

Kritiks

What kinds of kritiks may be run on this year’s topic? Here goes:

• Security kritik: this kritik argues that affirmative plans which attempt to avoid “security” impacts such as wars by improving the US position of leadership in the world lead to a cycle of insecurity through threat construction. This might extend to criticizing representations of conflicts or security concerns. The kritik rejects this way of describing the world and says we should instead use more positive representations or discourse.• Development kritik: this kritik argues that US economic engagement policy is built around the idea of “improving” countries that are “less developed,” which creates a hierarchy in which the US is cast as superior to other countries. This, in turn, justifies racism or even military intervention to “fix” those countries or make them into our image. The kritik would reject this way of thinking and avoid using development discourse or thinking.• Capitalism kritik: this kritik argues that the root cause of problems on Earth is the existence of capitalism. It argues that policy proposals which attempt to economically engage other countries take place within an exploitative capitalist system and only reproduce the problems. It will argue that the only way to truly solve is to reject the whole capitalist system.• Race kritik: this kritik will argue that the impacts of economic engagement are not experienced equitably by people of different races. For example, economic engagement with Mexico only benefits people of a certain ethnic background – while ignoring the impact of failed US policies in other parts of Latin America, such as Haiti. This kritik will argue that these racist assumptions should be rejected.• Coercion kritik: this kritik will argue that the only legitimate function of government is to provide for the common defense and protect private property – and that things like US economic engagement should be done entirely by private enterprise. The kritik will argue that it is immoral for the government to tax people in order to fund the plan, and that this form of government coercion should be resisted at all costs.


Topicality


The

‘The’ Means UniqueMerriam-webster's online collegiate dictionary, 2007. Accessed May 10, 2007, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary b -- used as a function word to indicate that a following noun or noun equivalent is a unique or a particular member of its class <the President> <the Lord>

‘The’ Means All PartsMerriam-webster's online collegiate dictionary, 2007. Accessed May 10, 2007, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary4 -- used as a function word before a noun or a substantivized adjective to indicate reference to a group as a whole <the elite>


United States

The united states is the executive, legislative, and judicial branchesPrinceton university wordnet 1997, Online, accessed May 15, 2007, http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=united%20statesunited states: 2: the executive and legislative and judicial branches of the federal government of the US

United states is the united states of americaThe american heritage dictionary, 1983, p. 857.United States: Also United States of America. Country of central and NW North America, with coastlines on the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic oceans. Cap. Washington, D.C. Pop. 226,504,825.

United states is the states within territorial boundsAmerican heritage dictionary, 2nd college edition, 1988.United States: A federation of states, esp. one forming a nation within a definitely specified territory: politicians who proposed a United States of Africa.

United states means a union of statesThe oxford english dictionary, 1989.United States: The proper name or distinctive title of a confederacy, federation, or union of States.

United states means the united states of americaThe oxford english dictionary, 1989.United States: The Republic of North America. Abbrev. U.S. or U.S.A.

United states are a federation of statesWebster's ninth new collegiate dictionary, 1988.United States: a federation of states esp. when forming a nation in a usually specified territory (advocating a United States of Europe)

The united states is the 48 states plus hawaii, alaska and d.c.The oxford encyclopedic english dictionary, 1991.United States of America: a country occupying most of the southern half of North America and including also Alaska in the north and Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean, comprising 50 States and the Federal District of Columbia.


Federal Government

Federal government is administered by a union or confederation of statesBlack’s law dictionary. 1979, Black, Henry Campbell. p. 550Federal Government: The system of government administered in a nation formed by the union or confederation of several independent states.

Federal government is control and influence by the central governmentDictionary of american politics, 2nd edition, 1968.Federal Government: In the United States: the Government which, from its capital in the District of Columbia, directly legislates, administers, and exercises jurisdiction over matters assigned to it in the Constitution and exerts considerable influence, by means of grants-in-aid and otherwise, over matters reserved to the State governments.

Federal government means the central governmentDictionary of american politics, 2nd edition, 1968.federal government: In the United States: the Government which, from its capital in the District of Columbia, directly legislates, administers, and exercises jurisdiction over matters assigned to it in the Constitution and exerts considerable influence, by means of grants-in-aid and otherwise, over matters reserved to the State governments.

Federal government means the central government in washington dcDictionary of american politics, 2nd edition, 1968.federal government: In the United States: the Government which, from its capital in the District of Columbia, directly legislates, administers, and exercises jurisdiction over matters assigned to it in the Constitution and exerts considerable influence, by means of grants-in-aid and otherwise, over matters reserved to the State governments.


Should

Should expresses obligation or desirabilityWebster's new world dictionary, 3rd edition, 1988.p.1242.used to express obligation or duty, propriety, or desirability.

Should is different from wouldWebster’s new universal unabridged dictionary, 1983.Should: 2b. expectation or probability: e.g., since they left Saturday they should be here by Monday: equivalent to ought to and replaceable by would.

Should can be replaced by wouldWebster’s new universal unabridged dictionary, 1983.Should: 2d. futurity in polite or unemphatic requests or in statements with implications of uncertainty or doubt: replaceable by would: e.g., should (or would) you like some tea? I should (or would) think he’d like it.

Should means past tense of shallWebster’s new universal unabridged dictionary, 1983.p. 1679. 1. past tense of shall.


Substantially

Substantial means “large”Oxford english dictionary, 2nd ed, 1989.[substantial:] Of ample or considerable amount, quantity, or dimensions. More recently also in a somewhat weakened sense, esp. ‘fairly large.’

Substantial means largeWebster’s new world dictionary, 1988.p.1336Substantial 4. considerable; ample; large

Substantial means considerable in quantityMerriam-webster’s collegiate dictionary. 1993,p. 1174Substantial 2b. Considerable in quantity.

Substantially is considerable or largeThe american heritage dictionary, 1983, p. 678.Substantially 5. Considerable; large; won by a substantial margin.

Substantially means truly, largely, essentiallyWebster’s new universal unabridged dictionary, deluxe second edition, 1983Substantially: 2. to a substantial degree; specifically, a. truly; really; actually; b. largely; essentially; in the main.

Substantial means importantBlack’s law dictionary. 1979, p. 1280 Black, Henry Campbell. Substantial Something worthwhile as distinguished from something without value or merely nominal.

Substantial means of real worth and importanceBlack's law dictionary, 6th edition, 1990, p.1428Of real worth and importance.

Substantial means importantThe american heritage dictionary. 1982, p. 1213Substantial 5. Considerable in importance, value, degree, amount, or extent.

Substantial means of considerable or vital worthWebster’s new universal unabridged dictionary, deluxe second edition, 1983Substantial: 6. of considerable worth or value; vital; important; as, they agree on all substantial issues.


Increase

Increase means to make greaterRandom House, 2010, “Increase,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase–verb (used with object) 1. to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment; add to: to increase taxes.

Make greaterCollins English Dictionary, 2009, “increase,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase— vb 1. to make or become greater in size, degree, frequency, etc; grow or expand

Increase means to make greaterMerriam-Webster, 2010, “increase,” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/increasetransitive verb 1 : to make greater : augment


Its

“Its” is the possessive form of the pronoun “it”Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1991)Its: the possessive form of IT (used as an attribute adjective) The book has lost its jacket. I'm sorry about its being so late.

Its means of or belonging to the noun referenced as “it”Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Ed, 1989Of or belonging to it, that thing.

Its is possessive or genitive of “it”CHAMBERS 20TH CENTURY DICTIONARY, 1983.Its: possessive or genitive of it.

Its is of or relating to “it” as the subject or object of an actionWEBSTER'S NINTH NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY, 1988.Its: adj. of or relating to it or itself esp. as possessor, agent, or object of an action (going to its kennel) a child proud of its first drawings) (its final enactment into law).


Economic Engagement

Economic engagement means incentives – distinct from political engagementRobert N. Haass, Director of Foreign Policy Studies @ Brookings, 2000, “Terms of Engagement,” Survival, Vol 42, no. 2, Summer, p. 114-5Architects of engagement strategies can choose from a wide variety of incentives. Economic engagement might offer tangible incentives such as export credits, investment insurance or promotion, access to technology, loans or economic aid. Other equally useful economic incentives involve the removal of penalties such as trade embargoes, investment bans or high tariffs, which have impeded economic relations between the United States and the target country. Facilitated entry into the global economic arena and the institutions that govern it rank among the most potent incentives in today’s global market. Similarly, political engagement can involve the lure of diplomatic recognition, access to regional or international institutions, the scheduling of summits between leaders – or the termination of these benefits.

Economic engagement can be either conditional or unconditionalMiles Kahler, Graduate School of IR @ UCSD, and Scott L. Kastner, Politics @ Maryland, 2006, “Strategic Uses of Economic Interdependence: Engagement Policies on the Korean Peninsula and Across the Taiwan Strait,” Journal of Peace Research, 43(5), p. 523While the determinants and effectiveness of economic sanctions have been the subject of a substantial and growing literature in international relations, much less attention has been given to economic engagement strategies, where a country deliberately expands economic ties with an adversary to change the target’s behavior. This article develops a theoretical framework that distinguishes between three types of engagement strategies: conditional policies that directly link economic ties to changed behavior in the target state; unconditional policies where economic interdependence is meant to act as a constraint on the behavior of the target state; and unconditional policies where economic interdependence is meant to effect a transformation in the foreign policy goals of the target state.

Economic engagement requires a quid pro quoMichael Mastanduno, Government Prof @ Dartmouth, 2003, “The Strategy of Economic Engagement,” in Economic Interdependence and International Conflict, ed. Mansfield and Pollins, p. 184-5Much of the attention in political science to the question of interdependence and conflict focuses at the systemic level, on arguments and evidence linking the expansion of economic exchange among states on the one hand to the exacerbation of international conflict or the facilitation of international cooperation on the other. The approach taken in this chapter focuses instead at the state level, on the expansion of economic interdependence as a tool of state craft. Under what circumstances does the cultivation of economic ties, that is, the fostering of economic interdependence as a conscious state strategy, lead to important and predicable changes in the foreign policy behavior of a target state? Students of economic statecraft refer to this strategy variously as economic engagement, economic inducement, economic diplomacy, positive sanctions, positive economic linkage, or the use of economic “carrots” instead of sticks. Critics of the strategy call it economic appeasement.


Economic/Engagement

Economic means related to material wealthAmerican Heritage, 2009, “economic,” http://www.thefreedictionary.com/economic, accessed 5-10-2013ec·o·nom·ic (k-nmk, k-) adj. 1. a. Of or relating to the production, development, and management of material wealth, as of a country, household, or business enterprise. b. Of or relating to an economy: a period of sustained economic growth. 2. Of or relating to the science of economics: new economic theories regarding the effects of deficit spending. 3. Of or relating to the practical necessities of life; material: wrote the book primarily for economic reasons. 4. a. Financially rewarding; economical: It was no longer economic to keep the manufacturing facilities open. b. Efficient; economical: an economic use of home heating oil.

Economic means related to the economyCollins English Dictionary, 2003, “economic,” http://www.thefreedictionary.com/economic, accessed 5-10-2013economic [ˌiːkəˈnɒmɪk ˌɛkə-] adj 1. (Economics) of or relating to an economy, economics, or finance economic development economic theories 2. (Business / Commerce) Brit capable of being produced, operated, etc., for profit; profitable the firm is barely economic 3. (Economics) concerning or affecting material resources or welfare economic pests 4. concerned with or relating to the necessities of life; utilitarian 5. a variant of economical 6. Informal inexpensive; cheap Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

Engagement means the act of engagingRandom House Dictionary, 2013, “engagement,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/engagement?s=t, accessed 5-10-2013en·gage·ment [en-geyj-muhnt] Show IPA noun 1. the act of engaging or the state of being engaged. 2. an appointment or arrangement: a business engagement. 3. betrothal: They announced their engagement. 4. a pledge; an obligation or agreement: All his time seems to be taken up with social engagements. 5. employment, or a period or post of employment, especially in the performing arts: Her engagement at the nightclub will last five weeks.

Engaging means to occupy attentionRandom House Dictionary, 2013, “engage,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/engagement?s=t, accessed 5-10-2013en·gage [en-geyj] Show IPA verb, en·gaged, en·gag·ing. verb (used with object) 1. to occupy the attention or efforts of (a person or persons): He engaged her in conversation. 2. to secure for aid, employment, use, etc.; hire: to engage a worker; to engage a room. 3. to attract and hold fast: The novel engaged her attention and interest. 4. to attract or please: His good nature engages everyone. 5. to bind, as by pledge, promise, contract, or oath; make liable: He engaged himself to repay his debt within a month.


Toward

Toward means in the direction ofRandom House Dictionary, 2013, “toward,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/toward?s=t, accessed 5-10-2013to·ward [prep. tawrd, tohrd, tuh-wawrd, twawrd, twohrd; adj. tawrd, tohrd] Show IPA preposition Also, to·wards. 1. in the direction of: to walk toward the river.

Toward means in the direction ofMerriam Websters, 2013, “toward,” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/toward, accessed 5-10-20132to·ward preposition \ˈtō-ərd(z), ˈto(-ə)rd(z), tə-ˈword(z), ˈtword(z), ˈtwōrd(z)\Definition of TOWARD 1 : in the direction of <driving toward town> 2 a : along a course leading to <a long stride toward disarmament> b : in relation to <an attitude toward life> 3 a : at a point in the direction of : near <a cottage somewhere up toward the lake> b : in such a position as to be in the direction of <your back was toward me> 4 : not long before <toward the end of the afternoon> 5 a : in the way of help or assistance in <did all he could toward raising campaign funds> b : for the partial payment of <proceeds go toward the establishment of a scholarship>

No difference between toward and towardsAmerican Heritage Dictionary, 2009, “toward,” http://www.thefreedictionary.com/toward, accessed 5-10-2013to·ward (tôrd, trd, t-wôrd) prep. also to·wards (tôrdz, trdz, t-wôrdz) 1. In the direction of: driving toward home. 2. In a position facing: had his back toward me. 3. Somewhat before in time: It began to rain toward morning. 4. With regard to; in relation to: an optimistic attitude toward the future. 5. In furtherance or partial fulfillment of: contributed five dollars toward the bill. 6. By way of achieving; with a view to: efforts toward peace. adj. (tôrd, trd) 1. Favoring success or a good outcome; propitious. 2. often towards Happening soon; imminent. 3. Obsolete Being quick to understand or learn. [Middle English, from Old English tweard : t, to; see to + -weard, -ward.] Usage Note: Some critics have tried to discern a semantic distinction between toward and towards, but the difference is entirely dialectal. Toward is more common in American English; towards is the predominant form in British English.


Cuba/Mexico/Venezuela

Cuba is the countryOxford Dictionaries, 2013, “Cuba,” http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Cuba, accessed 5-10-2013Definition of Cuba a Caribbean country, the largest and furthest west of the islands of the West Indies, situated at the mouth of the Gulf of Mexico; population 11,451,700 (est. 2009); official language, Spanish; capital, Havana. A Spanish colony, Cuba became nominally independent after the Spanish-American War of 1898 and achieved full autonomy in 1934. Fidel Castro led a communist revolution in 1959, and held the presidency until replaced by his brother Raúl Castro in 2008. The country suffered under a U.S. trade embargo and, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc, lost much of its trade

Mexico is the countryAmerican Heritage Dictionary, 2009, “Mexico,” http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Mexico, accessed 5-10-2013Mex·i·co (mks-k) A country of south-central North America. Southern Mexico was the site of various advanced civilizations beginning with the Olmec and including the Maya, Zapotec, Toltec, Mixtec, and Aztec cultures. Mexico was conquered by Cortés in 1521 and held by the Spanish until 1821. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the Mexican War (1846-1848) awarded all lands north of the Rio Grande to the United States. Mexico City is the capital and the largest city. Population: 109,000,000.

Venezuela is the countryCollins English Dictionary, 2009, “Venezuela,” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/venezuela, accessed 5-10-2013Venezuela — n 1. Official name: Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela a republic in South America, on the Caribbean: colonized by the Spanish in the 16th century; independence from Spain declared in 1811 and won in 1819 after a war led by Simón Bolívar. It contains Lake Maracaibo and the northernmost chains of the Andes in the northwest, the Orinoco basin in the central part, and the Guiana Highlands in the south. Exports: petroleum, iron ore, and coffee. Official language: Spanish. Religion: Roman Catholic majority. Currency: bolívar. Capital: Caracas. Pop: 26 170 000 (2004 est). Area: 912 050 sq km (352 142 sq miles) 2. Gulf of Venezuela an inlet of the Caribbean in NW Venezuela: continues south as Lake Maracaibo


Cuba Embargo Neg


Inherency – Embargo Will Be Lifted Now

Obama will loosen the embargo now even if Congress won’t moveDamien Cave, 11-19-2012, "Changes in Cuba Create Support for Easing Embargo," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013In Washington, Mr. Gross is seen as the main impediment to an easing of the embargo, but there are also limits to what the president could do without Congressional action. The 1992 Cuban Democracy Act conditioned the waiving of sanctions on the introduction of democratic changes inside Cuba. The 1996 Helms-

Burton Act also requires that the embargo remain until Cuba has a transitional or democratically elected government. Obama administration officials say they have not given up, and could move if the president decides to act on his own. Officials say that under the Treasury Department’s licensing and regulation-writing authority, there is room for significant modification. Following the legal logic of Mr. Obama’s changes in 2009, further expansions in travel are possible along with new allowances for investment or imports and exports, especially if narrowly applied to Cuban businesses.

Cuba debates coming in Washington nowJoel Brinkley, journalism prof @ Stanford, Pulitzer winner, 12-18-2012, "Cuba embargo isn't working but isn't going away," POLITICO, http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/cuba-embargo-isnt-working-but-isnt-going-away-85281.html, accessed 5-10-2013Right now, though, Cuba and the embargo are not occupying even a moment of attention in Washington, given

the urgent concerns about Iran, North Korea, the fiscal cliff and so much else. But that will almost certainly change next month. In October, the Cuban government gave its people permission to travel at will beginning in mid-January. Well, since 1966 the Cuban Adjustment Act has afforded every Cuban

who reaches the United States by any means automatic refugee asylum. Now, with travel to the U.S. legalized, some in Congress — including outgoing

Rep. David Rivera (R-Fla.), a fervent embargo supporter — are talking about hurriedly revising the act before the new Cuban law takes effect next month and thousands of Cubans begin stepping off airplanes. Suddenly Cuba could be thrust to center stage in Washington again. That may prove to be the time, some experts say, when serious discussion of the embargo could be on the table again, for the first time in more than 50 years.

Obama can act on his own to undermine the embargo – doesn’t require congressJoshua Goodman, 2-20-2013, "Obama Can Bend Cuba Embargo to Help Open Economy, Groups Say," Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-20/obama-should-bend-cuba-embargo-to-buoy-free-markets-reports-say.html, accessed 5-10-2013President Barack Obama should break free of the embargo on Cuba and assert his authority to promote a free-market overhaul taking place on the communist island.The recommendation is contained in concurrent reports to be published today by the Cuba Study Group and the Council of the Americas, two groups seeking to end

a decades-old deadlock on U.S. policy toward Cuba. Among steps Obama can take without violating sanctions passed by Congress are opening U.S. markets, as well as authorizing the sale of American goods and services, to the estimated 400,000 private entrepreneurs that have arisen since Cuban President Raul Castro started cutting state payrolls in 2011. The reports also recommend allowing U.S. credit card and insurance companies to provide basic financial services to licensed U.S. travelers to Cuba. “We’ve been sitting on the sidelines with our hands tied by an antiquated law that’s being too strictly interpreted,” said Chris Sabatini, an author of the report and senior policy director for the Council of the

Americas, a business-backed group based in New York. “There’s more Obama can do to be a catalyst for meaningful economic change.” Obama in 2009 allowed companies for the first time to provide communications services to the Caribbean island of 11 million and lifted a travel ban for Cuban-Americans. The loosening of restrictions, while heralded by the White House as a way to undermine the Castro government’s control of information, was seen as insufficient by potential investors including Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc. Economic Overhaul Now, in a second term, and

with private business expanding in Cuba, Obama has a freer hand to do more, said Sabatini. An exception to the embargo allowing U.S. businesses and consumers to trade with non-state enterprises in Cuba would be

small in scale though help empower a growing, viable constituency for change on the island, he said.


Inherency – Lifting Embargo Inevitable

Embargo will eventually be lifted nowJavier Manjarres, 3-28-2013, "FL Democrat Breaks From Wasserman Schultz and Others-”Lift the U.S.-Cuban Embargo”," Hispolitica, http://shark-tank.net/2013/03/28/fl-democrat-breaks-from-wasserman-schultz-and-others-lift-the-u-s-cuban-embargo/, accessed 5-10-2013But are Castor’s words the just the beginning of a bigger plan by the Obama administration to eventually lift the Cuban embargo? President Obama has already eased some travel restrictions to Fidel Castro’s island, and could revert to signing Executive Orders to lift the ban all together. Also take into consideration that Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Secretary of State John Kerry have openly opposed the embargo. Hagel’s opposes the trade restrictions between the U.S. and Cuba, citing that limitation to farmers would hamper any future development of a market on island. Kerry has gone as far as to call they U.S. policy against Castro’s regime a “failure,” and while serving in the U.S. Senate, Kerry offered up a bill in 2009 have would lift the embargo. Could President Obama go as far as to lift the Cuban embargo?

Momentum building to loosen the embargo nowDamien Cave, 11-19-2012, "Changes in Cuba Create Support for Easing Embargo," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013With Cuba cautiously introducing free-market changes that have legalized hundreds of thousands of small private businesses over the past two years, new economic bonds between Cuba and the United States have formed, creating new challenges, new possibilities — and a more complicated debate over the embargo. The longstanding logic has been that broad sanctions are necessary to suffocate the totalitarian government of Fidel and Raúl Castro. Now, especially for many Cubans who had previously stayed on the sidelines in the battle over Cuba policy, a new argument against the embargo is gaining currency — that the tentative move toward capitalism by the Cuban government could be sped up with more assistance from Americans.

Obama will lift the travel embargo nowSamantha Worgull, 1-30-2013, "Cuba supply hurdles limit post-embargo growth," Hotel News Now, http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles.aspx/9804/Cuba-supply-hurdles-limit-post-embargo-growth, accessed 5-10-2013“Cuba has been the forbidden fruit for 55 years now, and people are curious about it,” said SNR Denton’s Timothy Ashby. Experts anticipate the travel embargo between the U.S. and Cuba will be lifted during President Obama’s second term. Cuba’s hotel market does not have enough supply to meet domestic demand, let alone an infusion of global travelers.


AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Yes US-Cuba

Obama has already substantially improved US-Cuban relationsDelia Lloyd, 8-24-2010, "Ten Reasons to Lift the Cuba Embargo," Politics Daily, http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/24/ten-reasons-to-lift-the-cuba-embargo/, accessed 5-10-2013What a difference a few years makes. As my colleague Luisita Lopez Torregrosa reported back in May, the Obama administration has been working quietly behind the scenes with the Cuban government on a host of bilateral issues. In May 2009, President

Obama lifted travel restrictions for Cuban Americans wishing to visit their relatives on the island. This summer, that apparent thaw in Cuban-American relations accelerated dramatically. In June, the House Agriculture Committee voted to reverse a decades-long ban

on U.S. citizens traveling to Cuba and to ease restrictions on the sale of American commodities there. In July, two senators followed suit by announcing a bipartisan

bill that would also facilitate travel to Cuba, which they claimed enjoyed two-thirds support in Congress. And last week, the White House reportedly stepped into the fray again, with signals that the president would issue an executive order to further open existing travel opportunities for American

students, teachers and researchers, possibly before Labor Day. For its part, Cuba released 52 of its 167 political prisoners in a July deal brokered

by the Catholic Church, which many see as an important precursor for normalization of relations between the two countries. It's not yet clear what all of this will amount to. The congressional bills still need to wend their way through several other committees, where they may face entrenched opposition to altering Cuba policy, especially on the long-standing trade embargo. And even the presidential order (if it comes) will only return Cuban policy to

where it was under President Clinton after a decade of more severe restrictions under President Bush. Still, all of this has lots of people speculating that there's a sea change afoot in U.S.-Cuban relations, one that has the potential to not only ease travel restrictions but possibly even overturn the embargo itself.

Status quo will solve – Kerry and Hagel are pro-CubaPaul Haven, 1-26-2013, "Will The New Obama Cabinet Help Lift The Cuba Embargo?," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/kerry-hagel-cuba-us-trade-embargo_n_2559023.html, accessed 5-10-2013The nominee for U.S. Secretary of State, Sen. John Kerry, once held up millions of dollars in funding for secretive U.S. democracy-building programs in Cuba. Defense Secretary hopeful Chuck Hagel has called the U.S. embargo against the communist-run island "nonsensical" and anachronistic. Both men are now poised to occupy two of the most important positions in President Barack Obama's Cabinet, leading observers on both sides of the Florida Straits to say the time could be ripe for a reboot in relations between the longtime Cold War enemies – despite major obstacles still in the way.

Kerry and Hagel nominations means rapprochement with Cuba is comingPaul Haven, 1-26-2013, "Will The New Obama Cabinet Help Lift The Cuba Embargo?," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/kerry-hagel-cuba-us-trade-embargo_n_2559023.html, accessed 5-10-2013"I think having a secretary of state and secretary of defense who understand and are willing to speak publicly that isolation is counterproductive is a very good start," said Tomas Bilbao, executive director of the

nonpartisan Cuba Study Group, which advocates using engagement to spur democratic change. "I'm optimistic about the opportunity." Carlos Alzugaray, an ex-Cuban ambassador to the European Union and the author of several studies about Cuba-US

relations, said that if both men are confirmed, no Cabinet since the Carter administration would have such high-level voices in favor of rapprochement. At the same time, the composition of Cuban-Americans in Florida is evolving, with younger voters less emotionally attached to the issue than their parents and grandparents. Exit polls showed 49 percent of Cuban-Americans in the state voted for Obama, roughly the same percentage as four years ago, an indication the group no longer plays the make-or-break role it once did in presidential politics. The atmosphere is changing in Cuba as well. Alzugaray noted that the island has taken many steps that would normally be welcomed by Washington such as freeing dozens of political prisoners, opening the economy to limited capitalism, hosting peace talks for war-torn Colombia and eliminating most restrictions on travel for its own citizens. "Cuba is changing, and it is changing in the direction that the United States says Cuba must change," Alzugaray told The Associated Press in an interview in his Havana apartment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/kerry-hagel-cuba-us-trade-embargo_n_2559023.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/kerry-hagel-cuba-us-trade-embargo_n_2559023.html


AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Terrorism Answers

Cuba doesn’t support terrorismAnya Landau French, Director of the New America Foundation U.S. – Cuba Policy Initiative, 2-24-2013, “Raul Castro to Retire (soon), Who's Talking about Terrorism, and Why Leahy' Delegation to Cuba Mattered,” http://thehavananote.com/2013/02/raul_castro_retire_soon_whos_talking_about_terrorism_and_why_leahy_delegation_cuba_mattered, accessed 5-10-2013This week in Washington, sparks flew around one of those fossilized elements of U.S. Cuba policy, designating Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism. Cuba has been on the list since 1982, originally for its support of armed leftist groups in the Americas. But since the collapse of the Soviet Union more than 20 years ago, whose patronage made such Cuban adventures abroad possible, the State Department has repeatedly admitted that Cuba was no longer providing such support. While many analysts have repeatedly called for its removal, no administration has dared take that step. And

then there was this story out last week, which suggested the Obama administration might actually be preparing to take that step soon :

“There is a pretty clear case . . . that they don’t really meet the standard anymore,” said a senior administration official with direct knowledge regarding US-Cuba policy who was not authorized to speak publicly. “They have neither the wherewithal nor are they doing much.”

Any scenario about Cuban terrorism is a jokeWayne S. Smith, U.S. Diplomat and Specialist in Cuban Affairs for 25 years, adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC, 8-6-2007, “Inside Track: Take Cuba Off The Terrorist List,” The National Interest, online: http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=15108, accessed 5-10-2013Cuba was placed on the list of terrorist nations in March of 1982 with little in the way of explanation. Twenty-five years later, the State Department’s reasons for keeping it there are totally unconvincing. It is not involved in any terrorist activities that the State Department can point to. It does not endorse terrorism, as the State Department says it does. On the contrary, it has condemned it in all its manifestations, has signed all twelve UN anti-terrorist resolutions and offered to sign agreements with the United States to cooperate in combating terrorism—an offer the Bush Administration ignores. There are American fugitives in Cuba, yes, but even under our own legislation, this does not constitute grounds for declaring Cuba to be a terrorist state. And if Cuba does not regularly extradite those fleeing from American justice, the United States

has not in more than 47 years extradited a single Cuban—including infamous terrorists such as Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles. In sum, there is simply no credible evidence that Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism. The central question we should be asking is how can U.S. interests possibly be served by putting forward these spurious allegations and insisting that it is a terrorist state when it obviously is not, and by rebuffing its offers to cooperate in the struggle against terrorism? Does this not undermine our own credibility and cast doubt on our seriousness of purpose? Surely it is time to put an end to this dishonest and counterproductive policy. Congress should take the first step by holding hearings to examine the rationale and evidence—if any exists—behind this policy and to call for a new, more constructive approach.

Cuba condemns all terrorism – won’t support itWayne S. Smith, U.S. Diplomat and Specialist in Cuban Affairs for 25 years, adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC, 8-6-2007, “Inside Track: Take Cuba Off The Terrorist List,” The National Interest, online: http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=15108, accessed 5-10-2013After 25 years, Cuba remains on the State Department’s annual list of state sponsors of terrorism for reasons that do not withstand the most perfunctory examination. There is, for example, the oft-repeated charge that Cuba endorses terrorism as a tactic. Former Undersecretary of State John Bolton, for one, claimed in March of 2004 that Fidel Castro "continues to view terror as a legitimate tactic to further revolutionary objectives." The charge is simply not true, and neither Bolton nor anyone else has been able to point to a single statement of Castro’s endorsing terrorism. On the contrary, there are myriad Cuban statements condemning it. Within hours of the 9/11 attack, for example, the Cuban government issued a statement condemning the attacks and ruing the loss of life . Late in September, Castro categorically condemned all forms of terrorism as an "ethically indefensible phenomenon which must be eradicated." He vowed that, "the territory of Cuba will never be used for terrorist actions against the American people."


AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Drug Trafficking Answers

Cuba isn’t key – rest of Central America ensures the drug tradeKaren Hooper, Stratfor, 11-17-2011, “The Mexican Drug Cartel Threat in Central America,” http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111116-mexican-drug-cartel-threat-central-america, accessed 5-10-2013Central America has no short-term escape from being at the geographical center of the drug trade and

from the associated violence. Unless and until technologies shift to allow drugs to flow directly from producer to consumer via ocean or air transport, it appears likely that Central America will only become more important to the drug trade. While the drug trade brings huge amounts of cash (admittedly on the black market) into exceedingly capital-poor countries, it

also brings extreme violence.¶ The billions of dollars drugs command create an insurmountable challenge for the regional counternarcotic campaigns. The U.S. "war on drugs" pits the Guatemalan elite's political and financial interests against their need to retain a positive relationship with the United States, which views the

elites as colluding with drug organizations to facilitate the free passage of drugs and key figures in the drug trade.¶ For the leaders of Central America, foreign cartel interference in domestic arrangements and increasing violence is the real threat to their power. It is not the black market that alarms a leader like Perez Molina enough to call for greater involvement by the United States: It is the threat posed by the infiltration of Mexico's most violent drug cartel into Guatemala, and the threat posed to all three countries by further Central American drug gang destabilization, which could lead to even more violence.

Guatemala is key to drug trafficking, not CubaKaren Hooper, Stratfor, 11-17-2011, “The Mexican Drug Cartel Threat in Central America,” http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111116-mexican-drug-cartel-threat-central-america, accessed 5-10-2013Perez Molina's invitation for increased U.S. participation in Guatemalan counternarcotic operations presents a possibility for U.S. involvement in a country that, like Mexico, straddles the continent. The Guatemalan choke point has a much shorter border with Mexico — about 600 miles — in need of control, and is far enough north in Central America to prevent insertion of drug traffickers into the supply chain between the blocking force and Mexico. While the United States would not be able to stop the illicit flow of cocaine and people north, it could make it significantly more difficult. And although significantly reducing traffic at the Guatemalan border would not stop the flow of the drugs to the United States, it would radically decrease the value of Central America as a trafficking corridor.¶ Accomplishing this would require a much more significant U.S. commitment to the drug war , and any such direct involvement would be costly both in money and political capital. Absent significant U.S. help, the current trend of increased Mexican cartel influence and violence in Central America will only worsen.

Mexico makes their impacts inevitableMichael Moran, executive editor and policy analyst, Council on Foreign Relations, 7-31-2009, “Six Crises, 2009: A Half-Dozen Ways Geopolitics Could Upset Global Recovery,” http://fbkfinanzwirtschaft.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/six-crises-2009-a-half-dozen-ways-geopolitics-could-upset-global-recovery/, accessed 5-10-2013Risk 2: Mexico Drug Violence: ¶ At Stake: Oil prices, refugee flows, NAFTA, U.S. economic stability ¶ A story receiving more attention in the American media than Iraq these days is the horrific drug-related violence across the northern states of Mexico, where Felipe Calderon has deployed the national army to combat two thriving drug cartels, which have compromised the national police beyond redemption.¶ The tales of carnage are horrific, to be sure: 30 people were killed in a 48 hour period last week in Cuidad Juarez alone, a city located directly across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Texas. So far, the impact on the United States and beyond has been minimal. But there also isn’t much sign that the army is winning, either, and that raises a disturbing question: What if Calderon loses?¶ The CIA’s worst nightmare during the Cold War (outside of an administration which forced transparency on it, of course) was the radicalization or collapse of Mexico.

The template then was communism, but narco-capitalism doesn’t look much better.


AT: US-Cuba Advantage – Environment Answers

Lots of alt causes to the Cuban environment Daniel J. Whittle, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, et al, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Despite the apparent commitment of Cuban officials to build a body of environmental laws, policies, and regulations, the country’s environment is not immune to natural and manmade pressures. These threats range from global challenges — such as climate change, which is causing ocean acidification, rising seas, and intensifying storms — to more local problems, including management of liquid and solid wastes, soil erosion, deforestation, and pressure to develop pristine coastal areas for tourism and other economic sectors.

Tourism to Cuba only makes the problem worseSISGI Group, consulting and nonprofit organization, 3-25-2013, “Tourism in Cuba?” Not Enough Good, http://notenoughgood.com/2013/03/tourism-in-cuba/, accessed 5-10-2013There are downsides, though, to increasing tourism in Cuba. The environment, for one, could suffer greatly from an influx of foreign tourists. Cuba’s strict laws prevent even locals from entering some areas, thus keeping them pristine and beautiful. A tourist boom–which seems inevitable if the US were to drop the travel embargo–would encourage the Cuban government to ease restrictions to allow travelers access to these natural paradises, which would then, of course, not be pristine paradises any longer. Additionally, as some have already noted, the increase in tourism just in the last 10 years has “prettified” some of the traditional Cuban landmarks, like the once-scruffy Dos Hermanos bar where Hemmingway reportedly drank. The Cuban Ministry of Tourism would have to work hard to ensure that Cuba retains the mystery and natural beauty that makes tourists so eager to visit, or else the tourism would not be sustainable. Once the draw of visiting a formerly forbidden country wears off, the cultural heritage sites and beautiful beaches must be enough to encourage future tourism.

Lifting the embargo only makes the Cuban environment worse – increases damaging fertilizersSonia Saini, 1-18-2012, "SIS Intersession Abroad 2012: Cuba: Environment," SIS Cuba, http://siscuba12.blogspot.com/2012/01/environment.html, accessed 5-10-2013In the end, none of these environmental issues in Cuba can be separated from international politics. The blockade plays a major role in so many aspects of life, and as ridiculous as I believe the half century-old restrictions are, I can’t help but feel like it has its benefits, both practical and symbolic. If Cuban are to start cultivating rice on a larger scale than they currently do, for example, then cheap imports from the U.S. would certainly undermine that (although Cuba does already import food from the

U.S. under an exception to the embargo). The availability of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides would offer no guarantee that farmers would not use them to increase yields. Furthermore, Cuba has been able to survive and in many ways, thrive despite the restrictions, so this also sends a strong message to the world against U.S. domination and hegemony, a message that deserves to be heard. That said, there are countless reasons to lift the blockade, and for Cuba to succumb to the same negative effects that other countries that have traded freely with the U.S. have experienced, much more would have to change than just the trade restrictions. It will be interesting to see how these issues continue to play out in the years and decades to come.

http://notenoughgood.com/2013/03/tourism-in-cuba/

http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf


AT: Obama Cred Advantage – SQ Solves

Obama will engage with Cuba nowSimon Tisdall, editor @ Guardian, 4-8-2013, "Time for U.S. and Cuba to kiss and make up," CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/08/opinion/opinion-simon-tisdall-cuba, accessed 5-10-2013Anger over Beyoncé's supposed breach of the U.S. embargo rules restricting American citizens' travel to Cuba is symbolic of a deeper fear among right-wingers. Two key factors have changed since the days -- not so long ago -- when Washington seemed to be regularly threatening the Castro government with Iraq-style overthrow. One is that George W. Bush has been replaced by a Democrat. As Barack Obama enters his second and final term, immune to electoral imperatives, conservatives worry he may use his freedom of action to effect an historic rapprochement with Cuba. American liberals certainly believe he should do so.

Cuba not key – Obama is boosting soft power through Myanmar nowMichael Sullivan, 11-18-2012, "Obama's visit to Myanmar an exercise in 'soft power'," GlobalPost, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/thailand/121118/obama-visit-myanmar-burma-exercise-soft-power, accessed 5-10-2013For decades now, the Chinese have had carte blanche in Myanmar, cutting sweetheart deals with that country’s brutal and corrupt military leadership. Those deals allowed China to strip the country of natural resources, power and just about everything else at bargain basement prices. But in the aftermath of democratic elections in Burma earlier this year and a new opening to the West, it appears Myanmar’s leaders — including President Thein Sein — have grown tired of an arrangement that favors only the Chinese. And President Obama’s visit to the region sharply underscores that point. Not that China is too happy about it. Obama’s historic trip began Saturday when he boarded Air Force One, stopping here in Thailand and arriving in Myanmar on Monday. His purpose may be weightier issues of ‘hard power,’ such as the potential flashpoint of the South China Sea. But the symbolism of his trip to Myanmar, the first in history for a sitting American president, is unmistakably focused on ‘soft power.’

Burma trip solves Obama cred nowMichael Sullivan, 11-18-2012, "Obama's visit to Myanmar an exercise in 'soft power'," GlobalPost, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/thailand/121118/obama-visit-myanmar-burma-exercise-soft-power, accessed 5-10-2013David Steinberg, Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies at Georgetown University and a frequent visitor to Myanmar, said that China’s influence in the country also known as Burma has historically been all about ‘soft’ power,’ to borrow the phrase coined by retired Navy Admiral and current Harvard University Professor Joseph Nye, which refers to a nation’s use of economic cooperation to achieve its geopolitical goals rather than the ‘hard power’ of military might. Steinberg said Obama’s visit offered a great deal of diplomatic opportunity in the area of ‘soft power.’ “It’s an opportunity for Thein Sein, it’s an opportunity for us, I think it’s a good thing that will benefit us and I don’t think Obama is taking a chance. I think his Burma policy is the most, the only successful foreign policy of Obama’s administration in East Asia in his first term,” Steinberg said.


AT: Obama Cred Advantage – No Cuba Reforms Now

Cuba isn’t actually reformingHannah Allam, 2-25-2013, "WASHINGTON: Even if Raul Castro steps down in 2018, U.S.-Cuba relations may not thaw," Miami Herald, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/02/25/3253690/even-if-raul-castro-steps-down.html, accessed 5-10-2013The State Department was publicly resistant Monday to calls for a softening of the U.S. stance toward Cuba, with a spokesman bluntly dismissing Raul Castro’s promise to step down as not “a fundamental change” for Cuba because it lacked concrete measures toward democratic rule. “We remain hopeful for the day that the Cuban people get democracy, when they can have the opportunity to freely pick their own leaders in an open democratic process and enjoy the freedoms of speech and association without fear of reprisal,” State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell told reporters Monday.

“We’re clearly not there yet.” In the 35-minute speech he gave when he was ratified for a second term as president, Raul Castro made clear that he had no intention of moving away from his socialist roots. “I was not chosen to be president to restore capitalism to Cuba. I was elected to defend, maintain and continue to perfect socialism, not destroy it,”

Castro told Parliament, according to a translation published in news reports. That message is why longtime Cuba observers find it hard to swallow that such an entrenched regime would willingly push reforms that could hasten the demise of Communist Party rule. Critics say Cubans are less likely to see a shift in U.S. policy than a rise in domestic unrest that forces change from within as Cubans grow impatient for promised reforms.

“It’s political kabuki and I’m not sure it can hold together for another five years,” said Jason Poblete, a Cuban-American attorney in Washington and an outspoken critic of the Castro regime.

Increased engagement with Cuba only helps the regime – they control everythingRon Radosh, 3-18-2013, "The Time to Help Cuba’s Brave Dissidents Is Now: Why the Embargo Must Not be Lifted," PJ Media, http://pjmedia.com/ronradosh/2013/03/18/the-time-to-help-cubas-brave-dissidents-is-now-why-the-embargo-must-not-be-lifted/, accessed 5-10-2013Next, they nail the claim that travel without restrictions by citizens of our country to Cuba would help spread freedom. The men respond: In a cost-benefit analysis, travel to Cuba by Americans would be of greatest benefit to the Castro regime, while the Cuban people would be the least to benefit. With all of the controls and the totalitarian system of the government, it would be perfectly able to control such travel. We know this, as I reported a few months ago, about how a group of Americans taking the usual state-controlled Potemkin village tour came back raving about how wonderful and free Cuba is, and how Cuban socialism works. Finally, the two former prisoners made this point about lifting the embargo:

To lift the embargo at this time would be very prejudicial to us. The government prioritizes all of the institutions that guarantee its hold on power. The regime’s political police and its jailers receive a much higher salary and privileges than a doctor or engineer, or than any other worker that benefits society. We’ve all seen municipalities with no fuel for an ambulance, yet with 10, 15, 20, 50 cars full of fuel ready to go repress peaceful human rights activists.

Cuban reforms are all stalledAmerican Interest, 7-17-2012, "Exciting Cuban Economic Reforms: Always Coming Tomorrow," http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/07/17/cuba-opening-or-not/, accessed 5-10-2013When Raul Castro began assuming power from Fidel in 2008, there were hopes he would open up the Cuban economy. The Obama administration relaxed some restrictions on travel and remittances in 2009. In late 2010, the Cuban government allowed citizens to open private businesses. Cell phone use on the island increased. And this past April, the government vowed to shift 40 percent of Cuba’s economic output to the non state sector within five years. As the New York Times reports, those plans have stalled in the face of resistance from conservative party apparatchiks: Those awaiting measures to create even more opportunity for private business got the opposite last week, when news spread of a little-advertised government decision to charge steep customs duties on the informal imports, from Miami and elsewhere, that are the lifeblood of many young businesses. “This could have a huge impact,” said Emilio Morales, president of the Miami-based Havana Consulting Group, who said state-owned shops in Cuba were losing business to street vendors. “It shows the state isn’t ready to compete with the private sector.” Raul recently expressed concern that too many reforms, introduced too quickly, could unleash the kind of turmoil that dissolved the Soviet Union. I’ve

been watching Cuba fairly closely for almost 20 years, and during all that time, sweeping economic reform has always been just around the corner.It still is.


AT: Economy Advantage – Cuba Not Key

Cuba not key – regulations on small businesses outweighDonna Wiesner Keene, senior fellow @ Indep. Women’s Forum, 5-2-2013, "Government regulations hinder economic growth: Column," USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/05/02/economy-washington-congress-column/2124083/, accessed 5-10-2013Washington is mystified by an economy in shambles . While Congress is debating exempting themselves from ObamaCare and discussing

Internet taxation rules that would require record-keeping for all 50 states for every small business , the man on the street can tell you why he

doesn't have a job. Hamstrung by Uncle Sam, too many businesses are afraid to hire. It's no wonder that so much home repair takes place on the black market.

Unburdened by regulations and taxation, an illegal immigrant can tinker with your dishwasher with rudimentary knowledge of mechanics from his Brazilian high school classes and can come fix you dock tomorrow for an affordable price. If you won't hire the illegal immigrant, your option

is to wait. Much of government's expanding regulatory power is dotted with assertions about saving the environment or protecting the earth. Yet the opposite happens when innovations and jobs cannot cross borders due to federal, state, county and even conflicting local regulations. Someone has to pay for the senseless regulatory systems we see today -- and that someone is us.

Congress is already taking steps to boost small businessesHoward Owens, 5-3-2013, "Collins proposes payroll tax deferral for small businesses with new employees," Batavian, http://thebatavian.com/howard-owens/collins-proposes-payroll-tax-deferral-small-businesses-new-employees/37247, accessed 5-10-2013Congressman Chris Collins (NY-27) pushed the Main Street Revival Act (H.R. 952) in Batavia today. The bipartisan legislation will help promote economic growth and fill vacancies along America’s main streets. Collins is the lead Republican cosponsor of the legislation in the House. “If Washington is serious about getting our economy back on track, we need to get serious about

supporting American small business,” Collins said. “Encouraging and incentivizing new small businesses, particularly in struggling areas, will be critical to rebuilding our economy and this legislation does just that.” The Main Street Revival Act would allow a small business to defer payment of payroll taxes for one year after it hires its first employee. The taxes will be paid back in equal installments over

the subsequent four years. The deferment would hopefully provide meaningful relief to a new small business, or one which is just at the beginning stages of growth, which is traditionally a hard time for my small business owners. “The ability to defer payroll taxes for one year may be just

enough of a break to help a new small business owner hire one more person or purchase a new piece of equipment,” said Collins. “This legislation represents the practical, commonsense solutions Washington needs to take to nurture small business development, create jobs, and spur real economic development in our communities.”

The economy is doing fine and adding jobs without CubaNelson D. Schwartz, 5-3-2013, "Jobs Data Ease Fears of Sharp Slowdown in U.S. Economy," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/04/business/economy/us-adds-165000-jobs-in-april.html?pagewanted=all, accessed 5-10-2013The United States economy created an estimated 165,000 jobs in April, averting fears of a sharp slowdown and pushing the unemployment rate to its lowest level since the end of 2008.The latest jobs figures from the Department of Labor paint a brighter picture of the overall economy than other recent data, which had been weaker and prompted economists to warn of a spring swoon for the third year in row. Those worries had been heightened after the March jobs report, which initially showed the economy to have added just 88,000 jobs, much fewer than had been expected. On Friday, however, the government sharply revised upward its estimates for job creation in February and March, concluding that the economy actually generated 332,000 jobs in February and 138,000 in March. The unemployment rate, which is based on a separate survey, fell by 0.1 percentage point to 7.5 percent, from 7.6 percent in March.


AT: Economy Advantage – US/Cuban Economy Alt-Causes

US economy is doing sluggishly nowLucia Mutikani, 5-2-2013, "U.S. April employment data to point to sluggish economy," Chicago Tribune, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-02/news/sns-rt-us-usa-economybre942057-20130502_1_u-s-april-job-creation-pace-factory-data, accessed 5-10-2013U.S. employment growth likely picked up in April, but probably not by enough to counter other signs that suggest the economy has lost a step in recent weeks. Nonfarm payrolls are expected to have increased by 145,000 jobs, according to a Reuters survey of economists, after braking to a nine-month low of 88,000 in March. Taken together, the job creation pace over the past two months would still be far below the average of 200,000 for the first two months of this year. "That would be consistent with an economy that's losing growth momentum but hasn't fallen out of bed," said Millan Mulraine, a senior economist at TD Securities in New York.

Lots of other threats to the US economyLucia Mutikani, 5-2-2013, "U.S. April employment data to point to sluggish economy," Chicago Tribune, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-02/news/sns-rt-us-usa-economybre942057-20130502_1_u-s-april-job-creation-pace-factory-data, accessed 5-10-2013Factory data for April imply the loss of momentum persisted early in the second quarter, setting the stage for a replay for

a third straight year of what economists have called the spring swoon. Economists say uncertainty over the full impact of higher taxes and deep government spending cuts on already sluggish demand was making businesses reluctant to hire. A 2 percent payroll tax cut ended at the start of the year, and $85 billion in federal budget cuts went into effect on March 1. The forecast job gains should be just enough to hold the unemployment rate at a four-year low of 7.6 percent, though the rate could even fall as older Americans retire and younger people give up the hunt for work in frustration. The labor force participation rate - the share of working-age Americans who either have a job or are looking for one - hit a 34-year low in March.

"We need more than 3 percent growth on a sustained basis to make real inroads in reducing not only the number of those counted as unemployed, but the legions of those who are nowhere to be found in the labor force data," said Patrick O'Keefe, head of Economic Research at CohnReznick in Roseland, New Jersey.

Cuban economy is in trouble no matter what happens with reformsTed Piccone, Senior Fellow and Deputy Director of Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, 1-19-2012, “Cuba Is Changing, Slowly but Surely,” Brookings, http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2012/01/19-cuba-piccone, accessed 5-10-2013The big question for Cuba’s leaders today is whether they can bring their people with them down this new,

uncertain path after five decades of Cuban-style communism. If reforms happen too quickly, it could cause excessive dislocation and

unhappiness and potentially destabilize the regime. Already bureaucrats who have something to lose under the new system are resisting change, much to Raul Castro’s chagrin. If the pace of change is too slow, on the other hand, budding entrepreneurs, the middle class and disaffected youth, who have no overt commitment to the values of the 1959 revolution, may give up sooner and head to greener pastures in the United States, Spain or Canada. As it is, Cubans are leaving the island in droves to join their families in Florida and beyond, beneficiaries of U.S. policies that grant Cubans preferred immigration benefits once their feet reach American soil, and of Spanish laws that

grant some Cubans Spanish citizenship. ¶ The trick for party officials, then, is to demonstrate enough tangible improvements that Cubans will maintain faith in their ability to lead the country even after the Castros leave the scene. This explains the Communist Party’s determined effort to intensify popular consultations throughout the island and to keep up the momentum and rhetoric of slow but steady change. “In everything we do,” said one official, “we will try to be inclusive.”


AT: Economy Advantage – SQ Solves Ag Exports

US ag trade with Cuba is high nowAlexa van Sickle, 1-29-2013, "Is Cuba The Next Emerging Market?" Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/bmoharrisbank/2013/01/29/is-cuba-the-next-emerging-market/, accessed 5-10-2013 The U.S. is, despite the embargo, the largest exporter of food and agricultural products to Cuba, providing around 30% of Cuba’s food imports. Under the 2000 Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act, hundreds of U.S. businesspeople travel to Cuba every year to sell agricultural goods. The catch is that Cuba must pay cash up front on these transactions. Regardless, Cuba has bought over $3.5 billion in agricultural products from the United States since trade began in 2001. Modest sales of $138 million that year climbed steadily to a peak of $710 million in 2008, according to statistics from the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council.

US ag exports to Cuba are already highRon Smith, 12-6-2012, "Cuba trade holds promise for U.S. agricultural exports, Texas A&M economist says," Southwest Farm Press, http://southwestfarmpress.com/markets/cuba-trade-holds-promise-us-agricultural-exports-texas-am-economist-says, accessed 5-10-2013Rosson, speaking at the Texas Plant Protection Association’s annual conference today in Bryan, Texas, said ag exports to Cuba could reach $450 million for 2012, short of the more than $700 million exported to Cuba in 2008, when numerous hurricanes hammered the island nation and increased the need for imported food. Rosson said key U.S. ag exports to Cuba include corn, poultry, soy and soy products, feeds, pork and wheat. Potential exists for increased export of higher quality cuts of beef, which currently are limited to use in the Cuban tourist industry. Since 2000, U.S ag suppliers fill some of those needs. The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000, “created exceptions,” Rosson said. The act permits exports of food, medicines and some chemicals into Cuba although the embargo remains in place for most trade. Also banned are imports from Cuba, including Cuban cigars. U.S. banking with Cuba is prohibited as is tourism and spending money in Cuba. Reforms do allow exporters to travel to Cuba. “The United States is stringent about the embargo,” Rosson said. And that embargo is likely to remain in place, he added, “as long as a Castro is in power.” With the easing of restrictions, Cuba has become one of the U.S. top 35 trading partners. The U.S. supplies a significant percentage of Cuba’s food supply.

US farm trade to Cuba is already highDaniel Griswold, dir. Trade @ Cato, 6-15-2009, "The US Embargo of Cuba Is a Failure," Cato Institute, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/us-embargo-cuba-is-failure, accessed 5-10-2013In 2000, Congress approved a modest opening of the embargo. The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act allows cash-only sales to Cuba of US farm products and medical supplies. The results of this modest opening have been quite amazing. Since 2000, total sales of farm products to Cuba have increased from virtually zero to $691m in 2008. The top US exports by value are corn, meat and poultry, wheat and soybeans. From dead last, Cuba is now the number six customer in Latin America for US agricultural products. Last year, American farmers sold more to the 11.5 million people who live in Cuba than to the 200 million people in Brazil.

http://southwestfarmpress.com/markets/cuba-trade-holds-promise-us-agricultural-exports-texas-am-economist-says

http://southwestfarmpress.com/markets/cuba-trade-holds-promise-us-agricultural-exports-texas-am-economist-says


AT: Economy Advantage – AT: Agriculture Impact

US agricultural competitiveness is doing fine without CubaWall Street Journal, 4-23-2013, "Long Term Prospects for U.S. Agriculture Sector Are Excellent, Says BMO Economics," WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130423-910160.html?mod=googlenews_wsj, accessed 5-10-2013Agricultural producers fought through the ramifications of drought conditions in 2012 to produce solid farm earnings, and the longer-term prospects for the industry are excellent, says BMO Economics. "Demand for agricultural products is growing rapidly, particularly in emerging markets, which has put agricultural prices and profitability on an upward trajectory," said Aaron Goertzen, Economist, BMO Capital Markets. "Meantime, the industry's international competitiveness has been bolstered by a lower U.S. dollar." Goertzen also notes that technological advances in production techniques have provided a major boost to overall efficiency, and he expects that interest rates should remain manageable even when they inevitably begin to rise.

Tech advances will solve their agriculture impactsMatt Ridley, author and columnist for WSJ, 8-17-2012, “Apocalypse Not: Here’s Why You Shouldn’t Worry About End Times,” Wired, http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/08/ff_apocalypsenot/all/, accessed 5-10-2013On a “stinking hot” evening in a taxi in Delhi in 1966, as Paul Ehrlich wrote in his best seller, The Population Bomb, “the streets seemed alive with people. People eating, people washing, people sleeping. People visiting, arguing, and screaming. People thrusting their hands through the taxi window, begging. People defecating and urinating. People clinging to buses. People herding animals. People, people, people, people.” Ehrlich’s conclusion was bleak: “The train of events leading to the dissolution of India as a viable nation” was already in progress. And other

experts agreed. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” said Denis Hayes, organizer of the first Earth Day in 1970. Sending food to India was a mistake and

only postponed the inevitable, William and Paul Paddock wrote in their best seller, Famine—1975!¶ What actually happened was quite different. The

death rate fell. Famine became rarer. The population growth rate was cut in half , thanks chiefly to the fact that as babies stop dying, people stop having so many of them. Over the past 50 years, worldwide food production per capita has risen, even as the global population has doubled. Indeed, so successful have farmers been at increasing production that food prices fell to record lows in the early 2000s and large parts of western Europe and North America have been reclaimed by forest. (A policy of turning some of the world’s grain into motor fuel has reversed some of that decline and driven prices back up.)¶ Meanwhile, family size continues to shrink on every continent. The world population will probably never double again, whereas it quadrupled in the 20th

century. With improvements in seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, transport, and irrigation still spreading across Africa, the world may well feed 9 billion inhabitants in 2050—and from fewer acres than it now uses to feed 7 billion.

No global food shortagesIndur Goklany, PhD electrical engineering, 2009, “Have increases in population, affluence and technology worsened human and environmental well-being?” http://www.ejsd.org/docs/HAVE_INCREASES_IN_POPULATION_AFFLUENCE_AND_TECHNOLOGY_WORSENED_HUMAN_AND_ENVIRONMENTAL_WELL-BEING.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Although global population is no longer growing exponentially, it has quadrupled since 1900. Concurrently, affluence (or GDP per capita) has sextupled, global economic product (a measure of aggregate consumption) has increased 23-fold and carbon dioxide has increased over 15-fold (Maddison 2003; GGDC 2008; World Bank 2008a; Marland et al. 2007).4 But contrary to Neo- Malthusian fears,

average human well-being, measured by any objective indicator, has never been higher. Food supplies, Malthus’ original

concern, are up worldwide. Global food supplies per capita increased from 2,254 Cals/day in 1961 to 2,810 in 2003 (FAOSTAT 2008). This helped reduce hunger and malnutrition worldwide. The proportion of the population in the developing world, suffering from chronic hunger declined from 37 percent to 17 percent between 1969–71 and 2001–2003

despite an 87 percent population increase (Goklany 2007a; FAO 2006).


Politics Link – Lifting Embargo Unpopular

Engaging Cuba costs political capitalGlobal Post, 11-10-2010, “Midterms and a changing face of Congress,” http://www.globalpost.com/webblog/cuba/midterms-and-changing-face-congress, accessed 5-10-2013But it is highly unlikely that the President will spend any of his diminished political capital on the issue of Cuba

when there is so little potential gain for him in doing so. The likely cost—say, a storm of ill will from Republicans in Congress and from an easily angered public that is vigilant these days for signs of executive overreach—simply outweighs any benefit that might emerge… a positive reaction from the global community, perhaps? The promise of applause from partners abroad has not been the impetus for any change on U.S. policy toward Cuba in prior years and will not be now, not even when the entire body of the United Nations General Assembly (save Israel) condemns the embargo. Every year the vote is taken and every year the tiny U.S. team has become more outnumbered: in 2008 the vote was 185 to 3; in 2009, 187 to 3; and now in 2010 (last week), 187 to 2—the two being the United States and Israel, a country whose citizens freely travel to, spend and invest in Cuba.

Plan unpopular – pro-embargo groups are well organized and politically powerfulYeganeh June Torbati, 7-13-2010, "Farm Groups Push Congress to Ease Exports to Cuba," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/us/politics/14cuba.html?_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013But groups in favor of maintaining restrictions are also more organized than ever, said Philip Peters, a Cuba analyst at the Lexington Institute, a research group. Despite efforts by the Texas Farm Bureau to convince the three Texans on the Agriculture Committee to vote to lift restrictions, only one, Representative Henry Cuellar, a Democrat, voted to advance the bill. Opponents of the House bill point to continued human rights violations in the country, criticizing farm-state legislators for linking a reversal of the travel ban — which they argue would enrich the Castro government while doing little to benefit ordinary Cubans — with more popular provisions lifting export restrictions. Hard-line Cuban-American groups in Florida remain firmly against engaging the government, and, despite demographic shifts that may be lessening those groups’ numbers, they remain a powerful political force. Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, has pledged to block a Senate version of the bill, though Senator Michael B. Enzi, Republican of Wyoming, and Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, say they have enough votes to overcome a filibuster.

Changing Cuba policy requires a huge investment of capital Larry Birns, Dir. Council on Hemispheric Affairs and Kelsey Strain, Research Associate at the COHA, 11-18-2010, "The Mid-Term Elections: An Easy Prediction for the Future of U.S.-Cuba Relations," http://www.coha.org/the-mid-term-elections-an-easy-prediction-for-the-future-of-u-s-cuba-relations/, accessed 5-10-2013As former U.S. Ambassador to Cuba, Wayne Smith, explains, “There is a small minority blocking the sensible will of the majority.” Despite such a forceful push for reform across the globe, Washington has repeatedly failed to show a willingness to alter its Cuban policy. A misreading of the conciliatory attitude from Miami’s Cuban community has kept timorous Washington politicians from daring to think boldly when it comes to Cuba. In spite of a new congressional make-up and a desk filled with challenges coming from around the world, President Obama’s commitment to “new relations” with the island should be seen through. Given the new environment in which he will be working, a normalization of U.S.-Cuban relations will only happen if Obama makes it a primary objective, should he decide that it is worth the political investment.


Politics Link – AT: Link Turns

Lifting the embargo is still politically unpopularJoshua Goodman, 2-20-2013, "Obama Can Bend Cuba Embargo to Help Open Economy, Groups Say," Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-20/obama-should-bend-cuba-embargo-to-buoy-free-markets-reports-say.html, accessed 5-10-2013The Washington-based Cuba Study Group urges Obama to gain even more leverage by getting Congress to repeal the so-called Helms-Burton act of 1996 and other legislation that conditions the easing of sanctions on regime change. Any move to ease the five-decade-old

embargo would probably encounter anti-Castro resistance in Florida, one of the biggest prizes in recent presidential elections, and opposition from key lawmakers including Senator Robert Menendez, the Democratic

chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A bill introduced by Representative Jose Serrano, a New York Democrat, in the 112th

Congress to dismantle the web of legislation governing relations with Cuba since as early as the 1960s received no co-sponsors.

Turn shield – supporters of the plan won’t speak up, but it still sparks controversyLarry Birns, Dir. Council on Hemispheric Affairs and Kelsey Strain, Research Associate at the COHA, 11-18-2010, "The Mid-Term Elections: An Easy Prediction for the Future of U.S.-Cuba Relations," http://www.coha.org/the-mid-term-elections-an-easy-prediction-for-the-future-of-u-s-cuba-relations/, accessed 5-10-2013Although a handful of surviving House liberals and centrists will continue to maintain a strong opposition to travel restrictions and the trade embargo, Cuban policy is likely to remain on the backburner for the time being in Washington, if not completely at a standstill. Veteran Republican Representative Ileana Ros-

Lehtinen, herself a Cuban-American, is expected to block any remaining efforts to change the U.S.’s modest policies. Taking over as chairwoman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) will replace Democratic Representative Howard L Berman, who collaborated with Republican Senator Richard Lugar in April 2009 to formulate a convincing argument in

favor of terminating the embargo. Ros-Lehtinen’s track record and her sustained, aggressive stance on Latin American issues demonstrate that she has little tolerance for regional dissidents who oppose the United States’ hemispheric policies. Her extremist line of moderation when it comes to the U.S.-hemispheric issues is shockingly uncompromising. For example, in 2006 she candidly stated, “I welcome the opportunity of having anyone assassinate Fidel Castro and any leader who is oppressing the people.”1 Additionally, she has supported every coup that has attempted to overthrow left-leaning governments in Latin America. In 2002, shortly after the coup in Venezuela, she declared that Venezuelan Pedro Soto, who called for Hugo Chávez’s overthrow, was a “great patriot,” despite the fact that Chávez had been elected through a fair and democratic process. In a similar situation, she strongly supported last year’s coup in Honduras, and she continues to help block any movement by U.S. diplomats favoring dialogue with Venezuela and its fellow ALBA nations. Bill H.R. 4645, known as the Travel Restriction Reform and Trade Enhancement Act, would end travel restrictions to Cuba for all Americans—a very significant change in U.S. policy. Nevertheless, the bill has remained stationary for

months now, with no signs of forward movement. With Ros-Lehtinen as chairwoman, it is certain that any movement in favor of a detente will be blocked at the passing.

Anti-Cuba backlash at any détente – lobby is influentialSaul Landau, Senior Fellow at the Transnational Institute, August 2008, “Baseball diplomacy or just baseball?” online: http://www.tni.org/article/baseball-diplomacy-or-just-baseball, accessed 5-10-2013Diaz-Balart and his brother Mario, who also represents a south Florida district filled with Cuban exiles, get their knickers in a twist whenever they learn of any event that might even slightly dent the harsh rules of embargo and travel ban that they, along with the other members of the Hate-Castro industry (not quite in the multi billion dollars range

yet), help preserve. For the Diaz-Balart brothers, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, their female south Florida counterpart,

limiting travel to Cuba ranks far higher on the priority scale than the banal issues facing their constituents --

unemployment, foreclosures, school drop outs and lack of health care. Ros-Lehtinen and the Diaz-Balart brothers

help guide the small but influential -- with the Bush family -- Cuba Democracy Caucus on Capital Hill. On July 10, this bastion of Castro haters invited all Members to an “important” meeting with Bisa Williams, Coordinator for the State Department's Office of Cuban Affairs, and Barbara Hammerle, Deputy Director of OFAC.


Democracy DA – Uniqueness – Yes Cuba Reforms

Reforms in Cuba now – Castro regime days are numberedBrett Wilkins, 4-17-2013, "US Cuba Embargo is Height of Hypocrisy," Morallowground, http://morallowground.com/2013/04/17/us-cuba-embargo-is-height-of-hypocrisy/, accessed 5-10-2013As for claims that Cuba is run by a monstrously brutal communist dictatorship, well, let’s just say that the US supports far worse regimes around the world. Saudi Arabia, Equatorial Guinea, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iraq and Bahrain are all far worse human rights violators than Cuba. Israel, which receives $3 billion in annual US military aid, is the only nation on earth which simultaneously practices occupation, apartheid, colonization and ethnic cleansing. Meanwhile, things are slowly but inexorably changing in Havana. There are less than 100 political prisoners in Cuba. There have been no executions in many years. Economic reforms abound. And for the first time in generations, Cubans are free to travel abroad without obtaining exit visas. Yes, the Castro regime is the only totalitarian government left in the Americas. But the regime’s days are almost certainly numbered and the US is supremely hypocritical in selectively singling out Cuba for collective punishment when Washington does business with far worse dictators– even communists. As Jay-Z rapped in his recently-released “Open Letter”: “I’m in Cuba, I love Cubans/This communist talk is so confusing/When it’s from China, the very mic I’m using.” US leaders really ought to be careful when pointing the finger at Cuba. After all, no other nation on the face of the earth has killed more innocent civilians in more countries outside its own borders since the end of WWII than the United States. No other nation even comes close. US atrocities make worldwide headlines on almost a daily basis– witness yesterday’s release of a bipartisan task force study of American torture. If you surveyed all the world’s people on which country, Cuba or the United States, is more worthy of censure, I’d bet the house that at least 90 percent of humanity would choose the latter.

Cuba is already engaging in democratic reformsJeff Patterson, 4-8-2013, "Florida Democratic Congresswoman calls for Cuban embargo to be lifted," WFLA, http://www.wfla.com/story/21911379/florida-democratic-congresswoman-calls-for-cuban-embargo-to-be-lifted, accessed 5-10-2013Castor just returned from a trip to Cuba and says the country is changing. " They have embarked on economic reforms that the United States of America should promote.", says Castor. The Florida Democrat says she believes she is only the second member of congress from the state to visit Cuba since 1959. Castor met with a number of Cuban government officials during her trip and she is calling for a significant change to U.S. and Cuban relations. Castor says, "Fiedel Castro is no longer in power. There is a

generational change occurring in the government of Cuba. They are still a hard corps communist nation, but they are embarking on market reforms in their economy that deserve encouragement."

Overall trend is for Cuba improvingDaniel Hanson, economics researcher at the American Enterprise Institute, Dayne Batten UNC Public Policy, and Harrison Ealey financial analyst, 1-16-2013, "It's Time For The U.S. To End Its Senseless Embargo Of Cuba," Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/01/16/its-time-for-the-u-s-to-end-its-senseless-embargo-of-cuba/, accessed 5-10-2013While the embargo has been through several legal iterations in the intervening years, the general tenor of the U.S. position toward Cuba is

a hardline not-in-my-backyard approach to communism a la the Monroe Doctrine. The official position is outdated, hypocritical, and counterproductive. The Cuban embargo was inaugurated by a Kennedy administration executive order in 1960 as a response to the confiscation of American property in Cuba under the newly installed Castro regime. The current incarnation of the embargo – codified primarily in the Helms-Burton Act – aims at producing free markets and representative democracy in Cuba through economic sanctions, travel restrictions, and international legal penalties. Since Fidel Castro abdicated power to his brother Raul in 2008, the government has undertaken more than 300 economic reforms designed to encourage enterprise, and restrictions have been lifted on property use, travel, farming, municipal governance, electronics access, and more. Cuba is still a place of oppression

and gross human rights abuse, but recent events would indicate the 11 million person nation is moving in the right direction.


Democracy DA – Embargo Links

Lifting the Cuban embargo wrecks all Latin American democracyJorge G. Castañeda, professor at New York University and fellow at the New America Foundation, was Mexico's foreign minister from 2000 to 2003, September-October 2008, “Morning in Latin America,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 87, No. 5, p. npRealpolitik and fear of another exodus of Cuban refugees across the Straits of Florida may tempt Washington to pursue a "Chinese," or "Vietnamese," solution to the relationship with Cuba: that is, normalizing diplomatic relations in exchange for economic reforms while leaving the question of internal political change until much later. It should not do this, chiefly because of the regional implications. Over the past few decades, the United States, Canada, the European Union, and Latin America have patiently constructed a regional legal framework to defend and encourage democratic rule as well as respect for human rights in the hemisphere. These values have been enshrined in conventions, charters, and free trade-agreements, from the Inter-American Democratic Charter, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to the American Convention on Human Rights and the labor and environmental chapters of flee-trade agreements, as well as in the democratic clauses of the economic agreements between Chile and the EU and between Mexico and the EU. These mechanisms are not perfect, and they have not truly been tested. But to waive them in the interests of simply guaranteeing stability in Cuba and ensuring an exodus-free succession instead of a democratic transition--that is, creating once again a "Cuban exception" for reasons of pure pragmatism--would be unworthy of the enormous efforts every country in the hemisphere has made to deepen and strengthen democracy in the Americas. Cuba must return to the regional concert

of powers, but accepting this concert's rules. To allow it to proceed otherwise would weaken democracy and encourage authoritarian traditions in the hemisphere--and lay the groundwork for other exceptions that would justify their

existence by invoking the Cuban precedent.

Lifting the embargo with no preconditions undermines US signal in favor of democracy and human rightsJorge G. Castañeda, professor at New York University and fellow at the New America Foundation, was Mexico's foreign minister from 2000 to 2003, 4-21-2009, “The Right Deal on Cuba,” online: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124027198023237151.html, accessed 5-10-2013The question of what to do about the embargo has once again cornered an American president. If President Barack Obama lifts the embargo unilaterally, he will send a message to the Castros and the rest of Latin America that human rights and democracy are not his bailiwick. Furthermore, he lacks the votes in the Senate to do so, unless he obtains an explicit Cuban quid pro quo, which Raúl Castro cannot grant him, especially with his brother back in charge. Conversely, if Mr. Obama limits change to the recently announced freer flow of remittances and family visits to the island, Democrats in the House, Latin American leaders, and the Castros will remain unsatisfied. And if he insists on political change as a precondition for lifting the embargo, Mr. Obama would be pursuing the policy that his last 10 predecessors have fruitlessly followed. There might be a way to square the circle. It begins with a unilateral end to the embargo: Nothing is expected from Cuba. But in exchange for eliminating the embargo, key Latin American players would be expected to commit to actively seeking a normalization process between Washington and Havana, and to forcing Cuba to establish representative democracy and respect for human rights.

Should only lift the embargo as a quid pro quo with CubaJoel Brinkley, 12-18-2012, "Cuba embargo isn't working but isn't going away," POLITICO, http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/cuba-embargo-isnt-working-but-isnt-going-away-85281.html, accessed 5-10-2013America’s embargo on Cuba began its 53rd year this fall, and it’s hard to find anyone who thinks it’s working. Even Cuban-Americans who hate the Castro brothers and fervently insist that the embargo remain in place generally agree that it has accomplished little, if anything. Still, said Jaime Suchlicki, a Cuban émigré who is the director of the Cuba Transition Project at the University of Miami, “do you give away a policy that has been in place for 50 years, whether you think it’s right or wrong, good or bad, effective or not — for nothing? Without a quid pro quo from Cuba?”


Democracy DA – AT: Link Turn

Embargo doesn’t give the Castro’s a scapegoat – people aren’t that dumbJoel Brinkley, journalism prof @ Stanford, Pulitzer winner, 12-18-2012, "Cuba embargo isn't working but isn't going away," POLITICO, http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/cuba-embargo-isnt-working-but-isnt-going-away-85281.html, accessed 5-10-2013After the Soviet Union fell in 1991 that reasoning fell away, but at that time the Cuba lobby in Miami was at its strongest. Looking at the embargo today (Cuba calls it “the blockade”), its principal accomplishment is that “it has given Fidel Castro and Raúl Castro the perfect scapegoat on which it can blame all their problems,” argued Ted Henken, a fervent Cuba expert at Baruch College in New York. A few days ago, Cuba’s Ministry of Education asserted that “the 50-year trade embargo imposed by the United States has severely undermined the country’s education efforts.” Piccone said most Cubans aren’t buying that argument. “The average Cuban is not blaming the U.S.” he said. “I’ve seen polling on this. They’re blaming the system.”

Loosening the embargo undermines Cuban reformDamien Cave, 11-19-2012, "Changes in Cuba Create Support for Easing Embargo," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013When asked about Cuban entrepreneurs who are seeking more American support, Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who is chairwoman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, proposed an even tighter embargo. “The sanctions on the regime must remain in place and, in fact, should be strengthened, and not be altered,” she wrote in an e-mail. “Responsible nations must not buy into the facade the dictatorship is trying to create by announcing ‘reforms’ while, in reality, it’s tightening its grip on its people.”

Arguing for lifting the embargo only helps the regimeRon Radosh, 3-18-2013, "The Time to Help Cuba’s Brave Dissidents Is Now: Why the Embargo Must Not be Lifted," PJ Media, http://pjmedia.com/ronradosh/2013/03/18/the-time-to-help-cubas-brave-dissidents-is-now-why-the-embargo-must-not-be-lifted/, accessed 5-10-2013What these liberals and leftists leave out is that this demand — lifting the embargo — is also the number one desire of the Cuban Communists. In making it the key demand, these well-meaning (at least some of them) liberals echo precisely the propaganda of the Cuban government, thereby doing the Castro brothers’ work for them here in the United States. And, as we know, many of those who call for this actually believe that the Cuban government is on the side of the people, and favor the Cuban Revolution which they see as a positive role model for the region. They have always believed, since the 1960s of their youth, that socialism in Cuba has pointed the way forward to development and liberty based on the kind of socialist society they wish could exist in the United States. Another brave group of Cuban opponents of the regime has actually taped a television interview filmed illegally in Havana. “Young Cuban democracy leader Antonio Rodiles,” an American support group called Capitol Hill Cubans has reported, “has just released the latest episode of his civil society project Estado de Sats (filmed within Cuba), where he discusses the importance U.S. sanctions policy with two of Cuba’s most renowned opposition activists and former political prisoners, Guillermo Fariñas and Jose Daniel Ferrer.” The argument they present is aimed directly at those on the left in the United States, some of whom think they are helping democracy in Cuba by calling for an end to the embargo. In strong and clear language, the two dissidents say the following: If at this time, the [economic] need of the Cuban government is satisfied through financial credits and the lifting of the embargo, repression would increase, it would allow for a continuation of the Castro’s society, totalitarianism would strengthen its hold and philosophically, it would just be immoral … If you did an opinion poll among Cuban opposition activists, the majority would be in favor of not lifting the embargo.


Cuba Joint Ventures Neg


Inherency – Oil Exploration Now

Cuba will be producing oil on their own in the next 3 yearsCommander Carlos Iglesias, United States Navy, 2012, "United States Security Policy Implications of a Post-Fidel Cuba" www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408, accessed 5-10-2013Just recently there has developed a light at the end of Cuba’s energy tunnel . Surveys of offshore hydrocarbon fields may indicate a coming energy windfall . A U.S. Geological Survey approximates that Cuba's northern offshore fields contain upwards of 4.6 billion barrels of oil and 10 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Cuba’s oil enterprise, Cubapetroleo or “Cupet , ” released a (questionably ) higher estimate of 20 billion barrels of recoverable

crude – levels comparable to U.S. national reserves . 80 If these fields prove productive, within three to five years Cuba could be producing as much a 350,000 BPD. Assuming the industry standard 60 - 40 split in production - sharing agreements with

foreign oil companies, this would make Cuba energy self - sufficient for the first time in its history . 81 But oil and gas are not the only energy prospect s for the country. A joint venture in sugarcane production with Brazil could reclaim up to 1 million hectares of sugar fields and convert the crop into a $2.3 billion annual ethanol harvest. Combined with a fully operational oil industry, Cuba’s GDP could increase $3 - 5 billion annually from the energy boom . 82 This economic windfall in conjunction with the prerequisite market transparencies required for supporting FDI would help eliminate its “dependency on a single - source provider of subsidies” and allow it to economically flourish.

Cuba will do oil exploration without the USSarah Stephens, et al, Executive Director of the Center for Democracy in the Americas, 2011, “As Cuba plans to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. policy poses needless risks to our national interest,” http://democracyinamericas.org/pdfs/Cuba_Drilling_and_US_Policy.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Cuba is working with foreign oil companies to explore blocks offshore.¶ With drilling to take place in 2011, attention is now shifting to the international partners who will work with Cuba on exploration offshore. Due to the embargo, the U.S. is noticeably absent from the roll call of partners18—from Spain, Malaysia, Norway, India, Russia, Vietnam, Brazil, and

Venezuela19—who are poised to help Cuba exploit these resources. ¶ Repsol, an oil company from Spain, will drill first. Repsol holds the rights to drill in six blocks in the Gulf of Mexico in a production-sharing agreement with CUPET, Cuba’s national oil company.20 In its share, Repsol has a 40% majority interest; Statoil, Norway’s national oil company, holds 30%; and India’s state Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) holds the

remaining 30%.21¶ Diplomats in Havana told Reuters that Malaysia’s PETRONAS, which has partnered with Russia’s Gazprom, will get the rig next, after Repsol completes drilling.22 PETRONAS, which has four exploration blocks, has conducted seismic work and built offices for a battery of employees who will come to Cuba for the project, their sources

said.23¶ According to one foreign analyst, Cuba’s foreign partners have spent hundreds of millions of dollars preparing to drill off the coast. Lisa Margonelli adds, “There is the cost of the rig alone, and then there is the risk involved in building a rig for Cuban use which then must comply with the embargo— meaning it’s not easily repurposed for use around the globe. In the oil industry, what’s significant is not simply the investment in dollars, but the implied risk of making investments that cannot easily be recovered.”

Oil companies already finished exploration in Cuban waters – didn’t find anythingCuba Headlines, 5-3-2012, "Cuba's Oil Bust," Cuba Headlines, http://www.cubaheadlines.com/2013/05/03/37330/cubas_oil_bust.html, accessed 5-10-2013Remember all the hype about Cuba drilling for oil in Caribbean waters and American companies missing out on the bonanza because of the U.S. embargo? Well, like all the other Cuban get-rich-quick schemes of the past 50 years, this one seems to have flopped too. Last week, Florida's Sun Sentinel reported that "after spending nearly $700 million during a decade, energy companies from around the world have all but abandoned their search for oil in deep waters off the north coast of Cuba near Florida." Separately, CubaStandard.com reported on Friday that "the shallow-water drilling platform used by Russian oil company OAO Zarubezhneft will leave Cuban waters June 1, to be redeployed to Asia." According to the Sun Sentinel story, Jorge Piñon, an oil-industry guru who had been cheering Cuba's exploration attempts, said "Companies are saying, 'We cannot spend any more capital on this high-risk exploration. We'd rather go to Brazil; we'd rather go to Angola; we'd rather go to other places in the world where the technological and geological challenges are less.'"

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA560408


Inherency – Oil Spill Exceptions Now

US can cooperate with Cuba over oil spills even without the planMcClatchy Newspapers, 2-4-2011, “Coast Guard preparing for Cuba oil spills,” http://www.theolympian.com/2010/09/30/1531424/coast-guard-preparing-for-cuba.html, accessed 5-10-2013In addition, Repsol's drilling rig reportedly will be outfitted with a blowout preventer manufactured in the United States. Baumgartner noted that even without an agreement, the United States shared information with Cuba during the Deepwater Horizon spill over the summer "so that they knew what was going on.'' The State Department said last summer and repeated this week that U.S. oil spill cleanup service companies could be licensed through the Treasury Department to provide oil spill prevention support to companies working in Cuba. Baumgartner said the U.S. government is also looking to see if it needs to revise oil spill tracking computer models that were developed in 2004 when Repsol last drilled exploratory wells off the Cuban coast. "We have area contingency plans about how we would deal with oil that are pretty much well established,'' he said. "What we would look at here is what would we need to change or update, what are some other things we might need to be aware of with this particular scenario. "The primary responsibility lies with Repsol to address this, but we're going to look to be prepared to do whatever we need to do,'' he said.

US oil spill companies can already get licenses to cooperate in CubaNeelesh Nerurkar, Specialist in Energy Policy, and Mark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, Congressional Research Service, 2011, “Cuba’s Offshore Oil Development: Background and U.S. Policy Considerations,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41522.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013U.S. oil spill mitigation service companies can be licensed through the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) to provide oil spill prevention and containment support to companies operating in Cuba. At least two U.S. companies so far have received such licenses. According to the Department of State, the United States expects any foreign oil company engaged in oil exploration activities in Cuba to have adequate safeguards in place to prevent oil spills and contingency plans to address a spill should it happen.

U.S. companies can be exempted from the embargo to provide oil safety services New York Times, 9-29-2010, “Drilling Plans Off Cuba Stir Fears of Impact on Gulf,” p. npThere are signs the Obama administration is aware of the safety issues. Shortly after the BP accident, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, the agency that regulates the embargo, said it would make licenses available to American service companies to provide oil spill prevention and containment support. Charles Luoma-Overstreet, a State Department spokesman, said licenses would be granted on a “application-by-application basis,” but he would not comment on the criteria.


AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – China Impact Answers

US-China war won’t escalateJames Dobbins, directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation, previously served as American Ambassador to the European Community and Assistant Secretary of State, August/September 2012, “War with China,” Survival, Vol. 54, No. 4, p. 7-24It is important to begin any such analysis by recognising that China is seeking neither territorial aggrandisement nor ideological sway over its neighbours. It shows no interest in matching US military expenditures, achieving a comparable global reach, or assuming defence commitments beyond its immediate periphery . Such intentions might change, but if so, the United States would probably receive considerable warning, given the lead times needed to develop such capabilities. Despite cautious and pragmatic Chinese policies, the risk of conflict with the United States remains, and this risk will grow in consequence and perhaps in probability as China’s strength increases. Among the sources of conflict most likely to occasion a China–US military clash over the next 30 years, listed in descending order of probability, are changes in the

status of North Korea and Taiwan, Sino-American confrontation in cyberspace, and disputes arising from China’s uneasy relationships with Japan and India. All these sources are on China’s

immediate periphery, where Chinese security interests and capabilities seem likely to remain focused. It is important to stress that a China–US military conflict is not probable in any of these cases, but that judgement is based on the view that the United States will retain the capacity to deter behaviour that could lead to such a clash throughout this period.

Obama multilateralism means no sphere of influence impactsCharles A. Kupchan, professor of international affairs at Georgetown and Bruce W. Jentleson, professor of public policy and political science at Duke, October/November 2012, “Obama’s strong suit,” Chatham House, http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/The%20World%20Today/2012/october/WT1012Kupchan.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Obama’s formula for exercising American leadership rests on striking a balance between power and partnership geared

to the dynamic nature of this 21st century world. The Bush administration relied too heavily on power and bluster alone – a mistake that Romney seems all too prepared to repeat – failing to understand that brute force and intimidation often

do more to invite resistance than acquiescence . Instead, Obama has adhered to a centrist brand of US internationalism that provides leadership through teamwork and consensus building, relying on coercion only as a last resort. Obama’s embrace of multilateralism has shored up America’s alliances around the globe. Allies again feel like partners that

matter, not objects of American power. Opinion surveys reveal that in many countries, people hold much more positive views of the United States today than they did during the Bush era. Meanwhile, Washington has repaired its

tarnished relationship with international institutions, including the UN and NATO. All told, one of Obama’s signature accomplishments is the reclamation, at home and abroad,

of the legitimacy of American power and purpose.

China can’t challenge the USRobert D. Kaplan, senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, and Stephen S. Kaplan, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, March/April 2011, “America Primed,” National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/america-primed-4892, accessed 5-10-2013AMERICA’S MACROSTRATEGIC environment is chockablock with assets unavailable to any other country. If nothing else, the United States has an often-overlooked and oft-neglected bulwark of allies: the Anglosphere. This is Washington’s inner circle of defense ties, and it finds no equivalent in its competitor nations’ strategic arsenals. The Anglosphere is perennially—and incorrectly—declared dead or in decline by the media and politicians. Nevertheless, Great Britain, Canada, Australia and the United States remain

extremely close in their military and intelligence relations and exchange vast volumes of sensitive information daily, as they have for decades. On terrorism, virtually anything and everything is shared. The National Security Agency and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters have been nearly inextricable since World War II. The same is largely true of the CIA and Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service. The various English-speaking nations, in practical terms, even assign individual parts of the world to each other, and each worries about the others’ security equities. The linguistic and other cultural links between the United States and these other English-speaking countries are so deep that the sharing of sensitive information 24-7 is practically an afterthought, even as the media and politicians highlight the narcissism of comparatively small differences. Of course, the values and national purposes of the individual countries are unique, owing to different geographies and historical experiences; yet that is something America can quietly manage. Given how close the United States is to the Anglosphere in most ways, when these allies resist what America is attempting to do, that should constitute a warning that perhaps the policy coming out of Washington is either outright wrong or needs adjustment. (Canada’s balking in the face of U.S. bullying to hop on board the Iraq War train is an obvious case in point.) The

Anglosphere, in addition to everything else it provides, is a reality check that can facilitate American policy making. With a combined population of 420 million, with strategic locations off the continent of Europe (Great Britain), near the intersection of the Indian Ocean and western Pacific sea-lanes (Australia), and in the Arctic and adjacent to Greenland’s oil and gas (Canada), the Anglosphere, if not abused or ignored, will be a substantial hard-power asset for the United States

deep into the twenty-first century. China and Russia enjoy nothing comparable.

http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/america-primed-4892


AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – Russia Impact Answers

Russian alliance with Cuba probably won’t happen and doesn’t escalate without another bay of pigsInter-American Dialogue, 2012, “Are External Tensions Entangling Latin American Countries?” http://www.cepr.net/documents/CEPR_News/LAA120810.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013A Stephen Johnson, senior fellow and director of the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: "It may or may not be true that Russia's government is seeking to build resupply bases for its navy in Cuba, Vietnam

and the Seychelles islands. While Russian navy officials say 'da,' the foreign ministry says 'nyet.' Similar talk of establishing bases elsewhere, such as Venezuela, has not materialized. In any case, it would not present a direct threat unless such a facility became an entry point for hostile arms similar to the nuclear-tipped missiles

that provoked the 1962 crisis. Like any other state, Russia can strike diplomatic agreements to base military units in other countries.

No risk of Russian expansionismRobert D. Kaplan, senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, and Stephen S. Kaplan, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, March/April 2011, “America Primed,” National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/america-primed-4892, accessed 5-10-2013But this last scenario, among the worst anyone can come up with, is not at all dismal. Consider this: had power in Russia at a particularly fragile moment in 1917 not been wrested by the Bolsheviks, it is entirely possible—likely

even—that (over the course of the twentieth century) Russia would have evolved into a poorer, slightly more corrupt and unstable version of France and Germany, anchored to Europe, where most of Russia’s population

is in any case located. The seventy-year Bolshevik interregnum which created a non-European empire is now past, the strongly European configuration of Russian demography remains unchanged, and now–

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s fitfully modernizing national-security state has no ideology to impose outside its borders, nor troops available to permanently occupy Eastern Europe like it did during the Cold War. In short, Russia is demographically tied to the Continent but finds it hard to dominate it. Meanwhile, Germany, as its economy and power amplify,

may be forced to become a normal regional actor able to balance against Russia; in the process it might lose its quasi pacifism. Moreover, Moscow, as a fading European power, presents the United States with options because of Russia’s own manifold insecurities.

Even if Russia does expand, it’s not threateningRobert D. Kaplan, senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, and Stephen S. Kaplan, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, March/April 2011, “America Primed,” National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/print/article/america-primed-4892, accessed 5-10-2013Any new Russian empire will be a weak reincarnation of previous ones, limited not only by Chinese influence in the Russian Far East but by Chinese political and economic influence in Muslim Central Asia

as well. Newly vibrant states like China, India, Turkey, Poland and Kazakhstan are already containing Russia after a

fashion. America’s goal must be to support Russia’s consolidation of its own Far East, so that China will feel less secure on land and consequently be unable to so completely devote its energies to sea power.

Balancing against Russia in Europe and yet helping it abroad is the kind of subtle strategy that would help guard against any one nation achieving the level of dominance elsewhere that America already enjoys in the Western Hemisphere.




AT: Latin American Relations Advantage – Brazil Prolif Impact Answers

Brazil won’t proliferate - Regional integration and lack of motivationDr. Peter Lavoy, Director and Senior Lecturer in National Security Affairs at the Center for Contemporary Conflict, and Robin Walker, Research Associate in National Security Affairs at the CCC, 7-29-2006, http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/events/recent/NuclearWeaponsProliferation2016Jul06_rpt.asp, accessed 5-10-2013Both Argentina and Brazil have taken nuclear weapons production options off the table, and while both maintain civilian nuclear programs, they are about technology and modernity, not military power. Historically, Brazil sees itself as a potential power, and it uses this quest for greatness as a rationale for many

of its actions. Despite that, Latin America is an isolated security environment and historically militaries in the region have been more of a threat to their own countries than to foreign powers. The regional integration of South America, both economically and in security cooperation, further decreased the likelihood of international conflict. However, Argentina and Brazil maintain their nuclear expertise and capabilities. The governing left-center coalitions have nationalistic tendencies and view nuclear power as a way to demonstrate power, modernity and technology. Through its nuclear program, Brazil has achieved energy autonomy. The possibility also remains for either Argentina or Brazil to export technology in order to earn reciprocity in other matters.

No Brazil prolifDr. Peter Lavoy, Director and Senior Lecturer in National Security Affairs at the Center for Contemporary Conflict, and Robin Walker, Research Associate in National Security Affairs at the CCC, 7-29-2006, http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/events/recent/NuclearWeaponsProliferation2016Jul06_rpt.asp, accessed 5-10-2013Several factors were crucial in Brazil’s reversal. Brazil faced no serious threats to its national security. The personal leadership shown by the presidents of Brazil and Argentina also was key. Finally, technology denial, diplomatic pressure, and Brazil’s economic problems all slowed technical progress, buying time for political changes to occur and for confidence-building to work without being overtaken by the early attainment of dangerous capabilities.

Brazil doesn’t have the money for military modernizationDonald Schulz, Chairman of the Political Science Department at Cleveland State University, March 2000, “The United States and Latin America: Shaping an Elusive Future,” DTIC, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA375197&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013How serious a threat might Brazil potentially be? It has been estimated that if the nuclear plant at Angra dos Reis (Angra I) were only producing at 30 percent capacity, it could produce five 20-kiloton weapons a year. If production from other plants were included, Brazil would have a capability three times greater than India or Pakistan. Furthermore, its defense industry already has a substantial missile producing capability. On the other hand, the country has a very limited capacity to project its military power via air and sealift or to sustain its forces over long distances. And though a 1983 law authorizes significant military manpower increases (which could place Brazil at a numerical level slightly higher than France, Iran and Pakistan), such growth will be restricted by a lack of economic resources. Indeed, the development of all these military potentials has been, and will continue to be, severely constrained by a lack of money. (Which is one reason Brazil decided to engage in arms control with Argentina in the first place.)


AT: Oil Spills Advantage – SQ Solves Spills

No risk of Cuba spills – US isn’t keyRichard Sadowski, J.D. candidate at Hofstra, 2012, “Cuban offshore drilling: Preparation and prevention within the framework of the United States’ embargo,” http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1497&context=sdlp, accessed 5-10-2013Fears that Cuban offshore drilling poses serious environmental threats because of the proximity to the United States and the prohibition on U.S. technology transfer are overblown. Cuba has at least as much incentive to ensure safe-drilling practices as does the United States, and reports indicate that Cuba is taking safety seriously. n64 Lee Hunt, President of the Houston-based International Association of Drilling Contractors, said, "[t]he Cuban oil industry has put a lot of research, study and thought into what will be required to safely drill," and that "they are very knowledgeable of international industry practices and have incorporated many of these principles into their safety and regulatory planning and requirements." n65 Thus, while the economic embargo of Cuba restricts American technology from being utilized, foreign sources have provided supplemental alternatives.

Low risk of a spill – companies investing in Cuba have extensive offshore experience Neelesh Nerurkar, Specialist in Energy Policy, and Mark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, Congressional Research Service, 2011, “Cuba’s Offshore Oil Development: Background and U.S. Policy Considerations,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41522.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013It is difficult to assess the likelihood of a spill. According to Saipem, Scarabeo-9 is built to Norwegian standards, including extra equipment to shut off blown-out wells beyond what is required in the United States.30 Repsol has significant offshore experience, including projects in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. It has had issues with oil spills, which is not abnormal for an oil company.31 Among other Cuban lease holders, Petrobras and Statoil have extensive offshore experience, including projects in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, and are generally seen as accomplished offshore operators. Petronas, ONGC, and PetroVietnam also have offshore experience. PdVSA does not, but its offshore project appears the furthest from seeing drilling activity among existing licenses.

Coast guard already has contingency plans for a Cuban spillMcClatchy Newspapers, 2-4-2011, “Coast Guard preparing for Cuba oil spills,” http://www.theolympian.com/2010/09/30/1531424/coast-guard-preparing-for-cuba.html, accessed 5-10-2013The new U.S. Coast Guard commander for the southeastern United States said Thursday that his agency is looking "very seriously'' at Cuba's plans to drill for oil and reviewing contingency plans in the event of a spill that could reach the Florida coast. "We are

actively looking at all the different implications and scenarios to make sure our plans are revised and up to date,'' Rear Adm. William D.

Baumgartner told editors at the Miami Herald. He said other agencies also are reviewing their plans. The Spanish oil giant Repsol has leased several undersea blocks from the Cuban government and is expected to begin drilling next year with a rig, the Scarabeo 9, that is being built in China in part to avoid conflicts with the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba. The first block Repsol is expected to explore lies under 5,600 feet of water — 600 feet deeper than the water where BP's Deepwater Horizon well exploded in April — and about 55 miles south of Florida's Marquesas Key. Baumgartner acknowledged that the United States has no emergency response agreement with Cuba for oil spills. The U.S. signed such an agreement with Mexico in 1980. "We have longstanding agreements with Mexico about how we would manage incidents and the . . . plan is routinely monitored,'' Baumgartner said. "There is

not a bilateral U.S.-Cuba agreement on oil spills right now.'' While some oil industry analysts worry that Cuba would be ill prepared for an oil spill, Baumgartner noted that Repsol would be responsible for cleaning up any spill that entered U.S. waters and that the Coast Guard would manage

any cleanup in U.S. waters. "There are international agreements that discuss the notification and information sharing that has to happen between countries,'' he said.


AT: Oil Spills Advantage – Impact Defense

Cuban oil spills stay contained – no risk of large spreadDaniel J. Whittle et al, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf , accessed 5-10-2013While areas at risk of immediate impact appear to be those along the Straits of Florida and U.S. south Atlantic coast, scientists are careful to note that the models are far from precise, authoritative forecasts. NOAA specialists themselves emphasize that the models vary significantly based on weather data and location of the drilling site. Richard Sears, who served as chief scientific advisor on the federal commission that investigated the Deepwater Horizon disaster, stressed there was significant uncertainty in projecting the path of the BP oil slick in 2010, even with the combined technical expertise of federal agencies and private companies.42 “There were a wide array of models surrounding the BP spill, ranging from most of the oil projected to come ashore to Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida—to a significant portion going out through the Straits of Florida and up the East Coast towards North Carolina,” Sears said in a personal interview. “Neither of those happened.”

Spill impact would be very contained – probably only affects FloridaDaniel J. Whittle et al, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013In preparation for Repsol’s exploration project in 2012, NOAA generated computer tracking models to assess the threat to U.S. coasts and shorelines from deepwater drilling off the coast of Cuba. NOAA selected 20 potential deepwater drilling sites from the western region of Cuba to the Bahamas. The model was run using 200 different spill scenarios based on a variety of ocean current and weather conditions. According to the agency’s first study of a hypothetical spill from a deepwater well site offshore of Cuba, the area at highest risk of shoreline impact could be the eastern shore of Florida.40 Areas as far north as Charleston, South Carolina could face potential shoreline risk, though the modeled scenario predicted a lower likelihood of oiling for shorelines north of the Florida border.

Oceans resilientVictor Kennedy, PhD Environmental Science and Dir. Cooperative Oxford Lab., 2002, “Coastal and Marine Ecosystems and Global Climate Change,” Pew, http://www.pewclimate.org/projects/marine.cfm, accessed 5-10-2013There is evidence that marine organisms and ecosystems are resilient to environmental change. Steele (1991) hypothesized that

the biological components of marine systems are tightly coupled to physical factors, allowing them to respond quickly to rapid environmental change and thus rendering them ecologically adaptable. Some species also have wide genetic variability throughout their range, which may allow for adaptation to climate change.




AT: Oil Spills Advantage – Alt-Causes

Drilling in other areas make spills inevitableJeff Goodyear, Ph.D., an accomplished oceanographer and marine ecologist with over twenty-five years of experience August 2012, “Environmental Risks with Proposed Offshore Oil and Gas Development off Alaska’s North Slope”, http://www.nrdc.org/land/alaska/files/drilling-off-north-slope-IP.pdf, da 5-1-2013It is premature to proceed with oil and gas exploratory drilling and other oil and gas activities in the Beaufort and

Chukchi Seas. Scientists still have much to learn about the remote area where Shell and other oil corporations want to drill. The intricate workings of Arctic Alaska’s unique ecology remain mysterious in many ways. Perhaps even less is known about the likely effects of accidents that would result from large-scale oil and gas drilling. But there will be accidents; nowhere on Earth has oil development occurred without spills and other incidents. Even if there were

no such calamities, vessel traffic and other commercial activity generated by oilfield development would take a toll on the environment and the Alaska Natives tied to the natural world. In addition, it would be ironic, as well as tragic, for this nation to undertake a project that will exacerbate climate change in the very place where the dangerous impacts of this phenomenon are most obvious.

No impact to spills – transportation and natural sources outweighDavid Holt, President of Consumer Energy Alliance, 5-1-2012, “Technology is the Antidote to Risk,” National Journal, http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2012/04/what-more-can-be-done-to-ensur.php, da 5-1-2013But, what’s really missing from this question is how we, as a nation, balance risk with reward. The risk of a catastrophic blowout remains very, very small. In over forty years of offshore drilling, the United States has suffered two very large oil spills resulting from a blowout – the Santa Barbara blowout in 1969 and Deepwater Horizon in 2010. In fact, since 1979, for every 130 billion barrels of oil produced worldwide, one well incident resulting in a large oil spill has occurred. Of these incidents, one-third was the result of military action. In the United States, from 1971-2009, over 41,500 wells (exploratory and production wells) were drilled in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), producing nearly 16 billion barrels of oil. Of these 41,500 wells, fifty well control incidents caused the

release of oil. In effect, out of the billions of oil produced from the U.S. OCS, about 0.00001147% of the volume was spilled. For comparison sake, natural seeps account for approximately 63 percent of oil in the oceans while another 33 percent of oil in the ocean comes from cars, boats and planes .

Lots of other threats to ocean bio-diversity nowDanielle Torrent, University of Florida News, 4-11-2013, “Scientists stress need for national marine biodiversity observation network,” http://news.ufl.edu/2013/04/11/marine-biodiversity-network/, da 5-1-2013With ocean life facing unprecedented threat from climate change, overfishing, pollution, invasive species and habitat destruction, a University of Florida researcher is helping coordinate national efforts to monitor marine biodiversity. Humans depend on the ocean for food, medicine, transportation and recreation, yet little is known about how these vast ecosystems spanning 70 percent of the Earth’s surface are functioning and changing. Following a workshop sponsored by U.S. federal agencies in 2010, researchers at eight institutions have proposed a blueprint for establishing a cooperative marine biodiversity observation network to monitor trends in marine ecosystem health and the distribution and abundance of oceanic life. The research will appear online in BioScience Thursday and in the journal’s May print issue. Biodiversity observation networks are indispensible tools, allowing scientists to follow and predict ecosystem changes to facilitate proactive responses to environmental pressures, said study co-author Gustav Paulay, invertebrate zoology curator at the Florida Museum of Natural History on the UF campus.

http://news.ufl.edu/2013/04/11/marine-biodiversity-network/

http://energy.nationaljournal.com/2012/04/what-more-can-be-done-to-ensur.php

http://www.nrdc.org/land/alaska/files/drilling-off-north-slope-IP.pdf

http://www.nrdc.org/land/alaska/files/drilling-off-north-slope-IP.pdf


AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – US Not Key Cuban Oil

Cuban oil is a bust – nothing the US does mattersCuba Headlines, 5-3-2012, "Cuba's Oil Bust," Cuba Headlines, http://www.cubaheadlines.com/2013/05/03/37330/cubas_oil_bust.html, accessed 5-10-2013Then came promises of an oil boom and last week the predictable bust. The Brazilian state-owned Petrobras PETR4.BR

+1.79% had given up on deep-sea drilling in Cuban waters in 2011. Repsol REP.MC -0.53% gave up in May 2012. The

deep water platform it was using was then passed to Malaysia's state-owned Petronas, which also came up empty. Venezuela's PdVSA had no luck either.

In November Cuba announced that the rig that had been in use would be heading to Asia. Last week came the end of shallow-water drilling. The loss to the regime is not just about the foreign exchange that oil implied. The threat of spills, as well as lost opportunity for

American companies, were ways for Cuba to engage the U.S. and perhaps even get the embargo lifted without having to make any human-rights concessions. Some Democrats, whose party is more often found in opposition to oil exploration, tried to help. At a House subcommittee hearing in November 2011 on the matter, Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.) argued that "companies like Exxon Mobil, XOM +1.21% Chevron CVX +1.43% and the ConocoPhillips COP +1.37% " should be doing the "first drilling" in Cuban waters. "I would hope that the Majority's opposition to lifting the embargo against Fidel does not outweigh their fidelity to creating more jobs for American businesses and American workers in our own country."

No offshore drilling in Cuba – nothing for the US to participate inCuba Standard, 4-19-2013, "Russian offshore drilling to end earlier than anticipated,” Cuba Standard, http://www.cubastandard.com/2013/04/19/russian-offshore-drilling-to-end-earlier-than-anticipated/, accessed 5-10-2013The shallow-water drilling platform used by Russian oil company OAO Zarubezhneft will leave Cuban waters June 1, to be redeployed to Asia, the company that owns the rig said. The exploratory campaign of the Songa Mercur platform in Cuba ends June 1, “and the rig will thereafter be demobilized back to Asia where the rig is actively marketed,” Oslo-based Songa Offshore AS said in an April 4 update of its fleet performance. The pullout of the Songa Mercur comes earlier than previously announced. The Soviet-built and Norwegian-owned semi-submersible was originally chartered by Zarubezhneft for 325 days, according to a Songa press release last year. Given the rig’s arrival Nov. 15 in Cuban waters, the charter would have expired sometime in fall 2013. The pullout will effectively end all offshore exploratory drilling in Cuba, for now. A Zarubezhneft executive said last year the company expected to make an announcement about the results of the drilling in May.

The problem is geology, not the embargo – no oil in CubaEduard Gismatullin, 4-19-2013, "Bahamas Expects to Strike Oil After Cuba Exploration Failed," Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-19/bahamas-expects-to-strike-oil-even-after-cuba-exploration-failed.html, accessed 5-10-2013While Cuba’s national oil company, known as Cupet, has been pumping oil from the Caribbean island for decades, foreign explorers including Repsol SA, Petroliam Nasional Bhd. and Petroleos de Venezuela SA have failed to find commercial quantities of crude. OAO Zarubezhneft, a Russian state-owned oil producer, suspended drilling at its well off Cuba following a technical malfunction, Songa Offshore SE (SONG), the rig operator, said April 4. The well is the nearest to BPC’s planned drilling location. “Zarubezhneft was targeting similar deep” geology, Potter said. There are “concerns in Cuba that they won’t have time to get this deep” before releasing the rig in June, he said.Irina Brichkalevich, a spokeswoman for the Moscow-based company, declined immediate comment.


AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – No Drilling Now

No Cuban oil drilling now – lack of foreign investmentNew York Times, 11-9-2012, “Cuba’s Prospects for an Oil-Fueled Economic Jolt Falter With Departure of Rig,” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/world/americas/rigs-departure-to-hamper-cubas-oil-prospects.html, accessed 5-10-2013Cuba’s hopes of reviving its economy with an oil boom have produced little more than three dry holes, persuading foreign oil companies to remove the one deepwater rig able to work in Cuban waters so it could be used for more lucrative prospects elsewhere. The rig, which was built in China to get around the United States trade embargo, is expected to depart in the next few weeks. With no other rigs available for deepwater exploration, that means Cuba must now postpone what had become an abiding dream: a windfall that would save Cuba’s economy and lead to a uniquely Cuban utopia where the island’s socialist system was paid for by oil sales to its capitalist neighbors. “The Cuban oil dream is over and done with, at least for the next five years,” said Jorge Piñon, a former BP and Amoco executive who fled Cuba as a child but continues to brief foreign oil companies on Cuban oil prospects. “The companies have better prospects by going to Brazil, Angola and the U.S. Gulf.”

Cuban oil isn’t competitive no matter whatNew York Times, 11-9-2012, “Cuba’s Prospects for an Oil-Fueled Economic Jolt Falter With Departure of Rig,” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/world/americas/rigs-departure-to-hamper-cubas-oil-prospects.html, accessed 5-10-2013The potential for Cuba’s oil reserves, like nearly everything involving Cuba, has been a matter of dispute. Cuban officials had predicted that oil companies would find 20 billion barrels of oil reserves off its northern coast. The United States Geological Survey has estimated Cuban oil reserves at 5 billion barrels, one quarter of the Cuban estimate. The best-case scenario for production, according to some oil experts, would be for Cuba to eventually become a medium-size producer like Ecuador. But as the three dry holes showed, far more exploration effort would be needed, and that presents a challenge for a country with limited resources and the hurdle of American sanctions. There are many offshore areas that are competing with Cuba for the attention of oil companies, particularly off the coasts of South America and East and West Africa.

Our offense is unique – drilling can’t happen without the planJaime Suchlicki, Cuban-American Studies Prof @ University of Miami, June 2011, “Drilling for Oil in Cuban Waters,” http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/FOCUS_Web/Issue143.htm, accessed 5-10-2013Two specific areas where Cuba will continue to need to turn abroad are for deep water rigs and refining, including prospectively to American companies. The rigs are increasingly expensive to use (over $200,000 per day), and companies in these cases must pool resources, which has proved tricky given the wide array of foreign partners. Older technologies will make exploration and production more expensive. There is talk in

Washington of banning foreign companies operating in Cuban waters from using some U.S. cutting-edge technology. On refining, Cuba

almost entirely lacks heavy oil refining capacity. The Russians built a refinery in Cienfuegos, in central Cuba, but mothballed it in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Venezuela, which became Cuba’s largest benefactor, renovated the refinery at a cost of more than $170 million. The plant has the capacity to refine 65,000-100,000 barrels of heavy oil a day, which will allow Cuba to refine part of the oil from off-shore production. (3) In late 2010, China announced an investment of US$6 billion to expand the Cienfuegos refinery. The project will be funded primarily by China’s Eximbank and will more than double the refinery’s capacity to 150,000 barrels per day. (4) Cuba is going to need continued support in these areas, and while many foreign companies will rush in to fill the void, the specter of American companies providing rigs and refining support hangs over this entire process.

http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/FOCUS_Web/Issue143.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/world/americas/rigs-departure-to-hamper-cubas-oil-prospects.html





AT: Cuban Oil Advantage – AT: Ethanol Impact

No Cuban ethanol – not enough sugar and Castro says noAdriana E. Sanchez, NotiEn, News Agency, 2011, “Biofuels Fighting for Space in Central America and Cuba,” http://repository.unm.edu/bitstream/handle/1928/12797/Biofuels%20Fighting%20for%20Space%20in%20Central%20America%20and%20Cuba.pdf?sequence=1, accessed 5-10-2013Similar to Central America, Cuba’s potential to become a leader in biofuel production is subject to speculation, and it will be strongly tied to the energy policy that the island adopts within the next few years. The

Association for the Study of Cuban Economy (ASCE) says sugarcane could seemingly provide the raw material for biofuel production. But tight supplies might be a problem. The island nation is expected to produce only 1.2 million tons of raw sugar. This is a very small amount when compared to sugar production in the 1990s, which was estimated to reach 7 million to 8 million tons per year. With its current sugarcane output, Cuba could produce an estimated 3.2 billion gallons of ethanol per year, energy industry sources say. ¶ In an interview with NotiEn, Jorge Piñón, a well-known expert on Cuban energy policy, suggested that Cuba would have to stop its dependence on fossil fuels from foreign countries if it is to develop energy independence. "Cuba passed from papa Russia to papa Venezuela to solve its population’s energy demand," said Piñón. "Cuba must strive to start working on an energy policy that can help the country independent of who is in power." ¶ Piñón said ethanol production has not been more actively promoted because of the complicated relation that Cuba has had with sugarcane. "Fidel Castro puts his foot down every time there are talks about an increase in ethanol production; for him it is a political issue," said Piñón, a visiting research fellow at the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University’s Latin American and Caribbean Center and an analyst for the Center for Hemispheric Policy at the University of Miami.

Castro won’t allow Cuban ethanol – too worried about food tradeoffJonathan Benjamin-Alvadaro, PhD Poly Sci @ Nebraska, 2010, “Cuba’s Energy Future: Strategic Approaches to Cooperation,” Brookings, p. npCastro has rightly pointed out that there can be a direct trade-off between using land for food production and for ethanol. And in many areas of the world, the shift in land use to crops for ethanol has resulted in rapidly rising costs for food. There are also trade-offs between increasing acreage devoted to crops for ethanol and other objectives such as issues related to climate, environment, and biodiversity. In Brazil, for example, increasing acreage under sugarcane cultivation has resulted in shifting other crops to newly cleared areas, often in the rainforest, a process that ultimately could have devastating effects on climate and biodiversity within and beyond Brazil.

Cuba won’t do ethanolMarc Frank, Reuters, 2-22-2008, “Cuban ethanol boom doubtful after Castro exit,” http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/22/cuba-castro-ethanol-idUSN2261316320080222, accessed 5-10-2013Fidel Castro's retirement this week fueled speculation that ethanol could become a billion-dollar export

industry for the cash-strapped communist country under his brother Raul Castro.¶ The younger Castro, who is expected to be confirmed as Cuba's new leader on Sunday, is considered less ideological and more pragmatic than his brother, and has indicated an interest in drawing more foreign investment in recent speeches.¶ But Fidel Castro is expected to retain huge influence in Cuba and he has repeatedly branded the use of food crops to produce fuel as a crime against humanity because rising prices will increase hunger.¶ A local economist with ties to the sugar industry said Cuba is working to develop technology to produce fuel from milled sugar cane bagasse. If successful, Cuba could become more interested in making ethanol, he said.¶ "It is inconceivable while Fidel is still alive that his brother Raul, or anyone else, would convert a significant proportion of our sugar crop or vacant land to ethanol," the economist said, asking not to be

identified.¶ "Even after Fidel dies, I can't imagine that happening for quite some time," he said.


Solvency – Cuba Says No

Cuba says no – too many bureaucratic obstaclesJonathan P. White, J.D., University of Colorado School of Law, Summer 2010, “NOTE & COMMENT: Drilling in Ecologically and Environmentally Troubled Waters: Law and Policy Concerns Surrounding Development of Oil Resources in the Florida Straits,” Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law & Policy, 21 COLO. J. INT'L ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 557, p. 557 Additionally, Cuba's ability to cultivate a flourishing oil industry depends on Havana's willingness to reduce bureaucratic obstacles to investment on the island. Writing in the Journal of Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, Daniel Erikson of the Washington, D.C., policy organization The Inter-American Dialogue describes the sizeable institutional and bureaucratic hurdles facing foreign

investment in Cuba: Cuba remains a rigid communist state with a centrally controlled economic structure, a workforce with uncertain habits, low per capita income, and high levels of external debt. Canadian and

European investors in Cuba cite numerous difficulties related to red tape, arbitrary treatment by Cuban regulators, interference in hiring decisions, and questionable labor practices. n171 Accordingly, while Cuba's

potential oil reserves have drawn willing investors, the extent to which drilling in Cuban waters thrives

depends upon overcoming these infrastructural, administrative, and bureaucratic obstacles. China's recent replacement of Havana's relic "camel" buses may provide the best analogy of what is required to update and expand the infrastructure necessary for drilling. The example suggests that Cuba lacks the means or initiative necessary to expand and modernize existing infrastructure on its own, but welcomes foreign capital to accomplish those objectives. Whether that capital arrives is, at this stage, speculative.

Cuba doesn’t want relations with the US to improveAnya Landau French, Director of the New America Foundation U.S. – Cuba Policy Initiative, 2-10-2013, “Secretary Kerry: Will He or Won't He Take On Cuba?,” http://thehavananote.com/2013/02/secretary_kerry_will_he_or_wont_he_take_cuba, accessed 5-10-2013And, then there’s the Cuban government. As much as many in the Cuban government (particularly the diplomatic corps)

want to reduce tensions with the United States and finally make real progress on long-standing grievances held by both sides,

they aren’t desperate for the big thaw. Many U.S. analysts, including in government, speculate that this is because Cuba’s leaders don’t really want to change the relationship, that strife serves their needs better than would the alternative. That could be so, but there’s also a hefty amount of skepticism and pride on the Cuban side, as well. After so many decades and layers of what Cuba calls the U.S. blockade, Cubans are unwilling to have the terms of any ‘surrender’ dictated to them. In fact, they are bound and determined that there will be no surrender. They would argue, what is there to surrender but their government’s very existence, something the leadership obviously isn’t going to put on the table.

Offshore drilling doesn’t spill over to broad relations Tim Padgett 12, TIME, 1-27-2012, “The Oil Off Cuba: Washington and Havana Dance at Arms Length Over Spill Prevention,” http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2105598,00.html#ixzz2NxDjxp81, accessed 5-10-2013What experts on both sides of the Straits hope is that sea currents will carry any oil slick directly out into the Atlantic Ocean. But that's wishful thinking. So probably is the notion that U.S.-Cuba cooperation on offshore drilling can be duplicated on other fronts. Among them are the embargo, including the arguably unconstitutional ban on U.S. travel to Cuba, which has utterly failed to dislodge the Castro regime but which Washington keeps in place for fear of offending Cuban-American voters in swing-state Florida; and cases like that of Alan Gross, a U.S. aid worker imprisoned in Cuba since 2009 on what many call questionable spying charges.


Solvency – Long Timeframe For Drilling

Long timeframe for Cuba oil production Daniel J. Whittle, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, et al, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Energy experts also note that examples from deepwater exploratory drilling around the world demonstrate that it is not atypical to drill numerous dry or commercially unviable holes in new fields before a profitable discovery is found.24 Jorge Piñón, the former president ofAmoco Oil Latin America and now an energy

specialist at the University of Texas at Austin, explained that economic discoveries often play out over a longer time horizon. “A lot of people have been very naïve in thinking that an oil-rich Cuba was going to materialize overnight, and that is not the case,” Piñón said. “You don’t just turn the faucet on overnight.”25

Takes a long time – Cuba has to modernize infrastructure and reduce bureaucracyJonathan P. White, J.D., University of Colorado School of Law, Summer 2010, “NOTE & COMMENT: Drilling in Ecologically and Environmentally Troubled Waters: Law and Policy Concerns Surrounding Development of Oil Resources in the Florida Straits,” Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law & Policy, 21 COLO. J. INT'L ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 557, p. 557 Beyond the environmental risks associated with drilling in the Florida Straits, any industrialization of this maritime zone depends on Cuba's success in modernizing its refining capacity and reducing bureaucratic impediments to investment . n161

While interest in oil leasing off Cuba has generated a "buzz," as indicated by the formation of joint ventures between

international firms and Cubapetroleo, the considerable expenses associated with doing business with the communist nation may inhibit drilling. n162 In terms of infrastructure, Cuba's oil refineries, many relics from the Soviet-era, are in decrepit condition, and their poor repair may impede the nation's ability to exploit its offshore oil resources .

n163 Cuba needs international investment to improve its refineries. n164 Without refinery refurbishment, some argue that Cuba will have no place to send its oil for refining, since nearby U.S. refineries will not accept it . n165 Whether Cuba receives foreign capital for its refineries depends on a host of factors including world oil prices, the actual size of the island's offshore deposits, and, most acutely in the near future, the continued economic and political support of other nations, such as its main regional ally, Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. n166 A November 2008 visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao suggests that China might become an active player in the island's economy, a role that could include revitalizing some of the country's poor infrastructure. n167 Tellingly, China has modernized [*582] Havana's public buses in recent years by delivering new buses to the capital to replace the city's dirty "camello" (camel) metropolitan transit buses, which were left from the Soviets. n168 China is also Cuba's second largest trading partner, behind Venezuela. n169 Whether investment from China or elsewhere improves Cuba's oil infrastructure is speculative, though modernization is essential to Cuba realizing its oil potential. In the end, some experts on Cuba politics believe that the only serious contenders for updating and expanding Cuba's oil infrastructure are U.S. oil companies presently barred from operating in Cuba. n170

Takes year before Cuba starts drillingNeelesh Nerurkar, Specialist in Energy Policy, and Mark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, Congressional Research Service, 2011, “Cuba’s Offshore Oil Development: Background and U.S. Policy Considerations,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41522.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Cuba is moving toward development of its offshore oil resources. While the country has proven oil reserves of just 0.1 billion barrels, the U.S. Geological Survey estimates that offshore reserves in the North Cuba Basin could contain an additional 4.6 billion barrels of undiscovered technically recoverable crude oil. The Spanish oil company Repsol, in a consortium with Norway’s Statoil and India’s Oil and

Natural Gas Corporation, is expected to begin offshore exploratory drilling in 2011, and a number of other companies are considering exploratory drilling. At present, Cuba has six offshore projects with foreign oil companies while two more projects are being negotiated. If oil is found, some experts estimate that it would take at least three to five years before production would begin. While it is unclear whether offshore oil production could result in Cuba becoming a net oil exporter, it could reduce Cuba’s current dependence on Venezuela for oil supplies.



Oil DA Links

Plan sends a large signal of new oil production – Cuban reserves are largeRichard Sadowski, J.D. candidate at Hofstra, 2012, “Cuban offshore drilling: Preparation and prevention within the framework of the United States’ embargo,” http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1497&context=sdlp, accessed 5-10-2013A U.S. Geological Survey estimates that Cuba's offshore oil fields hold at least four and a half billion barrels of recoverable oil and ten trillion cubic feet of natural gas. n29 Cupet, the state-owned Cuban energy company, insists that actual reserves are double that of the U.S. estimate. n30 One estimate indicates that Cuba could be producing 525,000 barrels of oil per day. n31 Given this vast resource, Cuba has already leased offshore oil exploration blocks to operators from Spain, Norway, and India. n32 Offshore oil discoveries in Cuba are placing increasing pressure for the United States to end the embargo. First, U.S. energy companies are eager to compete for access to Cuban oil reserves. n33 [*38] Secondly, fears of a Cuban oil spill are argued to warrant U.S. investment and technology. n34 Finally, the concern over Cuban offshore drilling renews cries that the embargo is largely a failure and harms human rights.

At least 4.6 billion barrels in the North Cuba basin Daniel J. Whittle, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, et al, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013 In 2005, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) released an assessment that estimated a mean of 4.6 billion barrels of undiscovered oil, a mean of 9.8 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered natural gas, and a mean of 0.9 billion barrels of undiscovered natural gas liquids in the North Cuba Basin of Cuba (see Figure 1).

Even that number is highly conservativeDaniel J. Whittle, Cuba Program Director for the Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund, et al, 2012, “Bridging the Gulf: Finding Common Ground on Environmental and Safety Preparedness for Offshore Oil and Gas in Cuba,” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/EDF-Bridging_the_Gulf-2012.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Secondly, the USGS estimate of 4.6 billion barrels of undiscovered oil represents a mean figure based on a conservative probability distribution. The high-end potential of the North Cuba Basin, according to the agency’s assessment, could reach 9.3 billion barrels of undiscovered oil and 21.8 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered natural gas. The USGS assessment suggests that the country’s low-end potential is 1.1 billion barrels of undiscovered oil and 2.0 trillion cubic feet on undiscovered natural gas. The USGS characterizes the low-end potential as a 95 percent likelihood that the calculated figures, at minimum, are undiscovered. The wide range of these figures depicts the current level of uncertainty that exists regarding the size of undiscovered oil and gas reserves in Cuba. While the mean figures are commonly cited in media reports, it is important to note that they are not absolute and represent only one value in a broad statistical distribution.




Politics Link – Joint Oil Unpopular

Bipartisan opposition to joint oil development with CubaThe Oracle, 2-16-2011, “US leaders must cooperate with Cuba to prevent oil spills,” http://www.usforacle.com/us-leaders-must-cooperate-with-cuba-to-prevent-oil-spills-1.2471166, accessed 5-10-2013In Singapore, a semisubmersible oil rig is being prepared for oil exploration off the coast of Cuba. Repsol, a Spanish energy company working with Cuba, is expected to drill as close as 50 miles off the coast of Florida and at depths deeper than Deepwater Horizon, which exploded in U.S.

waters last year, producing the largest oil spill ever in the Gulf of Mexico. These developments rightly have the attention of Florida's federal leaders. Attempts to use brute force in ceasing Cuban oil operations to protect Florida's beaches, marine life and tourism revenue may be sincere, but they are not the best way to prevent a repeat of the Deepwater spill. The bipartisan efforts include placing pressure on Repsol and legislation such as U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson's (D-Fla) plan to pull U.S. visas for company executives associated with Cuban oil . or U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan's (R-Sarasota) proposed legislation that would have the U.S. Interior Department deny oil and gas leases to companies dealing in Cuban oil .

The plan gets drawn into divisive embargo debates Neelesh Nerurkar, Specialist in Energy Policy, and Mark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, Congressional Research Service, 2011, “Cuba’s Offshore Oil Development: Background and U.S. Policy Considerations,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41522.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013On the opposite side of the policy debate, a number of policy groups and members of Congress oppose engagement with Cuba, including U.S. investment in Cuba’s offshore energy development. A legislative initiative introduced in the 111th Congress, H.R. 5620, would go

further and impose visa restrictions and economic sanctions on foreign companies and its executives who help facilitate the development of Cuba’s petroleum resources. The bill asserts that offshore drilling by or under the authorization of the Cuban government poses a “serious economic and environmental threat to the United States” because of the damage that an oil spill could cause. Opponents of U.S. support for Cuba’s offshore oil development also argue that such involvement would provide an economic lifeline to the Cuban government and thus prolong the continuation of the communist regime. They maintain that if

Cuba reaped substantial economic benefits from offshore oil development, it could reduce societal pressure on Cuba to enact market-oriented economic reforms. Some who oppose U.S. involvement in Cuba’s energy development contend that while Cuba might have substantial amounts of oil offshore, it will take years to develop. They maintain that the Cuban government is using the enticement of potential oil profits to break down the U.S. economic embargo on Cuba.

Exceptions to the Cuban embargo spark a political fightNew York Times, 11-19-2012, “Easing of Restraints in Cuba Renews Debate on U.S. Embargo,” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0&pagewanted=print, accessed 5-10-2013In Washington, Mr. Gross is seen as the main impediment to an easing of the embargo, but there are also limits to what the president could do without Congressional action. The 1992 Cuban Democracy Act conditioned the waiving of sanctions on the introduction of democratic changes inside Cuba. The 1996 Helms-Burton Act also requires that the embargo remain until Cuba has a transitional or

democratically elected government. Obama administration officials say they have not given up, and could move if the president decides to act on his own. Officials say that under the Treasury Department’s licensing and regulation-writing authority, there is room for significant modification . Following the legal logic of Mr. Obama’s changes in

2009, further expansions in travel are possible along with new allowances for investment or imports and exports, especially if narrowly applied to Cuban businesses. Even these adjustments — which could also

include travel for all Americans and looser rules for ships engaged in trade with Cuba , according to a legal analysis commissioned by the Cuba Study Group — would

probably mean a fierce political fight. The handful of Cuban-Americans in Congress for whom the embargo is sacred oppose looser rules. When asked about Cuban entrepreneurs who are seeking more American support, Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the Florida Republican who is chairwoman of the House Foreign Relations Committee ,

proposed an even tighter embargo.


Politics Link – AT: Anti-Spills Plan Popular

Plan unpopular – Congress thinks drilling in Cuba is risky and they think prevention is the best medicineJaime Suchlicki, Cuban-American Studies Prof @ University of Miami, June 2011, “Drilling for Oil in Cuban Waters,” http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/FOCUS_Web/Issue143.htm, accessed 5-10-2013A key factor driving opposition to Cuban drilling in the U.S., especially from politicians representing Gulf Coast states, is concern about what happens if something goes wrong with Cuban drilling. The Gulf

oil spill in 2010 increased apprehension about liability close to the Florida Coast and the Bahamas. Given Cuba’s economic conditions, liability for an oil spill will rest with the European and Asian companies involved in drilling. The U.S. embargo would prevent U.S. companies, in most cases, from helping with cleanup efforts in the event of a major accident. Yet in the event of a spill, the U.S. would be under pressure to grant an exception to the embargo allowing U.S. companies to help so that the spill would not negatively impact US territory. During the Gulf spill, the U.S. shared information with Cuba about the spill. The Administration publicly declared its willingness to provide limited licenses for U.S. firms to respond to a catastrophe that threatened Cuba. Meanwhile, Cuba permitted a vessel from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to look for damage in Cuban waters. But, ongoing concerns about the US underwriting the costs of spill cleanup has increased political pressure to halt Cuban drilling before it even begins.

Environmental concerns don’t outweigh our linksKaren Hoffman, Earth Island Journal, 3-15-2012, “Cuba’s Gulf of Mexico Oil Exploration Makes Strange Bedfellows,” http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/cubas_gulf_of_mexico_oil_exploration_makes_strange_bedfellows/, accessed 5-10-2013From his hotel in Havana, marine scientist and conservation policy specialist David Guggenheim, aka the “Ocean Doctor,” can see the lights of Scarabeo 9. The recently arrived oil-drilling platform off the Cuban coast began drilling exploratory deepwater wells on the Cuban side of the Florida Straits, about 70 miles from Key West, last month. The 53,000-ton rig is, literally, under more pressure than Deepwater Horizon. Operated by Spanish company Repsol, it’s what’s known as an “ultra-deepwater” platform, drilling at depths up to 6,000 feet. (Deepwater Horizon’s depth was 5,000 feet.) A Scarabeo 9 spill would damage critical marine ecosystems in the Gulf. US environmentalists and policymakers are concerned that Cuba doesn’t have the resources, technology,

or expertise needed to prevent or respond to such a disaster. But even the threat of irreparable environmental damage

hasn’t been enough to clear away old Cold War resentments and political inertia between the two countries and get them working together to formulate an emergency response plan. Which is why an unlikely coalition of environmentalists, oil executives, and scientists — like Guggenheim — are joining forces to try to, in his words, “fight half a century of an illogical policy with logic.”

Joint oil development is unpopular – combines anti-Cuba backlash and anti-drilling Jaime Suchlicki, Cuban-American Studies Prof @ University of Miami, June 2011, “Drilling for Oil in Cuban Waters,” http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/FOCUS_Web/Issue143.htm, accessed 5-10-2013The prospect of foreign companies exploring for petroleum in the waters of Cuba and close to Florida is driving debate about possible involvement of U.S. companies, many of whom are eager to join their European and Asian counterparts. American firms have privately suggested that if foreign companies are exploring so close to American shores, American companies should also be allowed to explore in Cuban waters. This raises concerns, however, among Florida’s Congressional delegation, resolutely opposed to drilling off the coast of Florida and in the Gulf. Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson wrote to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking her “to use diplomatic channels to temporarily keep Repsol (Spain) and others from supporting drilling for oil off Cuba”. This is an uphill battle, however, given the variety of countries involved, their commercial interests, and the difficulty in negotiating with Spain’s Socialist government.




Cellulose DA 1NC

Cuban oil also results in a cellulosic ethanol boomSarah Stephens, et al, Executive Director of the Center for Democracy in the Americas, 2011, “As Cuba plans to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. policy poses needless risks to our national interest,” http://democracyinamericas.org/pdfs/Cuba_Drilling_and_US_Policy.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Cuba’s potential contribution to the regional energy market could be valuable to the U.S.Professor Soligo cites several benefits to the United States if Cuba is able to realize the potential of its oil resources in the Gulf of Mexico. In his remarks at the National Foreign Trade Council, Professor Soligo said, “Whoever develops these resources it would be good for the United States.”93 For example, Professor Soligo observed that Cuba has the potential to develop an ethanol industry, and the U.S. cannot meet its ethanol targets without imports. Policy changes would be required to allow Cuba access to the U.S. market, and would provide substantial environment and energy policy benefits were they to be made. While Cuba has opposed using corn for ethanol, it has the resources to produce cellulosic material in its place.

Cellulosic ethanol is unsustainable and causes environmental collapseTad Patzek, Engineering prof @ Berkeley, 2008, “Can the Earth Deliver the Biomass-for-Fuel we Demand,” in Biofuels, Solar, and Wind as Renewable Energy Systems, ed. Pimentel, p. 36-44Business as usual will lead to a complete and practically immediate crash of the technically advanced societies and, perhaps, all humanity. This outcome will not be much different from a collapse of an overgrown colony of bacteria on a petri dish when its sugar food runs out and waste products build up. Today, the human “petri dish” is Earth’s surface in Fig. 2.5, and “food” is the living matter and water we consume and the ancient plant products and minerals (oil, natural gas, coal, etc.) we mine

and burn. The Earth operates in endless cycles as in Fig. 2.9, and modern humans race along short line segments, as in Fig. 2.10 and 2.7. At each turn of her cycles, the Earth renews herself, but humans are about to wake up inside a huge toxic waste dump with nowhere to go. 2.3 Plan of Attack As you are beginning to suspect, it is not sufficient to limit ourselves just to discussing liquid transportation fuels and their future biological sources. These transportation fuels intrude upon every other aspect of life on the Earth: Availability of clean water to drink and clean air to

breathe, healthy soil and healthy food supply, destruction of biodiversity and essential planetary services in the tropics, acceleration of global climate change, and so on. As with many important policy-making decision processes, I start from the end,

here the cellulosic ethanol refineries. This is where most public money, attention, and hope are. I show that these refineries are inefficient compared with the existing petroleum- and corn-based refineries, and are difficult

to scale up. Then I return to the beginning and show that even if the cellulosic biomass refineries were marvels of efficiency , they still could not maintain our current lifestyles by a long stretch , simply because the Earth will not give us the extra biomass needed to keep on existing as we do . For a while we might continue to rob this biomass from the poor tropics, but the results are already disastrous for all humanity, see Fig. 2.11.

Cellulosic ethanol destroys soil decomposers – extinctionJohn Ikerd, Professor Emeritus of Agricultural Economics at the University of Missouri, June 24, 2008, “Rethinking the Meaning of Waste in Relation to Energy, Food, and Climate,” online: http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/papers/Lake%20Ozark%20-%20Rethinking%20Waste.htm, da 5-1-2013Everything we do affects everything else, including us. When we generate energy from wood wastes or sawdust, we are depriving the decomposers in forest soils of food and thus deprive food from forests of the future. When we generate energy from crop residues, animal manure, and other agricultural wastes, we are depriving the decomposers in agricultural soils of the food they need to make soil nutrients available for plants of the future. We humans are biological beings; we eat other biological organisms. We can’t eat the sun or

digest the electricity generated by windmills, falling water, or photovoltaic cells. If wastes equivalent to ten percent of our current fossil energy use were diverted from the agricultural waste stream, it would deprive the decomposers of about 75-percent of

so-called wasted energy they use to help feed agricultural crops. When we generate energy from agricultural residues and wastes, we are depriving people of food just as surely as when we generate

bioenergy from food crops; the process is just a bit more complex.The same basic ethical and ecological questions are raised by using agricultural wastes to produce biofuels and biomaterials as are raised by using corn and soybeans to produce ethanol and biodiesel. In addition,

depriving the soil decomposers of their life’s energy may represent an even more serious threat to the future of humanity than does depleting the earth’s remaining fossil energy. Even if we deplete the earth of fossil energy, humanity might still learn to

live from the daily inflow of new solar energy – we would still have biological sources of food. If we starve the biological foundation of the earth’s living pyramid, the decomposers, we may well have deprived future humanity of their only significant source of biological energy – their only source of food.

http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/papers/Lake%20Ozark%20-%20Rethinking%20Waste.htm


Mexico Guest Workers Neg


Inherency – Yes Guest Worker Program

Guest worker program will happen nowThomas D. Elias, 4-25-2013, "Will farm labor shortage drive immigration changes?" Coast News, http://thecoastnews.com/2013/04/will-farm-labor-shortage-drive-immigration-changes/, accessed 5-10-2013But the nation’s largest labor group, the AFL-CIO, has now worked out a deal with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business interests that would allow workers to be imported as needed to fill jobs that otherwise go unfilled. The proposed new visa would not specify a single employer for each worker, so that employers could no longer discipline migrant workers by threatening to have them deported if they’re not docile. It would also include wages above the federal minimum and require decent working conditions. The Chamber also agreed to the unions’ idea of setting up a new government bureau to curtail work visas when unemployment rises to as-yet unspecified levels. Two

things are clear from all this: It’s highly likely that any major immigration change legislation passing Congress this year will have a guest worker component. And that this is happening mainly because of the labor shortages here and in other big farm states.

Guest worker program will pass nowAshley Parker and Steven Greenhouse, 3-30-2013, "Deal Reached on Guest Worker Program in Immigration," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/us/politics/deal-said-to-be-reached-on-guest-worker-program-in-immigration.html?_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013The nation’s top business and labor groups have reached an agreement on a guest worker program for low-skilled immigrants, a person with knowledge of the negotiations said on Saturday. The deal clears the path for broad immigration legislation to be introduced when Congress returns from its two-week recess in mid-April. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, convened a conference call on Friday night with Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Richard L. Trumka, the president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the nation’s main federation of labor unions, in which they agreed in principle on a guest worker program for low-skilled, year-round temporary workers. Mr. Schumer is one of eight senators from both parties who have been negotiating an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws. Pay for guest workers was the last major sticking point on a broad immigration package, and one that had stalled the eight senators just before the break. The eight senators still need to sign off on the agreement between the business and labor groups, the person with knowledge of

the talks said. “This issue has always been the deal breaker on immigration reform, but not this time,” Mr. Schumer said.

Agreement on guest worker package now – ensures the bill will be introducedAshley Parker and Steven Greenhouse, 3-30-2013, "Deal Reached on Guest Worker Program in Immigration," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/us/politics/deal-said-to-be-reached-on-guest-worker-program-in-immigration.html?_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013The accord between the influential business and labor groups all but assured that the bipartisan group of senators would introduce their broad immigration legislation in the next few weeks. Their bill, which they have been meeting about several times a week since the November election, would provide a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country. It would also take steps to secure the nation’s borders. A similar bipartisan group in the House has been meeting on and off for nearly four years, and hopes to unveil its own immigration legislation shortly. The agreement resolved what the pay level should be for low-skilled immigrants — often employed at hotels and restaurants or on construction projects — who

could be brought in during labor shortages. Labor groups wanted to ensure that guest workers would not be paid less than the median wage in their respective industries, and the two sides compromised by agreeing that guest workers

would be paid the higher of the prevailing industry wage as determined by the Labor Department or the actual employer wage. Under the deal, guest workers would be allowed to pursue a path to citizenship and to change jobs after they arrived in the United States.


AT: Agriculture Advantage – No Farm Labor Shortage

No farm labor shortage – it’s a total mythJohn Carney, senior editor, 11-29-2012, "The Farm Labor Shortage That Isn't," CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/id/50016592, accessed 5-10-2013Despite the absolute lack of evidence of anything approaching a farm-labor shortage, complaints about this invisible menace continue to make headlines . Here's how a recent piece from the Washington bureau of Gannett begins: Farmers from Arizona to New York are struggling to

find enough people to harvest their crops this season, a shortage they blame on state and federal laws designed to crack down on the migrant labor that makes up the bulk of the nation's seasonal farmworkers. "We see shortages in all parts of the country," said Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau. "Farmers are struggling with fewer bodies out there to harvest the crop. They're definitely stressed." Farmers with labor-intensive crops or livestock, including fruit, vegetables, nuts, Christmas trees and dairy cows say they are being

hit especially hard. "We've got neighbors literally competing against each other just to have enough of a workforce to harvest their crops," Boswell said. Heaven forefend! Neighbors "literally competing against each other." It's practically a civil war. The fact is that there is no data whatsoever to support the alleged farm labor crisis . The latest data, issued from the Department of Agriculture on November 27,

shows that labor expenses on farms have increased just 0.7 percent over the past year . Costs for hired labor, those who work on

the farm long-term, are up just 0.5 percent. Costs for contract labor, the harvest-time pickers, are up just 1.5 percent. In other words, labor costs are well-below the level of general price inflation. In fact, farm labor costs are still below where they were in 2008 on a nominal basis. In real terms, labor costs are falling for farmers.

No farm labor shortage nowLinda Levine, specialist in Labor Economics for the Congressional Research Service, 11-9-2009, “Farm Labor Shortages and Immigration Policy,” CRS, http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL30395.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Although the employment of hired workers engaged in crop or livestock production (including contract workers) has fluctuated erratically over time, the trend overall has been downward (see columns 3 and 7 in Table 1). The employment pattern among crop workers hired directly by growers (i.e., excluding those supplied by farm labor contractors and crew leaders) regularly rose and then fell back during the 1990s, but to a

higher level through 2000 (column 4). This ratcheting upward of employment produced a 12% gain over the 1990-2000 period. In contrast, other wage and salary workers experienced steady and robust job growth over almost the entire period: from 1990 to 2000, wage and salary employment in nonfarm industries advanced by 18%.

These divergent employment patterns suggest that hired farm workers did not share equally in the nation’s long

economic expansion of the 1990s and appear to be inconsistent with the presence of a nationwide farm labor shortage at that time. Nonfarm wage and salary employment showed signs of revival from the 2001 recession in 2003. It continued to rise until the decade’s second recession began in December 2007. In contrast, the various measures of farm worker employment fluctuated erratically between the two recessions and generally ended the period down from their initial level. The disparate patterns again suggest that hired farm workers did not share equally in the nation’s latest economic expansion and appear to be inconsistent with the existence of a nationwide farm labor shortage. (See columns 3 and 7 of Table 1.)

There’s an ag labor surplus, not a shortageLinda Levine, specialist in Labor Economics for the Congressional Research Service, 11-9-2009, “Farm Labor Shortages and Immigration Policy,” CRS, http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL30395.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Employment data paint an incomplete picture of the state of the labor market. At the same time that employment in a given occupation is decreasing or increasing relatively slowly,

unemployment in the occupation might be falling. Employers would then be faced with a shrinking supply of untapped labor from which to draw. A falling unemployment rate or level would offer some basis for this possibility. As

shown in Table 3, the unemployment rate of hired farm workers engaged in crop or livestock production (including contract labor) is quite high. Even the economic boom that

characterized most of the 1990s did not reduce the group’s unemployment rate below double-digit levels, or about twice the average unemployment rate in the nation at a minimum. Discouragement over their employment prospects in agriculture or better opportunities elsewhere (e.g., the housing construction industry) may have prompted some unemployed farm workers to leave the sector as evidenced by their reduced number over the years (see column 4 of the table). Others have examined the

unemployment rates in counties that are heavily dependent on the crop farming industry. The GAO, for example, found that many of these agricultural areas chronically experienced double-digit unemployment rates that were well above those reported for much of the rest of the United

States. Even when looking at monthly unemployment rates for these areas in order to take into account the seasonality of farm work, the agency found that the agricultural counties exhibited comparatively high rates of joblessness .22 These kinds of findings imply a surplus rather than a shortage of farm workers.23 Another perspective on the availability of untapped farm labor comes from the DOL’s National Agricultural Worker Survey (NAWS). During FY2001-FY2002, the typical crop worker

spent two-thirds of the year performing farm jobs. The remainder of the year, these farm workers either were engaged in nonfarm work

(10% of the year) or not working (16%) while in the United States, or they were out of the country (7%).24 This pattern also suggests an excess supply of labor, assuming that the workers wanted more farm employment . Alternatively, grower advocates contend that the pattern is a

manifestation of working in a seasonal industry. Even in a month of peak industry demand, however, only a small majority of farm workers hold farm jobs .25


AT: Agriculture Advantage – Agriculture Alt-Causes

Immigration isn’t key – Mexicans don’t want to do ag jobs anymoreJohn Carney, 3-12-2013, "Why Farm Labor Is Declining," CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/id/100547277, accessed 5-10-2013In other words, the supply of farm labor is shrinking faster than the supply of non-farm labor. Which means that

a good deal of the supply problem is not about the borders. Rather, it's competition from better jobs.

This isn't confined to Mexicans or Mexican-Americans in California. It's happening in Mexico, too. "Mexico is following the pattern of countries around the world: as its income rises, workers shift out of farm work into other sectors. Mexico's per-capita income, adjusted for the cost of living, now exceeds $15,000 per year. Growth in Mexico's non-agricultural employment began before the recession and persists now. As non-farm opportunities increase, the Mexican workforce will continue moving out of agriculture," Taylor and Charlton write.

EPA regs doom ag industry competitivenessBen Lieberman, climate policy analyst for the heritage foundation, 4-1-2010, “EPA's Global Warming Regulations: A Threat to American Agriculture,” Heritage, http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/04/EPAs-Global-Warming-Regulations-A-Threat-to-American-Agriculture, accessed 5-10-2013Although global warming legislation looks less likely for the foreseeable future (though the President and some Senators are trying to revive it), there is an ongoing attempt to impose this agenda via regulations. The EPA regulations that would apply to

stationary sources pose a threat to American agriculture. Pursuant to a 2007 Supreme Court decision, the EPA has authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act. In January,

the EPA concluded that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. The first substantive regulations, on car and truck greenhouse gas emissions, were promulgated on April 1. However, now that carbon dioxide is a regulated pollutant for motor

vehicles, all the other provisions of the Clean Air Act--including those targeting stationary sources--will also apply, because they impose non-discretionary requirements for all regulated pollutants. Any source emitting 250 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), an easily met threshold, would be subject to the statute's tough requirements. Overall, a number

of onerous permitting and other provisions would apply to a million or more entities that use fossil fuels--small businesses, commercial properties, and agricultural operations.[4] Of particular

concern to the American Farm Bureau is Title V, the Clean Air Act's operating permits program, as well as the pre-construction permitting program known as Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD).[5] According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Title V would apply to "dairy

facilities with over 25 cows, beef cattle operations of over 50 cattle, swine operations with over 200 hogs, and farms with over 500 acres of corn."[6] The compliance burden would be daunting. The EPA puts the first-year cost of each

Title V permit at $46,500 and PSD at $84,500.[7] The EPA has tried to avoid the impact on small businesses and farms (at least temporarily) by increasing the threshold for CO2 emissions from 250 to 25,000 tons, the so-called tailoring rule, which the EPA claims would spare 37,351 farms and ranches from Title V and 299 from PSD.[8] However, such a regulatory rewrite of the Clean Air Act is on shaky legal ground, and in any event the agency conceded that it would start regulating smaller sources in six years.[9] Thus, those 37,000-plus farms would come under these costly and burdensome programs in 2016, if not sooner. In addition, the agency holds open the possibility of regulating emissions in other ways, as yet unspecified, that could be applicable to farms.[10] In some respects, EPA regulations would be even worse for farmers than cap and

trade. Cap-and-trade legislation would have targeted energy companies and not individual farmers, though the higher energy costs would have been passed on to them. But EPA regulations would be directly imposed on farmers, imposing tremendous paperwork and compliance burdens as well as energy cost increases comparable to those inflicted by cap and trade. Such unilateral action would also put American agriculture at a competitive disadvantage relative to the rest of the world. No other country has contemplated imposing anything like the EPA's regulatory

scheme on its farmers. Thus, the EPA's regulations would make it harder for American farmers to compete in international markets because they would face higher operating costs .

Other factors substantially outweigh labor shortages – their ev is hypeJohn Carney, senior editor, 11-29-2012, "The Farm Labor Shortage That Isn't," CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/id/50016592, accessed 5-10-2013This doesn't mean all is well for the farmer. There are genuine challenges and for the first time in years, farm profits seem set to fall this year. The Department of Agriculture is projecting farm revenue to come in at a record

$448.5 billion, which is a 4.6 percent gain over last year. But expenses are rising for farms. The big increases in expenses are the cost of feed (up $12.2 billion, or 13 percent), seed (up $2.1 billion, or 11.9 percent), fertilizer (up $1.6 billion, or 6.3 percent),

and pesticides (up $1.1 billion, or 9 percent). These increases dwarf the $200 million increase in labor costs spread across the nation. If

there were a labor shortage, we'd see the price of farm labor rising rapidly. We just don't see that—indicating that there is no shortage at all. There is, instead, a consist cry from the farm lobby for policy makers to adopt policies aimed at lowering labor costs. Gannet reports, for example, that "the American Farm Bureau and other farm groups are working on a plan to present to the new Congress that would allow more migrant laborers to work legally on U.S. farms." That's what all this noise is really about: enacting policies to crush already low farm wages by allowing farmers to import more foreign workers.


AT: Agriculture Advantage – Ag Not Key Economy

The US is no longer an agricultural economyUSA.Org, 2013, "A Service Economy," http://www.usa.org/economy/service_economy.html, accessed 5-10-2013Services produced by private industry accounted for 67.8 percent of U.S. gross domestic product in 2006, with real estate and financial services such as banking, insurance, and investment on top. Some other categories of services are wholesale and retail sales; transportation; health care; legal, scientific, and management services; education; arts; entertainment; recreation; hotels and other accommodation; restaurants, bars, and other food and beverage services.

Production of goods accounted for 19.8 percent of GDP: manufacturing—such as computers, autos, aircraft, machinery—12.1

percent; construction, 4.9 percent; oil and gas drilling and other mining, 1.9 percent; agriculture, less than 1 percent. Federal, state, and local governments

accounted for the rest—12.4 percent of GDP. The most rapidly expanding sectors are financial services; professional, scientific, and technical

services; durable goods manufacturing, especially computers and electronic products; real estate; and health care. Decreasing their share of GDP growth are agriculture and mining and some other kinds of manufacturing, such as textiles. "Low-value, commodity-based manufacturing is disappearing from the United States, moving to developing nations where routine manufacturing can be performed at low cost," the Council on Competitiveness says.

Agriculture is only 1% of US GDPFAO, 2009, “State of the World’s Forests 2009,” UN Food and Ag. Org., ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0350e/i0350e01e.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013The region accounted for 32 percent of global GDP in 2006, although this share is declining . From2000 to

2006,GDP growth was about 3 percent. GDP is forecast to increase fromUS$15 trillion in 2006 to more than US$20 trillion in 2020. The United States accounts for more than 80 percent of regional GDP (Figure 39). Poverty and income disparity are important issues in the region. About 35 percent of the rural population in

Mexico (World Bank, 2004) and about 12 percent in the United States(USDA, 2004)were estimated to be below the poverty level in 2002. As a result of the shift from an agricultural to an industrial economy in the twentieth century, agriculture now accounts for less than 1 percent of GDP in Canada and the United States . This transition also contributed to the stabilization of forest area (MacCleery, 1992).Mexico is still in the transformation phase; agriculture’s share in GDP declined from 13 percent in 1970 to 8 percent in 1990 and 4 percent in 2006(WorldBank,2007a). However, it remains important for employment in the country (19percentof employmentin2004)(FAO,2005b).Although commercial agriculture has grown rapidly, subsistence agriculture also remains prominent, particularly under the system of ejidos (communally held lands) and other traditional community arrangements. Agriculture-related deforestation remains high.

Agriculture isn’t key to the economyThomas M. Hoenig, Int’l Confed. for Ag. Credit, 9-23-2002, “Agricultural Lenders”, http://www.kc.frb.org/SPCH&BIO/IntnlConfAgCredit.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013While continued consolidation poses a challenge, an even bigger challenge may be adjusting to a dynamic rural economy where agriculture’s direct role is declining. Many of your member

institutions were created when agriculture dominated the rural economy. That is simply no longer the case throughout much

of the developed world. Other non-agricultural industries are becoming more important in the rural economy. Agriculture can still supply new growth to the rural economy, especially through a new generation of products, but agriculture’s role in the rural economy seems likely to continue its trend to still lower levels in the years to come . Here in the United States, we can track this trend for

agriculture. Agriculture accounts for less than 2 percent of U.S.[GDP] gross domestic product. Similarly, agriculture’s share of the U.S. civilian labor force has fallen from 12 percent in 1950 to only 2 percent in 2000. The smaller role of agriculture in the rural economy is even more striking. During the past 30 years, agriculture’s share of employment has fallen from 4.9 to 3.1

percent. Agriculture’s share of rural income has fallen more than half, from 13 percent to 5.0 percent. In short, agriculture is now the primary source of income in only one in every 10 rural counties. Agriculture’s declining role in the economy is not unique to the United States, of course. The trend is widespread throughout the developed world. By 2000, agriculture accounted for less than 5 percent of GDP in most developed countries and less than 2 percent in Japan, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Agriculture’s share of the labor force fell from a third to approximately 6 percent in Japan during the past 40 years. During the same time period, agricultural employment fell sharply in other countries across the globe, including Germany, France, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.


AT: Agriculture Advantage – AT: Small Farms Impact

Small farms are already destroyedJacob C. Toews, 6-10-2010, “The Disappearing Family Farm,” Real Truth Magazine, http://realtruth.org/articles/100607-006-family.html, accessed 5-10-2013Gone are the evening meals where families recounted the day’s accomplishments.A class of society is being lost, and with it, iconic barns and sprawling rural landscapes are fading at an alarming rate. The concept of a small family farm—one that has been owned and operated by one family for possibly several generations—has been all but destroyed. Changing Structure The ever-encroaching crush of urbanization plays a major part in the disappearance of the family farm. “According to the Census of Agriculture,” a United States Department of Agriculture report revealed, “the number of U.S. farms fell sharply until the early 1970s after peaking at 6.8 million in 1935…By 2002, about 2.1 million farms remained.” “The American Farmland Trust estimates an acre of U.S. farmland goes into development every two minutes, while Environment Colorado estimates the state lost 1.26 million acres of agricultural land between 1997 and 2002,” The Denver Post reported. “This loss averages 690 acres per day in Colorado, the third highest in the nation.”

Agribusiness inevitably destroys small farms – solves their impacts betterJacob C. Toews, 6-10-2010, “The Disappearing Family Farm,” Real Truth Magazine, http://realtruth.org/articles/100607-006-family.html, accessed 5-10-2013Giant agribusinesses are an additional factor. Even though 90 percent of all farms are still owned by families or individuals, more and more farms are becoming “corporations.” These giant agribusinesses are not just involved in local farming, but also in the distribution, processing, storage and retail of farm products nationwide. The result is that milk in a carton now can contain the milk of hundreds of cows. The same can be said of the fast-food burger. “The days when hamburger meat was ground in the back of a butcher shop, out of scraps from one or two sides of beef, are long gone…the huge admixture of animals in most American ground beef plants has played a crucial role in spreading E. coli…” Eric Schlosser wrote in Fast Food Nation. “A single fast food hamburger now contains meat from dozens or even hundreds of different cattle.” As small family farms are squeezed out of existence, investment groups and equity firms are buying more and more land, according to a Reuters article. “The World Bank and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) cited the trend in a

report in January, noting a ‘sharp increase’ in agricultural investments the world over. Such private investment could offer significant benefits to the sector—not to mention the human race—by helping modernize farming tools and techniques, the agency said.

Small farms can’t solve food needsSteve Savage, Agricultural Scientist, 2-4-2010, “You Talk About ‘Industrial Farming’ Like It’s A Bad Thing!” Eat Drink Better, http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2010/02/04/you-talk-about-industrial-farming-like-its-a-bad-thing/, accessed 5-10-2013I’m all for small-scale, local farms, CSAs, gardens and the like, it is just that this cannot be extrapolated as the kind of farming that will feed the US population, let alone the millions of people around the world who depend on

US agriculture. To think that it can is actually a dangerous delusion that is wide-spread among our non-farming population. People just don’t understand the scale of food production that is needed. The demonization of “industrial farming” serves no

constructive purpose. Yes, modern farming is “industrial.” It has to be. Like any industry, farming can be improved from an environmental point of view (and it has, dramatically). We will accomplish a lot more for the environment and for humanity by supporting the further adoption of “Agriculture 2.0″ practices on “industrial” farms than by pretending we don’t need it.


AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – Illegal Immigration Down

Illegal immigration downJeffrey S. Passel, Senior Demographer for the Pew Hispanic Center, and D’Vera Cohn, Senior Writer for Pew, 2-1-2011, “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010,” Pew Hispanic Center, http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/133.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013As of March 2010, 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants were living in the United States, virtually unchanged

from a year earlier, according to new estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. This stability in 2010 follows a two-year decline from the peak of 12 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2009 that was the first significant reversal in a two-decade pattern of growth. The

number of unauthorized immigrants in the nation’s workforce, 8 million in March 2010, also did not differ from the Pew Hispanic Center estimate for 2009. As with the population total, the number of unauthorized immigrants in the labor force had decreased in 2009 , from its peak of 8.4 million in 2007. The number of children born to at least one unauthorized-immigrant parent in 2009 was 350,000, essentially the same as it was a year earlier. An analysis of the year of entry of unauthorized

immigrant parents of babies born in 2009 indicates that 61% arrived before 2004, 30% arrived from 2004 to 2007, and 9% arrived from 2008 to 2010. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, unauthorized immigrants made up 3.7% of the nation’s population and 5.2% of its labor force in March 2010. Births to unauthorized immigrant parents accounted for 8% of newborns from March 2009 to March 2010, according to the center’s estimates, which are based mainly on data from the

government’s Current Population Survey. The decline in the population of unauthorized immigrants from its peak in 2007 appears due mainly to a decrease in the number from Mexico, which went down to 6.5 million in 2010 from 7 million in 2007. Mexicans remain the largest group of unauthorized immigrants, accounting for 58% of the total. The decline in the population of unauthorized immigrants since 2007 has been especially marked in some states that recently had attracted large numbers of unauthorized immigrants. The number has decreased in Colorado, Florida, New York and Virginia. The combined unauthorized immigrant population of three contiguous Mountain West states—Arizona, Nevada and Utah—also declined. The number of unauthorized immigrants may have declined in other states as well, but this cannot be stated conclusively because the measured change was within the margin of error for these estimates.

Immigration from Mexico is downJulia Preston, 4-23-2012, "Mexican Immigration to U.S. Slowed Significantly, Report Says," NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/us/mexican-immigration-to-united-states-slows.html, accessed 5-10-2013Mexican immigration to the United States, the largest wave of migrants from a single country in the nation’s history, has stopped increasing after four decades of surging growth and may be declining, according to a report released Monday by the Pew Hispanic Center.In what the report called a “notable reversal of the historic pattern,” the number of Mexicans leaving rose sharply in the five years after 2005, while the new flow of migrants coming from Mexico into the United States fell steeply, Pew demographers found. For the first time in at least two decades, the population of illegal immigrants from Mexico living in this country significantly decreased, according to the report. In 2011, about 6.1

million Mexicans were living here illegally, down from a peak of nearly 7 million in 2007, it said. “We really haven’t seen anything like this in the last 30 or 40 years,” said Jeffrey Passel, the senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center and a co-writer of the report with D’Vera Cohn and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera. The center, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington that does not advocate policy positions, has provided some of the most reliable estimates for the elusive numbers of Mexican immigrants. Over all, the report said, about 58 percent of an estimated 11.2 million illegal immigrants in the United States are from Mexico.

Lots of people are leaving the US and going back to MexicoJulia Preston, 4-23-2012, "Mexican Immigration to U.S. Slowed Significantly, Report Says," NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/us/mexican-immigration-to-united-states-slows.html, accessed 5-10-2013The report presents a striking change from earlier findings by the Pew Hispanic Center on the number of Mexicans who have been returning to their country.

While earlier Pew studies said the data did not show any exodus, the report published Monday includes new data from the 2010 Mexican census revealing that about twice as many Mexicans returned home from 2005 to 2010 than in the previous five years . In all, about 1.4 million people moved from the United States to Mexico in that time, the Mexican census showed. The report cited Mexican data showing a big increase in the number of United States citizen children with Mexican parents who were living

in Mexico — to about 500,000 in 2010 from about 240,000 in 2000. Some of those Americans are the children of deportees, the data suggested. The report found that more Mexicans who were deported after coming to the United States to work said they were not likely to try to re-enter. About 20 percent of deportees in 2010 said they would not try to return, up from 7 percent in 2005. Still, in 2010, six in every 10 deportees said they would try to re-enter within seven days, according to the new Pew report.


AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – AT: Terrorism Impact

Illegal immigration doesn’t cause terrorismDaniel Griswold, associate director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, 4-1-2004, “Securing Our Borders Under a Temporary Guest Worker Program,” Congressional Testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Citizenship, http://www.freetrade.org/node/341, accessed 5-10-2013The Southwest border is not a frontline on the war on terrorism. First, Mexicans themselves are not a national security threat. No Mexican national to my knowledge has been connected with Al Qaeda or any other international terrorist network. Mexicans almost universally come here to work. Second,

international terrorists have not viewed the Southwestern border as a preferred means of entry . The

Canadian border is more attractive. It's twice as long, with far fewer border patrol personnel per mile.

Middle Eastern nationals tend to stand out more in Mexican society than in Canadian society or at a typical

international airport. Recall that it was at a port of entry at the Washington state/British Columbia border in 1999 that U.S

agents apprehended Ahmed Ressam, one of the so-called millennium bombers. Why would potential terrorists incur the risks of sneaking across our

Southwest border when other doors are more attractive? A special investigation by the Associated Press last November found that not a single terrorist suspect had been arrested trying to enter the United States across the Mexican border since the September 11 terrorist attacks. As border patrol agent Matt Roggow told the AP, "The people who are coming across [the Mexican] border are people who can only pay $1,500 to a smuggler.

A terrorist can pay $30,000 or $40,000 and go to the northern border where we don't have the resources to stop them."[2] While we were guarding the back door in 2001 to make sure no Mexican immigrants entered our country illegally, we were neglecting the far larger barn door of temporary non-immigrant visas through which all the September 11 hijackers entered.

Nuclear terrorism is overblown government hypeAlan Wolfe, Poly Sci Prof @ Boston College, 3-27-2012, “Fixated by “Nuclear Terror” or Just Paranoia?” HLS Watch, http://www.hlswatch.com/2012/03/27/fixated-by-“nuclear-terror”-or-just-paranoia-2/, accessed 5-10-2013Now it is an election year, and there is bound to be the usual ridiculous rhetoric coming from the offices of those who are intent on becoming a political leader. That’s to be expected. But the fixation isn’t on the actual capability of terrorists to cause a nuclear incident; rather, the fixation is on the possibility that it could someday happen. This is the difference between fact-based risk management on existing hazards and paranoid overreaction to perceived threats.

If nuclear terrorism hasn’t happened yet, it won’t – terrorists are weaker nowJustin Sigger, defense policy analyst, 1-26-2010, “Terrorism Experts Can Be Alarmists, Too”, http://armchairgeneralist.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/01/terrorism-experts-can-be-alarmists-too-1.html, accessed 5-10-2013You find the famous bin Laden 1998 quote about WMDs, references from George "slam dunk" Tenet's book on al Qaeda intentions and actions in the desert, meetings between Muslim scientists and suppliers, statements by terrorists that were obtained under "interrogations," and yes, even Jose Padilla's "dirty bomb" - a charge which people may remember the US government

dropped because it had no evidence on this point. And no discussion about AQ would be complete without the "mobtaker" device that never really emerged in any plot against the West. That is to say, we have a collection of weak evidence of intent without any feasible capability and zero WMD incidents - over a period of fifteen years, when AQ was at the top of their game, they could not develop even a crude CBRN hazard, let alone a WMD capability. Mowatt-Larsen doesn't attempt to answer the obvious question - why didn't AQ develop this capability by now? He points to a June 2003 article where the Bush administration reported to the UN Security Council that there was a "high probability" that al Qaeda would attack with a WMD within two years. The point that the Bush administration could have been creating a facade for its invasion into Iraq must have occurred to Mowatt-Larsen, but he dodges the issue. This is an important report to read, but not for the purposes

that the author intended. It demonstrates the extremely thin thread that so many terrorist experts and scientists hang on when they claim that terrorists are coming straight at the United States with WMD capabilities.


AT: Illegal Immigration Advantage – Link Turn

Guest worker programs just increase illegal immigrationRamesh Ponnuru, visiting fellow @ American Enterprise Inst., 4-22-2013, "New Immigration Bill Has One Terrible Flaw," Bloomberg, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-22/new-immigration-bill-has-one-terrible-flaw.html, accessed 5-10-2013So we would have a two-tier labor market. Most people who work in the U.S. can quit their jobs without worrying that they’ll be ejected from the country

after 60 days of unemployment. Temporary workers would have no such security. Most people can leave one industry for another. The temporary agricultural workers in the bill would have no such freedom. Some foreigners may choose this fate as better than their alternatives. It seems unfair, though, to ask Americans to compete with workers who will be more willing to put up with bad working conditions because of this artificially precarious situation. Organized labor and its liberal allies have traditionally opposed guest-worker programs. President Bill Clinton came out strongly against the idea when he was in office, citing the work of Barbara Jordan’s bipartisan commission on immigration. That

commission found that such programs were bad for workers and didn’t reduce illegal immigration as advertised. Instead they increased it: Guest workers overstayed their terms, and family members and friends came to join them.

Guest worker programs increase illegal immigrationPaulina M. Irigaray, 2011, “An Analysis of the H-2a Agricultural Guest Worker Program” p. 36-37As a result of these IRCA and H-2A program drawbacks, one can discern that the agricultural guest worker program is inflexible, onerous, and defective for the United States’ agricultural market needs. “.. .Guest.worker programs are simply too stiff to fit with the dynamic U.S. market” (Thornburgh) The American agribusiness industry is not static and is reliant on Guest worker programs consequently, the failure of such programs ampli fies illegal immigration, exploitation of farm laborers, and manipulation of the laws. Furthermore, the inconsistencies and malfunctions that

surround the H-2A program also consequently affect the American economy and labor markets. b. Economic Considerations “A foreign guest worker program would certainly increase illegal immigration by exposing more foreign workers to the economic attractions of the American labor market” (Briggs 242). Immigration, legal and illegal, have economic repercussions. In tenns of the H-2A program, an analysis of these effects implies the success rate of the H 2A guest worker program. Determining whether or not the United States’ agricultural sector experiences labor shortages, depleted wages and other economic concerns can divulge truths about illegal immigration and exploitation. Certain laws weaved into the H-2A program correspond directly with these facets of the economy, those of which will demonstrate variances in the program and imply malfunction.

Guest worker programs don’t solve illegal immigrationPhilip Martin, professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics at UC Davis, April 2000, “Guestworker Programs for the 21st Century,” Center for Immigration Studies, http://www.cis.org/articles/2000/back400.html, accessed 5-10-2013Guest worker programs have failed wherever and whenever they have been tried. The indicators of failure are that some migrants settled, illegal migrants accompanied legal migrants, and the programs lasted longer and got larger than anticipated. Some level of failure can be expected when governments attempt to regulate a relationship in which

migrants and employers have different goals than regulators. Experience with guest workers suggests that three principles should guide any new policies:

Illegal immigration must be under control. Migrants may prefer to be unauthorized if they have to pay fees to get visas , or if they are

tied to one employer. Employers can avoid wage and housing regulations, as well as the scrutiny of government agents, if they hire unauthorized workers outside the program. Employers must have a continued incentive to seek alternatives. Under the current H-2A program, once an employer satisfies program requirements, he or she pays only administrative fees. Employers who have adapted to guest worker rules do not actively seek U.S. workers or labor-saving alternatives. For example, the Florida sugar cane industry began importing Caribbean workers to hand cut cane in 1943 and maintained that cane harvesting could not be mechanized because unique muck soils would bog down machines. But after a lawsuit was filed in the early 1990s alleging that workers guaranteed $5.30 an hour and required to cut one ton of cane per hour should be paid $5.30 a ton, rather than the $3.70 a ton they were paid, cane companies mechanized the harvest within three years. Bilateral agreements should govern recruitment, remittances, and returns. The H-2A program gives U.S. employers complete discretion in where and how to recruit workers -- employers can and do select the "best and brawniest" of foreign work forces; migrants often pay hundreds of dollars to get selected for U.S. farm jobs. The workers' home country should be involved in the guest worker program so that recruitment can be regulated, remittances used to foster job-creating growth, and worker returns facilitated. The

AgJOBS proposal does not satisfy any of these criteria. Instead, it hands a major new task to state ES offices that they are unlikely to be able to fulfill; the ES failure to register and have available to farmers legal workers will help to divert blame for "labor shortages" from farmers to the government. The complex legalization program, with its requirements for continued farm work, is likely to foster both exploitation and fraud. Workers wanting to


satisfy the five-year requirement to become immigrants are not likely to complain and risk firing. Farm labor contractors, on the other hand, can develop a lucrative sideline issuing real and false letters of employment to probationary AgJOBS workers.


AT: US-Mexico Advantage – Yes US-Mexico Relations

US and Mexico are boosting relations nowMegan Slack, 5-3-2013, "President Obama Reaffirms the United States-Mexico Relationship," White House, http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/05/03/president-obama-reaffirms-united-states-mexico-relationship, accessed 5-10-2013On the first day of his trip to Mexico and Costa Rica, President Obama was in Mexico City for meetings and a joint press conference with President Peña Nieto. The two leaders,

who first met in Washington, DC last November, discussed the broad range of issues that bind our nations and affect the daily lives of citizens in both countries, and renewed their commitment to a strong relationship between the United States and Mexico. While working together to confront urgent challenges like security, “we can’t lose sight of the larger relationship

between our peoples, including the promise of Mexico’s economic progress,” President Obama said. “I believe we’ve got a historic opportunity to foster even more cooperation, more trade, more jobs on both sides of the border, and that’s the focus of my visit. The United States and Mexico have one of the largest economic relationships in the world. Our annual trade has now surpassed $500 billion -- more than $1 billion every day. We are your largest customer, buying the vast majority of Mexican exports. Mexico is the second largest market for U.S. exports. So every day, our companies

and our workers -— with their integrated supply chains —- are building products together. And this is the strong foundation that we can build on.

Obama is boosting relations with Mexico nowJo Tuckman, 5-3-2013, "Barack Obama calls for 'new realities' and improved US-Mexico relations," Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/03/barack-obama-mexico-enrique-pena-nieto, accessed 5-10-2013President Barack Obama called for a positive re-evaluation of the US-Mexico relationship on Friday, in an emphatically upbeat

speech in Mexico City. Obama expressed strong confidence that immigration reform in the US would become a reality before the end of the year. "It is time to put old mind sets aside and time to recognize new realities," Obama said, in a speech to hundreds of Mexican students interspersed with

political leaders. The relationship, he said, should not be defined by threats but by shared prosperity. This message of mutual respect, partnership and economic potential has dominated Obama's two-day visit to Mexico , which began on Thursday with a meeting with the

country's new president, Enrique Peña Nieto. In the press conference that followed, the emphasis on the economy dovetailed with an effort to defuse underlying tensions over America's role in Mexico's drug wars, by stressing that US collaboration would be respectful of the new government's promise to prioritize reducing violence rather than going after the cartels.

US-Mexican relations are high nowGulf Times, 5-5-2013, "Mexico, US commit to moving beyond the stereotypes," http://www.gulf-times.com/us-latin%20america/182/details/351514/mexico,-us-commit-to-moving-beyond-the-stereotypes, accessed 5-10-2013US President Barack Obama and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, emphasised this week a new phase in ties between the two countries, one that focuses more on their economic partnership and moves away from stereotypes and traditional problems. “It’s time for us to put the old mindsets aside,” Obama said Friday. “The great partnership between our two countries will not simply continue. It’s going to go stronger and become broader ,” he

said. Indeed, Obama’s fourth visit to Mexico as president contained the declared will to move away from immigration and security, the classic core of relations between the two nations, away from prejudice and what Obama defined as “distortions”. “It’s time to recognise

new realities, including the impressive progress of today’s Mexico,” he said. While Obama has talked about a relationship of equal partners, it somehow sounded different this week. The rhetoric came packed with figures: Mexico is the second-largest export market for US goods, bigger than the so-called BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China) taken together, Obama noted. The Mexican economy is much smaller than that of its northern neighbour, but it is the

world’s 14th largest. And, as Pena Nieto pointed out, 40% of the inputs needed to put together Mexico’s exports actually come from the US. The two economies are in many ways intertwined, not least through the millions of Mexicans or people of Mexican descent who live and work in the US, legally or illegally. “We believe in Mexico

and want to be a partner in your success,” Obama said. Obama and Pena Nieto highlighted the need to strengthen that partnership, and the fact that strengthening it requires a wider focus that moves away from the traditional issues of the bi-national debate.


AT: US-Mexico Advantage – Alt-Causes To Relations

Their evidence on relations is just hype – lots of challenges to US-Mexico relationsTom Barry, 5-7-2013, "Changing Perspectives on US-Mexico Relations," Truthout, http://truth-out.org/news/item/16221-changing-perspectives-on-us-mexico-relations, accessed 5-10-2013It’s unfortunate that the two presidents chose to hold their May 2-3 summit in Mexico City. Both nations and Presidents Barack Obama and Enrique Peña Nieto would have been better served by a meeting at the border—where the grim reality of neighborly relations would not be masked by the pomp and circumstance of the grand presidential residence of Los Pinos. A meeting at the customs building in Ciudad Juárez—the site of the first Mexico-U.S.

presidential meeting in 1909 between Porfirio Díaz and William Taft—would have likely resulted in a more memorable and productive summit of the current heads of state, Enrique Peña Nieto and Barack Obama. As it is, this meeting will likely be soon forgotten—lost in protocol, predictable rhetoric about interdependence, and the photogenic smiles of the two presidents. A century ago the Rio Grande/Río Bravo clearly marked the divide between El Paso and Juárez, the border twins that were jointly known as El Paso del Norte—the pass to the north. Today, however, it’s unlikely that the presidential delegations and the accompanying media would now passes for a river—really just an alarmingly greenish trickle of

pesticides, fertilizer runoff, and human waste. Instead of news photos from the bilateral meeting depicting two smiling presidents, we would be witnessing images of the stark divide between the two neighbors: the formidable border security infrastructure, the smog rising from the long lines of vehicles waiting to cross, the beggars and street vendors taking advantage of the stalled south-north traffic, the ravages of the drug wars, the miles of low-slung factories called maquiladoras, the sprawling colonias of Mexico’s expanding, but still largely poor, middle class (those families earning at least $7,500 annually), and still-poorer squatter settlements that spread out into the Chihuahuan Desert. The lead items of the Los Pinos meeting are ones that have long dominated U.S.-Mexico presidential meetings: immigration, border control, economic integration, and drug-related security. The presidents will achieve some camaraderie chatting about the domestic political obstacles that complicate their plans for national and international progress. In the pleasant,

climate-controlled setting of Los Pinos, it’s unlikely that Peña Nieto and Obama will address in any depth, if at all, what will soon become the top agenda item of most binational and multilateral meetings : the scourge of climate change.

Water problems will wreck US-Mexico relations nowTom Barry, 5-7-2013, "Changing Perspectives on US-Mexico Relations," Truthout, http://truth-out.org/news/item/16221-changing-perspectives-on-us-mexico-relations, accessed 5-10-2013If Obama and Peña Nieto were to talk about common concerns while on the border instead of in sitting rooms of the White House and Los Pinos,

they would see a common future in the river that divides the two nations . Climate change-aggravated drought has reduced the Río Bravo to a viscous,

milky green trickle. Groundwater reserves in the greater borderlands are being quickly depleted, and farmers, ranchers, and city planners on

both sides of the border are battling over rapidly diminishing supplies in the first skirmishes of the water wars that will surely soon overshadow the drug wars as the main threat to regional stability. A

common commitment by Obama and Peña Nieto for each government to do its part to mitigate and mutually adjust to climate change—which doesn’t respect border lines or border security fortifications—

would be a sign that binational relations can move beyond being merely economic partners and fighting on the same side of the drug war. The sad plight of the once glorious Río Bravo should not further divide the two nations, but bring the communities to the north and those to the south together as

neighbors and part of the larger North American community with shared interests and responsibilities.

Empirically there have been challenges in the US-Mexico relationship – nobody really cares about themJulián Aguilar, 4-21-2013, "Expert discusses complicated U.S-Mexico relationship," Monitor, http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/article_ed99723e-aa02-11e2-bcbb-0019bb30f31a.html, accessed 5-10-2013In her book Two Nations Indivisible, Shannon K. O’Neil dissects the complicated, symbiotic and often testy relationship between the United States and Mexico as they charge ahead in the 21st century. For Mexico, it means a changing system of checks and balances and a growing middle class, which is occurring against the backdrop of a horrific, years-long drug war. O' Neil, a senior fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, writes that the U.S. will be better served if it acknowledges the changes under way in Mexico. O’Neil, in Austin recently on a book tour, took time to speak with the Tribune about what she sees looking forward

with Texas' largest trading partner, her thoughts on immigration reform, the new Mexican administration and why it is important to realize Mexico still has a challenging road ahead. An abridged transcript of that

interview follows. Texas Tribune: Very early in your book, you mention that the United States has historically misunderstood Mexico. Why do you make that assessment? O’Neil: The U.S.

misunderstands Mexico often because it doesn’t give Mexico enough time. When you look at the people in our foreign policy elite, you look at the people that are really guiding our

international relations and their careers and their interests. They move far away from this hemisphere. They focus on the Middle East; they focus on Europe, on Russia or China, but much less on the Western Hemisphere and very little on Mexico. So when we get to the bilateral relationship, without people studying it, they make quick assumptions about our neighbors, many which are often faulty.


AT: US-Mexico Advantage – AT: Drug Trafficking Impact

Mexico won’t cooperate to reduce drug violence – they want to focus on citizen securityDavid Shirk, Prof @ Univ. San Diego, 5-4-2013, “U.S.-Mexico Relations Complicated, Conditioned By Drug War,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/2013/05/04/181053775/u-s-mexico-relations-complicated-conditioned-by-drug-war, accessed 5-10-2013HIRK: Well, I'm not sure that the idea is necessarily to reduce collaboration so much as to reshape the dynamics of collaboration. I think that's probably how the

Pena Nieto administration would portray this. For one thing, the Pena Nieto administration is trying to move away from the security policies that were employed by the Calderon administration. So, these efforts to go after high-level targets and to dismantle drug-trafficking organizations is diminishing as a priority of the Mexican government. And what they have emphasized instead is promoting citizen security. I think that the Pena Nieto administration

thinks that you had a real problem with the lack of coordination under the Calderon administration. And their idea, in the

Pena Nieto government, is to try to tighten up and centralized the mechanisms of coordination and cooperation with the United States. And I think that's a deliberate attempt to vet and control whatever types of cooperation we're going to see between the U.S. and Mexican government.

US-Mexico drug cooperation is already high and doesn’t solve drug violenceDavid Shirk, Prof @ Univ. San Diego, 5-4-2013, “U.S.-Mexico Relations Complicated, Conditioned By Drug War,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/2013/05/04/181053775/u-s-mexico-relations-complicated-conditioned-by-drug-war, accessed 5-10-2013SHIRK: In the last 12 years, and especially the last six years, have really been a high-water mark in U.S.-Mexico collaboration, particularly on security issues. Levels of trust are so high that we have had the opportunity to fly drones in Mexico, we have agents operating in direct collaboration with their Mexican counterparts, we've seen record levels of extradition. So, the collaboration is at a much higher level of intensity than we've ever seen before - or has been, at least over the last six years or so.

SIMON: And has U.S. involvement been helpful? SHIRK: That's a great question. I think it has been, depending on what you consider to be success. We have not seen violence go down. We have not necessarily seen the flow of drugs diminish. We have not seen necessarily an overall reduction in corruption in Mexico. But you can look at tactical successes. The dismantling of major organized crime groups, the target of specific organized crime figures has been accomplished over the last several years, thanks to this very high level of collaboration.

US-Mexico relations are shifting to focus on trade – no longer about drugs and securityKatelyn Fossett, 4-30-2013, "IPS – In U.S.-Mexico Relations, a Shift from Security to Economy," IPS News, http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/04/in-u-s-mexico-relations-a-shift-from-security-to-economy/, accessed 5-10-2013 Ahead of President Barack Obama’s trip to Mexico and Costa Rica, experts here are expecting that security will take a back seat to issues of economic cooperation between the U.S. and Mexico. But some Washington advocacy groups are sounding alarms about shifting away too soon from critical security and rights concerns. “A lot of the focus is going to be on economics,” President Obama told reporters Tuesday. ”We’ve spent so much time on security issues between the United States and Mexico that sometimes I think we forget this is a massive trading partner responsible for huge amounts of commerce and huge numbers of jobs on both sides of the border. “We want to see how we can deepen that, how we can

improve that and maintain that economic dialogue over a long period of time,” he continued. This shift is notable, as issues of security, law enforcement and combating crime formed the backbone of U.S.-Mexican relations during the previous Mexican administration. “Even before [former Mexican President Felipe] Calderon took office, it was part of the discussion with the U.S., and the U.S. and Mexican administrations went on to develop a close and complex relationship on security matters,” Eric Olson, associate director of the Latin America programme at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank, told IPS.


Solvency – Guest Worker Programs Fail

Guest worker programs failMike Scruggs, 3-22-2013, "The substantial pitfalls of guest-worker programs: who wins and who pays?" Tribune Papers, http://www.thetribunepapers.com/2013/03/22/the-substantial-pitfalls-of-guest-worker-programs-who-wins-and-who-pays/, accessed 5-10-2013In 1997, after several years of thorough study, the Commission on Immigration Reform, headed by the late Congresswoman Barbara Jordan adamantly rejected guest-worker programs as a solution to illegal immigration. Past guest-worker programs exacerbated rather than relieved immigration problems. The Commission specifically stated that a guest-worker program would be “a grievous mistake” and gave powerful reasons for rejecting such programs. Guest-worker programs have depressed the wages of American workers . Those most adversely affected were the unskilled and thus poorest segment of the American labor force. Foreign guest workers are often more exploitable than U.S. workers . They are less likely to complain of exploitive pay practices or unsafe working conditions. The presence of large numbers of guest workers in particular localities presents substantial costs in housing, healthcare, social services, education, and basic infrastructure that are borne by the broader community and even the federal government rather than by the employers who

benefit from cheap labor. Guest-worker programs also fail to reduce illegal immigration. In fact, they tend to encourage more illegal immigration. Guest workers often violate

their work visa by going illegal and jumping to a better job. They then remain in the country permanently in violation of the conditions of their admission. They also have many birthright citizen babies at public expense.

Be skeptical even if their arguments sound good – in practice guest worker programs are a failureMike Scruggs, 3-22-2013, "The substantial pitfalls of guest-worker programs: who wins and who pays?" Tribune Papers, http://www.thetribunepapers.com/2013/03/22/the-substantial-pitfalls-of-guest-worker-programs-who-wins-and-who-pays/, accessed 5-10-2013In the joint hearings before the U.S. Senate and House committees on immigration, a distinguished member of the Commission, Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, President Emeritus of the University

of Notre Dame, carefully explained that: “The idea of a large, temporary work program is tremendously attractive. Perhaps a better word though, would be ‘seductive.’ There is a superficial plausibility to this argument, and the Commission gave it serious consideration for more than a year and a half…. In the end, we were persuaded after much study, that it would be a mistake to launch such a program.” He went on to point out some serious questions about effective control of temporary worker programs and enumerated some important failings of past temporary worker programs. Temporary worker programs need some limits, which would require serious attention to effective enforcement. It is difficult to turn off such programs once started . A large program would build a dependency on foreign labor in certain sectors of the economy. Without strict enforcement

of employer sanctions against hiring other illegal immigrants, a temporary worker program would stimulate new migration pressures in the long run, exacerbating rather than curtailing illegal immigration “Certain jobs would be identified with foreigners,” which would effectively stigmatize such jobs.

Guest workers programs only work for large farmersBrian Sparks, group editor for American/Western Fruit Grower, February 2011, “H-2A The Right Way,” American/Western Fruit Grower, http://www.growingproduce.com/americanfruitgrower/?storyid=4941&style=1, accessed 5-10-2013In spite of these benefits, McDougall acknowledges that the H-2A program is not for everyone. “You need to be a certain sized grower to justify adding the infrastructure,” he says. At a time when business costs are mounting, this is no small concern. Compounding the cost is that wage rates are constantly changing. “It’s a moving

target every year.” As noted earlier, new regulations by the Obama administration will push wages much higher. In addition,

the approximate cost of housing is $11,500 per bed, no small investment. In order to manage the countless small details that go along with H-2A, McDougall & Sons relies on a team that includes Scott, a human resources manager, three assistants, and a full-time housing manager. This administrative element is critical, McDougall says. “These people put in a tremendous amount of time when the contract period begins.” When McDougall & Sons first opted to enter the H-2A program, the economy was still chugging along. Since this time, with the housing and construction market in the tank, McDougall admits that finding an adequate labor force may not be as much of a challenge now as it was then. However, he makes two very important observations.


Solvency – Empirics Prove Guest Worker Programs Don’t Work

Guest worker programs empirically failedTed Hesson, 2-25-2013, "Why Guest Worker Programs Have Failed," ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/guest-worker-programs-failed-past/story?id=18591194#.UYm5trXFXzw, accessed 5-10-2013The visa would not be another guest worker program, according to Ana Avendaño, a top immigration policy aide at AFL-CIO. That distinction is important, mainly because guest worker programs, as we know them, have a bad track record. Here are some of the ways that guest worker programs have failed in the past, and how the newly proposed visa might do better: 1. Lack of Worker Protections One of the biggest guest worker programs in the history of the U.S., the Bracero program, admitted more than 4 million farm workers from Mexico from 1942 to 1964. On paper, labor protections

looked relatively good, with workers receiving government-supervised contracts, housing and a salary that would amount to at least the minimum wage spelled out in the contract. The Bracero program, as it was originally conceived, was "the most comprehensive farm labor contract in the history of American agriculture," according to Cindy Hahamovitch, a

professor at William & Mary who has written extensively about guest workers. But in practice, immigrant workers faced several types of abuses, Hahamovitch says. Growers regularly disregarded promises made in contracts, she writes in her book No Man's Land: Jamaican Guestworkers in America and the Global History of Deportable Labor. Mexican news outlets also reported instances of physical abuse and discrimination.

The US just ends up deporting temporary workersLaura Merriman, 2-20-2013, "Marco Rubio and GOP: The Guest Worker Program Is Not A Viable Solution," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-merriman/the-guest-worker-program-_1_b_2084210.html, accessed 5-10-2013Our nation has a history of recruiting foreign laborers to do jobs that U.S.-born workers cannot or do not want to do and then "returning" them to their country of origin without granting them to opportunity of gaining U.S. citizenship. While U.S. farm workers were fighting in World War II, the U.S. government recruited Mexican workers to replace them in our fields. At the end of the war, an immigration

program entitled "Operation Wetback" expelled thousands of Latino nationals from the U.S., including many legal immigrants, even though the Supreme Court ruled Hispanics have equal protection under the 14th amendment that same year. By 1954, 1.1 million Latino workers had been expelled back to Mexico. One of the first modern-day examples of a guest worker program occurred during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, when the Department of Homeland Security

suspended I-9 employer inspections requiring employers to check cleanup workers' citizen status. Under this program, the most dangerous, messiest jobs, were reserved for disposable foreign workers some of whom were never paid for the work that was subcontracted out by our government to firms like Haliburton. Shelley Davis, the co-executive director of the Farmworker Justice Fund argues that the guest worker program make employees, "like indentured servants, at the mercy of their employer without legal protections" and opens the door for horrendous

cases of worker exploitation. This past year, guest workers employed by Walmart seafood supplier CJ's in Breaux Bridge, Louisiana were locked into the plant by their employers, endured beatings, lived in labor camps, and were forced to perform unpaid work. Our government cannot keep foreign workers in limbo without offering the protections or rights that come along with citizenship. It does a disservice to U.S. workers too when companies employ disposable, low-wage guest workers instead of allocating employees the benefits and living wages we all deserve. The guest worker program is not a concrete solution to our country's economic problems or to the immigration debate.

Even if they win short term advantages, guest worker programs are bad in the long runMike Scruggs, 3-22-2013, "The substantial pitfalls of guest-worker programs: who wins and who pays?" Tribune Papers, http://www.thetribunepapers.com/2013/03/22/the-substantial-pitfalls-of-guest-worker-programs-who-wins-and-who-pays/, accessed 5-10-2013Rev. Hesburgh summarized his remarks to the joint committees with this conclusion: “We do not think it wise to propose a program with potentially harmful consequences to the United States as a whole.” It is fairly obvious that the pressure for guest-worker programs is coming from those employers, who are now breaking U.S. immigration laws and from other businesses that benefit from this situation. Hence we have the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business associations advocating a policy advantageous in the short term to their constituent members, but damaging to the common good and prosperity of the American people. Ironically, the Chamber is advocating a policy that would damage the U.S. economy and its own constituent members in the longer term by importing a new electorate proven to be more interested in big government social-welfare programs than free enterprise.


Politics Link – Plan Unpopular With Labor Unions

Unions oppose guest worker programAlex Nowrasteh, 3-6-2013, "Guest Workers Key to Reform," Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/03/06/guest_workers_key_to_reform_117310.html, accessed 5-10-2013Why is President Obama ignoring a guest-worker visa program? Because unions — one of the president’s most valued constituencies — have historically opposed guest workers. A 2007 immigration reform effort largely failed because of union efforts to kill it. Late in the game, Senate Democrats amended the bill to end its guest-worker program after five years. The amendment passed 49-48 — with then-Sen. Obama, ominously, voting in favor. As a result, Republicans and business interests that supported increased lawful immigration withdrew their support, and the reform effort collapsed. At the time, the leaders of the AFL-CIO, the Teamsters, and other unions all wrote letters opposing the guest-worker program. James P. Hoffa of the Teamsters opposed a guest-worker program because it would “[force] workers to toil in a truly temporary status with a high risk of exploitation and abuse by those seeking cheap labor.”

Labor unions oppose guest worker programAllahpundit, 3-21-2013, "Rubio: If we can’t come up with a solid guest-worker program, we’ll have 10 million new illegals here in a decade," Hot Air, http://hotair.com/archives/2013/03/21/rubio-if-we-cant-come-up-with-a-solid-guest-worker-program-well-have-10-million-new-illegals-here-in-a-decade/, accessed 5-10-2013What’s wrong with this picture? SEN. MARCO RUBIO, in an interview for “Behind the Curtain,” on the likelihood of immigration reform going to President Obama’s desk this year – the first time Rubio has said this: “A lot of it is going to hinge on the viability of a guest worker program. There are elements in organized labor that don’t want one. I think, really, that’s going to become the critical issue in this debate … whether we can create a viable guest worker program that protects American workers, but also ensures that in the future [if] we need foreign labor for limited periods of time, we’re able to access that in a legal way. Because if we don’t have a program like that in place, we’re going to have 10 million illegal immigrants here in a decade again.” He’s not kidding that organized labor doesn’t want one. Rumors are swirling tonight that the unions are trying to kill the bill. But never mind that. Mickey Kaus spots a problem with Rubio’s logic

They’re the most powerful lobby in WashingtonKevin Bogardus, 1-16-2013, "Chamber, union leaders mull alliance to press for immigration reform," The Hill, http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/277397-chamber-unions-mull-immigration-alliance, accessed 5-10-2013Washington’s most powerful business lobby and prominent union leaders are discussing a joint push on immigration reform this year. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is in discussions with the AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) about shared principles for reforming the immigration system, officials involved with the talks told The Hill. “The cause of the undocumented is our cause, and the Chamber can be a powerful ally in expanding citizenship to all working people in the United States,” said Ana Avendano, the AFL-CIO’s director of immigration and community action.


Politics Link – Obama Gets Blame For Plan

Obama would get credit for the plan – he’s brokering the deal on guest workersDavid Nakamura, 2-5-2013, "On guest-worker program, White House tries to foster a deal between business and labor," Washington Post, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-05/politics/36762830_1_guest-worker-program-immigration-reform-illegal-immigrants, accessed 5-10-2013The Obama administration is trying to broker a deal between business and labor leaders over a controversial guest-worker program for foreigners, resolving a long-standing sticking point that has created political peril for President Obama in the past. In the 2007 debate over immigration reform, Obama — then a senator from Illinois — voted for an amendment backed by labor unions that would have phased out a guest-worker program after five years. That amendment passed by a single vote, but some Republican leaders now say the measure helped kill broader reform legislation. The White House is treading cautiously, sensing that business and labor leaders are closing in on an agreement that would make the two sides powerful allies in Obama’s push to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws this year. On Tuesday, the president met separately with representatives from both sides, hoping to marshal their support.

Obama is in charge of horsetrading on immigration, including guest workersDavid Nakamura, 2-5-2013, "On guest-worker program, White House tries to foster a deal between business and labor," Washington Post, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-05/politics/36762830_1_guest-worker-program-immigration-reform-illegal-immigrants, accessed 5-10-2013The behind-the-scenes negotiations come as the Obama administration faces a difficult path in shepherding a potential comprehensive immigration bill through the Democratic-controlled Senate and the Republican-led House. The effort could face serious obstacles, including disagreements over whether a plan should include same-sex couples or provide a path for citizenship for illegal immigrants. In the first immigration hearing at the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, early partisan cracks emerged on issues such as a path to citizenship and a guest-worker program. Rep. Raul R. Labrador (R-Idaho) said he is “dumbfounded” by opposition to a guest-worker program. But he said he opposes providing a path to citizenship as part of a reform package, as Obama and other Democrats favor.

GOP wouldn’t get credit for the planNate Cohn, elections and politics expert at The New Republic, 1-16-2013,“A New GOP Begins, and Ends, With Immigration Reform,” http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate/111912/immigration-reform-house-republicans-test, accessed 5-10-2013Given that nearly two-thirds of House Republicans opposed the McConnell-Biden "fiscal cliff" deal, it's possible that a pathway to citizenship will meet similar opposition—especially without the looming threat of something like

across-the-board tax increases. Even if House Republicans ultimately assent to the president’s planned proposal for a pathway to citizenship, the cumbersome process of getting conservatives on board might lead the GOP into a final act of alienating Hispanics. It is difficult to envision Republicans getting credit for the enactment of comprehensive immigration reform if a vociferous wing of the party drags its feet or employs the alienating language that characterized prior immigration debates. Even if it caves on substance, the GOP might be out-flanked by process: The New York Times reports that the president plans to offer a comprehensive package, but conservatives prefer a piecemeal, multi-bill process. If conservatives argue for a piecemeal approach, Democrats will accuse them of attempting to derail the process. And if

Marco Rubio proposes a middle ground on a pathway to citizenship, Democrats are well-positioned to insist on their approach, since Hispanics would probably blame the failure of immigration reform on Republicans.


Worker Abuse DA Link

Guest worker programs cause abuses of workersAura Bogado, 3-28-2013, "Obama Hiccups on Guest Workers," The Nation, http://www.thenation.com/blog/173566/obama-hiccups-guest-workers, accessed 5-10-2013The guest worker issue is an important one. Labor and immigrant rights groups know that such a program not only subverts the power of US workers but also welcomes the exploitation of foreign workers. As the Southern Poverty Law Center outlines, guest workers are often not paid the wages they’re owed, are effectively confined during their time in the United States,

and live in ramshackle housing. Guest workers are tied to their employers, who can make the unilateral decision to send them home at any time. Josh Eidelson has been covering the way that McDonald’s has been exploiting student workers on visit for educational exchanges.

Organized by the National Guestworker Alliance, these student workers are trying to put a face on a perennial problem that most people rarely hear about: essential workers who

cannot enjoy basic worker protections.

Guest worker program causes indentured servitudeMichael Lind, 1-29-2013, "Immigration, yes. Indentured serfdom, no," Salon, http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/immigration_yes_indentured_serfdom_no/, accessed 5-10-2013The outlines of a bipartisan plan for immigration reform have been announced by a group of senators. While most of its provisions are reasonable — a path to citizenship for most illegal

immigrants, increased skilled immigration and increased law enforcement — one provision stinks to high heaven and should be rejected by Americans of left, right and center. That provision is a massive, special-interest-driven expansion of indentured servitude in the United States, in the form of a new “guest-worker program .” (President Obama, while

hailing the plan in general on Tuesday, has not weighed in on the specifics of the guest-worker program.) Indentured servitude or contract labor, like slavery, is a form of unfree labor. Unfortunately, the U.S., having abolished slavery, still has pockets of indentured servant labor. Whether relatively well-paid, like many highly educated H-1B workers, or poorly paid, like many H-2A agricultural workers, indentured servants are, in effect, indentured serfs. Because their presence in the U.S. is dependent on their employment by a particular employer, they cannot quit and are motivated to appease their employer, no matter how brutally they are exploited. If they protest maltreatment, they can be fired and forced to return to their home countries.

Reforms and regulations don’t solve our link – any guest worker program would be abusedMichael Lind, 1-29-2013, "Immigration, yes. Indentured serfdom, no," Salon, http://www.salon.com/2013/01/30/immigration_yes_indentured_serfdom_no/, accessed 5-10-2013These Democratic and Republican senators, echoing the well-paid lobbyists for indentured serfdom, few if any of whom are in danger of

being deported if they displease their bosses, promise that abuses can be prevented, by including stronger standards in new

indentured serf programs. But if the federal government, corrupted by pressure from powerful business lobbies, does not enforce today’s laws, why should we expect pro-guest-worker laws to be enforced in the future — particularly if an increase is guest workers is successfully extorted from the federal government by lobbyists and donors representing agribusiness and Silicon Valley? In a 2007 report titled “Close to Slavery: Guestworker Programs in the United States,”

the Southern Poverty Law Center described the existing H-2 guest worker program, which would presumably be a model for any expanded agricultural guest worker program included in a bipartisan immigration bill: Federal law and U.S. Department of Labor regulations

provide some basic protections to H-2 guestworkers — but they exist mainly on paper. Government enforcement of their rights is almost non-existent. Private attorneys typically won’t take up their cause.


Comprehensive Immigration Reform DA Link

Passing individual pieces of immigration reform would kill the chances for comprehensive reformGreg Sargent, 4-29-2013, "The Morning Plum: How conservatives will try to kill immigration reform," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/29/the-morning-plum-how-conservatives-will-try-to-kill-immigation-reform/, accessed 5-10-2013With the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” compromise introduced, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee have already signaled that they will introduce immigration reform in pieces. The ostensible purpose of this legislative strategy is to move slowly, to make it easier to eventually win over House conservatives and get them to back a path to citizenship. But it remains unclear how citizenship would figure into that piecemeal approach, or why moving reform pieces would make it any more likely that those opposed to citizenship would come around to it . Indeed,

the strategy may be designed to scuttle reform, rather than make it more likely . The Post editorial board explains the real

game plan: That strategy gives conservatives a chance to say they were for immigration reform before they were against it. They may vote for bills that would tighten border security, provide a steady source of migrant farm workers and expand a program that companies may use to verify the immigration status of employees. Then, decrying “amnesty,” they can shoot down measures that would extend legal status and eventual citizenship to most of the undocumented.

Piecemeal approach to immigration reform will tank chances for a comprehensive billDaffany Chan, 4-30-2013, "Why is the House Trying Its Damndest to Kill Immigration Reform?," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/38699/immigration-reform-2013-why-is-the-house-trying-its-damndest-to-kill-it, accessed 5-10-2013If passed, the "Gang of Eight's" proposal will be the nation's most comprehensive immigration reform legislation — reform that the nation urgently needs. But the bill faces overwhelming obstacles, and is already under intense scrutiny, before

Congress even considers the possibility of its passage. The main objectors to the bill are unhappy House Republican lawmakers, who intend to prolong examination of the lengthy bill in order to threaten the Senate's efforts: "The House Judiciary Committee intends to examine immigration reform in a step-by-step approach ," House

Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte said. According to the Huffington Post, the House plans to analyze each bill through a piecemeal approach rather than a comprehensive outlook, which will endanger its passage. This process essentially makes passage an all-or-nothing ordeal, with Senator John McCain referencing the past DREAM Act failure. The proposal, which

was also analyzed through a piecemeal approach, ultimately failed to pass the Senate in particular because it did not feature border security measures.

Piecemeal approach trades off with comprehensive reformDaffany Chan, 4-30-2013, "Why is the House Trying Its Damndest to Kill Immigration Reform?," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/38699/immigration-reform-2013-why-is-the-house-trying-its-damndest-to-kill-it, accessed 5-10-2013The clash between the House and Senate in their approach to legislation will hinder any chance of comprehensive reform. While the "Gang of Eight" has been actively rallying senators from both parties in order to gain 70 votes in the Senate, which McCain called "very

doable," the House has been idle on the issue of immigration. According to the New York Times, the bipartisan House group focusing on

immigration still has no proposal after four years of infrequent meetings. The lack of urgency from the House stems from the fact that for many House lawmakers, immigration does not concern their constituents. Though South Carolina Representative Trey

Gowdy chairs the House immigration policy subcommittee, he notes that his district is less than 2% Hispanic. Thus, House lawmakers from districts with small minority populations are less inclined to push for policy fixes that their constituents don't necessarily want or care for.


Mexico Trade Bloc Neg


Status Quo Solves US Economy

US economy strong and growing now – jobs and stock marketNew York Times, 5/3/13, "Jobs Data Eases Fears of Economic Slowdown in U.S.," www.nytimes.com/2013/05/04/business/economy/us-adds-165000-jobs-in-april.html?pagewanted=all, accessed 5/12/13Washington may be hitting the brakes, but the private sector is still rolling ahead, helping create nearly 200,000 jobs a month, on average, since the beginning of the year and forcing the overall unemployment rate in April down to its lowest level since the end of 2008. This push-and-pull dynamic was evident in data released Friday by the Labor Department, as private employers added 176,000 people to their payrolls even as the public sector shed an additional 11,000 workers. The latest figures painted a somewhat brighter picture of the overall economy than had been expected as the government sharply revised upward its estimate for job creation in the previous two months. Those revisions concluded that the economy generated a robust 332,000 jobs in February, not the 268,000 originally reported, and 138,000 in March, up from 88,000. The news sent the stock market soaring to new highs, with major stock market indexes closing up 1 percent for the day.

Predictive index’s show economic recovery nowHuffington Post Business, 3/17/13, "Gauge of US economy's future health up in April," www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130517/us-leading-indicators/?utm_hp_ref=sports&ir=sports, accessed 5/22/13A measure of the U.S. economy's future health rose solidly in April, buoyed by a sharp rise in applications to build homes and a better job market. The Conference Board said Friday that its index of leading indicators increased 0.6 percent last month to a reading of 95. That followed a 0.2 percent decline in March. The index is intended to signal economic conditions three to six months out. Conference Board economist Ken Goldstein said the index is 3.5 percent higher at an annual rate than it was six months ago, suggesting expansion for the economy. Goldstein said that steady job gains and a recovering housing market are driving the economy and helping offset deep federal spending cuts that threaten growth.

The economic foundation is strong – sustained growth in the futureEconomic Times 5/25/13, "US economy to revive? Investors shift focus to growth stocks," economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/global-markets/us-economy-to-revive-investors-shift-focus-to-growth-stocks/articleshow/20254162.cms, accessed 5/24/13After a period of subdued growth, investors are more optimistic that the economy is set to revive. If the economy is poised for an upturn, companies whose fortunes are more closely linked to growth should do better. Technology stocks have gained 6.6 per cent in the past month, the best performance of all the industry groups that make up the S&P 500. Utilities did the worst, falling 5.7 per cent. The index as a whole rose 4.8 per cent. Here are some of the reasons behind the shift in investor sentiment: IT'S THE ECONOMY Earlier this month, the government said that unemployment fell to a four-year low as hiring picked up. That was another piece of evidence pointing to better growth. If investors believe that the economy will carry on improving, it makes sense for them to load up on the stocks of companies that will benefit most from accelerating growth.


No Economy I/L – Decoupling

No global collapse – other economies have decoupled.Peter Passell, senior fellow at the Milken Institute, 4/4/2012, “Decoupling: Ties That No Longer Bind,” Foreign Policy blog, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/03/ties_that_no_longer_bind, accessed 5-15-2013Everybody knows that the global economy is becoming more tightly integrated -- that factors ranging from the collapse of ocean shipping costs, to the rise of multinational manufacturing, to the growth of truly international securities markets, have bound national economies to each other as never before. This, of course, must mean we're now all in it together. Booms and busts in rich countries will reverberate ever more strongly through developing and emerging market economies. Right? Sounds reasonable, but that's not what's happened. The big emerging market economies

(notably, China, India and Brazil) took only modest hits from the housing finance bubble and subsequent recession in the U.S., Japan and Europe, then went back to growth-as-usual. Hence the paradox: Emerging-market and developing countries have somehow "decoupled" from the Western business cycle in an era of ever-increasing economic integration. But the experts have yet to agree on why. Here are the two contending explanations:

Other countries will maintain growth despite US decline – diversification and proactive policymaking.Peter Passell, senior fellow at the Milken Institute, 4/4/2012, “Decoupling: Ties That No Longer Bind,” Foreign Policy blog, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/03/ties_that_no_longer_bind, accessed 5-15-2013There is no real need to choose between these explanations. By virtue of their size and diversification, emerging market economies have now more influence on the economic fortunes of other emerging-market and developing economies. And by virtue of their improving track records as credible inflation-fighters, they have more capacity to use fiscal and monetary stimulus to stay ahead of global recessions. This is

surely good news. But it does leave a big unanswered question. The big emerging market countries are acquiring the will and the way to protect their own interests during global economic crises. We don't know, though, whether they will have sufficiently broad perspective to step up to leadership roles in managing global crises as their economic power converges with that of the rich industrial countries.

Developing countries can survive downturns in the US – empirical proof.Cris Heaton, contributor to MoneyWeek, 1/6/2012, “The truth about emerging market 'decoupling',” MoneyWeek, http://www.moneyweek.com/investments/stock-markets/emerging-markets/moneyweek-asia-emerging-equities-or-us-treasuries-20100, accessed 5-15-2013That's significant, because emerging economies are often seen as being entirely geared to growth in the developed world. When the US and Europe are doing well, emerging markets do even better. When they falter, emerging markets fall harder. That's certainly true of some emerging economies. If you're a small, trade-dependent economy, you will outperform to the upside and to the downside. But it didn't hold true for the emerging world as a whole. Large, more domestically driven economies such as China, India, Indonesia and (to a lesser extent) the Philippines held up much better. There is a substantial bloc of economies within the emerging world that have their own momentum and aren't solely dependent on what happens in the developed world, even though they are still affected by it. A decade or so ago, this wasn't so true; the emerging economies that investors cared about then were mostly smaller and more export-centred.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/03/ties_that_no_longer_bind


Economy Resilient

US economy is resilient – innovation and open government.Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group,July/August 2011, “On the Economy, Be Careful What You Wish For,” Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/06/20/on_the_economy_be_careful_what_you_wish_for?page=0,2, accessed 5-15-2013Some might argue that the impact of the relative decline of the U.S. economy has already been felt and that a weaker dollar will ultimately make American products more competitive abroad. FP's survey results seem to reflect this optimistic view, though the vast majority of those surveyed are clamoring for rebalancing, with all its pitfalls and dangers. There is no reason to doubt, moreover, the long-term resilience of America's political and economic systems. Democracy offers a degree of domestic political legitimacy that cannot be earned in any other way. America's achievements in higher education and innovation are, and will remain, the envy of much of the rest of the world. But rebalancing will upend lots of assumptions, in the United States and around the world, about American economic resilience and its importance for other countries. This transition is not a product of poor decisions or myopic political leadership -- though leaders of both parties in Washington have offered plenty of both in recent years. This is a structural shift, one that has been decades in the making. Resistance is futile. Adapting to its impact can help Americans, and everyone else, thrive in the era to come.

US economy can withstand shocks – empirically proven.Bloomberg, 5/9/2012, “Fed’s Plosser Says U.S. Economy Proving Resilient to Shocks,” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-09/fed-s-plosser-says-u-s-economy-proving-resilient-to-shocks.html, accessed 5-15-2013Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank President Charles Plosser said the U.S. economy has proven “remarkably resilient” to shocks that can damage growth, including surging oil prices and natural disasters. “The economy has now grown for 11 consecutive quarters,” Plosser said today according to remarks prepared for a speech at the

Philadelphia Fed. “Growth is not robust. But growth in the past year has continued despite significant risks and external and internal headwinds.” Plosser, who did not discuss his economic outlook or the future for monetary policy, cited shocks to the economy last year, including the tsunami in Japan that disrupted global supply chains, Europe’s credit crisis that has damaged the continent’s banking system and political unrest in the Middle East and North Africa. “The U.S. economy has a history of being remarkably resilient,” said Plosser, who doesn’t have a vote on policy this year. “These shocks held GDP growth to less than 1 percent in the first half of 2011, and

many analysts were concerned that the economy was heading toward a double dip. Yet, the economy proved resilient and growth picked up in the second half of the year.”

New regulations check decline – US economy resilient.Greg Robb, MarketWatch Pulse, 5/15/2012, “Geithner: U.S. Economy Improving, More Resilient,” Fox Business, http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2012/05/15/geithner-us-economy-improving-more-resilient/, accessed 5-15-2013Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Tuesday said the U.S. economy is gradually getting stronger, with areas of strength broadening. "We are doing a lot of the really tough work you need to...dig our way out of the mess that caused the crisis

and I think growth now looks more broad-based and resilient," Geithner said at a conference sponsored by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. Geithner said J.P. Morgan's $2 billion trading loss was a failure of risk management. He said it made a "very powerful case for financial reform - the reforms we have ahead and the reforms we have already put in place." Geithner said he has not talked to Jamie Dimon since the J.P. Morgan Chase & Co's CEO announced the loss late last week. The test of financial reform is to make sure bank mistakes don't put the economy at risk, Geithner said. "We are going to work very hard to ensure that these reforms are tough and effective - not just the Volcker rule - but the broader complement of reforms on capital and liquidity and derivatives markets," he said.


No Economy impact

Recession proves that economic slowdown doesn’t cause war.Thomas P.M. Barnett, senior managing director of Enterra Solutions LLC, 8/24/2009, “The New Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis,” World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/4213/the-new-rules-security-remains-stable-amid-financial-crisis, accessed 5-15-2013When the global financial crisis struck roughly a year ago, the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of scary predictions of, and commentary regarding, ensuing conflict and wars -- a rerun of the Great Depression leading to world war, as it were. Now, as global economic news brightens and recovery -- surprisingly led by

China and emerging markets -- is the talk of the day, it's interesting to look back over the past year and realize how globalization's first truly worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the international security landscape.

No diversionary war – risks of lash-out via conflict are too high.Charles R. Boehmer, Associate Professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, Texas, June 2010, “Economic growth and violent international conflict: 1875-1999,” Defence and Peace Economics, p.265The results also show that theories from the Crisis-Scarcity perspective lack explanatory power linking GDP growth rates to war at the state level of analysis. This is not to say that such theories completely lack explanatory power in general, but more particularly that they cannot directly link economic growth rates to state behavior in violent interstate conflicts. In contrast, theories of diversionary conflict may well hold some explanatory power, although not regarding GDP growth in a general test of states from all regions of the world across time. Perhaps diversionary theory better explains state behaviors short of war, where the costs of externalizing domestic tensions do not become too costly, or in relation to

the foreign policies of particular countries. In many circumstances, engaging in a war to divert attention away from domestic conditions would seemingly exacerbate domestic crisis conditions unless the chances of victory were practically assured. Nonetheless, this study does show that domestic conflict is associated with interstate conflict. If diversionary conflict theory has any traction as an economic explanation of violent interstate conflicts, it may require the study of other explanatory variables besides overall GDP growth rates, such as unemployment or inflation rates.

Studies prove – economic decline doesn’t cause war.Charles R. Boehmer, Associate Professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, Texas, June 2010, “Economic growth and violent international conflict: 1875-1999,” Defence and Peace Economics, p.261The military expenditure growth variable is also insignificant. However, this variable is significant if expenditure growth is measured with either a one-year lag or a ten-year moving average (not reported in Table I). Hence, there is some evidence that states with growing military expenditures are more prone to initiate militarized disputes, in support of Hypothesis 5, although this finding is not robust across different time measurements of expenditure growth. As we would also expect, major powers and states with many neighbors are more likely to initiate militarized disputes than minor powers or states with fewer neighbors (measured with Borders). Both variables are positive and highly significant. There is some evidence here for the proposition that domestic unrest leads states to initiate militarized disputes, which is in part congruent with diversionary conflict theories. Protest is positive and highly significant whereas Rebellion is also positive but weakly significant. However, there is no evidence here to support the argument provided by the crisis-scarcity perspective that lower economic growth rates directly lead states to initiate interstate conflicts. Economic development does not appear to affect MID initiation but institutional constraints on executives decreases this likelihood. There is indeed also some serial autocorrelation captured by the Peace Years and spline variables (not reported in Table I) in the MID Initiation model; states that have more recently initiated a MID are more likely to do so again in the future.


Competitiveness Collapse Inevitable

Can’t solve competitiveness – structural political problems.Niall Ferguson, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History, Harvard University, 3/28/2012, “Is the US Losing Competitiveness?” Testimony for the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee, http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/03.28.12_CJS_-_American_Manufacturing_and_Job_Repatriation_-_Niall_Ferguson_-_Testimony.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013The nation’s capital may be a competitive city by the EIU’s criteria. But, to judge by the evidence presented here, Washington seems to be intent on rendering the rest of America uncompetitive in a highly troubling way. All discussions of declining U.S. competitiveness need to focus on a hitherto largely overlooked phenomenon: a measurable degeneration in the quality of this country’s institutional framework. When executives complain about the effectiveness of [the] political system, the defects of K-12 education system, the complexity of the tax code, the inconsistency of macroeconomic policy, the burdens of regulation, and the inefficiency of [the] legal framework, they are not fantasizing or passing the buck. They are identifying real problems. In some respects, I might go so far as to call it the problem of “Soviet America”. The United States was victorious in the

Cold War. Yet, imperceptibly, certain traits we used to associate with the Communist enemy have been creeping into American life. Over-mighty bureaucracy, excessive regulation, a sham rule of law, corruption: these are dangerous tendencies, and economic stagnation is only one of their likely consequences. Other consequences we might expect include political decadence and geopolitical decline. At the very least, we are seeing here the emergence of a more European America – though European in the sense of Italy, not Germany.

Bureaucratic education system destroys long-term competitiveness.Craig R. Barrett, Former CEO and Chairman, Intel Corporation, 9/12/2011, “Education Reform and U.S. Competitiveness,” http://www.cfr.org/education/education-reform-us-competitiveness/p25816, accessed 5-15-2013To compete in the twenty-first century, individuals and countries will have to add value in the workplace to command a high standard of living and be competitive in the global marketplace. Education is the key to adding value. The United States recognizes that its K-12 education is not doing the job. You need good teachers with content expertise, high expectations, and feedback systems to help struggling students and teachers. These

three requirements are difficult to implement in a massive public education system designed more for working adults than for learning students.

Tax code is the key internal link to collapsing competitivness.Al Cardenas, chairman of the American Conservative Union, 11/8/2011, “The Chief Threat to American Competitiveness: Our Tax Code,” National Review, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282557/chief-threat-american-competitiveness-our-tax-code-al-cardenas#, accessed 5-15-2013More than three years after America’s financial system hit a crisis point, the state of our economy remains in turmoil. As our nation’s leaders grapple with immediate challenges through dueling jobs plans and the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction tries to come to agreement on a trillion and a half in reductions, we must also consider long-term measures to strengthen our economic security. As it stands now, the number one threat to the future of American competitiveness isn’t other countries. It’s our tax law. The United States Tax Code is difficult to understand and even harder to navigate, for families and businesses alike. Title 26 has been patchworked, reformed, and tinkered with for decades, giving us an antiquated mess of laws rife with


inequities. Our corporate tax rate is among the highest in the world. We refuse to shift to a Territorial Tax System that would stop punishing our companies for bringing earned overseas income back to the U.S. for reinvestment. Tax rates for small businesses remain high and inconsistent.


Competitiveness Resilient

US competitiveness resilient – history proves.Harold L. Sirkin and Michael Zinser, senior partner at The Boston Consulting Group and Michael Zinser and partner who leads the firm's manufacturing work in the Americas, 3/6/2012, “New Math Will Drive a U.S. Manufacturing Comeback,” http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/03/new_math_will_drive_a_us_manuf.html, accessed 5-15-2013As we all know, U.S. manufacturing has faced many threats in the past. "Japan Inc." was going to close down U.S. factories in the 1970s. Then came the Asian Tigers: Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. Now it's Brazil, China and India. Each time, U.S. manufacturing took a hard blow, adjusted, and recovered. So today, some 40 years after the Japanese challenge first emerged, U.S. factories are producing two-and-a-half times more than they did in 1972, in terms of manufacturing value added, with 30% less total labor. The China challenge could play out the same way. While China is much larger and a bigger threat, its wages are rising 15-20 percent per year and its domestic demand for consumer goods is growing rapidly.

Competitiveness resilient – history and current metrics prove.Daniel Gross, columnist and economics editor for Yahoo! Finance, 5/10/2012, “The Myth of American Decline,” HBR Ideacast interview, http://blogs.hbr.org/ideacast/2012/05/the-myth-of-american-decline.html, accessed 5-15-2013JUSTIN FOX: So why are we being deluged by so many predictions of doom and urgent prescriptions for improvement? Like, for example, HBR's March issue on restoring US competitiveness. DANIEL GROSS: Well, I think we have a very procyclical economy, and we have a very procyclical market for ideas. When everybody's going in one direction, everybody piles on. So you get this stuff about how great private equity and real estate is in '06 and how great technology was in 1999. And the flip side is when you took a fall like the one we took. We had an economy shrinking at a 6% annual rate, which is something we haven't seen in 80 years. We had the deepest recession we've had in 80 years. The contraction in car sales, in housing, no one had witnessed this in their lifetime. And so when this comes on you very

quickly, it's very easy for people to say, well, how are we gonna get out of this? What are we all going to do for jobs if we're not going to work in real estate or structured finance? How are we going to pay down these debts? And I think the reality is that we've been at these junctures many times in the past. '30s, '50s when we were concerned about Sputnik. In the '70s when we had double-digit inflation and runaway oil costs. And we have proved, as an economy, quite adaptable and resilient. We figure out new ways of doing things.

Manufacturing strength proves resiliency.Arvind Kaushal, Thomas Mayor and Patricia Riedl, partner, senior executive advisor and principal with Booz & Company, Autumn 2011, “Manufacturing’s Wake-up Call,” Strategy+Business, http://www.strategy-business.com/media/file/sb64_11306.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Still, the data shows clearly that U.S. manufacturing as a whole has great potential to rebound. When

considered sector by sector, many U.S. companies can and should be the supplier of choice for the vast majority of goods sold in North America – and some can still be a primary source of production for global markets. This resilience was evident in the survey of manufacturing professionals; more than 65 percent of respondents said that it was unlikely they would stop investing in new U.S. manufacturing assets and technologies by 2025. Many of them are shifting manufacturing activities back to North America from Asia and other off-shore locations.


Competitiveness Not Key To Heg

Competitiveness not key to hegRobert E. Pape, Professor of Political Science, University of Chicago, January-February 2009, “Empire Falls,” The National Interest, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_99/ai_n32148803/pg_6/, accessed 5-15-2013And of course America needs to develop a plan to reinvigorate the competitiveness of its economy . Recently,

Harvard's Michael Porter issued an economic blueprint to renew America's environment for innovation. The heart of his plan is to remove the obstacles to increasing investment in science and technology. A combination of targeted tax, fiscal and education policies to stimulate more

productive investment over the long haul is a sensible domestic component to America's new grand strategy. But it would be misguided to assume that the United States could easily regain its previously dominant economic position, since the world will likely remain globally competitive. To justify postponing this restructuring of its grand strategy, America would need a firm expectation of high rates of economic growth over the next several years. There is no sign of such a burst on the horizon. Misguided efforts to extract more security from a declining economic base only divert potential resources from investment in the economy, trapping the state in an ever-worsening strategic dilemma. This approach has done little for great powers in the past, and America will likely be no exception when it comes to the inevitable costs of desperate policy making.

Military superiority key to heg – no one can challenge the US.Barry R. Posen, Professor of Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Summer 2003 “Command of the Commons,” International Security, http://web.mit.edu/ssp/people/posen/commandofthecommons.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013One pillar of U.S. hegemony is the vast military power of the United States. A staple of the U.S. debate about the size of the post–Cold War defense budget is the observation that the United States spends more than virtually all of the world’s other major military powers combined, most of which are U.S. allies . Observers of the

actual capabilities that this effort produces can focus on a favorite aspect of U.S. superiority to make the point that the United States sits comfortably atop the military food chain, and is likely to remain there. This article takes a slightly different approach. Below I argue that the United States enjoys command of the commons—command of the sea, space, and air . I discuss how command of the commons supports a hegemonic grand strategy. I explain why it seems implausible that a challenge to this command could arise in the near to medium term. Then I review the arenas of military action where adversaries continue to be able to fight U.S. forces with some hope of success— the “contested zones.” I argue that in the near to medium term the United States will not be able to establish

command in these arenas. The interrelationship between U.S. command of the commons and the persistence of the contested zones suggests that the United States can probably pursue a policy of

selective engagement but not one of primacy.

Competitiveness not key – US military too far ahead.Robert Kagan, senior fellow at Brookings, 1/11/2012, “Not Fade Away,” The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism, accessed 5-15-2013Military capacity matters, too, as early nineteenth-century China learned and Chinese leaders know today. As Yan Xuetong recently noted, “military strength underpins hegemony.” Here the United States remains unmatched. It is far and away the most powerful nation the world has ever known, and there has been no decline in America’s relative military capacity—at least not yet. Americans currently spend less than $600 billion a year on defense, more than the rest of the other great powers combined. (This figure does not include the deployment in Iraq, which is ending, or the combat forces in Afghanistan, which are likely to diminish steadily over the next

couple of years.) They do so, moreover, while consuming a little less than 4 percent of GDP annually—a higher percentage than the other great powers, but in historical terms lower than the 10 percent of GDP that the United States spent on defense in the mid-1950s and the 7 percent it spent in the late 1980s. The superior expenditures underestimate America’s actual superiority in military capability. American land and air forces are equipped with the most advanced weaponry, and are the most experienced in actual combat. They would defeat any competitor in a head-to-head battle. American naval power remains predominant in every region.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism


Hegemony Resilient

Heg is resilient – no shot of decline.Michael Beckley, research fellow in the International Security Program at Harvard Kennedy School’sBelfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Winter 2011/2012, “China’s Century? Why America’s Edge Will Endure,” International Security, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Chinas_Century.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Change is inevitable, but it is often incremental and nonlinear. In the coming decades, China may surge out of its unimpressive condition and close the gap with the United States. Or China might continue to rise

in place—steadily improving its capabilities in absolute terms while stagnating, or even declining, relative to the United States. At the time of this writing, the United States remains mired in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and carries the largest debt in its history. Moreover, the recent partisan standoff over raising the debt ceiling suggests the American political system is losing the capacity for compromise on basic issues, let alone on large-scale problems. It is impossible to say whether the current malaise is the beginning of the end of the unipolar

era or simply an aberration. The best that can be done is to make plans for the future on the basis of long-term trends; and the trends suggest that the United States’ economic, technological, and military lead over China will be an enduring feature of international relations, not a passing moment in time, but a deeply embedded condition that will persist well into this century.

Hegemonic crises are overhyped – US leadership always bounces back.Robert Kagan, senior fellow at Brookings, 1/11/2012, “Not Fade Away,” The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism, accessed 5-15-2013Success in the past does not guarantee success in the future. But one thing does seem clear from the historical evidence: the American system, for all its often stultifying qualities, has also shown a greater capacity to adapt and recover from difficulties than many other nations, including its geopolitical competitors. This undoubtedly has something to do with the relative freedom of American society, which rewards innovators, often outside the existing power structure, for producing new ways of doing things; and with the relatively open political system of America, which allows movements to gain steam and to influence the behavior of the political establishment. The American system is slow and clunky in part because the Founders designed it that way, with a federal structure, checks and balances, and a written Constitution and Bill of Rights—but the system also possesses a remarkable ability to undertake changes just when the steam kettle looks about to blow its lid. There are occasional “critical elections” that allow transformations to occur, providing new political solutions to old and apparently insoluble problems. Of course, there are no guarantees: the political system could not resolve the

problem of slavery without war. But on many big issues throughout their history, Americans have found a way of achieving and implementing a national consensus.

Problems with hegemony are self-correcting – empirically proven.Daniel W. Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, 1/27/2012, “Is American influence really on the wane?” Foreign Policy, http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/01/27/is_american_influence_really_on_the_wane, accessed 5-15-2013It seems that Walt's primary concern is that without better domestic policies, the United States might fritter away its great power advantages. I'm sympathetic to that argument -- I'd also take the bold position that I'd like to see

improvements in American education and infrastructure as well. One of the points I was making in my original post, however was that

even absent grand initiatives from Washington, the United States economy was finding ways to heal itself. Indeed, compared to either Europe or China, one could argue that the United States has adjusted to the post-2008 environment the best. This is not so much praise for Washington as an indictment of rigidities in

Brussels and Beijing. Still, power and influence are relative measures, and I see little evidence to support Walt's pessimism.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism


No Impact To Hegemonic Decline

Hegemony not key to their impacts – current order will outlive US hegemony.John Ikenberry, Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University, 10/16/2011, “Ikenberry's turn,” Foreign Policy blog, http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/10/16/ikenberrys_turn, accessed 5-15-2013I go on to argue that this hegemonic order is in crisis. Importantly, it is not liberal internationalism -- as a logic of order -- that is in crisis. It is America's hegemonic role that is in trouble. There is a global struggle underway over the distribution of rights, privileges, authority, etc. I argue that this is a "crisis of success" in that it is the rise of non-Western developing states and the ongoing intensification of economic and security interdependence that have triggered the crisis and overrun the governance institutions of the old order. This is a bit like Samuel Huntington's famous "development gap" -- a situation in which rapidly mobilizing and expanding social forces and economic transformation, facilitated by the old political institutions, have outpaced and overrun those institutions. That is what has happened to American hegemony. The book ends by asking: what comes next?

And I argue that the constituencies for open, rules-based order are expanding, not contracting. The world system may become "less American," but it will not become "less liberal." So that is my argument.

Hegemony fails – their impact authors ignore the forms of resistance that prevent effective deployment.Charles F. Doran, Professor of International Relations at Johns Hopkins University, 2009, “Fooling Oneself: The Mythology of Hegemony,” International Studies Review, p.178Yet, led by a groundswell of neo-conservative foreign policy thought (Krauthamer 1991; Mastanduno 1997; Wohlforth 1999; Kagan 2002; Barnett 2004), intellectual elites have so committed themselves to the hegemonic thesis that they have blinded themselves to the consequences of their own speculation. Should they be surprised when the ‘‘hierarchy’’ of international relations turns out to be non-existent, or the capacity to control even very weak and divided polities is met with frustration? Americans have invented a mythology of hegemonic domination that corresponds so poorly to the position they actually find themselves in that they cannot comprehend the responses of other governments to their actions. Bobrow and his fellow writers show the dozens of ways that other governments find to

evade, and to subvert, the proscriptions and fulminations emanating from Washington. By creating a mythology of hegemony rather than learning to work with the (properly conceived) balance of power, the United States has complicated its foreign policy and vastly raised the costs of its operation (Brown et al. 2000; Brzezinski 2004). By destroying a secular, albeit brutal, Sunni Arab center of power in Iraq, the United States must now contend with a far greater problem (Fearon 2006) of itself having to hold the country together and to balance a resurgent Iran. Bogged down in Iraq, it is unable to deter aggression against allies elsewhere such as Georgia and the Ukraine, or to stop the growing Russian penetration of Latin America. By waving the flag of hegemony, the United States finds that very few other governments see the need to assist it, because hegemony is supposed to be self-financing, self-enforcing, and self-sufficient.

Hegemony doesn’t cause a net decrease in conflict – ongoing wars prove.Daniel Larison, Ph.D. graduate from the University of Chicago and contributing Editor, 4/5/2010, “A Bright Post-Hegemonic Future,” The American Conservative, http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/04/05/a-bright-post-hegemonic-future/, accessed 5-15-2013In other words, unsustainable U.S. hegemony will not be as great as it was, and that will mean that other major and rising powers will be able to exert something more like the normal influence in their regions that such powers have exerted throughout most of modern history. Will there be conflicts in

such a world? Of course, there will be, but we already have a number of conflicts in the world that have either been deemed irrelevant to the maintenance of Pax Americana or they are the products of policies designed to perpetuate Pax Americana. In practice, securing this “peace” has involved starting several wars, the largest and most destructive of which has been the war in Iraq, as well as supporting proxies and allies as they escalated conflicts with their neighbors.


No Impact – Protectionism

Protectionism won’t happen – countries don’t even enact legal barriersEdward Alden, Senior Fellow at CFR, 10/23/12, “A U.S.-China “Trade War”: Time to Abolish a Silly Notion,” http://blogs.cfr.org/renewing-america/2012/10/23/what-exactly-is-a-trade-war-time-to-abolish-a-silly-notion/, accessed 5/19/13Secondly, almost every nation in the world seems fully aware of the dangers of aggressive protectionism. One of the striking things about the Great Recession– which resulted in global trade volumes plunging by more than 12 percent in 2009, the biggest drop since World War II – is how little of the protectionism that is permitted under WTO rules actually occurred. Chad Bown of the World Bank has documented the surprising low level of new trade barriers imposed during the recession and its aftermath.

No chance of 1930s style protectionism – several factors checkNewsweek 2/2/09, “Myths of the Global Recession; In the last of our Davos series, we look at why much of the forecasted gloom has yet to come to pass,” p. npToday’s thick web of free-trade zones and globe-spanning institutions, such as NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, will almost certainly prevent a Smoot-Hawley II. Katinka Barysch, a political analyst at the Centre for European Reform in London, says Western countries would have to tear up the entire WTO rulebook for protectionism on the scale of the 1930s to take hold. That seems unlikely, particularly since trade-negotiating incentives have changed since the 1930s, and indeed, even since the early 1980s , when a deep recession prompted President Ronald Reagan to impose export restrictions on Japanese automobiles. Today large companies produce their goods all around the world and regularly partner with foreign firms, making them a powerful bloc that would oppose any new restrictions. “ It’s a much more interwoven network of economic activity than it was in the 1980s,” says Douglas Irwin, a Dartmouth economist. U.S. automakers, for instance, have equity stakes in Korean, Japanese and European manufacturers. “Therefore it just doesn’t make as much economic sense to block off imports.” It’s illustrative that in December, Detroit’s automakers asked for bailouts, not tariff barriers; their foreign competitors already operate enormous plants in the American South, making protectionism pointless.

No risk of major trade warEdward Alden, Senior Fellow at CFR, 10/23/12, “A U.S.-China “Trade War”: Time to Abolish a Silly Notion,” http://blogs.cfr.org/renewing-america/2012/10/23/what-exactly-is-a-trade-war-time-to-abolish-a-silly-notion/, accessed 5/19/13I have a suggestion for everyone who writes about international trade: it is time to bury, once and for all, the concept of a “trade war.” The phrase is so ubiquitous that it will be awfully hard to abolish; I have probably been guilty myself from time to time. Indeed, it is almost a reflex that every time the United States or some other nation takes any action that restricts imports in any fashion, reporters and editorial writers jump to their keyboards to warn that a trade war is looming. But it is a canard that makes it far harder to have a sensible discussion about U.S. trade policy. No sooner had President Obama and Mitt Romney finished their latest round of “who’s tougher on trade with China?” in their final debate Monday night than the New York Times – to take one of many possible examples – warned that “formally citing Beijing as a currency manipulator may backfire, economic and foreign-policy experts have said. In the worst case, it could set off a trade war, leading to falling American exports to China and more expensive Chinese imports.” But what exactly is a “trade war”? To take the U.S.-China example, the notion seems to be that, if the United States restricts Chinese imports, China will respond by restricting imports of U.S. goods, in turn leading to further U.S. restrictions and so on and so on until trade between the two countries plummets. The closest historical example is the reaction to the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariff act of 1930, which raised the average U.S. tariff on imports to

historically high levels. As trade historian Douglas Irwin of Dartmouth has shown persuasively, Smoot-Hawley did not cause the Great Depression, and probably did not even exacerbate it very much since trade was a tiny part of the U.S. economy. But Smoot-Hawley did result in Great Britain, Canada and other U.S. trading partners raising their own tariffs in response. Irwin suggests that the higher tariffs were probably responsible for about a third of the 40 percent drop in imports between 1929 and 1932, and perhaps a slightly higher percentage of export losses. And the new trade barriers put in place took many decades to dismantle. With imports and exports today comprising roughly a third of the U.S. economy, and the few remaining tariffs mostly in the single digits, the consequences of similar tit-for-tat tariff increases today would be far more severe. But

what are the chances of such a “trade war” actually occurring? Pretty close to zero, for two big reasons.

http://blogs.cfr.org/renewing-america/2012/10/23/what-exactly-is-a-trade-war-time-to-abolish-a-silly-notion/





TPP Failure Inevitable

Obama bowing to protectionist pressures that will undermine an effective TPPAlan Oxley, Former chairman of the General Agreement in Tariffs and Trade, 9/11/12, “The President Must Be Bold on Pacific Trade,” Roll Call, p. npUnwisely, the Obama administration has bowed to pressure from organized labor and environmental groups to include measures that work against that goal. It has proposed that the agreement advance labor and environmental standards proposed by U.S. unions and green groups. That's unwise. First, it would doom the TPP agreement. Developing countries would see it as a strategy to reduce their competitiveness and growth. They made it perfectly clear at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro in June that labor and environmental standards must fit their economic circumstances. Meeting U.S. labor standards or imposing Environmental Protection Agency rules, which is the standard U.S. and labor groups want, would instantly make producers in developing countries globally uncompetitive.

Congress will block TPPIan Fergusson, Specialist in Internatinoal Trade and Finance, 4/15/13, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Issues for Congress," www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42694.pdf, accessed 5/24/13As the negotiations proceed, a number of issues important to Congress are emerging. One is whether the United States can balance its vision of creating a “comprehensive and high standard” agreement with a large and expanding group of countries, while not insisting on terms that other countries will reject. Another issue is how Congress will consider the TPP, if concluded. The present negotiations are not being conducted under the auspices of formal trade promotion authority (TPA)—the

latest TPA expired on July 1, 2007—although the Administration informally is following the procedures of the former TPA. If TPP implementing legislation is brought to Congress, TPA may need to be considered if the legislation is not to be

subject to potentially debilitating amendments or rejection. Finally, Congress may seek to weigh in on the addition of new members to the negotiations, before or after the negotiations conclude.

Congress will block the TPP because of tactics employed by the executiveNile Bowie, Political Analyst, 4/2/13, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), An Oppressive US-Led Free Trade Agreement, A Corporate Power-Tool of the 1%," Global Research, www.globalresearch.ca/the-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp-an-oppressive-us-led-free-trade-agreement-a-corporate-power-tool-of-the-1/5329497, accessed 5/20/13Due to the unconstitutional nature of the TPP, members of Congress would likely object to many of its stipulations – naturally, the Obama administration is employing its executive muscle to restrict congressional authority by operating under “fast-track authority,” a trade provision that requires Congress to review an FTA under limited debate in an accelerated time frame subject to a yes-or-no vote so as to

assure foreign partners that the FTA, once signed, will not be changed during the legislative process. No formal steps have been taken to consult Congress as the agreement continues to be negotiated, and Obama looks set to subtly ram the treaty into law. Such is the toxic nature of US policies that seek to bring in disaster-capitalism on a global scale, while keeping those whose lives will be most affected by deal completely in the dark. The message behind this unfettered corporate smash and grab is simple – bend over!


TPP Bad

TPP curtailment of buy American hurts competitiveness and increases trade deficitMichele Nash-Hoff, Founder and president of ElectroFab Sales, 5/2/13, "Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Would Hurt American Manufacturers," Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-nashhoff/why-the-trans-pacific-par_b_3186557.html, accessed 5/24/13The TPP treaty would exacerbate our trade deficit problem and make it even harder for American manufacturers to compete in the global marketplace. Instead of weakening "Buy American" requirements through additional trade agreements such as TPP, we need to strengthen the requirements. This drastic curtailment of "Buy American" procurement provisions is another reason why we must make sure Congress rejects any fast-track authority the Obama administration seeks to invoke when it comes time to get final congressional approval for the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

The TPP harms the economy and competitivenessNile Bowie, Political Analyst, 4/2/13, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), An Oppressive US-Led Free Trade Agreement, A Corporate Power-Tool of the 1%," Global Research, www.globalresearch.ca/the-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp-an-oppressive-us-led-free-trade-agreement-a-corporate-power-tool-of-the-1/5329497, accessed 5/20/13According to leaked draft texts, the TPP would also impose investor protections that incentivize offshoring jobs

through special benefits for companies – the TPP stifles innovation by requiring internet service providers to police user-activity and treat small-scale individual downloads as large-scale for-profit violators. Most

predictably, it would rollback regulation of finance capital predators on Wall Street by prohibiting bans on risky financial services and preventing signatory nations from exercising the ability to independently pursue monetary policy and issue capital controls – signatories must permit the free flow of derivatives, currency speculation and other manipulative financial instruments. The US-led partnership – which seeks to impose ‘Shock and Awe’ Globalization – aims to abolish the accountability of multinational corporations to the governments of countries with which they trade by making signatory governments accountable to corporations for costs imposed by national laws and regulations, including health, safety and environmental regulations.

TPP will give a competitive edge to foreign manufacturersMichele Nash-Hoff, Founder and president of ElectroFab Sales, 5/2/13, "Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Would Hurt American Manufacturers," Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-nashhoff/why-the-trans-pacific-par_b_3186557.html, accessed 5/24/13A letter from Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and 68 other Congressional Reps to President Obama on May 3, 2012 states in part, "We are concerned about proposals we understand are under consideration in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement negotiations that could significantly limit Buy American provisions and as a result adversely impact American jobs, workers, and manufacturers...We do not believe this approach is in the best interest of U.S. manufacturers and U.S. workers. Of special concern is the prospect that firms established in TPP countries, such as the many Chinese firms in Vietnam, could obtain waivers from Buy American policies. This could result in larger sums of U.S. tax dollars being invested to strengthen other countries' manufacturing sectors, rather than our own."


Politics Links

Pursuing new trade initiatives with Mexico will divert massive amounts of political capitalRobert A. Pastor, professor and director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, January 23, 2012, “North America or Asia? The 21st Century Choice for the United States”, http://www.canambusco.org/resources/UofMiamiPerspectives-Pastor-NA_or_Asia-FINAL.pdf, accessed 5/22/2013Some might argue that the United States should pursue both the TPP and a North American initiative at the same time, but the fact that it took eight years for the United States to ratify free-trade agreements with Colombia and Panama suggests there is a limit of political capital and administration attention. It would be ideal to do both, but the politics preclude it. The decision to pursue the TPP will divert scarce political capital and attention from North America, and to do anything significant on North America will also require a major political effort by all three countries. So the leaders need to choose. If the question is which strategy will generate the most jobs in the United States and make the U.S. and its neighbors more competitive, North America should be the option.

Their link turns don’t understand actual politics – limited understanding means politicians only see the downside of the plan.Christopher E. Wilson, Associate at the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, May 2013, “A U.S.-Mexico Economic Alliance: Policy Options for a Competitive Region,” New Ideas for a New Era: Policy Options for the Next Stage in U.S.-Mexico Relations, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/new_ideas_new_era.pdf, access 5/22/2013At a time when Mexico is poised to experience robust economic growth, a manufacturing renaissance is underway in North America and bilateral trade is booming, the United States and Mexico have an important choice to make: sit back and reap the moderate and perhaps temporal benefits coming naturally from the evolving global context, or implement a robust agenda to improve the competitiveness of North America for the long term. Given that job creation and economic growth in both the United States and Mexico are at stake, the choice should be simple, but a limited understanding about the magnitude, nature and depth of the U.S.-Mexico economic relationship among the public and many policymakers has made serious action to support regional exporters more politically divisive than it ought to be.

Trade with Mexico sparks congressional oppositionNPR, 3/17/09, "Trade Dispute Flares Between U.S., Mexico," www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102015890, accessed 5/20/13If there's one thing that just about every economist agrees on right now, it's this: Rising protectionism is a bad thing and ought to be avoided. Yet, that is just what is developing between the U.S. and Mexico. The first shot in this trade skirmish was fired last week by Congress when it shut down a program under which Mexican trucks were allowed on U.S. highways. In retaliation, the Mexican government said Monday that it would impose tariffs on a variety of U.S. products entering Mexico.

http://www.canambusco.org/resources/UofMiamiPerspectives-Pastor-NA_or_Asia-FINAL.pdf


LNG Exports CP 1NC 1/2

Text: The United States Department of Energy and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should approve applications to export natural gas.

LNG Exports are feasible – the only barrier is government approvalCharles Ebinger, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings, May 2012, “Liquid Markets: Assessing the Case for U.S. Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas,” www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf, accessed 5/24/13Detailed analysis of the foregoing factors suggests that the exportation of liquefied natural gas from the United States is logistically feasible. Based on current knowledge, the domestic U.S. natural gas resource base is large enough to accommodate the

potential increased demand for natural gas from the electricity sector, the industrial sector, the residential and commercial sectors, the transportation sector, and exporters of LNG. Other obstacles to production, including infrastructure, investment, environmental concerns, and human capacity, are likely to be surmountable. Moreover, the current and projected supply and demand fundamentals of the international LNG market are conducive to competitive U.S.-sourced LNG. While LNG exports may be practically feasible, they will be subject to approval by policy makers if they are to happen. In making a determination on the advisability of exports, the federal government will focus on the likely implications of LNG exports: i.e.

whether LNG exports are in the “public interest.”

Solves the economy and leadershipCharles Ebinger, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings, May 2012, “Liquid Markets: Assessing the Case for U.S. Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas,” www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf, accessed 5/24/13The potential benefits of U.S. LNG exports relate to trade, macroeconomics, and geopolitics. Exports of natural gas would bring foreign exchange revenues to the United States and have a positive effect on U.S. balance of payments, although in the context of overall U.S. trade, the impact of LNG revenues are likely to be small. The construction, operation, and maintenance of LNG export facilities and related infrastructure will also likely lead to some, limited, job creation. Exports may also serve as a stimulus to continue and even increase production of natural gas , which may result in an additional supply of employment. With some domestic production—mainly dry gas with little liquid content—being suspended due to gas prices being too low for continued economic extraction, exports may serve as an important source of incremental demand to support necessary volumes to stabilize gas prices . To the extent that gas for export is produced at zero or negative cost in

association with unconventional oil, such gas can be seen as a consequence, rather than a detriment to increased U.S. energy security. Additional volumes of U.S. LNG will be beneficial to the global gas market. While U.S. export volumes are unlikely to transform the existing fragmented

structure of existing LNG trade, it will help to erode the basis of oil-linked contracts that have characterized it for decades, and to move the market toward global price convergence. In the short-term, the emergence of the United States as an exporter comes at a time of tightening global supply, meaning U.S. exports will provide much needed liquidity to natural gas consumers around the world , potentially improving the energy costs for consumers in LNG-dependent countries like Japan and

India. While the economic benefits of this are clear, the progression towards a more global LNG market has substantial geopolitical implications as well. Although the U.S. government cannot directly influence the destination of each LNG cargo exported from the United States, U.S. foreign policy interests are served through a better-supplied global LNG market and through assistance to import-dependent strategic allies in Europe who will gain strategic leverage from the increased competition to Russian gas.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf





LNG Exports CP 1NC 2/2

LNG exports key to competitivenessUS News and World Report, 1/10/13, “Should the U.S. Export Natural Gas?,” www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/01/10/should-the-us-export-natural-gas, accessed 5/20/13"Moving forward with the timely permitting of [natural gas] exports to our nation's allies and global trading partners will lead to more American job creation, economic growth, a reduction in our trade imbalance , and cleaner air—all of which is in the public interest," the letter argued. Bill Cooper, President of the Center

for Liquefied Natural Gas, agreed: "Exporting [natural gas] is a winner for American jobs and the economy ," he said in a released statement.

"America's newfound gas supplies are so abundant that we can meet our needs here at home and enhance America's competitiveness in the global marketplace by selling some to our trading partners at the same

time."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/01/10/should-the-us-export-natural-gas


LNG CP – Politics Net Benefit

The counterplan doesn’t link to politics – no perception or congressional involvementReuters, 6/7/12, “As Congress looks away, U.S. tiptoes toward exporting a gas bounty,” www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-usa-lng-exports-idUSBRE85Q05820120627, accessed 5/20/13In a bitterly divided U.S. political environment, there's at least one thing Republicans and Democrats can agree on: Avoid a public showdown on natural gas exports, arguably the most important energy policy decision in recent memory. While fluctuating gasoline prices, the Keystone pipeline and the fight over fracking steal headlines, the question of how much of the newfound U.S. shale gas bounty should be shared with the rest of the world goes largely without comment or coverage --

despite holding far wider and longer-lasting consequences. The reason is clear: unlike the relatively simple, black-and-white issues

that politicians often favor and voters connect to, liquefied natural gas (LNG) is deep, deep gray. It affects a tangled web of constituents, from Big Oil to international allies such as Japan, pits free-trade orthodoxy against the domestic economy, and requires an awkward explanation of why allowing some exports -- inevitably raising U.S. energy prices in the short term, even if at the margin -- may ultimately be better for the country in the long run. All the same, this U.S. president or the next will have to make a tricky decision, and its consequences may only become clear years from now: How much U.S. gas should be sold to other countries if it means boosting prices for consumers at home? "Right now I don't think this issue is getting anywhere near the attention it deserves," said Democratic congressman Edward Markey, one of a small number of politicians actively seeking to rein in energy exports. "Keystone and Solyndra are election-year political sideshows," he said, referring to the bankruptcy of a government-funded solar panel maker. "This is the main event." But lobbyists on both sides of the

issue say it suits them best to keep the subject out of the headlines. The gas producers that stand to benefit from higher selling prices see no upside from a public brawl, while many manufacturers who could benefit from continuing low prices shy away from anti-export statements. With Congress unlikely to weigh in, the decision falls to a small, obscure unit of the Energy Department, the Office of Natural Gas Regulatory Activities.

Congress won’t risk opposing LNG exportsReuters, 6/7/12, “As Congress looks away, U.S. tiptoes toward exporting a gas bounty,” www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-usa-lng-exports-idUSBRE85Q05820120627, accessed 5/20/13Not since the liberalization of power markets in the 1980s have politicians had more sway over future energy costs -- or been less willing to grapple publicly with the issue. Only one hearing on LNG exports has been held to date in the Senate, and in the House of Representatives, the Energy and Commerce Committee has no plan to hold hearings at the moment. Markey has struggled to get traction behind legislation that would block gas exports, a measure almost certain to fail to pass through the divided Congress. Few lawmakers openly oppose exports, though even fewer vocally advocate a fully open market that would raise prices at home.

The counterplan doesn’t require congressional actionMichael Levi, Senior Fellow for Energy, 12, “A Strategy for U.S. Natural Gas Exports, http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/a_strategy_for_u.s._natural_gas_exports/, accessed 5/20/13I thus propose that, to facilitate potential natural gas exports, the DOE should approve applications for LNG exports to non-FTA countries that are pending before it, barring specific concerns about individual applications that are not related to the

broader wisdom of allowing LNG exports. In doing so, the DOE is required to find that allowing exports is in the “public interest.” The framework outlined in this paper provides one way of presenting such an assessment. The FERC must also approve modifications to terminals in order for exports to be allowed (Ebinger et al. 2012). I propose that it approve any applications to operate export terminals that have been approved by the DOE, barring problems with individual applications that are unrelated to the broader wisdom of allowing LNG exports. Implementing these steps will not require any new staffing, funding, or action by Congress, which has already put in place the legislative framework needed to approve and monitor LNG exports. Congress need only refrain from placing new statutory restrictions on LNG exports.

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/a_strategy_for_u.s._natural_gas_exports/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-usa-lng-exports-idUSBRE85Q05820120627

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/27/us-usa-lng-exports-idUSBRE85Q05820120627


LNG CP – Economy Solvency

LNG exports key to boost the economy – best studies prove Jon Entine, Visiting Fellow at AEI, 1/24/13, “Odd couple: Will Dow Chemical and Ed Markey's opposition to natural gas exports cripple America's energy advantage?,” www.aei.org/article/energy-and-the-environment/conventional-energy/natural-gas/odd-couple-will-dow-chemical-and-ed-markeys-opposition-to-natural-gas-exports-cripple-americas-energy-advantage/, accessed 5/20/13The LNG issue boiled over last month when the US Department of Energy released the second of its delayed and highly anticipated reports on the potential impact of relaxing restrictions on natural gas exports. This analysis, prepared

by NERA Economic Consulting, concluded “the US would experience net economic benefits from increased LNG exports”—and they could be staggering. Among other key points: any potential price impacts would be in a “relatively narrow range” and exports would result in “an increase in US households’ real income and welfare,” even among vulnerable lower income families . NAM, along with another

powerful industry group, the American Chemistry Council, endorsed the DOE findings, even though most of its members, particularly chemical companies, could see modest natural gas price rises, a marginal cost in manufacturing processes. The researchers estimate that

increasing exports could eventually generate more than $125 billion and as many as 5 million jobs—a jolt for the US economy still trying to shake off worldwide financial doldrums. The Energy Department’s conclusions echo numerous comprehensive independent studies from across the ideological spectrum ,

including progressive analyses by the Hamilton Project led by Michael Levi, senior fellow and energy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations and research directed by Charles Ebinger at the Brookings Institution . This is a rare instance in which liberals and conservatives as well as industry and thoughtful environmentalists mostly agree.

LNG exports will drive production leading to jobs, revenue, and investmentWashington Times, 1/23/13, “Limiting natural gas exports a bad call for the economy,”www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/23/vitale-limiting-natural-gas-exports-bad-call-econo/, accessed 5/20/13Pennsylvania and other states are looking for ways to begin exporting natural gas abroad. Just as decreased demand decreases production, an increased demand in natural

gas would drive an increase in production, leading to additional investments in U.S. manufacturing, more jobs in local communities and more revenue for local, state and federal governments. The Department of Energy recently released a study that emphasized the link between exports and economic gains . The more liquefied natural gas was

exported, the greater net benefits for the United States — from landowners to steelworkers. In fact, the study estimated that exports could boost our economy by $47 billion by 2020. Everyone wins. Natural gas production does not simply affect natural gas companies, but all industries and manufacturers. For example, global steel output has grown by 14 percent since 2008, thanks in large part to the natural gas industry. Meanwhile, American carbon dioxide emissions have decreased by 20 percent thanks to coal-powered plants being converted to operate on natural gas. This could occur throughout the entire world if foreign nations were to operate their plants with American natural gas. This is a viable and proven solution to climate change.

LNG exports shore up long term employment ratesCharles Ebinger, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings, May 2012, “Liquid Markets: Assessing the Case for U.S. Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas,” www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf, accessed 5/24/13The implications of LNG exports on job creation are similarly difficult to quantify. Other than temporary construction jobs created by the need to build liquefaction capacity, pipelines, and other ancillary infrastructure, the operation of the liquefaction facility will likely provide little permanent employment benefit. As outlined in the section on price impacts above, as much of the gas for export will come from new production, rather than the displacement of consumption in other sectors, the negative economic, and therefore jobrelated, effects on those sectors is likely to be limited. Beyond the labor required for additional gas production to satisfy LNG exports, the net impact of LNG exports is likely to be minimal. Further upstream, the job potential may be greater. By increasing domestic natural gas production, employment from additional oil and gas producers will increase, as will the demand for manufacturers of equipment for oil and gas production, gathering, and transportation.



http://www.aei.org/article/energy-and-the-environment/conventional-energy/natural-gas/odd-couple-will-dow-chemical-and-ed-markeys-opposition-to-natural-gas-exports-cripple-americas-energy-advantage/




LNG CP – Asian Leadership Solvency

LNG Exports key to successful Asian leadershipCharles Ebinger, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings, May 2012, “Liquid Markets: Assessing the Case for U.S. Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas,” www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf, accessed 5/24/13Increased LNG exports will provide similar assistance to strategic U.S. allies in the Pacific Basin. By adding supply volumes to the global LNG market, the U.S. will help Japan, Korea, India, and other import- dependent countries in South and East Asia to meet their energy needs. The desire on the part of Pacific Basin countries for the U.S. to become a gas supplier to the region has been underlined by the

efforts of the Japanese government, which has attempted to secure a free-trade agreement waiver from the United States to allow exports. As with oil price-linked Russian gas contracts in Europe, U.S. LNG exports linked to a floating Henry Hub benchmark, have the potential to weaken the market power of incumbent LNG providers to Asia, increasing the negotiating power of consumers and decreasing the price. As U.S. foreign policy undergoes a “pivot to Asia,” the ability of the U.S. to provide a degree of increased energy security and pricing relief to LNG importers in the region will be an important economic and strategic asset.

LNG exports key to US foreign policy influenceCharles Ebinger, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy Security Initiative at Brookings, May 2012, “Liquid Markets: Assessing the Case for U.S. Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas,” www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2012/5/02%20lng%20exports%20ebinger/0502_lng_exports_ebinger.pdf, accessed 5/24/13A large increase in U.S. LNG exports would have the potential to increase U.S. foreign policy interests in

both the Atlantic and Pacific basins. Unlike oil, natural gas has traditionally been an infrastructure-constrained business, giving geographical proximity and political relations between producers and consumers a high level of importance. Issues of “pipeline politics” have been most directly visible in Europe, which relies on Russia for around a third of its gas. Previous disputes between Moscow and Ukraine over pricing have led to major gas shortages in several E.U. countries in the winters

(when demand is highest) of both 2006 and 2009. Further disagreements between Moscow and Kiev over the terms of the existing bilateral gas deal have the potential to escalate again, with negative consequences for E.U. consumers. The risk of high reliance on Russian gas has been a principal driver of European energy policy in recent decades. Among central and eastern European states,

particularly those formerly aligned with the Soviet Union such as Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, the issue of reliance on imports of Russian gas is a primary energy security concern and has inspired energy policies aimed at diversification of fuel sources for power generation.

From the U.S. perspective such Russian influence in the affairs of these democratic nations is an impediment to efforts at political and economic reform. The market power of Gazprom , Russia’s state-owned gas monopoly, is evident in these countries. Although they are closer to Russia than other

consumers of Russian gas in Western Europe, many countries in Eastern and Central Europe pay higher contract prices for their imports, as they are more reliant on Russian gas as a proportion of their energy mixes.

LNG exports allows the US to reconfigure geopolitical alliances in its favorJon Entine, Visiting Fellow at AEI, 1/24/13, “Odd couple: Will Dow Chemical and Ed Markey's opposition to natural gas exports cripple America's energy advantage?,” www.aei.org/article/energy-and-the-environment/conventional-energy/natural-gas/odd-couple-will-dow-chemical-and-ed-markeys-opposition-to-natural-gas-exports-cripple-americas-energy-advantage/, accessed 5/20/13According to the independently produced International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook 2012, the global energy map is being redrawn on the back of shale gas . The

United States was recently facing the prospect of long-term scarcity. Now the US could pass Russia and Saudi Arabia as the world’s top energy producer during the,2020s while dramatically decreasing its carbon footprint—unless political forces conspire to turn back the clock. Natural gas spot prices in the US currently hover around $3.70 per thousand cubic feet. Historical low prices have been a boon for

consumers who are saving billions of dollars as they switch from more expensive and far dirtier coal and oil. It’s also led to an energy security windfall. While natural gas prices are rock bottom in the US, they remain exorbitant in Europe and Asia—four to five times as high—where a lack of a geological industry infrastructure to support sophisticated new mining techniques and political opposition to fracking have paralyzed politicians.

Europe remains heavily dependent on dirty coal, Russia’s Gazprom and Middle East supplies while Asia relies on coal,

nuclear energy and massive foreign oil imports. The past few years have seen several countries, including the Netherlands, Argentina, Brazil, Kuwait, Thailand, the UAE and Indonesia, once the world’s largest LNG exporter, join the ranks

of natural gas importers. More than a dozen other countries are considering or constructing import facilities. The market for US exports is potentially huge. And the potential to reconfigure geopolitical alliances in America’s favor are immeasurable, say foreign policy and energy experts.









Venezuela Neg


SQ Solves Latin America Engagement

The U.S. is increasing economic engagement to boost relations nowMiami Herald (editorial), April 30, 2013, “Latin America no longer anyone’s ‘backyard’,” http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/30/3373319/latin-america-no-longer-anyones.html, accessed 5-1-2013Although crime and violence pose serious challenges and will undoubtedly garner attention during this trip, they are far from the sole issues on the agenda with either Mexico or Central America. Greater energy, commercial, and education cooperation are centerpieces of the U.S. agenda in the Americas as our increasingly connected and capable neighbors no longer measure the strength of relations by totaling up U.S. security assistance. Instead, our neighbors desire dynamic partnerships built upon the more than $1 trillion in U.S. trade with and investment in the Americas. Although room remains for neighbors to step up and more effectively share responsibility, countries like Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Chile are engaged in trilateral cooperation with the United States and other nations in the region to tackle common challenges and advance shared interests. This shift to partnership together with an appreciation of the United States’ place in the Americas is the key to understanding how the president’s trip to Mexico and Central America advances modern U.S.-Latin American relations.

Plan Colombia proves the U.S. is engaged in Latin America nowZach Silberman, Global Security Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Advanced Governmental Studies, February 4, 2013, “Opportunity Knocks in Latin America,” U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, http://www.usglc.org/2013/02/04/opportunity-knocks-in-latin-america/, accessed 5-2-2013The U.S. is also working closely with Latin America on mutual national security issues. For example, programs like Plan Colombia demonstrate the success of engagement these critical areas. The Obama administration could use the success of a Plan Columbia as a guide to build on programs that we already have in place in Latin America that will have a positive impact towards improving the lives of many. U.S. Southern Command, which has responsibility for Latin America, has worked across agencies in the past specifically through Plan Colombia and through its successor the Colombian Strategic Development Initiative.

Current Obama engagement policies are working in Latin AmericaArturo Valenzuela, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Brookings Institution, January 6, 2011, “U.S.-Latin American Relations: A Look Ahead,” http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/ 2011/154105.htm, accessed 5-2-2013Since its first days in office, the Obama Administration has worked very hard to shift the balance in the U.S.-Latin American relationship in a positive and constructive direction – and we are confident that our approach is achieving results. I see so many here who, like me, have spent the better part of their careers studying the Americas, or U.S. policy in the region. For us, in particular, these are fascinating times. That’s because we are seeing the convergence of two powerful and positive trends: the consolidation of successful market democracies that are making big strides in meeting their peoples’ needs, and the growing global integration of Latin America. These trends are fundamentally reordering our interaction with each other. Indeed, our greatest regional challenges – including

inequality, the impunity of power, lack of rights, ineffective institutions, lack of opportunity – are receding in most countries in the Americas. And nations of the hemisphere are realizing their stake in new global challenges, like food security, climate change, transnational crime, and economic competitiveness. Most importantly, they are realizing their capacity to act, on a global level, to address these issues. So there is a whole new set of incentives for democratic societies to adjust national policies, pursue greater regional integration, and join in new networks of partnership around the world in order to help meet the tests of our times.

http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/%202011/154105.htm

http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/%202011/154105.htm

http://www.southcom.mil/ourmissions/Pages/US-Military-Support-to-Colombia.aspx

http://www.usglc.org/2013/02/04/opportunity-knocks-in-latin-america/

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/30/3373319/latin-america-no-longer-anyones.html

http://www.state.gov/www/regions/wha/colombia/fs_000328_plancolombia.html


China Solves Economic Engagement

China’s economic engagement in Venezuela leads a push for alternatives to the U.S.Jonathan Watts, Staff Writer, March 26, 2013, “China's exploitation of Latin American natural resources raises concern,” The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/china-latin-america-resources-concern, accessed 5-2-2013Since the 2008 financial crisis, China has also become the main lender to the region. In 2010, it provided $37bn (£24bn) in loans – more than the World Bank, Inter-American Bank and the US Import-Export Bank combined. Most of this has gone to four primary exporters – Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina and Ecuador – for mining or transport infrastructure. The economic benefits have been enormous. Trade between China and Latin America was just $10bn in 2000. In 2011, it had surged to $241bn. While the distribution has varied enormously from country to country, this helped Latin America avoid the worst of the financial and economic crises that gripped much of the developed world and provided extra revenue for poverty alleviation programmes that have eased the region's notorious inequality. It also played a major part in bolstering left-leaning governments that are seeking an alternative to neo-liberal prescriptions from Washington and Wall Street.

China has extensive economic engagement with VenezuelaHai Luong, Staff Writer, March 7, 2013, “Post-Chavez Venezuela and the Chance for Change,” Epoch Times, http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/4167-post-chavez-venezuela-and-the-chance-for-change/, accessed 4-26-13China’s interest in Chavez is clear: Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves. Its proven crude reserves reached 296.5 billion barrels in 2010, surpassing Saudi Arabia’s 264.5 billion barrels, according to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. In the last half of Chavez’s 14-year rule, China became a major player in Venezuela’s oil industry. Today, China imports 10 times more Venezuelan crude than it did five years ago. By contrast, the United States imports 40 percent less than it did a decade ago. In the next 10 years, China intends to double imports. Beijing has been doing what it can to ensure the oil will keep flowing in a post-Chavez future. Beijing has made major loans to Venezuela totaling $38 billion as of April 201Those loans are all to be repaid in oil.

Chinese economic engagement is strong in Venezuela and Latin AmericaJonathan Watts, Staff Writer, March 26, 2013, “China's exploitation of Latin American natural resources raises concern,” The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/china-latin-america-resources-concern, accessed 5-2-2013Amazonian forest cleared in Ecuador, a mountain levelled in Peru, the Cerrado savannah converted to soy fields in Brazil and oil fields under development in Venezuela's Orinoco belt. These recent reports of environmental degradation in Latin America may be thousands of miles apart in different countries and for different products, but they have a common cause: growing Chinese demand for regional commodities . The world's most populous nation has joined the ranks of wealthy countries in Europe, North America and east Asia that have long consumed and polluted unsustainably. This has led to what author Michael T Klare calls "a race for what's left" and its impact is particularly evident in the continent with much of the untapped, unspoiled natural resources. Even more than Africa, Latin America has become a major focus of Beijing's drive for commodities. A study last year by Enrique Dussel Peters, a professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico,

found that the region has been the leading destination for Chinese foreign direct investment – mostly for raw materials and by big government-run companies such as Chinalco and CNOOC.

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/DP33DusselNov12.pdf

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/brazil

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/20/chinese-mining-peru-corporate-responsibility

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/ecuador-chinese-oil-bids-amazon

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/china-latin-america-resources-concern


http://www.guardian.co.uk/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/4167-post-chavez-venezuela-and-the-chance-for-change/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/about-us.html/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/about-us.html/

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/author/hai-luong/




http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/commodities

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/ecuador

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/china


Venezuela Prefers China

Latin America is actively engaging China. They want to work with ChinaGabriel Marcella, PhD, Strategic Studies Institute, Winter 2012, “China's Military Activity in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.ciaonet.org.er.lib.k-state.edu/journals/aq/aq1054/04.html, accessed 5-1-2013The alarmist reporting, much of it from U.S. sources, also ignores the Latin American perspective. Latin Americans are not simple bystanders. They seek to engage China in order to understand the nature and extent of China's power and influence-and its effect on their national interests and foreign policies. They also want to keep their options open for acquiring military equipment at an affordable price and technology transfers for coproduction or independent production. They are also aware of the risks of acquiring a motley mix of systems from various nations, a prospect that makes maintenance expensive and readiness problematic.

Venezuela is economically dependent on Chinese economic engagementJonathan Watts, Staff Writer, March 26, 2013, “China's exploitation of Latin American natural resources raises concern,” The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/china-latin-america-resources-concern, accessed 5-2-2013Venezuela and Ecuador, which have been unable to access international capital markets since defaulting, have received hefty loans from China. Argentina is seeking similar treatment. But giving up one kind of dependency can lead to another. Repayments to China are guaranteed by long-term commodity sales, which means a commitment to push ahead with resource exploitation – often with dire consequences for the environment and indigenous communities.

China uses extensive economic engagement to push out U.S. influenceFrank Vernuccio, Staff Writer, August 3, 2012, “China a major factor in Latin America,” The Examiner, http://www.examiner.com/article/china-a-major-factor-latin-america, accessed 5-2-2013China has become a major factor in Latin American and Caribbean affairs. After President Hu Jintao’s first visit to the region in 2004, it took just three years for bilateral trade to reach over $100 billion, notes Russell Hsiao. 121 bilateral agreements and cooperation initiatives have been signed since 2000, concentrating in trade, cultural, public administration/consular affairs, science and technology, tourism, and military matters. Participation in regional organizations has become extensive. Beijing joined the Organization of American States as a permanent observer. It also joined the Inter-American Development Bank with a donation of $350 million . It expanded diplomatic ties with the Group of Rio, the Andean Community, and the Caribbean Community groups. China has also been particularly encouraging in the development of regional organizations that exclude the United States. President Hu Jintao sent an enthusiastic congratulatory message to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Chilean President Sebastian Pinera past December on the founding of the “Community of Latin American and Caribbean States” (CELAC), a grouping that includes every nation in the western hemisphere except the United States and Canada.

http://www.examiner.com/article/china-a-major-factor-latin-america




http://www.ciaonet.org.er.lib.k-state.edu/journals/aq/aq1054/04.html

http://www.iadb.org/

http://www.iadb.org/

http://www.examiner.com/topic/china


Yes China-Venezuela Arms Sales

Arms sales to Venezuela are part of China’s overall agenda to undermine the U.S.Fox News Latino (Editorial), November 16, 2012, “Chinese Military Planes Begin Arriving in Venezuela,” http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/16/chinese-military-planes-begin-arriving-in-venezuela/, accessed 5-2-2013The U.S.-China Economic & Security Review Commission reports that Venezuela, Chile, Bolivia and Cuba now maintain strong ties to the Chinese military “through a high number of official visits, military officer exchanges, port calls, and limited arms sales.” Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador have begun to buy Chinese arms and military equipment, including radar and aircraft. Bolivia has signed a military cooperation agreement with China. Cynthia Watson’s study Of China’s arms sale to the region notes that the introduction of Chinese armaments allows Latin American governments to distance themselves from Washington. She notes that “Beijing’s military to military ties are growing with the states of South America across

the board: military missions, educational exchanges and arms sales. This activity is part of Beijing’s overall advancement of a foreign policy.” America has traditionally kept potential threats far from the Western Hemisphere. The Obama Administration now must decide whether to ignore a policy that has worked successfully for two centuries.

Chinese economic engagement in Latin America leads to arms salesLoro Horta, Visiting Scholar at the Center for International Security Studies (CSIS) at Sydney University in Australia, September/October 2008, “In Uncle Sam’s Backyard: China's Military Influence in Latin America,” Military Review, p. 47 There are significant political, economic, and military dimensions to most weapons trade. By that, I mean

that major arms sales tend to follow or run in parallel with close and favorable political and economic relations. For instance, major recipients of U.S. arms, such as Israel, are allies of Washington that enjoy a close, privileged relationship. The

same applies to NATO members and U.S. allies in Asia and the Middle East. Arms sales take place in a larger political and diplomatic setting. A direct link exists between major arms transferences and the nature of political and economic relations. Using this line of reasoning, we can conclude that China's arms sales to Latin America are likely to increase as China's political and economic relations with Latin America progress. Beijing's rising economic and political influence in Latin America may pave the way for major Chinese arms sales and a further expansion of its military influence. China's sophisticated new defense diplomacy is a major force driving this process.

Venezuela engages China for arms to circumvent the U.S. banFox News Latino (Editorial), November 16, 2012, “Chinese Military Planes Begin Arriving in Venezuela,” http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/16/chinese-military-planes-begin-arriving-in-venezuela/, accessed 5-2-2013After the U.S. said it would ban arm sales to his country, Chávez actively began looking for a new place to buy them. He found cooperation among Russia and China. Chávez announced this week that he would begin receiving new Chinese-made military transport planes – shrugging off U.S.’s attempt to choke off Venezuela’s weapons supply. The Venezuelan president said during a televised Cabinet meeting that the first two of the Y-8 planes that Venezuela has bought from China have arrived. He has said previously that Venezuela agreed to buy a total of eight planes from China last year for nearly $353 million. The U.S. government in 2006 banned arms sales to Venezuela, citing the country's ties with Iran and Cuba and accusing it of not fully cooperating in counterterrorism efforts. Chávez has instead turned to Russia and China, spending billions of dollars on fighter jets, transport planes, radar systems, helicopters and assault rifles.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/16/chinese-military-planes-begin-arriving-in-venezuela/


http://search.proquest.com.er.lib.k-state.edu/pubidlinkhandler/sng/pubtitle/Military+Review/$N/40805/DocView/225306723/fulltext/$B/1?accountid=11789

http://www.jamestown.org/




Politics – Plan Popular With GOP

GOP Supports increasing economic engagementDoug Palmer, Staff Writer, May 8, 2012, “Top Republican urges deeper engagement in Latin America,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/08/us-usa-trade-boehner-idUSBRE84718520120508, accessed 5-2-2013The Congress' top Republican called on Tuesday for deeper economic engagement with Latin America as a bulwark against Iran's attempt to gain influence in the region and the destabilizing effects of international drug cartels. "The best defense against an expansion of Iranian influence in Latin America - and against the destructive aspirations of international criminals in the region - is for the United States to double down on a policy of direct engagement," U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said at the State Department. "We must be clear that we will be there, with our friends and partners in the region, committed to fighting and winning the war for a free, stable, and prosperous hemisphere," Boehner said in a speech to the Council of Americas, which represents companies that do business in Latin America.

Republicans are pushing for Obama to increase engagementAndres Oppenheimer, Staff Writer, September 2, 2012, “GOP's tilt on Latin America,” Charleston Gazette (West Virginia), p. 3C The Republicans are right in that Obama has neglected Latin America. He has (and, by the way, so did former President Bush after 9/11). But critics are right that tough-sounding rhetoric plays right into the hands of Chavez and his disciples in the region. They are constantly insulting Washington in hopes of getting the U.S. president to say something that would justify their claim that the "U.S. empire" is about to invade their countries at any moment, and who use that fantasy as an excuse to grab absolute powers. If Romney takes that line, he may - ironically - strengthen them.

Republicans back increasing economic deals with Latin AmericaJulia E. Sweig, the Nelson and David Rockefeller senior fellow for Latin America studies and director for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, January 2013 - February 2013, “Getting Latin America Right,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/article/getting-latin-america-right-7880, accessed 5-2-2013Over the following months, the slog in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee over Cuba, Honduras and confirmations led to an administration practice of bending to ideological winds in Congress when it came to Latin America —even at the expense of the president’s stated diplomatic objectives. This occurred despite support for the president from key congressional Democrats and a number of Republicans, including Representative Paul Ryan, who backed trade with and travel to Cuba. This path of least political resistance extracted a cost for the administration in terms of U.S. standing in the region. In the meantime, the noise over Cuba and Honduras reinforced the administration’s strategic instincts to focus on the region’s biggest countries, especially Mexico, Brazil and Colombia. Mexico mattered particularly because of its proximity and the severity of its security crisis, as well as the depth of its commercial and human ties to the United States. Brazil stood out for its sheer size and growing diplomatic and economic weight. Colombia—long tied to U.S. security assistance—represented an institutionalized legacy relationship and an opportunity to involve a model ally in security efforts within and beyond Latin America. With such priorities rising to the top in a low-priority region, Obama’s Latin America policy increasingly resembled his predecessor’s.

http://nationalinterest.org/article/getting-latin-america-right-7880

http://nationalinterest.org/article/getting-latin-america-right-7880

http://www.reuters.com/finance?lc=int_mb_1001

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/08/us-usa-trade-boehner-idUSBRE84718520120508


Conditions CP Solvency

Congress wants conditions on engagementRoger F. Noriega, former assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to the Organization of American States, January 07, 2013, “Venezuelan roulette,” American Enterprise Institute, http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/latin-america/venezuelan-roulette/, accessed 5-3-2013Bipartisan leaders in Congress are paying closer attention to the dangerous developments in Venezuela than are the foreign policy agencies in the executive branch. It is vital that they weigh in urgently to ensure that U.S. diplomats make vital law enforcement, security, and human rights concerns a condition of rapprochement with Caracas.

We should condition the plan on human rights and rule of law reformsDiana Villiers Negroponte, Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies, Duke University, April 16, 2013, “Maduro as President of Venezuela: What to Expect,” http://latinamericancaribbean.duke.edu/ news/archive/2013/04/16/maduro-as-president-of-venezuela-what-to-expect, accessed 5-3-2013Under these circumstances, what should the U.S. government do? I anticipate that President Obama will recognize Maduro as president in the near future, and cannot prevent growing Chinese influence. However, Washington should not accept the abuse of human rights and the denial of the rule of law. Together with the democratic countries in the hemisphere, it should use the weight of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and its effective court system to protect Venezuelan citizens and prevent the consolidation of authoritarian rule in the hemisphere.

The U.S. should condition engagement on transparency and reformPatrick Christy, staff writer, March 15, 2013, “Obama Must Stand Up for Democracy in Post-Chavez Venezuela,” U.S. News & World Report, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/15/after-chavez-us-must-encourage-democratic-venezuela, accessed 5-5-2013Corruption and criminality were widespread under the Chavez regime, as high-level government and military officials benefited from close ties to corrupt businesses and international drug traffickers. Yet to date, the Obama administration has done little to hold Venezuela's leaders accountable. Washington should make clear that full diplomatic relations with the United States will be contingent upon Venezuela ending ties to international terrorist groups and rogue regimes like Iran. If Venezuela takes meaningful steps to end these ties and ensure future elections, the United States should work with Caracas and the private sector to reform Venezuela's energy industry and identify key development projects and reforms to improve the country's economic future.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/15/after-chavez-us-must-encourage-democratic-venezuela

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/15/after-chavez-us-must-encourage-democratic-venezuela

http://latinamericancaribbean.duke.edu/%20news/archive/2013/04/16/maduro-as-president-of-venezuela-what-to-expect

http://latinamericancaribbean.duke.edu/%20news/archive/2013/04/16/maduro-as-president-of-venezuela-what-to-expect

http://www.brookings.edu/experts/negroponted?view=bio

http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/latin-america/venezuelan-roulette/

http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/latin-america/venezuelan-roulette/


Solvency – Venezuela Says No

Maduro will say no in the short term. Relations thaw will take a long timeMark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, April 9, 2013, “Hugo Chávez’s Death: Implications for Venezuela and U.S. Relations,” CRS Report for Congress, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/ R42989.pdf, accessed 4-26-13While some observers contend that Chávez’s passing and the beginning of a new political era in Venezuela could ultimately lessen tensions in U.S.-Venezuelan relations, there is no expectation that this will happen quickly. In fact, State Department officials have cautioned that the upcoming electoral campaign could delay any forward movement in improving bilateral relations. Just hours before Chávez’s death on March 5, Vice President Maduro announced that two U.S. military attachés were being expelled from Venezuela for reportedly attempting to provoke dissent in the Venezuelan military and even appeared to blame Chávez’s sickness on the United States. State Department officials strongly denied the Venezuelan charges regarding the attachés, and ultimately responded on March 11 by expelling two Venezuelan diplomats (a consular official in New York and a second secretary at the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington).

Maduro will say no to the plan to shore up military credibilityPaul D. Shinkman, Staff Writer, April 24, 2013, “Iranian-Sponsored Narco-Terrorism in Venezuela: How Will Maduro Respond?,” US News & World Report, http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/ 04/24/iranian-sponsored-narco-terrorism-in-venezuela-how-will-maduro-respond, accessed 4-25-2013U.S. officials might try to engage the new Venezuelan president first in the hopes of improving the strained ties between the two countries. But Maduro has never been close with the senior military class in his home country, and will likely adopt a more confrontational approach to the United States to prove his credentials to these Bolivarian elites. "Maybe if he were operating in different circumstances, he could be a pragmatist," Farah says. "I don't think he can be a pragmatist right now."

Anti-Americanism is essential to Maduro’s political survivalDaniel W. Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, March 7, 2013, “Why post-Chavez Venezuela won't be a U.S. ally anytime soon,” Foreign Policy, http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/07/why_post_chavez_venezeula_ wont_be_a_us_ally_anytime_soon, accessed 4-24-2013Combative words, a warning of U.S. military intervention, and oddball conspiracy theories meant to encourage suspicion and distrust were always basic ingredients in Chávez’s rhetoric. The fear now is that Chavismo’s blend of bravado and insecurity could swing unpredictably in the hands of whichever cronies succeed Chávez. In a country as polarized as Venezuela, having political figures tell their supporters that the people who disagree with them may be responsible for their beloved leader’s demise comes dangerously close to throwing a match on a tinderbox.

http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/07/why_post_chavez_venezeula_%20wont_be_a_us_ally_anytime_soon


http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/07/why_post_chavez_venezeula_wont_be_a_us_ally_anytime_soon

http://fletcher.tufts.edu/

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/author/Daniel%20W.%20Drezner

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/%2004/24/iranian-sponsored-narco-terrorism-in-venezuela-how-will-maduro-respond

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/%2004/24/iranian-sponsored-narco-terrorism-in-venezuela-how-will-maduro-respond

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/%20R42989.pdf

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/%20R42989.pdf


Solvency – Madero Says No

Maduro will continue to demonize the U.S,Daniel W. Drezner, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, March 7, 2013, “Why post-Chavez Venezuela won't be a U.S. ally anytime soon,” Foreign Policy, http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/07/why_post_chavez_venezeula_ wont_be_a_us_ally_anytime_soon, accessed 4-24-2013All of which may spell a more insecure, paranoid, and perhaps aggressive presidential palace. Indeed, Maduro’s statement informing Venezuelans of Chávez’s death wasted no time in engaging in bizarre, politically charged scapegoating. “We have no doubt, the time will come in history when we can create a scientific commission to show that Comandante Chávez was attacked with this disease,” said Maduro on Tuesday. “We already have plenty of clues about this, it’s a very serious matter that will have to be investigated by a special committee of scientists.” Maduro also announced the expulsion of two American military attachés and accused the United States of trying to destabilize the regime.

Maduro won’t engage because demonizing the U.S. is key to his power baseJordan Fabian, Staff Writer, March 6, 2013, “Hugo Chávez Death: Fixing the U.S.-Venezuela Relationship Won't Be Easy,” ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/hugo-chavez-death-fixing-us-venezuela-relationship-easy/story?id=18668275&page=2#.UXyTkrXz2m4, accessed 4-23-13Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas and Americas Society, said that it's in Maduro's political self-interest to maintain Venezuela's current tack against the United States. "My strong belief is that Maduro is going to keep relations with the U.S. in the deep freeze because he has to establish his own legitimacy," he said in an interview with ABC/Univision. "He doesn't have his own base of support. He's got to keep tensions high with the United States." Tried and true tactic."

Maduro will say no to engagementElise Labott, CNN Foreign Affairs Reporter, March 6, 2013, “U.S.-Venezuela relations likely to remain tense after Chavez,” CNN Wire, http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/06/u-s-venezuela-relations-likely-to-remain-tense-after-chavez/, accessed 4-27-13"The opportunities are not there yet for the U.S. to engage" says Carl Meacham of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "For the next month or so, Maduro has to show he is even more Chavez than Chavez was. That means he is going to be more anti- American, more anti-capitalist, more anti-systemic. As far as a rapprochement, I don't see it coming anytime soon."

The plan can never solve if Venezuela says noPaul Richter and Chris Kraul, Staff Writers, March 6, 2013, “U.S.-Venezuela ties may now thaw; Chavez's immediate successors appear a lot less hungry for regional leadership,” Los Angeles Times, p. A8."It's going to take two to tango," Nuland said. "It's going to take action on the Venezuelan side." It may be difficult for the Obama administration to move toward better relations with Venezuela without a major step from Caracas, partly because it would open the administration to attacks from congressional Republicans. They consider the White House too soft on the regime.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/06/u-s-venezuela-relations-likely-to-remain-tense-after-chavez/

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/06/u-s-venezuela-relations-likely-to-remain-tense-after-chavez/

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/hugo-chavez-death-fixing-us-venezuela-relationship-easy/story?id=18668275&page=2#.UXyTkrXz2m4

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/hugo-chavez-death-fixing-us-venezuela-relationship-easy/story?id=18668275&page=2#.UXyTkrXz2m4



http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/07/why_post_chavez_venezeula_wont_be_a_us_ally_anytime_soon

http://fletcher.tufts.edu/

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/author/Daniel%20W.%20Drezner


Solvency – AT: Maduro Isn’t Chavez

Maduro will continue Chavez’s anti-American foreign policyTed Piccone, a senior fellow and deputy director for Foreign Policy at Brookings, March 6, 2013, “Chavez Is Dead. Chavismo Lives On,” http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/03/06-chavez-venezuela-piccone, accessed 5-3-2013In foreign policy, Maduro is unlikely to veer from Chavez's tested formula of demonizing the United States, at least rhetorically, a tactic he has already deployed in accusing Washington of somehow instigating Chavez's illness and expelling two U.S. military attachés. The longstanding close relationship between Chavez and the Castros in Havana is likely to continue under new leadership in Venezuela, at least for the short to medium term. Cuba has carefully inserted itself into the transition planning process in Caracas and both sides benefit from continuity in terms of oil subsidies, medical and education services, security and intelligence cooperation and ideological and anti-U.S. solidarity.

Maduro will be just as paranoid as Chavez and will scapegoat the U.S.Washington Post (Editorial Board), March 6, 2013, “A misguided U.S. strategy for Venezuela,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-baffling-us-strategy-for-post-chavez-venezuela/ 2013/03/06/d068c30c-8687-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html, accessed 5-3-2013Anticipating the death of Hugo Chavez, the Obama administration began reaching out months ago to his designated successor, Nicolas Maduro, in the hope of bettering U.S.-Venezuelan relations. On Tuesday, that strategy absorbed a body blow: Hours before revealing that Mr. Chavez had died of cancer, Mr. Maduro tried to blame the United States for his illness, and he expelled two U.S. military attaches on charges of “proposing destabilizing plans” to the armed forces. So much for the “reset” with Caracas. The ludicrous and crude propaganda launched by Mr. Maduro was a sign that Mr. Chavez’s successors will be more thuggish and less politically adept than he was — and, if anything, more inclined to scapegoat the United States and Venezuela’s democratic opposition for the horrendous problems the caudillo leaves behind.

Maduro will be a puppet of regional leadersAlvaro Vargas Llosa, Senior Fellow of The Center on Global Prosperity at The Independent Institute, February 8, 2013, “The End of the Latin American Left , Will Hugo Chávez’s revolution die with him?,” http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=3550, accessed 5-3-2013All of this points to the Cuba-Venezuela connection continuing to play a pivotal role through Maduro. That said, Maduro will have considerably less ability to project influence than when Chávez was at the helm. Presumably, the vacuum partially left by Chávez will see various forces vying for an increased role, including Kirchner as the radicalized Peronista running the largest populist economy, while Morales and Correa, as well as Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, call attention to themselves without the necessary power to back their chutzpah. Brazil will arbitrate among these leftists and wait to see what emerges before throwing its lot with anyone.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=3550

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/venezuela-officials-call-for-unity-army-pledges-loyalty-after-hugo-chavez-dies-at-age-58/2013/03/05/1b749452-85f7-11e2-a80b-3edc779b676f_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hugo-chavez-passionate-but-polarizing-venezuelan-president-dead-at-58/2013/03/05/42525790-afdd-11e0-90e1-c12867691ae6_story.html?hpid=z3

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-baffling-us-strategy-for-post-chavez-venezuela/%202013/03/06/d068c30c-8687-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-baffling-us-strategy-for-post-chavez-venezuela/%202013/03/06/d068c30c-8687-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/03/06-chavez-venezuela-piccone


http://www.brookings.edu/about/programs/foreign-policy


US Engagement Doesn’t Solve US influence

Latin America wants to pursue a path independent of U.S. influenceJesse Jackson, Founder of Rainbow/PUSH, April 13, 2013, “Time to restart U.S.-Venezuela relations,” Chicago Sun-Times, http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/18781426-452/time-to-restart-us-venezuela-relations.html, accessed 4-26-13At Chavez’s funeral, leaders of the new populist politics in Latin America gathered — including the presidents of Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. Some have used anti-American postures to consolidate their legitimacy at home. All search for building greater economic and political independence from the U.S.

U.S. can’t improve relations in Latin America without ending the Cuba embargoPeter Hakim, Staff Writer, March 27, 2013, “Post Chavez: Can U.S. rebuild Latin American ties?,” Reuters, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/03/27/post-chavez-can-u-s-rebuild-latin-american-ties/, accessed 5-1-2013Recent developments suggest, however, that for Washington to regain clout in regional affairs, it must it end its standoff with Cuba. U.S. policy toward Cuba sets Washington against the views of every Latin American and Caribbean government. Long-standing U.S. efforts to isolate and sanction Cuba, have, counterproductively, brought every country in Latin America to Cuba’s defense with a general admiration of Havana’s resistance to U.S. pressures.

Latin America prefers regional solidarityHoward LaFranchi, Staff Writer, March 5, 2013, “Hugo Chavez legacy: a wedge between US, Latin America,” Christian Science Monitor, http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0305/Hugo-Chavez-legacy-a-wedge-between-US-Latin-America-video, accessed 5-1-2013With Chávez’s death, the question for Venezuela and Latin America becomes, “Will there be Chavismo without Chávez?” says Tinker Salas. For Venezuela, the short-term answer appears to be yes. In elections for state governors in December, Chavista candidates – several of them leftist former military officers like Chávez – trounced the opposition. Latin America, on the other hand, has already largely moved on from Chávez, though a few leftist populist states still depend on Chávez largess. Even so, strains of Chávez’s anti-imperialist, region-centric doctrine and his socialist rhetoric are heard in the region's new responses to global and economic challenges, some experts say. Chávez sits with Fidel Castro and “the sainted Che Guevara” in touching “a chord in Latin America that is there,” says Charles Shapiro, a former US ambassador to Venezuela who is now director of the Institute of the Americas in San Diego.

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/San+Diego

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Institute+of+the+Americas

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Institute+of+the+Americas

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Che+Guevara

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0305/Hugo-Chavez-legacy-a-wedge-between-US-Latin-America-video

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0305/Hugo-Chavez-legacy-a-wedge-between-US-Latin-America-video

http://www.csmonitor.com/About/Staff/Howard-LaFranchi

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/03/27/post-chavez-can-u-s-rebuild-latin-american-ties/


http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/18781426-452/time-to-restart-us-venezuela-relations.html

http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/18781426-452/time-to-restart-us-venezuela-relations.html


Economic Engagement Alt-Causes

Latin America will side with Cuba versus U.S. engagementPeter Hakim, Staff Writer, March 27, 2013, “Post Chavez: Can U.S. rebuild Latin American ties?,” Reuters, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/03/27/post-chavez-can-u-s-rebuild-latin-american-ties/, accessed 5-1-2013Because this U.S. policy is viewed as so extreme, no Latin America country is willing to criticize Cuba — almost regardless of its words or actions. Chavez, with his close association with Cuba, possessed some of that immunity — with his neighbors leaving him unaccountable for his violations of democracy, human rights and decency. His funeral made it clear that the United States has a lot of work to do to prevent that immunity from spreading.

Economic engagement is not enough. Other factors have too much influenceJim Kuhnhenn, Staff Writer, April 13, 2012, “Obama praises US-Latin America trade relationship,” Seattle Times, http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2017977076_apltobama.html, accessed 5-2-2013Still, while U.S. exports in dollar amounts have increased in the Americas, its share of the market has declined over the past decade. China, in particular, is surpassing the U.S as a trading partner with Brazil, Chile, and Peru. In the United States, labor is already restive over a U.S. trade deal with Colombia that is awaiting final certification. The Colombian government has worked to meet the requirements of a labor rights agreement that was a condition of passage in Congress last year. The question bubbling in Cartagena was whether Obama, over the objections of U.S. union leaders, would certify that Colombia has successfully met the terms. And trade could get lost in the discussion over Cuba's exclusion from the summit, a rising call from Latin American countries to consider legalizing drugs to ease the violence associated with narco-trafficking, and even Argentina's claims to the British-controlled Falkland Islands. Adding an embarrassing wrinkle to the visit was Friday's acknowledgement by the Secret Service that agents facing allegations of misconduct for deeds before the president's arrival had been sent home. What's more, U.S. influence in Latin America has waned as countries such as Brazil and Chile gain economic stature. The U.S. can no longer buy its standing in the Americas through development assistance.

Latin America doesn’t want U.S. democracy, just regional solidarityPeter Hakim, Staff Writer, March 27, 2013, “Post Chavez: Can U.S. rebuild Latin American ties?,” Reuters, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/03/27/post-chavez-can-u-s-rebuild-latin-american-ties/, accessed 5-1-2013The problem is not that Latin America has retreated from democratic rule. Though democratic governance has deteriorated in some countries, it is still the overwhelming regional norm - and getting stronger in many places. The commitment of Latin Americans to democracy, however, now largely applies to their own countries. What they have given up on is the idea of collectively defending democratic practice in countries other than their own. Regional solidarity is now a higher priority than democracy, a reflection of the many ideological and political differences among Latin American nations.



http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2017977076_apltobama.html




Latin American Engagement Fails

Latin Americans are organizing to exclude the U.S.The Time-Herald Record (Editorial), April 27, 2012, “The real scandal: our Latin America policies,” http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120427/OPINION/204270322/-1/SITEMAPResponding to overall U.S. intransigence, other Western Hemisphere countries are organizing. Greg Grandin, professor of Latin American history at New York University, told me: "Latin Americans themselves are creating these bodies that are excluding the United States. This seems to be a venue in which they come together in order to criticize Washington, quite effectively." Grandin compared Obama's Latin America policies to those of his predecessors: "The two main pillars of U.S. foreign policy — increasing neoliberalism and increasing militarism around drugs — continue. They have created a crisis running from Colombia through Central America to Mexico. That's been a complete disaster."

U.S. engagement fails without coop for democracy reforms and counter-terrorismRay Walser, PhD, Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America and Jessica Zuckerman, a Research Associate in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation, March 6, 2013, “Venezuela After Chavez: U.S. Should Rally to Democracy,” http://www.heritage.org/ research/reports/2013/03/venezuela-after-death-of-chavez-us-should-rally-to-democracy, accessed 5-2-2013Dealing with a post-Chavez Venezuela will require an ongoing U.S. commitment to free and fair presidential elections, to the defense of individual rights and liberties, and to leveraging future improvements in bilateral relations to genuine cooperation in the fight against transnational crime and terrorism. Working with Venezuela for a more stable and secure hemispheric energy market is also a desired, if still distant, objective.

The U.S. should hold off on engagement to gauge Maduro’s leadershipTed Piccone, a senior fellow and deputy director for Foreign Policy at Brookings, March 6, 2013, “Chavez Is Dead. Chavismo Lives On,” http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/03/06-chavez-venezuela-piccone, accessed 5-3-2013Washington should bide its time and quietly wait out what should be a relatively smooth transition to a post-Chavez leadership and then remount its earlier efforts to turn a page away from the antagonism of the Chavez era toward a more pragmatic relationship of mutual interests. If Maduro concludes, however, that he has more to gain parroting the Chavez line of virulent anti-Americanism, it will be difficult to turn the other cheek for another six years.



http://www.brookings.edu/about/programs/foreign-policy

http://www.heritage.org/%20research/reports/2013/03/venezuela-after-death-of-chavez-us-should-rally-to-democracy

http://www.heritage.org/%20research/reports/2013/03/venezuela-after-death-of-chavez-us-should-rally-to-democracy

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120427/OPINION/204270322/-1/SITEMAP


AT: Iran Advantage – Not A Threat

Chavez’s death took the strength out of Venezuela-Iranian tiesIlan Berman, Staff Writer, March 12, 2013, “Hugo Chavez's Death Is a Blow to Iran,” US News & World Report, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/12/after-chavez-a-challenge-for-iran, accessed 4-27-13Even so, the departure of Chavez is bound to be a blow to Tehran. Without its most reliable broker, Iran now faces a region in profound political flux. During his 14 years in office, Chavez had served as the champion of anti-Americanism in Latin America. Now that mantle of leadership, coveted by power-hungry regional leaders like Ecuador's Correa, is up for grabs. So, too, is the prevailing attitude toward Tehran.

Iran’s influence in Venezuela and Latin America is just lackluster propagandaMark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, January 10, 2013, “Venezuela: Issues for Congress,” CRS Report for Congress, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40938.pdf, accessed 4-26-13Venezuela also has played a key role in the development of Iran’s expanding relations with other countries in the region. This outreach has largely focused on leftist governments—Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua—that share the goal of reducing U.S. influence in the region. While Iran has promised significant assistance and investment to these countries, observers maintain that there is little evidence that such promises have been fulfilled. Iranian President Ahmadinejad also visited Cuba, Nicaragua, and Ecuador in January 201Although he signed a number of agreements during his tour, it is doubtful that this will lead to significant Iranian investment or financial support. Analysts point out that leaders’ statements during these trips are largely propaganda, with the official Iranian press trumpeting relations with these countries in order to show that Iran is not isolated internationally and that it has good relations with countries geographically close to the United States. Some press accounts characterized Ahmadinejad’s tour of the region as “lackluster” and a mere diplomatic show attempting to remind the world that Iran continues to have relations with countries in Latin America. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified before Congress in late January 2012 that while the U.S. intelligence community remains concerned about Iran’s connection with Venezuela, Ahmadinejad’s recent trip to Latin America “was not all that successful.”

Iran doesn’t need Venezuela because it has the entire regionIlan Berman, Staff Writer, March 12, 2013, “Hugo Chavez's Death Is a Blow to Iran,” US News & World Report, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/12/after-chavez-a-challenge-for-iran, accessed 4-27-13But now, Chavez's death—and the political jockeying that is sure to follow his passing, both within Venezuela and throughout Latin America—could call all of that into question. Of course, Iran's leaders have not been caught totally unprepared. In truth, the Iranian regime has planned for some time for a post-Chavez era, and the past two years have seen it expand its political ties to the governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael Correa in Ecuador, as well as to a number of other regional players (most recently the administration of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner in Argentina). Iran has had considerable success in doing so, broadening its strategic footprint in the region in the process.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-21612517

http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/02/15/irans_man_in_ecuador

http://www.ilanberman.com/11722/iran-woos-bolivia-for-influence-in-latin-america

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/03/12/after-chavez-a-challenge-for-iran


http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40938.pdf




AT: Iran Advantage – Latin America Not Key

Despite trade deals, Iran has lost almost all influence in Latin AmericaSara Miller Llana, Staff Writer, January 10, 2013, “What's Ahmadinejad getting out of his Latin America tour?,” Christian Science Monitor, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2012/0110/What-s-Ahmadinejad-getting-out-of-his-Latin-America-tour/Iran-may-actually-be-losing-allies?nav=topic-tag_topic_page-storyList, accessed 5-2-2013Despite a flurry of deals signed in recent years, some say Iran 's economic and political influence in Latin America is shrinking. Only a handful of countries in the region – mostly impoverished , with the exception

of Venezuela – extend an open hand to Ahmadinejad and Venezuela is the clear ringleader. Without him in office – a possibility given Venezuela’s presidential election in October, as well as his cancer diagnosis – the other countries very well may forgo the friendship, says Meir Javedanfar, an expert on contemporary Iranian politics at the Interdisciplinary Center – Herzliya in Israel.

Ecuador would still supply uranium to IranRoger F. Noriega, Cresencio S. Arcos Jr., Otto Reich, and Mark D. Wallace, American Enterprise Institute, January 14, 2013, “Iran: A regional threat beyond the Middle East,” South Florida Sun Sentinel, http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/middle-east-and-north-africa/iran-a-regional-threat-beyond-the-middle-east/, accessed 5-2-2013While Venezuela is Iran's most notorious enabler in the region, other countries are also ramping up their support for Tehran. The most recent and blatant offender in this regard is Ecuador, which has been one of the most vocal proponents of Iran's development of so-called "peaceful nuclear energy." In July, Ecuador

announced that it would defy international sanctions and purchase some $400 million of Iranian oil. Even more troubling, there is growing evidence that Ecuador's radical president Rafael Correa is actively facilitating Iran's illegal activities. For example, Ecuador plans to begin mining uranium in the next few years and in late 2009, signed an agreement with Iran "to boost closer and mutually beneficial relations with the Islamic Republic

of Iran on a variety of fronts, among them mining and geology." The entire international community should clearly be concerned by the prospect of an Ecuador-Iran alliance cemented by a steady supply of uranium ore to Tehran.

Others countries outside of the topic will aid IranRoger F. Noriega, Cresencio S. Arcos Jr., Otto Reich, and Mark D. Wallace, American Enterprise Institute, January 14, 2013, “Iran: A regional threat beyond the Middle East,” South Florida Sun Sentinel, http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/middle-east-and-north-africa/iran-a-regional-threat-beyond-the-middle-east/, accessed 5-2-2013In the past year the international community has taken unprecedented action to pressure the Iranian regime to abandon its nuclear ambitions. For example, the U.S. and European Union have adopted comprehensive new sanctions measures aimed at tightening the economic noose around the regime, while a number of other nations have finally taken steps to curtail Iranian oil imports - striking at the economic heart of the regime. These actions are having a tangible effect on Iran's economy as evidenced most demonstrably by the crash of Iran's currency, the rial, which has plummeted to historic lows in recent weeks. Against this backdrop of increasingly effective and broad economic pressure, however, is a curious anomaly.

Several countries in one region of the world are working to undermine international sanctions against Iran and some are even helping the Iranian regime engage in illegal activities such as money laundering and narco-terrorism. Surprisingly, these countries are not located in the Middle East, but rather in a region much closer to the United States: Latin America. It is time for the U.S. and other like-minded countries to acknowledge and confront this growing threat.

http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/middle-east-and-north-africa/iran-a-regional-threat-beyond-the-middle-east/


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-iran-a-regional-threat-beyond-the-middle-east-by-ambassador-cresencio-s-arcos-jr-ambassador-otto-rei-20130114,0,5995775,print.story


http://www.aei.org/scholar/roger-f-noriega/





http://www.aei.org/scholar/roger-f-noriega/

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Israel

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Interdisciplinary+Center+Herzliya

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Interdisciplinary+Center+Herzliya

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Meir+Javedanfar

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Venezuela

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2012/0110/What-s-Ahmadinejad-getting-out-of-his-Latin-America-tour/Iran-may-actually-be-losing-allies?nav=topic-tag_topic_page-storyList



http://www.csmonitor.com/About/Staff/Sara-Miller-Llana

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Latin+America

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Latin+America

http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Iran


AT: Iran Nuclearization Impact

Iran won’t cause nuclear war with IsraelZachary Taylor, staff writer, August 2012, “War With Iran: 3 Biggest Myths About Nuclear Weapons and Israel,” PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/13917/war-with-iran-3-biggest-myths-about-nuclear-weapons-and-israel, accessed 5-5-2013Iran lacks a strong ideological commitment to Israel’s destruction, much less a commitment stronger than the wish to forgo its own survival. It’s true that the Iranian regime sponsored terrorist attacks against Israel long before any Israeli leader suggested bombing Iran, but that is because these attacks were a relatively low-cost way of boosting its anti-Israel credentials. Nuclear war changes the calculation.

U.S. deterrence will contain a nuclear IranShashank Joshi, doctoral student at Harvard University and associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, February 21, 2012, “Nuclear alarmism over Iran is backing us into a corner,” Cristian Science Monitor, http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/1012/Hey-America-Iran-still-isn-t-threat-No.-1, accessed 5-5-2013Comments like these reflect a growing nuclear alarmism that could drag us into an unwinnable and unnecessary war. A nuclear Iran is profoundly undesirable – but it's also eminently containable . The first argument, that Iran is too crazy to be deterred, is historically untenable. Stalin's Soviet Union was viewed in exactly the same terms.NSC-68, one of the most famous American intelligence assessments of the cold war, judged Moscow to be "animated by a new fanatic faith, antithetical to our own", aimed at "domination of the Eurasian landmass". That was the year after the Soviets' first nuclear test. Mao Zedong, who was to acquire a bomb shortly thereafter, welcomed a nuclear war in which "imperialism would be razed to the ground, and the whole world would become socialist".

There is no evidence Iran has or will produce nuclear weaponsDavid Cortright, Director of Policy Studies at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame, April 29, 2013, “Coercive Sanctions and Military Threats Push Iran Closer to the Nuclear Threshold,” accessed 5-5-2013, http://theglobalobservatory.org/ interviews/491-coercive-sanctions-and-military-threats-push-iran-closer-to-the-nuclear-threshold.htmlIt’s quite clear that they have a substantial nuclear production capacity, but also clear that no evidence exists that they have turned that into a nuclear weapon. The US intelligence agencies, as you indicate, have been assessing every year for the last several years that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons capability and that it made a decision several years ago to desist from any further activities in that direction. We also have the several-times-a-year reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Their reports also say that we cannot state whether Iran has a nuclear weapon or not. We have no such evidence. We can’t state the positive, but we can’t state the negative. We really have no evidence to suggest that they are actually in possession of a nuclear weapon, and a lot of evidence that they have built up this capacity. But actual creation of a weapon—they don’t have that yet.

http://theglobalobservatory.org/interviews/491-coercive-sanctions-and-military-threats-push-iran-closer-to-the-nuclear-threshold.html

http://theglobalobservatory.org/interviews/491-coercive-sanctions-and-military-threats-push-iran-closer-to-the-nuclear-threshold.html

http://kroc.nd.edu/

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/nsc-68/nsc68-1.htm

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/1012/Hey-America-Iran-still-isn-t-threat-No.-1

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/1012/Hey-America-Iran-still-isn-t-threat-No.-1

http://www.policymic.com/articles/13917/war-with-iran-3-biggest-myths-about-nuclear-weapons-and-israel

http://www.policymic.com/articles/13917/war-with-iran-3-biggest-myths-about-nuclear-weapons-and-israel

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ftv7ks-Ehq0C&lpg=PA788&ots=-0wYIWSmas&dq=mao%20%22imperialism%20would%20be%20razed%20to%20the%20ground%22&pg=PA788#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/16/iran-false-nuclear-fears


US Sanctions On Venezuela Good

Sanctions on Venezuela prevent support for HezbollahMark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, and June S. Beittel, Analyst in Latin American Affairs, April 5, 2013, “Latin America: Terrorism Issues,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/ RS21049.pdf, accessed 5-6-2013A reason for U.S. concerns about Iran’s deepening relations with Venezuela is its ties toHezbollah, a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization. Hezbollah, along withIran, is reported to have been linked to two bombings against Jewish targets in Argentina in theearly 1990s, including the 1994 bombing of the Argentine-Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) inBuenos Aires that killed 85 people (See Table 1 for background on the AMIA investigation.) TheUnited States has imposed sanctions on individuals and companies in Latin America forproviding support to Hezbollah, including two Venezuelans. The State Department’s 2011terrorism report maintained that “there were credible reports that Hizballah sympathizers andsupporters engaged in fundraising and support activity in Venezuela.” (For more, see “Concernsabout Hezbollah” below.)

Absent sanctions, Venezuela can resume aiding enemies of the U.S.Jose Orozco, staff writer, February 12, 2013, “U.S. Imposes Sanctions on Venezuela’s Cavim Arms Company,” Bloomberg News, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-12/u-s-imposes-sanctions-on-venezuela-s-cavim-arms-company.html, accessed 5-6-2013The U.S. imposed sanctions on a state-owned Venezuelan weapons company after it traded with Iran, North Korea or Syria, the State Department said in a statement posted on its website. The U.S. sanctioned the Venezuelan Military Industry Company under the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act, known as INKSNA. The sanctions, which the statement didn’t detail, expire in February, 2015. The U.S. also penalized companies or individuals in Belarus, China, Iran, Sudan and Syria, according to the statement. “There was credible information indicating they had transferred to, or acquired from, Iran, North Korea, or Syria, equipment and technology,” the State Department said yesterday.

Aid from Venezuela helps rogue states advance nuclear proliferationEl Pais (English edition editorial)m February 14, 2013, US sanctions Venezuelan arms firm for illegal sales,” http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/02/14/inenglish/1360847589_160965.html, accessed 5-6-2013The US State Department on Tuesday announced sanctions against Venezuela's state-owned weapons manufacturer Venezuelan Military Industry Company (Cavim) - along with other firms from different nations - for selling arms and transferring defense technology that could allegedly help Iran, North Korea and Syria develop sophisticated weapons. The US government will prohibit Cavim and 12 other firms from doing business with any company in the United States or federal or state agencies until February 2015. The sanctions were imposed under the Iran, North Korea and Syria Nonproliferation Act. The "sanctions were imposed on these entities and individuals because there was credible information indicating they had transferred to, or acquired from, Iran, North Korea, or Syria, equipment and technology listed on multilateral export control lists [...], or items that are not listed, but nevertheless, could materially contribute to a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or cruise or ballistic missile program," the State Department release said.

http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/02/14/inenglish/1360847589_160965.html

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2013/02/204013.htm

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-12/u-s-imposes-sanctions-on-venezuela-s-cavim-arms-company.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-12/u-s-imposes-sanctions-on-venezuela-s-cavim-arms-company.html

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/%20RS21049.pdf



US Should Not Lift Sanctions On Venezuela

Sanctions are irrelevant. They will continue to trade with IranAletho News, editorial, February 17, 2013, “Venezuelan arms maker to continue Iran trade despite US bans,” http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/venezuelan-arms-maker-to-continue-iran-trade-despite-us-bans/, accessed 5-6-2013Venezuelan officials say the state-owned weapons manufacturer, CAVIM, will keep on trading with Iran in defiance of the US sanctions imposed on the company, Press TV reports. “We think that it is logical for Venezuela to have trade and economic relations with all countries in the world. We are exercising our sovereignty,” Venezuelan Envoy to international rights bodies German Saltron said. “We feel it is an abuse of power that the United States’ government is trying to block Iran from trading with other countries,” he added.

Lifting sanctions would give a green light to weapons cooperation with IranMark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, and June S. Beittel, Analyst in Latin American Affairs, April 5, 2013, “Latin America: Terrorism Issues,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/ RS21049.pdf, accessed 5-6-2013U.S. officials have expressed concerns over the past several years about Venezuela’s lack of cooperation on antiterrorism efforts, President Hugo Chávez’s sympathetic statements for Colombian terrorist groups, and Venezuela’s relations with Iran. Since May 2006, the Secretary of State has made an annual determination that Venezuela has not been “cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts” pursuant to Section 40A of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The most recent determination was made in May 201As a result, the United States imposed an arms embargo on Venezuela in 2006, which ended all U.S. commercial arms sales and retransfers to Venezuela. (Other countries currently on the Section 40A list include Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, not to be confused with the “state sponsors of terrorism” list under Section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979.) As discussed, below, the United States has imposed various sanctions on Venezuelan individuals and companies for supporting the FARC, Iran, and Hezbollah.

Free from sanctions, Venezuela can resume aid to the FARCMark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, and June S. Beittel, Analyst in Latin American Affairs, April 5, 2013, “Latin America: Terrorism Issues,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/ RS21049.pdf, accessed 5-6-2013To date, the United States has imposed financial sanctions against seven current or formerVenezuelan government and military officials for providing support to the FARC. In September2008, the Treasury Department froze the assets of two senior intelligence officials—GeneralHugo Carvajal and General Henry Rangel Silva—and the former interior minister, Ramón Rodríguez Chacín, for allegedly helping the FARC with weapons and drug trafficking. General Rangel was appointed by President Chávez as defense minister in January 2012, an action that raised concern among U.S. policymakers. He stepped down in October 2012, and went on to win the governorship of the Venezuelan state of Trujillo in December 2012 elections. Rodríguez Chacín also was elected as governor of the state of Guárico in December.





http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/venezuelan-arms-maker-to-continue-iran-trade-despite-us-bans/

http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2013/02/17/venezuelan-arms-maker-to-continue-iran-trade-despite-us-bans/


Politics DA


Immigration Reform DA 1NC 1/2

Immigration reform will pass nowMike W. Thomas, 5-1-2013, "Rep. Lamar Smith says immigration reform could pass this year," San Antonio Bus. Journal, http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/blog/2013/05/san-antonio-congressman-says.html, accessed 5-10-2013Immigration reform of some form is almost certain to pass later this year, says U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, the senior member of San

Antonio’s congressional delegation. The issue which has dogged Congress for the past several legislative sessions is coming to a head with at least two complementary bills likely to reach the finish line this time, Smith says. One is similar to a bill that Smith introduced in the last session that would create a guest worker program for up to half a million immigrants. A complementary bill would provide funding for an e-verify program that would help businesses make sure they are hiring people who are legally allowed to work in the U.S. This legislation, if passed, would also shield businesses from sanctions they would incur for hiring illegal immigrants. Smith addressed the issue of immigration during a luncheon Wednesday, May 1,

sponsored by the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce at the Menger Hotel downtown. “I believe there will be something that passes this year that will be an improvement over our current system,” Smith says. The final reform package will likely address the need for more high-skilled immigrants in the workforce by increasing the number of H1-B visas that are

available each year, Smith says. Likewise, it will address all the undocumented children living in the U.S. through no fault of their own

by providing some kind of pathway to citizenship. Smith, a Republican who has served the 21st District of Texas since 1987, says he

believes that the prospects for bipartisan compromise are better than what has been portrayed in the media. To foster better cooperation, Smith says he always plans bipartisan retreats for the committees that he chairs.

The plan costs political capital – economic engagement sparks controversyCraig Forcese, LLM Yale, 2002, “Globalizing Decency: Responsible Engagement in an Era of Economic Integration,” YALE HUMAN RIGHTS & DEVELOPMENT L.J., p. 3That said, there remains a very vigorous dissenting view on the moral advantages of economic engagement. Though difficult to isolate with any certainty, the shared vision of the loose amalgam of globalization opponents, labor unions and non-governmental groups protesting in the streets of Seattle, Prague, Washington, Quebec City and elsewhere, is that economic integration undermines national sovereignty, entrenches social disadvantage between social classes and between North and South, debases national labor and environmental standards, and sometimes props up repressive regimes. If true, the natural consequence of such liberalized trade and investment will be continued class and North/South exploitation, some form of political backlash and a measure of political instability.

Political capital is key to immigration reformJudson Berger, 3-4-2013, “Recurring budget crises could put squeeze on Obama's second-term priorities,” Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/04/recurring-budget-crises-could-put-squeeze-on-obama-second-term-priorities/#ixzz2OknXmt3G, accessed 5-10-2013The automatic spending cuts that kicked in over the weekend effectively added another administrative headache for a White House and Congress that have struggled with even the most perfunctory tasks. ¶ At a certain point, something's got to give. ¶ The day-in, day-out

debate and speechifying and crisis management are getting to a point where they could overshadow the other planks of President Obama's second-term agenda -- for now, anyway. ¶ "He has a very ambitious agenda with

both the sequester and his separate policy priorities, and there is a bandwidth issue at the end of the day," said

John Ullyot, a longtime senior Senate aide and Republican strategist. ¶ For starters, agencies must now figure out how to trim their fiscal waistlines, while the president tries

anew to negotiate a more "balanced" deal out of Congress -- all while trying to avert a government shutdown and secure another debt-ceiling increase. ¶ Still, all the items from the president's campaign and State of the Union address supposedly remain on the docket: immigration reform, gun control, policies to curb climate change, an increase in the minimum wage and expanded access to preschool. ¶ Over the weekend, President Obama stressed his commitment to pursuing all those items. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reiterated that message

Monday from the briefing room. ¶ But while administration officials have insisted that Washington can walk and chew gum, the president's first term stands as a cautionary tale. The president devoted his political capital and time to passing the health care overhaul, while other legislative items were pushed off. ¶ Obama has revived

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/04/recurring-budget-crises-could-put-squeeze-on-obama-second-term-priorities/#ixzz2OknXmt3G

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/04/recurring-budget-crises-could-put-squeeze-on-obama-second-term-priorities/#ixzz2OknXmt3G


some -- immigration reform -- and introduced others -- gun control -- at the start of his second term. But politics and a crowded agenda could already be tainting the Washington waters.


Immigration Reform DA 1NC 2/2

Immigration reform is key to hegemonyJoseph S. Nye, former US assistant secretary of defense and chairman of the US National Intelligence Council, Professor at Harvard University, 12-10-2012, “Immigration and American Power,” Project Syndicate, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/obama-needs-immigration-reform-to-maintain-america-s-strength-by-joseph-s--nye, accessed 5-10-2013CAMBRIDGE – The United States is a nation of immigrants. Except for a small number of Native Americans, everyone is originally from somewhere else, and even recent immigrants can rise

to top economic and political roles. President Franklin Roosevelt once famously addressed the Daughters of the American Revolution – a group that prided itself on the early arrival of its ancestors – as “fellow immigrants.” ¶ In recent years, however, US politics has had a strong anti-immigration slant, and the issue played an important role in the Republican Party’s presidential

nomination battle in 2012. But Barack Obama’s re-election demonstrated the electoral power of Latino voters, who rejected Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney by a 3-1 majority, as did Asian-Americans.¶ As a

result, several prominent Republican politicians are now urging their party to reconsider its anti-immigration policies, and plans for immigration reform will be on the agenda at the beginning of Obama’s second term. Successful reform will be an important step in preventing the decline of American power.

Heg solves great power war Zalmay Khalilzad, the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations, 2-8-2011, “The Economy and National Security; If we don’t get our economic house in order, we risk a new era of multi-polarity,” National Review, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad, accessed 5-10-2013We face this domestic challenge while other major powers are experiencing rapid economic growth. Even though countries such as China, India, and Brazil have profound political, social, demographic, and economic problems, their economies are growing faster than ours, and this could

alter the global distribution of power. These trends could in the long term produce a multi-polar world. If U.S. policymakers fail to act and other powers continue to grow, it is not a question of whether but when a new international order will emerge. The closing of the gap between the United States and its rivals could intensify geopolitical competition among major powers, increase incentives for local powers to play major powers against one another, and undercut our will to preclude or respond to international crises because of the higher risk of escalation.¶ The stakes are high. In modern history, the longest period of peace among the great powers has been the era of U.S. leadership. By contrast, multi-polar systems have been unstable, with their competitive dynamics resulting in frequent crises and major wars among the great powers. Failures of multi-polar international systems produced both world wars.¶ American retrenchment could have devastating consequences. Without an American security blanket, regional powers could rearm in an attempt to balance against emerging threats. Under this scenario, there would be a

heightened possibility of arms races, miscalculation , or other crises spiraling into all-out conflict. Alternatively, in seeking to accommodate the

stronger powers, weaker powers may shift their geopolitical posture away from the United States. Either way, hostile states would be emboldened to make aggressive moves in their regions.

Immigration reform also solves the case – key to Latin American relationsMichael Shifter, President of Inter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship: The United States and Latin America,” IAD Policy Report, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Some enduring problems stand squarely in the way of partnership and effective cooperation. The inability of Washington to reform its broken immigration system is a constant source of friction between the United States and nearly every other country in the Americas. Yet US officials rarely refer to immigration as a foreign policy issue.

Domestic policy debates on this issue disregard the United States’ hemispheric agenda as well as the interests of other nations.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad


Yes Immigration Reform – General

Comprehensive immigration reform will passCBS News, 5-4-2013, "Obama: "No reason" immigration reform can't pass," CBS News, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57582886/obama-no-reason-immigration-reform-cant-pass/, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama said there's "no reason" a comprehensive immigration reform bill cannot pass Congress this year in his weekly address on Saturday, delivered from Mexico as the president continues a three-day trip through Latin America. "In recent weeks, we've seen a common-sense immigration reform bill introduced in the Senate," the president said, referring to a bipartisan reform package devised by a "gang of eight" senators. That bill, Mr. Obama said, contains "common-sense steps that a majority of Americans support. So there's no reason that immigration reform can't become a reality this year."

Immigration reform will passLos Angeles Times, 5-3-2013, "Obama 'absolutely convinced' immigration law will pass this year," latimes, http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-mexico-obama-immigration-law-20130503,0,6247591.story, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama said Friday that he is “absolutely convinced” Congress will pass new immigration laws this year, projecting more confidence in his ability to work with Republicans from the Mexican capital than he has shown lately at home. In a speech to Mexican students, Obama said he has tried to “lift the shadow of deportation” from young people brought to the United States as children and said he wants to do more thorough comprehensive changes to U.S. immigration policy. “I am optimistic that, after years of trying, we are going to get it done this year,” Obama said. “I’m absolutely convinced of it.”

Immigration reform will pass – Obama has enough political capitalBuzzFeed, 5-3-2013, "Obama Is Very Confident About Immigration Reform," http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/obama-is-very-confident-about-immigration-reform, accessed 5-10-2013After a week of chatter about the limits of his power, President Obama told the people of Mexico Friday he has the juice to get immigration reform passed this year. Obama said he was not only "convinced" bipartisan immigration reform will happen, he said he was "absolutely convinced of it." His confidence on stage went farther than his prepared remarks did — a version of the speech sent to reporters ahead of delivery didn't contain one instance of the word "convinced," let alone two. Instead, the prepared version hedged things quite a bit. Obama's remarks said when it came to comprehensive reform containing a pathway to citizenship, the president was "optimistic that—after years of trying—we're finally going to get this done." But the prepared speech set no timeframe for completing reform, a huge part of the Obama's second term agenda. When Obama delivered the remarks, however, a time frame was added. "I'm working with our Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform this year," Obama said. "I'm convinced we can get it done."


Yes Immigration Reform – AT: Uniqueness Overwhelms Link

The GOP is still on the fence on immigrationSandra Lilley, 5-3-2013, "Poll: Republicans need to pass – not just support – immigration reform, Latinos say," NBC Latino, http://nbclatino.com/2013/05/03/poll-republicans-need-to-pass-not-just-support-immigration-reform-latinos-say/, accessed 5-10-2013Even with more and more prominent Republicans actively supporting immigration reform, the party risks turning off even more Latino voters than in 2012 if conservative Republicans block immigration legislation this year, finds a new Latino Decisions/impreMedia poll. Forty one percent of registered Latino voters said they would have a more negative view of the Republican party if some

Republicans worked to defeat the immigration bill, even if the party has made inroads with Hispanic voters and some Republicans have been supporting this legislation. “The GOP gets no political boost for bipartisan support on the bill if Republicans sabotage it,” said Latino Decisions political scientist Matt Barreto, who discussed the poll’s findings. The poll also found 39 percent of Latinos said their image of Republicans would remain the same, and 18 percent said it would be more favorable.

Immigration reform will pass, but there are still problemsReuters, 3-27-2013, “Senators say they expect to deliver immigration bill,” http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-usa-immigration-senate-idUSBRE92Q17Z20130327, accessed 5-10-2013Members of a bipartisan group of eight Senators took their quest for a deal on immigration reform to the Arizona-Mexico border on Wednesday where they said they were on track to deliver a bill when Congress resumes next month.¶ The senators - New York Democrat Charles Schumer, Arizona

Republicans John McCain and Jeff Flake and Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet - toured a stretch of the Arizona-Mexico border where many foreigners have entered the United States illegally.¶ The senators are trying to create metrics for defining whether the border is secure as part of a comprehensive immigration bill that would give millions of

illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.¶ Speaking at a news conference after meeting with border patrol agents and flying over the international border around the frontier city of Nogales, Schumer said he was hopeful they would

present a bill when Congress resumes April 8.¶ "The bottom line is we are very close. I'd say we are 90 percent there. We have a few little problems to work on ...

but we're very hopeful that we will meet our deadline," said Schumer, who was speaking at a building that was within sight of the steel border fence.¶ "We

hope to have a bill agreed to and done .. the day we come back," he said.¶ The senators are members of the so-called Gang of Eight - four Democrats and four Republicans - who are working on a plan for the biggest overhaul of immigration laws since 1986.¶ Flake and McCain have tried to impress on their colleagues the difficulties in their home state of Arizona, which is part of the most heavily trafficked section of the nearly 2,000 mile southwest border with Mexico.¶ "In the last several years we have made improvements on the border. The border is still not in many areas as secure as we want it to be or expect it to be," McCain told reporters at the same news conference.¶ Asked if it would take billions of dollars and decades to secure the border, McCain said, "We are talking about a lot of money, but we also have to make sure that the money is well spent."¶ Although the group of senators has

agreed to create a way for the 11 million undocumented foreigners in the country to earn citizenship, problems with the future flow of immigrants has remained a sticking point.¶ A new temporary worker program is critical for Republicans, who will not agree to overhaul the immigration system unless there is a process for foreigners to fill U.S. jobs

temporarily if needed.¶ The issue of wages for the new workers briefly stalled talks on Friday in Washington with unions and businesses publicly hurling insults at each other.¶ At the time, the AFL-CIO, the biggest labor federation,

said Republicans and businesses wanted to undercut wages. The Chamber of Commerce, the biggest U.S. business lobby, said the unions had jeopardized the entire immigration reform effort.¶ Tempers cooled earlier this week with both sides cautiously voicing some optimism.¶ Obama acknowledged on Wednesday that

the future flow of guest workers was a sticking point between labor and business, but he said the conflicts could be resolved.¶ "I don't agree that it's threatening to doom the legislation," Obama said in an interview with Telemundo, according to a transcript. "This is a resolvable issue."

Bill still needs tweaking in order to pass – requires PCSean Sullivan, 5-1-2013, "Rubio: Immigration bill probably won’t pass the House," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/05/01/why-immigration-reform-will-be-so-tough-part-11/, accessed 5-10-2013One of the reasons lawmakers will have a tough time overhauling the nation’s immigration laws is all of the different players in the process, and where they have each lined up their pieces, so to speak. To start with, let’s take a look at Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the leading conservative voice for reform. On Tuesday, Rubio, the most prominent conservative member of the Senate’s “Gang of Eight,” said that the bill he helped craft would probably not pass the GOP-controlled House without some tweaks. “The bill that’s in place right now probably can’t pass the House,” Rubio told conservative radio host Mike Gallagher. “It will have to be adjusted, because people are very suspicious about the willingness of the government to enforce the laws now and in the future.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/27/us-usa-immigration-senate-idUSBRE92Q17Z20130327


Yes Immigration Reform – AT: Thumpers

Immigration reform is Obama’s top priority – comes before their thumpersFox News Latino, 5-2-2013, "Obama To Make Immigration Top Priority During Visit To Mexico," http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/05/02/obama-to-make-immigration-top-priority-during-visit-to-mexico/, accessed 5-10-2013President Barack Obama is making his domestic ambition for an immigration overhaul the top of his agenda for his visit to Mexico this week. With new data from the Pew Hispanic Center showing Mexican and Mexican-Americans comprise about 64 percent of U.S. Latinos, Obama recognizes that in order to achieve immigration reform back home, he needs a growing economy in Mexico and a Mexican president willing to help him secure the border. On Thursday, Obama will fly to Mexico City to meet with President Enrique Peña Nieto, eager to promote Mexico's economic success and the neighboring country's place as the second largest export market for U.S. goods and services. Mexicans will be hanging on the president's words, but Obama also has in mind an important audience back in the United States. Though the role played by Latino voters in last year's U.S. presidential election gets much credit for the current momentum for changing immigration laws and providing a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally, another reason for the change in attitudes is that stronger border protections and the recession have been disincentives to cross into the U.S. As a result, illegal immigration has declined.

Gay rights dispute won’t kill the bill – or the court will strike down DOMADylan Matthews, 5-3-2013, "The GOP may kill immigration reform over gay rights. The Supreme Court could stop them.," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/03/the-gop-may-kill-immigration-reform-over-gay-rights-the-supreme-court-could-stop-them/, accessed 5-10-2013Leahy, of course, disputes that, telling Politico, “It’s not going to kill the bill.” Jonathan Rauch, a leading gay libertarian, supports bringing up the amendment if for nothing else than as a test of Republicans. “Just how much electoral support and moral standing does the GOP want to give up to affirm its hostility to homosexuals?” Rauch asks. But there’s an interesting wrinkle in the issue that’s gotten surprisingly little attention. The law that’s standing in the way of allowing same-sex spouses who get married in one of the 10 states (plus Washington, D.C.) where same-sex is legal to get green cards is the Defense of Marriage Act. DOMA bans federal recognition of same-sex marriages. But the law is also before the Supreme Court at the moment, and there’s a real chance that a majority will rule it to unconstitutional.

Obama won’t spend political capital on tradeWSJ, 3-18-2013, “Words of Warning on Trade Talks,” Wall Street Journal, http://blogs.wsj.com/brussels/2013/03/18/words-of-warning-on-trade-talks/, accessed 5-10-2013Mr. Zoellick expressed concern that the White House has not yet picked a new trade chief and questioned whether President Barack

Obama is ready to throw political capital into the fight.¶ “I don’t mean to be in any way skeptical, but it’s going to take a lot of work, and for those people who have actually closed trade agreements and gotten them through, you know it takes a tremendous amount of political will on both sides,“ he said.¶ Swedish

Foreign Secretary Carl Bildt also warned that without top-level political backing from both sides of the Atlantic, the talks will be heavy lifting. He said European leaders must constantly remind their publics that the trade talks can provide an exit sign from the recession and a way of underpinning the Atlantic partnership in a fast-changing world.


Immigration Reform Is Top of Docket

Immigration reform is the only thing on the docketWayne Potts, 5-4-2013, "Immigration reform should be a top priority," Your Houston News, http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/eastex/opinion/immigration-reform-should-be-a-top-priority/article_8335bb86-bdbe-586f-80f2-91fc34e89a77.html, accessed 5-10-2013It seems that immigration reform is the only thing on the agenda in Washington, D.C., these days. Watch the news programs and they are filled with stories about it. A bipartisan committee of U.S. senators, known as the Gang of Eight, have been trying to work out a bill that will pass both the senate and the congress. From reports, they seem to be making progress. Now our president has stepped in and wants to put his imprint on the bill. He had four years to start something on this subject, and he did nothing. Now that it seems it might gain a little traction, he wants to step in and put his two cents’ worth in. In the last few weeks he has made comments that he wants this bill passed quickly. Why? There are just too many questions that need to be answered before this bill should be passed.

Immigration is the top of the agendaAlan Silverleib, Cnn Congressional Producer, 4-8-2013, "Springtime for immigration reform?" CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/07/politics/immigration-reform-sunday/, accessed 5-10-2013Last November, Hispanic voters planted the seeds for serious immigration reform when they backed President Barack Obama by a record margin. This April, we'll see if those seeds can grow in Capitol Hill's toxic partisan soil. Congress returns from spring break Monday, and immigration reform tops the agenda. The Senate's bipartisan "Gang of Eight" is preparing to release its long-awaited plan for resolving the status of 11 million undocumented men, women, and children now living in America's shadows. Can a unique confluence of factors -- a Democratic president trying to build his legacy, a Republican Party grappling with new demographic realities -- overcome the usual strong bias for inaction in a sharply divided Congress? The answer remains unclear.

Immigration reform is top of the agendaJudy Woodruff, 5-2-2013, "Obama Talks Trade, Security, and Immigration on Trip to Mexico, Latin America," PBS Newshour, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/jan-june13/mexico_05-02.html, accessed 5-10-2013U.S. immigration reform will be a central piece of their agenda. President Obama wants Congress to approve a plan that would provide visas for seasonal workers, as well as a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million people now living in the U.S. illegally. More than half are from Mexico, according to the Pew Research Center. At a November visit in Washington, then president-elect Pena Nieto voiced support for those proposals. But a key issue for Republicans is stepped-up security along the 2,000-mile shared border with Mexico and a stop to the flow of drugs, guns and crime.


Obama Pushing Immigration Reform

Obama just started pushing immigration reformWashington Examiner, 5-4-2013, "Obama predicts immigration reform will get done ‘this year’," http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-immigration-reform-will-get-done-this-year/article/2528783, accessed 5-10-2013The White House is banking that Obama’s trip to Mexico and Costa Rica, now in its second day, will improve the prospects for long-elusive reforms. Obama has mostly maintained a low-key approach on immigration, not wanting to deter ongoing talks on Capitol Hill. Sensing momentum behind the issue, the White House calculated that Obama could step up his focus on immigration.

Immigration is a cornerstone of Obama’s agendaAndrew Seidman, Inquirer Staff Writer, 5-4-2013, "Camden Bishop: 'moral urgency' for immigration reform," Philadelphia Inquirer, http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20130504_Camden_Bishop___moral_urgency__for_immigration_reform.html, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama has made immigration reform a cornerstone of his second-term agenda. In April, the U.S. Senate introduced a bill that would tighten border security and create a 13-year pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in the country. Legislation is likely to be trickier in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where some conservatives denounce legalization as "amnesty."

Obama is solely pushing immigration reformYNet News, 5-1-2013, "Obama renews push on immigration reform ," ynet, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4374618,00.htmlObama renews push on immigration reform, accessed 5-10-2013President Barack Obama's prospects for a sweeping legislative victory this year now rest almost solely on the immigration overhaul working its way through Congress. Obama signaled during a White House news conference Tuesday that he's backing a bill drafted by the Senate's bipartisan group of four Democrats and four Republicans. The bill would strengthen border security, allow tens of thousands of new high- and low-skilled workers into the country, require all employers to check their workers' legal status and provide an eventual path to citizenship for some 11 million immigrants now in the US illegally.


Politics Link – Mexico – General

Plan gets pulled into controversial debates over MexicoOscar Montealegre, 1-24-2013, "U.S.-Mexico Relations: Love Thy Neighbor," Diplomatic Courier, http://www.diplomaticourier.com/news/regions/latin-america/1331-us-mexico-relations-love-thy-neighbor, accessed 5-10-2013It is not common knowledge that Mexico is the United States’ third largest trading partner, behind Canada and China. Every day, at least a billion dollars of goods flows across the border. Yet, Mexico is frequently negatively caricaturized, primarily with images of migrants illegally crossing the border into the U.S. and stealing U.S. jobs. Instead of viewing Mexico as a valuable partner that can benefit the U.S. in many facets, it is perceived as a liability, a region that cultivates corruption and violence and is the root of the current U.S. immigration ‘problem’ that has spurred controversial rogue measures like Arizona’s SB 1070.

Turn shield – Noone will speak out in favor of the plan, Mexico is an afterthoughtOscar Montealegre, 1-24-2013, "U.S.-Mexico Relations: Love Thy Neighbor," Diplomatic Courier, http://www.diplomaticourier.com/news/regions/latin-america/1331-us-mexico-relations-love-thy-neighbor, accessed 5-10-2013In matters of foreign policy, Mexico is an afterthought—our attention and resources are diverted to the Middle East or to grand strategies based on ‘pivoting’ our geopolitical and economical capacity towards Asia. With the U.S. economy performing at a snail-like pace, an emphasis on exports has re-emerged, but the bulk of the exporting narrative revolves around Asia. This is unfortunate, because our neighbor to the south has quietly positioned itself to be the next jewel in the emerging markets portfolio.

Even if Mexico policy is popular, it still requires heavy lifting by ObamaAntonio Garza, 4-29-2013, "Obama Goes to Mexico: Time is Ripe to Advance Bilateral Relations," Fox News Latino, http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2013/04/29/obama-goes-to-mexico-time-is-ripe-to-advance-bilateral-relations/, accessed 5-10-2013The U.S.-Mexico economic partnership is thriving. Mexico is the U.S.’s second largest export market and third leading source of imports. Bilateral trade reached nearly one-half trillion dollars in 2012, roughly $1.4 billion each day. An estimated six million U.S. jobs depend on trade with Mexico. And strong regional supply chains mean that nearly 40 percent of every product the U.S. imports from Mexico is really “Made in America.” As strong as the bilateral relationship is now, however, it must deepen and evolve in order to ensure expanded opportunity and security for both countries going forward. Presidents Peña Nieto and Obama have both entered a post-honeymoon environment that demands hard work and successively heavier lifts on every policy goal. With the stakes potentially so high on so many issues fundamental to the relationship, only the highest-level commitment will advance the agenda. There may never be a more opportune time.


Politics Link – Mexico – Guest Workers

Guest worker programs are the most controversial aspect of immigrationDylan Matthews, 4-29-2013, "How low-skilled guest workers could become citizens under ‘Gang of 8 ′bill," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/29/how-low-skilled-guest-workers-could-become-citizens-under-gang-of-8-bill/, accessed 5-10-2013Among the more controversial aspects of the Gang of Eight immigration bill (now dubbed S. 744: Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act) is the creation of “W visas.” Hashed out as a compromise between the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce, this program would issue guest worker visas for low-skilled workers, defined in the bill as those whose jobs don’t require a bachelor’s degree. Workers would serve three-year stints, renewable indefinitely, and would be allowed to bring their families with them. The program sets a first-year cap of 20,000 for the program, but the agency running it would be allowed to increase that to as high as 200,000 per year. That makes it a potentially huge source of future migration to the U.S., and raises the question of whether or not these migrants will be eligible for permanent residence (aka “green cards”) or citizenship later on. Some visas, like the H-1B program for high-skilled workers, allow people to apply for permanent residency (these are called “dual intent” visas), but others, like the H-2A program for unskilled agricultural workers, don’t.

Guest worker programs are perceived as amnestyJena Baker McNeill, homeland security policy analyst at Heritage, 6-30-2009, “Ag JOBs Amnesty: The Wrong Way to Help American Agriculture,” Heritage Foundation, http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/06/Ag-JOBs-Amnesty-The-Wrong-Way-to-Help-American-Agriculture, accessed 5-10-2013The Ag JOBS Act would create a pilot program that would provide work visas, also known as "blue cards," to guest workers looking to work in the agricultural sectors. Blue cards have long been used to help legal individuals work in the United States. However, under Ag JOBS, blue cards would be given to workers whether or not they were in the U.S. legally. After working for three to five years, program participants are required to become citizens. This would provide amnesty and a direct path to citizenship for the estimated 600,000-800,000 illegal agricultural workers and their family members (this number has decreased since the economic downturn; in 2007 this number was estimated at 1.3 million). To gain blue card status, applicants would only have to demonstrate that they worked in

agriculture for "863 hours or 150 work days" in 2007 and 2008. The bill would not require necessarily valid documentation; it would instead allow an alien to provide "any other reliable document" to demonstrate worked hours. This means some individuals could gain citizenship without working a day in the agricultural sector.

Amnesty hugely unpopular – DREAM failure provesJena Baker McNeill, immigration analyst for Heritage, 12-21-2010, “Beyond DREAM: Getting Immigration Reform Right,” Heritage, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/Beyond-DREAM-Getting-Immigration-Reform-Right, accessed 5-10-2013Last weekend, the United States Senate voted not to proceed to a final vote on the House-passed Development, Relief and

Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. This bill would have given legal permanent resident status to illegal immigrants who came

to the U.S. before the age of 16 and who agreed to attend college or enter the military. In this way the bill would have granted amnesty

to around 2.8 million illegal immigrants inside the U.S. Now that Congress has rejected the “amnesty” strategy once again, it is time for the Administration to put this unrealistic approach aside once and for all and begin a serious, practical, and honest approach to fixing America’s broken borders and flawed immigration system. Pushing the issue off on the next generation or using immigration as a tool to win votes through amnesty is not only irresponsible but wrong in terms of national security, the rule of law, and economic prosperity.


Politics Link – Mexico – Piecemeal Immigration Reform

Piecemeal immigration reform hurts the chances for comprehensive reform to passMichael Mcauliff, 4-25-2013, "House Unveils Immigration Plan That Senators Say Is Doomed," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/immigration-reform-house_n_3155908.html, accessed 5-10-2013House lawmakers rolled out a piecemeal approach to passing immigration reform Thursday, even as senators warned that a go-slow, incremental effort would likely fail. Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) said the House Judiciary Committee, which he chairs, would unveil a series of measures aimed at fixing the immigration

system one piece at a time. "By taking a fine-tooth comb through each of the individual issues within the larger immigration debate, it will help us get a better bill that will benefit Americans and provide a workable immigration system," Goodlatte said. "We want to make sure we get immigration reform right this time so that we don't have the same problems in the future that we've had with past immigration reform bills," he said, referring to President Ronald Reagan's 1986 law that legalized some 3 million people and to the 2007 reform bid that failed. "It was driven from the top down, not brought from the grassroots." The House Republicans intend to start this week by introducing one bill to establish a guest worker program for agricultural laborers and another to set up an "e-verify" type program that would track people who enter and

leave the United States. Goodlatte and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) announced their plan even as the two lead senators in the immigration reform effort told reporters that piecemeal will not work. "It has got to be a comprehensive approach," said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), noting that past attempts to pass popular measures to legalize the children of undocumented immigrants had all failed when lawmakers began to tack on amendments.

Piecemeal immigration reform empirically failsMichael Mcauliff, 4-25-2013, "House Unveils Immigration Plan That Senators Say Is Doomed," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/immigration-reform-house_n_3155908.html, accessed 5-10-2013"We can't do individual bills because the problem is people say, 'What about me?'" declared Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking at a breakfast with reporters. "What we found is, ironically, it may be a little counterintuitive, but the best way to pass immigration legislation is actually a comprehensive bill because that can achieve more balance, and everybody can get much, but not all, of what they want. "I think that the idea of doing separate bills is just not going to work," Schumer added. "It's not worked in the past, and it's not going to work in the future." In particular, the senators argued that if immigration reform does not include a pathway to citizenship for people who are already in the United States, it will fail. "There's no way of getting this job done without giving people a path to citizenship," said McCain. "Any attempt to say in the House that you will not have a path to citizenship would be a non-starter, and I say that unequivocally," said Schumer. "It will not pass the Senate. I do not think you would get a Democratic vote." Some observers have also warned that a go-slow approach will make passage more difficult because it risks pushing the debate into the 2014 election year, when lawmakers will be more sensitive to pressure from interest groups.

Piecemeal reform sparks opposition – comprehensive is key to getting bipartisan compromiseABC News, 4-25-2013, "A Piecemeal Approach to Imm. ," ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/house-republican-encourages-piecemeal-approach-immigration-reform/story?id=19041315#.UYWxNrXFXzw, accessed 5-10-2013Whether immigration reform should be passed in pieces or in one large bill cuts to the heart of the immigration debate in Congress. A bigger bill allows for more bipartisan trade-offs. An immigration reform plan devised in the Senate, by four Democrats and four Republicans, contains a mix of provisions to satisfy both parties. For example, undocumented immigrants are offered a path to citizenship, but that path is dependent on the county meeting certain goals for border security. That tackles issues that are important to the left and right. "The best way to pass immigration legislation is comprehensively because that can achieve more balance," Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), a leading Democrat in the Senate's bipartisan "Gang of Eight" told reporters Thursday at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. "I think the idea of doing separate bills is just not going to work."


Politics Link – Cuba – Embargo

Jay Z and Beyonce trip proves Cuban embargo still sparks controversyDamien Cave, 4-8-2013, "Cuba Trip by Beyoncé and Jay-Z Investigated," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/09/world/americas/cuba-trip-by-beyonce-and-jay-z-is-investigated.html, accessed 5-10-2013The United States Treasury Department has begun investigating whether Jay-Z and Beyoncé — music’s royal couple — violated the trade embargo against Cuba by traveling to the island two weeks ago during their wedding anniversary, according to officials and a person who helped arrange their visit. In a sudden predictable controversy that proves the embers of conflict between Miami and Havana are never far from becoming flames, Treasury officials on Monday said they were working on a response to demands for more information about the trip from two Cuban-American lawmakers from South Florida — Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, both Republicans, who appear to be using the highly photographed visit to rekindle outrage about Americans going to Cuba for fun.

GOP opposes the planDaniel Griswold, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, 10-12-2005, "Four Decades of Failure: The U.S. Embargo against Cuba," Cato, http://www.cato.org/publications/speeches/four-decades-failure-us-embargo-against-cuba, accessed 5-10-2013For all those reasons, pressure has been building in Congress for a new policy toward Cuba. In the past five years, the House and occasionally the Senate have voted to lift the travel ban to Cuba, and also to lift the cap on remittances and even to lift the embargo altogether. Yet each time efforts in Congress to ease the embargo have been thwarted by the administration and the Republican leadership. Support for the embargo certainly does not come from the general American public, but from a group of Cuban-American activists concentrated in southern Florida . By a fluke of the electoral college, Republican presidents feel obligated to please this small special interest at the expense of our broader national interest.

Lifting the embargo is empirically unpopularRobert Creamer, political organizer, strategist, author, 1-18-2011, "Changes in U.S. Cuba Policy Good First Step -- But It's Time to Normalize Relation," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/changes-in-us-cuba-policy_b_810161.html, accessed 5-10-2013Many recent policy reports have recommended that the United States take some unilateral steps to roll back sanctions on Cuba. The removal of sanctions, however, would be just one step in the process of normalizing relations. Such a process is sure to be controversial , as indicated by the heated congressional debate spurred in March 2009 by attempts to ease travel and trade restrictions in a large appropriations bill. "Whatever we call it--normalization, détente, rapproachement--it is clear that the policy process risks falling victim to the politics of the issue ," says Sweig.


Politics Link – Cuba – Embargo Exceptions

Even small exceptions to the embargo link to politicsDamien Cave, 11-19-2012, "Changes in Cuba Create Support for Easing Embargo," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013In Washington, Mr. Gross is seen as the main impediment to an easing of the embargo, but there are also limits to what the president could do without Congressional action. The 1992 Cuban Democracy Act conditioned the waiving of sanctions on

the introduction of democratic changes inside Cuba. The 1996 Helms-Burton Act also requires that the embargo remain until Cuba has a transitional or democratically elected government. Obama administration officials say they have not given up, and could move if the president decides to act on his own. Officials say that under the Treasury Department’s licensing and

regulation-writing authority, there is room for significant modification. Following the legal logic of Mr. Obama’s changes in 2009, further expansions in travel are possible along with new allowances for investment or imports and exports, especially if narrowly applied to Cuban businesses. Even these adjustments — which could also include travel for all Americans and looser rules for ships engaged in trade with Cuba, according to a legal analysis commissioned by the Cuba Study Group — would probably mean a fierce political fight. The handful of Cuban-Americans in Congress for whom the embargo is sacred oppose looser rules.

Even minor exceptions to the embargo can spark a firestorm – Jay-Z/Beyonce incident provesJacob G. Hornberger, 4-10-2013, "Reject Congressman Ros-Lehtinen’s Statism and Lift the Cuban Embargo," Future of Freedom Foundation, http://fff.org/2013/04/10/reject-congressman-ros-lehtinens-statism-and-lift-the-cuban-embargo/, accessed 5-10-2013Florida Republican Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen woke up this morning with a bit of egg on her face, after she attempted to rat on Beyonce and

her husband Jay-Z for what Ros-Lehtinen thought might have been an illegal trip the couple took to Cuba . Learning that

the couple had celebrated their wedding anniversary in Cuba, Ros-Lehtinen wrote a letter to the Treasury Department to push for an investigation into whether the trip violated the U.S. national-security state’s 52-year-old economic embargo against Cuba. No doubt Ros-Lehtinen was

fantasizing over a criminal prosecution or at least a civil proceeding against Beyonce and Jay-Z, one that could send a message to all the Americans who are thinking of traveling to Cuba and spending money

there in violation of the embargo. As it turned out though, Beyonce and Jay-Z had secured official permission to travel to Cuba as part of an “education” exception to the embargo. Under that exception, the Treasury Department has the authority to issue licenses to Americans to travel to Cuba for “educational” purposes. Perhaps in order to cut Ros-

Lehtinen off at the pass before she made a new claim that the couple had violated the terms of the license by spending money on fun things in Cuba, a Treasury Department official explained in a letter that licensees may “engage in noneducational activities off hours,” such as, as the New York Times explained, imbibing a mojito or two.

Even individual exemptions to the embargo, like oil, cause controversyAssociated Press, 7-30-2006, “Will Cuba's offshore oil discovery finally break U.S. trade embargo?” Lubbock Online, http://lubbockonline.com/stories/073006/bus_073006025.shtml, accessed 5-10-2013In May, with much fanfare, Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, introduced twin bills to the House and Senate that would exempt Big Oil from the embargo.¶ Before introducing his legislation, Craig told a reporter that "prohibition on trade with Cuba has accomplished just about zero." Ominously, he added: "China, as we speak, has a drilling rig

off the coast of Cuba." (The senator failed to mention that the Chinese are working in shallow water near Cuba's shore, and possess neither the technology nor the expertise to tap Cuba's promising deep-water reserves.)¶ Regardless, the bills represent the best chance yet to "punch a big hole into the embargo," says Johannes Werner, editor of Cuba Trade & Investment News, published in Sarasota, Fla.¶ That scenario raises the hackles of the conservative, and highly influential, Cuban-American voting lobby of south Florida.¶ Says Alfredo Mesa, executive director of the Cuban American National Foundation in Miami: "Those who would advocate for ... allowing U.S. companies to drill off Cuba lose sight of how that would damage our ability to press the Cuban government on other issues, such as human rights."¶ Environmentalists are also squarely set against oil-industry access to Cuba, though for different reasons. Oil spills - even routine toxic pollution from drilling - could pollute the Everglades and Florida's most economically important beaches, they say, and wreck the state's tourism industry.


Politics Link – Cuba – General

Cuban policy sparks controversy in FloridaSeattle Times, 5-4-2013, "The U.S. embargo of Cuba is supported by politics, not by results," http://seattletimes.com/html/editorials/2017478445_edit12cuba.html, accessed 5-10-2013American law allows the export of some food and medicine to Cuba. Other than that, nothing. For Boeing to sell a jetliner to Cubana Airlines is forbidden. Why? The ordinary American is not angry about Cuba or thinks about Cuba at all. Who wants the embargo? The Cuban Americans in Florida, at least the older ones, are the ones who want it, and their votes matter because Florida is a pivotal state in presidential elections. The Bush-Gore contest of 2000 came down to Florida's 25 electoral votes — and in this year's election, Florida will have 29 electoral votes. This accidental fact of U.S. political geography is the only reason the embargo of Cuba still exists.

Even if it’s not true, politicians perceive Cuba as controversialBennet Kelley, 4-2-2012, "The Difference Between April and November Fools," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennet-kelley/cuba-us-embargo_b_1395520.html, accessed 5-10-2013After Pope Benedict reiterated the Vatican's long-standing condemnation of the United States' 50-year-old embargo of Cuba, I noticed some chatter in social media that maybe the remarks could lead to a change in U.S. policy. After double-checking to make sure that pigs were not flying outside, I resigned myself to the fact that the longest embargo in U.S. history was just a sad fact of life in American politics. The embargo is estimated to cost the U.S. economy between $1-4 billion each year; and not only has it failed to convince the Cuban government to abandon Communism but it has given the Castro regime a political scapegoat. No wonder former Reagan Secretary of State George Schultz calls continuation of the embargo "insane." Yet the policy continues, not because there is any grand expectation that next year is the year it finally works, but rather because both parties fear the wrath of Florida's Cuban community should they lift the embargo (even though younger Cuban-Americans oppose the blockade).

Politicians are scared to support CubaJudi Lynn, 3-29-2012, “U.S. politicians are afraid to cross the Cuban America mafia in Miami,” http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=85469, accessed 5-10-2013As you've noticed all candidates for the Presidency and others beat a path to Miami every election season to court the same people and their families who triggered the revolution through their corruption, violence, and sense of entitlement when they were the big fish in Cuba's small pond. They've acquired a power far outweighing their actual importance to this country by gaining control of Florida's state government, many electors, and through their appeal to the U.S. reactionary right-wing. The right-wing and the Cuban "exiles" rammed through a law, the Helms-Burton, through which they gave themselves the power to override any Presidential decision to drop the embargo, so he no longer has the ability to remove it as long as there is right-wing control of Congress:


Politics Link – Venezuela – General

Official GOP platform opposes engagement with VenezuelaUnited States Institute of Peace, 8-30-2012, "GOP Platform on Iran," http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2012/aug/30/gop-platform-iran, accessed 5-10-2013We will resist foreign influence in our hemisphere. We thereby seek not only to provide for our own security, but also to create a climate for democracy and self-determination throughout the Americas. The current Administration has turned its back on Latin America, with predictable results. Rather than supporting our democratic allies in the region, the President has prioritized engagement with our enemies in the region. Venezuela represents an increasing threat to U.S. security, a threat which has grown much worse on the current President’s watch. In the last three years, Venezuela has become a narco-terrorist state, turning it into an Iranian outpost in the Western hemisphere. The current regime issues Venezuelan passports or visas to thousands of Middle Eastern terrorists offering safe haven to Hezbollah trainers, operatives, recruiters and fundraisers.

GOP hates VenezuelaAndres Oppenheimer, 8-29-2012, "Republicans tilt right on Latin America," Miami Herald, http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/29/2974974/republicans-tilt-right-on-latin.html, accessed 5-10-2013The Republican platform approved by the party’s convention earlier this week — a blueprint of what a Romney administration would

do if it is elected — makes no bones about its hard-line policy toward Latin America. Its section on the region starts

out by saying that “We will resist foreign influence in our hemisphere,” and calls Venezuela a “narco terrorist” state. Much in line with the document’s general foreign policy plank — whose first line reads, “We are the party of peace through

strength” — the new Republican platform’s Latin America section is also a sharp turn to the right from the same section in the party’s 2008 platform. That document started with the words, “Faith and family, culture and commerce, are enduring bonds among all the peoples of the Americas.” Before we get into what I think of the newly released 2012 Republican platform’s section on the region, let’s take a closer look at what it says. “The current administration has turned its back on Latin America, with predictable results. Rather than supporting our democratic allies in the region, the president has prioritized engagement with our enemies in the region,” the new Republican document says.

Republicans want to designate Venezuela a state sponsor of terrorism – they don’t want to be dependent on themBridget Johnson, 8-7-2010, "In Colombia, GOP Rep. Mack calls on Obama to put Venezuela on terror list," The Hill, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/113173-in-colombia-mack-calls-on-obama-to-put-venezuela-on-terror-list, accessed 5-10-2013Rep. Connie Mack (R-Fla.), in Bogota on Saturday, called for the Obama administration to designate Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism. Mack was one of eight lawmakers in Colombia for the swearing in of the country's new president, Juan Manuel Santos. He met with departing President Alvaro Uribe and held a press conference in Bogota to detail his efforts to have Colombia's neighbor

placed on the terror list. "I think the time is now to put him on that list," Mack told The Hill by phone from Colombia, saying that President Hugo Chavez supported the FARC rebels in Colombia and was aligned with Iran and Syria. Mack said the White House is aware of his effort, and

added he'd talked with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well. "The response I get is, 'We'll look into it' or 'The timing's just not right,'" he said. Still, he said he hoped the White House would "act quickly" to put Venezuela on the list. "All that I can do is continue to push, try to build consensus with other members ," Mack said, adding that he's never before seen such bipartisan agreement "that Hugo Chavez is a force in Latin America that's on the side of evil and is determined to destroy freedom and democracy in Venezuela and encourage other countries to do the same." Venezuela cut off ties with Colombia late last month after Colombia presented evidence at the Organization of American States of 87 alleged FARC guerrilla camps running out of Venezuela. The FARC rebels are designated as a terrorist organization by the

United States. Shortly afterward Chavez threatened to cut off oil supplies to the United States if Colombia commits "armed aggression" against Venezuela. "We wouldn't send one more drop" of oil to the U.S., which is the top buyer of oil from Venezuela, Chavez said. Mack said he's been lobbying since 2008 to beef up strategic reserves to the extent that the U.S. would not depend on Venezuelan oil, and told The Hill that it should be the United States that tells Venezuela it won't buy oil.


Political Capital Key Immigration Reform

Obama’s capital is key to immigration reformAFP, 2-19-2013, “Obama courts key Republicans on immigration reform,” p. npThe White House had maintained that its staffers had met congressional officials working on immigration reform.¶

Obama's move may be seen as an effort to prevent partisan wrangling from derailing hopes of immigration reform, as it did under the presidency of his predecessor George W. Bush.¶ Immigration reform may be Obama's best chance for a genuine legacy-boosting success in his second term.¶ Senior

Republicans, meanwhile, are wary of entering another election hampered by the mistrust of Hispanic voters, a growing slice of the electorate for whom immigration reform is a key issue.¶ A key sticking point in the debate is the Republican demand that the process of offering legal status to illegals should only start once the US southern border with Mexico has been certified as secure.¶ Obama has so far declined to make that linkage.

Political capital is key to Obama’s agendaDavid Nakamura, writer for the Washington Post, 2-20-2013, “Obama says he has a year to get stuff done,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/02/20/in-interview-obama-says-he-has-a-year-to-get-stuff-done/, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama said Wednesday he’s eager to move quickly to enact his second-term agenda, acknowledging that he has a severely limited time frame before the political world begins thinking about the next election cycle in 2014 and beyond.¶ Obama told a San Francisco television station that he wants to “get as much stuff done as quickly as possible.”¶ “Once we get through this year, then people start looking at the mid-terms and after that start thinking about the presidential election,” Obama said during a brief interview with KGO, an ABC affiliate. “The American people don’t

want us thinking about elections, they want us to do some work. America is poised to grow in 2013 and add a lot of jobs as long as Washington doesn’t get in the way.”¶ Obama’s remarks were an acknowledgement that a second-term president’s ability to use his political capital faces rapidly diminishing returns, highlighting the high stakes of his bids to strike deals with Congress on issues from tax reform,

budget cuts, immigration reform and gun control.

Political scientists and experts agree political capital is keyMatthew N. Beckman, Professor of Political Science @ UC-Irvine, 2010, “Pushing the Agenda: Presidential Leadership in U.S. Lawmaking, 1953-2004,” pg. 50However, many close observers of the presidential–congressional relationship have long cited prevoting bargaining across Pennsylvania Avenue as being substantively important. For example, discussing President

Eisenhower’s legislative record in 1953, CQ staffers issued a caveat they have often repeated in the years since:¶ The President’s leadership often was tested beyond the glare spotlighting roll calls. . . . Negotiations off the floor and action in committee sometimes are as important as the recorded votes. (CQ Almanac 1953,

77)¶ Many a political scientist has agreed. Charles Jones (1994), for one, wrote, “However they are interpreted, roll call votes cannot be more than they are: one form of floor action on legislation. If analysts insist on scoring the president, concentrating on this stage of lawmaking can provide no more than a partial tally” (195). And Jon Bond and Richard Fleisher (1990) note that even if they ultimately are reflected in roll-call votes, “many important decisions in Congress are made in places other than floor votes and recorded by means other than roll calls . . . ” (68).


AT: Winners Win

Winners don’t win for Obama’s second termKen Walsh, covers the White House and politics for U.S. News., 12-20-2012, “Setting Clear Priorities Will Be Key for Obama,” US News, http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken-Walshs-Washington/2012/12/20/setting-clear-priorities-will-be-key-for-obama, accessed 5-10-2013And there is an axiom in Washington: Congress, the bureaucracy, the media, and other power centers can do justice to only one or two issues at a time. Phil Schiliro, Obama's former liaison to Congress, said Obama has "always had a personal commitment" to gun control, for example.¶ But

Schiliro told the New York Times, "Given the crisis he faced when he first took office, there's only so much capacity in the system to move his agenda." So Obama might be wise to limit his goals now and avoid overburdening the system, or he could face major setbacks that would limit his power and credibility for the remainder of his presidency.

Winners loseTodd Eberly, coordinator of Public Policy Studies and assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at St. Mary's College of Maryland, 1-21-2013, “The presidential power trap,” Baltimore Sun, http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-01-21/news/bs-ed-political-capital-20130121_1_political-system-george-hw-bush-party-support, accessed 5-10-2013Only by solving the problem of political capital is a president likely to avoid a power trap. Presidents in recent years have been unable to prevent their political capital from eroding. When it did, their power assertions often got them into further political trouble.

Through leveraging public support, presidents have at times been able to overcome contemporary leadership challenges by adopting as their own issues that the public already supports. Bill Clinton's centrist "triangulation" and George W. Bush's careful issue selection early in his

presidency allowed them to secure important policy changes — in Mr. Clinton's case, welfare reform and budget balance, in Mr. Bush's tax cuts and education reform — that at the time received popular approval.¶ However, short-term legislative strategies may win policy success for a president but do not serve as an antidote to declining political capital over time, as the difficult final years of both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush presidencies demonstrate. None of Barack Obama's recent predecessors solved the political capital problem or avoided the power trap. It is the central political challenge confronted by modern presidents and one that will likely weigh heavily on the current president's mind today as he takes his second oath of office.

Even if they’re right, Obama already won on the deficit – can’t win on both immigration and the plan Coral Davenport, energy and environment correspondent, National Journal, 12-6-2012, “How Obama and Congress Could Find Common Ground on Energy,” National Journal, http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/how-obama-and-congress-could-find-common-ground-on-energy-20121206, accessed 5-10-2013One big obstacle is time. A second-term president has about two years to push through major legislation before the next presidential campaign begins. In addition, two huge issues are already on the docket: immigration and tax reform. A sweeping overhaul of the nation’s tax code, which could easily absorb Congress through 2014, offers the first opportunity for major energy reform. Some lawmakers will probably insert a carbon-tax swap proposal in a broader tax-reform package, although for now the carbon tax seems unlikely to succeed. Democrats will also try to end tax breaks for the oil industry while extending those for renewable energy.¶ But if the tax-reform debate ends without comprehensive new energy provisions, it may be too late to enact an energy overhaul. “If President Obama has victories on immigration and the deficit, that’s two potentially momentous victories for the president in a second term, where victories are not typical ,”

says historian Alfred Zacher, author of Trial and Triumph: Presidential Power in the Second Term. “It’s difficult to believe he’d win three.”


Immigration Reform Good – Economy

Immigration reform is key to the economy and tradeMary Bruce, 5-2-2013, "In Mexico, President Obama Says Immigration Reform Is Critical to Trade," ABC News Blogs, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/in-mexico-president-obama-says-immigration-reform-is-critical-to-trade/, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama arrived in Mexico City today, where the economy and trade were intended to top the agenda of his three-day trip to Mexico and Costa Rica. With Congress poised to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws, however, border security and immigration reform are overshadowing much of the

public discussion. “I’m optimistic about us getting this done because it’s the right thing to do. We’ve seen leaders from both parties indicate that now’s the time to get comprehensive immigration reform done,” Obama said at a joint press conference with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. “If we’re going to get that done,

now’s the time to do it.” Obama argued that reforming the U.S. immigration system is an economic imperative and, given the

amount of trade between the U.S. and its southern neighbor, that it’s important for the countries not to get bogged down with border issues. Mexico is the United States’ second-largest trading partner.

Immigration reform solves the deficitCynthia Tucker, columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11-19-2010, “We need immigrants to help pay the deficit,” Atlanta J-C, http://blogs.ajc.com/cynthia-tucker/2010/11/19/we-need-immigrants-to-help-pay-the-deficit/, accessed 5-10-2013Recommendations for taming the deficit include raising the retirement age, raising the federal gas tax and ending the mortgage

interest deduction for homeowners. Ouch!¶ But there is a palliative that would ease the pain: Put 11 million illegal immigrants on a path to legalization. And don’t touch birthright citizenship!¶ Yes, you heard that right: Granting legal residency to illegal immigrants will eventually help sop up some of the federal budget’s red ink. I know that’s counterintuitive since so many

citizens have come to believe that Mexican landscapers and Guatemalan maids are a drain on the treasury. But the fact is that their relative youth is just what the U.S. economy needs.¶ The explosion of the long-term deficit is largely the consequence of an aging population, with more retirees depending on taxes from fewer workers. While

the recession, two unfunded wars and Bush-era tax cuts fueled the immediate deficit, a tsunami of long-term red ink will swamp the budget in about ten years, as a massive wave of baby boomers leaves the workplace.¶ So we need as many younger workers as we can find to help support the coming crush of senior citizens. The U.S. is lucky enough to have a higher birthrate than many other Westernized democracies, even among native-born

women. Immigrants are an added demographic bonus.¶ “When some people think of immigrants, they think of people coming in and immediately absorbing our resources,” said Emory economist Jeffrey Rosensweig. “Most immigrants come here to work. They’re young workers, and they’re paying taxes.” Why not add all of them to the federal tax rolls?

Deficits kill the economyChristine Bogusz, Congressional Budget Office, December 2005, “The Long-Term Budget Outlook,” Congressional Budget Office, p. npSustained and rising budget deficits would affect the economy by absorbing funds from the nation’s pool of savings and reducing investment in both the domestic capital stock and foreign assets.12 Investment in business structures, equipment, research and development, worker training, and education would be lower than it

would be in the absence of such large levels of federal borrowing. As a result, the growth of workers’ productivity would gradually slow, real wages would begin to stagnate, and economic growth would tend to taper off. If that situation continued long enough, rising deficits could actually

lead to a sustained contraction of the economy . Although some portion of the deficit could be financed by foreign investors—lessening the degree to which the deficit crowded out investment in the

domestic capital stock— borrowing from abroad would not be free. Over time, foreign investors would claim larger shares of the nation’s output. In the end, fewer resources would be available for domestic consumption. Taken to the extreme, such a path could result in an economic crisis. Foreign investors could reduce their purchases of U.S. securities, the

exchange value of the dollar could plunge, interest rates could climb, consumer prices could shoot up, or the economy could contract sharply. Amid the anticipation of declining profits and rising inflation and interest rates, stock markets could collapse and consumers might sharply reduce their consumption. Moreover, economic problems in the United States could spill over to the rest of the world and seriously weaken the economies of U.S. trading partners .


Immigration Reform Good – US-Latin America Relations

Failure to fix US immigration wrecks relations with Latin AmericaMichael Shifter, President of Inter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship: The United States and Latin America,” IAD Policy Report, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Washington’s failure to repair the United States’ broken immigration system is breeding resentment across the region, nowhere more so than in the principal points of origin and transit: Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. Latin Americans find the idea of building a wall on the US-Mexico border particularly offensive.

Solves a laundry list of impactsMichael Shifter, President of Inter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship: The United States and Latin America,” IAD Policy Report, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013There are compelling reasons for the United States and Latin America to pursue more robust ties. Every country in the Americas would benefit from strengthened and expanded economic relations, with improved access to each other’s markets, investment capital, and energy resources. Even with its current economic problems,

the United States’ $16-trillion economy is a vital market and source of capital (including remittances) and technology for Latin America, and it could contribute more to the region’s economic performance .

For its part, Latin America’s rising economies will inevitably become more and more crucial to the United States’ economic future. The United States and many nations of Latin America and the Caribbean would also gain a great deal by more cooperation on such global matters as climate change, nuclear non-proliferation, and democracy and human rights. With a rapidly expanding US Hispanic population of more than 50 million, the cultural and demographic integration of the United States and Latin America is proceeding at an accelerating pace, setting a firmer basis for hemispheric partnership Despite the multiple opportunities and potential

benefits, relations between the United States and Latin America remain disappointing . If new opportunities are not seized, relations will likely continue to drift apart . The longer the current situation persists, the harder it will be to reverse course and rebuild vigorous cooperation . Hemispheric affairs require urgent attention—both from the United States and from Latin America and the Caribbean.

Immigration reform boosts US diplomacy and soft powerJoseph S. Nye, former US assistant secretary of defense and chairman of the US National Intelligence Council, Professor at Harvard University, 12-10-2012, “Immigration and American Power,” Project Syndicate, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/obama-needs-immigration-reform-to-maintain-america-s-strength-by-joseph-s--nye, accessed 5-10-2013Equally important are immigration’s benefits for America’s soft power. The fact that people want to come to the US enhances its appeal, and immigrants’ upward mobility is attractive to people in other countries. The US is a magnet, and many people can envisage themselves as Americans, in part because so many successful Americans look like them. Moreover, connections between immigrants and their families and friends back home help to convey accurate and positive information about the US.¶

Likewise, because the presence of many cultures creates avenues of connection with other countries, it helps to broaden Americans’ attitudes and views of the world in an era of globalization. Rather than diluting hard and soft power, immigration enhances both.


Immigration Reform Good – China/India Growth

Immigration reform expands skilled labor solves Chinese and Indian growthCarol Williams, LA Times international affairs writer, 11-9-2012, “Other countries eagerly await U.S. immigration reform,” LA Times, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/11/us-immigration-reform-eagerly-awaited-by-source-countries.html, accessed 5-10-2013"Comprehensive immigration reform will see expansion of skilled labor visas ," predicted B. Lindsay Lowell, director of policy studies for the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. A former research chief for the congressionally appointed Commission on Immigration Reform,

Lowell said he expects to see at least a fivefold increase in the number of highly skilled labor visas that would provide "a significant shot in the arm for India and China."¶ There is widespread consensus among economists and academics that skilled migration fosters new trade and business relationships between countries

and enhances links to the global economy, Lowell said.¶ "Countries like India and China weigh the opportunities of

business abroad from their expats with the possibility of brain drain, and I think they still see the immigration opportunity as a bigger plus than not," he said.

Chinese economic growth prevents global nuclear warAntoni Z. Kaminski, Professor @ Institute of Political Studies, 2007, “World Order: The Mechanics of Threats (Central European Perspective)”, Polish Quarterly of International Affairs, 1, p. 58As already argued, the economic advance of China has taken place with relatively few corresponding changes in the political system, although the operation of political and economic institutions has seen some major changes. Still, tools are missing that would allow the establishment of political and legal foundations for the modem economy, or they are too weak. The tools are efficient public administration, the rule of law, clearly defined ownership rights, efficient banking system, etc.

For these reasons, many experts fear an economic crisis in China. Considering the importance of the state for the development of the global

economy, the crisis would have serious global repercussions. Its political ramifications could be no less dramatic owing to the special position the military occupies in the Chinese political system, and the existence of many potential vexed issues in East Asia (disputes over islands in the China Sea

and the Pacific). A potential hotbed of conflict is also Taiwan's status. Economic recession and the related destabilization of

internal policies could lead to a political, or even military crisis. The likelihood of the global escalation of the conflict is high, as the interests of Russia, China, Japan, Australia and, first and foremost, the US clash in the region.

Indian growth solves Indo-Pak warDawood Mamoon, et al, Researcher @ the Inst. Of Social Studies, 3-7-2010, “The Conflict Mitigating Effects of Trade in the India-Pakistan case,” http://www.springerlink.com/content/4736rl34w118q532/fulltext.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013However, if India is able to export or import more, this would at least put a check on any rise in the severity of conflict and hostilities would adjust to some average level. Any decline in Indian trade will enhance hostilities. The current low levels of bilateral trade between Pakistan and India is conflict enhancing, so more trade with increased exports by both sides to each other should be encouraged. More access to Pakistani markets on the Indian side may not lead to conflict mitigation if Pakistan is not able to also export more to India. A rise in education expenditure puts a check on hostilities, as seen in Graph 1e. Graph 1f is the standard representation of India-Pakistan conflict, and not only best fits historical trends but also explain the rationale behind recent IndiaPakistan peace initiatives with decreasing hostilities when not only India but Pakistan also has had economic growth rates as high as 7% per annum. The forecasts suggest that conflict will rise, even if there is a significant increase in combined democracy scores, if growth rates plummet. Both Pakistan and India have seen many such years, when hostilities between both countries rose significantly when at least one

of the countries is performing poorly, but were channeling more resources on the military as a proportion of their GDPs. The forecasts favour the economic version over the democratic version of the liberal peace . Thus one may look at current peace talks between both countries with optimism as both are performing well on the economic front and channeling fewer resources on the military as a proportion of national income, while at the same time having a divergent set of political institutions, though recently Pakistan has edged towards greater democracy with elections in February 2008.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/11/us-immigration-reform-eagerly-awaited-by-source-countries.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/11/us-immigration-reform-eagerly-awaited-by-source-countries.html


Immigration Reform Good – Cyberterrorism

Immigration reform will increase high-skilled visasJennifer Martinez, writer @ The Hill, 1-21-2013, “Obama makes call for high-skilled immigration reform in inaugural address,” The Hill, http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/278323-obama-makes-call-for-high-skilled-immigration-reform-in-inaugural-address, accessed 5-10-2013Obama has made clear that passing comprehensive immigration legislation will be a policy priority during his second term. It's expected that a measure aimed at boosting the number of visas available to foreign-born graduates of U.S. universities with master's degrees and Ph.D.s in engineering, math and science fields will be

included in forthcoming immigration legislation.¶ In his speech, Obama argued that foreign-born engineers and graduates with advanced degrees should be able to stay in the U.S. and join the workforce rather than be forced to return to their home countries.

Boosting visas is key to cyberterror preventionThomas F. McLarty III, President McLarty Associates and Former White House Chief of Staff and Task Force Co-Chair, 7-8-2009, “U.S. Immigration Policy: Report of a CFR-Sponsored Independent Task Force”, Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/publication/19759/us_immigration_policy.html, accessed 5-10-2013We have seen, when you look at the table of the top 20 firms that are H1-B visa requestors , at least 15 of those are IT firms. And as we're seeing across industry, much

of the hardware and software that's used in this country is not only manufactured now overseas, but it's developed overseas by scientists and engineers who were educated here in the United States.¶ We're seeing a lot more activity around cyber-security , certainly noteworthy attacks here very recently. It's becoming an increasingly dominant set of requirements across not only to

the Department of Defense, but the Department of Homeland Security and the critical infrastructure that's held in private hands. Was there any discussion or any interest from DOD or DHS as you undertook this review on the security

things about what can be done to try to generate a more effective group of IT experts here in the United States, many of which are coming to the U.S. institutions , academic institutions from overseas and often returning back? This potentially puts us at a competitive disadvantage going forward.¶ MCLARTY: Yes. And I think your question largely is the answer as well. I mean, clearly we have less talented students here studying -- or put another way, more talented students studying in other countries that are gifted, talented, really have a tremendous ability to develop these kind of technology and scientific advances , we're going to be put at an increasingly disadvantage. Where if they come here -- and I kind of

like Dr. Land's approach of the green card being handed to them or carefully put in their billfold or purse as they graduate -- then, obviously, that's going to strengthen, I

think, our system, our security needs.

Cyberterrorism causes miscalcRoss Rosenbaum, Slate Staff Writer, 5-9-2008, “A Real Nuclear Option for the Nominees”, Slate, http://www.slate.com/id/2191104/pagenum/all/#page_start, accessed 5-10-2013So it's insanely short-fused as it is. But when I spoke to Blair in Washington last week, he noted an additional cause for concern: cyber-attacks. He pointed to the preface of his Oslo paper, which focused on how "information warfare" in cyberspace heightened the threat of "inadvertent" nuclear war. "The nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground," Blair wrote, "on which more than 20 nations including Russia, China, and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs. These programs deploy viruses to

disable, confuse, and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations. At the brink of conflict, nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision-making. The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear." "Perverse consequences" seems to understate the matter. In a footnote, Blair cites one scary example: the discovery of "an unprotected electronic backdoor into the naval

broadcast communications network used to transmit launch orders by radio to the U.S. Trident deterrent submarine fleet. Unauthorized persons including terrorists might have been able to seize electronic control of shore-based radio transmitters ... and actually inject a launch order into

the network. The deficiency was taken so seriously that new launch order validation protocols had to be devised, and Trident crews had to undergo special training to learn them." Is this the only "electronic back door"? Or is it just the only one we've discovered? And if an unauthorized launch order could be insinuated into the system by hackers, why not a false-attack warning, which could generate an authorized (but mistaken) launch order? So in addition to the potential for accidental nuclear war, there is an even more disturbing threat of deliberate-but-unauthorized nuclear launches .

http://www.slate.com/id/2191104/pagenum/all/#page_start


Midterms DA


Midterms DA 1NC 1/2

GOP will win the midterms nowBethany Blankley, Christian Post, 4-24-2013, "8 US Senators Retiring: 2014 Mid-Term Election Could Be Toss-Up," http://www.christianpost.com/news/8-us-senators-retiring-2014-mid-term-election-could-be-toss-up-94651/, accessed 5-10-2013Yet, CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said, "If 2014 is similar to past midterm elections, the demographics of the people who turn out to vote will be very different from the electorate in the presidential elections of 2008 or 2012. If history is any guide, the 2014 midterm electorate will be older and a bit whiter than this year, which could easily benefit Republican candidates." Larry

Sabato, of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, points out that history reveals that a second-term president's last midterm is "frequently bad for his party." Going back to the era of World War II, he points out that historically, there have been significant congressional losses for a president's respective party in what he refers to as the "sixth-year itch" midterm elections. "Will there be a sixth-year itch to scratch in 2014?" he asks. "The odds are, yes. But how irritating an itch for the Democratic Party? That is completely unknowable," he says.

Engagement with other countries is popular with the publicWorld Public Opinion, 10-11-2006, "Americans Continue to Support International Engagement Despite Frustration over the War in Iraq," http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/256.php, accessed 5-10-2013Most Americans believe the war in Iraq has not reduced terrorism or helped spread democracy in the Middle East. Instead they say the war has hurt U.S. relations with the Muslim world and should make nations more cautious about using military force. Nonetheless,

Americans are not turning against international engagementï¿½strong majorities still want the United States to play an active role in world affairs. The 2006 Chicago Council on Global Affairs survey found no evidence of declining support for U.S. engagement on a wide-range of international issues.

Americans believe the United States is and should remain the most influential country in the world. But

they do not want their government to take on the role of world policeman, preferring that it work with other countries to solve global problems through the United Nations and other international institutions. Most Americans respond negatively when asked about the impact of the war in Iraq. Two out of three (66%) say that the war has damaged U.S. relations with the Muslim world and believe that the U.S. experience in Iraq ï¿½should make nations more cautious about using military force to deal with rogue states.ï¿½ Majorities disagree with those who argue that the war will help promote democracy in the Middle East (64%) and that it has reduced the threat of terrorism (61%). Nonetheless, the Chicago Council survey finds that frustration with the war in Iraq has not affected Americansï¿½ general attitudes about foreign policy. Since World War II,

about two-thirds of the U.S. public has said that the United States should play an active role in world affairs, a proportion that fell significantly only during the period following the Vietnam War. Sixty-nine percent of Americans say in the 2006 poll that the United States should remain engaged in international affairs, statistically the same as in 2004 (67%). An Active and

Multilateral Foreign Policy Asked what international role they would like the United States to play, Americans say they want their country to remain engaged overseas without trying to dominate world affairs. Only 12 percent say ï¿½the United States should withdraw from most efforts to solve international problems ,ï¿½ a proportion that has remained statistically unchanged since 2004 (10%). However, Americans

do not want the United States to remain the dominant power and believe that it should try to refrain from unilateral efforts to police international conflicts. Only 10 percent say that ï¿½as the sole remaining superpower the United States should continue to be the preeminent leader in solving world problems.ï¿½ Three-fourths (76%) say that the United States too often plays the role of world policeman.

Obama’s popularity is key to Democratic success in the MidtermsLara Brown, 4-10-2013, "2014 Will Be About Obama," USNWR, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/lara-brown/2013/04/10/barack-obama-will-be-on-the-ballot-in-2014, accessed 5-10-2013But midterm elections aren't about themes. They're about presidents—their coattails in the previous election, their current popularity, and their party's in-power status. Despite the fact that his name won't be printed at the top of any Democratic ticket, President Barack Obama will be on every voter's ballot in 2014 and his presence will likely hurt his party. Even though political scientists argue over how to interpret and forecast these electoral outcomes, all acknowledge one persistent pattern: Since 1934, the president's party almost always loses House seats and frequently loses Senate seats in the midterm elections. In sum, the only real question about 2014 is how much damage will the Democrats sustain? While the Democrats have managed to spin the 2010 election into a relative success on the basis of "only" losing majority control of the House (unlike 1994), no one should forget that Democrats did lose six seats in the Senate that year. As it happens, that's the number of pick-ups the Republicans need in 2014 to gain that chamber's majority. But

more to the point, opposition party themes (e.g., "Contract with America" and "Culture of Corruption") take hold and wave elections build when the public is dissatisfied with the president and his party has unified government control. As Gallup

explained prior to the election in 2010, "history shows that presidents who have sub-50 percent approval ratings prior to midterm elections generally see their parties suffer large congressional seat losses."


Midterms DA 1NC 2/2

Democratic house means Obama can get a carbon tax passedBen Wolfgang, The Washington Times, 3-13-2013, “Issue of carbon tax rears up once again,” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/13/issue-of-carbon-tax-rears-up-once-again/#ixzz2NrEfFHxI , accessed 5-10-2013Business leaders joined a group of House Republicans on Wednesday to denounce a tax on carbon emissions — a concept that they acknowledge has virtually no chance of being translated into law anytime soon.¶ But while they’re confident

such a tax has little chance of passing Congress, some Democrats and environmental groups still vehemently support it. President Obama’s recent vow to aggressively confront climate change in his second term has helped resurrect the notion, despite the long odds.¶ “President Obama and his minions are floating the idea, bills are being introduced,” said Rep. Joe Barton, Texas Republican, speaking at a Wednesday afternoon news

conference outside of the Capitol.¶ “It’s part of their agenda. We’ve decided that instead of being silent, it’s better to be pro-active,” he added.¶ As part of that offensive strategy, Mr. Barton and Rep. Steve Scalise, Louisiana Republican and chairman of the party’s study committee, introduced a House resolution opposing “efforts by Washington liberals to install a nationwide carbon tax.”¶ It’s not yet clear whether the resolution will get a vote on the House floor.

Carbon tax would destroy the US economyAlan Caruba, 3-26-2013, "Warning Signs: A Carbon Tax Would Destroy America," Warning Signs, http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-carbon-tax-would-destroy-america.html, accessed 5-10-2013If you want to know what a carbon tax on emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would do to America you need only look at the destruction of industry and business in Australia, along with the soaring costs for energy use it imposes on anyone there. “The carbon tax is contributing to a record number of firms going to the wall with thousands of employees being laid off and companies forced to close factories that have stood for generations”, Steve Lewis

and Phil Jacob reported in a March 18 issue of The Daily Telegraph, a leading Australian newspaper. “Soaring energy bills caused by the government’s climate change scheme have been called ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’ by

company executives and corporate rescue doctors who are trying to save ailing firms.” The passage of a carbon tax in America would have the exact same results and it remains a top priority for the White House and Democrats in Congress who see it as a bonanza in new funding for the government.

Economic collapse causes nuclear warMichael O’Hanlon, Ph.D., senior fellow at The Brookings Institution, specializing in defense and foreign policy issues and Kenneth Lieberthal, Ph.D., senior fellow in Foreign Policy and Global Economy and Development at Brookings, 7-3-2012, “The real national security threat: America's debt,” LA Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/03/opinion/la-oe-ohanlon-fiscal-reform-20120703, da 2-1-2013Lastly, American economic weakness undercuts U.S. leadership abroad. Other countries sense our weakness and wonder about our purported decline. If this perception becomes more widespread, and the case that we are in decline becomes more persuasive, countries will begin to take actions that reflect their skepticism about America's

future. Allies and friends will doubt our commitment and may pursue nuclear weapons for their own security, for example; adversaries will sense opportunity and be less restrained in throwing around their weight in their own neighborhoods. The crucial Persian Gulf and Western Pacific regions will likely become less stable. Major war will become more likely.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/03/opinion/la-oe-ohanlon-fiscal-reform-20120703


Yes GOP Win Midterms

GOP will win the midterms nowLara Brown, 4-10-2013, "2014 Will Be About Obama," USNWR, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/lara-brown/2013/04/10/barack-obama-will-be-on-the-ballot-in-2014, accessed 5-10-2013Given that our federal government is already divided (unlike 2006 and 2010), it seems improbable that a giant Republican wave will come to swamp Democrats next year. Still, given the large number of pick-up opportunities in the Senate and the miniscule number of competitive seats in the House, one imagines history's tendencies will favor the GOP. Obama may not be in for another "shellacking," but he's surely in for a disappointment. All of this makes next year's electoral theme simple: "Republicans are back."

Fundraising gap doesn’t doom the GOPDanielle Saul, 4-23-2013, "Expect a Republican Rebound in the 2014 Elections," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/37207/midterm-elections-2014-republicans-looking-good-going-in, accessed 5-10-2013After suffering a crushing loss this fall, everyone thought that the Republican Party as we knew it was finished. However,

Republicans across America should start getting excited looking forward to the 2014 mid-term elections. At

this point in the 2010 cycle, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) had three times more cash on hand than the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). By the end of March 2009, the DSCC had already raised $5.02 million, had $7.2 million cash on hand, and was $10.9 million in debt, while the NRSC had only raised $4.9 million, had $2.3 million cash on hand, and owed more than $10 million in debt. Even though the DSCC had all that extra money, the Republican Party still pulled off an amazing sweep in 2010 gaining five seats. Now we all know you have to work twice as hard to score on defense; and so far, the Democratic candidates definitely haven't been putting their best candidates forward, with the exception of Braley in Iowa. Besides, if the DSCC really believed money is more important than ever in 2014, then they are in big trouble in Kentucky — which they claim is their best opportunity. The DSCC may currently be ahead of the NRSC in their fundraising efforts, but when you look at the big picture, the two parties are actually fairly equal. The DSCC has $8.2 million on hand and $15 million in debt, while the

NRSC has $5.2 million on hand and $9.5 million in debt. Besides, in our current political structure party committees no longer are the dominant fundraising source. Campaigns have millions of dollars being poured into their races by various PACs from throughout the country. The NRSC's main concern right now should be picking quality candidates that know how to sell

the conservative message in 2014. Republicans had a tough election in 2012, but they learned their lesson, took the time to correct their mistakes, and came back ready to put up a fight in 2014. Conservatives shouldn’t worry about the latest DSCC numbers because as we saw in 2010, those numbers don’t mean anything.

GOP will win the midterms nowEric Black, 4-23-2013, "Outlook promising for GOP to pick up seats in U.S. Senate," MinnPost, http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/04/outlook-promising-gop-pick-seats-us-senate, accessed 5-10-2013Democrats chances of holding onto their U.S. Senate majority in next year’s midterm election took another blow today with the announcement by Montana Sen. Max Baucus that he would retire rather than seek a seventh term. Judging by its behavior in presidential elections, Montana is a red state, although it currently has two Democratic senators. Brian Schweitzer, a recent Democratic governor, is being mentioned as a likely Dem nominee for the vacant seat, and he might have a chance. It’s too soon to know about that. Lots of red states have sent Democrats to the Senate. The overall picture looming for the 2014 is very promising for Republicans to substantially increase their current 45-seat minority. For starters, the 35 seats up for election in 2014 include 21 currently held by Dems, which gives the Repubs most of the pick-up opportunities.


Yes GOP Win Midterms – AT: Gun Control Thumper

Gun control doesn’t thump the link – Dems need a popular policy to have a chanceSean Trende, 4-22-2013, "Gun Control Vote Likely Won't Affect Midterms," Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/22/gun_control_vote_likely_wont_affect_midterms_118045.html, accessed 5-10-2013The other problem for the “2014-as-payback” theory is geographic. Because of the geographic concentration of Democratic voters, 250 House districts have a Republican-leaning or even partisan voting index (in other words, tend to vote more Republican than the nation as a whole). Of these, 226 voted for Mitt Romney outright, even as he lost nationally by four points. In other words, the battle for control of the House will largely be fought on territory that is pretty favorable to Republicans. Overcoming this advantage will require a popular, high-salience issue for the Democrats, and as seen above, gun control isn’t it.

Gun control failure only helps the GOP in the midtermSean Trende, 4-22-2013, "Gun Control Vote Likely Won't Affect Midterms," Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/22/gun_control_vote_likely_wont_affect_midterms_118045.html, accessed 5-10-2013In the Senate, the picture is even worse. Only one Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, is running in a state the president carried. The only other Republican-held state that Romney won with less than 55 percent of the two-party vote is Georgia, where it is hard to imagine blowback over the gun control vote. South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas are the only other states where Romney ran under 60 percent, and again it is hard to see the gun vote hurting Republicans there. If anything, in an odd sort of way, the failure of gun control will help Democrats retain the Senate. Vulnerable senators in red states like Arkansas, Alaska and Montana got to cast votes against the administration, which they will doubtless remind voters about when their opponents try to link them to the president.

Refusing to pass gun control is empirically only good for politiciansPaul Begala, 5-6-2013, "Paul Begala: The Price Is Right on Gun Control," Daily Beast, http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/05/06/paul-begala-the-price-is-right-on-gun-control.html, accessed 5-10-2013Bentsen’s political observation comes to mind in the current discussion of gun control. Sure, the polls say 90 percent of Americans support expanded background checks. But have you ever seen anyone lose his or her seat for voting against gun control? I’ve seen more than I care to recall lose their seat for supporting it. The

Gingrich revolution of 1994 was fueled in part by right-wing reaction to the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban. Jack Brooks, who chaired the House Judiciary Committee, was a fearless, cigar-chomping, old-school Texan Democrat, tougher than armadillo jerky. He warned Clinton that banning assault weapons would cost a lot of Democrats their seats. Clinton would not waver, and as he described the 1994 congressional elections in his memoir, “The NRA had a great night ... Jack Brooks had supported the NRA for years and had led the fight against the assault weapons ban in the House, but as chairman of the Judiciary Committee he had voted for the overall crime bill even after the ban was put into it. The NRA was an unforgiving master: one strike and you’re out. The gun lobby claimed to have defeated nineteen of the twenty-four members on its hit list. They did at least that much damage.”


AT: Uniqueness Overwhelms Link

Election will probably be close – but events could make it into a waveCharlie Cook, National Journal, 4-23-2013, "Too Early to Know Whether Democrats Will Fall Prey to Second-Term Jinx," Yahoo! News, http://news.yahoo.com/too-early-know-whether-democrats-fall-prey-second-221457105--politics.html, accessed 5-10-2013It’s important to remember that wave elections are not the norm—they are actually the exception to the rule. The adage by the late

Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill that “all politics is local” would more accurately be “all politics is local, except when it is not.” In the 1980 elections, Ronald Reagan unseated President Carter by a 10 percentage-point margin, and Republicans gained 12 seats in the Senate and 34 in the House; this was the first wave election our country had seen since the 1974 Watergate upheaval. The next true wave election after 1980 was in 1994, during the Newt Gingrich-led Republican takeover of the House, which resulted in a 52-seat gain, accompanied by a strong eight-seat gain in

the Senate. (Note: Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama switched from the Democratic to the GOP the day after the election, bringing the total Republican gain to nine.) After 1994, there was not another wave for 12 years. Then we saw three consecutive wave elections: 2006, 2008, and the reverse wave in 2010, when Republicans were the beneficiaries and Democrats were the victims.

The safer way to look at congressional elections is to start off assuming that any election will be a normal “all politics is local” situation, while constantly looking closely for signs that it might not be. Keep an eye out for the chance that it turns out to be a wave year, rather than a relatively level battlefield.

GOP is ahead now, but it could still go either wayDante Chinni, 5-6-2013, "Politics Counts: The Math on 2014 Midterms," WSJ, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/03/politics-counts-the-math-on-2014-midterms/, accessed 5-10-2013Midterm elections always hold the potential for big changes in Washington, but 2014 is shaping up to be an especially significant year in senate. Already eight senators – six Democrats and two Republicans – have announced they won’t seek re-election. And Massachusetts, which this week held Democratic and Republican primaries to fill Secretary of State John Kerry’s former senate seat, will have also

have a newly minted senator defending that office. The 2014 midterms are still a long way off, but a few trends are emerging from the numbers around the open seats. The Democrats clearly have the tougher job in terms of number of seats to defend, but the larger demographic patterns may offer some help. The Republicans, meanwhile, probably feel good about their chances to go on offense and pick up seats, but they may also want to keep an eye on the shifting terrain in Georgia.

Even if it’s early, that just means that our link arguments still have time to flip the electionDante Chinni, 5-6-2013, "Politics Counts: The Math on 2014 Midterms," WSJ, http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/03/politics-counts-the-math-on-2014-midterms/, accessed 5-10-2013The numbers suggest Georgia is changing rapidly and bears watching, though the changes may not be coming fast enough to flip to a Democratic senate seat in 2014. Of course, it’s early to draw too many conclusions from the numbers at this point on these eight seats or any others for that matter. As 2012 made clear, candidates and their unforced errors can make a huge difference in what actually happens on Election Day. And the national and individual state political scenes will likely be quite different in 16 months than they are now. But as the 2014 conversation begins in earnest, these figures lay out the statistical terrain upon which these Senate campaigns will unfold. And as 2012 also made clear, that terrain can play a big role in elections in a country that is rapidly changing .


AT: GOP Senate Impossible

GOP can win the senate – only takes a handful of upsetsDonald Lambro, 5-3-2013, "Can Republicans Win the Senate in 2014?," Donald Lambro, http://townhall.com/columnists/donaldlambro/2013/05/03/can-republicans-win-the-senate-in-2014-n1585655, accessed 5-10-2013The 2014 election battle for control of the Senate will affect just about everything it does this year and next,

because it could take just a handful of upsets to put the Republicans back in charge. The two-year, midterm

election cycle, which is off to a faster pace than usual in the Senate, certainly affected the gun control vote when five Democrats from conservative-leaning states voted against it. Two of the Democrats' no votes were Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mark Begich of Alaska who will face the voters next year in states where gun control isn't popular. The upcoming votes on immigration reform will also pose a tough test for Democrats in states where the issue is just as unpopular. Democrats control 55 seats in the Senate, including two Independents who usually vote with them. But once again, the Republicans have a stronger numerical advantage in next year's Senate races, because 21 Democratic seats are at stake compared to just 14 for the Republicans .

GOP taking the Senate is possibleBethany Blankley, Christian Post, 4-24-2013, "8 US Senators Retiring: 2014 Mid-Term Election Could Be Toss-Up," http://www.christianpost.com/news/8-us-senators-retiring-2014-mid-term-election-could-be-toss-up-94651/, accessed 5-10-2013In addition to these Democratic senators, two Republicans are retiring as well-Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Mike Johanns (R-Neb.). These eight open seats, once seen as shoo-ins by well-funded incumbents, are now potential toss-ups. If Republicans were to gain the six seats being vacated by the Democrats, they could attain a majority in the Senate in 2014. Currently, there are 53 Democratic, 45 Republican, and 2 Independent senators. On Nov. 4, 2014, 35 of the 100 Senate seats will be up for election – of those seats, 14 are held by Republicans and 21 are held by Democrats. Most the states where voters will cast their ballots are Republican-leaning and seven of the 21 Democratic-held seats are in states that were carried by Mitt

Romney in 2012.

GOP will win both halves nowDaily Caller, 3-26-2013, “Why the Republicans could win the White House, Senate and hold the House by 2016,” Daily Caller, http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/26/why-republicans-could-win-the-white-house-senate-and-the-house-by-2016/, accessed 5-10-2013But what about 2014? The president’s party typically loses seats during mid-term elections, and since Republicans already control the House, it’s probably safe to assume they will retain control at least until 2016. Meanwhile, the Senate seems poised for Republican pickups next year. Democratic incumbents are defending seats in states like Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, and the news keeps getting worse. As the AP’s Thomas Beaumont and David Espo write, Republicans must gain six seats to win a majority in the Senate, and South Dakota now leaps to the top of the party’s list of most favorable states. Republican Mike Rounds, a popular former two-term governor, has been campaigning for the seat since last year, though he declined to comment Monday on [U.S. Sen. Tim Johnson's] retirement. Democrats won open Senate seats in places like North Dakota in 2012, so nothing is guaranteed. Blowing such a golden opportunity in 2014 could further add to the GOP’s identity crisis, causing more introspection and soul-searching. But having said that, it is interesting to note that — with all the

handwringing going on among conservatives (I’m as guilty as anyone) — the GOP’s electoral prospects in the near future look pretty promising. Despite all the problems, it’s entirely plausible that Republicans could control almost everything in a few short years. I wonder if we will start hearing ridiculous talk about a “permanent governing majority” if that happens?


Link – Mexico – Guest Workers Popular – Public

Guest worker programs are popular with the publicJohn S. Niblock, 5-1-2013, "Immigration plan includes guest worker program, key to floral trade," Produce News, http://www.producenews.com/index.php/floral/10209-immigration-plan-includes-guest-worker-program-key-to-floral-trade, accessed 5-10-2013After months of intense negotiations, a bipartisan group of eight U.S. Senators announced a sweeping immigration bill April

18 that includes a guest worker visa program vital to the floral and agricultural industries. The 844-page bill is designed to secure the border, allow foreign workers into the country while requiring employers to verify their legal status, and put 11 million people here illegally on a path to citizenship. The news conference unveiling the bill was attended by veterans of past failed efforts at reform, including a 2007 bill pushed by President George W.

Bush that collapsed due to a ferocious public backlash and opposition from special interest groups. At the April 18 event, united in support of the bill, were traditional opponents from big business and labor, conservative groups and liberal groups. Polls indicated majority public support for the idea.

Public now supports guest worker programsRon Elving, NPR senior Washington editor, 4-1-2013, “The Politics Of The Guest-Worker Program,” NPR, http://www.npr.org/2013/04/01/175938451/the-politics-of-the-guest-worker-program, accessed 5-10-2013CONAN: Now we hear that many Republicans are reconsidering their position on this and other aspects of immigration reform

after, well, last year's election when this played a big part in the whopping majority that President Obama and the Democrats enjoyed at the

polls. Is that same kind of pressure being felt at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce? ELVING: I believe that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is also capable of reading a public opinion poll. They know that the iron is hot. They know this is the time to go forward. They know this is the time to get a lot of the things they would like to get. And a great deal of the immigration impetus, if you will, the inspiration for why so many people come to this country, of course, is the open arms with which they're greeted by a lot of American industries that are looking for people, including people in low-skilled occupations, who are willing to work and willing to take on difficult conditions - one of the reasons that you see quite so many immigrant workers on construction sites and so on. And they're very eager to have them and they see this as an opportunity for their conditions to be good for them and good for business and they're eager to strike while the iron is hot.

Majority of the public supports expanded guest worker programDick Wadhams, 4-10-2013, "National Poll Shows Guest Workers Should Be Determined By Employer Demand, Not Government Quotas," Guest Worker Permit Red Card, http://redcardsolution.com/index.php/press-releases/235-national-poll-shows-guest-workers-should-be-determined-by-employer-demand-not-government-quotas, accessed 5-10-2013The number of guest workers allowed under any immigration reform bill should be determined by employer demand and not government quotas according to a new national poll released today. The poll was

conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and Ciruli and Associates, and sponsored by the Vernon K. Krieble Foundation. When asked whether private employers or the federal government should determine the number of guest worker permits

made available and distributed to non-citizens, 65 percent said employer demand and the need for guest workers to fill jobs that cannot be filled by American workers while 27 percent said the federal government should set quotas on the numbers of jobs

filled by guest workers. "It is very clear from this national poll that a workable, employer driven guest worker program is the cornerstone of any immigration reform," said Helen Krieble, founder and president of the Vernon K. Krieble Foundation. "We need to get this right with employers, not government quotas, determining the number of guest workers."


Link – Mexico – Guest Works Popular – Farm Lobby

Guest worker programs are popular with the farm lobbyAdrian Florido, 1-30-2013, "Farmers And Advocates Want Guest Worker Reform," Fronteras Desk, http://www.fronterasdesk.org/news/2013/jan/28/farmers-and-advocates-want-guest-worker-reform/, accessed 5-10-2013As talk of immigration reform heats up, overhauling the nation’s guest worker program as part of an immigration reform package has become a top priority for the nation’s farm lobby. They say making it easier to bring in foreign labor is more important than ever as domestic farm labor has become scarce in recent years. Noel Stehly said his organic farm is an example. It’s at the end of a winding country road an hour north of San Diego. It’s 200 acres, but his crops, mostly orange and avocado groves, stretch out in rows across just 110 of those acres. “I’ve had to cut back on what I plant in my fields. I’ve decided not to harvest some things because I couldn’t get the labor to do it,” he said. It’s been a common complaint among farmers for the last three to four years: The economy and tougher immigration enforcement have sapped the local workforce dry.

Farmers support guest worker programs – H-2A isn’t enough for themAdrian Florido, 1-30-2013, "Farmers And Advocates Want Guest Worker Reform," Fronteras Desk, http://www.fronterasdesk.org/news/2013/jan/28/farmers-and-advocates-want-guest-worker-reform/, accessed 5-10-2013But Stehly hasn’t even considered it. Instead, he relies on a core team of longtime employees to recruit friends and family for seasonal labor when it’s harvest time.

He said the H-2A program is cumbersome and expensive. “Sure the H-2A program says go ahead and bring farm workers in, but the H-2A program doesn’t work,” said Eric Larson, director of the San Diego County Farm Bureau, which represents San Diego farmers. To participate in H-2A, farmers have to prove to the Labor Department that they tried to hire U.S. workers but couldn’t. They have to transport guest workers from their home country, provide housing and three meals a day. They also have to show their guest workers won’t depress local wages, among other requirements. All this means

lots of money, paperwork and often, attorneys. “Consequently nobody uses it,” Larson said. “I think we have one farmer in San Diego County that uses the H-2A for about eight workers, where in reality we have 10,000-12,000 farm workers in San Diego County.” Nationally, farmers recruit about 55,000 H-2A workers

each year, mostly in Florida and the Midwest. But farmers want to make bringing in guest workers easier. What Larson wants is

simple: a card that would let Mexican farm workers cross the border when needed, and return home when farmers’ seasonal needs end.

Farm lobby can influence electionsIan T. Shearn, 7-16-2012, "Whose Side Is the American Farm Bureau On?," The Nation, http://www.thenation.com/article/168913/whose-side-american-farm-bureau, accessed 5-10-2013In rural areas, the Farm Bureau grooms compliant political candidates, mostly Republicans; it wields the power to dictate outcomes of legislative elections and appointments to powerful state agriculture committees. Then it influences which farm-related bills become law. Along the way, it has become a close second to Monsanto in lobby expenditures for agriculture-related issues, spending nearly $6 million in 2011 —all in the name of “farmers.” American Farm Bureau Federation president Bob Stallman was succinct, almost militant in his opening address last year at the group’s annual meeting: “We will not stand idly by while opponents of today’s American agriculture…try to drag us down…try to bury us in bureaucratic red tape and costly regulation—and try to destroy the most productive and efficient agricultural system in the world,” he said.


Link – Mexico – Immigration Reform Popular Public

Public supports immigration reformAmerica’s Voice, 1-23-2013, "Poll After Poll: American Public Wants Immigration Reform with Citizenship — Immigration Reform," http://americasvoiceonline.org/polls/poll-after-poll-american-public-wants-immigration-reform-with-citizenship/, accessed 5-10-2013A range of new polls offer fresh evidence that Americans want immigration reform with citizenship, while providing another reminder of the momentum behind immigration reform in 2013: Bipartisan Poll from Hart

Research and Public Opinion Strategies – Overwhelming Support for Citizenship and Likely Legislative Framework: As Eliseo Medina of SEIU writes in Huffington Post of the bipartisan

polling, “A solid 77 percent of voters favor a full package of immigration reforms, including a roadmap to citizenship, according to a poll of 1,000 voters conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a Republican polling firm, and Hart Research Associates, a Democratic firm. The poll — sponsored by Service Employees

International Union, America’s Voice Education Fund, and National Immigration Forum — confirms our strong belief that fixing the broken immigration system is not just a Latino priority, but also a high priority for the American people. A long-lasting program with accountability and a path to citizenship is what voters want; and it is not the third rail of politics that politicians have long feared.” The poll asked directly about support for creating a path to full citizenship for immigrants versus temporary status, finding that a whopping 87% of Americans said “it would be better to give people a chance to eventually earn citizenship at some point after they register for legal status, pass a background check, learn English, and pay taxes,” while just 7% said “they should be allowed to

qualify for legal status and work in the United States but should never be given the chance to earn citizenship.” Support for citizenship was strong across party lines, with 83% of Republicans, 91% of Democrats, and 82% of Independents choosing full integration.

Public supports immigration reform and citizenshipAmerica’s Voice, 1-23-2013, "Poll After Poll: American Public Wants Immigration Reform with Citizenship — Immigration Reform," http://americasvoiceonline.org/polls/poll-after-poll-american-public-wants-immigration-reform-with-citizenship/, accessed 5-10-2013CNN/ORC International – Majority Backs Legalization as Government’s Main Focus, Debate Trending in Positive Direction for Reform: New polling from CNN/ORC International also finds majority support for legalization, as well as further evidence that the debate is trending in a positive direction for the reform effort. As CNN’s poll recap notes, “By a 53%-43% margin, people questioned in the poll say that main focus of the federal government should be on developing a plan that would allow undocumented immigrants to become legal residents, rather than deporting them. That’s a switch from 2011, when by a 55%-42% margin, Americans said that deporting undocumented residents and stopping more of them from coming into the country should be the main focus of U.S policy on illegal immigration.” Additionally, the New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight.com blog highlighted

four other recent polls exploring immigration and citizenship questions, finding that support for reform and earned citizenship – asked in different ways in each poll – was significantly higher than the enforcement-only alternatives in an ABC News/Washington

Post poll, a Fox News poll, a CBS News poll, and a United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection poll. According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice Education Fund, “The American public – Democrats and Republicans alike – is ready for immigration reform that includes citizenship for the 11 million undocumented Americans. Now it’s time for Republicans who may have been fearful of backlash in the past to realize that there is substantial and growing support for enacting broad immigration reform in 2013.”

The public supports immigration reformFederation for American Immigration Reform, 2013, "Public Opinion Polls on Immigration," http://www.fairus.org/facts/public-opinion, accessed 5-10-2013The general public overwhelmingly favors immigration reform. Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws. 59% of likely voters believe that the “policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration.” Only 23% disagree (Rasmussen, September 2011). 72% of likely voters believe parents should be required to prove they are legal residents when registering their child for public school; only 21% oppose such a requirement. Only 32% believe that children of illegal aliens should be allowed to attend public school in the U.S., opposed to 53% who disagree (Rasmussen, August 2011). 81% of likely voters oppose granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens in their state, with 12% supporting tuition breaks for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2011). 66% of likely voters say that gaining control of the border is more important than amnesty for illegal aliens. Only 27% believe amnesty is more important (Rasmussen, July 2011). 43% of Americans believe that immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, 35% believe that it should be remain at its present level, while only 18% believe that it should be increased (Gallup, June 2011). 60% of likely voters believe that the "policies and practices" of the federal government encourages illegal immigration (Rasmussen, May 2011).


Link – Cuba – Engagement Popular With Public

Majority of the public supports engaging CubaScott Stern, 2-10-2012, "STERN: Lift the Cuba embargo," Yale Daily News, http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2012/02/10/stern-lift-the-cuba-embargo/, accessed 5-10-2013There is, however, hope. Recent public opinion polls show an overwhelming majority of Americans support at least re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba. President Obama has relaxed some of the harsh travel restrictions against Cuba and shown signs of favoring the normalization of relations there as well. Cuba, too, has shown a willingness to change, highlighted by its recent legalization of the private sale of real estate. It is time for the embargo to end.

Public thinks we need a new approach to CubaWorld Public Opinion, 4-14-2009, “Americans Favor New Approach to Cuba: Lift the Travel Ban, Establish Diplomatic Relations,” http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/600.php, accessed 5-10-2013A majority of Americans feel that it is time to try a new approach to Cuba, according to a national poll by WorldPublicOpinion.org. More specifically, the public favors lifting the ban on travel to Cuba for Americans and re-establishing diplomatic relations as well as other changes. By a wide margin the American public believes that increasing trade and travel will lead Cuba to become more open and democratic rather than having the effect of strengthening the Communist regime. These are among the findings of a new national poll of Americans on the subject of Cuba policy conducted March 25 - April 6, 2009 among 765 adults (margin of error +/- 3.7 percentage points).

Public supports engagement with CubaWorld Public Opinion, 4-14-2009, “Americans Favor New Approach to Cuba: Lift the Travel Ban, Establish Diplomatic Relations,” http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/600.php, accessed 5-10-2013Americans likewise favor re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba by a clear majority - 69 percent favor, only 28 percent are opposed. All partisan groups support re-establishing diplomatic relations, though Democrats do so in larger numbers (82%) than Republicans (57%) or independents (58%). To understand trends in American opinion, the diplomatic relations question was drawn from a question used by the Gallup organization in 2002, 04, 06, and 08. Over this period, the proportion of Americans which favors re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba has increased from 55% (2002, 2004), to 67% in 2006, 61% in 2008 and currently 69%. The Program on International Policy Attitudes asked a quite similar question in 1998 and found that 56% of Americans supported re-establishing relations. Other organizations (CNN, Associated Press) have also reported that a majority of Americans support diplomatic relations with Cuba, and the trend favoring diplomatic relations seems to be increasing.


Link – Cuba – Popular With Cuban-Americans

Even Cuban Americans now support lifting the embargoReuters, 12-3-2008, "Cuban-American support for embargo fading: poll," http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/12/03/us-usa-cuba-poll-idUSTRE4B273S20081203, accessed 5-10-2013In a dramatic shift, a new poll shows most Cuban-Americans in Florida favor lifting the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba. Fifty-five percent of participants in the poll, which signals hope for better U.S.-Cuba relations, said they oppose continuing the embargo that the United States has maintained against the communist-ruled island for nearly five decades. The poll was conducted by Florida International University shortly after the U.S. presidential election and marks the first, since it began surveying attitudes toward Cuba in 1991, in which a majority of Cuban-Americans opposed the

trade ban. In an FIU poll last year, only 42 percent of respondents in the Miami-Dade County area, the traditional heartland of exile opposition to Fidel Castro, said they opposed continuing the embargo.

Times have changed – Cuban Americans now support engagement with CubaReuters, 12-3-2008, "Cuban-American support for embargo fading: poll," http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/12/03/us-usa-cuba-poll-idUSTRE4B273S20081203, accessed 5-10-2013Miami's 650,000 Cuban exiles account for more than a quarter of the population of the greater Miami area, making the city a bastion of staunch anti-Castro sentiment that has long wielded a disproportionate influence over U.S. policy toward Cuba . The hard-liners are fading in the face of a changing exile community, however, and analysts say younger Cuban-Americans, in

particular, are more concerned with domestic issues like the U.S. economy than they are with the political situation in Cuba. "The (poll) result demonstrates a continuing shift in attitudes by Cuban-Americans and reflects a generational rift between those Cuban-Americans who arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s and those who came to the U.S. in the 1980s or later," FIU said in a statement. U.S. President-elect Barack Obama has stopped short of saying he supports lifting the embargo against Cuba, which Washington has repeatedly vowed to enforce until Cuba's government releases political prisoners, grants basic freedoms and schedules internationally monitored elections. But Obama has said he would end the restrictions on travel to Cuba by Cuban-Americans imposed by President George W. Bush to toughen the embargo in 2004, and 66 percent of those polled by FIU said they support ending the travel restrictions too. Obama

has also said he favors talks or direct diplomacy with the new Cuban government of President Raul Castro, who formally took over from his ailing brother earlier this year. Sixty-five percent of participants in the FIU survey said they favored reestablishing U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba, up from 57 percent a year earlier.

Cuban Americans won’t punish politicians for the planChristine Armario, 12-9-2012, “Obama maintains standing with Cuban-Americans,” AP, http://2thinkgood.com/2012/12/09/what-cuban-american-views-on-the-embargo-and-global-warming-have-in-common/, accessed 5-10-2013The victories by supporters of looser restrictions on Cuba travel illustrate changing attitudes of Americans who hail from the island nation: They seem to be less resistant to politicians who promote travel to Cuba and more focused on more traditional American concerns such as the economy, rather than Cuba policy. Those shifting attitudes could have implications for U.S. policy toward Cuba in the next four years, as well as how presidential candidates and politicians approach Cuban-Americans in Florida, an important swing state, in the future. There are plenty of other impediments, chiefly the continued

detention of U.S. contractor Alan Gross by the Cuban government, which could delay a further easing of restrictions with Cuba. Gross was arrested in 2009 while working as part of a democracy-building program; he’s now serving a 15-year prison term for bringing restricted

communications equipment into Cuba. But analysts argue that the political environment is ripe for reducing restrictions on the Cuba travel policy, and they point to both the election outcome and changes on Capitol Hill among Florida’s Cuban-American delegation. “The fact the president did extremely well among Cuban-Americans in the election … should give him a good indication that the Cuban-American community supports the type of measures that he’s enacted and would like to see additional steps taken ,” said Tomas Bilbao, executive director of the nonpartisan Cuba Study Group.

He served in former President George W. Bush’s administration in the Department of Housing and Urban Development.


Coattails Key Midterms

Obama’s popularity is key to the midterms – Dems can still winBethany Blankley, Christian Post, 4-24-2013, "8 US Senators Retiring: 2014 Mid-Term Election Could Be Toss-Up," http://www.christianpost.com/news/8-us-senators-retiring-2014-mid-term-election-could-be-toss-up-94651/, accessed 5-10-2013Nathan Gonzales, deputy editor of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report said, "There are some vulnerabilities on the Democratic side, but a lot of it depends on how popular the president is in the midterms and the quality of the Republican [candidates]." Matt Canter, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) communications director, told CNN that Democrats have proven that they "can win in red states, we can overcome steep spending deficits, and we can defy the odds even when the map is tilted against us. Remember only two Democratic incumbents have lost re-election in eight years."

Obama’s popularity is key to Democrats chances – only high approval rating can cause Democratic gainsSean Trende, 5-2-2013, "Midterms Forecast: No Wave, Just Modest Gains," Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/02/midterms_forecast_no_wave_just_modest_gains_118213.html, accessed 5-10-2013Josh Kraushaar joked in 2011 that the president’s job approval was right at the Mendoza Line, separating acceptable mediocrity from unacceptable mediocrity. That’s about where it is now. If he stays at this level, it will probably be a quiet election night. But if he slides much more, the Democrats start to get into really problematic territory. Note also that, historically speaking, the president’s party has only gained seats when his job approval is above 60 percent. Reaching that level is not impossible by any stretch, but it’s a long haul from where we are today.

Low Obama popularity is undermining democrats in the midterm nowKarl Rove, Bush’s election advisor, 4-10-2013, "Karl Rove: Obama Gears Up to 'Flip the House' in 2014," WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324695104578414601489108398.html, accessed 5-10-2013To flip the House, Democrats will first focus on the 16 Republican congressmen whose districts were carried by Mr. Obama. But in 11 of these districts, Mr. Obama received less than 52%; and in four, less than 50%. Nor is Mr. Obama likely to be much more popular by Election Day 2014. His Gallup job-approval rating this week was 49%; Mr. Clinton's was 59% at this point in 1997 and 63% by the 1998 midterms. FDR's was 52% before his second midterms in 1938 when Democrats lost 71 seats. It is much more probable that Democrats will lose seats than "flip" the House in 2014. There are nine vulnerable Democratic congressmen whose districts were carried by Mitt Romney last fall. Six won with less than 51%; four with 50% or less.


Turnout Key Midterms

Turnout is key to the midtermsExaminer, 3-14-2013, Political News Site, “Democrats look stronger going into the 2014 midterm elections”, http://www.examiner.com/article/democrats-look-stronger-going-into-the-2014-midterm-elections, accessed 5-10-2013The 2012 exit polls show the electorate was made up of 38 percent Democrats, 32 percent Republicans, and 29 percent independents and other voters. The Democratic Party, and especially the president's supporters through Organizing for Action, are strongly focusing on the goal of increasing turnout for 2014 and helping Democrats regain control of Congress. At the same time, we are not seeing the degree of enthusiasm and organizing of the Tea Party movement like we saw 4 years ago at this time. Turnout is always lower, in general, in midterm elections compared to

elections held during presidential years. It would not be surprising to see significantly low turnout among the bases of both

parties, and the actual electorate in 2014 to be made up of approximately four or five percent more Democrats than Republicans. This would be bad news for Republicans, who rode an even partisan mix of Democrats to Republicans in the 2010 midterm election to regain control of Congress and win a majority of governorships.Democrats might regain a majority of those state governorships next year while retaining control of the United States Senate and making gains in the Congress. The recruiting of candidates to challenge incumbent Republican members of Congress, and the degree Democrats are effective in getting their voters to the polls next year will determine whether they can take control of Congress.

Turnout is key to Democratic chances in the midtermsPage Gardner And Celinda Lake, 4-7-2013, "Opinion: Despite 'autopsy,' GOP could have revival in 2014," POLITICO, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/despite-autopsy-gop-could-have-revival-in-2014-89714.html, accessed 5-10-2013The 2014 elections, then, present a challenge for both parties. If members of the RAE turn out in force in 2014, Republicans risk losing the House and not making gains in the Senate. But if 2014 mirrors 2010, Democrats could lose the Senate and key statewide races, too. The lesson for Democrats is not to count on demographic destiny just yet. The 2014 election could be the last hurrah of the “old” traditional electorate. Democrats and progressives must organize today to prevent that outcome. The path forward for Republicans is clear, too. They will ignore the needs of unmarried women, minorities and young voters at their own peril.

Democratic success at boosting turnout can win the midtermsKarl Rove, Bush’s election advisor, 4-10-2013, "Karl Rove: Obama Gears Up to 'Flip the House' in 2014," WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324695104578414601489108398.html, accessed 5-10-2013Team Obama knows its chances of flipping the House are small. But they will do two things that—if left unchecked—could result in more Democratic victories than otherwise expected. The president's campaign has now morphed into a grass-roots lobbying group called "Organizing for Action" that's trying to energize Mr. Obama's supporters over gun control, equal pay, abortion and gay marriage. OFA says it won't be involved directly in elections, but information about its contacts can be transferred to the Democratic National Committee to be used to drive up turnout among voters who might otherwise stay home. Mr. Obama will also raise lots of campaign funds, having already agreed to headline an unprecedented eight fundraisers this year for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He's likely to do even more for Democrat candidates next year.


Latinos Key Midterms

Latino turnout is key to the midtermsKirk Clay, former National Director for the NAACP, senior advisor at PowerPAC, 4-12-2013, "midterm elections," http://kirkclay.com/tag/midterm-elections/, accessed 5-10-2013The Latino community came out in extraordinary numbers for the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform March.” It was also remarkable to see so many progressive whites and People of Color (POC) exercising their First Amendment right. As Reverend Joseph E. Lowery would say “You could almost see America expand the franchise before your eyes.”

People of all races and religions came from every corner of this nation to give their time, talent, and resources for a noble cause – helping their neighbor. During the March’s aftermath, this same coalition will undoubtedly come together to push through commonsense, compassionate, and comprehensive immigration reform. After that, they will stay together to fight future issues like

disenfranchisement, voting rights retrogression, racial profiling, and discriminatory employment practices. Because midterm elections are influential in underlining national issues, 2014 will present a new opportunity for this rising electorate to vote their interest. The

month of March has affected Washington in a big way, bringing even more electoral momentum to an already high powered movement. As

we saw in 2012, enthusiasm levels in communities of color tend to drive political activity at the state and local levels too. The next election will probably be a deliberate continuation of this trend . Just like the righteous issues of the past,

immigration reform may be the flame that ignites massive voter registration and epic midterm turnout.

Our link is unique – minority turnout will be low in the midterms nowHope Yen, 4-28-2013, "2012 Election A Historic Milestone For Black Voters," Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/28/black-voter-turnout-2012-election_n_3173673.html, accessed 5-10-2013Even with demographics seeming to favor Democrats in the long term, it's unclear whether Obama's coalition will hold if blacks or younger voters become less motivated to vote or decide to switch parties. Minority turnout tends to drop in midterm congressional elections, contributing to larger GOP victories as happened in 2010, when House control flipped to Republicans . The economy and policy matter. Exit polling shows that even with Obama's re-

election, voter support for a government that does more to solve problems declined from 51 percent in 2008 to 43 percent last year, bolstering the view among Republicans that their core principles of reducing government are sound. The party's "Growth and Opportunity Project" report

released last month by national leaders suggests that Latinos and Asians could become more receptive to GOP policies once comprehensive immigration legislation is passed.

Minority turnout in the midterm could swing the election democraticJames King, 4-15-2013, "Will There Be Another Republican Revival in 2014?," campusprogress.org, http://campusprogress.org/articles/will_there_be_another_republican_revival_in_2014/, accessed 5-10-2013Last month, the Republican National Committee released its autopsy of the 2012 election, stating Republicans “will lose future elections” if they aren't able to attract more women and minority voters. There's often a silver lining for the GOP in midterm elections, though. The electorate for midterms tends to be older, whiter and more conservative, which is essentially the GOP’s core constituency. Though the Democrats performed very well in the 2008 and 2012 elections, excitement was built off of President Obama, and when he wasn't on the ticket in previous midterms, the party suffered. This was apparent in the 2010 midterm elections, which took away Democrat control of the House and whittled down its numbers in the Senate. President Obama famously called the election a “shellacking.” It would seem this pattern could repeat in 2014, except that the Republicans elected in 2010 have pushed a legislative agenda that has angered many citizens,

leaving most Republican governors with low approval ratings. That could mean the "rising American electorate"—which consists of unmarried women, African-Americans, Latinos, other citizens of color, and young people ages 18-29—that turned out in droves to elect Obama twice, could break the mold and show up for midterms next year.


Midterms Not Too Far Off

It’s not too soon to predict the Midterms – our coattails links are still trueLara Brown, 4-10-2013, "2014 Will Be About Obama," USNWR, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/lara-brown/2013/04/10/barack-obama-will-be-on-the-ballot-in-2014, accessed 5-10-2013Independent political analyst Charlie Cook says it's too soon to know what "theme" will come to define the 2014 midterm elections. Describing the "two competing theories" speeding around the Beltway, he explains that either the Republican "brand" problems will continue to drag down GOP candidates with key segments of the electorate, or the Affordable Care Act's new requirements will work to undermine Democratic

candidates. But midterm elections aren't about themes. They're about presidents—their coattails in the previous election, their current popularity, and their party's in-power status. Despite the fact that his name won't be printed at the top of any Democratic ticket, President Barack Obama will be on every voter's ballot in 2014 and his presence will likely hurt his party. Even though political scientists argue over how to interpret and forecast these electoral outcomes, all acknowledge one persistent pattern : Since

1934, the president's party almost always loses House seats and frequently loses Senate seats in the midterm elections. In

sum, the only real question about 2014 is how much damage will the Democrats sustain?

Not too far off – parties are already doing ad buysAndrew Ian Dodge, 4-12-2013, "Three 2014 Races That Are Already Kicking Off," PolicyMic, http://www.policymic.com/articles/33433/midterm-elections-2014-three-races-that-are-already-kicking-off, accessed 5-10-2013We are just barely into the spring of 2013, and the political parties are already at it for 2014. Obviously buoyed by the current popularity ranking of Congress, both sides are throwing money at some up for "up for grab" seats. The National Republican Congressional Committee is already making an ad buy in seats where they believe the Democrat is vulnerable. While the TV stations in those areas are probably jumping for joy at the surprise injection of advertising cash, citizens might not be so keen. No doubt many TV viewers would welcome a cockroach in the kitchen over this development.

Not too far off – both parties already campaigningJessica Taylor, Hardball, 5-6-2013, "10 House seats Dems, GOP will spar over in 2014," MSNBC, http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/06/10-house-seats-dems-gop-will-spar-over-in-2014/, accessed 5-10-2013Democrats have an uphill task to gain back control of the House, and the shrinking competitive battlefield has made it even more difficult to flip the 17 seats they need to regain a majority–even if they are successful in the South Carolina’s 1st District special election tomorrow. With recruitment and fundraising in full swing, both parties are keeping an eye on more than 50 competitive congressional seats though, and hope to expand the narrow playing field in the coming months. But there are some top races both sides know they have their best chance at–and the other side must play their best defense.


Internal Link – GOP Win Stops Obama Agenda

Loss in the midterms wrecks Obama’s whole agendaJ.T. Young, served in the Department of Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget, 4-16-2013, "It's About the Legacy, Not the House," American Spectator, http://spectator.org/archives/2013/04/16/its-about-the-legacy-not-the-h/print, accessed 5-10-2013Obama’s not trying to regain Congress, he’s attempting to retain his legacy. Despite the much-reported spin about White House sights being set on retaking control of the House in 2014, it is really aiming at not replaying 2010’s devastating defeat. Obama’s first midterm loss stopped his agenda cold; a 2014 one could hurl it into reverse — and that’s not the way Obama wants to leave office and enter history.

Midterm loss in 2014 would kill Obama’s domestic agendaJ.T. Young, served in the Department of Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget, 4-16-2013, "It's About the Legacy, Not the House," American Spectator, http://spectator.org/archives/2013/04/16/its-about-the-legacy-not-the-h/print, accessed 5-10-2013That midterm loss’s consequences have cost Obama. Yes, he won reelection (by a smaller margin), but all the big parts of his agenda — such as Obamacare and financial regulation — came before his midterm defeat. Since then, his agenda has been stalemated without a House majority to advance it or sufficient Senate votes to break Republican filibusters. However, stalemate could look good compared to what could come from a 2010 replay. Another resounding Republican victory, especially if it flipped control of the Senate, would more than embolden opposition. It would mandate it. In 2016, Republicans will be seeking to regain the White House. They can’t do that without making a case against the current occupant. Right now, they have two big cards to play: the economy and the budget. However, these haven’t yet made a winning hand. Republicans need more and Congress is just the place to get it. Hearings and tough legislation are just two ways they could reshape Washington’s agenda to Obama’s detriment.

GOP winning the midterms crushes Obama’s agendaPaul Brandus, 5-3-2013, "Obama doesn't have a 'juice' problem. He has a Republican problem, " Yahoo! News, http://news.yahoo.com/obama-doesnt-juice-problem-republican-problem-094000285.html, accessed 5-10-2013In fact, the Kentucky senator has less incentive to deal now then ever before, because there's a good chance that Republicans will win the Senate next year. The Senate is 54-45 in favor of Democrats now (one independent, Bernie Sanders, caucuses with Democrats). But of the 35 Senate seats up for grabs in November 2014, 21 are held by Democrats, including several long-timers who are retiring. No sitting president's party has ever gained seats in the midterm of a second term, and if the GOP wins the Senate, and hangs onto the House (a good bet), the president would be completely shut out on Capitol Hill — and the lamest of ducks.


Ext – Democrat Win = Carbon Tax

GOP maintaining the house is key to stop Obama’s climate agendaDavid Roberts, 7-26-2012, “Obama could make climate progress internationally even if he’s hobbled at home”, Grist Magazine, http://grist.org/climate-policy/obama-could-make-climate-progress-internationally-even-if-hes-hobbled-at-home/, accessed 5-10-2013What are the possibilities and prospects for action on climate change if Barack Obama is reelected? Real talk:

Obama will get very little done on climate or energy domestically, especially if Republicans keep the House, most especially if they win the Senate too. The reasons are drearily familiar: deep polarization, corporate influence, and the 60-vote threshold in the Senate. Unless some large and unanticipated exogenous force knocks the system out of equilibrium, we can expect more of what the first term delivered, which is modest (read: woefully insufficient) progress on efficiency and clean energy.

Democratic win in the midterm lets Obama push gun control, immigration reform and climate change policiesKarl Rove, Bush’s election advisor, 4-10-2013, "Karl Rove: Obama Gears Up to 'Flip the House' in 2014," WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324695104578414601489108398.html, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama likes pretending he floats above politics. In fact, he is the most compulsively partisan president in modern times. Everything he says and does is better understood through a partisan lens. So consider the recent Washington Post article in which Scott Wilson and Philip Rucker reported Mr. Obama wants to "cement his legacy" by working "to flip the Republican-held House back to Democratic control" so he can then "push forward with a progressive agenda on gun control, immigration, climate change and the economy during his final two years in office."

Unchecked Obama agenda would result in a carbon taxAlan Caruba, 3-26-2013, "Warning Signs: A Carbon Tax Would Destroy America," Warning Signs, http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-carbon-tax-would-destroy-america.html, accessed 5-10-2013Marlo Lewis is a senior fellow in energy and environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. During the 2012 campaign, he described a carbon tax as “political poison for the Republican Party.” Mitt Romney opposed it, but ‘the big attraction of carbon taxes these days is not as a global warming policy but as a revenue enhancer. In both parties, deficit hawks and big spenders (often the same individuals) are flailing for ways to boost federal revenue.” That is precisely the problem afflicting a nation whose Congress and President could not find a reason to cut anything from the federal budget. The result was the “sequestration” that imposed cuts neither party could agree upon. In a Fox News article, “Here comes Team Obama’s carbon tax”. Phil Kerpen, president of American Commitment and author of “Democracy Denied” reported that “The Treasury Department’s Office of Environment and Energy has finally begun to turn over documents about its preparations for a carbon tax in response to transparency warrior Chris Horner’s Freedom of Information Act request. The documents provide solid evidence that the Obama administration and its allies in Congress have every intention of implementing a carbon tax if we fail to stop them.” President Obama’s nominee to be the next Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz, is on record wanting to double or triple the cost of energy, much as his predecessor wanted.


Carbon Tax Bad – Economy

Carbon tax wrecks the econ and competitivenessAlan Caruba, 3-26-2013, "Warning Signs: A Carbon Tax Would Destroy America," Warning Signs, http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-carbon-tax-would-destroy-america.html, accessed 5-10-2013Driessen points out that “Hydrocarbons (coal, oil, and natural gas) provide over 83% of all the energy that powers America. A carbon tax would put a hefty surcharge on everything we make, grow, ship, eat, and do. It would put the federal government in control of, not just one-sixth of the economy, as under Obamacare, but 100% of our economy and lives. It would make the United States increasingly less productive, less competitive globally, less able to provide opportunities for our children.” The case for a carbon tax simply doesn’t exist, but there are powerful forces in Congress and the support of the White House to impose such a tax. The power of the environmental movement and its long history of lies about the climate, primarily the global warming

hoax, cannot be dismissed or ignored. In Australia, “The Australian Securities & Investments Commission reports there were 10,632 company collapses for the 12 months to March 1—averaging 886 a month—with the number of firms being placed in administration more than 12 percent higher than during the global financial crisis.” It represents “a record high…led by widespread failures in manufacturing and construction, which accounted for almost one-fifth of collapses.” Greg Evans, the chief economic economist for the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry,

said that “It defies logic to adopt a policy which even the Treasury acknowledges will lower our standards of living and be harmful to national productivity.” Adding to Australia’s struggling companies, the carbon tax and one on mining were showing up as “sovereign issues” in discussions with foreign investors.”

Who would want to invest in Australia if these two taxes were destroying the economic strength of the nation?

Carbon tax would totally wreck the economyAlan Caruba, 3-26-2013, "Warning Signs: A Carbon Tax Would Destroy America," Warning Signs, http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-carbon-tax-would-destroy-america.html, accessed 5-10-2013A carbon tax, if enacted, would totally undermine a nation that has a debt climbing toward $17 trillion and millions unemployed in an economy that is struggling to inch its way out of the depths of the financial crisis. If you wanted to destroy America, you could do it with a carbon tax. Australia is reeling from the cost to its economy and the higher energy costs its people are paying. We don’t want that here.

Carbon tax kills the manufacturing sectorDerrick Morgan, 8-21-2012, "A Carbon Tax Would Harm U.S. Competitiveness and Low-Income Americans Without Helping the Environment," Heritage Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/08/a-carbon-tax-would-harm-us-competitiveness-and-low-income-americans-without-helping-the-environment, accessed 5-10-2013While some may believe that the United States is a post-industrial power, it is still the world’s top manufacturer[25] (although China is gaining),

with manufacturing accounting for 12.2 percent of U.S. GDP.[26] Proponents of cap-and-trade acknowledged that a price on GHG emissions would negatively affect domestic manufacturing unless the cost was fully and permanently offset. Additionally, to offset the impact on manufacturing fully and permanently would be to negate the desired environmental impact of the policy (make it more expensive to emit GHGs and therefore reduce GHGs). To

make up for the impact on manufacturers, the Waxman–Markey cap-and-trade bill gave temporary free allowances to manufacturers to ease the impact of the cap on emissions. Nearly all manufacturers use energy, and for those that emit greenhouse gases in significant quantities, such as

steelmakers, a tax on a major input would be devastating. Moreover, a tax on carbon would also affect those who use carbon-intensive fuels for feedstocks, as is the case in the chemical and fertilizer industry. The recent natural gas boom is

encouraging more investment in these industries,[27] but a carbon tax would make such investments much less appealing.


Carbon Tax Bad – AT: Solves Warming

Carbon tax doesn’t solve emissionsKenneth Green, resident scholar at AEI, 7-13-2012, “Dissecting the Carbon Tax”, American Enterprise Inst., http://www.american.com/archive/2012/july/dissecting-the-carbon-tax, accessed 5-10-2013No gain — There would be virtually no environmental benefits to unilateral greenhouse gas emission reductions by developed countries (whose GHG levels are already flat and slowly declining), while developing countries are pouring out virtually every kind of pollutant with joyous abandon. Some argue that we'll get "co-

benefits" from reducing other pollutants, such as particulates. Well, we already have highly effective (if economically damaging) regulations for conventional pollutants. If

they're not working, they should be fixed. Establishing a new set of controls based on ancillary benefits is not simply wasteful, it's dishonest.¶ A carbon tax would also have limited impact: If $4-per-gallon gas won't reduce consumer demand, how is adding another 10 cents, 50 cents, or dollar going to do so? Low carbon taxes won't have a significant effect, and high carbon taxes won't retain political support long enough to provide environmental benefits. That's not surprising: Houses, cars, and energy-consuming appliances are long-term investments that can't easily be changed when fuel prices fluctuate. Jobs are also not abandoned lightly, so commuting distances aren't easily adjusted.

Carbon tax can’t solve internationallyIlya Leybovich, 3-17-2009, NewsWeek, http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/2009/03/17/carbon-tax-versus-cap-and-trade-system-debate-heats-up/, accessed 5-10-2013“The taxpayers may pass the cost of the tax on down the chain of purchasers, and the behavioral effect of the tax will depend on how the price signals influence decisions by the taxpayers and subsequent purchasers, but the mechanism itself is implemented directly just between taxpayers and the IRS,” says Janet Milne in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Concerns remain about whether a carbon tax would actually

reduce emissions or if companies would simply pay the tax and continue to produce the same amount of carbon dioxide. However, as Gregg Easterbrook notes, “[t]his is possible, but unlikely: experience shows that individuals and firms change behavior to reduce taxation .” According to carbon tax proponent the Carbon Tax Center, a first-year tax rate of $15 per ton

of carbon dioxide coupled with incremental rate increases of $10 per ton each year would lower emissions to 25 percent below 2005 levels by 2022. These figures reflect a new carbon tax bill recently introduced to Congress. However, many people have voiced serious doubts about the feasibility of a carbon tax program. “If you were a pure economist, the most logical thing is taxation. It is the simplest. But

‘taxation’ is a word that makes people choke in normal times. And these are not normal times,” the director of the United Nations’ climate change program recently told the

New York Times. In addition to the widespread reluctance for additional taxation (in the midst of a recession, no less), critics argue that a carbon tax would not foster international participation due to the difficulty of coordinating global taxation efforts. For a carbon tax to work , Wagner and

Keohane argue, “it would be necessary to achieve a harmonized tax structure across countries.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/us/politics/07carbon.html

http://www.carbontax.org/blogarchives/2009/03/06/new-larson-bill-raises-the-bar-for-congressional-climate-action/

http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/roundtables/carbon-tax-vs-cap-and-trade

http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/2009/03/17/carbon-tax-versus-cap-and-trade-system-debate-heats-up/

http://news.thomasnet.com/IMT/2009/03/17/carbon-tax-versus-cap-and-trade-system-debate-heats-up/


Carbon Tax Bad – AT: Solves Warming Cont…

Carbon tax won’t workDevon Swezey, 9-20-2011, “The Carbon Tax, Then and Now,” Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2011/09/20/the-carbon-tax-then-and-now/, accessed 5-10-20131. Other countries won’t follow suit and then we are doing something with almost zero effectiveness. 2.

It may push dirty industries to less well regulated countries and make the overall problem somewhat worse. 3. There is Jim Manzi’s point that Europe has stiff carbon taxes, and is a large market, but they have not seen a major burst of innovation, just a lot of conservation and some substitution, no game changers. Denmark remains far more dependent on fossil fuels than most people realize and for all their efforts they’ve done no better than stop the growth of carbon emissions; see Robert Bryce’s Power Hungry, which is in any case a useful contrarian book for considering this topic. 4. Especially for large segments of the transportation sector, there simply aren’t plausible substitutes for carbon on the horizon. 5. A tax on energy is a sectoral tax on the relatively productive sector of the economy — making stuff — and it will shift more talent into finance and other less productive sectors. 6. Oil in particular will become so expensive in any case that a politically plausible tax won’t add much value

(careful readers will note that this argument is in tension with some of those listed above). 7. A carbon tax won’t work its magic until significant parts of the energy and alternative energy sector are deregulated. No more NIMBY! But in the meantime perhaps we can’t proceed with the tax and expect to get anywhere. Had we had today’s level of regulation and litigation from the get-go, we never could have built today’s energy infrastructure, which I find a deeply troubling point. 8. A somewhat non-economic argument is to point out the regressive nature of a carbon tax. 9. Jim Hamilton’s work suggests that oil price shocks have nastier economic consequences than many people realize. 9b. A more prosperous economy may, for political and

budgetary reasons, lead to more subsidies for alternative energy, and those subsidies may do more good than would the tax. Maybe we won’t adopt green energy until it’s really quite cheap, in which case let’s just focus on the subsidies. 10.

The actual application of such a tax will involve lots of rent-seeking, privileges, exemptions, inefficiencies, and regulatory arbitrage.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2011/09/20/the-carbon-tax-then-and-now/


GOP Win Good – Gun Control Bad Impact

Democratic win in the midterms would cause gun control – GOP win kills itJames Dao, 5-4-2013, "N.R.A. Officials Issue Rallying Cry for Midterm Elections," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/us/we-will-never-surrender-our-guns-never-lapierre-tells-nra-members.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 5-10-2013In speech after speech at the National Rifle Association’s annual convention here this weekend, its top leaders and political allies blasted President Obama and other gun control advocates, warned against “all-out, historic attacks” on the constitutional right to possess firearms, and issued a rallying cry to members to become a political force in next year’s midterm elections and the 2016 presidential race. “We are in the midst of a once-in-a-generation fight for everything we care about,” Wayne R. LaPierre, the association’s executive vice president and principal spokesman, told a cheering throng of members at the convention center here on Saturday. “We have a chance to secure our freedom for a generation, or to lose it forever.” “We must remain vigilant, ever resolute, and steadfastly growing and preparing for the even more critical battles that loom before us,” he said. Praising the N.R.A.’s membership for helping defeat a bipartisan Senate proposal to expand background checks for gun buyers last month, Mr. LaPierre said that the Senate fight had

helped swell the association’s membership to a record five million people. Not surprisingly, perhaps, the convention theme was “Stand and Fight,” and much of the fight was directed toward Mr. Obama, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York and those Mr. LaPierre described as their supporters in the “media elite” who were “conspiring right now, regrouping, planning, organizing” to exploit “the next horrific crime.” The Senate bill “wouldn’t have prevented Newtown, couldn’t have prevented Tucson or Aurora and won’t prevent the next tragedy,” he said. Later on, he added the Boston Marathon bombings to

bolster his position.“How many Bostonians wished they had a gun two weeks ago?” Mr. LaPierre said. “How many other Americans now ponder that life-or-death question?” Mr. LaPierre and James W. Porter II, who was

expected to be named president by the board of directors on Monday, succeeding David Keene, both urged N.R.A. members to become active in the 2014 midterm elections — which Mr. Porter described as more important than last year’s presidential election — and then

the 2016 presidential race. “We do that and Obama can be stopped,” Mr. Porter said.

Gun control is an unacceptable intrusion on personal libertyDaniel McCarthy, 8-8-2012, “Gun Control and Civil Liberties,” American Conservative, http://www.theamericanconservative.com/gun-control-and-civil-liberties/, da 12-30-2012Hogwash. It might save lives at the margin, too, if every American riding in an automobile were required to wear a helmet, but even Michael Bloomberg isn’t contemplating that. Risk is a corollary of freedom, and while there may be irresistible political pressure to compromise liberty when there are enormous risks to the general public, it’s with good reason that there is little constituency for such things otherwise — unless, that is, dangers are magnified out proportion by ideologues and ill-premised fears are indulged by people who wish to wallow in timidity or paranoia. The next time a liberal wants to restrict gun ownership, he should stop to think whether he would restrict the rights of minorities on such “better safe than

sorry” grounds. Right-wingers agitated about Sharia likewise ought to ponder whether they would agree to restrictions on their own Second Amendment rights under the same precautionary pretext. You can consistently limit both sets of liberties, of course, but better to consistently refuse to circumscribe the rights of others to assuage your own fears.

Gun control unacceptably infringes on freedomSheldon Richman, 12-27-2012, “Gun-Control, Mental-Health Laws Won’t Make Us Safer,” Future of Freedom Foundation, http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/gun-control-mental-health-laws-wont-make-us-safer/, da 12-30-2012We would do the young victims of the Newtown shootings no honor by frantically enacting futile restrictions on freedom. It may be satisfying to “do something.” But two things ought to be kept in mind. First, liberty is never more in peril than when politicians sense that the people want them to do something — anything. Second, a false sense of security is worse than no security at all. Legislating in the heat of emotion will not prevent future attacks, but it will do irreparable harm to innocent people. The proposition that restrictions on gun sales will prevent shootings has been debunked many times. One wonders how often it must be pointed out that someone who is willing to commit murder is not likely to be deterred by gun laws

or gun-free zones, which merely amount to an invitation to killers seeking to create maximum mayhem before killing themselves. Increases in violent crime followed tighter gun laws in Britain and Australia.

http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/gun-control-mental-health-laws-wont-make-us-safer/

http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/gun-control-mental-health-laws-wont-make-us-safer/

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/gun-control-and-civil-liberties/


China DA


China DA 1NC 1/2

China is expanding their sphere of influence in Latin America nowStratRisks, 5-6-2013, "In America’s Backyard: China’s Rising Influence In Latin America," http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/12352?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StratRisks+(StratRisks) , accessed 5-10-2013China is busy in America’s backyard. Over the past five years, Chinese businesses have been expanding their footprint in Latin America in a number of ways, beginning with enhanced trade to ensure a steady supply of bulk commodities such as oil, copper and soybeans. At this year’s Boao Forum for Asia, for the first time a Latin American sub-forum was created that included the participation of several heads of state from the region. Since 2011, China has overtaken the Netherlands to become Latin America’s

second biggest investor behind the United States. China has signed a series of large cooperation agreements with Latin American countries in such fields as finance, resources and energy. According to the latest statistics of the General

Administration of Customs of China, Sino-Latin American trade grew in 2012 to a total of $261.2 billion, a year-on-year increase of 8.18%. This trend risks undermining the position of the United States as Latin America’s single dominant trading partner. In 2011, the U.S.-Latin American trade volume was $351 billion. Some prominent Chinese have condemned the United States’ high-profile Return to Asia strategy, with its

intention of “containing China’s front door.” Shouldn’t the United States, which put forward the Monroe Doctrine two centuries ago, also question how China is quietly arriving in America’s backyard?

US economic engagement with Latin America boosts relations with the USInter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship,” http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Expanded trade, investment, and energy cooperation offer the greatest promise for robust US-Latin American relations . Independent of government policies, these areas have seen tremendous growth and development, driven chiefly by the private

sector . The US government needs to better appreciate the rising importance of Latin America—with its expanding markets for US exports, burgeoning opportunities for US investments, enormous reserves of energy and minerals, and continuing supply of needed labor—for the longer term performance of the US economy . With Brazil and many other Latin American economies thriving and showing promise for sustained rapid

growth and rising incomes, the search for economic opportunities has become the main force shaping relationships in the hemisphere . Intensive economic engagement by the United States may be the best foundation for wider partnerships across many issues as well as the best way to energize currently listless US relations with the region.

US influence in Latin America is zero sum with China – can only be one power in the hemisphereAlan Dowd, Senior Fellow with the American Security Council Foundation, 2012, “Crisis in the America's,” http://www.ascfusa.org/content_pages/view/crisisinamericas, accessed 5-10-2013Reengagement also means revitalizing security ties. A good model to follow might be what’s happening in China’s backyard. To deter China and prevent an accidental war, the U.S. is reviving its security partnerships all across the Asia-Pacific region. Perhaps it’s time to do the same in Latin America. We should remember that many Latin American countries—from Mexico and Panama to Colombia and Chile—border the Pacific. Given Beijing’s actions, it makes sense to bring these Latin American partners on the Pacific Rim into the alliance of alliances that is already stabilizing

the Asia-Pacific region.¶ Finally, all of this needs to be part of a revived Monroe Doctrine.¶ Focusing on Chinese encroachment in the Americas, this “Monroe Doctrine 2.0” would make it clear to Beijing that the United States

welcomes China’s efforts to conduct trade in the Americas but discourages any claims of control—implied or explicit—by China over territories, properties or facilities in the Americas. In addition, Washington should make it clear to Beijing that the American people would look unfavorably upon the sale of Chinese arms or the


basing of Chinese advisors or military assets in the Western Hemisphere.¶ In short, what it was true in the 19th and 20th

centuries must remain true in the 21st: There is room for only one great power in the Western Hemisphere.


China DA 1NC 2/2

Latin American influence is key to the Chinese economySebastian Sarmiento-Saher, editorial assistant for The Diplomat, 3-14-2013, “China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition,” http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-10-2013Despite a slowdown in China’s impressive economic growth, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) now ranks as the world’s second largest economy. A byproduct of this rapid expansion has been China’s search for new markets and resources to sustain its economic growth. While there has been much analysis of its activity in Africa and Central Asia,

another region of growing importance for China is Latin America. It is not without serious challenges or difficulties that

Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) are gradually emerging as a region of stable economic development. Although LAC is not a single country, many of its independent states have an abundance of natural resources and emerging manufacturing and service sectors that are projected to achieve solid growth in the coming years.

Chinese economic decline causes CCP lashout, hurts the global economy, heg and US-China relationsWalter Russell Mead, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2-4-2009, “Only Makes You Stronger,” The New Republic, 2/4/9, http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=571cbbb9-2887-4d81-8542-92e83915f5f8, accessed 5-10-2013The greatest danger both to U.S.-China relations and to American power itself is probably not that China will rise too far, too fast; it is that the current crisis might end China's growth miracle. In the worst-case scenario, the

turmoil in the international economy will plunge China into a major economic downturn. The Chinese financial system will implode as loans to both state and private enterprises go bad. Millions or even tens of millions of Chinese will be unemployed in a country without an effective social safety net. The collapse of asset bubbles in the

stock and property markets will wipe out the savings of a generation of the Chinese middle class. The political consequences could include dangerous unrest--and a bitter climate of anti-foreign feeling that blames others for China's woes. (Think of Weimar Germany, when both Nazi and communist politicians blamed the West for

Germany's economic travails.) Worse, instability could lead to a vicious cycle, as nervous investors moved their money out of

the country, further slowing growth and, in turn, fomenting ever-greater bitterness. Thanks to a generation of

rapid economic growth, China has so far been able to manage the stresses and conflicts of modernization and change; nobody knows what will happen if the growth stops.

ExtinctionHerbert Yee, Professor of Politics and IR @ Hong Kong Baptist, and Ian Storey, Lecturer in Defence Studies @ Deakin University, 2002, “The China Threat: Perceptions, Myths and Reality,” p. 5 The fourth factor contributing to the perception of a China threat is the fear of political and economic collapse in the PRC, resulting in territorial fragmentation, civil war and waves of refugees pouring into neighbouring countries. Naturally, any or all of these scenarios would have a profoundly negative impact on regional stability. Today the Chinese leadership faces a raft of internal problems, including the increasing political demands of its citizens, a growing population, a shortage of natural resources and a deterioration in the natural environment caused by rapid industrialization and pollution. These problems are putting a strain on the central government’s ability to govern effectively. Political disintegration or a Chinese civil war might result in millions of Chinese refugees seeking asylum in neighbouring countries. Such an unprecedented exodus of refugees from a collapsed PRC would no doubt put a severe strain on the limited resources of China’s neighbours. A fragmented China could also result in another nightmare scenario- nuclear weapons falling into the hands of irresponsible local provincial leaders or warlords. From this perspective, a disintegrating China would also pose a threat to its neighbours and the world.


Yes Chinese Influence In LA

Chinese influence in Latin American is growingSebastian Sarmiento-Saher, editorial assistant for The Diplomat, 3-14-2013, “China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition,” http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-10-2013Latin America’s prospects have attracted serious attention, especially from Chinese firms and policymakers keen to benefit from growing opportunities and access to raw materials in LAC. Under

President Hu Jintao China deepened its ties with Latin American countries through initiatives like the 2008 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Lima, Peru. China’s new President, Xi Jinping, is also no stranger to the region

after having made several state visits there as vice president. According to Barbara Stallings, Chinese exports to Latin America grew substantially from U.S. $6.9 billion in 2000 to U.S. $69.7 billion in 2008; while LAC exports to China increased from U.S. $5.3 billion in 2000 to U.S. $70.3 billion in 2008. However, despite these dramatic increases of 910 percent and 1,226 percent, the United States and the EU are still ahead of China in terms of trade flows with Latin America.

Cooperation between China and Latin America is increasingSebastian Sarmiento-Saher, editorial assistant for The Diplomat, 3-14-2013, “China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition,” http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-10-2013As Latin America continues to develop, China will undoubtedly play a significant role in its progress and advancement. There will continue to be cases of cooperation and competition between LAC countries and the PRC as their relations mature – but as long each side has much to offer the other, the people of both Latin America and China have a lot to look forward to in the evolution of their “South-South relations.”

Chinese involvement in Latin America is increasing – trend is neg, even if the US is still aheadMichael Cerna, 4-15-2011, "China’s Growing Presence in Latin America," China Research Center, http://www.chinacenter.net/chinas-growing-presence-in-latin-america-implications-for-u-s-and-chinese-presence-in-the-region/, accessed 5-10-2013By 2007 two-way trade between China and Latin America had already eclipsed $100 billion, almost 50% more than the previous year and three years ahead of schedule. In 2008, two-way trade and investment reached $140 billion, with approximately $120 billion devoted to bilateral trade (Miller, 2009). China appears to be slowly closing the gap on the U.S. In 2009, Latin American exports to China jumped nine times, reaching $41.3 billion, almost 7% of all Latin American exports, according to Kevin Gallagher of The Guardian. U.S. exports and imports with the entire region are still vastly greater than China’s, but year by year, China is catching up and in some countries, surpassing the U.S.


Yes Chinese Economy

Chinese economy is up – slowdown is overXinhua News, 5-7-2013, "Chinese economy stabilizes after slowdown: accountants' research," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-05/07/c_132366043.htm, accessed 5-10-2013The Chinese economy has become more stabilized with its slowdown ended, according to survey results issued on Tuesday by the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) and the Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). The survey, polling 2,000 financial professionals working in companies of various sizes, showed market confidence in China has been recovering. China's economic slowdown has become more manageable since pressures on cash flows and new orders lessened at the beginning of 2013, the ACCA and IMA survey said. Financial professionals participating in the survey said China's commercial construction accelerated in the first quarter, which ended a whole year of negative development in 2012.

Chinese economy is healthy now, despite slowing a littleXinhua News, 5-2-013, "News Analysis: China's economic growth slower but healthier," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-05/02/c_132354772.htm, accessed 5-10-2013However, analysts say China's slower growth, down from 7.9 percent in the final quarter of 2012, was still above the 7.5-percent full-year target for 2013 set by the government in March. The Chinese government was keen on pushing reforms and had prioritized balance over speed, and quality over quantity, they said. World Bank President Jim Yong Kim told

reporters in Washington in mid-April, despite the slower growth, the Chinese leadership was "laser-focused" on strategies that would build the foundation for future growth. The key for China was not to "sit around and react to the short-term fluctuations in growth figures," but "think about the medium term and long term and make those kinds of investments that are necessary to ensure growth going forward," he told the IMF/World Bank Spring Meetings. On April 16, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) cut its world economic growth forecast for 2013 to 3.3 percent, 0.2 percentage point lower than its earlier estimate in January.

The IMF predicted the Chinese economy would grow 8 percent in 2013, while the emerging markets and developing countries would

grow 5.3 percent. Meanwhile, the highest growth rate for developed countries was no more than 2 percent.

Chinese economy is doing well and growing, even if it’s slower than it used to beXinhua News, 5-2-013, "News Analysis: China's economic growth slower but healthier," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-05/02/c_132354772.htm, accessed 5-10-2013"Fast and slow are relative concepts," said Christian Murck, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in China (AmCham China), a non-

profit organization representing U.S. businesses in China. Considering the overall slowdown in the world economy, the 7.7-percent growth in the first quarter for China, the second largest economy in the world, could not be called slow, he said.

China's cooler growth pointed to a transforming and improving economy, analysts said, as a blind obsession with high-speed growth could trap the country in higher resources consumption and environmental costs. Instead of following the old path, the Chinese government is pushing reforms across the board, including structural adjustment, industrial upgrading and

boosting domestic consumption. It is also carrying out income distribution reforms, changing the role of the government and boosting the private sector. "A GDP slowdown may help Beijing tackle some of the structural problems with the economy, once described by former Premier Wen Jiabao as 'unbalanced, uncoordinated, and unsustainable,'" U.S. magazine the Atlantic said in an opinion article. In an interview with popular Chinese website Tencent, American economist and Nobel prize winner Michael Spence said some rating agencies were overreacting to China's slower growth in the

first quarter. In his view, China had made a smart move by slowing the economy a little to ensure better quality and efficiency, while keeping macroeconomic stability.


Yes Chinese Economy – AT: Overheat

No overheat – new Chinese government controlsWynne Wang and Shen Hong, 5-7-2013, “Yuan Falls as Beijing Cools Market,” Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323372504578466671171867396.html, accessed 5-10-2013China's yuan fell sharply against the U.S. dollar on Monday after Beijing unexpectedly introduced new rules intended to curb the flow of foreign currency into the country, which are also expected to slow the yuan's recent appreciation. The yuan rose on news that China is taking steps toward internationalizing the currency. The WSJ’s Shen Hong explains what the move

means for opening the country’s capital markets. The rules appear to have scaled back investors' expectations of further gains by the yuan in the short term by effectively limiting banks' ability to bet against the dollar versus the yuan in China. But analysts say the yuan's longer-term outlook remains bullish because of China's huge trade surplus and sound economic fundamentals. On Monday, the yuan fell against the

dollar for the first time since April 22, snapping what had been a strong run for the Chinese currency that came despite signs of a slowdown in China's economy. On the over-the-counter onshore market, the dollar was at 6.1667 yuan Monday, up from 6.1556 on Friday, as banks bought dollars to exit short positions against it, or bets that it would fall. The dollar traded in a range of 6.1521 yuan to 6.1768 yuan.

Chinese growth high despite risk of overheatAnsuya Harjani, 1-2-2013, “World's No. 2 Economy Is Setting Itself Up for Solid 2013”, CNBC, http://www.cnbc.com/id/100347827, accessed 5-10-2013Following a year tainted by heightened economic uncertainty, the world's second largest economy is setting itself up for a positive 2013, say analysts, pointing to China's latest economic data and stellar equity market performance.¶ China's official manufacturing purchasing managers' index (PMI) released earlier this week, which tracks larger state-owned corporations, remained at a 7-month high of 50.6 in December, while the HSBC PMI, a private survey of smaller factories, rose to a 51.5 -- up from 50.5 in November.¶ Supported by the slew of upbeat economic data and improving investor sentiment, the benchmark Shanghai Composite rallied almost 15 percent last month, pushing the market into positive territory for 2012. The market ended the year up 3.2 percent, reversing a 22 percent loss

in 2011.¶ "The economy looks to have stabilized reasonably nicely without a lot of extra stimulus – that sets China up for a solid start to 2013," Richard Yetsenga, Head of Global Markets Research at ANZ told CNBC on Wednesday.¶ Worries over possible overheating in the economy led Chinese policymakers to exercise caution with unleashing new stimulus to support growth in 2012. In September, Beijing approved over $150 billion in infrastructure spending – around one fourth of the total size of

the stimulus package unveiled in 2008 to prop up the economy following the onset of the global financial crisis.¶ Nonetheless, China's economy has staged a recovery helped by a pickup in domestic demand, and is expected to grow in the mid 8-percent range in 2013 - levels not seen since the last quarter of 2011.

Chinese inflation will stay in checkMarketWatch, 12-9-2012, “China’s inflation not such a worry for now”, http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2012/12/09/chinas-inflation-not-such-a-worry-for-now/, accessed 5-10-2013However, Ren also said that while inflation is expected to pick up in 2013, it won’t likely be a dramatic rise.¶

“China now is actually standing at the late stage of contraction and early stage of expansion — likely a weak expansion cycle. Bottom line is that inflation won’t be the No. 1 concern next year.” Ren said.¶ HSBC

Greater China chief economist Qu Hongbin also focused on the growth backdrop as a reason for expecting the data series to remain benign in 2013.¶ Demand is not running at full speed, he said, while modest growth means imported inflation risks should be manageable, as Chinese demand is so large that it plays a significant role in setting global commodities prices.¶ Qu said that “given that over 30% of China’s CPI basket is food, which is sensitive to weather conditions,” the CPI rate tends to be vulnerable to supply shocks. But he went some way to try to dispel fears about food prices.¶ “The good news is that the ninth consecutive good harvest – something not seen for half a century – will help maintain the balance of food supply and demand. The supply of live pigs is sufficient to avoid large

price rises,” the economist said.¶ Beijing will likely be happy with CPI in a range of between 3% and 4% in 2013, Qu said, adding that “price stability remains a priority, not only for economic development, but also for social stability.”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100347827


Link – Engagement Increases US Influence

Lack of US economic engagement with Latin America creates a vacuum that gets filled by other countriesNewsmax, 5-8-2013, "Boehner: Urges Deeper Engagement in Latin America," http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/boehner-latin-america-gop/2012/05/08/id/438420, accessed 5-10-2013The U.S. Congress' top Republican called on Tuesday for deeper economic engagement with Latin America as a bulwark against Iran's attempt to gain influence in the region and the destabilizing effects of international drug cartels. "The best defense against an expansion of Iranian influence in Latin America - and against the destructive aspirations of international criminals in the region - is for the United States to double down on a policy of direct engagement ," U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said at the State Department. "We must be clear that we will be there, with our friends and partners in the region , committed to fighting and winning the war for a free, stable, and prosperous hemisphere," Boehner said in a speech to the Council of Americas, which represents companies that do business in Latin America. Boehner said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visits to Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Ecuador this year "underscored the designs Iran has for expanding its influence in Latin America, and its eagerness to forge bonds with governments in the Western Hemisphere that have demonstrated a lesser interest in freedom and democracy."

Expanded economic engagement is key to bolster US regional influencePatrick Duddy, former ambassador to Venezuela and Prof @ Duke, and Frank O. Mora, dir. Latin American and Caribbean Center, 5-1-2013, "Latin America: Is U.S. influence waning?," Miami Herald, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/01/3375160/latin-america-is-us-influence.html, accessed 5-10-2013As Moises Naim notes in his recent book, The End of Power, there has been an important change in power distribution in the world away from states toward an expanding and increasingly mobile set of actors that are dramatically shaping the nature and scope of global relationships. In Latin America, many of the most substantive and dynamic forms of engagement are occurring in a web of cross-national relationships involving small and large companies, people-to-people contact through student exchanges and social media, travel and migration. Trade and investment remain the most enduring and measurable dimensions of U.S. relations with the region. It is certainly the case that our economic interests alone would justify more U.S. attention to the region. Many observers who worry about declining U.S. influence in this area point to the rise of trade with China and the presence of European companies and investors.

Even if the US has influence in Latin America in theory, they have to exercise itOtto Reich, president of Otto Reich Associates LLC and former U.S. assistant secretary of state, 12-17-2012, “Is the United States Losing Influence in Latin America?” The Dialogue, http://www.thedialogue.org/page.cfm?pageID=32&pubID=3179, accessed 5-10-2013Does the United States have influence in Latin America? It has enormous potential influence , by virtue of being the

remaining global superpower and by the geographic, historical and other ties that connect us. Sadly, however, in the past four years the U.S. government has apparently decided that Latin America is not worth the time or effort to use that influence for good purposes . The problem may not be insufficient attention but rather misplaced priorities. How else to explain the counterproductive policies directed at the region's most hostile countries while neglecting the friendliest nations? The primary purpose of any nation's foreign policy is to advance its national interests; U.S. interests are advanced by having free, democratic, secure, prosperous and friendly neighbors. In the past four years, the United States has tried to appease the anti-American alliance gathered under the ALBA umbrella, a group of failed or failing states united by anti-Americanism, Marxist economics and authoritarian methods. These are Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Argentina (Argentina is not yet an ALBA member, but it imitates one). In the same period that the United States exhibited unlimited patience with ALBA countries they have, individually or collectively, for example: expelled U.S. ambassadors and other diplomats; confiscated U.S. properties; cooperated with Iran and terrorist groups; held an American civilian hostage for three years and counting; stamped out individual freedoms; packed or neutered legislatures and judiciaries; voided the separation of powers; and generally made a mockery of democratic institutions, all in the name of '21st Century Socialism.' Meanwhile, it took the administration three years to ratify

a free-trade agreement with Colombia and with Panama, two friendly and strategically important countries; it has not begun or promoted any new free-trade negotiations in the region; it has weakly assisted Mexico's war on narcotics and organized crime; Chávez, Castro, Correa, Kirchner, Morales, Ortega and other despots still enjoy the fruits of their authoritarianism. If we really have influence in the region, why not use it? .


Link – Engagement Zero Sum

Strategic influence in the US is zero sum – Latin America is choosing China nowStratRisks, 5-6-2013, "In America’s Backyard: China’s Rising Influence In Latin America," http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/12352?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StratRisks+(StratRisks) , accessed 5-10-2013In their book America’s Blind Spot: Chavez, Oil, and U.S. Security, Andres Cala and Michael J. Economides avoid the usual patter of linking South America’s “China factor” with some sordid

conspiracy theory. Instead, they investigate Latin America’s subtle choice between China and the United States, attributing Washington’s weakened influence in the region to its failure in foreign policy and economic development — while China rises on the back of globalization. Since 1823, when America put forward the Monroe Doctrine and declared its sphere of influence to Europeans, it has maintained the unique position of the United

States in the Americas. Military intervention has always served as the most important tool for the United States. Especially after the start of the Cold War, in order to curb Communism from taking root in Latin America, the U.S. used military means largely without restraint. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States faced new external challenges such as the threat of

global terrorism. Latin America’s strategic significance has quickly slipped to a secondary and more local ranking. The United States has shifted its focus in Latin America to specific issues such as illegal immigration and drug smuggling.

Chinese and US engagement in Latin America trade offStuart Grudgings and Simon Gardner, 3-16-2011, "Analysis: Rising China threatens U.S. clout in Latin America," Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/16/us-latinamerica-china-idUSTRE72F19C20110316, accessed 5-10-2013Largely shut out by traditional international lenders, Argentina still had a place to turn last year for the billions of dollars it needed to renovate its decrepit railway system -- Beijing. The $10

billion package agreed with the China Development Bank was another clear sign of China's surging influence in Latin America, transforming the region's economies and undermining U.S. dominance in its traditional "backyard."

China will loom large over U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Latin America this week as he sends a message that Washington remains relevant to a region that owes much of its robust economic health in recent years to Chinese demand. In both Brazil and Chile, the two South American countries that Obama will visit, China

has recently overtaken the United States as the number-one trade partner. Even in those countries where the United States is still the dominant partner, China is catching up fast. It has lifted growth for years in commodity producers such as Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Peru with its voracious demand for raw goods such as iron ore, copper, and soy. More recently, it has followed up with a wave of investments and state-backed loans aimed at expanding its access to

commodities and tapping demand from Latin America's growing ranks of consumers. In doing so, China has emerged as an alternative source of funding for Latin American countries' development in areas such as infrastructure and energy that were long dependent on World Bank or IMF

loans that came with more strings attached. "It's a real opportunity for Latin America if they play it right and it's a real challenge to the U.S.," said Kevin Gallagher, an international relations professor at Boston University who co-wrote a book on China in Latin America. "The Chinese are a kick in the pants for the United States to articulate a little bit more of a serious relationship with the region."

Now is key – US has a window to keep influence in Latin America from ChinaStuart Grudgings and Simon Gardner, 3-16-2011, "Analysis: Rising China threatens U.S. clout in Latin America," Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/16/us-latinamerica-china-idUSTRE72F19C20110316, accessed 5-10-2013China may struggle to convert growing economic clout into political influence in Latin America, says Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington. "We may be entering a new phase now in the Chinese relationship with South America, where there are ongoing concerns about Chinese policies and practices and whether Latin America is getting the most favorable terms out of that relationship," he said. "I think that's going to be the case for the next couple of years, which opens it up again to the United States."


Link – Energy Competition

US and China are competing for energy resources in Latin AmericaAndres Cala, 3-21-2011, "China grabs Latin America, well ahead of Obama's outreach," Christian Science Monitor, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2011/0321/China-grabs-Latin-America-well-ahead-of-Obama-s-outreach, accessed 5-10-2013President Obama's current visit to Latin America is widely seen as a move to counteract the rising influence of China, which is in the midst of an unprecedented energy grab in the oil- and mineral-rich region. From oil to refineries, China is capturing and integrating Latin America as much as it can, securing at least $65 billion in deals throughout the region since 2010. The deals are expected to eventually translate into at least a million barrels of crude oil and refined products per day and growing markets on both sides of the continent. The grab is not only unprecedented but also a significant game-changer in China’s rise as a world power, especially because the US plans to increasingly meet its own energy demand with Latin American oil, setting the stage for a future competition between both countries.

Latin American energy supplies are a key source of competition with ChinaChietigj Bajpee, 2005, "The Jamestown Foundation: CHINESE ENERGY STRATEGY IN LATIN AMERICA," China Brief v. 5 iss. 14, http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=3870, accessed 5-10-2013Latin America is fast emerging as the major stage of competition for oil and gas resources among the global powers. The region, which has traditionally come under the U.S. “sphere of influence,” caught the attention of China following the significant growth potential of its energy resources. Latin America is estimated to hold 13.5 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves but accounts for only 6 percent of total output. Although China has tapped energy resources in Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador and Peru, and has begun to tap Argentina and Bolivia, there still exists significant room for expansion, especially given that China still depends on the Middle East for 60 percent of its oil imports and wishes to further diversify.

Latin America is the key area for US-China energy competitionChietigj Bajpee, 2005, "The Jamestown Foundation: CHINESE ENERGY STRATEGY IN LATIN AMERICA," China Brief v. 5 iss. 14, http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=3870, accessed 5-10-2013China’s domestic energy needs and regional developments in the Asia Pacific region are likely to fuel Beijing’s desire to access Latin American energy resources. China, which has been a net oil importer since 1993, is the world's number two oil consumer after the U.S., importing one third of its crude oil consumption. In the presence of sporadic power shortages, growing car ownership, cross-country air travel, and the importance of energy to maintain China’s burgeoning growth rates, pressure is mounting on China to access energy resources on the world stage. Furthermore, China’s limited progress in accessing local energy resources due to poor relations with neighboring states (witness the Sino-Japanese dispute over the energy-rich East China Sea, the disputed status of the Spratly and Paracel islands and growing political instabilities in Central Asia) have forced China to search for energy further afield. However, China's growing presence on the international energy stage could ultimately bring it into confrontation with the world's largest energy consumer, the U.S. Nowhere is the Sino-U.S. energy competition more evident than in the United States’ backyard.


Link – Cuba

Resolving the Cuban embargo would boost US relations with Latin AmericaInter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship,” http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Similarly, Washington’s more than half-century embargo on Cuba, as well as other elements of United States’ Cuba policy, is strongly opposed by all other countries in the hemisphere . Indeed, the US position on these troublesome issues—immigration, drug policy, and Cuba—has set Washington against the consensus view of the hemisphere’s other 34 governments . These issues stand as obstacles to further cooperation in the Americas . The United States and the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean need to resolve them in order to build more productive partnerships

China is engaging Cuba now – builds their influenceAdrian H. Hearn, Fellow @ U. Sydney, 2012, “China, Global Governance and the Future of Cuba,” Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=141204, accessed 5-10-2013China’s deepening engagement with Latin America has been accompanied by concerns about the Chinese government’s regard for international conventions of economic governance. Critics claim that across Latin America and the Caribbean, Chinese aid and trade are characterised by excessive state intervention. This article argues that, for two reasons, the rationale for these misgivings is dissipating. First, since the onset of the global financial crisis, China has gained influence in multilateral institutions, prompting them toward greater acceptance of public spending in developing countries. Second, recent developments in Cuba show that China is actively encouraging the Western hemisphere’s only communist country to liberalise its economy. China sits at the crossroads of these local and global developments, prompting Cuba toward rapprochement.

Cuba is symbolically important – most obvious place of difference between the US and ChinaAdrian H. Hearn, Fellow @ U. Sydney, 2012, “China, Global Governance and the Future of Cuba,” Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=141204, accessed 5-10-2013With few exceptions (e.g. Gonzalez-Vicente 2011; Hearn and León- Manríquez 2011; Kotschwar, Moran, and Muir 2011), little attention has been paid to the influence of China’s rise on the coordination and development of Latin American industrial sectors, and how this influence resonates – or not – with international conventions of governance. The case of Cuba is instructive, as no other country is so openly condemned by Washington and so publicly praised by Beijing. With bilateral trade exceeding 1.8 billion USD in 2010 (down from a pre-GFC high of 2.3 billion USD in 2008), China is Cuba’s second-largest trading partner, and the two countries have pursued state-led cooperation in sectors as diverse as biomedicine, tourism, industrial manufacturing, nickel and oil mining, and oil refining (UN-COMTRADE 2011). The workings of Sino-Cuban initiatives are guarded as state secrets, provoking concerns from external observers about their intentions, capacities, and potential threats to the United States. These apprehensions dovetail with a broader discourse on the negative influence that China may bear on development and democracy in Latin America.


Link – Cuba Oil

Cuba is engaging China over oil now – the plan would push them outJonathan Benjamin-Alvadaro, PhD Poly Sci @ Nebraska, 2006, “The Current Status and Future Prospects for Oil Exploration in Cuba: A Special,” http://cri.fiu.edu/research/commissioned-reports/oil-cuba-alvarado.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Given that there are no formal diplomatic of economic relations between the governments of the United States and Cuba, the level of interest has grown significantly in the 3 years due primarily to three reasons in the following interest areas: energy security interests; broader regional strategic; and purely economic interests. First, the energy security interests in the potential of Cuban oil – although it really would not minimize the immediacy of an American energy crisis – is seen as possible if only partial remedy to energy supply concerns. Second, as Cuba, in part because of the increasing number of oil partnerships furthers its diplomatic and economic ties to with countries like Venezuela, China, Brazil and members of the

European Union it may prove to provide Cuba for a sufficient buffer against U.S. opposition as it solidifies it

economic and diplomatic role in the region. This is important inasmuch as there is a de facto trend in the Americas that

clearly disavows and attempts to minimize the influence of the United States in the region, and with the growing

demands on the world economy by China, it stands to reason that Cuba may assume an increasing stature that

almost potentially lessens the presence of American influence in Cuban and hence regional affairs. Finally,

and as demonstrated by the presence of American oil interests in the February 2006 U.S.- Cuban Energy Summit in Mexico City, there may be interest in cooperating in joint venture projects, and by extension assisting in the long-term development in Cuba’s oil industry.

China is doing Cuban oil development now – key to their economyJeff Franks, 1-19-2012, "Oil rig arrives for Cuba offshore exploration work," Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/19/us-cuba-oil-rig-idUSTRE80I1WV20120119, accessed 5-10-2013A Chinese-built drilling rig to be used in the first major exploration for oil in Cuba's offshore waters arrived on

Thursday off the coast of the communist-ruled island's capital. The rig, known as Scarabeo 9, could be seen as it sailed slowly westward, miles off the north coast and Havana's famed Malecon seaside boulevard. Its arrival went mostly unnoticed by people in the capital, but it was a long-awaited and landmark day for the island's oil industry , which believes the platform will tap into rich oil fields in Cuba's part of the Gulf of Mexico. Starting next week, Spanish oil giant Repsol YPF, working in partnership with Norway's Statoil and ONGC Videsh, a unit of India's Oil and Natural Gas Corp, is

expected to drill at least two wells in Cuban waters about 70 miles from the Florida Keys. Malaysia's Petronas, in partnership with Russia's Gazprom Neft, will also drill a well using the Scarabeo 9. The rig has been contracted from its owner Saipem, a unit of Italian oil company Eni. All the wells will be in water at least a mile deep, like that of the BP well that blew out and spilled millions of gallons of oil in the U.S. part of the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. Cuba has said it may have 20 billion barrels of oil in its parts of the Gulf, but the U.S. Geological Survey has estimated about 5 billion. Repsol drilled the only previous offshore well in Cuba in 2004 and said it found oil, but said it was not "commercial." It has been trying for several years to bring another rig for more drilling, a task that was complicated by the longstanding U.S. trade embargo against Cuba and the limits it places on the amount of U.S. technology that can be used. The Scarabeo 9, a semi-submersible rig that floats on four giant pontoon legs and has living quarters for more than 200 crewmembers, was built in China, then sent to Singapore in late 2010 for completion. The only part

of the rig said to be American-made is the blowout preventer, the part that failed in the BP disaster. Cuba is hoping oil will ease its chronic economic woes and bring energy independence. It currently receives 115,000 barrels a day from its oil-rich socialist ally Venezuela.

China has a major role in current Cuban oil developmentJeff Franks, 6-8-2011, "China poised to play major role in Cuban oil development," Globe and Mail, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/china-poised-to-play-major-role-in-cuban-oil-development/article598579/, accessed 5-10-2013China looks ready to play a major role in the development of Cuban oil, including the island's soon-to-be explored fields

in the Gulf of Mexico, after the signing of energy-related accords during a visit this week by Vice-President Xi Jinping. The text of the agreements has not

been disclosed, but they appear aimed at making China a significant oil partner with its fellow communist-run country, which is likely to raise eyebrows in the nearby United States. State-owned China National Petroleum Corp said on

Wednesday the accords committed the company to make "full use" of its oil expertise to help Cuba raise its oil output and "to expand co-operation with (state-owned) Cubapetroleo in exploring and developing new onshore and offshore oil blocks in Cuba." Whether the agreement means CNPC has leased Gulf of Mexico blocks for exploration was not immediately clear. But Jorge Pinon, a visiting fellow at Florida International

University and expert on Cuban oil, said the Cubans have previously said they were discussing the leasing of five of their 59 offshore blocks to the Chinese. "All the pieces of the puzzle are finally falling into place," he told Reuters.


Link – Mexico

Resolving immigration issues with Mexico would solve Latin American resentment of the USInter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship,” http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Washington’s failure to repair the United States’ broken immigration system is breeding resentment across the region, nowhere more so than in the principal points of origin and transit: Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean . Latin Americans find the idea of building a wall on the US-Mexico border particularly offensive . Despite bitter political battles over immigration in the United States, there is general agreement about what sensible reform would include . It combines effective border and employer enforcement, the adoption of a general worker program consistent with labor market needs in the United States, and a path toward residence and citizenship for the estimated 12 million unauthorized residents living in the country . This package is similar to the reform effort (unfortunately defeated in Congress) proposed under President George W . Bush.

Guest worker programs for Mexico would be a huge signal of US relations to the regionInter-American Dialogue, April 2012, “Remaking the Relationship,” http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Still another advance could come through US immigration reform . By better aligning the supply and demand for workers in critical industries and opening new opportunities for millions of currently unauthorized residents, a more pragmatic migration policy would significantly bolster the US economy . No other single policy measure would more clearly demonstrate US commitment to cooperation with Latin America . The comprehensive reform advocated by both the George W . Bush and the Obama administrations represents the best approach . More modest changes, however, could still be helpful.

China and Mexico are boosting ties nowCatherine Cheney, 4-9-2013, "WPR Article," World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/12857/mexico-china-stand-to-benefit-from-improved-ties, accessed 5-10-2013Over the weekend, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, who is on a tour of Asia that ends tomorrow, met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in southern

China. Pena Nieto’s trip is part of an effort to develop closer bilateral ties between Mexico and China, after more than a decade of what the Financial Times has called “reciprocal coolness.” The trip “was predicated on the idea of engaging China in order that Chinese investors see Mexico as an optimal export platform into North America," Francisco Gonzalez, associate professor and Riordan Roett chair in Latin American Studies at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told Trend Lines in an email interview. "Numbers suggest that given high annual wage growth in China and a quadrupling of transportation costs across the Pacific, China's previous comparative advantages have weakened significantly, and therefore it makes growing sense to locate production facilities in Mexico to then export goods to the United States and Canada," he continued, noting Mexico's membership in NAFTA, which gives it largely unfettered access to Canadian and U.S. import markets. Enrique Dussel Peters, coordinator of the China-Mexico Studies Center at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, said in

a separate email interview that the main goal of the visit was to show that Mexico and its new administration under Pena Nieto is taking China seriously from the highest political level.


Link – Venezuela

China and Venezuela are increasing linkages to offset US-Venezuela tiesJames Parker, 3-7-2013, "China’s Hugo Chavez Blues," The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/pacific-money/2013/03/07/chinas-hugo-chavez-blues/, accessed 5-10-2013The death of Venezuela’s charismatic and controversial President Hugo Chavez has seemingly surprised many, despite a long and well documented struggle with his illness. Chavez’s international politicking was the main reason for much of the global attention on him, and his forging of relationships with countries hostile or troublesome to the United States has been a recurring theme throughout his tenure. Yet it is perhaps the relationship between China and Venezuela, which has blossomed during Chavez’s extended

term as President, which is now of most interest. For all his anti-U.S. rhetoric, the United States was still the largest single importer of Venezuelan crude oil even if the trend in recent years (in part thanks to the remarkable U.S. energy

revolution) was decidedly downwards. Both as part of his anti-U.S. Strategy and for domestic economic reasons, Chavez increasingly found a willing partner in China. China’s demand for oil has been growing in line with its economy, and indeed it is now the largest importer of oil in the world. Venezuela became a natural target for China’s sometimes confusing policy of engagement and support as applied to many poorer but rich-in-resources economies.

China and Venezuela cooperation is high nowMargaret Myers, 3-22-2013, “Perspectives on the Future of China-Venezuela Relations,” Inter-American Dialogue, http://www.thedialogue.org/page.cfm?pageID=32&pubID=3266, accessed 5-10-2013China has became a critical economic partner for Venezuela over the past decade. By means of the "China-Venezuela Joint Fund" and other mechanisms, China's policy banks offered more in loans to Venezuela than to any other country. But what is the likelihood of continued high-level, bilateral cooperation in a post-Chávez political environment? Tsinghua University’s Matt Ferchen, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences researcher, Sun Hongbo, and Venezuelan journalist, Andrés Rojas Jiménez, debated the future of China-Venezuela relations at the Inter-American Dialogue on March 22nd. Sun Hongbo opened with an optimistic view of the China-Venezuela relationship. Economic complementarity, he suggested, will ensure cooperation between the two nations for the foreseeable future. With respect to China’s $40-$50 billion in loans to Venezuela, Sun also foresees little risk, noting that China’s loan contracts have sufficient precautions built in.

China views engagement with Venezuela as high stakes – key to the rest of the regionEvan Ellis, 9-30-2011, "China's Cautious Economic and Strategic Gamble in Venezuela," The Jamestown Foundation, http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=38472, accessed 5-10-2013China’s deepening relationship with Venezuela is a high stakes gamble, motivated by strong, but different interests on each side. For the Chavez regime, Chinese assistance enables it to continue on its Bolivarian socialist course without having to compromise with Western governments, companies and financial institutions, and without having to control the rampant corruption and patronage that helps maintain the loyalty of key members of the government and military. For China, the relationship supports a range of both commercial and political objectives, ranging from reliable access to primary products at reasonable prices to sales of products and services in strategically important high value-added sectors—such as telecommunications and computers, autos and heavy equipment, logistics and transportation infrastructure and military and aerospace industries. Military and aerospace sales to Venezuela have also opened up opportunities for commercial and military engagement with other states in the region while generating substantial profits for Chinese companies and banks.


Link – Venezuela Oil

Oil is key to Chinese influence in Latin America – they need it for their economyStratRisks, 5-6-2013, "In America’s Backyard: China’s Rising Influence In Latin America," http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/12352?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StratRisks+(StratRisks) , accessed 5-10-2013Among the numerous needs of China, the demand for oil has always been the most powerful driving force. In the past 30 years, China has consumed one-third of the world’s new oil production and become the world’s second-largest oil importer. More than half of China’s oil demand depends on imports, which increases the instability of its energy security. Diversification is inevitable. In this context, Latin America and its huge reserves and production capacity naturally became a destination for China. China must better protect its energy supply, and can’t just play the simple role of consumer. It must also help solidify the important links of the petroleum industry supply chain. Indeed, the China National Petroleum

Corporation frequently appears in Latin American countries, and China’s investment and trade in the Latin American countries are also focused on its energy sector. In the opinion of many European and American scholars, China’s current practice isn’t much different from that of Western colonizers of the last century. These scholars believe that China doesn’t care about local human rights or the state of democracy when dealing with

countries. All China is interested in is establishing long-term, stable economic relations. This realistic path is exactly opposite to that of America’s newfound idealism. Thus China has become a close collaborator of certain Latin American countries, such as Venezuela, that are in sharp conflict with the United States.

China is deeply involved with Venezuelan oil nowMichael Cerna, 4-15-2011, "China’s Growing Presence in Latin America," China Research Center, http://www.chinacenter.net/chinas-growing-presence-in-latin-america-implications-for-u-s-and-chinese-presence-in-the-region/, accessed 5-10-2013It was not only in Brazil that China went after oil. In order to meet rising industrial needs and consumer demand, China has pursued investments and agreements with a variety of Latin American oil producers. In 2007 Venezuela agreed to a $6 billion joint investment fund for infrastructure projects at home and for oil refineries in China able to process

Venezuelan heavy crude oil (Santiso, 2007). Venezuela planned to increase oil exports to China by 300,000 barrels per day. Then in 2009, Venezuela announced a $16 billion investment deal with the Chinese National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) for oil exploration in the Orinoco River to develop heavy crude oil

resources (Economist, 2009). Meanwhile, the CNPC has invested $300 million in technology to use Venezuela’s Orimulsion fuel in Chinese power plants. This exemplifies Venezuela’s desire to break away from the U.S. During a visit to China in 2004, President Chavez said shifting exports to China would help end dependency on sales to the United States (Johnson, 2005).

Venezuelan energy resource are keyChietigj Bajpee, 2005, "The Jamestown Foundation: CHINESE ENERGY STRATEGY IN LATIN AMERICA," China Brief v. 5 iss. 14, http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=3870, accessed 5-10-2013As the world’s number five crude exporter with the largest proven oil reserves in the Western hemisphere, Venezuela is emerging as a major prize in the competition for energy resources in Latin America. While Venezuela sells 60 percent of its crude oil exports to the U.S. and is the United States’ fourth largest oil

supplier, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is attempting to reduce his country’s dependence on the U.S. market . President Chavez

has stated that "We have been producing and exporting oil for more than 100 years but they have been years of dependence on the United States. Now we are free and we make our resources available to the great country of China." [1] Easier said than done, as China’s refineries will have to be refitted to process Venezuela’s heavy crude oil. Furthermore, transporting energy resources from Venezuela and Argentina is particularly difficult given that both states are on South America’s Atlantic coast although there have been discussions to overcome this by constructing a pipeline from the Atlantic

to the Pacific through Panama. [2] Nevertheless, China has made significant inroads in accessing Venezuela’s energy resources . During

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's visit to Beijing in December and Chinese Vice President Zeng Qinghong's visit to Venezuela in January 2005, China committed to develop Venezuela’s energy infrastructure by investing $350 million in 15 oil fields, $60 million in a gas project as well as upgrading the country’s railway and refinery infrastructure. In exchange,


China will get 100,000 barrels of oil a day, 3 million tones of fuel oil a year and 1.8 million tones of Orimulsion, an alternative boiler fuel from Venezuela. China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has also been given significant oil and gas development opportunities in Venezuela including the fields at Zumano in eastern Venezuela, which has an estimated 400 million barrels of oil.


Chinese Influence Key Chinese Economy

Chinese influence in Latin America is key to their economy – only source of export growthChina Daily, 1-8-2013, “Latin America offers way out of demand doldrums: Official,” http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2013-01/08/content_16093644.htm, accessed 5-10-2013As the demand from developed markets, especially the European Union, decreases sharply, Chinese companies should be encouraged to export goods to Latin America, says Yang Wanming, Chinese ambassador to Chile.

"Latin America is now a strategically important market for China ... especially amid the European debt crisis," he said.

While China's foreign trade with some developed economies remained weak in 2012, "the rate of increase between China and Latin America ranged from 12 to 15 percent. That's a remarkable rate," he added. According to the General Administration of Customs, China's exports from January to November last year surged by 7.3 percent year-on-year, down sharply from the year-on-year growth of 21.1 percent in the same period of 2011. In the first 11 months of 2012, China's foreign trade increased by 5.8 percent from a year earlier, well below the central government's target of 10 percent for the year. The deceleration was largely a result of the European debt crisis, which has dampened demand in the EU, China's chief trade partner. In November, China's exports to the EU fell by 18 percent from a year earlier, showing their sixth straight

monthly decline. Yang said Latin American countries can "provide Chinese companies good opportunities to increase their exports".

Latin America is key to the Chinese economyChina Daily, 1-8-2013, “Latin America offers way out of demand doldrums: Official,” http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2013-01/08/content_16093644.htm, accessed 5-10-2013Experts say Latin America complements China in many ways. "It has abundant land, mining and energy resources, and China has a lot of manufactured goods that they need. It's a good match," said Zhang Yansheng, secretary-general of the National Development and Reform Commission's academic committee. But he also has concerns. "We are far away from each other, which makes business exchanges more difficult to arrange than with other places," Zhang added. "And the political instability in the region and cultural differences also pose

difficulties to Chinese exporters." For Latin American countries that either rely greatly on mineral goods or are trying to diversify their exports,

China's gigantic market and its rapid growth are attractive attributes, he said. China is the largest export destination for Brazil, and also the largest for Chile. China's exports have been on the decline since the latter half of last year, although they increased by close to 10 percent in

September. Yet that recovery has inspired little confidence in the nation's export prospects. Chinese manufacturers are now facing their most difficult circumstances since the financial crisis and have been calling on the government to expand shipments to emerging markets. "Latin America plays a essential role in helping China stabilize its exports growth and sustain economic growth," said Yang.

Latin America is driving the Chinese economy with commodities exportsJonathan Watts, 3-26-2013, "China's exploitation of Latin American natural resources raises concern," Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/26/china-latin-america-resources-concern, accessed 5-10-2013The world's most populous nation has joined the ranks of wealthy countries in Europe, North America and east Asia that have long consumed and polluted unsustainably. This has led to what author Michael T Klare calls "a race for what's left" and its impact is particularly evident in the continent with much of the

untapped, unspoiled natural resources. Even more than Africa, Latin America has become a major focus of Beijing's drive for commodities. A study last year by Enrique Dussel Peters, a professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, found that the region has been the leading destination for Chinese foreign direct investment – mostly for raw materials and by big government-run

companies such as Chinalco and CNOOC. Since the 2008 financial crisis, China has also become the main lender to the region. In 2010, it provided $37bn (£24bn) in loans – more than the World Bank, Inter-American Bank and the US Import-Export Bank combined. Most of this has gone to four primary exporters – Venezuela, Brazil,

Argentina and Ecuador – for mining or transport infrastructure. The economic benefits have been enormous. Trade between China and Latin America was just $10bn in 2000. In 2011, it had surged to $241bn. While the distribution has varied enormously from country to country, this helped Latin America avoid the worst of the financial and economic crises that gripped much of the developed world and provided extra revenue for poverty

alleviation programmes that have eased the region's notorious inequality. It also played a major part in bolstering left-leaning governments that are seeking an alternative to neo-liberal prescriptions from Washington and Wall Street.


Chinese Economy Good – Nuclear War/Lashout

Chinese economic collapse causes World War IIITom Plate, Scholar of Asian and Pacific Studies at Loyola Marymount, 6-30-2003, “WHY NOT INVADE CHINA?” The Straits Times, p. npBut imagine a China disintegrating -- on its own, without neo-con or CIA prompting, much less outright military invasion -- because the economy (against all predictions) suddenly collapses. That would knock Asia into chaos. Refugees by the gazillions would head for Indonesia and other poorly border-patrolled places, which don't want them and can't handle them; some in Japan might lick their chops for World War II Redux and look to annex a slice of China. That would send small but successful Singapore and Malaysia -- once Japanese colonies -- into absolute nervous breakdowns. India might make a grab for Tibet, and while it does, Pakistan for Kashmir. Say hello to World War III Asia-style!

Chinese growth is key to check CCP lashoutSusan L. Shirk, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Prof @ UCSD, 2007, “China: Fragile Superpower,” p. npBy sustaining high rates of economic growth, China’s leaders create new jobs and limit the number of

unemployed workers who might go to the barricades. Binding the public to the Party through nationalism also helps preempt opposition. The trick is to find a foreign policy approach that can achieve both these vital objectives simultaneously. How long can it last? Viewed objectively, China’s communist regime looks surprisingly resilient. It may be capable of surviving for years to come so long as the economy continues to grow and create jobs. Survey research in Beijing shows widespread support (over 80 percent) for the political system as a whole linked to sentiments of nationalism and acceptance of the CCP’s argument about “stability first.”97 Without making any fundamental changes in the CCP- dominated political system—leaders from time to time have toyed with reform ideas such as local elections but in each instance have backed away for fear of losing control—the Party has bought itself time. As scholar Pei Minxin notes, the ability of communist regimes to use their patronage and coercion to hold on to power gives them little incentive to give up any of that

power by introducing gradual democratization from above. Typically, only when communist systems implode do their political fundamentals change.98 As China’s leaders well know, the greatest political risk lying ahead of them is the possibility of an economic crash that throws millions of workers out of their jobs or sends millions of depositors to withdraw their savings from the shaky banking system. A massive environmental or

public health disaster also could trigger regime collapse, especially if people’s lives are endangered by a media cover-up imposed by Party authorities.

Nationwide rebellion becomes a real possibility when large numbers of people are upset about the same issue at

the same time. Another dangerous scenario is a domestic or international crisis in which the CCP leaders feel compelled to lash out against Japan, Taiwan, or the United States because from their point of view not lashing out might endanger Party rule.

Chinese lashout results in biological and nuclear strikesRenxing San, 8-4-2005, Epoch Times, http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-8-4/30931.html, accessed 5-10-2013Since the Party’s life is “above all else,” it would not be surprising if the CCP resorts to the use of biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons in its attempt to extend its life. The CCP, which disregards human life, would not hesitate to kill two hundred million Americans, along with seven or eight hundred million Chinese, to achieve its ends. These speeches let the public see the CCP for what it really is. With evil filling its

every cell the CCP intends to wage a war against humankind in its desperate attempt to cling to life. That is the main theme of the speeches. This theme is murderous and utterly evil. In China we have seen beggars who coerced people to give them money by threatening to stab themselves with knives or pierce their throats with long nails. But we have never, until now, seen such a gangster who would use biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons to threaten the world, that all will die together with him. This bloody confession has confirmed the CCP’s nature: that of a monstrous murderer who has killed 80 million Chinese people and who now plans to hold one billion people hostage and gamble with their lives.


Chinese Economy Good – Impact Calculus

China has no checks on lashoutSusan L. Shirk, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Prof @ UCSD, 2007, “China: Fragile Superpower,” p. npThe Chinese system lacks effective checks and balances to keep its leaders from lashing out internationally to bolster themselves domestically. During 2002 through 2004 I interviewed officials and journalists in some of China’s most globalized regions, Guangdong, Shanghai, and Shandong, searching for signs that provinces play as active a

role in making foreign policy as they do in economic policymaking. The interests of provincial officials, as one Guangzhou journalist put it, “center on economic growth to get tax revenue, create jobs, and keep stability.” Whenever domestic unrest or international tension makes foreign investors uneasy, local officials invite them for tea and try to reassure them. Yet, except for narrowly framed issues, like making it easier for Guangdong businesspeople to travel back and forth to Hong Kong, provinces never get into the act of making foreign policy. Nor do they

necessarily favor a softer line. An informal poll of provincial officials enrolled in a short-term course at the Central Party School in 2001 found that they expressed surprisingly hard-line views on relations

with Japan and the United States. (One possible explanation was offered by a scholar who said that the local officials “free ride on hard- line nationalism” because it helps them get promoted but is

“completely disconnected from their local economic interests.”) Given the clout of provincial officials in domestic policymaking, it will be important to track how their foreign policy preferences and influence evolve as their local economies become increasingly tied into global trade and investment. Private business is the other group that has a strong stake in maintaining international economic ties and avoiding military conflict. A senior official responsible for Taiwan policy told me that a group of private business executives met with him and urged him to start a dialogue with Tai- wan because their businesses were being held back by the uncertainty in the Strait. But private entrepreneurs do not yet have an institutional political voice. Jiang Zemin made a big push to allow private business people to join the Communist Party—changing the

social base of the CCP would have broad ramifications for both domestic and foreign policy. But so far, only one private businessperson serves as an alternate member of the CCP Central Committee. A retired PLA general confided to me that he worries about the lack of a political counterweight to the nationalist public, military, and intelligence agencies that might push China’s leaders into military action.

Nationalism outweighs – lashout can happen fastErik Fogg, MA in International Relations at MIT, 12-6-2006, “The Chinese Nuclear Weapons Program and its Threat to the United States and Her Allies”, http://web.mit.edu/efogg/Public/chinanuclear.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Nonetheless, the United States should lay some concern to China’s arsenal. The Chinese central government is small and puts a great deal of operational power and authority into its local extremities, and central policies are sometimes ignored or run-around; there is no hegemonic hierrarchical control35. ¶ Further, the Chinese people are incredibly nationalistic (as shown by the fierce reactions against the bombing of the Belgrade Embassy and Koizumi’s visit to war criminals’ shrines), and may therefore be prone to making impassioned decisions that contradict more conservative Chinese central government policies. The members of the military that suggested conventional or nuclear war with the United States may not consider China’s economic interests to be as important as the occupation of Taiwan or China’s dignity and integrity, and may act independently. ¶ The DF-31 missile has a three-minute preparation time and is launched from a relatively simple truck. The hurdles between an overzealous general and the launch of a nuclear missile are relatively few. If the Chinese Second Artillery Corps (in command of the Chinese ballistic missile program) has one or more zealous anti-American generals, they may defy government policy in action, as they have defied it in word in the past. And with a three-minute preparation time, the DF-31 could be launched well before the central government could be warned. The Chinese government must be wary not to press nationalism too hard upon its people, and must make its rules and laws clearer, as well as enforce them, if it expects its localities and its military to abide by them. Otherwise, there may

very well be dark consequences, and great damage may be done to China and to the world.

High risk of miscalc with ChinaAndrew Scobell, Professor of International Affairs @ Texas A&M University, Summer 2009, “Is There a Civil-Military Gap in China’s Peaceful Rise?”, Parameters, http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/09summer/scobell.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013The actions suggest a lack of civilian control, although after the fact they have been explained as acts of deterrence. The reins of civilian control over the PLA seem to be quite loose. At the very

least there is poor communication and coordination with key civilian entities, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The result appears to be a roguish PLA that makes crisis management

all the more difficult and heightens the potential for worrisome misunderstandings and misperceptions. While these explanations may help one to make sense of the words and deeds of the

Chinese military, they do not provide much relief or reassurance. First, the risk of miscalculation between the United States and China may be high er than many assume. It is dangerous for American policymakers and analysts to consider US resolve in isolation. This strategy presumes that China’s perception of the strength of US resolve in and of itself will be enough to deter Beijing from military action. 50 The logic

is flawed. For China, US resolve on the question of Taiwan is viewed as limited , especially in comparison to other issues, and smaller than China’s own unshakeable

resolve. For Chinese analysts, accurately assessing US resolve is tricky. While Beijing can have a high degree of confidence in its own degree of resolve, it is much harder to judge Washington’s. Second, once a crisis or confrontation develops, the

potential for unintended escalation is significant . The militaries of the United States and China continue to think about and plan for a possible conflict over Taiwan. This does not mean that a war is


inevitable, but it does mean that in a crisis, escalation might be rapid and difficult to control. 51 At least there is improved communication between the two militaries; a hotline linking the Pentagon with the Central Military Commission was

established in early 2008.


Chinese Economy Good – Key Global Economy

China is key to the global economyLi Ling, Professor @ Peking, 2-5-2013, “China’s path gives global economy hope,” People’s Daily, http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90778/8122121.html, accessed 5-10-2013China has brought confidence and hope to a global economy that is still stuck in the mud. China's economy is developing fast in the transformation process. In 2012 when it slowed its growth rate, it still maintained a growth rate of 7.8 percent. It is expected that the

figure will be about 8.2 percent in 2013. This trend has been admired by many. When I attended various forums and communicated with participants, they all spoke highly of China's economic development. Of course China has its own problems. When I discussed with experts about the problems and solutions, I often heard that every country has problems, and different problems come at different times. The changes China has experienced these years show that it has the capability to solve its problems. Some politicians also praised China for its plan-making, governance and implementation capabilities. CEOs from transnational corporations believed that the Chinese branches have developed the fastest and have the most

potential. When the world's economy is full of uncertainties, confidence is the most vital thing. The scale of China's reform and development is one of the largest in human history. It not only brings vitality to the sustainable development of the world, but also brings confidence and hope . As an alternative to the Western

development mode, China's path is injecting more and more positive energy to the world.

China is increasingly important to the global economyColonial First State, 2013, "Reaching new heights- China’s role in driving world economic growth,” http://www.colonialfirststate.com.au/market-iq-news/economic-insights/reaching-new-heights.aspx?menutabtype=m, accessed 5-10-2013The past two years have highlighted the reliance of the global economy on the Western consumer, particularly in the US, as a source of growth. The US economy, although up

from its lows, is still working through its recovery and consumer spending remains weak. It’s becoming increasingly evident that the Asian region, and in particular China, will become an increasingly important driver of global economic growth. China’s growth is a stand-out, being among one of the first economies to recover from the global recession. Other Asian economies are also showing signs of growth. Economic performance Since its reform began at the end of the 1970s, China’s economy has been growing at an average rate of 9% annually. China has become the third largest world economy and by around 2030 it’s anticipated that

China will be the largest economy in the world. The table below shows that in the midst of the global recession, the Chinese economy recorded strong positive economic growth and retail sales. In contrast, the US consumer was experiencing large job losses and sharp falls in house prices, conditions not conducive to consumer spending.

China key to the global economyPeople’s Daily, 3-5-2010, "China's early rebound is of vital world significance," http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90780/91344/6910295.html, accessed 5-10-2013Foreign economists, experts and scholars alike commend China's superb performance with an 8.7 percent growth in 2009 from a year earlier, as both legislature and advisory body currently meet in session. China's quickest economic rebound is of vital global significance and the country has contributed immensely to the integral recovery of world economy. After

the onset of global financial crisis, according to an ace member of the South Korea's National Finance Investment Association, China's government's stimulus package has been implemented timely and efficiently. With a gradual recovery of world economy, a growing number of countries have come to realize the importance of Chinese economy and that the nation's role is also expanding . All industries in the Republic of Korea (ROK), such as shipbuilding, electronics and logistics, have forged close contact with China's

economy. ROK stock market was closely related to U.S. economy in the past and analysts often analyzed the United States' policy and economic trends then. But to date, the ROK stock market, however, has strong, close relations with China's economy. So, personalities from ROK

economic circles show a keen interest in the annual sessions of the Chinese NPC and the CPPCC National Committee in a hope to know more about Chinese economic policies via the country's NPC and CPPCC sessions. GDP growth rate in China was the highest among major economies with an 8.7 percent economic growth reported in 2009, noted Prof. John W. Lewis of Chinese politics at Stanford's center for international security and

cooperation in his recent letter to the "Financial Times". The nation's rapid growth in domestic demand to substitute for the role of external demand shows China's superior capability to cope with the external environment. The reason Asia has been able to lead the rest of the world toward recovery rapidly is that China's net import growth has played a crucial role.


AT: Chinese Economy Bad – Environment

Chinese government is trying to improve the economyFox News, 3-12-2013, "China's leaders promise cleaner environment but face economic, political obstacles," http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/12/china-leaders-promise-cleaner-environment-but-face-economic-political-obstacles/, accessed 5-10-2013Facing public outrage over smog-choked cities and filthy rivers, China's leaders are promising to clean up its neglected environment — a pledge that sets up a clash with political pressures to keep economic growth strong. An array of possible initiatives discussed by officials and state media ahead of this week's meeting of China's legislature include tightening water standards and taxing carbon emissions. No change is expected at the National People's Congress, which will be dominated by the installation of a new Cabinet under Communist Party leaders who took power in November. Pollution and public frustration about it are hardly new to China. But now, the ruling party is under pressure from entrepreneurs and professionals who are crucial to its development plans and want cleaner living conditions.

Chinese government will solve the environment nowXinhua, 3-4-2013, "China to enhance environmental protection legislation," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-03/04/c_132206837.htm, accessed 5-10-2013China's top legislature will "respond positively" to the public concerns on environmental issues, a spokeswoman said at a press conference on Monday. The National People's Congress (NPC) will revise and improve the Law on the Prevention and Treatment of Air Pollution and the Environmental Protection Law, said Fu Ying, spokeswoman for the first session of the 12th NPC, which kicks off on March 5. Other measures include enhancing supervision and scrutiny of law enforcement, making environmental protection efforts and results part of the performance evaluations of local governments, and drawing up specific control measures on major pollutants and vehicle emissions, she said.

China will use tax policy to fix the environmentChina Briefing, 3-15-2013, “Report: China to Introduce Environmental Protection Tax, Carbon Tax,” http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2013/03/15/report-china-to-introduce-environmental-protection-tax-carbon-tax.html, accessed 5-10-2013According to a recent report presented by Jia Chen, head of the Tax Division at China’s Ministry of Finance (MOF), China will proactively introduce a set of new taxation policies designed to preserve the environment. “The Chinese government will collect the environmental protection tax instead of pollutant discharge fees, as well as levy a tax on carbon dioxide emissions, and the local authorities will be responsible for the tax collection,” Jia said in the report. This announcement came unexpectedly and its significance is huge, as China is far and away the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and burns nearly as much coal as the rest of the world combined. Therefore, even a small carbon tax imposed by the Chinese government would mean a significant step forward for the planet. “In the U.S. or most of the EU, other than Norway and Ireland, there is still no carbon tax, so if the Chinese government were starting small — using this very small amount to send a signal — and then planned to ratchet up the tax over time, that would be a very important move,” commented Thomas Kerr, the World Economic Forum’s Head of Climate Change Initiatives.


AT: Chinese Economy Bad – Warming

China will move to clean tech now – solves emissionsLuke Schoen, Associate in the Climate & Energy Program at WRI Insights, 10-19-2012, “Policy Experts Provide Insights Into China’s Leadership Transition,” http://insights.wri.org/news/2012/10/policy-experts-provide-insights-chinas-leadership-transition, accessed 5-10-2013Deborah Seligsohn, a climate and energy advisor to WRI, rounded out the call by highlighting that China’s economic restructuring can be compatible with environmental protection, including around action to address climate change. China’s efforts to control emissions will be “good for climate change, the planet, and other environmental issues that they have to grapple with,” Seligsohn

said. She discussed the main drivers behind China’s energy and climate actions, includ ing the country’s desire to: restructure its economy; increase innovation and development of new technologies; move toward greater environmental protections; and meet its targets in the 12th five-year plan. Seligsohn concluded that “there is strong agreement [among Chinese officials] that part of development is being both cleaner and more technologically sophisticated and having a more diverse economy.” China’s Energy

Future The discussions held during the call point to one key takeaway: Together, these underlying factors may indeed push China toward a lower-carbon energy future. These changes are unlikely to occur quickly, but we’ll all be watching closely to see if China’s new leadership is able to manage a transition to clean energy while ensuring the country stays on a solid growth pathway.

China is committed to moving to a low-carbon economy nowXinlei Li, Ph.D. Candidate, Environmental Policy Research Center, Graduate School of Global Politics, Freie Universität Berlin, 10-6-2012, “Green Evidence for Energy Security Transformation in China: Re‐conceptualization of Energy Security and Its Implication to China’s Renewable Energy Policy Change,” https://www.conftool.pro/bc2012/index.php/Li-Green_Evidence_for_Energy_Security_Transformation_in_China-159.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013Based on the emphasis on reducing energy intensity, China has further explicitly shown its political commitment on reducing the carbon intensity and constructing low carbon economy‐ . From the perspective of sustainable development, fossil fuels are the main culprit of global greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, reducing the

dependence on fossil fuels such as coal and oil is not only the need for energy supply security, but also a key factor for societal and environmental acceptability, which as green constraints for energy use security. In the 2009 Copenhagen conference, Chinese government has first time made a voluntary commitment for decreasing 40% ‐ 45% unit of GDP carbon dioxide emissions by 2020 based on the 2005 level. What is noteworthy that in 2010 Cancun Conference, all developed and developing countries are asked to take measurable, reportable and verifiable greenhouse gas emission reduction actions, which

symbolizing the rising international binding level of carbon intensity control. In the thirteenth meeting of the 11th NPC Standing Committee in February 2010, the NDRC has issued a report to officially involve the per unit GDP carbon dioxide emissions as significant compulsory binding

indicator into the 12th Five‐Year Plan. This indicates that the carbon intensity has been formally absorbed into the Chinese energy security concept. In the 12th Five‐Year Plan, it mentions that China will strive to establish a competitive renewable energy industry system, to

make a reduction of 16% energy intensity and 17% carbon intensity by 2015 compared with the 2010 level. Meanwhile on December 1st 2011, the 41st file from State Council is issued to formally decompose the whole targets and assign them to different provinces and municipalities(Wang 2012).

Chinese renewable development is coming nowXinlei Li, Ph.D. Candidate, Environmental Policy Research Center, Graduate School of Global Politics, Freie Universität Berlin, 10-6-2012, “Green Evidence for Energy Security Transformation in China: Re‐conceptualization of Energy Security and Its Implication to China’s Renewable Energy Policy Change,” https://www.conftool.pro/bc2012/index.php/Li-Green_Evidence_for_Energy_Security_Transformation_in_China-159.pdf, accessed 5-10-2013At the same time, China has accelerated the renewable energy development (especially wind, solar, biomass energy), actively engaged in clean coal and CCS carbon capture technology, in order to realize the following binding targets: the ration of non‐fossil fuels in primary energy accounting for 11.4% by 2015 and 15% by 2020.① These targets have been embodied in the local climate initiatives and low‐carbon city campaigns, for instance, the NDRC launched “Low‐Carbon Pilot Cities and Provinces Project ” in August 2010, five provinces (Guangdong, Liaoning, Hubei, Shaanxi, Yunnan) and eight cities(Tianjin,

Chongqing, Shenzhen, Xiamen, Hangzhou, Nanchang, Guiyang, Baoding) will act as low‐carbon pilots to promote the low ‐ carbon development planning and accelerate the establishment of low carbon emissions industrial system , so as to put low‐carbon energy security concept into practice . Since

then, the low carbon discourse has become an important component of China's energy security concept , which

signposting the green turning of carbon intensity reduction in China's energy security strategy.

http://insights.wri.org/news/2012/10/policy-experts-provide-insights-chinas-leadership-transition

http://insights.wri.org/news/2012/10/policy-experts-provide-insights-chinas-leadership-transition


AT: Chinese Influence Bad – Hegemony

Chinese-Latin American cooperation doesn’t kill US hegJiang Shixue, prof @ Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 11-3-2011, “The U.S. Factor in Sino-Latin American Relations,” China US Focus, http://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/the-u-s-worry-factor-in-sino-latin-american-relations/, accessed 5-10-2013Fourth, China’s cooperation with Latin America in military and security fields is not targeting any third party and it is hardly a secret issue. China’s first policy paper on Latin America, published in November 2008, openly set aside one section to deal with the issue. It said: “The Chinese side will actively carry out military exchanges and defense dialogue and cooperation with Latin American and Caribbean countries. Mutual visits by defense and military officials of the two sides, as well as personnel exchanges, will be enhanced.” Moreover, China’s military relations with Latin America are undertaken according to the following principles: 1) to gain better understanding of the Latin American military; 2) to improve professional expertise by learning from each other; 3) never target any third party; and 4) never harm regional and hemispheric stability. These principles are not counter to U.S. national interest and dominance in the western hemisphere.

Chinese growth is net better for the USUSA Today, 7-15-2010, “U.S. companies turn to China, other Asian nations, for growth,” http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2010-07-15-asiaexpansion15_ST_N.htm, accessed 5-10-2013The recent global recession has whet U.S. companies' appetite for growth in Asia. American corporations, including Wal-Mart, Pfizer and Yum Brands, are aggressively expanding, or planning to do so, in emerging economies such as China, where there's often greater growth potential than the U.S. Besides having a

relatively strong economy, the largest Asian nations also boast billions of potential consumers for everything from pharmaceuticals to cars, credit cards and clothing. In 2008, nearly half of U.S. companies surveyed saw their China-

based businesses perform better than the overall company, the U.S.-China Business Council found in a poll of its members. The results show that the once-prevalent notion that U.S. companies "cannot be profitable in China is a myth , " says

John Frisbie, the council's president. Even though the U.S. economy is recovering, the tough economic climate means that "growth has never been more important , and that's what dried up, " says Kent Kedl, general manager at Technomic Asia, a market strategy firm. U.S. companies are looking to China and other parts of Asia as the "hot spot of global growth opportunities."

Only the plan links – China will be constructive unless challenged by the US Deborah Welch Larson, Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Alexei Shevchenko, Assistant Professor of Political Science at California State University, Fullerton, Spring 2010, “Status Seekers: Chinese and Russian Responses to U.S. Primacy,” International Security, Vol. 34, No. 4, p. 63-95In sum, China has increasingly taken on a more activist, constructive world role that includes increased support for multilateralism, a policy that has reassured other states, enhanced China’s global role, and increased its relative status. Nevertheless, the United States must remain attentive to China’s status concerns, because Beijing is increasingly sensitive about its relative position and role in international gatherings such as the newly important G-20 and to the U.S. naval presence in Chinese coastal waters, claiming the area as part of its sphere of influence.135


AT: Chinese Influence Bad – Latin American Economy

Chinese and regional manufacturers are balancing – doesn’t push them outSebastian Sarmiento-Saher, editorial assistant for The Diplomat, 3-14-2013, “China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition,” http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-10-2013Despite these issues, recent external and internal developments may be creating an opportunity for the region to balance its growing economic relations with China. Notably, China’s comparative advantage may be eroding due to increased production costs and Beijing’s desire to lead its economy toward higher-end manufacturing and domestic consumption. If this trend continues, it would help beleaguered Mexico, whose security and political problems may finally start to improve and give Mexican industries a chance to compete on the global stage. Using targeted policies, other countries with manufacturing sectors may benefit from China’s economic restructuring.

Chinese investment in Latin America doesn’t cause Dutch DiseaseSebastian Sarmiento-Saher, editorial assistant for The Diplomat, 3-14-2013, “China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition,” http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-10-2013In terms of development overall, alarmism about China keeping LAC economies dependent on natural resources is overblown. As Latin America continues to grapple with deficits in infrastructure, education, and social mobility, the question about whether growing economic ties with the PRC will be a burden or a key opportunity lies in the actions of Latin America, not China. The central issue is about governance: those countries that benefit over the long term from the current commodity boom will be the ones most judicious when it comes to future investments and industrial policy. Fighting corruption is difficult anywhere, and Latin America is no exception. As democracy deepens and middle classes emerge in the region, new stakeholders will hold governments accountable.

Chinese growth is key to Latin American economiesBarry Eichengreen, Poly Sci Prof @ Berkeley, et al, March 2011, "When Fast Growing Economies Slow Down: International Evidence And Implications For China", National Bureau Of Economic Research, http://www.nber.org/papers/w16919.pdf?new_window=1, accessed 5-10-2013In addition, the large and fast-growing Chinese economy is increasingly viewed as a key engine of growth for the world economy. The advanced industrial countries, the traditional engines of global growth, have inherited serious problems from the crisis: weakened household balance sheets, increased public debts, and still troubled financial systems. In contrast, China

experienced few problems as a result of the crisis. There were few bank and enterprise failures. At the height of the crisis in 2009, growth “slowed” just to 9.2 per cent. Both advanced and developing countries benefited from China’s resilience. Robust Chinese demand lifted capital goods exports from Germany and Japan and commodity exports from Africa and Latin America. In particular, demand from China contributed substantially to recovery in East and Southeast Asia, which has close trade linkages with China.


Russia DA


Russia DA 1NC

US-Russian relations fragile but growing closerChristian Science Monitor, 5/7/13, "At Kerry-Putin meeting, US-Russia relations thaw – a little," www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2013/0507/At-Kerry-Putin-meeting-US-Russia-relations-thaw-a-little, accessed 5/15/13Experts say the atmosphere is a bit more favorable for US-Russia detente today than a few months ago, when each side

was passing laws that branded some of the other's officials as criminals . In part that may be because the tragedy of last month's Boston Marathon bombing has focused minds in both countries on the need for greatly improved security cooperation between their intelligence services. One of the main purposes of Kerry's two day visit, his first to Moscow since becoming secretary of State, is to prepare the ground for two high-profile upcoming meetings between Mr. Obama and Putin. The first is the G-8 summit, to be held this year in Northern Ireland in just over a month's time. Then, in September Obama will visit Russia for the first time since 2009, where he will hold meetings with Putin on the sidelines of the G-20 leader's

summit in St. Petersburg. "The Boston tragedy may turn out to be a catalyst which offers Obama and Putin an opportunity to do what they've clearly wanted to do for some time, which is to arrest the deterioration of the US-Russia relationship," says Sergei Markov, a political analyst and former adviser to Putin. "With Russophobia running rampant in the US these days, and anti-Americanism so strong in Russia, it's not easy for the two presidents to overcome the public moods. But everyone agrees on the need for better security, so they

can shake hands, make a deal about that, then move forward with other serious matters," he adds. Mr. Markov says the current upswing bodes well for almost all aspects of the troubled relationship, except Syria.

The plan is an intrusion into Russia’s sphere of influence[Insert Link]

Violating Russia’s sphere of influence in Latin America ensures relations collapseTed Carpenter, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, 10/19/10, "Resets and Spheres of Influence," The National Interest, nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/resets-spheres-influence-4266, accessed 5/24/13Like the proverbial broken clock that is right twice a day, however, the hawks are correct with respect to the Russian-Venezuelan nuclear deal. The United States has an important

interest at stake in making sure that Latin America, currently a nuclear-weapons-free zone, stays free of nuclear weapons. Moscow’s willingness to help Hugo Chavez, the Crazy Eddie of the Western Hemisphere, acquire nuclear capabilities—even if they are ostensibly for peaceful power-generation purposes—is an unfriendly act in our geopolitical back yard. Both sides need to back off. Russia needs to find a graceful way out of its increasingly cozy relationship with Chavez, and the United States needs to stop talking about deploying missile defenses or

expanding NATO eastward. Washington and Moscow must acknowledge that the concept of spheres of influence is alive and well, and that gratuitous violations of that concept will negate any prospect for a reset in relations. U.S. leaders must also comprehend that cordial relations with China require a willingness to accept that East Asia’s rapidly rising great power will seek to establish a sphere of influence in its neighborhood. Beijing’s expansive territorial claims in the South China Sea and the recent spat with Japan over disputed islets in another body of water are signs of that process. China’s growing power and assertiveness means that the United States will need to tread softly regarding such territorial disputes, as well as the even more sensitive Taiwan issue, if

Washington wants to avoid nasty confrontations with Beijing. Condoleezza Rice could not have been more wrong. Whether we like it or not, spheres of influence will be a crucial feature of international politics—and especially of great power relations—in the twenty-first century. It is imperative that U.S. policy makers understand and adjust to that reality.

Maintaining relations with Russia prevents nuclear conflictGraham Allison, Director Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 10/30/11, “Ten Reasons Why Russia Still Matters,” Politico, http://www.cfr.org/russian-fed/ten-reasons-why-russia-still-matters/p26345, accessed 5/20/13No one denies that Russia is a dangerous, difficult, often disappointing state to do business with. We should not overlook its many human rights and legal failures. Nonetheless, Russia is a player whose choices affect our vital interests in nuclear security and energy. It is key to supplying 100,000 U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan and preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Ten realities require U.S. policymakers to advance our nation's interests by engaging and working with Moscow. First, Russia remains the only nation that can erase the United States from the map in 30 minutes. As every president since John F. Kennedy has

recognized, Russia's cooperation is critical to averting nuclear war.

http://www.cfr.org/russian-fed/ten-reasons-why-russia-still-matters/p26345



Uniqueness – Relations High

Response to the Boston bombings have restored relationsCory Welt, Adjunct Fellow at the Center for American Progress, 4/22/13, "The Boston Marathon Attack, the North Caucasus, and U.S.-Russian Relations," www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2013/04/22/61146/the-boston-marathon-attack-the-north-caucasus-and-u-s-russian-relations/, accessed 5/12/13The Russian response to the Boston attack was entirely welcome, as sympathetic and supportive as have been American responses to terrorist attacks in Russia. In a call that Russian President Vladimir Putin initiated to President Barack Obama, the two leaders discussed the possibility of increased counterterrorism cooperation. The impact of the attack on U.S.-Russian relations has provided an echo of the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, which prompted a boost in the U.S.-Russian security partnership . This may seem like a dramatic turnaround given the decline in U.S.-Russian relations over the past year, especially in light of

Moscow’s January termination of an agreement on law enforcement and counternarcotics cooperation. But in recent months the U.S. and Russian governments have been seeking ways to renew security cooperation on issues such as nuclear nonproliferation and arms control via updated mechanisms. The Boston attack provides an entry point for discussions in the counterterrorism sphere.

US/Russia cooperation increasingReuters, 4/20/13, Boston bombings: a chance for U.S.-Russia cooperation, www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/20/us-usa-explosions-russia-cooperation-idUSBRE93J0F520130420, accessed 5/12/13Instead, he and the U.S. president made positive statements about cooperation on counterterrorism in a phone conversation on Friday, suggesting both sides see an opportunity to improve strained relations between their countries. "I hope the revelation of the bombers' Chechen ties will, if anything,

open a window of opportunity to repair U.S.-Russia security cooperation ," said Matthew Rojansky, deputy director of the Russia and Eurasia program at the

Carnegie Endowment in Washington. The Kremlin said in a brief statement after the phone call between Putin and Obama that the two presidents had agreed to step up cooperation on counterterrorism. Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, sounded an upbeat note in a television interview, telling state-run Russia 24: "I think that there will be contacts between our intelligence services." He gave no details. A U.S. law enforcement source told Reuters on Saturday that Russia had asked the FBI to investigate Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011. It was not clear what Moscow had done to cooperate with Washington since Monday's bombings, but even small steps would be progress in a security relationship that has worsened in recent years. Moscow and Washington have been at odds over the conflict in Syria and what the U.S. government sees as a clampdown on dissent since Putin's return to the Kremlin for a third term as president last May. WASHINGTON WANTS RESET, KREMLIN WANTS RETHINK The Kremlin appears to hope Washington will be forced into a rethink on the North Caucasus, even though the U.S. State Department said in its latest survey of human rights around the world that the rule of law was "particularly deficient" there. Putin cemented his rise to power by crushing an independence bid by Chechnya in the second of two wars there, so is sensitive to any criticism of his handling of the Islamist

insurgency that has now spread across the North Caucasus. Robert Legvold, professor emeritus at Columbia University and a Russia expert, said the events in Boston would help increase U.S.-Russian cooperation because the sides would share intelligence and information about the suspects. He underlined that Russia had been quick to rally behind Washington after the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, and a similar deepening of security cooperation could take place now. "I think in the end, the Russians under Putin want to keep the relationship as constructive as possible," Legvold said. "This episode is likely to be more positive than negative (for U.S.-Russian relations)." Putin needs

closer cooperation on security matters now because he wants to ensure the 2014 Winter Olympics pass off peacefully in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, which is close to the violence in the North Caucasus. During a visit to Moscow by White House national security adviser Tom Donilon this

week, the two sides avoided hostile public rhetoric in a sign they want to get the "reset" in relations, sought by Obama when he became president, on track.

Problem areas in the US/Russia relationship are being resolved constructively nowChristian Science Monitor, 5/7/13, "At Kerry-Putin meeting, US-Russia relations thaw – a little," www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2013/0507/At-Kerry-Putin-meeting-US-Russia-relations-thaw-a-little, accessed 5/15/13Other areas of tension in US-Russian relations look more promising, say experts . They include Afghanistan, where the Russians are increasingly alarmed

about what might happen after NATO draws down its forces next year. Even the thorny issue of a NATO-run anti-missile shield in Europe , which has stymied negotiators

for years, could see significant progress when Putin and Obama talk face-to-face in coming months, analysts say. "We will likely see a renewal of constructive dialogue about missile defense. There are a lot of small technical compromises that could be made quickly, and would build confidence," says Markov. "A full agreement is probably some time off, but the re-start of serious negotiations could happen very soon."


Uniqueness – AT: Magnitsky/Adoption

Magnitsky and Yakovlev won’t undermine relationsChristian Science Monitor, 4/15/13, Can US-Russia relations get back on track after human rights blacklists?, www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0415/Can-US-Russia-relations-get-back-on-track-after-human-rights-blacklists, accessed 5/18/13After the battle of the blacklists, can the US-Russia relationship get back on track? The leaders of both countries on Monday signaled a desire to move beyond a recent deterioration in what were already brittle relations. Last Friday, the United States released a list of 18 Russians subject to sanctions for alleged involvement in human rights abuses – prompting Russia to retaliate over the weekend with its own list of 18 Americans targeted for similar sanctions. The tit for tat of blacklists, which some US-Russia analysts describe as more worthy of the cold-war era, is the outcome of laws passed in 2012. After the US Congress approved a law targeting Russian human rights abusers, Russia retaliated with its own law banning adoptions of Russian children by Americans and providing for the targeting of US rights abusers. The US law was named the Magnitsky Act after Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian tax collector who reported hundreds of millions of dollars in stolen tax receipts, only to be thrown in prison, where he died in 2009. The Russian legislation approved in December was named for Dima Yakovlev, a Russian boy who died in 2008 after his adoption by a Virginia family. Now President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin are hinting at their hopes for getting past the Magnitsky and Yakovlev affairs to issues of mutual interest to the two powers, like missile defense and nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation.

Fallout from Magnitsky being managed nowReuters, 4/20/13, Boston bombings: a chance for U.S.-Russia cooperation, www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/20/us-usa-explosions-russia-cooperation-idUSBRE93J0F520130420, accessed 5/12/13The main obstacle to better ties in the past few months has been a row in which the United States passed legislation to punish Russians suspected of involvement in human rights abuses including the 2009 death of whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky in a Russian jail, and tit-for-tat moves adopted by Russia. But political analysts say the former Cold War enemies have both shown that despite the dispute, they want to limit the damage to relations.

Magnitsky sanctions were watered down – prevents relations backlashChristian Science Monitor, 4/15/13, Can US-Russia relations get back on track after human rights blacklists?, www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0415/Can-US-Russia-relations-get-back-on-track-after-human-rights-blacklists, accessed 5/18/13In fact, some Russian lawmakers had breathed a sigh of relief Friday when the Treasury Department released the list of 18 Russians to be slapped with visa bans and a freeze on any US assets, saying the list of mostly minor police and prison officials suggested that the Obama administration hoped to avoid rising tensions with Russia. “The US ... administration has decided against the path of escalating a political crisis with Moscow,” said Alexei Pushkov, chairman of the Russian Duma’s foreign affairs committee, in an interview with the Interfax news agency. He went on to describe the Obama administration as “disposed to be more reasonable than Congress.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0415/Can-US-Russia-relations-get-back-on-track-after-human-rights-blacklists





Uniqueness – AT: Syria

The US and Russia are finding common ground on SyriaDeutsche Welle, 5/8/13, "US, Russia seek to bridge divide over Syria," www.dw.de/us-russia-seek-to-bridge-divide-over-syria/a-16799373, accessed 5/21/13For more than two years, Washington and Moscow have been at loggerheads over Syria, as the civil war there continued to escalate. But now, the former Cold War foes are promising to bridge the diplomatic divide. If one were to take US Secretary of State John Kerry at his word, then the diplomatic stalemate between America and Russia over the Syrian civil war seems to have been a miscommunication. During talks in Moscow, Kerry told Russian President Vladimir Putin that the US and Russia have "very significant common interests" in pushing for a negotiated settlement to the conflict in Syria.

US and Russia working together on a negotiated settlement in SyriaBoston Globe, 5/18/13, "US, Russia may have found common ground in Syria," www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2013/05/17/russia-may-have-found-common-ground-syria/gRYLO15upAve8ymot6zhrI/story.html, accessed 5/24/13Despite fight after fight in recent months over everything from new sanctions targeting Russian officials for rights abuses to the detention of a US Embassy official this week on charges of espionage, the two diplomats seem to have found common purpose on one of the most intractable disputes between the United States and Russia: Syria’s civil war. Although much remains uncertain, they have revived the prospect of a negotiated settlement in Syria that was first proposed a year ago but then abandoned as the death toll from the war grimly mounted. They have done so with greater comity than Lavrov ever showed toward Clinton or her predecessor, Condoleezza Rice. Both women had famously frosty relationships with Lavrov and Russia’s leader, President Vladimir V. Putin, shaped in no small part by the Russians’ perception that the United States relentlessly meddles in their country’s internal affairs.

The US has capitulated to Russian demands over SyriaDeutsche Welle, 5/8/13, "US, Russia seek to bridge divide over Syria," www.dw.de/us-russia-seek-to-bridge-divide-over-syria/a-16799373, accessed 5/21/13The US position, however, may have moved closer to Russia's stance in one important respect. Kerry maintained that he does not personally see how Assad could play a role in a political transition. But the US secretary of state also said that it's for the Syrians to decide who ultimately participates in the process, leaving open the possibility that negotiations could include Assad."In some ways the United States has backed down from its more hard-line position in the beginning, which was that Assad has to go," Landis said. "The Russians made it very clear, that they would not accept preconditions - that they can't tell Assad to go."


Uniqueness – Sphere of Influence

US retreating from the Russian sphere of influence nowJackson Adams, Editorial intern at The American Spectator, 2/22/13, "Resetting the Reset on Russian Relations," American Spectator, spectator.org/blog/2013/02/22/resetting-the-reset, accessed 5/23/13All of this happens to be congealing in a period of U.S. disengagement. Mr. Kura-Murza noted that the State Department blandly congratulated the Russian people on their successful election on the same day as the election protests. As the U.S. pulls out of Afghanistan and quietly stops talking about a “new silk road,” they cede Central Asia to Russia’s sphere of influence. Finally, Russian moves to block action in Syria and Iran have so far met no apparent American resistance

Missile defense retreat shows respect for the Russian sphere of influence nowNew York Times, 3/16/13, "U.S. Cancels Part of Missile Defense That Russia Opposed," www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/world/europe/with-eye-on-north-korea-us-cancels-missile-defense-russia-opposed.html, accessed 5/14/13The United States has effectively canceled the final phase of a Europe-based missile defense system that was fiercely opposed by Russia and cited repeatedly by the Kremlin as a major obstacle to cooperation on nuclear arms reductions and other issues. Russian officials here have so far declined to comment on the announcement, which was made in Washington on Friday by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel as part of a plan to deploy additional ballistic missile interceptors to counter North Korea. The cancellation of some European-based defenses will allow resources to be shifted to protect against North Korea. Aides to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said there would be no reaction until early next week, when they expect to be briefed by American officials. But Russian news accounts quickly raised the possibility that the decision could portend a breakthrough in what for years has been a largely intractable dispute between Russia and the United States. A headline by the Itar-Tass news agency declared, “U.S. abandons fourth phase of European missile defense system that causes the greatest objections from Russia.”

The US is demonstrating respect for the Russian sphere of influenceWashington Post, 5/15/10, “U.S. abandoning Russia's neighbors,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/14/AR2010051404496.html, accessed 5/10/13Obama and other senior U.S. officials have repeatedly said they do not recognize a Russian "sphere of influence," but actions, or non-actions, speak louder than those words. Through its neglect of countries in the region except for Russia, the administration is ceding to Moscow exactly such a sphere. By some counts, Obama has spoken and met with his "friend and partner," President Dmitry Medvedev, more times than with any other leader, including on Thursday. He should use those occasions to lay down clear markers that Russian aggression toward and occupation of its neighbors are unacceptable. He also should start making "friends and partners" elsewhere in the region. Some of these leaders aren't the easiest to get along with, nor are they poster children for democracy and human rights -- but then again, neither are Medvedev and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/14/AR2010051404496.html


Link – Venezuela – Sphere of Influence

Russia views Venezuela in zero sum terms – US engagement is an encroachment on their sphere of influenceMichael Maloof, staff writer for WND and G2Bulletin and a former senior security policy analyst in the office of the secretary of defense, 3/3/13, "RUSSIA-CHINA STANDOFF IN VENEZUELA," WND, www.wnd.com/2013/03/russia-china-standoff-in-venezuela/Sechin and Maduro finalized a number of agreements that help assure Russia’s future position in Venezuela and keeps pace with China, which has loaned billions of dollars to the Chavez government to help ensure security of its own oil investments in the country. Both countries are in the process of helping develop Venezuela’s oil reserves, said to be the largest in the world at an estimated 296 billion barrels. Regional sources say that Sechin negotiated almost $47 billion in investments in the Venezuelan oil sector, including agreements to set up a joint Russia-Venezuela drilling and manufacturing company and to permit increased Russian access to offshore oil

reserves. However, both countries also have an ulterior strategic reason for maintaining their position in Venezuela, and that is having a base from which to watch and undertake a containment approach toward the United States. Russia is using its investments as a way to obtain more bases for its navy. In

2008, Russia sent in long-range bombers and a naval squadron to Venezuela. While it hasn’t done a repeat of these deployments,

Russia wants permanent basing rights in Venezuela. Russia also has expanded its arms sales to Venezuela, including more than 100,000 Kalashnikov rifles, Mi-35 helicopters, Su-30 jet fighters, air defense systems, tanks and armored vehicles. If Chavez dies, there is a question as

to what extent a new leader will be as friendly to both Russia and China. Any new leadership probably will continue working with them but could be friendlier to the United States,

unlike the Chavez regime, according to informed sources. In turn, this could create a climate for further American investment which the Russians would then find competitive with their own interests.

Russia is trying to build a strategic relationship with Venezuela to further its global powerInter Press Service, 3/18/13, "Russia to Get Venezuelan Oil for a Few Cents a Barrel," www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/russia-to-get-venezuelan-oil-for-a-few-cents-a-barrel/, accessed 3/18/13“Rosneft’s agreements with PDVSA are part of Russia’s projection towards Latin America, a region that has traditionally been in the sphere of influence of the United States,” said Kenneth Ramírez, an expert on oil geopolitics and president of the private Venezuelan Council of International Relations.

This projection is part of “Russia’s grand strategy to re-emerge as a global power and replicate the advance of

Washington over what was once its zone of influence, in central and southern Asia, the Caucasus, the Balkans and the Black Sea,” he told IPS. “Among its strategies is strengthening its ties with Brazil, the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and making advances to ALBA (the eight-member Bolivarian Alliance of the Peoples of Our America) which is led by Venezuela,” Ramírez said. Russian President Vladimir Putin sent the head of Rosneft, Igor Sechin, as his special representative to the state funeral for Chávez on Mar. 8. Sechin met with Nicolás Maduro, the acting president of Venezuela and the candidate expected to win the Apr. 14 elections, to smooth over obstacles in the bilateral oil relationship. Local media indicate PDVSA is having difficulties meeting its financial commitments, pointing to delays in its obligations to Brazilian state oil company Petrobras for the construction of the Abreu e

Lima refinery. But oil minister Rafael Ramírez, who is also head of PDVSA, confirmed “the commitment to continue the energy policy begun in 1999″ by the late president Chávez. “The strategic relationship with China and Russia will be deepened, in concordance with the multipolar scheme that has been the basis of the foreign policy of the revolution,” said the minister. As the projects are developed, the Russian-Venezuelan alliance will invest 46 billion dollars in the Orinoco belt, of which Moscow will contribute 17 billion dollars, he said. Kenneth Ramírez highlighted that Rosneft is also working in mature fields (those in which production has passed its peak) in areas other than the Orinoco belt, and has signed agreements to

participate in future gas production and to supply drills for crude extraction. “Moscow isn’t seeking supplies of oil, since it has reserves of 88 billion barrels,

but it’s looking for deals to leverage a strategic alliance,” he said.

Venezuela is one of Russia’s most important strategic partnersPravda, 3/6/13, "What will Russia do without Venezuela?," english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/06-03-2013/123984-russia_venezuela-0/, accessed 5/24/13Chavez was consistently pursuing the policy of building friendship with Russia. During the recent years, Caracas has become one of the most important strategic partners of Moscow on the Latin American continent.


Link Booster – Venezuelan Importance to Russia

Venezuela is a critical source of oil and arms sales for RussiaPravda, 3/6/13, "What will Russia do without Venezuela?," english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/06-03-2013/123984-russia_venezuela-0/, accessed 5/24/13First of all, it goes about the development of Junin-6 field in the Orinoco Oil Belt, where commercial production has already started. The total investment in the project is evaluated at $20 billion. All Russian companies take part in five projects for the extraction of oil in Venezuela. Russian oil company Rosneft signed documents on the possible participation in a number of projects on the shelf of Venezuela, including natural gas projects, as well as memorandums of understanding. Agreements in the field of hydropower were also signed. The head of the state-owned company, Igor Sechin, who visited the country at the end of December, said that Russian investments were protected and projects would be implemented in a long term perspective. Defense cooperation between Russia and Venezuela takes a special place. As predicted by the Center for the Analysis of World Arms Trade, Venezuela is to be ranked second in Russia's arms exports in 2012-2015, following India, with the purchasing volume of $3.2 billion.

Russia has a ton of arms sales wrapped up in VenezuelaKommersant, 3/11/13, "WILL RUSSIA'S COZY RELATIONSHIP WITH VENEZUELA DIE WITH CHAVEZ?," worldcrunch.com/world-affairs/will-russia-039-s-cozy-relationship-with-venezuela-die-with-chavez-/venezuela-chavez-russia-oil-military-trade-weapons/c1s11149/, accessed 5/22/13When word first came out in 2011 that Hugo Chavez was suffering from a serious illness, a Russian military source predicted the consequences of the end of the Chavez era: not only could Moscow lose contracts already signed, but it might also never get paid for weapons it has already delivered to Caracas. Russia has a lot to lose in Venezuela. In total, experts estimate that the projects that Moscow had inked with Chavez are worth no less than $30 billion. And now the guarantor is gone.

Russia wants Venezuelan oilInter Press Service, 3/18/13, "Russia to Get Venezuelan Oil for a Few Cents a Barrel," www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/russia-to-get-venezuelan-oil-for-a-few-cents-a-barrel/, accessed 3/18/13Russian state oil firm Rosneft and Venezuela’s PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela S.A.) have agreed to form a partnership to exploit an oilfield with estimated reserves of 40 billion barrels, strengthening the alliance between the two countries. For 1.5 billion dollars, the Russian company will take over 40 percent of a project at a Venezuelan deposit expected to produce 400,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude in five years’ time, executives from the two companies said. “It is an attractive deal for Rosneft to buy, or gain access to, reserves at a very low price. That 40 percent interest ‘buys’ 16 billion barrels at a cost of 10 cents of a dollar per barrel,” Víctor Poleo, a professor of graduate studies in oil economics at the Central University of Venezuela, told IPS. The cost of a barrel of oil on the international market is between 90 and 110 dollars.


Link – Cuba – Sphere of Influence

Russia sees increased US engagement with Cuba as encroaching on its sphere of influenceCarneades, Financial Analyst, 4/17/09, "Cuba: Sphere of Influence?," The Value at Risk, thevalueatrisk.blogspot.com/2009/04/cuba-sphere-of-influence.html, accessed 5/24/13The Obama Administration's recent engagement with Cuba has provoked outrage by those who, accurately so, portrary the Castro Regime as an authoritarian dictatorship that has accomplished little aside from keeping its citizens equally impoverished. Numerous motivations have been attributed to President Obama's "outreach" to Havana, however, from a geopolitical perspective, the move clearly underscores the strategic chess match between the United States and the Russian Federation. The principal observation we will make about the Russian people is that they have a strong yearning to achieve global significance and eventual SuperPower status. In fact, Vladimir Putin has built an entire political career around his knowledge of this one fact alone! Although many independent nations emerged from the fall of the Soviet Union, the Russian Government considers itself to still have "special privileged interests" over these former Soviet-bloc countries. This mindset has manifested into Russian foreign policy that tends to become more aggressive as the Motherland becomes more wealthy. We have seen Russia lash out militarily at its small neighbor Georgia, shut down natural gas pipelines to the Ukraine in the middle of the winter, attempt to interfere with US plans to install missile defense systems in the Czech Republic and Poland, and extend "strings attached" foreign aid to Armenia in a time of desperate need for that country. We would propose that, while this concept of a regional sphere of influence has historically been the forte of Russian foreign policy, its attractiveness insofar as crafting a pragmatic approach to American foreign affairs is gaining appreciation. The fact is, Cuba's geographical location is strategically attractive for a wide

array of military operations. More importantly, improved US-Cuban relations will symbolically expel Russia from a position of influence over the island.

Russia has a special relationship with Cuba that the plan will be seen as threateningPrensa Latina, 5/17/13, "Cuba and Russia Highlight Importance of Developing Bilateral Links," www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1423511&Itemid=1, accessed 5/19/13Russian Parliament president Valentina Matviyenko and her Cuban counterpart, Esteban Lazo, coincided Friday in the importance of keeping on the development of the bilateral relations between Cuba and Russia, which both regarded as excellent. In a meeting celebrated at the National Hotel in Havana, both expressed their satisfaction for the presence of a Russian delegation in Cuba, and this will contribute to strengthen the inter-parliamentary links, and also in other aspects. The president of the Council of the Russian Federation highlighted that Cuba is not only a strategic partner of her country, but a friend for whom they feel a special affection forged in historical relations accumulated for many years.

Russia has been heavily investing in Cuba to bring it into its sphere of influenceThe Voice of Russia, 2/26/13, "Russia cancels $30bn Cuba debt: breakthrough in bilateral relations," english.ruvr.ru/2013_02_26/Russia-cancels-30bn-Cuba-debt-breakthrough-in-bilateral-relations/, Accessed 5/24/13After the breakup of the USSR Moscow had to drop its financial support of Cuba and both countries have been trying to forge new ties in a post-Cold War world. With Russia as the Soviet Union’s legal successor Cuba was left with massive Soviet-granted loans, this had cast a shadow over Russia-Cuba ties. But following the visit to Cuba by the Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev the island has now received its biggest ever debt cancellation. Boris Martynov is Deputy Director of the Moscow-based Institute of Latin American Studies. He said the amount Cuba owed had impacted on Moscow-Havana relations. Boris Martynov: I think that this can be considered as a breakthrough in our bilateral relations,


meaning that we didn’t get that breakthrough after the visit of Putin in 2000 because the problem of the Soviet debt has always been one of the or maybe the most difficult in our relations.


Link Booster – Cuban Importance to Russia

Russia is pursuing major oil reserves in CubaKommersant, 2/28/13, "Why is Russia writing off billions of Cuba's debt?", worldcrunch.com/business-finance/why-is-russia-writing-off-billions-of-cuba-039-s-debt-/medvedev-castro-soviet-union-ussr-oil-offshore-drilling/c2s11038/, accessed 5/24/13There are several theories circulating among experts, however. One is that “opening” the relationship with Cuba is a type of insurance against changes in Venezuela. Another theory is that the interest in working with Cuba could be related to attempts to find oil off the Cuban coast. Since 2008 there have been discussions about the possibility of a large offshore oil deposit near the northern coast of Cuba. Venezuelan company PdVSA, the Malaysian Petronas, Russian Zarubezhneft and the Spanish Repsol have explored the area and decided, in 2012, that there was no commercially usable oil. But in December Zarubezhneft started a second round of explorations in a deeper area. The second round of tests will wrap up in June, but the results could theoretically be available already. If Zarubezhneft does find oil, it is entitled to sign an agreement with the Cuban state-owned oil company, Siret, to share exploitation of the deposits from now until 2034. Zarubezhneft did not comment on the issue. Local sources said there was no news on the second round of explorations. Regardless, Russia’s rush to complete the debt-restructuring process by Sept. 2013 could be related to the possibility of major oil reserves in Cuban

coastal waters. Regardless of the oil situation, Russia is trying to restore active trade with Cuba. The Federal Customs Service has already signed agreements with Cuba on information sharing and preferential tariffs. Cuba has also signed several contracts to purchase Russian airplanes. Hardly a return to the Cold War bustle between the two countries, but it was time to get back to business.

Russia wants a Cuban naval baseAWR Hawkins, PHD in military histroy from Texas Tech, 7/30/12, "Obama ignores Russian plans for naval base in Cuba," Breitbard, www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/07/29/Obama-Looks-The-Other-Way-As-Russia-Plans-Naval-Base-in-Cuba, Accessed 5/24/13If things go as planned, Russia could soon have a naval base just over 90 miles away from the continental U.S. Our former Cold

War foe has been in talks with Cuba for some time, and is now making it known that a deal between the two nations is closer to happening. Russian Vice Admiral Viktor Chirkov says Russia is "studying the creation of points for assistance and technical maintenance" not only in Cuba, but in "the Republic of Seychelles and Vietnam" as well. In short, this means that while Obama continues to dismiss Russia as any real threat to American interests or American security, Russia is looking for ways to expand its Navy's global reach.

Cuba is a critical trade partner for RussiaWall Street Journal, 5/18/13, "Cuba Parliament Leader: Ties With Russia Under Full Expansion," online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130518-700836.html?mod=googlenews_wsj, accessed 5/24/13Relations between Cuba and Russia are under full expansion, Esteban Lazo, president of Cuban parliament, said Friday. Lazo made the remarks after signing an agreement with the visiting leader of Russia's senate, Valentina Matviyenko, to boost the parliamentary cooperation between the two countries. The delegation of the Russian Senate arrived Thursday in Havana, headed by Ms. Matviyenko. Mr. Lazo said the visit would boost the "excellent" historical ties between both the governments and the peoples. He also called on Russia to increase the investments to the island country. Mr. Lazo stressed the importance of the current Russian investments in Cuba's oil sector and expressed the interest of the Cuban government in extending the cooperation to other areas, such as nickel production, tourism and agriculture. Cuba isn't just a strategic partner for Russia, but also a friend for whom Russia feels special affection, due to historical connections, Ms. Matviyenko said. Havana and Moscow were close allies during the Cold War era, but after the collapse of

the Soviet Union in 1991, the relations cooled. Since 2005, the bilateral relations have began to improve with the

resumption of mutual high-level visits. Currently, Russia is Cuba's ninth largest trade partner, with a trade volume of $224 million in 2011, according to official figures.


Internal Link – Sphere of Influence – Relations

Intruding on Russia’s sphere of influence undermines US/Russian relationsTed Carpenter, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, 10/19/10, "Resets and Spheres of Influence," The National Interest, nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/resets-spheres-influence-4266, accessed 5/24/13The Obama administration has explicitly sought to “reset” the relationship with Russia, which had become quite dysfunctional during the final years of the Bush administration. Although Washington has not used the reset terminology with respect to the troubled U.S. relationship with China, the substantive goal appears to be similar. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ effort to restore the dialogue between the militaries of the two countries is one indication of that intent. Both goals, however, are encountering headwinds for a key reason. Policy makers seem unwilling to accept the reality that any great power in the international system expects, and will seek to enforce, a sphere of influence in its immediate region. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice famously (or

infamously) insisted that the concept of a sphere of influence was both obsolete and pernicious. But that viewpoint is dangerously erroneous. The tensions between the United States and Russia and those between

the United States and China confirm that point. The latest, clumsy provocation is Moscow’s agreement to help Venezuela build a nuclear-power plant. Predictably, that move has caused hawks in the United States to thunder about perfidious Russian contempt for the Monroe Doctrine. There is more than a little hypocrisy in that outrage, since many of those same hawks successfully lobbied for adding the Baltic republics to NATO and now advocate deploying ballistic missile defenses in Eastern Europe and offering NATO membership to Ukraine and Georgia—as though Russia has no justifiable reason to object to such moves in its geopolitical back yard.

Only respect for Russia’s sphere of influence can allow a strategic partnershipWilliam Lind, Director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation, 3/28/13, "Don’t Break the China,” The American Conservative, www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/dont-break-the-china/, accessed 5/16/13Just as a return to spheres of influence can replace conflict with alliance between the United States and China, so it can harmonize relations elsewhere, again with the goal of allying all states against the forces of the Fourth Generation. We should recognize Russia’s “near abroad” as her sphere of influence. We should work actively to bring Afghanistan into Pakistan’s sphere of influence. While contested spheres of influence can exacerbate conflicts, agreed spheres reduce them. By acting as an honest broker to facilitate such agreement—including between China and Japan—rather than joining either side, the U.S. can do more for her real interests, including her vital interest in maintaining the state system.

Russia backlashes against US intrusions into its sphere of influenceStephen Cohen, Professor of Russian Studies and History at New York University, summer 2010, “Rethinking Russia: U.S.-Russian Relations in an Age of American Triumphalism,” Journal of International Affairs, www.russiaotherpointsofview.com/2010/05/rethinking-russia-usrussian-relations-in-an-age-of-american-triumphalism-.html#more, accessed 5/20/13So American policy is this: The United States can have spheres of influence but Russia cannot, not even in its own security neighborhood. Moscow understands this, and has reacted predictably. If U.S. policymakers and their accommodating media really care about American national security, which requires fulsome Russian cooperation in many areas, they would rethink this presumption. Instead, leaders like Senator McCain and Vice President Biden repeatedly visit Tblisi and Kiev to declare that Russia is not entitled to influence in those capitals while trying to tug those governments into NATO.

http://www.russiaotherpointsofview.com/2010/05/rethinking-russia-usrussian-relations-in-an-age-of-american-triumphalism-.html#more

http://www.russiaotherpointsofview.com/2010/05/rethinking-russia-usrussian-relations-in-an-age-of-american-triumphalism-.html#more

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/dont-break-the-china/

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/dont-break-the-china/


Internal Link – Sphere of Influence – Conflict

Intruding into Russia’s sphere of influence risks miscalculation and conflictEugene Rumer, Senior Fellow in the Institute for National Strategic Studies, April 2004, "Collision Avoidance: U.S.-Russian Bilateral Relations and Former Soviet States," Strategic Forum, www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a423059.pdf, accessed 5/24/13Relations between the United States and Russia are entering a delicate phase. American involvement on the Russian periphery is reaching unprecedented proportions even as a consensus has emerged in Russia that these areas constitute its exclusive sphere of influence. U.S. efforts in the former Soviet states are simply an extension of the global war on terrorism and are intended to provide security and stability to countries still struggling with independence. But to many Russians, the U.S. military presence in Central Asia and security assistance to many former Soviet states seem to be deliberate attempts at encirclement. This perception creates an atmosphere ripe for miscalculation and even confrontation.

US encroachment sparks Russian expansionismYuri Zhukov, PhD in government from Harvard, 2008, “A Russian Sphere of Influence is Geopolitical Reality” http://www.nextamerica.org/node/460, accessed 5/20/13Finally, a policy of neo-containment would be counterproductive. The alternative to a Russian sphere of influence may be a political and security vacuum, not necessarily a stronger U.S. position. As a global power, the U.S. will always face multiple demands on its foreign policy, of which Eurasia will rarely be the most pressing. Neither it nor any other regional power — whether China, India, Turkey or Iran — is likely to garner the resources and will to fill the void left by Russia. Meanwhile, when isolated and pushed into a corner, even a weak Moscow could create significant problems in areas of great importance to the U.S. — in weapons proliferation, Iran, the Eastern Mediterranean, Venezuela, the Korean Peninsula and in the former Soviet Union itself. Absent a credible commitment to the defense of its allies in

Eurasia, the U.S. will need to consider whether neo-containment is an effective means to support the independence of Russia’s

neighbors, or whether it will only bolster Russia’s desire to re-assert its authority in the region. Accepting a Russian sphere of influence in Eurasia need not be a strategic retreat. The U.S. should continue to expand its relationships with Russia’s neighbors and support their continued independence. At the same time, the U.S. should be keenly aware of the limits of what it can achieve.

US engagement in Russia’s sphere of influence risks warfareIvan Eland, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on Peace & Liberty at The Independent Institute, 11/3/08, "Is a “Resurgent” Russia a Threat to the United States?," The Independent Institute, www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2363, accessed 5/18/13U.S. analysts say, however, that increased military spending would allow Russia to have more influence over nations in its near abroad and Eastern Europe. Of course, throughout history, small countries living in the shadow of larger powers have had to make political, diplomatic, and economic adjustments to suit the larger power. Increased Russian influence in this sphere, however, should not necessarily threaten the security of the faraway United States. It does only because the United States has defined its security as requiring intrusions into Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. By expanding NATO into Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, the United States has guaranteed the security of these allied countries against a nuclear-armed power, in the worst case, by sacrificing its cities in a nuclear war. Providing this kind of guarantee for these non-strategic countries is not in the U.S. vital interest. Denying Russia the sphere of influence in nearby areas traditionally enjoyed by great powers (for example, the U.S. uses the Monroe Doctrine to

police the Western Hemisphere) will only lead to unnecessary U.S.-Russian tension and possibly even cataclysmic war.

http://www.nextamerica.org/node/460


Impact – Relations – Laundry List

US/Russia relations solve prolif, terrorism, Afghanistan, China, and the economyGraham Allison, Director Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 10/30/11, “Ten Reasons Why Russia Still Matters,” Politico, http://www.cfr.org/russian-fed/ten-reasons-why-russia-still-matters/p26345, accessed 5/20/13Second, Russia is our most consequential partner in preventing nuclear terrorism . Through a combination of more than $11 billion in U.S. aid, provided

through the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program, and impressive Russian professionalism, two decades after the collapse of the “evil empire,” not one nuclear weapon has been found loose. Third, Russia plays an essential role in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile-delivery systems . As Washington seeks to stop Iran's drive toward

nuclear weapons, Russian choices to sell or withhold sensitive technologies are the difference between failure and the possibility of success. Fourth, Russian support in sharing intelligence and cooperating in operations remains essential to the U.S. war to destroy Al Qaeda and combat

other transnational terrorist groups. Fifth, Russia provides a vital supply line to 100,000 U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan. As U.S. relations with Pakistan have

deteriorated, the Russian lifeline has grown ever more important and now accounts for half all daily deliveries. Sixth, Russia is the world’s largest oil producer and second largest gas producer. Over the past decade, Russia has added more oil and gas exports to world energy markets than any other nation. Most major energy transport routes from Eurasia start in Russia or cross its nine time zones. As citizens of a country that imports two of every three of the 20 million barrels of oil that fuel U.S. cars daily, Americans feel Russia’s impact at our gas pumps. Seventh, Moscow

is an important player in today’s international system. It is no accident that Russia is one of the five veto-wielding, permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, as well as a member of the G-8 and G-20. A Moscow more closely aligned with U.S. goals would be significant in the balance of power to shape an environment in which China can emerge as a global power without overturning the existing order. Eighth, Russia is the largest country on Earth by land area,

abutting China on the East, Poland in the West and the United States across the Arctic. This territory provides transit corridors for supplies to global markets whose stability is vital to the U.S. economy.

Relations solve multiple scenarios for extinctionJeffrey Tayler, Atlantic Correspondent, 11/14/2008, Medvedev Spoils the Party; It will take more than Obama's electoral triumph to improve the United States' strained relations with Russia,” The Atlantic, “http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/medvedev-spoils-the-party/7130/?single_page=true, accessed 5/23/13Like it or not, the United States cannot solve crucial global problems without Russian participation. Russia commands the largest landmass on earth; possesses vast reserves of oil, natural gas, and other natural resources; owns huge stockpiles of weapons and plutonium; and still wields a potent brain trust. Given its influence in Iran and North Korea, to say nothing of its potential as a spoiler of international equilibrium elsewhere, Russia is one country with which the United States would do well to reestablish a strong working relationship—a strategic partnership, even—regardless of its feelings about the current Kremlin

government. The need to do so trumps expanding NATO or pursuing “full-spectrum dominance.” Once the world financial crisis passes, we will find

ourselves returning to worries about resource depletion, environmental degradation, and global warming – the greatest challenges facing humanity. No country can confront these problems alone. For the United States, Russia may just prove the “indispensable nation” with which to face a volatile future arm in arm.




Impact – Relations – Laundry List Cont…

US-Russia relations key to solve global stability – nuclear proliferation, narcotics, terrorism, trade, economy, Middle East war, climate changeJohn Beyrle et al, Former US Ambassador to Russia, April 12, 2013, “Priorities for Russia-U.S. Relations: A Statement by Former Ambassadors to Washington and Moscow,” http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/04/12/priorities-for-russia-u.s.-relations-statement-by-former-ambassadors-to-washington-and-moscow/fza1, accessed 5/24/2013In our current talks, we welcomed further significant accomplishments by our two governments that have put in place a strong foundation for cooperation in the future. The new strategic arms agreement is being implemented and continuing to reduce the nuclear arsenals of both countries . The 123

agreement is in force and expanding our civilian nuclear cooperation. With strong U.S. support, Russia completed its formal entry into the World Trade Organization, and the level of mutual trade and investment is increasing. Russian-U.S. cooperation on Afghanistan has made the fight against terrorism and narcotics in that country more effective. And the signature of a major agreement on visas has made it easier for the citizens of both countries to visit and do business with each other. Against that backdrop of real achievement, we took a sober view of the strains that continue to complicate today’s relations. We agreed that the level of hard rhetoric and the high degree of mistrust that were once the norm in our relations have diminished, and the heads of our countries have expressed a desire to build a stable modus vivendi that takes into account the interests and national security of each state

and its allies as well as world peace. On the other hand, we noted that the experience of the recent past shows that serious irritants and differences still can disrupt our bilateral relations. We agreed that these issues often stem from failure to conduct our relations in ways

consistent with principles of equality and mutual respect. In discussing the global context for our relations, we stressed the reality of rapid change, and we agreed that one of the pressing tasks for us today is to coordinate better mutual bilateral and multilateral steps as we address the problems of a changing and complex global environment. Cooperation is essential as both nations face today’s challenges. The consequences of the global economic crisis linger. Shifting balances of economic, political, and military power reshape the international environment in unpredictable ways. The upheaval in the Arab Middle East has suddenly made that region a source of unpredictable and rapid change. Global problems—terrorism, climate change, and transnational crime—demand coordinated multilateral action. Nuclear proliferation and the uncertainties of dependence on increasingly complex technologies present familiar and new challenges to the status quo and global stability .

http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/04/12/priorities-for-russia-u.s.-relations-statement-by-former-ambassadors-to-washington-and-moscow/fza1

http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/04/12/priorities-for-russia-u.s.-relations-statement-by-former-ambassadors-to-washington-and-moscow/fza1


Impact – Relations – Arms Control

Relations key to arms control – prevents extinctionMatthew Rojansky, Deputy director of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment, 8/18/10, “Why Russia Matters,” Foreign Policy, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=41409, accessed 5/20/131. Russia's nukes are still an existential threat. Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons in stockpile and hundreds still on hair-trigger alert aimed at U.S. cities. This threat will not go away on its own; cutting down the arsenal will require direct, bilateral arms control talks between Russia and the United States. New START, the strategic nuclear weapons treaty now up for debate in the Senate, is the latest in a long line of bilateral arms control agreements between the countries dating back to the height of the Cold War. To this day, it remains the only mechanism granting U.S. inspectors access to secret Russian nuclear sites. The original START agreement was essential for reining in the runaway Cold War nuclear buildup, and New START promises to cut deployed strategic arsenals by a further 30 percent from a current limit of 2,200 to 1,550 on each side. Even more, President Obama and his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, have agreed to a long-term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons entirely. But they can only do that by working together.

US/Russian arms control key to avoid nuclear exchangeMatthew Martin, Program officer in Policy Analysis and Dialogue at the Stanley Foundation, July 2008, "Avoiding an Accidental Nuclear War," Think, www.stanleyfoundation.org/resources.cfm?id=498&article=1, accessesd 5/20/13Why is this important? Assistant Secretary for Verification, Compliance, and Implementation Paula DeSutter, the lead representative on the US side, has said that formal arms reductions treaties and monitoring and accounting measures between the US and Russia are no longer necessary because the Cold War is over. But this view ignores several key points. First, arms control discussions between the US and Russia (and before that, with the Soviet Union) have been one enduring opportunity for communication, transparency, and reassurance, regardless of the status of the political relationship between the two countries. Currently, when, despite the rosy rhetoric, the relationship is on rather rocky ground with serious disputes over NATO expansion and US missile defense plans for Eastern Europe, a steady venue for good, continued back-and-forth is helpful. Second, while a new arms race with Russia is unlikely, extending START solidifies that hope with verifiable, binding agreements while simultaneously keeping a watchful eye on new technologies that Russia has brandished quite publicly in recent months, such as the Topol-M missile. Finally, renewing START will provide momentum to further nuclear reductions by the two countries—reductions that Russia is seeking and which present an opportunity the United States should take advantage of to lower the chance of a US-Russian nuclear exchange.

Russian cooperation key to reduce nuclear arsenalsGary Hart, Wirth Chair professor at the University of Colorado, 4/5/07, “Letter to Democrats on U.S.-Russia Relationship,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/letter-to-democrats-on-u_b_45075.html, accessed 5/20/13What interests, if any, do we have in common?, should be our first question. It turns out there are several. First, we have an ongoing interest in reducing nuclear arsenals. Thanks to the persistent efforts of Senators Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar, and despite resistance by the Bush administration, we continue to work with the Russians to carry out long-standing steps to dramatically reduce nuclear warheads and delivery systems on both sides. A serious argument as to how rejection of this project makes us safer has yet to be offered.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/letter-to-democrats-on-u_b_45075.html


http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=41409


Impact – Relations – Terrorism

US/Russia relations key to solve terrorism – access to intelligence networksGary Hart, Wirth Chair professor at the University of Colorado, 4/5/07, “Letter to Democrats on U.S.-Russia Relationship,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/letter-to-democrats-on-u_b_45075.html, accessed 5/20/13Second, we have a mutual interest in defeating terrorism. Those interests have caused the Russians to conduct prolonged military actions in Chechnya and the United States to conduct equally prolonged military occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. Clearly, there are differences in methodology, with the Russians using much more brutal means, but the residents of Grosny and of Falluja may not see that much difference. Though opposing our invasion of Iraq, the Russians fully endorsed our invasion of Afghanistan (where they themselves had a rather unpleasant experience). If we are not fully exploiting Russian intelligence networks in pursuit of this common interest, it is to our detriment.

Russian cooperation is key to prevent WMD terrorismNixon Center, September 2003, “Advancing American Interests and the U.S.-Russian Relationship,” http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/monographs/FR.htm, accessed 5/20/13President Bush has correctly identified terrorism and the nexus of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction as the most serious security threat the U.S. faces today. His administration’s “Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction” warns that, “we will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes and terrorists to threaten us with the world’s most destructive weapons” (emphasis added). Fulfilling this commitment has become the organizing principle for America’s foreign policy. Addressing this threat requires not simply a strong coalition of the willing, but a structure in which Russia plays a leading cooperative role in fighting the War on Terrorism and proliferation.

Nuclear terrorism ensures planet-ending great power nuclear warDennis Ray Morgan, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, December 2009 , Futures, Volume 41, Issue 10, Pages 683-693In a remarkable website on nuclear war, Carol Moore asks the question ‘‘Is Nuclear War Inevitable??’’ [10].4 In Section 1, Moore points out what most terrorists obviously already know about the nuclear tensions between powerful countries. No doubt, they’ve figured

out that the best way to escalate these tensions into nuclear war is to set off a nuclear exchange. As Moore

points out, all that militant terrorists would have to do is get their hands on one small nuclear bomb and explode it on either Moscow or Israel. Because of the Russian ‘‘dead hand’’ system, ‘‘where regional nuclear

commanders would be given full powers should Moscow be destroyed,’’ it is likely that any attack would be blamed on the United States’’ [10]. Israeli leaders and Zionist supporters have, likewise, stated for years that if Israel were to suffer a nuclear attack, whether from terrorists or a nation state, it would retaliate with the suicidal ‘‘Samson option’’ against all major Muslim cities in the Middle East. Furthermore, the Israeli Samson option would also include attacks on Russia and even ‘‘anti-Semitic’’ European cities [10]. In that case, of course, Russia would retaliate, and the U.S. would then retaliate against Russia. China would probably be involved as well, as thousands, if not tens of

thousands, of nuclear warheads, many of them much more powerful than those used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would rain upon most of the major cities in the Northern Hemisphere. Afterwards, for years to come, massive radioactive clouds would drift throughout the Earth in the nuclear fallout, bringing death or else radiation disease that would be genetically transmitted to future generations in a nuclear winter that could last as long as a 100 years, taking a savage toll upon the environment and fragile ecosphere as well.

http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/monographs/FR.htm




Impact – Relations – Iran

US/Russia relations key to contain Iranian prolifGary Hart, Wirth Chair professor at the University of Colorado, 4/5/07, “Letter to Democrats on U.S.-Russia Relationship,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/letter-to-democrats-on-u_b_45075.html, accessed 5/20/13Fifth, Russia is neighbor to several Islamic states, former Soviet republics, and whether one subscribes to a Huntingtonian thesis of civilization clashes or merely civilization frictions, Russia occupies an unrivaled strategic position on the margins of a cultural divide. Further, it occupies a strategic position in Northeast Asia, particularly with regard to North Korea and China. Russia allied with the West and sharing a common international agenda can only be in our interest. As the noted Russian expert Dimitri Simes has repeatedly pointed out, its geo-strategic location places Russia in a unique position to exert influence on critical matters such as Iran's nuclear ambitions. According to Professor Simes, "exactly like the United States, Russians wonder what will be the immediate purpose of the Iranian nuclear enrichment program."

Iranian nuclearization makes nuclear war inevitable in the Middle East Colin Kahl, Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, Sep/Oct 12, “Iran and the Bomb,” Foreign Affairs; Vol. 91 Issue 5, p157-162Kenneth Waltz is probably right that a nuclear-armed Iran could be deterred from deliberately using nuclear weapons or transferring a

nuclear device to terrorists ("Why Iran Should Get the Bomb," July/August 2012). But he is dead wrong that the Islamic Republic would likely become a more responsible international actor if it crossed the nuclear threshold. In making that argument, Waltz mischaracterizes Iranian motivations and badly misreads history. And

despite the fact that Waltz is one of the world's most respected international relations theorists, he ignores important political science research into the effects of nuclear weapons, including recent findings that suggest that new nuclear states are often more reckless and aggressive at lower levels of conflict. RATIONAL BUT DANGEROUS Waltz correctly notes that Iran's leaders, despite their fanatical rhetoric, are fundamentally rational. Because Iran's leadership is not suicidal, it is highly unlikely that a nuclear-armed Iran would deliberately use a nuclear device or transfer one to terrorists. Yet even though the Islamic Republic is rational, it is still dangerous, and it is likely to become even more so if it develops nuclear weapons.

Iranian nuclearization causes regional and global arms racing.Joseph Cirincione, Director of the Non-Proliferation Project at Carnegie, Summer 2006, “A New Non-Proliferation Strategy”, SAIS Review The danger posed by the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran or North Korea is not that either country would be liable to use these weapons to attack the United States, the nations of Europe, or other countries. Iran, for example, would likely decide to build nuclear weapons only as a means to defend itself from the aggression of other nations. Iranian leaders, like the leaders of other states, would be deterred from using nuclear weapons in a first strike by the certainty of swift and massive retaliation. The danger is that certain actions may be viewed by Iran as a defensive move, however they would trigger dangerous reactions from other states in the region. A nuclear reaction chain could ripple through a region and across the globe, triggering weapon decisions in several, perhaps many, other states. Such developments could weaken Iran’s security, not increase it. With these rapid developments and the collapse of existing norms could come increased regional tensions, possibly leading to regional wars and to nuclear catastrophe.




Impact – Relations – Europe

Collapse of relations causes terrorism and instability in Europe and collapse of NATO effectiveness.Matthew Rojansky, Deputy Director of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, February 21, 2013, “Putin and Obama Need to do More Than Reset Relations (Again),” The Guardian, http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/02/21/putin-and-obama-need-to-do-more-than-reset-relations-again/fisn, accessed 5/24/2013As these foundations crumble, so too will the everyday cooperation now taken for granted, from trade relations that benefit American businesses and Russian consumers, to coordination that enables NATO supplies to transit Russia en route to Afghanistan, which helps stop terrorists and drug traffickers before they move north into Russia and Europe. President Obama's ambitions for new nuclear reductions? The possibility of working together to defuse the Syrian crisis? You can forget about both.

US/Russian relations key to European stabilityRobert Legvold, Professor of political science at Columbia, Winter 2002, “All the way: crafting a U.S.-Russian alliance,” National Interest , findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_2002_Winter/ai_95841626, accessed 5/20/13First, as Alexander Vershbow, the current U.S. ambassador in Moscow, puts it: "Russia is the most important key to the stability of Eurasia", without which neither Europe nor Asia--two regions in which the United States has vital interests--

can "be stable and prosperous." As long as Russia respects the sovereignty of the former Soviet republics, the United States has every reason to cooperate with Russia in stabilizing and aiding those states. In this regard, as well as others, alliance does not mean condominium; U.S.-Russian collaboration must not imply a readiness to decide matters over the heads of Russia's neighbors. On the contrary, an alliance's purpose would be to strengthen their sovereignty and vitality. A key example of the subtle way in which the revolution in Russian foreign policy makes this kind of alliance possible concerns Belarus. Putin's new agenda has led to a sharp cooling in Russia's relations with Alexander Lukashenka's regime. As a consequence, a leadership that flouts the values on which modern European security is based is increasingly isolated, the prospect of a Russian-Belarusian union has faded, and Ukraine's fears of encirclement have eased. Although not perfectly parallel, U.S. and Russian interests in Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova now converge sufficiently to make promoting stability and successful reform there a matter of common U.S. and Russian ground.

European war escalates and goes nuclearCharles Glaser, Assistant Professor in the Graduate School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago, Summer 93, International SecurityHowever, although the lack of an imminent Soviet threat eliminates the most obvious danger, U.S. security has not been entirely separated from the future of Western Europe. The ending of the Cold War has brought many benefits, but has not eliminated the possibility of a major power war, especially since such a war could grow out of a smaller conflict in the East. And, although nuclear weapons have greatly reduced the threat that a European hegemon would pose to U.S. security, a sound case nevertheless remains that a major European war could threaten U.S. security. The United States could be drawn into such a war, even if strict security considerations suggest it should stay out. A major power war could escalate to a nuclear war that, especially if the United States joins, could include attacks against the American homeland. Thus, the United States should not be unconcerned about Europe’s future.

http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/02/21/putin-and-obama-need-to-do-more-than-reset-relations-again/fisn

http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/02/21/putin-and-obama-need-to-do-more-than-reset-relations-again/fisn


Impact – Relations – Central Asia

Cooperation with Russia key to stabilize Central AsiaRobert Legvold, Professor of political science at Columbia, Winter 2002, “All the way: crafting a U.S.-Russian alliance,” National Interest, findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_2002_Winter/ai_95841626, accessed 5/20/13Second, to borrow the formulation of Alexei Bogaturov, in the 21st century no longer is peninsular Europe or Northeast Asia the critical "strategic rear" of the United States, but the vast turbulent region stretching from eastern Turkey to western China and along Russia's south. As the United States girds to cope with the threats emanating from this area, no country brings more value as a potential ally than Russia. As things stand, the United States has backed into Central Asia with military power as part of the war against terrorism, and in the process it has offered quasi-security commitments to its new partners, almost certainly without careful consideration of their wider implication." Central Asia forms the unstable core of Inner Asia; it is an area--the only one in the world--surrounded by four nuclear powers, two of whom recently teetered on the brink of war. It contains multiple points of friction--from Kashmir to the Fergana Valley to northwest Kazakhstan to China's Xinjiang province. Each of these points is capable of bleeding into a larger conflict, and of strengthening WMD proliferation and terrorism. It is populated by regimes whose stability is universally suspect, and contains wealth--particularly in energy resources--that will make it increasingly important to both Asian and European consumers.

US/Russia relations key to Central Asian stability.Jeffrey Mankoff, fellow and deputy director of the CSIS Russia and Eurasia Program, March 21, 2013, “Work with Moscow in Central Asia,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/work-moscow-central-asia-8242?page=1, accessed 5/24/2013While there is nothing wrong with efforts to build new trade and transit infrastructure across Central Asia per se, they ought to be driven by market logic rather than reflexive hostility to Russian and Chinese influence. While concern for Central Asian sovereignty had a place in the 1990s, the proliferation of trade and investment ties with a range of outside powers—led by China—has made these concerns outdated. And with threats to stability from within multiplying, Russia’s desire for a more active role in Central Asia offers an opportunity to address the problems of extremism, drugs, crime and regional rivalry—all without a major U.S. commitment that is unlikely to be forthcoming. Russia has assets on the ground, including troops Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and has proposed re-deploying its border guards along the porous Afghan-Tajik border. Russian efforts to bolster the CSTO could also provide a vehicle for multilateral security coordination among the Central Asian states, especially if Uzbekistan re-joins—which it will be more likely to do if it sees that Washington and Moscow are not engaged in a competition for influence in the region. . The U.S. should be thinking now about how to partner with Russia and the CSTO

to maintain peace and security in post-2014 Central Asia. Washington cannot afford to abandon the region entirely; maintaining access to Afghanistan via Central Asia will remain important, while the United States can and should do more

to encourage reform domestically. At the same time, overcoming its reflexive hostility to Russian influence will allow the United States to be more selective about its engagement and move beyond the crude geopolitical maneuvering that has characterized relations with Moscow for much of the past two decades.

Washington is in no position to take the lead in securing Central Asia after 2014. It should take advantage of Moscow’s interest to work collaboratively against the region’s shared threats.

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/work-moscow-central-asia-8242?page=1,


Impact – Relations – Central Asia Cont…

High risk of Central Asian conflict escalation.Jeffrey Mankoff, fellow and deputy director of the CSIS Russia and Eurasia Program, March 21, 2013, “Work with Moscow in Central Asia,” The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/work-moscow-central-asia-8242, accessed 5/24/2013The most serious threats facing Central Asia today are not external domination but internal breakdown. Though the war in Afghanistan has provided an impetus for cooperation, relations among the five Central Asian states are poor. Tensions over water and borders have the potential to spiral out of control (Uzbekistan has sealed and mined much of its borders with Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, for instance, and threatened to use force to prevent the completion of a dam project it opposes in Tajikistan). Meanwhile, corruption, repression, and poor governance are widespread, fueling an upsurge in militancy across much of the region, while creating fertile soil for the spread of Islamism as an alternative to the failing status quo. Tajikistan is wracked by a low-level insurgency. Kyrgyzstan has suffered from chronic instability in recent years, including protests that overthrew

governments in both 2005 and 2010 as well as pogroms against ethnic Uzbeks in late 2010. Central Asia is the main transit corridor for Afghan opium, and widespread corruption fuels the drug trade. Though largely driven from

Afghanistan by U.S. military operations in 2001-02, Central Asian jihadists have increasingly re-grouped in Pakistan’s tribal areas in collaboration with the Pakistani Taliban. Many in the region fear the withdrawal from Afghanistan will exacerbate these problems.




Impact – Relations – China

US/Russia relations key to avoiding conflict with ChinaRobert Legvold, Professor of political science at Columbia, Winter 2002, “All the way: crafting a U.S.-Russian alliance,” National Interest, findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_2002_Winter/ai_95841626, accessed 5/20/13Not only are the United States and Russia directly but separately implicated in the stability of this region, but China is as well. This raises the third aspect of a U.S.-Russian alliance to enhance Eurasian stability. China will be a decisive actor in Inner Asia, not the least because it forms an integral part of the region. Unfortunately, China enters through its underdeveloped northwest territories, including Xinjiang--precisely where it feels most vulnerable. In part because of

this sense of vulnerability, and in part because of the general state of Sino-American relations, China has not welcomed the arrival of American military power in Central Asia. On the contrary, while excusing a temporary deployment in the context of a war that it supports, China's

leadership has opposed an extended U.S. presence there as an element of a hostile encirclement stratagem. Russia and the United States have good reason to act jointly, not only to enhance their common stake in regional stability, but to draw China into a constructive dialogue over the role all three will play in Central Asia . Russia, with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, is already engaged in such an effort. Talking to the Russians about U.S. military activities in Central Asia (and Georgia) builds mutual confidence by promoting transparency, but it is not so far-fetched to imagine a far more ambitious trilateral dialogue among Russia, China, and the United States. Much as the United States and its European allies share assessments of threats at the edges of Europe, plan for coordinated action, and struggle to create the

necessary machinery to carry it out, so can and should Russia and the United States do the same in Eurasia with Chinese participation when appropriate.

Those conflicts go nuclearTuhin Chakraborty, Research Associate at Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies, 2010, “The Initiation & Outlook of ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting (ADMM) Plus Eight”, http://www.usiofindia.org/Article/?pub=Strategic%20Perspective&pubno=20&ano=739, accessed 5/20/13This can be seen as a more of a conventional threat to the region. The question here is that how far this ADMM Plus Eight can go to address the conventional security threats or is it an initiative which would be confined to meetings and passing resolution and playing second fiddle to the ASEAN summit. It is very important

to realize that when one is talking about effective security architecture for the Asia Pacific one has to talk in terms of addressing the conventional issues like the territorial and political disputes. These issues serve as bigger flashpoint which can snowball into a major conflict which has the possibility of turning into a nuclear conflict .

US/Russia relations key to contain China.Jeffrey Mankoff, Adjunct Fellow, CSIS, June 12, 2012, “Partnership in the Pacific? Russia between China and the United States in Asia,”http://us-russiafuture.org/2012/06/12/partnership-in-the-pacific-russia-between-china-and-the-united-states-in-asia/, accessed 5/24/2013 In the long run, Russia has an interest in more direct cooperation with the United States in Asia as a means of hedging against excessive dependence on China. Meanwhile, the U.S. would benefit from having Russia as a contributor to regional stability and security, and not closely tied to China. Both sides face serious obstacles though. The U.S. is reluctant to take Russia seriously as an Asian power given its meager contribution to the regional economy and regional security. Moreover, the U.S. is deeply committed to its alliance with Japan, whose own difficult relationship with Russia is an obstacle to Moscow playing a more active security role in Asia. Russia is trapped by its more general ambivalence about the U.S., notwithstanding the Obama-Medvedev “reset,” and its wariness about alienating China. Washington’s interest in building a more resilient regional architecture to manage China’s rise, coupled with Russia’s interest in having a strategic hedge argue for greater cooperation between the two in Asia. Achieving it will require a re-thinking of fundamental assumptions on both sides, and a greater openness to change than either side has so far evinced.

http://www.usiofindia.org/Article/?pub=Strategic%20Perspective&pubno=20&ano=739


Impact – Relations – Hegemony

US/Russian relations key to US leadershipNixon Center, September 2003, “Advancing American Interests and the U.S.-Russian Relationship,” http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/monographs/FR.htm, accessed 5/20/13Notwithstanding its diminished status and curtailed ambition, Russia has considerable influence in its neighborhood and a significant voice elsewhere as well. Moscow can contribute importantly to U.S. interests if it chooses to do so. Accordingly Russia can markedly decrease, or increase, the costs of exercising American leadership both directly (by assisting the United States, or not) and indirectly (by abetting those determined to resist, or not).

Relations key to heg – lack of cooperation tanks US foreign policy.Anne Gearan, Diplomatic correspondent, January 13, 2013, “Sour U.S.-Russia relations threaten Obama’s foreign policy agenda,” Washington Post, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-13/world/36323155_1_putin-and-obama-missile-defense-russian-president-vladimir-putin, accessed 5/24/2013Like the United States, Russia holds a veto in the U.N. Security Council, and its membership in other diplomatic clubs confers outsize international clout to the former superpower. By saying no, Putin can stymie U.S. goals in matters far beyond his own shores — and far removed from Russia’s long-standing beef with

the United States over the latter’s plans to erect a missile defense shield in Europe. U.S. leverage is limited. Obama is unlikely to either drop the missile defense plan or revisit steps that have eased commercial trade between both nations. Russia appears less swayed by the prospect of arms-control concessions than in the past.

Only US hegemony prevents great power war.Robert Kagan, senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, 1/11/2012, “Not Fade Away,” The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism?page=0,1&passthru=ZDkyNzQzZTk3YWY3YzE0OWM5MGRiZmIwNGQwNDBiZmI&utm_source=Editors%20and%20Bloggers&utm_campaign=cbaee91d9d-Edit_and_Blogs&utm_medium=emailThe underlying assumption of such a course is that the present world order will more or less persist without American power, or at least with much less of it; or that others can pick up the slack; or simply that the benefits of the world order are permanent and require no special exertion by anyone. Unfortunately, the present world order—with its widespread freedoms, its general prosperity, and its absence of great power conflict—is as fragile as it is unique. Preserving it has been a struggle in every decade, and will remain a struggle in the decades to come. Preserving the present world order requires constant American leadership and constant American commitment.

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/99521/america-world-power-declinism?page=0,1&passthru=ZDkyNzQzZTk3YWY3YzE0OWM5MGRiZmIwNGQwNDBiZmI&utm_source=Editors%20and%20Bloggers&utm_campaign=cbaee91d9d-Edit_and_Blogs&utm_medium=email



http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-13/world/36323155_1_putin-and-obama-missile-defense-russian-president-vladimir-putin

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-13/world/36323155_1_putin-and-obama-missile-defense-russian-president-vladimir-putin

http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/monographs/FR.htm


Impact – Relations – Prolif

Cooperation with Russia key to global nonproliferation regimeCenter for Strategic and International Studies, March 2009 “Pressing the reset button on US-Russian relations,” http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090405_policy_briefing_russia_balance.pdf, accessed 5/20/13Third, the United States needs to lead in the recommitment to nuclear nonproliferation. More and more countries are acquiring nuclear arms, and there is a concern that if Iran, in particular, develops nuclear arms, the nonproliferation regime will have failed and no further controls will

be feasible. If the United States is serious about achieving a nuclear-free world and thus fulfilling its Article 6 commitments to the NPT, there must be a substantial cut

in the US nuclear arsenal. The Obama administration should also work closely with its Russian partners to promote a successful 2010 NPT review

conference, in part by trying to ensure that Russia does not perceive any threats to its strategic stability. As the two leading nuclear powers, the United States and Russia have shared interests in preventing the collapse of nonproliferation efforts. Cooperation on cuts as well as defenses will send the strongest message to Tehran and is the best way to encourage Moscow to move more aggressively on sanctions against Tehran if the latter does not transparently

abandon its nuclear weapons program. US collaboration with Moscow in this area could persuade Russia to become a more constructive partner in dealings with Iran. Because Russia harbors concerns about the INF treaty, it is up to Moscow to propose changes. Its objection is that the bilateral treaty prohibits the United States and Russia from having intermediary nuclear missiles even as other countries have or are developing such missiles. Russia may, therefore, propose that the INF Treaty become a multilateral treaty involving all nuclear powers. If so, the United States should be open to such a suggestion, especially if the alternative is Russia’s withdrawal from the treaty.

Proliferation sparks wars that escalate to great power nuclear conflictTim Below, Wing Commander, RAF, June 2008, “Options for US nuclear disarmament: exemplary leadership or extraordinary lunacy?,” June 2008, Thesis for School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, AlabamaProliferation. Roger Molander, of RAND Corporation, asserts that “in the near future, a large number of countries are each going to develop a small number of nuclear weapons.”50 The Union of Concerned Scientists considers this to be the greatest long term danger confronting both US and international security today.

Proliferation increases risk in a number of ways. First, the more states that hold nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that one will have an insufficiently mature or robust nuclear doctrine to manage its capability responsibly. Tom

Sauer suggests that developing states that do not have democratic political systems present a particularly high risk because in dictatorial regimes, the military are frequently in control, and as Sagan has observed, the military appear to be more inclined to initiate preventative attacks against adversaries than civilians.52 Second, the more widely proliferated nuclear weapons become, the more

theoretical opportunities may be presented for theft of nuclear material. Third, proliferation increases the risk of nuclear intervention by an established nuclear power, including the five NWSs. Stephen Younger envisages several scenarios in which

currently established nuclear powers might “feel a need” to intervene with nuclear weapons in present regional

conflicts, especially if WMD are being employed or threatened. Moreover, since proliferation is frequently associated with reaction to nuclear development either within a bordering nation or regional counterpart, further proliferation is in turn likely to generate a quasi-exponential expansion of

similar regional scenarios.53 Ambassador Lehman envisages a scenario in which proliferation may induce a chain reaction of related regional arms races that could result in unintended and unexpected consequences far removed from the objectives of the proliferating nations, and in the United States’ specific case, a risk that the nation could get sucked into a conventional regional conflict which is subsequently escalated into nuclear warfare by its allies or their opponents.

US/Russia relations key to solve prolifChristian Science Monitor, 9/27/08, “US, Russia announce breakthrough on new Iran resolution”Of course, not all interested parties would be happy to see the US adopt a pragmatic approach to relations with Russia that puts big-picture interests over regional concerns. US allies in Eastern and Central Europe especially may shudder at the thought of the US backing off from its support of them in favor of smoother relations with Moscow. Still, the recent references by both sides to common interests - as well as a surprise fourth Security Council resolution on Iran - will reassure some that cooler heads have prevailed as the US and Russia work through new realities in their relations. "We just can't get too carried away with the sparring," says Ms. Oudraat of USIP, "because on the big issues like proliferation, energy security, even climate change, we need Russia."

http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090405_policy_briefing_russia_balance.pdf


China CP


China Solves Cuba—Economic Engagement

China solves economic engagement with CubaXinhua, 4-10-2012, "China, Cuba sign agreements to enhance economic cooperation," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-04/10/c_131517105.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Entrepreneurs from Cuba and China's Shandong province signed cooperation agreements in the fields of biotechnology and information Monday.¶ Officials from China's Lukang Pharmaceutical Company and Cuba's Center for

Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology signed an agreement calling for collaboration in the area of manufacturing and marketing biotech products.¶ Also, Cuba's Ministry of Information and Communications and China's Inspur Electronic Information Industry Co., Ltd said they wanted to develop bilateral trade.¶ During the meeting, Deputy Governor of Shandong Cai Limin said trade between Cuba and Shandong province, China's third largest province in terms of GDP, reached nearly 100 million U.S. dollars in 2011.¶ Representatives of both countries said they wanted to boost bilateral economic cooperation, especially in the fields of renewable energy, oil, biotechnology and tourism.¶ Cuba and China established diplomatic relations on Sept. 28, 1960, and have since maintained strong ties.¶

Today, China is Cuba's second largest trade partner after Venezuela, with an annual trade volume of about 2 billion dollars, according to Cuba's National Statistics Office.

China can better engage—non-commercial linksR. Evan Ellis, Ph.D, is Assistant Professor, Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, NDU, Washington DC, 2-2012, “The Expanding Chinese Footprint in Latin America: The Challenges for China, and Dilemmas for the US,” Ifri Center for Asian Studies, http://www.ifri.org/?page=contribution-detail&id=7014, accessed 5-15-2013A special category of the “non-commercial” presence in Latin America is increasing number of Chinese students traveling to the region. The greatest concentration of such students are in Cuba, with an estimated 1130 in residence in Havana at the time of President Hu Jintao’s visit in November 2008, and some 5,000 Chinese students passing through Cuba between 2006 and 2011.7 Such students, learning the language and culture of the region, lay the groundwork for the next generation of Chinese government and commercial personnel to more effectively engage with the region. Despite the significance of “official” Chinese activities in Latin America, by contrast to the

“state-centered” presence of the Soviet Union in Latin America during the Cold War, the most impactful part of the Chinese footprint in Latin America is arguably its growing commercial presence, to which this paper now turns.

China effectively economically engages Cuba—empiricsChen Weihua et al, 6-7-2011, "China, Cuba sign host of cooperation deals," China Daily, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-06/07/content_12646298.htm, accessed 5-15-2013China and Cuba strengthened their economic and political ties on Sunday by signing a dozen cooperation agreements that will provide strong financial support to the Latin American country as it embarks on economic reforms.¶ The signing of the 13 agreements, including a memorandum of understanding for bilateral economic relations over the next five years, was presided over by visiting Chinese Vice-President Xi Jinping and Cuban President Raul Castro.¶ Under the agreements, China will provide interest-free loans, economic aid and equipment to repair irrigation projects.¶ The agreements also cover cooperation in digital television and telecommunications, banking supervision and financing for public health projects, as well as an oil refinery expansion project and a liquefied natural gas project.¶ The agreements "reflect the political will of both parties and governments to continue deepening their ties", Agence France-presse cited an official Cuban announcement as saying.¶ Experts said the agreements would inject more momentum into Cuba's economic reforms and enhance ties between China, Cuba and other Latin American countries.


China Solves Cuba—Laundry List

China solves joint venturesFrançois Simon, 4-9-2013, "Cuba and China: a communist understanding?," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/cuba-china-communist-understanding, accessed 5-15-2013Indeed, China has launched many bilateral deals in the past fifteen years in cultural, medical and technical fields and has taken on the Soviet’s legacy as Cuba’s main manufacturer. Bilateral trade has risen from $440 million in 2001 to $1,9 billion in 2010 (official Chinese figures), mainly due to Chinese exports. While China imports nickel, sugar, tabaco and biotechnology, Cuba mostly imports electronics and construction material. China has also repeatedly offered interest free loans and credit lines to Cuba as it opens its markets. These Chinese funds are in many cases used to buy Chinese products: in 2001, a $200 million loan was used to modernise telecommunication and $150 million to buy Chinese television sets. However the particularity of Sino-cuban trade is that it includes two communist state-controlled partners. This benefits Chinese goods directly as they are coordinated and distributed nation-wide by the Cuban government. For example China has recently exported many low consumption electronics (refrigerators, washing machines, televisions and air conditioners) which were directly put on the government and domestic markets with virtually no competition. In exchange of these official state channels for Chinese goods many joint ventures include Cuban based factories and technological transfer. The first was in 1997 with a bicycle factory using Chinese capital and expertise, followed by electric fan factories, slippers, etc. This gives China great control over its trade with Cuba, from the production to the distribution of goods and even funding.

China solves Cuban infrastructureFrançois Simon, 4-9-2013, "Cuba and China: a communist understanding?," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/cuba-china-communist-understanding, accessed 5-15-2013In the past 10 years China has been modernising Cuba’s Soviet-era infrastructure, from transport to IT and communications. HuaWei and ZTE, two Chinese telecommunication equipment companies, are omnipresent in bringing up to date the Cuban internet infrastructure. HuaWei for example has been updating the very slow inland internet system and China helped build Venezuela’s underwater ALBA broadband cable to Cuba in 2011. A number of deals were made in between both countries to modernise all types of transport. From 2006 to 2008, 100 Chinese locomotives and 1000 Yutong buses were

delivered. Indeed, after the end of the Soviet era, bus spare parts stopped being produced and Cuban bus mobility was reduced to 20-30%. Today though, bus transport has been restored and Cuban buses are sometimes even referred to as “Yutong” by the population. In 2011, The China Harbor Engineering Company also started work on the Santiago port project. This is important for China as it thus gains the capacity to use Cuba as a pivot for its trade in Central and South America.

China and Cuba can cooperate on raw materialsWilliam M. Leogrande, is professor in the Department of Government, School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, D.C., 4-2-2013, "The Danger of Dependence: Cuba's Foreign Policy After Chavez," World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12840/the-danger-of-dependence-cubas-foreign-policy-after-chavez, accessed 5-15-2013As China's rapid growth has transformed it into a global powerhouse, Beijing has expanded its economic and diplomatic presence in Latin America, and is now Cuba's second-largest trade partner. China provides Cuba with a range of durable goods and capital equipment, and is investing in Cuban nickel and oil production. Like China's relations with the rest of the region, its relations with Cuba are fundamentally commercial rather than ideological, aimed at securing China's access to raw materials.


China Solves Cuba—Oil

Chinese investment solves Cuban energyR. Evan Ellis, Ph.D, is Assistant Professor, Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, NDU, Washington DC, 2-2012, “The Expanding Chinese Footprint in Latin America: The Challenges for China, and Dilemmas for the US,” Ifri Center for Asian Studies, http://www.ifri.org/?page=contribution-detail&id=7014, accessed 5-15-2013In Cuba, in June 2011, CNPC subsidiary China Huanqiu Contracting & Engineering Corp was contracted to support a Cuba-Venezuela consortium in a $6 billion project to double the output of Cuba’s Cienfuegos refinery.33 To date, there are few indications that the Venezuelan, Ecuadoran, Bolivian, or Cuban governments have tried to limit the role of Chinese companies and workers in these projects funded by Chinese institutions. Moreover, as the ALBA governments’ dependence on funding from the PRC continues to increase, the associated role of Chinese construction companies and workers in these countries is likely to expand.

Chinese investment empirically solves Cuban oilAssociated Press, 6-10-2011, "China agrees to invest in Cuban oil refinery," The Gleaner, http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20110610/business/business95.html, accessed 5-15-2013Chinese Vice-President Xi Jinping toured a joint oil exploration project in Cuba near the end of a three-day visit during which the two countries signed economic accords that include the expansion of a refinery, Cuban state media said Tuesday.¶ Xi, who is widely expected to be China's next president, called the Camarioca Norte 100

exploratory well and other projects a sign of excellent relations and close economic cooperation. Chinese equipment is operating at the well, Cuban Communist Party newspaper Granma said Tuesday.¶ Ministry of Basic Industry chief Tomas Benitez said Empresa de Perforacion y Extraccion de Peroleo del Centro, Cuba's leading hydrocarbons concern, is working with Chinese help on several oil exploration and exploitation projects in the country.¶ Cuba's domestic production is exclusively heavy oil with a high sulphur content, but there are high hopes for offshore Gulf reserves that could contain large quantities of lighter, sweet crude. A test well in 2004 turned up only modest deposits, however.¶ Benitez said drilling is expected to begin later this year on six deep-water exploration wells with the help of a platform built in China and scheduled to come online starting in October, according to government Web portal Cubadebate.¶ The agreement on the Cienfuegos refinery is a joint plan by China and Cuban-Venezuelan oil company Cuven Petrol SA, a division of China National Petroleum Corp and Technip Itali SA.

Chinese engagement solves Cuban oil productionEsteban Israel, 11-24-2010, “Cuba deal boosts China's Latin American oil plans,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/24/cuba-china-oil-idUSN2417046320101124, accessed 5-15-2013China is taking another great leap forward in its Latin American energy plans, raising Cuba's energy importance in the process, with a deal to lead a $6 billion refinery expansion project on the communist island, experts said this week.¶ The project, to be funded mostly by China's Eximbank, is the latest of several significant moves in the region for the Asian power as it continues to expand its global influence.¶ For Cuba, the refurbishing of its antiquated refinery in the coastal city of Cienfuegos will provide an outlet for oil it hopes to tap soon in the Gulf of Mexico, while also laying the groundwork for the island to possibly become a key oil transhipment point for the Caribbean basin.


China Solves Mexico—Economic Engagement

China solves economic engagementNick Miroff, 4-18-2013, "Mexico and China look to trade away old rivalry," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/mexico-and-china-look-to-trade-away-old-rivalry/2013/04/17/d001c432-a2ec-11e2-bd52-614156372695_story.html, accessed 5-15-2013More often than not, the business went to China. But with labor costs rising there and Mexico pushing for new access to Chinese consumers, the rivalry is shifting, economists and trade analysts say.¶ No longer pure competitors but not quite partners, the two countries are moving toward an expanded trade relationship that could ultimately benefit the United States by boosting U.S. exports and keeping cheap imports flowing to U.S.

consumers.¶ Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto’s recent trip to China, coming just four months into his term, has been viewed here as a smart overture aimed at mending ties between two nations that have often been at odds over trade issues.¶ Mexico resisted China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001, and its share of the U.S. import market started slumping soon after.¶ Now that trend is in reverse. Mexico accounts for a growing portion of U.S. imports, and China’s slice of the $2.7 trillion market has narrowed. Those tendencies are likely to continue, economists say, as several new studies show that Mexican manufacturing costs are now lower than China’s when factors such as shipping and energy prices are taken into account.¶ “They started out as rivals, because there was a bull rush to China and Mexico lost out,” said Barry Lawrence, director of the Global Supply Chain Laboratory at Texas A&M University. “But Mexico is now the more competitive of the two.”¶ “That implies direct competition, but the reality is that the two will be looking at building optimal supply chains,” Lawrence said. “There will be a lot of business in China, but a lot of it will come through Mexico.”

China should economically engage MexicoCatherine Cheney, On, 4-9-2013, " Mexico, China Stand to Benefit From Improved Ties," World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/12857/mexico-china-stand-to-benefit-from-improved-ties, accessed 5-15-2013Beyond trade relations, Mexico also wants to deepen its diplomatic, research and development and political links with China, Gonzalez said. But Dussel Peters said the two countries still lack a clear strategy for how to improve relations. He noted that the so-called High Level Group established in 2004 to work on the bilateral agenda (.pdf) has not met in the past three years.¶ ¶ Moving forward, Gonzalez said Mexico and China are likely to improve their economic cooperation, and that both could benefit from prioritizing their bilateral relationship. He emphasized Mexico's key geopolitical position, with its 2,000-mile border with the U.S., its ports on both the Pacific and the Atlantic and its location next to Central America and the Caribbean as a great potential asset to China.¶ "Any long-term strategy by China to expand its presence and influence around the world has to consider Mexico as a top-10 destination to achieve this in a meaningful, effective way," said Gonzalez.

China and Mexico should work together economicallyCynthia J. Arnson is director of the Latin American Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Jeffrey Davidow is the president of the Institute of the Americas and former assistant secretary of state for the Western Hemisphere and

ambassador to Venezuela and Mexico, 1-2011, “China, Latin America, and the United States: The New Triangle,” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/LAP_120810_Triangle_rpt.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013China has become one of Mexico’s main competitors in the U.S. ¶ market . To address this, Ley suggested, “If you cannot fight the competitor, join forces with them, and together conquer the market.” ¶ Structural economic reforms, Chinese investment in the Mexican ¶ manufacturing sector, and continued attempts to increase Mexican exports to China are necessary in order for Mexico to address the challenges and opportunities presented by China. In sum, a state policy ¶ must be present to guide bilateral relations between the two countries ¶ into a real strategic partnership .


China Solves Mexico—Laundry List

China solves foreign investment and telecommAlberto Esenaro has expertise in high-profile corporate law with over 15 years of experience helping US and European companies doing

business in Mexico and LatAm," 5-1-2013, Mexico and China: An Expanding Economic Partnership," Before You Do Business, http://beforeyoudobusiness.com/archives/787, accessed 5-15-2013 “Mexico can be a gateway for China to enter North America, the world’s richest market. It can so be a point of access

to several countries in Central America and the Caribbean.” said Peña Nieto. This could very well be of high interest to Chinese companies such as Huawei and ZTE, two telecoms companies who have been effectively shut out of the American telecom market, a market Chinese telecoms have been wanting to crack for quite a long time. While their products may still not get into the U.S. market, both ZTE and Huawei could become involved in the potentially lucrative Mexican telecom sector, where reforms have recently been passed to allow foreign investment.

China solves Mexico—multiple economic sectorsEnrique Dussel Peters, Coordinator, Center for Chinese-Mexican Studies, National Autonomous University of Mexico, 12-2008, “Mexico’s Economic Relationship with China: Heading for conflict?” http://www.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.113470!4%20Mexico%20GENERAL.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Why is normalizing the relationship with China relevant? There are multiple benefits. In ¶ addition to being Mexico’s second biggest trading partner and having a dynamism that ¶ exceeds that of Mexico’s other trading partners, three

aspects stand out. First, it is essential ¶ that Mexico take advantage of the enormous demand for imports in China. They are an ¶ important global exporter, and will soon become the main global exporter, and their ¶ imports show the same dynamics.

However, Mexico has yet to take advantage of this ¶ opportunity. Secondly, regularizing the trade and economic relationship with Mexico would ¶ be significant, faced with the possibility that imports from China and the establishment of ¶ Chinese companies in Mexico could increase the competitiveness of Mexican production. ¶ In several sectors, from agriculture to science and technology, China has products, ¶ processes and experiences that are relevant to Mexico. This opportunity should not be ¶ rejected by Mexico, which is currently replacing US imports with Asian imports, ¶ particularly from China, and should instead be actively benefited from. Third, China has ¶ undoubtedly replaced an important sector of Mexican production, both for the domestic ¶ market and exports, especially those oriented to the United States, and therefore it is ¶ imperative that preparation measures be taken in the short, medium, and long term. Since ¶ the nineties, China has become a “global player”; the potential for strategic and short, ¶ medium and long-term strategies shows great opportunities and the need to take action ¶ before the implied challenges.

Mexico wants Chinese economic engagement—infrastructure and tradeAlberto Esenaro has expertise in high-profile corporate law with over 15 years of experience helping US and European companies doing

business in Mexico and LatAm," 5-1-2013, Mexico and China: An Expanding Economic Partnership," Before You Do Business, http://beforeyoudobusiness.com/archives/787, accessed 5-15-2013While Mexico’s economy has been growing steadily since the implementation of NAFTA and various other free trade agreements with dozens of other countries, the general perception has been that the country’s main trading partners and investors have been the United States and Japan. However, Mexico’s partnership with manufacturing and economic powerhouse China has been gaining steam over the past few years and is showing positive signs of continued and expanding growth.¶ Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, on the evening before his visit to China, in a written interview with Xinhua, China’s top

news service, spoke of his pledge to increase ties with China in a way that both countries can enjoy a win-win situation. China should and can be a “strategic partner” to the Latin American country, he said. Remarkable opportunities exist in many sectors, including infrastructure and trade.


China Solves Mexico—Oil

Chinese engagement can develop Mexican oilAlex Erquicia, 4-4-2013, "Mexico’s Peña Nieto looks to strengthen relations with China," Blouin News, http://blogs.blouinnews.com/blouinbeatbusiness/2013/04/04/mexicos-pena-nieto-looks-to-strengthen-relations-with-china/, accessed 5-15-2013Mexico’s oil could close the gap. China is on a global drive to secure oil for its expanding economy, and continues to secure energy agreements worldwide. Peña Nieto plans to open his country’s oil industry to foreign investment, a priority in his new energy reforms expected to be implemented from the summer, to help reverse the long-

term decline in the country’s oil production. China’s oil firms could be welcome partners in that endeavor, especially at Mexico’s onshore fields that are closer to the Pacific than the bulk of its current oil production in and bordering the

Gulf of Mexico.¶ At the same time, Mexico’s state-owned oil giant, Pemex, is expanding abroad rapidly. This seems fertile ground for oil-for-investment deals and joint ventures.

Chinese investment and expertise solvesOil & Gas Financial Journal, 4-1-2013, "Winds of Change Mexico's Hydrocarbon Renaissance," http://www.ogfj.com/articles/print/volume-10/issue-4/features/special-report--mexico/winds-of-change-mexico-s-hydrocarbon-renaissance.html, accessed 5-15-2013Not surprisingly, some of the first multinational companies to bet on the resurgence of Mexico's oil & gas industry are coming from cash-flush China. China Oilfield Services Limited (COSL) first entered the Mexican market in 2007 when speak of an energy reform was already beginning to brew and PEMEX was heightening its offshore exploration. As the leading integrated oilfield service provider in China's offshore segment, COSL's expertise is precisely the kind of collaboration that PEMEX needs to succeed in unchartered deep waters.

China and Mexico can cooperate on oilHelena Powell, 5-2-2013, "China/Latin America: Oil deal between Mexico and China could redress trade imbalance," Pulsamerica, http://www.pulsamerica.co.uk/2013/05/02/chinalatin-america-oil-deal-between-mexico-and-china-could-redress-trade-imbalance/, accessed 5-15-2013At the beginning of April Mexican oil company Pemex signed an agreement with the second largest Chinese state-owned oil enterprise Sinopec. The deal has initially been put in place for two years and aims to strengthen trade relations between the two companies and encourage increased exports of crude oil to China.¶ The accord was signed by the directors of both companies in the presence of Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto.¶ The deal indicates a rapprochement between Mexico and China, who have had a chequered relationship over the last couple of years. Efforts to mend bilateral fences are being led by Peña Nieto, who visited China at the beginning of April to promote and develop Sino-Mexican relations.¶ The chief executive of Pemex, Emilio Lozoya, stated that the company would increase exports to China with immediate effect, upping supplies by 30,000 barrels a day. In addition he explained that, according to the agreement, exports could be increased to meet demand within the two year timeframe of the deal.¶ Increased oil exports will benefit both parties. For China the agreement will diversify its import sources as it overtakes the US as the world’s largest oil importer by 2014, according to a report from the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). In 2012 only 9% of China’s oil came from Latin America, whereas nearly 50% came from the Middle East.


China Solves Venezuela—Economic Engagement

China and Venezuela have a solid economic relationshipXulio Ríos is director of China Policy Observatory, 3-2012, “China and Venezuela: the "perfect match"?” IGADI: Instituto Galego de Análise e Documentación Internacional, http://www.igadi.org/china/2011/xr_china_and_venezuela__the___perfect_match.htm, accessed 5-15-2013The relationship between China and Venezuela has experienced in recent years a comprehensive and rapid development, both economically and politically and in other areas. The establishment of a "strategic partnership" between the two countries in 2001 has defined a stable framework for collaboration. China and Venezuela established diplomatic relations in June 1974 but it has been with the start of the presidency of Hugo Chavez (1998) when relations have intensified dramatically. In that recognized and open impulse, that Caracas defined as a "perfect match”, it should be noted, however, some important reservations.¶ Economic cooperation ¶ China calls "pragmatic" the ambitious economic relationship with Venezuela that has been built, covering areas such as energy, agriculture, high technology or infrastructure construction, with the first two sectors favored by both governments. In total, more than 300 cooperation projects have been implemented or are in progress (1). The Convention on Economic and Technical Cooperation signed in September 2000 is the driving framework of this process.

China has successfully engaged Venezuela in the pastXulio Ríos is director of China Policy Observatory, 3-2012, “China and Venezuela: the "perfect match"?” IGADI: Instituto Galego de Análise e Documentación Internacional, http://www.igadi.org/china/2011/xr_china_and_venezuela__the___perfect_match.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Moreover, in the financial order, cooperation began in 2010. Projects managed in yuan are estimated at about twenty, and it exits the political will to gradually increase that number. The signing of a financing plan between the Venezuelan government and the China Development Bank (CDB) contextualize the relationship. Both countries decided to create earlier this decade, a joint financing fund to finance projects in Venezuela with 4,000 million U.S. dollars provided by China and Venezuela providing 2,000 million. In February 2009, during the Vice President Xi Jinping's visit to Venezuela, the fund was expanded in other 6 billion additional dollars, which, according to Caracas, will provide secure funding to undertake development projects and to keep the economy growing despite the global financial crisis (4). The Bank of Economic and Social Development of Venezuela (BANDES), a state agency committed to building a bilateral social and productive development platform, manage the fund. And now it reached the figure of 12,000 million dollars. The China's contribution to projects in Venezuela reached the figure of 32 billion dollars. (5)

Venezuela wants Chinese economic engagementXulio Ríos is director of China Policy Observatory, 3-2012, “China and Venezuela: the "perfect match"?” IGADI: Instituto Galego de Análise e Documentación Internacional, http://www.igadi.org/china/2011/xr_china_and_venezuela__the___perfect_match.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Developing economic relations with China is particularly attractive to Chavez for two main reasons. First, the rapidly industrializing China has provided a high growth economy and major financial capital endowments. This is compounded by its energy needs, which could increase by 150 percent by 2020. Caracas expects to benefit from this increase of demand. Second, the fact that China does not hold political or moral imperatives in its trade relations. China also has no history of intervention in the Western Hemisphere, and assumes no messianic vocation of advocating a particular political system. China's foreign policy promotes a stress-free environment, which considers essential to develop their businesses and investments.


China Solves Venezuela—Laundry List

China solves Venezuelan infrastructure and miningR. Evan Ellis, Ph.D, is Assistant Professor, Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, NDU, Washington DC, 2-2012, “The Expanding Chinese Footprint in Latin America: The Challenges for China, and Dilemmas for the US,” Ifri Center for Asian Studies, http://www.ifri.org/?page=contribution-detail&id=7014, accessed 5-15-2013As of the end of 2011, for example, Venezuela had a portfolio of over $25 billion in infrastructure projects being funded by China Development Bank, all using Chinese companies and workers, including a $520 million effort for China Harbor Engineering Company (CHEC) to expand a new terminal in Puerto Cabello,23 a $200 million project for the Metallurgical Corporation of China (MCC) to expand the port of Palua, and another $161 million project for China Cons-truction Corporation to dredge the Orinoco river.24 Also as part of this portfolio, the Chinese company Sinohydro is earmarked to construct the new “El Chorrin” hydroelectric facility, while other Chinese compa-nies including China Harbor Engineering corporation will build seven new thermoelectric facilities in the country, as well as upgrading an existing facility. Also in Venezuela, China Railway Engineering Corporation is building a $7.5 billion high-speed rail line across the center of the country from Tinaco to Anaco. The project will reportedly employ 7500 workers,

of which a substantial number are likely to be Chinese.25 In addition, the Venezuelan mining ministry (MIBAM) has signed $727 million in contracts with four Chinese companies to perform mining-related activities: Wuhan Iron and Steel, China Railway Engineering Corporation, Metallurgical Group Corporation, and China Communications Construction Company LTD.26

China solves economic cooperation—loansFrançois Simon, 4-29-2013, "China in Venezuela: loans for oil," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/china-in-venezuela-loans-for-oil/, accessed 5-15-2013Indeed, China is Venezuela’s biggest creditor. Venezuela’s difficult economic situation (growth of 6%, high inflation at 20%, budget deficit at 20%, growing public debt at 50% of GDP in 2012) means that it cannot easily borrow from global capital markets to pay for Chavez’ expensive social programs. Beijing and Caracas established a Joint Investment Fund in 2007 with an initial

investment of $4 billion by China and $2 billion by Venezuela later boosted to a total of $12 billion in 2009. This fund is mainly used for investment in infrastructure, energy and agricultural projects. A study of Latin America funding by China in 2012 by Trufts University confirms another advantage of Chinese lending over the West as seen in Algeria: banks do not impose any policy condition on borrowing governments and generally have low environmental guidelines. These “tied loans” do however require equipment purchase and oil sales. For example the China Development Bank lent $500 million to PDVSA to buy machinery and equipment for oil drilling with contracts mostly awarded to Chinese-owned companies. Thereby, China serves as an alternative to international banks for financing with low rate loans, while securing access to Venezuela’s oil at a fixed low price and creating business opportunities. Beijing has lent $46,5 billion since 2008, which represents over half of the loans the country has received (95%

are loans-for-oil). Thus Venezuela is becoming oil-debt dependent which is naturally a great advantage for Chinese state-owned companies in trade deal and contract negotiations.

China solves—tech transfersFrançois Simon, 4-29-2013, "China in Venezuela: loans for oil," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/china-in-venezuela-loans-for-oil/, accessed 5-15-2013China’s investments are not limited to natural resources and are diversified. Many projects are under way enabling technological transfer to Venezuela. A joint venture railway company was launched in 2009 controlled at

40% by CREC (China Railways Engineering Corp). More importantly, China has built and launched Venezuela’s two satellites. The first, a geostationary telecommunication satellite called Simon Bolivar, was launched in 2008 from Sichuan in China. The controls were handed over to the Venezuelan government in 2009 after the training of Venezuelan engineers. The second, a monitoring satellite called Miranda, was recently launched in 2012 from Gansu also in China and was widely

greeted in Latin America as a great technological leap. China has also launched many joint ventures in electronics with factories built in Venezuela allowing a full transfer of Chinese know-how. In 2009, Venezuela’s first cellphone company, VTELCA (Venezolana de Telecomunicaciones), was set up as a joint venture between the government and Chinese state-controlled telecommunications company ZTE. The factory produces the “Vergatario” for Venezuelan and Caribbean markets which, highly subsidised by the Venezuelan government, is sold about $7 and may well be the world’s cheapest cellphone. Most workers (housewives and labourers) come from surrounding villages and are trained and

supervised by the Chinese while ZTE supplies parts and know-how. A last sector where China is operation a technological transfer is in the Agricultural sector with the establishment in 2011 of a joint venture in between PDVSA (70%) and Heilongjiang Beidahuang Nongken Group (30% – China’s largest agricultural company). Indeed, China which has a poor amount of arable land, is expanding its agricultural companies abroad to diversify its imports. In Venezuela, the company provides machinery and labourers as well as a greater variety


of seeds in return of approximately 20% of the harvest. Again, China’s main priority is to secure resources and conduct business but Venezuela is thereby achieving a great technological leap.


China Solves Venezuela—Oil

China can solve oil development—empirically provenR. Evan Ellis, PhD in political science and an Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., 9-21-2006, “The New Chinese Engagement With Latin America: Understanding Its Dynamics and the Implications for the Region,” Air & Space Power Journal, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2006/3tri06/elliseng.html, accessed 5-15-2013Venezuela. The PRC has long had a close relationship with the populist regime of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez,

including China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), which has been operating Venezuelan oil fields in Zulia and Anzoategui provinces for several years. The Chinese presence was important in helping the Venezuelan state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela Sociedad Anónima (PdVSA) to recover from the 2003 strike, when the Venezuelan president fired half of the PdVSA workforce. During 2005, CNPC signed additional agreements to develop the oilfields Zumano and the Junín 4 block in Orinoco, as part of collaboration with PdVSA to boost the nation’s petroleum output.

China solves oil developmentOlivia Kroth, 6-17-2012, "Venezuela's cooperation with Big Sister China," English pravda.ru, http://english.pravda.ru/business/companies/17-06-2012/121403-venezuela_china-0, accessed 5-15-2013Since 2009, a boost in Sino-Venezuelan cooperation can be noted in agriculture, energy, housing, telecommunications, trade, transport and tourism.¶ Great energy projects have seen the light of day during the last three years, from drilling oil in Venezuela's Orinoco Basin to creating a Sino-Venezuelan company to manufacture oil tankers and an oil refinery. "Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world," says President Hugo Chávez. "All the oil China needs is here in Venezuela." ¶ The Faja del Orinoco contains 520 billion barrels of crude oil. The Orinoco oil belt has been divided

into blocs, where oil is extracted by Sino-Venezuelan joint ventures in which Venezuela's state oil company PDVSA keeps at least a 60 percent controlling share.¶ Officials from PDVSA meet regularly with Chinese oil industry colleagues to plan further steps of oil extraction, building petroleum platforms, oil refineries and a fleet of oil tankers.¶ Currently Venezuela exports 400.000 barrels per day to China, the aim is to reach one million in 2025.¶ Hugo Chávez speaks of "gradualness and joint development." Sino-Venezuelan projects constitute part of a "strategic long-term development plan, to be implemented in several stages until 2025," according to the Venezuelan President.

China can replace the US in oil developmentFrançois Simon, 4-29-2013, "China in Venezuela: loans for oil," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/china-in-venezuela-loans-for-oil/, accessed 5-15-2013In the past decade but especially in the past 3 years, bilateral trade has soared more than exponentially from $500 million

in 1999 to $7,5 billion in 2009 and over $20 billion in 2012 (PDVSA). China is now Venezuela’s second trading partner after the US (Venezuelan trade ministry). In 2012, 65% of oil exports went to Venezuela’s traditional oil partner, the US, through its american subsidiary Citgo ; China was in second place with 20%. These numbers clearly show China’s new interest in the world’s 10th largest oil exporter (2012). More importantly, according to the US Geological Survey and the OPEC, Venezuela holds the world’s largest oil deposits in its Orinoco Oil Belt (although mostly heavy crude which needs important refining) and contracts are up for grabs. The oil industry, which accounts for 95% of the country’s exports, is controlled by PDVSA (Petroles de Venezuela), a state owned company created in 1976. The process of nationalisation of oil resources continued in 2007, when Chavez nationalised the Orinoco Belt projects, giving the state a minimum 60% ownership in all joint ventures. In these difficult conditions for foreign investors, China has two great advantages compared to its Western counterparts which are independence from the US and money.


China Solves Venezuela Better

Venezuela prefers Chinese engagementJames Suggett, 12-25-2009, "Venezuela and China Consolidate “Strategic Alliance,” Expand Bilateral Trade," VenezuelaAnalysis.com, http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5032, accessed 5-15-2013Since 2003, annual trade between the two countries has increased from less than a half a billion dollars to approximately $5 billion in 2008. In addition to this, China and Venezuela have signed $5 billion worth of planned Orinoco oil accords, and created a $12 billion bilateral investment fund for future projects.¶ President Chavez said the unprecedented growth in bilateral relations between Venezuela and China has the goal of creating a “balance in the world, a pluri-polar world,” in which there is no single dominant super power such as the United States. He said China “has demonstrated that it is not necessary to attack those who are weakest in order to be a great power.”

Chinese engagement better than the USXulio Ríos is director of China Policy Observatory, 3-2012, “China and Venezuela: the "perfect match"?” IGADI: Instituto Galego de Análise e Documentación Internacional, http://www.igadi.org/china/2011/xr_china_and_venezuela__the___perfect_match.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Based on the assumed belief that both are developing countries, the second axis of the Sino-Venezuelan relationship sits on the exchange of high level visits, close cooperation in international affairs based on the application of

identical criteria and the coincidence in the defence of what they regard as a basic principle of international relations: non-interference in internal affairs. His foreign policy principles are part of the promotion of a multipolar world in which nations interact in a context of fair, just, egalitarian and peaceful cooperation without precedence, as required by an ideological alignment, the schemes of imperial domination, characteristic of the capitalist system.¶ Add to this the nationalism that both countries share and that at levels of its power structure means finding political solutions that lead to the political disagreement with those who aspire to the universal shaping following political comparable models. This circumstance makes the coincidence of points of view on multilateral fora by not endorsing and sanctioning to veto decisions that drive the Western powers, especially the U.S., reaffirming an independent foreign policy that lets them to attempt to disparage any external influence.

Venezuela will remain Anti-AmericanYulia Zamanskaya, 2-1-2013, "Venezuela without Chávez: Caracas will not only continue to strengthen its ties with Russia and Iran but will also extend its sphere of influence to China," The Voice of Russia, http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_02_01/Venezuela-without-Chavez-Caracas-will-not-only-continue-to-strengthen-its-ties-with-Russia-and-Iran-but-will-also-extend-its-sphere-of-influence-to-China, accessed 5-15-2013In this sense, Venezuela's relations with Russia are likely to remain unchanged after President Chávez's death. Similarly unchanged will be Caracas' antagonism toward Washington. In Mr. Torres' words, "during almost 14 years in office, President Chávez made anti-Americanism one of the fundamental principles of Venezuela's foreign policy. Throughout his presidential term Chávez tried to undermine US influence. To this end, his greatest accomplishment was a close relationship that he forged with Iran - the country that in Washington's opinion develops nuclear weapons and sponsors international terrorism". Mr. Torres believes that Chávez's successor will maintain anti-American course and will further deepen Venezuelan relations with Iran.


AT: Chavez’s Death Means No Cooperation

Maduro will work with ChinaHelena Powell, 4-16-2013, "China/Latin America: Maduro’s win cements Venezuelan relationship with China," Pulsamerica, http://www.pulsamerica.co.uk/2013/04/16/chinalatin-america-maduros-win-cements-venezuelan-relationship-with-china, accessed 5-15-2013Chinese President Xi Jinping was among the first to congratulate Nicolas Maduro on his presidential win last Sunday, and government representatives are confident that the bilateral relationship will go from strength to strength. In his message to Maduro Xi praised the progress of the strategic partnership between China and Venezuela, while Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, added that the government would like to deepen this partnership.¶ Experts believe that Maduro’s election will mean continuity in Venezuela’s policy towards China. Wu Changsheng, director of the Latin American Research Center at the China Foundation for International Studies, says, ‘The two countries’ relationship could become more stable.’¶ Wu also disagreed with critics who predicted gloom and doom for Chinese investors in Venezuela after the death of Hugo Chávez. He argues the relationship will continue as before, though with even more economic cooperation to alleviate Venezuela’s severe inflation and food shortages.¶ ‘The relationship is mutually beneficial, as China needs more oil and Venezuela needs more financial support,’ he said.

New Venezuelan president will work with ChinaFrançois Simon, 4-29-2013, "China in Venezuela: loans for oil," Dragon's Trail, http://dragonstrail.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/china-in-venezuela-loans-for-oil/, accessed 5-15-2013Beyond these difficulties, prospects are good for China-Venezuela relations, even after Chavez’s death. Since his election, Maduro has already promised that his first trip abroad would be to China. He even said “the best tribute that we could give to our Comandante Chavez is to deepen our strategic relationship with our beloved China”. China seems evermore poised to secure new deals in Venezuela’s oil-economy and eventually buy stakes in debt-ridden PDVSA if it is denationalised. Talks have also started in 2012 to establish a free trade agreement with Mercosur. The dragon’s strategy of tied loans and

loans-for-oil means it is at the same time securing resources and creating business through its investment. Although not risk-free, it is clear that Venezuela will need Chinese funds in the future and should respect the deals even in the case of a collpase of Maduro’s government. It is also establishing itself as the second power in the Caribbean region and in Latin America. China will have to be careful not to push the continent into a bipolar balance of power and not confront the US but rather build partnerships with it, so as not to hinder its “peaceful rise” global strategy.

Maduro will continue Chavez’s partnership with ChinaDaniel Wallis, 3-15-2013, “Venezuela's post-Chavez oil policy to focus on China, Russia,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/15/venezuela-election-oil-idUSL1N0C69N220130315, accessed 5-15-2013Venezuela's post-Chavez oil policy will increasingly focus on deals with China and Russia if acting President Nicolas Maduro wins an April 14 election to continue his late boss's socialist programs.¶ During his 14 years in power, Hugo Chavez nationalized most of the OPEC nation's oil industry with the aim of putting its crude reserves - the biggest in the world - at the service of his power base, Venezuela's poor majority.¶ Turning away from the United States, the traditional top buyer of Venezuelan oil, Chavez also sharply increased fuel sales to China and turned Beijing into his government's biggest source of foreign funding.¶ "We are not going to change one iota of the fundamental themes of President Chavez's policies," Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez said in a recent interview with a local TV station.¶ "We have a very important strategic relationship with China, which we're going to continue deepening and cultivating. It's the same with our cooperation with Russia ... Chavez's policies are more alive than ever, and we will push ahead with them."


China Solves Latin America

China solves economic engagementEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013The expansion of Chinese trade and investment with Latin America is a new economic and commercial challenge in a

previously consolidated market. On the positive side, to the extent that it has contributed to regional growth and kept financial contagion from the global economic crisis at bay, China’s engagement with the region has been beneficial. An economically growing region means that the pie is expanding for everyone, including the United States. That is a global public good, which International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Christine Lagarde acknowledged during her late 2011 travel to the region. Nonetheless, for the U.S., individual investment opportunities and market share are being lost to China, whose share of Latin American trade grew from less than 2 percent in 2000 to 11 percent in 2010.

China solves loans—infrastructure provesR. Evan Ellis, Ph.D, is Assistant Professor, Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, NDU, Washington DC, 2-2012, “The Expanding Chinese Footprint in Latin America: The Challenges for China, and Dilemmas for the US,” Ifri Center for Asian Studies, http://www.ifri.org/?page=contribution-detail&id=7014, accessed 5-15-2013The most significant source of Chinese construction companies and workers entering Latin America is the third category of projects: the billions of dollars of infrastructure work being done by Chinese companies directly for Latin American governments, tied to loans to those governments from Chinese banks. Since 2010, there has been a massive increase in such projects, as the Chinese government seems to have discovered an effective formula for leveraging their access to the ample capital of Chinese banks to meet the infrastructure needs of cash-strapped Latin American governments.

China and Latin America have a strong trade relationshipSebastian Sarmiento-Saher, 3-14-2013, "China and Latin America: Big Business and Big Competition," http://thediplomat.com/china-power/china-and-latin-america-big-business-and-big-competition/, accessed 5-15-2013Latin America’s prospects have attracted serious attention, especially from Chinese firms and policymakers keen to benefit from growing opportunities and access to raw materials in LAC. Under President Hu Jintao China deepened its ties with Latin American countries through initiatives like the 2008 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Lima, Peru. China’s new President, Xi Jinping, is also no stranger to the region after having made

several state visits there as vice president.¶ According to Barbara Stallings, Chinese exports to Latin America grew substantially from U.S. $6.9 billion in 2000 to U.S. $69.7 billion in 2008; while LAC exports to China increased from U.S. $5.3 billion in 2000 to U.S. $70.3 billion in 2008. However, despite these dramatic increases of 910 percent and 1,226 percent, the United States and the EU are still ahead of China in terms of trade flows with Latin America.¶ China is quickly catching up to many of LAC’s traditional trading partners, however. Already China’s trade numbers with LAC have surpassed those of Japan, the previously dominant Asian trading partner for Latin America. What is most significant about these developments overall is how rapidly Chinese businesses and organizations have expanded their activity in the region – a trend that continues to grow.


China Solves Better—Economic Model

Latin America prefers Chinese engagementR. Evan Ellis, PhD in political science and an Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., 9-21-2006, “The New Chinese Engagement With Latin America: Understanding Its Dynamics and the Implications for the Region,” Air & Space Power Journal, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2006/3tri06/elliseng.html, accessed 5-15-2013Many different perspectives exist on the nature and significance of Chinese initiatives in Latin America. US analysts and policymakers, as a whole, tend to view Chinese engagement in a more skeptical manner than business and political elites in Latin America. Within the region, the prospect of China as an export market and a source of investment is viewed as an important opportunity—particularly by nations of South America whose primary exports are primary products and foodstuffs. While some Latin American nations increasingly worry about competition with Chinese manufactures in domestic and developed country markets, others view China as a counterweight to the historical US dominance of the economic, financial, and political structures of the region. Within the US, Chinese initiatives in Latin America are viewed with varying degrees of skepticism or indifference. Some view Chinese engagement with Latin America as part of an orchestrated plan to lock-up key assets in an emerging global struggle for

energy and other resources. Others in the believe that Chinese interest presents an opportunity for the United States to work together with China to advance the economic and social development of the region.

Regional countries trust China moreR. Evan Ellis, PhD in political science and an Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., 9-21-2006, “The New Chinese Engagement With Latin America: Understanding Its Dynamics and the Implications for the Region,” Air & Space Power Journal, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2006/3tri06/elliseng.html, accessed 5-15-2013The confidence of the new generation of Chinese leadership is complimented by the political sea change that took place in Latin America following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Following 9-11, US attention and resources turned inward to focus on homeland security, and

also toward the Middle East, where Afghanistan and Iraq became the focal point abroad of the Global War on Terror. The perception by Latin American leaders that the region was no longer a US priority was reinforced by their perception that their positions were not taken into consideration on a wide range of international issues from the Iraq war to immigration policy. Meanwhile, within Latin America itself, a series of elections brought left-of-center governments to power, from pragmatic socialists such as Ricardo Lagos in Chile, Ignacio “Lula” de la Silva in Brazil and Tabaré Vasquez in Uruguay--to radical populists, such as Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, and

most recently, Evo Morales in Bolivia. The new Latin American leadership was less willing to accept the neo-liberal economic orthodoxy represented by the “Washington Consensus,” and more disposed to explore new types of relationships that could give their nations alternatives to the traditional US domination of the regional economy. For these

leaders, regional trade blocks such as MERCOSUR, and the building of relationships with non-traditional economic partners such as China,

India, and the European Union, represented new sources of leverage in the increasingly globalized economy . In short, a new generation of Chinese

leaders with acute resource needs, and willing to take risks, encountered a new Latin American leadership, looking for new opportunities and economic partners.

Latin America prefers the Chinese economic modelR. Evan Ellis, PhD in political science and an Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., 9-21-2006, “The New Chinese Engagement With Latin America: Understanding Its Dynamics and the Implications for the Region,” Air & Space Power Journal, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2006/3tri06/elliseng.html, accessed 5-15-2013The degree to which China captures the imagination of Latin America has less to do with the reality of trade and investment flows, and more to do with its unique combination of attributes. Like the role played by the former Soviet Union, China is increasingly a political counterweight to the United States in the global political and economic system, and--at least superficially in its rhetoric--a proponent of an ideological alternative

to neoliberal capitalism. But unlike the Soviet Union, China is also rapidly transforming itself from an underdeveloped country to a large and dynamic modern economy. The nations of Latin America can identify with China’s underdeveloped roots, while being inspired by the magnitude and rapidity of its


transformation. The often-mentioned size of the Chinese population and the “otherness” of its culture further add to the almost romantic appeal that China engenders.


China Solves Better—Trust

Latin American countries don’t trust the USEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013As a result, there may be a tendency to be suspicious of actions that promote U.S. economic and national security interests, including trade and investment expansion, counternarcotics programs, security assistance, and even democracy promotion in relation to Cuba and elsewhere. It is within this intellectual construct that they place the growing influence of extra-regional actors and also rising regional actors such as Brazil.¶ This overwhelming bias in the policy and academic communities—a bias that does not generally inform U.S. policy in other regions—continues to put U.S. policy in the region at a disadvantage. It focuses on things we cannot fully change while neglecting initiatives that would accrue to our benefit.

LA countries don’t want to work with the USEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013As well, such an approach does not take into account the reality that nations such as Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela do not particularly want to have a partnership with the U.S. at this juncture and that several are busily establishing hemispheric institutions that purposefully exclude the United States and Canada. Others,

particularly in Central America and the Caribbean, have little capacity for a true partnership with Washington no matter how much they and we might want one. The disparities in size, wealth and power are just too great.

Latin American countries prefer China—less strings attachedEric Farnsworth is vice president of the Council of the Americas, an international business organization based in New York, 7-11-2010, “What does China's wooing of Latin America mean for all the Americas?” http://www.sunjournal.com/perspective/story/876189, accessed 5-15-2013And all investment is not the same. U.S. investment generally brings with it anti-corruption provisions, payment of taxes, technology transfer, management expertise, labor force protections and capacity building, corporate social responsibility and hiring at the local level. Chinese investment, not as much. The U.S. also

has traditionally tried to use economic and financial incentives to encourage regional reforms.¶ China, on the other hand, promises only a commercial relationship without political or policy interference. They don't particularly care if the government in power is capitalist or populist, authoritarian or democratic, corrupt or not. They don't care if the government is pro-U.S. or anti-U.S. Their emphasis is to do business in the region undisturbed.¶ Despite the potential downside for long-term regional development, Chinese investment and trade are therefore an attractive option for regional leaders, particularly those seeking a course independent of the U.S. and liberal economic orthodoxy. On the flip side, U.S. ability to promote labor and environmental protections, human rights and the rule of law is being reduced, because the region now has other options.


AT: Perm

Chinese and US engagement in Latin America trades offCynthia J. Arnson is director of the Latin American Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Jeffrey Davidow is the president of the Institute of the Americas and former assistant secretary of state for the Western Hemisphere and ambassador to Venezuela and Mexico, 1-2011, “China, Latin America, and the United States: The New Triangle,” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/LAP_120810_Triangle_rpt.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Building a strategic relationship with China is challenging not only ¶ because of low levels of Chinese investment in the region, but also ¶ because the investment that does occur generally employs Chinese laborers and materials brought over for specific infrastructure projects.¶ While China’s lack of human rights and environmental restrictions ¶ makes it an easier commercial partner as compared to the United States ¶ and Europe, the relationship lacks the deep cultural kinship that exists ¶ between Latin America and these other two areas of the world. Within ¶ this context, Cunningham posited that the relationship between China ¶ and Latin America will remain strictly commercial, but recommended ¶ that the United States be vigilant regarding the way that increasing ¶ commercial ties can transform into political alliances. In order for the ¶ United States to maintain its privileged relationship with the region, ¶ it must compete with China at the commercial level . This consists of ¶ lowering trade barriers to Latin American exports and expanding preexisting commercial and corporate ties.

Both actors means loss of US leverageIsabel Hilton, formerly Latin America editor of The Independent newspaper and is editor of www.chinadialogue.net, 2-2013, “China in Latin America: Hegemonic Challenge?” NOREF, Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, http://www.peacebuilding.no/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/ application/26ff1a0cc3c0b6d5692c8afbc054aad9.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013The availability of Chinese funds changes the Latin American political and social landscape in a number of ways. The Pacific nations of Peru, Chile, Panama and Mexico seek Chinese money for market reasons unconnected with a po-

litical project, since these countries are building societies that are more consonant with U.S. than Chinese values. In other cases, however, the availability of Chinese funds signals a loss of political leverage for the United States and permits the survival of anti-U.S. governments – in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, for instance – that wish to pursue more radical political and social models. China, however, has exercised caution at times in its readiness to deploy lending. In November 2004, when Argentina’s President Kirchner secretly requested Chinese support to pay off Argentina’s debt to the International Monetary fund (IMf), China refused, apparently to avoid a direct challenge to U.S. influence.

Cooperation in Latin America means future conflictIsabel Hilton, formerly Latin America editor of The Independent newspaper and is editor of www.chinadialogue.net, 2-2013, “China in Latin America: Hegemonic Challenge?” NOREF, Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, http://www.peacebuilding.no/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/ application/26ff1a0cc3c0b6d5692c8afbc054aad9.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013China’s presence in Latin America is unlikely to diminish and will continue to affect its regional partners for the foreseeable future. Although this undoubtedly entails a loss of U.S. influence in the region, both China and the U.S. have so far sought cooperation rather than confrontation. In the context of the Obama administration’s “pivot” to Asia, however, and the latent, long-term strategic competition between China and the United States, there is potential for increasing competition for influence in the future. An escalation of tensions between China and U.S. allies in the South China or East China Sea could prompt China to raise retaliatory tensions in the U.S. backyard. At that point, the traditional Latin American allies of the U.S. could face some uncomfortable choices.


AT: China Bad DAs

Chinese influence in Latin America is inevitableR. Evan Ellis, PhD in political science and an Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., 9-21-2006, “The New Chinese Engagement With Latin America: Understanding Its Dynamics and the Implications for the Region,” Air & Space Power Journal, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2006/3tri06/elliseng.html, accessed 5-15-2013More China-Orientation in Business and Popular Culture. In a broader sense, expanding economic interactions with China will also impact the business and popular culture of Latin America. The promise of China as a source of commercial opportunity has already led to a boom in schools teaching mandarin Chinese. Moreover, with expanding commerce, the number of Chinese nationals in the region will continue to increase, including not only businessmen, but also tourists and long-term immigrants. This demographic trend is likely to have a variety of repercussions. On one hand, it is likely to expand the presence of Chinese culture in the region, from entertainment to foods to style. Although Latin America may continue to be dominated by US culture, the degree of that domination is likely to wane in the decades to come. On the other hand, such human and cultural intermingling is also likely to foster new social tensions. Throughout the world, in places such as Malaysia and Indonesia, differences in customs and levels of economic prosperity between Chinese immigrant communities and established ethnic groups have been a source of societal tension and ethnic violence. The violence against the Chinese ethnic community in the Venezuelan state of Carabobo during the 2004 recall referendum serves as a reminder that Chinese communities in Latin America will have social and political repercussions for the countries in which they are found.

China aims to keep the region stableCynthia J. Arnson is director of the Latin American Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Jeffrey Davidow is the president of the Institute of the Americas and former assistant secretary of

state for the Western Hemisphere and ambassador to Venezuela and Mexico, 1-2011, “China, Latin America, and the United States: The New Triangle,” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/LAP_120810_Triangle_rpt.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013By contrast, Sanborn classified agreements between China and Latin ¶ American governments as “accommodationist.” China does not belong ¶ to the EITI, and one has only to look to Venezuela and Ecuador to observe that China adapts to changing rules of the game more successfully ¶ than its Western counterparts. China is not only looking for trade opportunities, but is also interested in the stability of Latin American societies and seeks local capacities for negotiation. Sanborn specifically addressed the case of Peru and its evolving relationship with China. In ¶ Peru, mineral exploitation accounts for one-fourth of tax revenues and 6 ¶ percent of GDP, though in certain regions mineral revenue constitutes ¶ up to half of GDP. Thirty-four percent of mineral investments in Peru ¶ are from China, and Peru represents 26 percent of China’s global mergers and acquisitions (M &A). Indeed, 40 percent of oil production ¶ in Peru is owned by China investors through a partnership between ¶ China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) and the Argentine firm ¶ Pluspetrol. Eight large Chinese firms are present in Peru’s extractive industries, and while six of them are purely state-owned, there are also ¶ private Chinese investors purchasing lots. Given that China is expected ¶ to invest $7 billion in minerals over the next five years, this trend is unlikely to wane.

Chinese influence benefits the USWang Xiaoxia, 5-6-2013, "In America's Backyard: China's Rising Influence In Latin America," No Publication, http://worldcrunch.com/china-2.0/in-america-039-s-backyard-china-039-s-rising-influence-in-latin-america/foreign-policy-trade-economy-investments-energy/c9s11647/, accessed 5-15-2013China's involvement in the Latin American continent doesn’t constitute a threat to the United States,

but brings benefits. It is precisely because China has reached "loans-for-oil" swap agreements with Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador and

other countries that it brings much-needed funds to these oil-producing countries in South America. Not only have these funds been used in

the field of oil production, but they have also safeguarded the energy supply of the United States, as well as stabilized these countries' livelihood -- and to a certain extent reduced the impact of illegal immigration and the drug trade on the U.S. ¶ For South America, China and the United States, this is not a zero-sum game, but a multiple choice of mutual benefits and synergies. Even if China has become the Latin American economy’s new upstart, it is still not in a position to challenge the strong and diverse influence that the United States has accumulated over two centuries in the region.


China Sphere of Influence Net-Benefit

China and US trade off in Latin AmericaEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013Over the same period, the U.S. went from 53 to 39 percent of Latin American trade. To paraphrase Obama, this is not ideology—it’s math. While the U.S. remains the top trading partner overall, the challenge is readily apparent. In a post–Cold War world, where global competition is as much economic as military, the inability or unwillingness to contend for markets abroad has strategic implications. Complacently watching as established markets are captured by others is inexplicable, particularly when some of those markets were originally developed by years of patient, taxpayer-financed efforts to reduce violence, build capacity and support democracy. Just when the U.S. should be reaping the reward, others are swooping in to gain the advantage.¶ From a foreign policy perspective, the story is even more compelling. The reality is this: China’s still-early but growing efforts in the Americas provide Latin American and Caribbean nations with additional trade and investment options that reduce U.S. leverage to promote open market, democratic values.

Chinese engagement trades off with US leadership in Latin AmericaEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013All of this lends itself to several policy options that require active consideration. For the first time in years, the U.S. faces a multifaceted rival in the region that requires a rethink of priorities, and the implementation of a true foreign policy (rather than development policy) agenda. The U.S. must now contend for Latin America, recapturing the initiative in a region that, with China’s engagement if not instigation, has begun to dismantle the previous U.S.-led consensus.

US and China at odds in Latin AmericaEric Farnsworth, 1-2012, “Memo to Washington: China's Growing Presence in Latin America,” Americas Quarterly, http://www.americasquarterly.org/Farnsworth, accessed 5-15-2013Despite conventional wisdom, trade is not a dirty word in the hemisphere. In fact, recent scholarship has found that positive attitudes toward the U.S. are correlated with increased trade with the United States. One way for the U.S. to improve its regional standing would be to again promote the idea of a hemispheric trade area among willing partners. Given China’s growing regional footprint, now is the time to promote such an initiative.6¶ The contrast is real. The hemisphere has a choice. It’s time to acknowledge the stakes and get on with the important work of fighting for the soul of the hemisphere.


European Union CP


EU Solves Cuba—Economic Engagement

EU can do economic engagement with CubaDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm? csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013The Common Position was conceived to be distinct from ¶ US policy; it was an opportunity to show that engagement ¶ could work. The Europeans thought that the policy could ¶ bring the ‘carrots’ that the United States had eschewed in favor of punishing the Cuban ¶ regime with “sticks.” As a major source of trade for Cuba, the European Union could ¶ bring economic leverage to bear on its relations with the island. Finally, since no single ¶ European country had major interests in Cuba, there appeared to be little danger of ¶ any one state hijacking the policy – although over time the Spanish government under ¶ José Maria Aznar and later José Luis Zapatero has played a ¶ lead role in EU moves to take tougher or more conciliatory ¶ stances regarding Cuba.

EU solves economic engagement with CubaDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm? csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013European engagement of all kinds – trade, investment, tourism, cooperation assistance, ¶ cultural exchanges, and

political dialogue – reached an impressive level from the ¶ 1990s to the present. While critical of the human rights violations and

economic ¶ mismanagement of the Castro government, European mainstream politicians and ¶ newspapers recognize social

achievements of the Revolution and speak favorably about ¶ its effects on creating a good business atmosphere . In trade, Europe replaced the Soviet ¶ Union as Cuba’s main partner following the latter’s collapse in 1991. In 2008 the ¶ European Union was, collectively, Cuba’s largest trading partner, although Spain is ¶ the only European country that is among

Cuba’s top five trading partners. Forty-two per cent of Cuban exports to developed countries (USD 1.8 billion) go to the EU ¶ and almost two-thirds of Cuban imports from developed countries (USD 3.5 billion) ¶ come from Europe. Still, Cuba is the only Latin American country without a bilateral ¶ cooperation agreement with the EU and also the only member of the ACP outside of ¶ the Cotonou Agreement, the preferential trade and aid pact between the EU and 78 ¶ former European colonies.

EU can effectively economically engagePaul Hare, 9-2008, “The Odd Couple: The EU and Cuba 1996-2008,” Brookings, http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2008/09/cuba-hare, accessed 5-15-2013Many Cubans have been prepared for the inevitable economic opening by working in and dealing with the hundreds of joint ventures started by EU countries. Companies such as Sol Melia, Havana Club (Pernod-Ricard), Castrol, ING bank, Suchel-Lever, Etecsa, Habanos tobacco ( now a subsidiary of Imperial tobacco), InBev of Belgium, Souza Cruz ( Brazilian subsidiary of British American Tobacco), have shown Cubans business principles. With the exception of Canada and Sherritt,

no other countries have approached this penetration. They have paid real wages, at least 40 or 50 times the average

monthly wage. And the EU have not been passive investors. They have insisted on better working conditions, more flexible operating, use of material incentives, cutting back stifling bureaucracy, always reminding the Cubans they could go elsewhere. They regularly told the Ministry of Foreign Investment (MINVEC) of problems they were having in such area as recruitment, incentives, clarity of regulations, delays in import licences etc. They have formed a formidable lobbying group.


EU Solves Cuba—Democracy

EU solves Cuban democracyDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013In 2009, the European Union appears well-positioned to have an impact on the ¶ development of Cuban democracy. The heart of the EU’s foreign-policy strategy towards ¶ Cuba has focused on maintaining political and economic engagement while sustaining ¶ rhetorical pressure on the Cuban regime to improve political and civil liberties on ¶ the island. While the US policy towards Cuba centered on its economic embargo of ¶ the island, even the diverse actors within the EU seem to have agreed that economic ¶ sanctions are not on the table for Cuba. Since 1996, the EU Common Position on ¶ Cuba has stated: ‘It is not European Union policy to try to bring about change by ¶ coercive measures with the effect of increasing the economic hardship of the Cuban ¶ people.’ Despite multiple diplomatic spats in recent years, the economic relationship has ¶ remained strong. When the arrest of 75 dissidents in Cuba sparked the EU into action ¶ in 2003, the sanctions imposed only stopped development aid and high-level diplomatic ¶ visits, but did nothing to address trade, investment, or tourism. Instead, the EU has ¶ focused its attention on human rights and democracy, with rhetoric that skirts but does not cross the line enough to severely restrict diplomatic ties ¶ between Brussels and Havana . So far, the EU foreign policy ¶ strategy has had minimal effect on the development of ¶ Cuban democracy, although the EU did notch one modest ¶ success when Cuba agreed to sign two United Nations’ ¶ (UN) human rights agreements in early 2008, though the ¶ implementation of these remains in question.

EU is ideal for peaceful Cuban transition to democracyVassiliki Tzivelis is a student at the College of Europe, Brussels campus, 3-2006, “The European Union’s Foreign Policy Towards Cuba: It Is Time to Tie the Knot,” Miami European Union Center, http://www6.miami.edu/eucenter/Tzivelisfinal.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Considering that the EU has already invested diplomatic efforts and millions of ¶ euros in the hope of promoting the development of better living conditions for the Cuban ¶ population, and considering that the EU is an ideal partner for the promotion of a ¶ peaceful transition in Cuba, thanks to its economic and political expertise, the current ¶ standstill should be seized as an opportunity for the EU to re-evaluate its policy towards ¶ Cuba and define an approach that is aimed at “consolidating the economic and social ¶ changes, that are easing the way for a peaceful transition.”147

EU can solvePaul Hare, 9-2008, “The Odd Couple: The EU and Cuba 1996-2008,” Brookings, http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2008/09/cuba-hare, accessed 5-15-2013Those who question EU policy in Cuba often say it hasn’t produced the transition that many hope for. The tourism, investment and contacts have not changed the Cuban regime. This is true but foreign policy seldom produces changes on its own. The Cuban government retains formidable advantages which help maintain its control: nationalism, an island territory, its monopoly on information, the near total dependence of all Cubans on the state for income and services, and the safety valve of exile and emigration. The job of the EU in Cuba is far from complete. But it has made a start, it has shown decisiveness in pushing policies and in demonstrating an unusual even-handedness. In a little more than a decade the EU has produced an enduring presence on the island. It has been true to its principles and shown more unity than it has on other foreign policies

issues. Overall, EU policy has ensured that Cuba has been more gradually and positively exposed to the benefits of economic and political openness than were the countries of Eastern Europe in the 1980s. The 2008 scenario is a

new one but Raul Castro knows that the EU will be an influential piece in the jigsaw of the new Cuba. The EU experiment in Cuba foreign policy is one of the better instances of sustained critical engagement in the modern era.


EU Solves Cuba Better

EU better positioned to engage Cuba than the USDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013Economic engagement is another bedrock principle for ¶ Europe . Through two-way trade, investment, and tourism, ¶

the EU can create incentives for gradual change. But the EU ¶ should move beyond these pillars of economic engagement. Through European lending ¶ institutions and joint ventures, the EU is well-positioned to advise and encourage the ¶ process of ‘enterprise perfecting’ that Raúl Castro has made a public goal . Additionally, ¶ communication and cooperation with European states with strong public service ¶ sectors could be beneficial to both parties. Europe has lauded the achievements of ¶ Cuban healthcare and education while acknowledging that public oversight in these ¶ sectors often limits efficiency and creates shortages of supplies and personnel. While ¶ Europe might not be fertile ground for a Barrio Adentro programme like the one that ¶ has placed about 25,000 Cuban doctors abroad in Venezuela, the EU social democracy ¶ model might be one that is more appealing to the Cubans than the prevalent US socioeconomic model.

EU better on Cuba—high level contacts and non-adversarialDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013At the moment, the EU has relatively high-level contacts with and access to Cuban ¶ government officials. This is the primary advantage of the European position and this ¶ level of communication should be maintained if not

expanded. The EU could seize the ¶ opportunity to reach out to Raúl Castro following Fidel Castro’s death. Raúl Castro ¶ may be inclined to work with European governments. The EU is particularly wellpositioned to engage and influence the new government, because, unlike the United ¶ States, it is not perceived to be openly adversarial.

EU better than the US—economic opennessFRIDE, Independent Think Tank in Madrid, Spain, 11-8-2005, “Common Goals, Different Strategies? Options for a Transatlantic Agenda on Cuba,” FRIDE, http://www.fride.org/publication/195/other-publications, accessed 5-15-2013Finally,Tomás Duplá del Moral reflected that, although¶ both the EU and the US support a peaceful and¶ constructive transition, which

would bring about a¶ democratic Cuba, their tactics do not necessarily¶ coincide. He explained that the EU believes that¶ openness to foreign investment has beneficial effects¶ for the population, because it creates employment and¶

offers opportunities for economic survival. Similarly, it¶ could have the added benefit of opening the minds of¶ those who work with foreign companies. He recalled¶ that the Bush government does not share this opinion¶ and that the extraterritorial sanctions of the Helms-¶ Burton Bill passed in 1996 in the US make this task¶ more complicated and that they are rejected by the¶ EU.¶ Similarly, the EU thinks that constructive engagement¶ with the Cuban government is useful, despite the¶ frustrations that this policy has given rise to. Although¶ dialogue with the Cuban authorities is not an end

in¶ itself, unlike the US, the EU does not believe in¶ isolating Cuba. Another EU idea not shared by the US¶ is that the presence of tourists can contribute to an¶ openness of views on Cuba.


AT: EU Common Position

Common Position doesn’t prevent strong economic relations with CubaWilliam M. Leogrande, is professor in the Department of Government, School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, D.C., 4-2-2013, "The Danger of Dependence: Cuba's Foreign Policy After Chavez," World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12840/the-danger-of-dependence-cubas-foreign-policy-after-chavez, accessed 5-15-2013Cuba's relations with Western Europe started returning to normal in the late-1970s, when Western banks, flush with petrodollars, were eager to loan money to Cuba to boost trade. Although the European Union's "Common Position," adopted in 1996, defines the EU's objective in Cuba as "transition to a pluralist democracy," it has not been a significant obstacle to normal diplomatic or economic relations in recent years. Europe, excluding the Russian Federation, constitutes 19 percent of Cuban trade. Russia and Cuba were estranged during Boris Yeltsin's presidency, but relations improved significantly under Vladimir Putin. Still, trade with the Russian Federation is less than 2 percent of Cuban trade.

Common Position strengthens EU’s economic cooperation approachAbigail Griffith, Coha Research Associate, 7-15-2010, “The European Union and Cuba: The Common Position,” Council on Hemispheric Affairs, http://www.coha.org/the-european-union-and-cuba-the-common-position/, accessed 5-15-2013The current EU common position on Cuba was established in 1996 under the influence of the Spanish Prime Minister. The policy establishes a unilateral relationship with Cuba on the basis of human rights and political openness. Unlike United States policy, the EU outlines a procedure that excludes coercive means for encouraging political change in Cuba. The EU aims to open the Cuban economy through increased trade and cooperation. The common position encourages peaceful change in Cuba through increased dialogue between the government and the Cuban people, and also allows EU countries to push for freedom of the press and of association.

The Common Position promotes economic engagementEvgenij Haperskij, Coha Research Associate, 2-4-2010, "No “Common Policy,” as Europe Grapples over its Future ties with Cuba," Council on Hemispheric Affairs, http://www.coha.org/no-common-policy-as-europe-grapples-over-its-future-ties-with-cuba/, accessed 5-15-2013The two main objectives of the Common Position policy have been: (1) to “encourage a process of transition to pluralist democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,” and (2) to contribute “to a sustainable recovery and improvement of the living standards of the Cuban people.” Thereby, the EU conditions its support of Cuban economic development to progress made in democratic reforms. Although the promotion of democracy has been the declared objective of the Common Position, its companion goal was economic engagement. At its heart, the Common Position was the European response to the United States’ Helms-Burton Act, which was passed by overwhelming majorities in both Houses of Congress on March of 1996, shortly before the “Common Position” was implemented.


EU Solves Mexico—Economic Engagement

EU can work with Mexico on economic issuesCouncil of the European Union, 6-16-2010, “Mexico-European Strategic Partnership Joint Executive Plan,” Europa, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_PRES-10-126_en.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Mexico and the European Union recognize the complex dynamics resulting from the globalization of the economic and financial systems, and understand that the existing challenges must be dealt with through internationally

concerted policy efforts. Hence, the Parties agree to set up a Macroeconomic Dialogue, which will be a useful instrument to exchange views, enhance mutual understanding and promote coordination on economic and financial issues. ¶ Mexico and the EU will seek increased convergence to assist the recovery of the global economy, the implementation of cooperative and coordinated exit strategies once durable recovery is secured, the strengthening of financial regulation and supervision, and the reform of the international financial institutions. This will include ensuring the swift implementation of the quota share reforms in order to increase the voice of underrepresented countries to the benefit of developing and emerging economies at the IMF and World Bank, as promised at the Pittsburgh G20 Summit increasing the voice of developing and emerging economies. Mexico and the EU commit to sustaining appropriate macroeconomic policies and promoting employment, social protection and poverty reduction as essential components of the policy response to the current crisis and to cushion its social impacts, notably on the Millennium Development Goal (MDGs)¶ They recognise the importance of encouraging concrete cooperation measures to promote employment-generating investment, with special emphasis on those sectors of the population in disadvantage, including in developing countries, especially the long-term unemployed, women, minority groups, young people and persons with disabilities.

Strong economic relationshipEuropean Commission, 6-17-2012, “Joint EU-Mexico statement following the EU-Mexico Summit in Los Cabos,” Europa, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-452_en.htm, accessed 5-15-2013The Leaders concurred that cooperation is an important component to strengthen the intense relation between Mexico and the EU. Therefore, the Leaders agreed to instruct their competent agencies to jointly review the general framework and the operational basis of the bilateral cooperation. Activities in this field play a crucial role in the development of new capacities in areas of common interest such as social cohesion, science and technology, environment and climate change, competitiveness and innovation, health, regional development and energy.¶ The Leaders expressed their interest to continue working dynamically in projects of social cohesion, particularly in subjects related to urban poverty, micro-regionalization, social participation and the decentralization of programs. The preparation for the second phase of the Social Cohesion Programme with a co-financed budget focusing on Human Rights and Public Security matters is underway.¶ Likewise, the Leaders recognized the importance of ongoing economic cooperation initiatives to boost the competitiveness of Mexican SMEs, as well as to provide them with the necessary tools to access the European markets in the same way as EU firms access the Mexican market.

EU solves—strong economic relationshipEuropean Commission, 6-17-2012, “Joint EU-Mexico statement following the EU-Mexico Summit in Los Cabos,” Europa, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-452_en.htm, accessed 5-15-2013The Leaders concurred that the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Mexico and the EU, in force since

2000, has established the basis to strengthen the economic relations between them, contributing to the diversification of markets and to the increase of competitiveness for the benefit of both industries and consumers. The Leaders note with satisfaction the significant increase of bilateral trade under the Agreement, with a record of 57 billion dollars (in excess of € 40 billion) in 2011. Similarly, the flow of bilateral investments has continued its upward trend, consolidating the position of the EU as Mexico’s second largest source of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), through investments of 105 billion dollars accumulated between 1999 and 2011, which represent 36.6% of Mexico’s FDI received in that period of time.


EU Solves Mexico—Drugs

EU should act on Mexico’s drug tradeReuters, 5-2-2011, “Europe must act to curb Mexican drug problem –Germany,” http://www.trust.org/item/?map=europe-must-act-to-curb-mexican-drug-problem—germany, accessed 5-15-2013Europe holds joint responsibility with Mexico in the fight against drug cartels and must reduce demand for

narcotics and battle money laundering, German President Christian Wulff said on Monday.¶ More than 38,000 people have been killed since Mexican President Felipe Calderon began a campaign against Mexico's drug gangs in 2006 that has strained ties with the United States and hurt his conservatives' chances of re-election.¶ Wulff, on a one-week visit to Latin America, praised Mexico for its "courage" in standing up to the cartels.¶ "We hold joint responsibility here. Europe too must play its part by curbing drug consumption and fighting money laundering. We have a job to do there too, and we can't leave Mexico by itself," he told a news conference with Calderon.¶ The United States is the biggest market for illegal drugs smuggled through

Mexico, though officials say huge quantities are increasingly making their way to Europe.

EU can solve Mexico’s drug tradeJustice in Mexico, 2-17-2012, “NEW E.U. DIPLOMATIC LEADER REAFFIRMS PLANS TO STRENGTHEN STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP WITH MEXICO, INCREASE SUPPORT TO ANTI-DRUG TRAFFICKING EFFORTS,” http://justiceinmexico.org/2012/02/17/new-european-union-diplomatic-leader-reaffirms-plans-to-strengthen-strategic-partnership-with-mexico-increase-support-to-anti-drug-trafficking-efforts/, accessed 5-15-2013 In a Mexico City press conference last week, the European Union (E.U.) reaffirmed its commitment to its Strategic Partnership with Mexico, pledging increased support for anti-drug and human rights efforts. E.U. Vice-President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton spoke during what has been her first tour of Latin America since taking office. She visited Mexico on her way to Brazil.¶ Mexico and Brazil are currently the only countries in the region to hold Strategic Partnerships with the European Union. This form of partnership extends beyond the normal scope of a trade agreement, to encompass political and economic advisement, along

with education and human rights initiatives. The European Union is Mexico’s third-largest trading partner, and its second-largest source of direct foreign investment. Trade with the European Union has injected 102 billion dollars into the

Mexican economy since 1999. Ashton confirmed the E.U.’s intentions to intensify the partnership, particularly in the automotive, aerospace, and green technology industries.

EU can work with Mexico to solve drugsJustice in Mexico, 2-17-2012, “NEW E.U. DIPLOMATIC LEADER REAFFIRMS PLANS TO STRENGTHEN STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP WITH MEXICO, INCREASE SUPPORT TO ANTI-DRUG TRAFFICKING EFFORTS,” http://justiceinmexico.org/2012/02/17/new-european-union-diplomatic-leader-reaffirms-plans-to-strengthen-strategic-partnership-with-mexico-increase-support-to-anti-drug-trafficking-efforts/, accessed 5-15-2013 Ashton also announced a new round of E.U.–Mexico dialogue on security issues later this year, in order to coordinate cooperation against drug trafficking, which Ashton categorized as a “global threat.” At the talks, the leaders will work to develop protocols for trans-national investigation and information sharing, training programs for Mexican judges and lawyers in the new accusatorial justice system, and strategies to impede the international flow of the chemical precursors to drugs such as methamphetamines. A clamp down on the movement of these chemical precursors, which often originate in India and China, would benefit Mexico and the rest of the world: amphetamines have become “the fastest-growing illicit drug in the world,” according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, and National Public Radio has reported that Mexican drug cartels are currently “making a major push into synthetic drugs.” (Read more about a record-breaking methamphetamine bust last week just outside of Guadalajara here.) The European Union also hopes to expand the anti-drug policies it develops with Mexico into the rest of Central America in the future. E.U. officials have urged Mexico to direct the European Union as to how it can best help Mexico, rather than to impose European ideas upon the country.


EU Solves Venezuela—Economic Engagement

EU can help Venezuela with economic growth and diversificationEuropean Commission, 11-4-2007, “VENEZUELA COUNTRY STRATEGY PAPER,” http://eeas.europa.eu/venezuela/csp/07_13_en.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013The European Commission’s relations and co-operation assistance with Venezuela take place both at a regional (EU-LAC and in the future EU-Mercosur) and bilateral level. While the former concentrates on aspects relating to the strengthening of regional integration and social cohesion, the latter will focus on support to the government’s efforts to modernise and decentralise the public sector, and to help build equitable and sustainable economic growth and diversification. Under the Development Cooperation Instrument

(DCI), an indicative allocation of € 40 million has been earmarked for Venezuela in the period 2007-2013. These resources can be supplemented by projects and programmes financed under the Latin American regional programmes, as well as from thematic programmes and other cooperation instruments of the European Commission.

EU can work with Venezuela through MercosurEuropean Commission, 11-4-2007, “VENEZUELA COUNTRY STRATEGY PAPER,” http://eeas.europa.eu/venezuela/csp/07_13_en.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Political relations between Venezuela and the EU have been conducted not only bilaterally but also in the framework of regional relations with the Andean Community (including through its political dialogue aspects,

high level dialogue on drugs and framework co-operation agreement). Following the country’s recent decision to leave the Andean Community and join Mercosur, Venezuela is now expected to begin participating in

ministerial and senior officials meetings in the context of the EU-Mercosur political dialogue. After accession, it will also participate fully in the negotiations for an EUMercosur regional association agreement. In a bilateral context, the EU issued several Presidency declarations between 2002 and 2004, expressing its full support for efforts by the OAS and the Group of Friends and emphasizing the need for peaceful, democratic, constitutional and electoral solutions to the country’s political problems. The EU deployed an EU Election Observation Mission to observe the country’s legislative elections in December 200515 and again for the Presidential elections in December 200616

Venezuela leaving CAN doesn’t prevent cooperation with the EUPeople’s Daily, 4-29-2006, “Venezuela says exit from CAN not to affect relations with EU,” http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200604/29/eng20060429_262147.html, accessed 5-15-2013Venezuela's exit from the Community of Andean Nations (CAN) would not affect its relationship with the European Union (EU), Venezuelan Deputy Foreign Minister Pavel Rondon said on Friday. "The Venezuela-EU relationship will be intense and will continue without suffering problems," Rondon said. Venezuela warned last week that it could withdraw from the CAN if fellow members Colombia, Peru and Ecuador go through with free trade pacts with the United States. But Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he was willing to reconsider Venezuela's decision to leave, if Colombia and Peru rethink their treaties with the United States. The CAN, founded in 1969 as a project to integrate the Andean countries, now groups Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia. Chile withdrew from the trade bloc five years after it was formed.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200604/29/eng20060429_262147.html

http://eeas.europa.eu/venezuela/csp/07_13_en.pdf

http://eeas.europa.eu/venezuela/csp/07_13_en.pdf


EU Solves Venezuela—Oil

EU is a major investor in Venezuelan oilSusanne Gratius, specialist in EU-Latin America relations @ FRIDE, 4-25-2012, “Global Insider: EU-Venezuela Ties Distant but Cordial,” World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/11887/global-insider-eu-venezuela-ties-distant-but-cordial, accessed 5-15-2013European investment in Venezuela is concentrated in the energy sector, both oil and gas. France, Spain and

the U.K. are the main European investors, and Spain in particular has a close economic relationship with Venezuela. Apart from the energy sector, Spain is also present in the financial sector, communications and tourism. Venezuela is not a major trade partner of the EU and has not signed any free trade agreements with Brussels. Exports from Venezuela concentrate on oil, while industrial products and services are the main imports from Europe.

Venezuela empirically cooperates with European energy companiesDeisy Buitrago and Mario Naranjo, 8-10-2012, “No worries for Spain's Repsol in Venezuela – Chavez,” Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/10/venezuela-repsol-idAFL2E8JAK8Z20120810, accessed 5-15-2013President Hugo Chavez ruled out on Friday any retaliatory measures against Repsol's interests in Venezuela as a result of its legal battle with his ally President Cristina Fernandez's government in Argentina. "Do you think that if Repsol saw any danger for its investments in Venezuela, they would come and sign another agreement?" he told reporters, referring to recently-signed new agreements relating to a gas project. Last

month, Chavez advised the Spanish energy company to seek a friendly agreement after Argentina nationalized its local unit, YPF, in April. Repsol has sued for $10 billion in compensation and taken steps to file for World Bank arbitration. Fernandez, one of Chavez's most important allies in Latin America, said Repsol had not invested enough in YPF and had allowed crude production and exploration to decline. "We are friends of Repsol, we are allies and friends of the Argentine Republic. What I have done is make a reflection and send a message to Repsol, I don't think it's the right thing to go to international arbitration," Chavez told reporters. "We think it's a bad sign that Repsol sues Argentina at an international tribunal because that shows that if any dispute arises with us tomorrow or after, would they go there and do the same? Let's fix this as allies is what we propose." Chavez, who is Washington's most vocal critic in the region, has nationalized large swathes of Venezuela's economy including most of the oil industry during his 14 years in

office. Chavez, who is Washington's most vocal critic in the region, has nationalized large swathes of Venezuela's economy including most of the oil industry during his 14 years in office. Repsol and Italy's ENI signed a major deal last year with Venezuela's state oil company, PDVSA, to develop the OPEC nation's Perla

offshore natural gas field, where they have certified more than 15 trillion cubic feet. Repsol also has an 11 percent stake in Carabobo Project 1 in Venezuela's extra heavy Orinoco crude belt, where reserves are seen at 31 billion barrels and output at 400,000 barrels per day. The company has said it expects to invest $15 billion in Carabobo. Earlier this year, Chavez strongly backed Fernandez's move to take over YPF, saying the rest of South America had a duty to support her as well. In 2007, he nationalized four Orinoco projects, prompting U.S. majors Exxon Mobil Corp and ConocoPhillips to sue for tens of billions of dollars.

Spain has an energy alliance with Venezuela – our evidence assumes Maduro, who’s the new presidentLatin American Herald Tribune, 2009, “Argentine Spanish Repsol YPF to Explore for Oil in Venezuela Orinoco,” http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=340280&CategoryId=13280, accessed 5-15-2013Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro announced a new stage in his nation's "energy alliance" with Spain during a meeting with his Spanish counterpart. Maduro made his remarks Tuesday during the second day of talks with Miguel Angel Moratinos, alluding to contracts to be signed when Spain's top diplomat and business leaders from the Iberian nation meet with leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Wednesday at the presidential palace. The most significant agreements include a pact allowing Spain's Repsol YPF to explore for oil in Venezuela's Orinoco Belt, and another involving Spanish utilities Iberdrola

and Elecnor in the construction of an electric plant in the eastern Venezuelan state of Sucre. Railroad, naval and infrastructure agreements also are to be signed. In his statements on Tuesday, Maduro said Venezuela is laying the groundwork for a new approach to "the development of energy security and stability, both in our region and in

brotherly countries like Spain."

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=340280&CategoryId=13280

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/10/venezuela-repsol-idAFL2E8JAK8Z20120810

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/10/venezuela-repsol-idAFL2E8JAK8Z20120810

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/11887/global-insider-eu-venezuela-ties-distant-but-cordial

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/11887/global-insider-eu-venezuela-ties-distant-but-cordial


EU Solves Latin America

EU can effectively economic engage Latin AmericaShannon O’Neil, Latin America Policy Expert, 11-19-2012, “EU-Latin America Economic Ties,” Latintelligence, http://shannononeil.com/blog/eu-latin-america-economic-ties/, accessed 5-15-2013Europe has also provided development loans to Latin America through the European Investment Bank

(EIB). Though these loans pale in comparison to China’s in recent years, the EIB has financed several significant projects,

including the US$507 million renovation of the Panama Canal and US$530 million for energy infrastructure development in Brazil.¶ Overall, and despite the financial crisis, the European Union’s economic ties with Latin America have continued to grow. While most analysts believe China will overtake the EU to become the second largest trading partner with Latin

America by 2015, on the investment side the EU far outpaces other nations (even that of the United States). These long term bets by European companies on Latin America’s economy mean deeper ties into the future.

EU solves financial investmentsGermán Ríos is Director of Strategic Affairs in the European Office of CAF Development Bank of Latin America, 9-17/18-2012, “The Challenges of the Global Context and Their Impact on the Relationship between Latin America and the EU,” EU-LAC Foundation, http://www.eulacfoundation.org/sites/default/files/Proceedings%20EU-LAC-GIGA%20Seminar%202012.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013To tackle these problems the region should undertake an agenda of productive transformation, and we ¶ believe the European Union could play a significant role. In all our countries we should have an agenda ¶ of public policies in order to improve competitiveness (although recently we have seen improvements ¶ on the competitiveness indexes). These policies must include infrastructure (we believe Europe has ¶ plenty to teach us on this issue), education, promoting new discoveries in added values activities, innovation and technology, as well as the regional clusters I mentioned before. In a first stage, we should ¶ attempt to create regional production and value chains in order to take one more step towards global ¶ production chains.¶ The acquisition of good-quality foreign investment is an important issue for Latin America. There has ¶ been much discussion during the past in our subcontinent on this subject and currently there is the fear ¶ that foreign investors will arrive in order to exploit our natural resources and will leave taking everything ¶ with them. For example, there is a certain fear of Chinese investments. We have to learn from the past ¶ and not allow this kind of enclaves. Those investments must be negotiated, and our enterprises and ¶ countries must bind FDI with the condition to go hand in hand with human capital training and technology transfer. Obviously we have many necessities, but

there are, for example, three areas in which we ¶ believe that FDI, including from Europe, could have an important impact in the region: infrastructure, ¶ adding value to our commodities, and enabling the insertion into global production chains.

EU can effectively engage Latin AmericaKen Parks and Carolina Pica, 1-27-2013, “EU Leaders Move to Foster Ties With Latin America,” Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323644904578268202448946268.htmlThe EU and democratic countries of Latin America skirted the Cuba question and instead focused on the economic opportunities for both regions.¶ "We acknowledge the creation of CELAC as a step in the region's ambition to deepen regional cooperation," European Council President Herman Van Rompuy said at the summit.¶ A spokeswoman for the Cuban delegation declined to comment.¶ The gathering of 61 delegations and about 40 heads of state in a convention center on the outskirts of the Chilean capital showed the EU's commitment to strengthening its already considerable cultural and economic ties with Latin America and the Caribbean.¶ The EU is the region's second-largest trade partner, with a 13% share of its exports and imports in 2011, according to United Nation data.¶ The economies of Latin America and the Caribbean will grow an estimated 3.6% this year, while Europe will muddle through a second-consecutive year of recession, according to the International Monetary Fund.


EU Solves Better—Influence

EU better—US influence is waningRoger F. Noriega and José R. Cárdenas, 12-5-2012, "An action plan for US policy in the Americas," American Enterprise Institute, http://www.aei.org/outlook/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/latin-america/an-action-plan-for-us-policy-in-the-americas, accessed 5-15-2013Times have changed. The US fiscal crisis and preoccupation with two distant wars have distracted policymakers in Washington and undermined US leadership in the Americas. Although access to the US market, investment, technology, and other economic benefits are highly valued by most countries in the Western Hemisphere, today, the United States is no longer the only major partner to choose from. Asia (principally China) and Europe are making important inroads. So, as US policymakers retool their strategy for the Americas, they must shelve the paternalism of the past and be much more energetic in forming meaningful partnerships with willing neighbors.

US influence is fading, the EU is betterPeter Hakim has taught at MIT and Columbia University and is President Emeritus of the Inter-American Dialogue, 9-17/18-2012, “European and the US Policies Converge in Latin America,” EU-LAC Foundation, http://www.eulacfoundation.org/sites/default/files/Proceedings%20EU-LAC-GIGA%20Seminar%202012.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013Despite all these many reasons for divergent approaches to Latin America, the US and EU relationships with Latin America turn out to be strikingly similar, and they are continuing to converge. Part of ¶ the reason for the convergence is the changing nature of the US relationship with Latin America. The notion that the US is joined to the region naturally in a Western Hemispheric community has largely ¶ faded away. While US politicians and diplomats frequently employ such terms as community, neighborhood, and partnership to describe the relationship, Latin Americans do so only rarely.

EU can lead in Latin AmericaFredo Arias-King is the founder of the academic quarterly Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, published since 1992 in Washington, DC. He is an analyst with two regional think tanks: CEON (Miami) and CADAL (Buenos Aires), 6-2008, “Latin America and European ‘Soft Power’ Geopolitics,” European View, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, accessed 5-15-2013While they will not say so openly, Latin American elites (both liberal and traditionalistconservative) actually crave an outside figure they can follow, yet that figure has failed to appear. The only one they have is Washington, which at least has been broadly consistent (since President Ronald Reagan) in its approach towards the region—unlike Spain or other potential suitors. Just as the United States proved an important impetus for European unification after World War II (through the conditions of Marshall Plan aid and other mechanisms), the EU too can provide that external catalyst and leadership role to an otherwise mutually distrustful and bickering group of nations.


EU Solves Better—Trade

EU has just as many trade agreements as the USPeter Hakim has taught at MIT and Columbia University and is President Emeritus of the Inter-American Dialogue, 9-17/18-2012, “European and the US Policies Converge in Latin America,” EU-LAC Foundation, http://www.eulacfoundation.org/sites/default/files/Proceedings%20EU-LAC-GIGA%20Seminar%202012.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013To be sure, the US maintains a very heavy economic footprint in the region, but so does Europe. The ¶ US now has free trade agreements with eleven Latin American nations. These are exactly the same ¶ countries that have FTAs with Europe – Mexico, five Central American nations, the Dominican Republic, ¶ Panama, Colombia, Peru, and Chile. Only three of ten South American countries have agreements ¶ with either the US or the EU, compared to eight of nine of the Northern group of Latin American countries (Cuba is the holdout). Neither the US or Europe have managed to reach trade accords with Argentina or Brazil, which together represent nearly half of Latin America’s economic activity. Venezuela’s ¶ entry to Mercosur this year sharply diminishes the prospect of an EU or US agreement with that key ¶ South American trade group.

EU better for Latin American trade relationshipsWelt Am Sonntag, 2-13-2013, “Why the EU should not get into bed with the US over trade,” Presseurop, http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/3404671-why-eu-should-not-get-bed-us-over-trade, accessed 5-15-2013Transatlantic trade has surged in recent years, which is precisely why industry associations are pressuring governments on both sides of the Atlantic to speed up the agreement. But the game is shifting elsewhere – to Asia and Latin America.¶ World economic expert Langhammer fears that a transatlantic merger would harm Europe’s trading balance by harming its economic relationship with the emerging economies.¶ Jagdish Bhagwati sees the situation similarly. From a European perspective, the project as a whole is “not a good idea.” In trade matters, Europe is more flexible than the US; thanks to the EBA initiative, which allows the poorest countries to export their products duty free to Europe (with the exception of arms).¶ “That’s why the EU should bury the plans. Otherwise it will weaken only itself. And besides, the developing countries are better off without such an agreement.”

EU has massive trade relationship with Latin AmericaReuters, 1-25-2013, “Factbox: Five facts about EU-Latin American trade,” http://www.nbcnews.com/id/50592536/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/factbox-five-facts-about-eu-latin-american-trade/#.UZozIyt37qA, accessed 5-15-2013Here are five facts about trade between the EU and Latin America:* Bilateral trade has more than doubled over the last decade to reach some 200 billion euros ($280 billion) last year, and Europe is the top foreign investor in Latin America and the Caribbean.* Both regions have populations of about 500 million, but the EU's total economic output is three times bigger at $17.6 trillion.* Like the United States, the EU has free-trade agreements with much of Latin America. Along with those of Mexico and Chile, EU lawmakers approved free-trade accords with Colombia, Peru and six Central American nations in December.* A free-trade deal with the South American trade bloc Mercosur, made up of Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Uruguay and Paraguay, would be a real coup for the Europeans. The EU is Mercosur's biggest trading partner. Mercosur is the EU's No. 8 trading partner. EU exports to the region rose to 45 billion euros in 2011 from 28 billion euros in 2007.


AT: Perm

US and EU work at cross-purposes in Latin AmericaDiana Villiers Negroponte is a nonresident senior fellow with the Latin America Initiative under Foreign Policy at Brookings, 1-25-2013, “Summitry between Europe and Latin America,” http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/01/25-eu-celac-negroponte, accessed 5-15-2013Should Washington care? Yes. This is a wake up call from entrepreneurs who compete with U.S. manufacturers, scientists and

engineers. The Europeans have not arrived at the CELAC meeting to buy primary commodities. They have flown over to explore ways in which to combine their management skills and funds with the opportunities presented by energetic entrepreneurs, known as “multi-latinos.” They will find governments,

such as the Mexico’s and Colombia’s, who understand fully the value of foreign direct investment, scientific and technological expertise. They will communicate in languages and cultures that are compatible with South American values. ¶ U.S. business needs to play a leadership role and not wait for Washington to organize the next delegation. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the Council of the Americas can stimulate their members to visit Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Chile, Uruguay and Brazil with a view to doing business. Medium size businesses in the United States can access the support of the U.S. Foreign Commercial Service to find partners in the hemisphere. There is plenty of business opportunities for both the Europeans and the North Americans, but we must get off the couch and develop alliances and joint ventures. Otherwise, the Europeans might eat our lunch!

Economic engagement in Latin America is zero sumJoel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and a distinguished presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, 2-18-2013, “U.S. LATE TO THE PARTY ON LATIN AMERICA, AFRICA,” Newgeography.com, http://www.newgeography.com/content/003500-us-late-party-latin-america-africa, accessed 5-15-2013Conventional wisdom in our chattering classes holds that, in the "information age," raw materials no longer represent an advantage for economic growth. Yet as the world's population grows, and its middle class expands, there seems to be a cascading demand for raw materials, either for direct consumption or for use in manufactured goods. Energy consumption itself, according to the International Energy Agency, could rise as much as 50 percent by 2030, with more than 84 percent of that increase coming from fossil fuels.¶ Increasingly the competition over Latin America and Africa reflects something of a reprise of what was once seen as "the great game," where European colonial powers struggled for control of resources and land masses in regions as diverse as Central Asia, Africa, South America and the Middle East. Today, this struggle includes many more protagonists, including Japan, Korea and, most powerfully, China, all of whom are targeting investments in the continent.

US and EU should not work together in Latin AmericaJoel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and a distinguished presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, 2-18-2013, “U.S. LATE TO THE PARTY ON LATIN AMERICA, AFRICA,” Newgeography.com, http://www.newgeography.com/content/003500-us-late-party-latin-america-africa, accessed 5-15-2013Clearly, the rise of these two regions signals that we need to adjust our foreign policy priorities. American business is already becoming more engaged with these two continents; over the past decade trade growth there has more than tripled,

compared with a doubling of trade with Asia and Europe. We need to move not only beyond our old strategic ties with Europe, and embroilment with the volatile Middle East, and look to engage in the places where our primary rivals, notably

China, already see the future of the world economy.¶ Will America, finally awakening from its European slumbers and no-win Middle Eastern involvements, get with the new program? It took three decades for the foreign policy establishment to acknowledge the reality of the Pacific era. Hopefully it won't take nearly as long to acknowledge the growing influence of both our southern neighbors and emergent powerhouse that is Africa.


AT: EU Not Unified/Lack of Cohesion

EU can still act, even if not all of the policies are exactly the sameDaniel P. Erikson, Senior Associate for US policy and Director of Caribbean programs at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), 2009, “Europe’s Cuba Problem: The Limits of Constructive Engagement,” Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/resources/analysis/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile&pageid=38108, accessed 5-15-2013EU policy is thus caught between conditional engagement ¶ that has had scant impact and engagement without ¶ conditions, an approach that would leave the EU vulnerable ¶ to criticism that its Cuba policy has no significant human ¶ rights component. One potential way to break the impasse would be to formulate an ¶ alternative approach based on several guiding principles for EU member states – such ¶ as encouraging democratic reform and economic engagement while maintaining links ¶ with the current government – but with an emphasis on countries experimenting with ¶ different policy approaches on a national level beyond the EU Common Position. This ¶ would allow each individual member country to pursue its own policies according to its ¶ national interests and comparative advantages. While every European government will ¶ take its own position bilaterally, there can be some ‘unity in diversity’; an umbrella set ¶ of principles that can guide the work of the EU countries.

Economic crisis pushed Europe to common foreign policyStephen Majors is an editor with Eurasia Group, 10-5-2012, “Europe's debt crisis: A nudge toward a common security policy,” http://eurasia.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/05/ europe_s_debt_crisis_a_nudge_toward_a_common_security_policy, accessed 5-15-2013The global political and economic environment is also helping encourage consideration of a common foreign policy. European countries are on the verge of becoming security-takers instead of security-makers. European officials -- perhaps surprised by former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' candor when he said European states were not pulling their weight in NATO -- concede the facts. In part, the issue is driven by economic stagnation. European countries had started to reduce defense spending even before the debt crisis, which has simply compounded the economic challenge. And the trend is expected to continue. By 2050, according to a projection from HSBC economists, Europe will only have five economies in the top 20, compared to eight today, illustrating the decline in the prominence of individual European countries. Collective security would be a logical way to address those concerns, if (and it's a big if) the political issues can be resolved. The EU could be a force to be reckoned with; it has more than 500 million people (far larger than the U.S., but smaller than China or India).

EU has unified foreign policyMarta Palombo, 5-9-2013, “The EU does have a foreign policy – and here is why we like it,” Nouvelle-Europe, http://www.nouvelle-europe.eu/en/eu-does-have-foreign-policy-and-here-why-we-it, accessd 5-15-2013The EU is nice¶ “The Union’s aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples”, states article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty. For the very nature of the European Union as a political project, its foreign policy is strongly committed to certain values: it supports (and not “exports”) peace, democracy, human rights and prosperity. It also promotes multilateralism, regional cooperation, sustainable development and environmental engagement. It is not only the largest aid donor in the world; it also bases its trade agreements on a policy of conditionality, in order to guarantee the respect of the values it promotes.¶ Surely the EU foreign policy is not exclusively made of values; interests are always at stake. But the identity and rhetoric that the EU promotes, together with the constraints that decision-making among 27 states causes, oblige the EU to be particularly ethical in its foreign policy. The EU, as Kagan wrote, is a promoter of Kant’s perpetual peace.


EU-Latin American Relations Net Benefit

EU engagement bolsters the strategic allianceXinhua, 1-24-2013, “LatAm-EU summit to push "strategic alliance," http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-01/24/c_132124936.htm, accessed 5-15-2013Latin American, Caribbean and European leaders are set to meet here on Saturday and Sunday and are expected to push ahead the "strategic alliance" they initiated 14 years ago.¶ At a bi-regional summit held in Rio de Janeiro in 1999, Europe and Latin America forged an ambitious "strategic alliance" to strengthen economic and trade cooperation based on broad political dialogue.¶ The alliance, however, stumbled due to the global economic crisis, which now is an overriding reason for both sides to work together to face the challenges of the 21st century.¶ The 2008 crisis, which was born in the United States and had spread to the rest of the world, marked the end of a period of economic expansion and the beginning of an era of financial insecurity and instability that has impacted Europe and, to a lesser degree, Latin America.¶ While the EU is trying to prop up its economy, uncertainty and insecurity persist, affecting the entire eurozone, especially Spain and Portugal, the two countries with the strongest ties to Latin America.¶ Latin America and Europe have more than 500 years of shared history and culture due to the old-

time colonial explorations of Spain and Portugal, making the two regions' economies and politics closely linked.¶ Among Europe's biggest hurdles are how to find new sources for economic growth and how to pay off sizeable public and private debts, while guaranteeing the supply of goods. This is where Latin American countries can offer significant opportunities.

That solves warmingThe Guardian, 12-25-2012, “EU and Latin America: strategic partnership,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/25/eu-latin-america-strategic-partnership, accessed 5-15-2013Europe needs new markets, and Latin America needs European-style small and medium-sized enterprises and Germany's famed dual vocational training system. The fact that investment capital is drying up for such businesses in Europe does not mean the model is bust. ¶ A renewed relationship between the two continents is far from being solely about mutually beneficial economics. Between the two of them – 33

states of Latin America and the Caribbean with 600 million inhabitants; and 27 states of the EU with 500 million inhabitants – they comprise most of the western world. The two blocks of countries tend in their voting patterns at the UN to converge on global issues such as climate change. ¶ There is much to build on. The relationship is not one-way. With America looking the other way, with transpacific replacing transatlantic alliances, the opportunity exists for Latin America and the EU to build a progressive strategic partnership.

Warming causes extinctionOliver Tickell, Climate Researcher, 8-10-2008, “On a Planet 4C Hotter, All We Can Prepare for is Extinction” The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange, accessed 5-15-2013We need to get prepared for four degrees of global warming, Bob Watson told the Guardian last week. At first sight this looks like wise counsel from the climate science adviser to Defra. But

the idea that we could adapt to a 4C rise is absurd and dangerous. Global warming on this scale would be a catastrophe that would mean, in the immortal words that Chief Seattle probably never spoke, "the end of living and the beginning of survival" for humankind. Or perhaps the beginning of our extinction . The collapse of the polar ice caps

would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities,

transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland. The world's geography would be transformed much as it was at

the end of the last ice age, when sea levels rose by about 120 metres to create the Channel, the North Sea and Cardigan Bay out of dry land. Weather would become extreme and unpredictable, with more frequent and severe droughts, floods and hurricanes. The Earth's carrying capacity would be hugely reduced. Billions would undoubtedly die. Watson's call was supported by the government's former chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, who

warned that "if we get to a four-degree rise it is quite possible that we would begin to see a runaway increase". This is a remarkable understatement. The climate system is already experiencing significant feedbacks, notably the summer melting of the Arctic sea ice. The more the ice melts, the more sunshine is absorbed by the sea, and the more the Arctic warms. And as the Arctic warms, the release of billions of tonnes of methane – a greenhouse gas 70 times stronger than carbon dioxide over 20 years – captured under melting permafrost is already under way.


EU-Latin American Relations Net Benefit Extensions

Latin America wants EU strategic alliance—economic engagement keyHarvey Morris, 1-25-2013, “Ascendant Latin America Seeks to Recast European Ties,” The New York Times, http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/latin-america-seeks-to-redraw-european-ties/, accessed 5-15-2013Leaders from Latin America and Europe are meeting in Santiago, Chile, this weekend to discuss updating a close and longstanding relationship to better reflect the new global economic realities.¶ At a summit meeting of the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean States (CELAC) and the European Union, government leaders from Europe will face calls for a more equal partnership in what has in the past been seen as a one-sided relationship.¶ Sebastián Piñera, the Chilean president and host of the summit talks, told members of parliament from the two blocs this week: “What we are seeking is a new strategic alliance, a new era in the relations between the two continents.”¶ The Europeans have traditionally been big investors in Latin economies, with the European Union accounting for 40 percent of the total in the past decade, or around $30 billion a year.

Economic engagement key to strategic alliance—that solves warming and the economyHarvey Morris, 1-25-2013, “Ascendant Latin America Seeks to Recast European Ties,” The New York Times, http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/latin-america-seeks-to-redraw-european-ties/, accessed 5-15-2013Alicia Bárcena Ibarra of Mexico, the executive secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, warned ahead of the Santiago summit meeting that Europe could be facing the kind of “lost decade” that Latin American countries confronted 30 years ago.¶ In those days, countries in the region found themselves deep in debt after taking on loans from Western banks that were eager to recycle petrodollars from oil producers whose coffers were overflowing in the wake of the 1970s oil price explosion.¶ “The South is no longer the same,” Ms. Bárcena said. “Europe is going to find a different and a changed Latin America. That means taking on new global challenges with responsibility and dealing with issues such as climate change and financial security.”¶ Outlining Latin America’s agenda, for a more balanced relationship with Europe, she said: “We want foreign investment that helps us modernize our production structure, that contributes to employment, that helps us care for the environment and that respects social rights.”

EU engagement bolsters strategic allianceIFACCA, International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies, 10-20-2009, http://www.ifacca.org/international_news/2009/10/20/european-unions-strategic-alliance-latin-america/, accessed 5-15-2013The European Commission devised a new policy to consolidate the strategic alliance between the EU and Latin America. In its communication “EU-Latin America: an alliance between global agents” the Commission evaluates the current situation of the biregional relationship’s and summarizes the objectives for the next few years. Looking towards the next EU-Latin America Summit that will take place in Spain during 2010 Spring season, the communication points out and provides new political directions and recommendations to face the challenges that affect both regions, like climate change, economic and financial downturn, energy security and migration.¶ It also proposes to create an investment mechanism in Latin America that will allow mobilising resources of financial institutions to support projects in energy infrastructure, transportation, environment and social cohesion.


EU Soft Power Net Benefit

Focusing on Latin America boosts EU soft powerFredo Arias-King is the founder of the academic quarterly Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, published since 1992 in Washington, DC. He is an analyst with two regional think tanks: CEON (Miami) and CADAL (Buenos Aires), 6-2008, “Latin America and European ‘Soft Power’ Geopolitics,” European View, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, accessed 5-15-2013This is a pity, since a focused and realistic EU could play a crucial role in the Western hemisphere. This is the one area of the world that could still be susceptible to a positive influence from the EU—and the European business elites seem to understand this better than the politicians do. By avoiding paternalistic and

‘great power’ complexes and instead drawing on its recent history of successful transitions and a relatively high standing with our elites here, an EU-influenced transformation in Latin America would prove fortuitous for the long-term success of the EU itself.

EU soft power key to solving warmingMenouar Alem, Ambassador of the Mission of Morocco to the EU, 4-25-2006, “DEFINING EUROPE’S SOFT POWER,” Friends of Europe, http://www.friendsofeurope.org/Portals/6/Documents/Reports/SOD %20CC%20on%20Soft%20Power%2025-04-06.pdf, accessed 5-15-2013However, Europe, as a soft power, is making a difference beyond the political and economic arena, the

debate heard. Amanda Burton, policy advisor for the Brussels-based European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), told guests that Europe has also been setting the agenda when it comes to climate change. "Soft power and all that that entails is not just about military conflict resolution. It also relates to climate change which, let us remember, has been recognised as being the greatest challenge facing the world today," she said. "We should not underestimate the role that Europe and the EU can play - and their responsibilities - in making progress on climate change. This so-called soft power can be used as a force for good in years to come in tackling climate change."

Warming causes extinctionOliver Tickell, Climate Researcher, 8-10-2008, “On a Planet 4C Hotter, All We Can Prepare for is Extinction” The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange, accessed 5-15-2013We need to get prepared for four degrees of global warming, Bob Watson told the Guardian last week. At first sight this looks like wise counsel from the climate science adviser to Defra. But

the idea that we could adapt to a 4C rise is absurd and dangerous. Global warming on this scale would be a catastrophe that would mean, in the immortal words that Chief Seattle probably never spoke, "the end of living and the beginning of survival" for humankind. Or perhaps the beginning of our extinction . The collapse of the polar ice caps

would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities,

transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland. The world's geography would be transformed much as it was at

the end of the last ice age, when sea levels rose by about 120 metres to create the Channel, the North Sea and Cardigan Bay out of dry land. Weather would become extreme and unpredictable, with more frequent and severe droughts, floods and hurricanes. The Earth's carrying capacity would be hugely reduced. Billions would undoubtedly die. Watson's call was supported by the government's former chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, who

warned that "if we get to a four-degree rise it is quite possible that we would begin to see a runaway increase". This is a remarkable understatement. The climate system is already experiencing significant feedbacks, notably the summer melting of the Arctic sea ice. The more the ice melts, the more sunshine is absorbed by the sea, and the more the Arctic warms. And as the Arctic warms, the release of billions of tonnes of methane – a greenhouse gas 70 times stronger than carbon dioxide over 20 years – captured under melting permafrost is already under way.


EU Soft Power Net Benefit Extensions

Latin America is key to boost European soft power—they must act Fredo Arias-King is the founder of the academic quarterly Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, published since 1992 in Washington, DC. He is an analyst with two regional think tanks: CEON (Miami) and CADAL (Buenos Aires), 6-2008, “Latin America and European ‘Soft Power’ Geopolitics,” European View, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, accessed 5-15-2013While some view the EU as a counterweight to the United States, more enlightened leaders today realise that in a world that includes China, India and ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), the EU should see itself as part of a global family that includes other liberal democracies in alliance against resurgent challenges. This will likely include the United

States and Canada, plus other members of the ‘political West’ such as India and Japan. The great landmass that is Latin America could tip the balance one way or another and it is currently up for grabs—yet one would not guess this by observing the official policies of the EU and its larger Member States here.

EU soft power worksFraser Cameron, director of the EU-Asia Centre, 10-17-2012, “Judy Asks: Does the EU’s "Soft Power" Really Work?,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, http://carnegieendowment.org /2012/10/17/judy-asks-does-eu-s-soft-power-really-work/e1tw, accessed 5-15-2013The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the EU has been derided by the usual eurosceptics. But what they cannot deny is the success of the unique experiment in sharing sovereignty that the EU has built up over the past half century. There have been several attempts to unite Europe before, by force. The EU has done it by establishing a legal order that member states voluntarily sign up to for the greater good. That is also soft power in action.¶ So, there will be no European aircraft carriers patrolling the Taiwan straits, but China and Taiwan have both

adopted EU standards on car exhaust emissions. China is building up the share of euros in its foreign currency reserves. Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans look to the EU for inspiration for their own regional integration projects. Soft power, the EU has it in abundance, and it works.

New action in South America would boost EU soft powerJackson Janes, executive director of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University, 10-17-2012, “Judy Asks: Does the EU’s "Soft Power" Really Work?,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, http://carnegieendowment.org /2012/10/17/judy-asks-does-eu-s-soft-power-really-work/e1tw, accessed 5-15-2013The next chapters of this story will be written not only about what Europe can do for itself, but also about what Europe might be able to do for the world in which it has been able to evolve during the past decades. Just like German unification in 1990, European unification emerged from an environment that was shaped by factors, many of which, like the Soviet Union, are no longer relevant. Other, more contemporary forces have become shapers of today's choices well beyond the European continent in Asia, South America, and most certainly, in the troubled regions of the Middle East. It also includes changes in transatlantic equations of power and influence, along with new webs of interdependence—for better and for worse.¶ Europe has come a long way in a short period of history. It can take justifiable pride in that accomplishment with or without a Nobel Peace Prize. But that very accomplishment is also a signal that Europe needs to continue to pursue opportunities it has achieved, but also those it has been given in order to continue both the process and the project it started two generations ago.¶ In the meantime, Europe is more than the sum of its parts and processes. It is part of a much larger global project in which it has much to contribute and much to gain. Europe needs to widen its lens to see that opportunity.


Capitalism K


1NC Capitalism Kritik 1/2

U.S. policymaking is completely subordinate to the service of capital. This informs every policy decision. Samir Amin, Director of Third World Forum in Senegal, 7/8-2003, “Against Militarization and War: Confronting the Empire,” Centre for Research on Globalisation, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/AMI305A.html, accessed 5-6-2013Politically, the U.S. state is designed to serve the economy and nothing else, abolishing the contradictory and dialectical relationship between economy and politics. The genocide carried out against the Native Americans, the enslavement of the blacks, the successive waves of immigration into the United States leading to the predominance of ethnic and racial conflict, as manipulated by the ruling class, at the expense of the maturation of class consciousness-have all combined to produce the political monopoly of U.S. society by the single party of capital. Both segments of this party share the same strategic global vision, though addressing their rhetoric to different "constituencies," themselves drawn from the less than half of U.S. society that believes sufficiently in the system to bother voting. Not benefiting from the tradition by which the social democratic worker's parties and the communists marked the formation of modem European political culture, American society does not have the ideological instruments at its disposal to allow it to resist the dictatorship of capital. On the contrary, capital shapes every aspect of this society's way of thinking, and reproduces itself by reinforcing the kind of deep-seated racism that allows U.S. society to see itself as constituting a master race.

Engagement decisions are made by capitalist elites in response to shifting market forces; the extrinsic benefits of engagement are irrelevant to its power in shaping capitalist development. Immanuel Wallerstein, Senior Research Scholar at Yale University, 1996, “The Inter-State Structure of the Modern World System,” in International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, eds. Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zelewski, pp. 88-89.It matters little whether the activity is transformational (agricultural, industrial) or service (merchandising, informational, transport, financial). At given times, and under given conditions, any of these activities may be core-like or peripheral, high-profit or low-profit. What matters first and foremost is the degree to which the activity is (can be) relatively monopolized at a given point in time. The successful entrepreneurs (capitalists) discern which kinds of economic activities have the possibility in the short run of a high degree of monopolisation, and whose products have or can be induced to have a considerable demand. A successful capitalist has no intrinsic commitment to product, to place, to country, or to type of economic activity. The commitment is to the accumulation of capital. Therefore, the capitalist will shift locus of economic engagement (product, place, country, type of activity) as shifts occur in the opportunities to maximise revenues from undertakings.


1NC Capitalism Kritik 2/2

Capitalism will cause extinction and is the root cause of every crisis.Charles Brown, Professor of Economics at the University of Michigan, 4-13-2005, "Capitalism, Exploitation, and Oppression," PEN-L, http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/pen-l/2005w15/msg00062.html, accessed 5-6-2013The capitalist class owns the factories, the banks, and transportation-the means of production and distribution. Workers sell their ability to work in order to acquire the necessities of life. Capitalists buy the workers' labor, but only pay them back a portion of the wealth they create. Because the capitalists own the means of production, they are able to keep the surplus wealth created by workers above and beyond the cost of paying worker's wages and other costs of production. This surplus is called "profit" and consists of unpaid labor that the capitalists appropriate and use to achieve ever-greater profits. These profits are turned into capital which capitalists use to further exploit the producers of all wealth-the working class. Capitalists are compelled by competition to seek to maximize profits. The capitalist class as a whole can do that only by extracting a greater surplus from the unpaid labor of workers by increasing exploitation. Under capitalism, economic development happens only if it is profitable to the individual

capitalists, not for any social need or good. The profit drive is inherent in capitalism, and underlies or exacerbates all major social ills of our times. With the rapid advance of technology and productivity, new forms of capitalist ownership have developed to maximize profit. The working people of our country confront serious, chronic problems because of capitalism. These chronic problems become part of the objective conditions that confront each new generation of working people. The threat of nuclear war, which can destroy all humanity, grows with the spread of nuclear weapons, space-based weaponry, and a military doctrine that justifies their use in preemptive wars and wars without end. Ever since the end of World War II, the U.S. has been constantly involved in aggressive military actions big and small. These wars have cost millions of lives and casualties, huge material losses, as well as trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Threats to the environment continue to spiral, threatening all life on our planet.

Alternative: Vote Negative to refuse to prop-up capitalism. The collective desire to move beyond capital is the only alternative to slavery and extinction.James Herod, retired educator and anti-capitalist philosopher, 2005, Getting Free, http://site.www.umb.edu/faculty/salzman_g/Strate/GetFre/06.htm, accessed 5-5-2013.Thus our strategy of gutting and eventually destroying capitalism requires at a minimum a totalizing image, an awareness that we are attacking an entire way of life and replacing it with another, and not merely reforming one way of life into something else. Many people may not be accustomed to thinking about entire systems and social orders, but everyone knows what a lifestyle is, or a way of life, and that is the way we should approach it. The thing is this: in order for capitalism to be destroyed millions and millions of people must be dissatisfied with their way of life. They must want something else and see certain existing things as obstacles to getting what they want. It is not useful to think of this as a new ideology. It is not merely a belief-system that is needed, like a religion, or like Marxism, or Anarchism. Rather it is a new prevailing vision, a dominant desire, an overriding need. What must exist is a pressing desire to live a certain way, and not to live another way. If this pressing desire were a desire to live free, to be autonomous, to live in democratically controlled communities, to participate in the self-regulating activities of a mature people, then capitalism could be destroyed. Otherwise we are doomed to perpetual slavery and possibly even to extinction.


Link – Economic Engagement

Engagement is part of an overall strategy of capitalist hegemony to bring outlying nations into the fold of market forces.Ashley Smith, member of the United National Antiwar Committee steering committee, member editorial board of the ISR, July-August 2011, “Rehabilitating U.S. Intervention,” International Socialist Review, http://www.isreview.org/issues/78/feat-imperialism.shtml, accessed 5-1-2013 Outlining his grand strategy in the National Security Strategy and Quadrennial Defense Review, Obama aims to use multilateral institutions to incorporate and subordinate international and regional rivals. In the National Security Strategy, he argues for the U.S. to focus its “engagement on strengthening international institutions and galvanizing the collective action that can serve common interests such as combating violent extremism; stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and securing nuclear materials; achieving balanced and sustainable economic growth; and forging cooperative solutions to the threat of climate change, conflict, and pandemic disease.”

Engagement is a tool of capitalist discipline designed to secure and manage other nations.Ashley Smith, member of the United National Antiwar Committee steering committee, member editorial board of the ISR, July-August 2011, “Rehabilitating U.S. Intervention,” International Socialist Review, http://www.isreview.org/issues/78/feat-imperialism.shtml, accessed 5-1-2013 By building this international architecture to serve U.S. interests, Obama plans to police and discipline those states and non-state actors identified as U.S. enemies. Despite this multilateral strategy, he does not rule out the use of unilateral means (such as the assassination of Osama bin Laden) or bilateral agreements outside international institutions when the United States cannot get its way through multilateral action. Through this strategy of engagement, Obama hopes to secure a world order under U.S. management and in its interests.

Interimperialist rivalry necessitates the economic penetration of outlying nations. The Central Committee of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, 10-1999, “Notes on Political Economy,” http://revcom.us/a/special_postings/poleco_e.htm, accessed 4-25-2013There is an interconnection between deepening imperialist penetration of the Third World and intensifying geoeconomic rivalry between the major imperialist powers. This is expressed in struggle over the exact terms of and enforcement authority behind new international trade and investment agreements (like the WTO). It is also expressed in the vying strategic agendas between the U.S. and Japan in APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum).

http://revcom.us/a/special_postings/poleco_e.htm

http://www.isreview.org/issues/78/feat-imperialism.shtml

http://www.isreview.org/issues/78/feat-imperialism.shtml


Link – Engagement = Assimilation

Foreign economic engagement is a strategy to ideologically assimilate nations into the paradigm of free markets and capitalist ideology. Spyros Sakellaropoulos, Assistant Professor of Social Policy at Panteion University, and Panagiotis Sotiris, academic and activist who lives on the island of Crete, 2008, “American Foreign Policy as Modern Imperialism: From Armed Humanitarianism to Preemptive War,” http://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/siso.2008.72.2.208, accessed 5-6-2013.The United States’ open endorsement of aggressive capitalist policies , restructuring of capitalist production, attacks on the welfare state, defense of property rights (especially intellectual property rights), free trade and generally all forms of reinstatement of capital’s power over labor on a global scale was an essential part of its hegemonic role. It was not just a

domestic policy. It was more a strategic choice of class interests and a social basis for an expansive internationalization of capital, the very basis of modern imperialism (Wood, 2003). And although the growth of the financial sector has been described as a sign of the structurally weak and crisis-prone character of modern capitalism in general and the U. S. economy in particular (Brenner, 2002), we think that such a view underestimates the disciplinary character of

international financial deregulation and the way it induces neoliberal policies and capitalist restructuring and enhances the hegemonic role of the United States (Rude, 2004). It was not only about the lowering of trade barriers or financial liberalization. It has more to do with the removal of most forms of protection that had aimed at safeguarding less productive capitals and traditional petty bourgeois strata against international competition and at guaranteeing forms of class compromise. It was not only an open-market policy serving U. S. firms; it also offered other capitalist social formations a way out of capitalist crisis and the use of international competition as pressure for capitalist restructuring. And this can explain why non-hegemonic formations might accept a global economic and financial architecture that actually puts greater stress on their domestic economies.

We can say that with this internationalization of capital and capitalist restructuring there has been some sort of objective dialectic of hegemony at work. The entire strategy of internationalization became a strategic consideration to incorporate all ex-socialist countries into the economic, political, and ideological practices of the imperialist chain by means of their adoption of free market policies, dismantling of all forms of social protection, abolition of all barriers to foreign investment and full compliance with the current American strategy (Gowan, 1990; Gowan, 1995).

U.S. economic engagement props up market capitalism and benefits global elites, ignoring the world’s poor. Dinker Raval and Bala Subramanian, retired professors at Morgan State University, 11-25-2011, “Time to Refocus Knowledge Engagement,” India Abroad, p. A19.Historically, the US has followed the concept of engagement as a positive part of its foreign policy with its adversaries. After World War II, it followed the policy of political engagement with the Soviet Union. This eventually resulted in transforming the Soviet bloc countries into aspiring democracies. President Richard Nixon's political engagements of China paid off by bringing

China out of its isolation and into the world community. At the end of the 20 th century, economic engagement became the policy focus to promote market economic model, after the Soviet economic model collapsed . Although the US engagement strategies paid

off in mitigating many global challenges, the real strength of the US as a nation that cherishes values of individual freedom, choice and openness did not catch world's imagination. The political and economic engagement strategies, though successful, were not effective in transmitting the real image of America to the masses. A possible reason is that the benefits of these engagements reached only the powerful and elitists and not the average person. The average person remained unaware of the real America. For

example, its economic engagement strategy encouraged globalization of the markets, which benefitted multinationals, but not the billions of poor at the ‘bottom of the pyramid.’


Link – Engagement = Assimilation Cont…

The goal of global economic integration is fundamentally imperialist; history proves it has been a strategy of empire. Gareth Austin, Professor of Economics at The Graduate Institute, Geneva, 2005, "Economic Imperialism," The Oxford Encyclopedia of Economic History, http://www.oup.com/us/pdf/economic.history/imperialism.pdf, accessed 4-28-2013Much of the history of global economic integration, including the reduction of transaction costs that provided the framework for price convergence

in goods and eventually in factor markets, has been the history of imperialism. In principle, the results of empire might be distinguished from those of peaceful migration and trade: but the distinction is meaningless when conquest was a precondition of foreign settlement, or for mercantilism, or where free trade was imposed by foreign guns. That

the populations of Australasia and the Americas speak European languages would not have happened without the violent seizure of overseas territory. Empire has been central to both the fact and the form of integration in the global economy during the last five hundred years.

http://www.oup.com/us/pdf/economic.history/imperialism.pdf


Link – Cuba

Foreign investment based on capitalist economic models dooms Cuba's path towards worker ownership and economic democracy.Keith Harrington, contributing writer and activist, 1-17-2013, "New Cuba: Beachhead for Economic Democracy Beyond Capitalism," Truthout.org, http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13918-the-new-cuba-a-beachhead-for-economic-democracy-we-should-support, accessed 5-6-2013In short, the worker-ownership movement could greatly benefit from a national-scale economic environment that will allow cooperative enterprises to develop according to their own particular democratic nature and exhibit their true potential, free from the profit-above-all dictates of capitalism. No country bears as much promise in this respect than contemporary Cuba. Nevertheless, for Cuba's experiment to work, all efforts should be made to steer the economy and the behavior of the country's emergent private entrepreneurial class in a direction that comports with the ethos and objectives of economic democracy. Above all, this would likely require severe restrictions, if not an outright ban, on the entry of large foreign capitalist firms or the establishment of large domestic capitalist firms. For, as economists such as Jamee Moudud of Sarah Lawrence University and many structuralist thinkers have pointed out, as jobs and tax revenues become dependent on the success of capitalist firms, societies become constrained in their ability to pursue developmental paths that do not prioritize

capitalist accumulation. Accordingly, during the early years of the cooperative experiment, Cuba should seek to limit foreign direct investment to cooperative or triple-bottom-line firms as much as possible, facilitate joint-ventures between such firms and its own cooperatives and continue to seek industrial loans largely from committed social democratic partners such as Venezuela, and other "pink-tide" trade partners.

Cuba’s move toward market reforms is tentative; U.S. engagement is decisive.Damien Cave, Staffwriter, 11-19-2012, “Easing of Restraints in Cuba Renews Debate on U.S. Embargo,” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 4-28-2013The longstanding logic has been that broad sanctions are necessary to suffocate the totalitarian government of Fidel and Raúl Castro. Now, especially for many Cubans who had previously stayed on the sidelines in the battle over Cuba policy, a new argument against the embargo is gaining currency — that the tentative move toward capitalism by the Cuban government could be sped up with more assistance from Americans.

Engagement emboldens capitalist reformers in Cuba.Damien Cave, Staffwriter, 11-19-2012, “Easing of Restraints in Cuba Renews Debate on U.S. Embargo,” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, accessed 4-28-2013Even as defenders of the embargo warn against providing the Cuban government with “economic lifelines,” some Cubans and exiles are advocating a fresh approach. The Obama administration already showed an openness to engagement with Cuba in 2009 by removing restrictions on travel and remittances for Cuban Americans. But with Fidel Castro, 86, retired and President Raúl Castro, 81, leading a bureaucracy that is divided on the pace and scope of change, many have begun urging President Obama to go further and update American policy by putting a priority on assistance for Cubans seeking more economic independence from the

government. “Maintaining this embargo, maintaining this hostility, all it does is strengthen and embolden the hard-liners,” said Carlos Saladrigas, a Cuban exile and co-chairman of the Cuba Study Group in Washington, which advocates engagement with Cuba. “What we should be doing is helping the reformers.”


Link – Mexico

Trade between the U.S. and Mexico props up the exploitation of workers on both sides of the border and entrenches corporatism, environmental degradation, and poverty.Mark Karlin, editor of BuzzFlash at Truthout, 7-15-2012, “The 1% Connection: Mexico and the United States, Crony Capitalism and the Exploitation of Labor Through NAFTA,” Truthout.org, http://truth-out.org/news/item/10309-the-1-connection-mexico-and-the-united-states-crony-capitalism-and-the-exploitation-of-labor-through-nafta, accessed 5-5-2013Free trade, such as NAFTA, is a way of exploiting labor without national boundaries and ravaging the environment in pursuit of higher corporate profits. Borders only exist for poor migrants seeking money to keep themselves and their families alive.

The victims of this trade policy - and its synergistic companion, crony capitalism - eke out an existence on both sides of the Mexican-United States border. In reporting on the rise in poverty despite the gross domestic product of Mexico actually increasing in the last two years, the director of Amnesty International in Mexico told The Los Angeles Times: "Behind these figures are people with stories of injustice, dispossession, discrimination and insecurity." So it also goes in the United States. There is no border wall for economic injustice.

U.S. economic engagement with Mexico guarantees further pro-market reforms and integrates Mexico into U.S. capitalism. Eric Farnsworth and Michael Werz, vice president of the Council of the Americas and Americas Society, and Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, 11-30-2013, “The United States and Mexico: The Path Forward,” Center for American Progress, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2012/11/30/46430/the-united-states-and-mexico-the-path-forward/, accessed 4-29-2013Given this backdrop, the new Mexican president needs major political and policy successes in 2013 to consolidate power within his own party and secure congressional majorities for an ongoing economic reform process. Here, the United States has an important role to play: The two countries are intertwined in a unique way and thus the political success of Enrique Peña Nieto will, at least in part, be impacted by what happens north of the border. And the to-do list for the United States is extensive, but it is largely focused on economic policy and immigration reform. Immigration reform is increasingly likely to dominate the domestic debate once the fiscal cliff is resolved. President-Elect Peña Nieto

made a strong endorsement of immigration reform at his Washington press conference with President Obama this week, stating that he fully supports President Obama’s proposal. Even though a strong majority of Americans support a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the country, it will remain a difficult legislative battle. And while aligning with a popular U.S. president who will be viewed as fighting to legalize Mexican nationals makes obvious sense, there is some risk that a failed legislative effort will trigger

collateral damage to Peña Nieto’s image in Mexico. On the economic front, the success of the new Mexican administration’s economic reform and growth agenda is a core interest of the United States. A number of policy fields will be crucial to create a successful North American growth model and will elevate the transactional partnership with Mexico to a strategic relationship much like the United States enjoys with Canada.

Engagement solidifies Mexico as an arm of U.S. capital. Oscar Montealegre, Contributing Editor, 1-24-2013, “U.S.-Mexico Relations: Love Thy Neighbor,” Diplomatic Courier, http://www.diplomaticourier.com/news/regions/latin-america/1331-us-mexico-relations-love-thy-neighbor, accessed 4-28-2013The interconnectedness between both countries strongly conveys why the dialogue should revolve around bilateral trade and commerce agendas. For Mexico, 30 percent of GDP is dependent on exports, and 80 percent of exports are tagged to the U.S. Most importantly, one of ten Mexicans lives in the

U.S., accounting for nearly 12 million Mexicans that consider the U.S. their current residence. Add in their descendants, and approximately 33 million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans reside in the U.S. Let’s put this figure in perspective: Venezuela has a population of 29 million; Greece,

11 million; and Canada, 34 million. Essentially we have a ‘country’ within a country—the beauty of America—but it must be embraced instead of shunned or ignored. Economically, it is a plus for Mexico, because there is a market for Mexican products; it is also a plus for the U.S. in many areas, including soft power, diversity, direct linkages to Mexico and Latin America. A cadre of American-born and educated human capital are able to cross cultures into Mexico and Latin America to conduct business and politics.


Link – Venezuela

U.S. engagement with Venezuela undermines the Bolivarian anti-capitalist movement. Dane Bryant, management consultant and freelance writer, 9-28-2012, “Chávez or Not, It's Time to Rethink the U.S.-Venezuela Relationship,” World Politics Review, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12380/chavez-or-not-its-time-to-rethink-the-u-s-venezuela-relationship, accessed 5-2-2013This is why the second plank of Washington’s Venezuela policy must emphasize sustainable economic growth. Regardless of next week’s election outcome, any serious response to the challenges that Venezuela poses to U.S. regional interests must address the country’s socio-economic inequalities, which Chávez has depended upon for popular support throughout his political career. Solving the widespread social exclusion and poverty that fuel the Bolivarian movement, if only incrementally, will be critical if the United States is to make any inroads in what could be a vital partnership.

Venezuela serves as a nexus of the anticapitalist struggle in Latin America. Jonathan Nack, Oakland-based activist and journalist, 4-13-2013, "So Much Is at Stake in Venezuela's Presidential Election," San Francisco Bay View, http://sfbayview.com/2013/so-much-is-at-stake-in-venezuelas-presidential-election/, accessed 4-28-2013Why is Venezuela so important? Why does it lead the way? There’s no getting around it: An awful lot of it is because of the tremendous oil wealth Venezuela has. Oil is one commodity that the developed world cannot do without, that capitalists will pay dearly for; and the huge revenues the Venezuelan government derives from it form a large part of the funding for the projects and social

benefits of the Bolivarian Revolution. The oil wealth is the beginning of the story, but far from the end. The late President Chavez declared many times that the Bolivarian Revolution aspires to regional liberation, to unite Latin America and the Caribbean against the powers of corporate capitalism and the U.S. empire. To give birth to something new Chavez called “Socialism for the 21st Century,” not just for Venezuela, not just in the Americas, but for the world. The words of President Chavez were matched by deeds. Many countries, first and foremost Cuba, received generous long-term deals for the purchase of Venezuelan oil

on very favorable terms, even including some barter agreements. Venezuela led the formation of a new regional alliance spearheaded by leftist led governments called ALBA, The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (Spanish: Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América, or ALBA). Along with Venezuela, key member nations, Cuba, Bolivia and Ecuador, form the core of this regional block which has grown to include 10 nations.

Venezuela serves as an example of socially-owned wealth and alternatives to capitalism.Roberto Jorquera, member of Revolutionary Socialist Party and organizer of Australian-Venezuela Solidarity Network brigade, 11-2008, "Revolutionary Venezuela and the Capitalist Crisis," Direct Action, http://directaction.org.au/issue6/revolutionary_venezuela_and_the_capitalist_crisis, accessed 5-5-2013.Though no country will be immune from the effects of the current capitalist world economic meltdown, the example of Venezuela clearly shows what is possible with an increasingly socially-owned economy directed by a government that serves the interests of working people rather than profits of capitalist corporations.


Capitalism Bad – Totalitarianism

Capitalist logic culminates in total domination, violence, and war.Istvan Mezsaros, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Sussex University, 2008, The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time, p. 116. The military dimension of all this must be taken very seriously. It is no exaggeration to say-also in view of the formerly quite unimaginable destructive power of armaments accumulated in the second half of the twentieth century-that we have entered into the most dangerous phase of imperialism in all history. For what is at stake today is not the control of a particular, no matter how large, part of the planet, putting at a disadvantage but still tolerating the independent actions of some rivals, but the control of its totality by one hegemonic economic and military superpower, with all means-even the most extreme authoritarian and, if needed, violent military ones-at its disposal. This is what the ultimate rationality of globally developed capital requires, in its vain attempt to bring under control its irreconcilable antagonisms. The trouble is, though, that such rationality-which genuinely corresponds to the logic of capital at the present historical stage of global development-is at the same time the most extreme form of irrationality in history, including the Nazi conception of world domination, as far as the conditions required for the survival of humanity are concerned.

Capitalism spurs fascism and war; history proves it’s worse than totalitarian communism.Norman Pollack, Guggenheim Fellow, and professor of history emeritus, Michigan State University, 4-15-2013, “Testing Hegemony,” Counterpunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/15/testing-hegemony/, accessed 5-1-2013For me, the advanced stage of capitalism, in which militarization of its structure, values, and hierarchical social relations is the dynamic element of its mature organization, reveals an inner core of fascism, waiting to be activated through war, depression, or other cataclysmic event. With complexity comes potential destabilization. (Max Weber’s insight, as I interpret his Theory of Social and Economic Organization, is that at the heart of the rational-legal order lies the

charismatic, testifying to capitalism’s fragility and need for absolute order.) From a democratic standpoint, stripped of nationalistic fervor, North Korea—

returning to our analysis—cannot possibly inflict the global damage of which the United States is capable, not because of size or nuclear arsenal, but because of electing to stand on the wrong side of history.

Capitalism causes war and totalitarianism.Nick Beams, National Secretary of the Socialist Equality Party (Australia), 11-10-2012, “A Major Shift in the Global Economy,” World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/11/pers-n10.html, accessed 5-1-2013. Faced with the ongoing breakdown of the global capitalist economy, the response of the ruling class the world over is to intensify its attacks on the working class. The re-elected Obama administration has made its first item of business the institution of sweeping spending cuts, above all to social security entitlements. In Europe, the austerity programs that have brought depression-like conditions to Spain and Greece are going to be intensified. And in China, the stimulus measures of the past four years have run into the brick wall of the global

downturn. The turn in the world economy poses decisive political challenges to the working class. The first step in meeting them is the recognition that the capitalist system has failed and there is not going to be a return to “normal” conditions. The “new normal” is a return to the conditions of the Great Depression—war, mass unemployment and dictatorial forms of rule.


Capitalism Bad – War

Capitalism is the root cause of war.Bill Van Auken, former Presidential candidate for the Socialist Equality Party, 4-3-2013, “The Terrible Cost of Washington’s Wars,” World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/04/03/pers-a03.html, accessed 4-30-2013.As these layers have moved ever further to the right, the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) alone has defended and developed a Marxist perspective on war. For over two decades, from the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, it has analyzed the explosive eruption of American militarism as a reflection of the crisis of US imperialism and its attempt to offset its historic decline by exploiting its continuing military superiority. The ICFI has further explained that the escalating imperialist violence abroad is inseparably bound up with the ever-widening social chasm separating the ruling financial oligarchy from the mass

of working people at home. It follows that a genuine movement against war and colonialism can be developed only through the independent political mobilization and international unification of the working class in struggle against the root cause of war, the capitalist system. With the events unfolding in Africa, this perspective has been thoroughly vindicated.

The inherently predatory nature of capitalism makes war inevitable.William T. Hathaway, Adjunct Professor of American Studies at the University of Oldenburg, 9-16-2012, "Capitalism is Always at War," Dandelion Salad, http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/capitalism-is-always-at-war-by-william-t-hathaway/, accessed 5-1-2013.Capitalism is inherently predatory. It demands aggressive growth. It’s either dominate or go under. This drive for domination is the root cause of war, and until we eliminate it, we’re going to continue killing one another. Eliminating it

requires a global struggle to bring down oligarchic capitalism and replace it with democratic socialism. Political democracy must be expanded and extended into the economic sphere. We, the people of the world, have to take control of the forces that shape our lives. This is the basis for building a society in which we can all fully develop as human beings. Once we achieve this, we’ll have a real chance at lasting peace.

Economic hierarchy makes war inevitable.William T. Hathaway, Adjunct Professor of American Studies at the University of Oldenburg, 9-16-2012, "Capitalism is Always at War," Dandelion Salad, http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/capitalism-is-always-at-war-by-william-t-hathaway/, accessed 5-1-2013.Goering was right about the democracies that existed both then and now. In these, the people’s influence in politics is regulated to ensure that only pro-capitalist parties have a chance. Corporate financing, winner-take-all elections, ballot-access laws, and slanted media coverage effectively exclude alternatives. Democracy means power is in the hands of the people. But the

real power in our society — economic power — remains firmly in the hands of the rich elite, enabling them to control politics — and us — to a large degree. Capitalism is always at war. The violence, though, is often abstract: forcing us either to accept low-paying, exhausting jobs or starve; denying us adequate health care, education, and

economic security; convincing us that human beings are basically isolated, autonomous units seeking self-gratification. But when this doesn’t suffice to keep their profits growing, the violence becomes physical, the cannons roar, and the elite rally us to war to defend “our” country and destroy the fiendish enemy.


Capitalism Bad – Environment

The logic of capital culminates in the complete destruction of nature. Istvan Mezsaros, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Sussex University, 2008, The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time, p. 116.The sobering truth is that capital's universalizing tendency can never come to fruition within its own framework, for capital must decree that the barriers which it cannot transcend--namely its innermost structural limitations are the insurmountable limits of all production in general. At the same time, what should indeed be recognized and respected as an inviolable limit and vital condition of ongoing development that is, nature in all its complexity as the foundation of humanity's very existence is totally disregarded in the systematic subjugation, degradation, and ultimate destruction of nature. This is so because the ultimately blind interest of capital expansion must overrule even the most elementary conditions of human life as directly rooted in nature. Consequently on both counts, i.e., both in relation to what capital refuses to acknowledge: its own structural limits, and with regard to its incorrigibly destructive impact on nature: the vital substratum of human life itself, a conscious break must be made from the self-serving determinations of the capital system.

Capitalism is the root cause of all environmental destruction and is a necessary component of the drive for profits.John Bellamy Foster, Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon, 6-15-2002, “Capitalism and Ecology: The Nature of the Contradiction,” Monthly Review, http://monthlyreview.org/2002/09/01/capitalism-and-ecology, accessed 5-6-2013Ecological degradation, like imperialism, is as basic to capitalism as the pursuit of profits itself (which depend to a large extent upon it). Nor should the environmental problem be seen largely through the economic prism in the sense that it derives its significance from the extent to which it generates economic crisis for capitalism. As Rosa Luxemburg pointed out, song birds were dying out not because they were directly part of capitalism, or its conditions of production, but simply because their habitat was destroyed in the process of the system's relentless expansion. Luxemburg rightly did not connect this phenomenon to economic crisis, but this did not stop her from raging against the destruction of what she called "these defenseless little creatures." There is no doubt that Luxemburg believed that the economy could

be organized under socialism so as to lessen such destruction. But her reasons for advocating change were not in this case economic, though they were consistent with materialism. The ultimate strength of Marxist analysis has never resided chiefly in its economic crisis theory, nor even in its analysis of class struggle as such, but lies much deeper in its materialist conception of history, both human and natural--understood, as this only truly can be, as a dialectical and endlessly contingent process.

Capitalism destroys the environment by creating a state of addiction to commodity consumption that necessitates poverty and waste.Joel Kovel Professor of Social Studies at Bard College, 2002, The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World? pg 66-68.The culture of advanced capital aims to turn society into addicts of commodity consumption, a state ‘good for business’, and, pari passu, had for ecologies. The evil is doubled, with reckless consumption leading to pollution and waste, and the addiction to commodities creating a society unable to comprehend, much less resist, the ecological crisis. Once time is bound in capitalist production, the subtle attunement to natural rhythms required for an ecological sensibility becomes thwarted. This allows accumulation itself to appear as natural. People with mentalities warped by the casino complex are simply not going to think in terms of limits and balances, or of the mutual recognition of all beings. This helps account for the chorus of hosannas from presumably intelligent

authorities at the nightmarish prospect of a doubling of economic product in the next 20 years. Thus capital produces wealth without end, but also poverty, insecurity and waste, as part of its disintegration of ecosystems.


Capitalism Bad – Climate/Environment

Capitalism is the root cause of the climate crisis, threatening all life.Simon Butler, contributing writer, 3-13-2013, "Capitalism Root Cause of Climate Crisis, New Book Shows," Green Left Weekly, http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/53605, accessed 5-6-2013.Hans Baer, a Melbourne-based anthropologist and radical activist, says all of these answers are unsatisfactory, and many downright dangerous. His new book,

Global Capitalism and Climate Change, probes for answers in the web of social and economic relationships that define modern life. He says the root cause of the climate emergency is capitalism — a global economic system that “systematically exploits human beings and the natural environment”. He concludes we need “a vision of an alternative world system, one based on two cardinal

principles — namely social equity and justice and environmental sustainability.” Baer says environmental destruction is inherent to capitalism because it only thrives on “profit-making” and “continued economic expansion”. Unable to jump off its “treadmill of production and consumption”, the system must continue to generate ever higher levels of waste and consumption, even though this threatens life on the planet.

Capitalism is the root cause of environmental degradation; this is why technological fixes within the current paradigm won't solve ecological crises.Brett Clark, assistant Professor of Sociology at North Carolina State University, and Richard York, associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon, 11-1-2008, "Rifts and Shifts: Getting to the Root of Environmental Crisis," Monthly Review, http://monthlyreview.org/2008/11/01/rifts-and-shifts-getting-to-the-root-of-environmental-crises, accessed 5-1-2013The ecological crisis is thus presented as a technical problem that can be fixed within the current system, through better ingenuity, technological innovation, and the magic of the market. In this view, the economy will be increasingly dematerialized, reducing

demands placed on nature. The market will ensure that new avenues of capital accumulation are created in the very process of dealing with environmental challenges. Yet, this line of thought ignores the root causes of the ecological crisis. The social metabolic order of capitalism is inherently anti-ecological, since it systematically subordinates nature in its pursuit of endless accumulation and production on ever larger scales. Technical fixes to socio-ecological problems typically have unintended consequences and fail to address the root of the problems: the political-economic order. Rather than acknowledging metabolic rifts, natural limits, and/or ecological contradictions, capital seeks to play a shell game with the environmental problems it generates, moving them around rather than addressing the root causes.

The impact is linear: The more capitalism expands, the more it degrades the environment.Brett Clark, assistant Professor of Sociology at North Carolina State University, and Richard York, associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon, 11-1-2008, "Rifts and Shifts: Getting to the Root of Environmental Crisis," Monthly Review, http://monthlyreview.org/2008/11/01/rifts-and-shifts-getting-to-the-root-of-environmental-crises, accessed 5-1-2013Paul Sweezy explained that the capitalist economic system “is one that never stands still, one that is forever changing, adopting new and discarding old methods of

production and distribution, opening up new territories, subjecting to its purposes societies too weak to protect themselves.” Thus, the tendency of capital is to violate the natural conditions that ensure nature’s vitality, undermining the base on which ecological and human sustainability depends. In part, this is because capital freely appropriates nature and its bounty—it is “purely a matter of utility.” The exploitation of nature and labor serve “as a means to the paramount

ends of profit-making and still more capital accumulation.” Hence, the expansion and intensification of the social metabolic order of capital generates rifts in natural cycles and process, forcing a series of shifts on the part of capital, as it expands environmental degradation.


Capitalism Bad – Democracy

Economic hierarchy renders democracy futile.Richard D. Wolff, Professor of Economics Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, 1-10-2013, "When Democracy Is Trumped by the Excesses of Capitalism," Truthout.org, http://truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/13812-when-democracy-is-trumped-by-the-excesses-of-capitalism, accessed 5-5-2013.What happens if we shift our focus from economics to politics? Politics in the United States has become utterly dependent on and corrupted by financial contributions to candidates, political parties, lobbyists, think tanks, and special committees, recently further enabled by the Citizens United Supreme Court decision. The disparity of interests between capitalists and workers and the disparity of the concentrated resources they can and do devote to supporting their favored positions, politicians, and parties undermine a democratic politics.

Capitalism allows the rich to hijack the political process and robs the people of necessary information for a functioning democracy.Richard D. Wolff, Professor of Economics Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, 1-10-2013, "When Democracy Is Trumped by the Excesses of Capitalism," Truthout.org, http://truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/13812-when-democracy-is-trumped-by-the-excesses-of-capitalism, accessed 5-5-2013.In fact, we must question the very possibility of genuine democracy in a society in which capitalism is the basic economic system. A functioning democracy would require that all people be provided with the time, information, counsel, and other supports needed to participate effectively in decision-making in the workplace and at the local, regional, and national levels of their residential communities. The economic realities of capitalism preclude that for the overwhelming majority of workers, in stark contrast to corporate directors, top managers, their professional staff, and all those with significant incomes from property (above all, their property in shares of capitalist enterprises). Such persons also have concentrated wealth in the forms of their enterprises' surpluses and/or their personal property that they can donate to their preferred representatives among the society's major institutions, parties, and candidates.

Corporations have hijacked the democratic process, making capitalism outstrip democracy.Robert B. Reich, former Secretary of Labor, 8-15-2007, "How Capitalism is Killing Democracy," Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2007/08/15/how_capitalism_is_killing_democracy, accessed 5-1-2013Why has capitalism succeeded while democracy has steadily weakened? Democracy has become enfeebled largely because companies, in intensifying competition for global consumers and investors, have invested ever greater sums in lobbying, public relations, and even bribes and kickbacks, seeking laws that give them a competitive advantage over their rivals. The result is an arms race for political influence that is drowning out the voices of average citizens. In the United States, for example, the fights that preoccupy Congress, those that consume weeks or months of congressional staff time, are typically contests between competing companies or industries.


Alternative Solves – Rejection Key

The struggle against capital must occur outside of bourgeois politics. This is the key to solving militarism and war. Bill Van Auken, former Presidential candidate for the Socialist Equality Party, 4-3-2013, “The Terrible Cost of Washington’s Wars,” World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/04/03/pers-a03.html, accessed 4-30-2013.The vast resources wasted and the incalculable human suffering inflicted by the bloated US military and intelligence apparatus pose the urgency of building a genuine mass movement against militarism and war. This can develop only as an independent social and political movement of the working class directed against the capitalist system.

Opposition to capital must be directed against the entire structure of the existing social system, requiring a rejection of all conventional politics. Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore, contributing writer and National Secretary of the Socialist Equality Party (USA), 3-4-2013, “The Financial Aristocracy and the Growth of Working Class Struggle,” World Socialist Web Site, http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/03/04/pers-m04.html, accessed 4-30-2013.The malignant character of social relations infects every political institution . The entire organism stinks of corruption. Both political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, function as direct instruments for the enrichment of the ruling class. Nothing can be changed through this political system. Social struggle is required. The working class must fight back, countering the dictates of the ruling elite through collective action. Social conflict is, indeed, inevitable. It has already begun to emerge in explosive forms in countries around the world, and the first signs of the coming eruption can be seen in the United States itself. For these struggles to succeed, however, opposition must be based on a clearly worked out political program—one that is directed against the entire structure of the existing social system

A unified vision is necessary to defeat capitalismMichael A. Lebowitz, Professor emeritus of Economics at Simon Fraser University, 1-17-2013, "Capitalism, Crises, and a Socialist Alternative: In Conversation With Michael A. Lebowitz," MR Zine, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2013/lebowitz170113.html, accessed 5-1-2013Anti-capitalism means something different for everyone. For some people, it is opposition to big corporations; for others, it is opposition to the banks or the capitalist state or money or large-scale industry, international capital or

inequality in income and wealth. Accordingly, the perceived alternative can range from breaking up the corporations to developing alternative currencies to supporting cooperatives and credit unions to putting an end to private ownership of the means of production and to returning simply to the good old days when people could anticipate a good job, a home of their own and all the amenities that their parents had. The multiplicity of views about what we don't like about capitalism (ie, anti-capitalism) was apparent in the Occupy movement. Of course people should struggle against every assault by capital and every violation of our conceptions of justice. Marx made the point well: without the struggles of workers over wages, workers would be a 'heartbroken, a weak-minded, a worn-out,

unresisting mass' and would be incapable of any larger struggles. Of course, too, it is essential to try to link these struggles. However, in the absence of a positive vision, capital can and will separate and defeat those who oppose it.


Alternative Solves – Every Act Key

Every refusal and act of negativity can challenge capitalism.Charlie Post, sociology teacher in New York City and member of American Federation of Teachers, 2002, “A Critical Loon at Empire,” Solidarity, http://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1195, accessed 5-6-2013In this world, all those who are subject to the vicissitudes of capitalist production and reproduction-whether they labor collectively in workplaces under the command of capital or are excluded from social production through unemployment, forced migration and the like-are equally part of a new revolutionary subject. According to Hardt and Negri 'the multitude has internalized the lack of place and fixed time; it is mobile and flexible, and it conceives the future only as a totality of possibilities that branch out in every direction.' (p. 380) Almost any act of 'negativity' - the refusal to work, migration from one part of the world to another, confrontations with the police, strike action - are equally powerful forms of resistance because 'the construction of Empire, and the globalization of economic and cultural relationships, means that the virtual center of Empire can be attacked from any point.'

Consciousness-building among all anti-capitalist social movements is the key to defeating capital. Michael A. Lebowitz, Professor emeritus of Economics at Simon Fraser University, 1-17-2013, "Capitalism, Crises, and a Socialist Alternative: In Conversation With Michael A. Lebowitz," MR Zine, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2013/lebowitz170113.html, accessed 5-1-2013Defeating capital won't happen spontaneously through some kind of collective epiphany. It requires conscious effort. But any attempt to create at this point a party to defeat capital would be viewed correctly as just another vanguard sect promising to deliver socialism. It is important to start from people's conception of fairness and to understand why they

are moved to struggle. However, we need to recognise the limits of guerrilla wars against capital and to learn to work together in practice to build an understanding about the nature of capitalism and the need for a socialist vision. That means finding ways to create spaces where popular movements can learn from each other -- spaces and new forms like people's assemblies at every level . We need but we're not ready to form a socialist party that can defeat capital.

But we can develop a socialist project, one which listens, educates, and helps to create the basis for a new type of party which is integral to and does not stand over and above social movements.

A constant intellectual attack on capitalism enables the paradigm shift necessary to overthrow it.Joel Kovel Professor of Social Studies at Bard College, 2002, The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World? pp 223-224.Revolutions become feasible when a people decides that their present social arrangements are intolerable, when they believe that they can achieve a better alternative, and when the balance of forces between them and that of the system is tipped in their favour . None of these conditions is close to being met at present for the ecosocialist revolution, which

would seem to make the exercise upon which we are about to embark academic. But the present is one thing, and the future another. If the argument that capital is incorrigibly ecodestructive and expansive proves to be true, then it is only a question of time before the issues raised here achieve explosive urgency. And considering what is at stake and how rapidly events can change under such circumstances, it is most definitely high time to take up the question of ecosocialism as a living process — to consider what its vision of society may be and what kind of path there may be towards its achievement. The present chapter is the most practical and yet also the most speculative of this work. Beaten down by the great defeats of Utopian and socialist ideals, few today even bother to think about the kinds of society that could replace the present with one of ecological rationality, and most of that speculation is within a green paradigm limited by an insufficient appreciation of the regime of capital and of the depths needed for real change. Instead, Greens tend to imagine an orderly extension of community, accompanied by the use of instruments that have been specifically created to keep the present system going, such as parliamentary elections and various tax policies. Such measures make transformative sense, however, only if seen as prefigurations of something more radical - something by definition not

immediately on the horizon. It will be our job here to begin the process of drawing in this not-yet-seen. The only certainty is that the result will at most be a rough and schematic model of what actually might emerge. However uncertain the end point, the first two steps on the path are clearly laid out, and are within the reach of every conscientious person. These are that people ruthlessly criticize the capitalist system ‘from top to bottom’, and that they include in this a consistent attack on the widespread belief that there can be no alternative to it. If one believes that capital is not only basically unjust but radically unsustainable as well, the prime obligation is to spread the news, just as one should feel obliged to tell the inhabitants of a structurally unsound house doomed to collapse of what awaits them unless they take drastic measures.

http://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1195


AT: Permutation

Hybridization guts the solvency of the alternative: The forces of capital will coopt the energy of the anti-capitalist movement, using it to solve its structural crises. Istvan Mezsaros, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Sussex University, 2008, The Challenge and Burden of Historical Time, p. 35. One more problem must be briefly mentioned in this context: the "hybridization" in evidence even in the capitalistically most advanced countries. Its principal dimension is the ever-greater direct and indirect involvement of the state in safeguarding the continued viability of capital's mode of social metabolic reproduction. Despite all protestations to the contrary, coupled with neoliberal fantasies about rolling back the boundaries of the state, the capital system could not survive for a week without the massive backing it constantly receives from the state . I have discussed this problem elsewhere, and

therefore a brief mention should suffice here. The point is that what Marx called the "extraneous help" given by Henry VIII and others to early capitalist developments has reappeared in the twentieth century in an unimaginably massive form, from common agricultural policies and export

guarantees to immense state-financed research funds and to the insatiable appetite of the military-industrial complex." `What makes the problem much worse is that no amount of it is ever enough. Capital, at the present phase of historical development, has become totally dependent on an ever-increasing provision of extraneous help. In this respect, too, we are approaching a systemic limit in that we are confronted by the chronic insufficiency of extraneous help in regard to what the

state is now capable of delivering. Indeed, the structural crisis of capital is inseparable from the chronic insufficiency of such extraneous help under conditions in which the defects and failures of this antagonistic system of societal reproduction call for an unlimited supply of it.

Mixing the bourgeois state and the workers’ movement upholds the illusions of the capitalist state, destroying the long-term goals of the anticapitalist movement. Michael Wainwright, former member of Socialist Party of Great Britain, 3-29-2006, "Marxism and the State," Socialist Alternative, http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/state/ch1.html, accessed 5-1-13.Whilst it is certainly true that our demands need to engage with, and intersect, the existing consciousness of workers if we are ever going to change it, it seems obvious to me that the demands we raise today must be consistent with our long term goals, or at least not contradict them. The problem with calls for achieving socialism through bourgeois parliamentary elections, or instituting "democratic control of the police" or demanding improvements in the working conditions of the

immigration police is that they contradict the fundamental duty of socialists to inform the working-class that the capitalists' state cannot be taken over, but rather, as I quoted earlier, "It must be broken up, smashed, and replaced by a new workers' state". Rather than "revealing and undermining the state's repressive function" these demands actively encourage illusions that the capitalist state, or at least key elements of it, can be forced to serve workers' interests. We should instead be raising demands that point to the rigged nature of capitalist "democracy" and lead to the conclusion that it is necessary to shatter the bourgeois state and replace it with new working class organs of power.

The permutation entrenches the idea that capital is the eternal present.Michael Wainwright, former member of Socialist Party of Great Britain, 3-29-2006, "Marxism and the State," Socialist Alternative, http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/state/ch1.html, accessed 5-1-13.It is crucial for Marxists to pose the difficult, and sometimes socially ostracising, reality that the capitalist state must be removed and replaced by alternative structures of working-class power. There is no other way, I suggest, of relating and connecting this fundamental necessity to our class other than to state the truth, even if that truth is one which diminishes our popularity. Marxists are not populists - we have a much harder task. That is the responsibility to maintain the link in the chain of revolutionary continuity by developing and charting a path towards Socialism armed with the

distilled lessons of past class-struggles. We must stand firmly on the tradition based upon the historical legacies of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky, for if we deviate from the latter then we will inevitably recede into empiricism and the eternal present.


AT: Human Nature = Capitalism

The majority of history disproves the assumption that capitalism is human nature.Jay Moore, radical historian and teacher, 4-10-2012, "Capitalism and 'Human Nature': A Rebuttal," MR Zine, http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2012/moore041012.html, accessed 5-3-2013Anyone who has had the pleasure of delving into the study of history and anthropology , as I have, marveling at the enormous variability of human societies and cultures across time and space and trying to discern some basic commonalities and patterns (which historical

materialism shows do exist), will have noted the rank fallacy of the aforementioned assumption that the modern bourgeois character type is a human universal. Most humans down through history have shown no such "propensity." Traders have existed in many, perhaps most, societies, but those who did so as a profession with the aim of enriching themselves might be looked upon with deep suspicion. Trade was mainly conducted at the societal margins. And, as David Graeber has shown in his monumental work on the political economy of "Debt," no known society has ever

been based on barter. Much more prevalent until modern times was a Gift Economy in which goods circulated from person to person within a society and in which there might be no calculation of worth requiring something paid back of equal or greater value or expectation of eventual return.

Human nature is cooperative: Altruism is hardwired. Shankar Vedantum, staffwriter, 5-28-2007, “If It Feels Good to Be Good, It Might Be Only Natural,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/27/AR2007052701056.html, accessed 5-2-2013.The results were showing that when the volunteers placed the interests of others before their own, the generosity activated a primitive part of the brain that usually

lights up in response to food or sex. Altruism, the experiment suggested, was not a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the brain, hard-wired and pleasurable . Their 2006 finding that unselfishness can feel good lends scientific support to the admonitions of spiritual leaders such as Saint Francis of Assisi, who said, "For it is in giving that we receive." But it is also a dramatic example of the way neuroscience has begun to elbow its way into discussions about morality and has opened up a new window on what it means to be good.

Empathy is hardwired in the brain through evolution. Shankar Vedantum, staffwriter, 5-28-2007, “If It Feels Good to Be Good, It Might Be Only Natural,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/27/AR2007052701056.html, accessed 5-2-2013.Grafman and others are using brain imaging and psychological experiments to study whether the brain has a built-in moral compass. The results -- many of them

published just in recent months -- are showing, unexpectedly, that many aspects of morality appear to be hard-wired in the brain, most likely the result of evolutionary processes that began in other species. No one can say whether giraffes and lions experience moral qualms in the same way people do because no one has been inside a giraffe's head, but it is known that animals can sacrifice their own interests: One experiment found that if each time a rat is given food, its neighbor receives an electric shock, the first rat will eventually forgo eating. What the new research is showing is that morality has biological roots -- such as the reward center in the brain that lit up in Grafman's experiment -- that have been around for a

very long time. The more researchers learn, the more it appears that the foundation of morality is empathy. Being able to recognize -- even experience vicariously -- what another creature is going through was an important leap in the evolution of social behavior. And it is only a short step from this awareness to many human notions of right and wrong, says Jean Decety, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago.


AT: Growth Good

Growth obtained through economic engagement fails; no long-term sustainability.The Central Committee of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, 10-1999, “Notes on Political Economy,” http://revcom.us/a/special_postings/poleco_e.htm, accessed 4-25-2013For the advanced capitalist economies to maintain reasonable rates of growth, growth must also take place in the Third World. But such growth (and further restructuring) requires enormous infusions of capital, which appear to be beyond the capacities of the West. It should be emphasized that this is not only a quantitative but also a qualitative matter. Imperialist investment in the Third World leads to and heightens disarticulation. And regardless of how much capital the imperialists invest, this will not lead, over any prolonged period, to the kind of growth that will enable imperialist capital to sustain long-term expansion and profitability overall.

The myth of perpetual growth will cause planetary self-destruction.Paul B. Farrell, contributing writer, 6-12-2012, "Myth of Perpetual Growth is Killing America, MarketWatch, http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-06-12/commentary/32176488_1_economics-gdp-growth-myth, accessed 5-6-2013Economists are master illusionists who rely on a set of fictions, fantasies and forecasts that emanate from a core magical mantra of Perpetual Growth that goes untested year after year. And yet it’s used to manipulate the public into a set of policies and decisions that are leading the American and the world economy down a path of unsustainable globalization and GDP growth assumptions that will self-destruct the planet.

Policy motivated by the growth imperative perpetuates inequality.Alan Nasser, Professor emeritus of Political Economy and Philosophy at The Evergreen State College, 5-3-2013, "The Economics of Over-Ripe Capitalism," Counterpunch, http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/03/the-economics-of-over-ripe-capitalism/, accessed 5-5-2013.Policy motivated by the myth of investment-driven growth perpetuates inequality. The Fed’s injections of liquidity have stimulated neither consumption nor investment. The prescription for reducing inequality is exactly what the classical economists recommended, wage-driven growth. We should be explicit: the demand for wage-driven growth, minus the propaganda about the need for additional investment funds, is a demand far more radical than we have been used to. We announce that profit net of depreciation is useful only for payouts to “investors”, speculation, wasteful and uninformative advertising and marketing, and payments to corporate attorneys. None of this represents a “contribution to production”.

http://revcom.us/a/special_postings/poleco_e.htm


Development K


Development K Shell 1/2

A. U.S. economic engagement is directly tied to development goalsThe Africa Society, March 7, 2013, “U.S. Senator, Coons On increasing U.S. Economic Engagement with Africa,” http://www.amipnewsonline.org/?p=3249, accessed 4-28-2013U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African Affairs, today released a report with concrete, substantive recommendations to increase U.S. trade with African markets. Africa is home to six of the ten fastest-growing economies in the world and is a critical emerging market for American businesses. The report is entitled “Embracing Africa’s Economic Potential: Recommendations for Strengthening Trade Relationships between the United States and Sub-Saharan Africa.” “The United States faces dramatic challenges in Africa – and enormous opportunities,” Senator Coons said. “This report offers specific, concrete recommendations to meet the need for increased economic engagement in sub-Saharan Africa. If we don’t take action now to invest in trade and development across the continent, we will fall behind our global competitors and potentially shut American businesses out of these fast-growing markets for decades to come.”

B. The Affirmative’s strategy for economic engagement initiates a privileged Western debate that reduces recipients to a-cultural bodies to be manipulatedReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 155Local understandings of the meanings behind traditions and practices were granted little merit by Western planners. Debates in the "First World" focused on the type of development that was needed, but the question of whether or not development was necessary or desirable was never on the table. Analysts on both the Left and the Right accepted that the "Third World" was an object that had to be "molded through planning to meet the scientifically ascertained characteristics of a development society." Planners took it for granted that all "underdeveloped" societies could achieve progress, and even prosperity, if they were modeled upon "developed" ones. This meant taking steps towards lowering fertility rates and increasing levels of industrialization, urbanization and formal education. These changes were facilitated through large scale money lending programs, which provided opportunities to influence the policies of distant governments.

C. Development is a toxic word that only benefits elitesGilbert Rist, Professor of Political Science and teaches social and cultural anthropology, inter-cultural relations, and the history of development theories at the Graduate Institute of Development Studies, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, pp. 24-25It should be clear by now why ‘development’ must be considered a toxic word, as I half-jokingly suggested at the beginning of this chapter. As a buzzword, it has been used time and again to promote a system that is neither viable, nor sustainable, nor fi t to live in. The (substantial) benefits that it still confers on a tiny minority are not enough to justify its continuing acceptance, in view of the lethal dangers that it entails.

The alternative is to reject the Affirmative’s appeal to development discourse.


Development K Shell 2/2

D. Development projects reproduce racist privilegeKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013As White writes about her personal experience in development projects: “[M]y whiteness opened me doors, jumped me queues, filled me plates and invited me to speak”. However, quoting a white development worker Kothari makes it clear that “…people don’t really believe that I am more intelligent and more knowledgeable because I am white, what they do believe is that I will have greater access to power, to decisionmakers and to those who

can get things done”. Hence, racist ideas virtually reproduce themselves: people favour persons who are perceived as being white for important positions, not because they necessarily consider them to be more intelligent but rather because of the privileged positions of most ‘white’ persons.

E. We must resist the concentration of wealth and privilege brought by developmentJeremy Seabrook, Associate at the Institute of Race Relations, 1993, Victims of Development Resistance and Alternatives, p. 248This experience of relentless change has fateful implications for those who have always advocated change as the basis for radical politics. For they risk being misunderstood and repudiated by those whose lives have been tormented precisely by incessant and dispossessing change. The devastation of ways of life, environments, cul tures , traditions and sustainable ways of answering human need has been in the interests of conserving only one thing – the maintenance of wealth and power where wealth and power are already concentrated. Change , then, in the lives of the people, is a visitation whose purpose is, ultimately, the preservation only of privilege. And in this act of conservation, it does not matter what valuable experiences,

practices and customs are swept away. Resistance to this is scarcely to be sought in appeals of yet more change. Opposition now means, rather, the construction of places of refuge, spaces of stability, tranquillity and peace, where people can live out their lives with an assured and decent sufficiency.

F. We should resist exploitation of power relations. The alternative shifts the conceptual frameworks that maintain dominant power relations of oppressionArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 92To be sure, there is a situation of economic exploitation that must be recognized and dealt with. Power is too cynical at the level of exploitation and should be resisted on its own terms. There is also a certain materiality of

life conditions that is extremely preoccupying and that requires great effort and attention. But those seeking to understand the Third World through development have long lost sight of this materiality by building upon it a reality that like a castle in the air has haunted us for decades. Understanding the history of the investment of the

Third World by Western forms of knowledge and power is a way to shift the ground somewhat so that we can start to look at that materiality with different eyes and in different categories.

http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice


http://www.globalpolitics.cz/author/katrin-kohler


Economic Engagement Embodies Development Discourse

1. Economic engagement is directly tied to developmentDaniel S. Sullivan, Assistant Secretary for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs at the U.S. Dept. of State, June 11, 2008, “Deepening U.S. Economic Engagement with Latin America,” accessed 4-28-2013, http://2001-2009.state.gov/e/eeb/rls/rm/2008/106426.htmOver the last seven years, we have worked steadily to implement this vision using a variety of tools. We refer to this as our Total Economic Engagement, or TEE strategy, using in a coordinated manner all elements of our economic policy and development tools to foster economic growth with key countries and regions of the world. This strategy has had a positive impact in many areas of the world. I want to highlight three broad initiatives of our TEE strategy that have had a positive impact in our Hemisphere. First, we have revolutionized our approach to development assistance. In 2002 world leaders gathered at Monterrey, Mexico and agreed to significantly increase development assistance, while developing countries would focus on implementing more responsible economic policies.

2. The E3 initiative proves the U.S. framework for economic engagement is premised on the expansion of developmentAndrew Elek, Australian national University, November 25, 2012, “US commits to ASEAN integration,” East Asia Forums, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/11/25/us-commits-to-asean-integration/, accessed 4-28-2013At the 2012 United States–ASEAN Leaders Meeting in Cambodia, President Barack Obama and leaders from the 10 members of ASEAN launched the US–ASEAN Expanded Economic Engagement (E3) initiative. This is a new framework for economic cooperation designed to facilitate commerce between the United States and ASEAN and another signal of America’s economic pivot towards Asia. The initiative will begin with a United States–ASEAN trade facilitation agreement, which aims to simplify customs procedures and improve the transparency of customs administration. It includes the development of information and communications technology principles that policy makers can use to guide action on cross-border information flows, localisation requirements and the role of regulatory bodies. It will also include the development of principles governing investment policies, with a particular focus on market access, non-discrimination, investor protections, transparency and responsible business conduct. The fourth major work program relates to standards development and practices.

3. U.S. Africa policy proves economic engagement is a pretext for developmentDavid Akana, Staff Writer, April 2, 2013, “US Senator Wants More Economic Engagement with Africa,” Inside Environment, http://insideenvironment.com/2013/04/02/us-senator-wants-more-economic-engagement-with-africa/, accessed 4-28-2013“The United States faces dramatic challenges in Africa and enormous opportunities,” Senator Coons said. “This report offers specific, concrete recommendations to meet the need for increased economic engagement in sub-Saharan Africa. If we don’t take action now to invest in trade and development across the continent, we will fall behind our global competitors and potentially shut American businesses out of these fast-growing markets for decades to come.”

http://insideenvironment.com/2013/04/02/us-senator-wants-more-economic-engagement-with-africa/

http://insideenvironment.com/2013/04/02/us-senator-wants-more-economic-engagement-with-africa/

http://insideenvironment.com/author/ngecha/

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/05/01/pacific-pivot-america-s-strategic-ballet/

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/11/25/us-commits-to-asean-integration/

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Eminent-Persons-Group-Report.pdf

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/11/19/fact-sheet-us-asean-expanded-economic-engagement-e3-initiative

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/11/19/fact-sheet-us-asean-expanded-economic-engagement-e3-initiative


The Word “Development” Should Be Rejected

1. The word “development” promotes an uncritical view of developmentAndrea Cornwall, Professorial Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 2But language does matter for development. Development’s buzzwords are not only passwords to funding and influence; and they are more than the mere specialist jargon that is characteristic of any profession. The word development itself, Gilbert Rist observes, has become a ‘modern shibboleth, an unavoidable password’, which comes to be used ‘to convey the idea that tomorrow things will be better, or that more is necessarily better’. But, as he goes on to note, the very taken-for-granted quality of ‘development’ – and the same might be said of many of the words that are used in development discourse – leaves much of what is actually done in its name unquestioned.

2. Development is a toxic word that should be rejectedSerge Latouche, Professor of Economics at University of Paris XI, June 2, 2003, “Sustainable Development as a Paradox,” Religion, Science, and the Environment Conference, Plenary Session II, http://www.rsesymposia.org/themedia/File/1151679499-Plenary2_Latouche.pdfTherefore, debate on the term “development” is not just a matter of words. It is not possible to show that development can be different from what it has been up to now. Development has been and is the Westernization of the world. Just as there are sweet words, there are poisonous words that penetrate into the blood like a drug, subverting desire and obscuring judgment. Development is one of these toxic words.

3. Trying to reclaim or reappropriate the word development gets cooptedAndrea Cornwall, Professorial Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 12One way of dealing with a denatured buzzword is to dump it altogether, and hope that others will follow suit. Replacing tired old buzzwords with captivating new alternatives, or rehabilitating the ‘lost’ words that spoke for hopes and dreams that never went away, is to play the development-buzzword game on its own terms. It is worth considering some of the words that might be put in the place of today’s fuzzwords. Justice, solidarity, and redistribution are attractive candidates, resonant with the demands of countless movements in their struggles to make a fairer, better world. They are resounding calls to action. And they are words that mainstream development agencies might sooner choke on than assimilate. But there is no guaranteeing that they would not become smoothed out, stripped of any disruptive meanings, and incorporated. Think, for instance, of how power and political agency, words that might seem at first sight to be anathema, have come to enter the discourse of the World Bank in recent years.

http://www.rsesymposia.org/themedia/File/1151679499-Plenary2_Latouche.pdf


Poverty Reduction Is A Development Buzzword

1. Poverty reduction through economic engagement is code for neoliberal deelopmentJohn Toye, Professor of International Development at the University of Oxford, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 49The global-transfer technology for poverty reduction is foreign aid, a.k.a. international development cooperation assistance, a.k.a. international partnership agreements. In recent years, bilateral aid agencies and international financial institutions have proclaimed that their paramount mission is nothing but poverty reduction. This came after a decade (the 1980s) during which conservative governments in the West had instructed them to focus their efforts exclusively on increasing economic growth by adopting a range of neo-liberal policies. The disappointing results from these policies created the public mood to resume the drive for poverty reduction. Increasingly, aid transfers have become conditional on the aid-recipient country adopting a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, a plan outlining national poverty-reduction policies.

2. Development to alleviate poverty is not neutral, but seeks to manage lifeArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 47Poverty, illiteracy, and even hunger became the basis of a lucrative industry for planners, experts, and civil servants (Rahnema 1986). This is not to deny that the work of these institutions might have benefited people at times. It is to emphasize that the work of development institutions has not been an innocent effort on behalf of the poor. Rather, development has been successful to the extent that it has been able to integrate, manage, and control countries and populations in increasingly detailed and encompassing ways. If it has failed to solve the basic problems of underdevelopment, it can be said—perhaps with greater pertinence—that it has succeeded well in creating a type of underdevelopment that has been, for the most part, politically and technically manageable. The discord between institutionalized development and the situation of popular groups in the Third World has only grown with each development decade, as popular groups themselves are becoming apt at demonstrating.

3. Development sustains poverty by turning poor persons into objects of managementFarzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, p. 68The discovery of mass poverty on global scale in general and in third world1 in particular is an outcome of early post Second World War period. Thereafter, the nascent order of capitalism and modernity relied on the politics of poverty the aim of which was not only to create consumers but to transform society by turning the poor into objects of knowledge and management. In 1948, the World Bank defined those countries as poor with an annual per capita income of less than $ 100. Thus, if the problem was insufficient income then the solution was economic growth. In this way, poverty became an organizing concept and the object of a new problematization.


Technical Assistance Presumes A Development Mentality

1. Technical assistance assumes a developed/underdeveloped mentality of “experts”Farzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 73-74 But according to the American President, there was now hope: “For the first time in history humanity possesses the knowledge and the skill to relieve the suffering of these people... I believe that we should make available to peace-loving peoples the benefits of our store of technical knowledge in order to help them realize their aspirations for a better life... What we envisage is a program of development based on the concepts of democratic fair dealing...Greater production is the key to prosperity and peace. And the key to greater production is a wider and more vigorous application of modern scientific and technical knowledge (ibid.)”. Thus, the hope stemmed from primarily from the USA, which was ‘preeminent among nations in the development of industrial and scientific techniques’. While the material resources available for ‘underdeveloped areas’ were limited, the ‘technical knowledge’ of the USA was, according to Truman, not only ‘constantly growing’, but also ‘inexhaustible’. By making this technological expertise available, the USA could help the ‘underdeveloped areas’ to ‘produce more food, more clothing, more materials for housing, and more mechanical power to lighten their burdens (ibid.).

2. Their discourse constructs technical assistance as the cure for underdevelopmentArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 53The crucial threshold and transformation that took place in the early post–World War II period discussed in this chapter were the result not of a radical epistemological or political breakthrough but of the reorganization of a number of factors that allowed the Third World to display a new visibility and to irrupt into a new realm of language. This new space was carved out of the vast and dense surface of the Third World, placing it in a field of power. Underdevelopment became the subject of political technologies that sought to erase it from the face of the Earth but that ended up, instead, multiplying it to infinity. Development fostered a way of conceiving of social life as a technical problem, as a matter of rational decision and management to be entrusted to that group of people—the development professionals—whose specialized knowledge allegedly qualified them for the task.

3. Development constructs persons a victims that just need technical assistanceFarzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, p. 74The order of discourse is telling. ‘Underdeveloped areas’ are portrayed as passive, as victims of diseases, poverty and stagnation. Their inertia stands in sharp contrast to the dynamism and itality of the ‘developed areas’, and the USA in particular. These areas can embark upon ‘bold programmes’, and their technical knowledge and scientific advances are constantly expanding, always reaching new highs. This in turn enables them to rescue the ‘underdeveloped areas’ from their ‘misery’, to deliver them from their primitiveness to modernity; to the era of ‘technical knowledge’, ‘scientific advances’, ‘greater production’, and ‘personal freedom and happiness for all mankind’.


Participatory Development Has The Same Problems As Traditional

1. Participatory development is embedded in a system of power relations that perpetuate inequalityKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013Regarding new organizational forms such as participatory approaches, Crewe and Priyanthi state that these “have allowed agencies to develop techniques for appearing democratic and accountable while retaining control over critical decision points”. Informal structures and ritualised consultation processes function to silence the objections of mostly ‘non-white’ participants. As a matter of course, participatory approaches are still highly preferable to organizational forms that do not allow for any consultation at all. However, the authors argue that consultation rituals should be analysed with respect to informal power relations in order to ensure that

voices of aid recipients are in the centre of attention rather than in the periphery. “After all, development encounters are embedded within unequal power relationships between givers and receivers, and to pretend to treat unequals as if they are equals is a particularly effective way to perpetuate inequality”.

2. Focusing on empowerment is just a failed development tacticSrilatha Batliwala, Civil Society Research Fellow at the Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations at Harvard University, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 118With donors increasingly abandoning empowerment as a no-longer-fashionable – indeed practical – methodology, and enthusiastically championing (with a few exceptions) large-scale micro-finance programmes as the quickest route to women’s empowerment (and overall economic development!), the old feminist concept and practice of empowerment have been interred without ceremony. Grassroots practitioners and movements find that they can no longer raise funds with the language and strategies of empowerment, or that they must disguise these within au courant frameworks or rhetoric (such as rights, micro-finance, transparency, accountability, and so forth). Some donors have moved resources out of broader-based empowerment approaches, because they don’t show ‘countable’ results and/or because empowerment doesn’t work fast enough.

3. Development discourse is a racializing force that colonizes knowledge even when locals participateKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013As I already explained above, development discourse underlines the necessity of western knowledge for the development process, thus implying development assistance and education of southern elites in the ‘North’. As White points out, development is closely linked with western education – clearly illustrated by the fact that development studies courses are mostly taught in ‘First World’ universities. Hence, the ‘North’ has and constantly produces knowledge about the ‘South’ and even teaches ‘Third World’ citizens about their own societies, whereas the idea that knowledge form the ‘South’ could be useful to solve problems of the ‘North’ still seems absurd to most people. We can clearly recognize the analogies to colonial discourse: “[T]his relationship of tutelage extends far beyond the institutions of formal education.








Appeals To “Experts” Are Colonialist

1. Appeals to Western “expertise” in economic engagement to erase culturesKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013Furthermore, expertise in development organizations (as in other businesses) is often associated with certain symbolic means: As Crewe and Priyanthi observe, development experts working abroad (expatriates) tend to display their expertise by “…quoting recent international publications and referring to their own work in other regions of the world”, using the latest technical equipment etc. For Southern experts the access to these symbols of expertise, contacts and information tends to be limited (due to visa restrictions and financial limits). “This has leads to a failure to recognize the diverse world of ideologies and aspirations and the ability of ‘recipients’ of aid to manage resources on their own, as well as a tendency to ignore non-western conceptions of, for example, ‘freedom’, ‘justice’ or,

indeed, ‘development’.”

2. Appeals to experts dominate development and participatory programsKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013It is in fact a dominant idiom underlying much of what is said and done in development. And why is this so

familiar? It is, of course, a classic way in which colonial racism imagined black–white relations”. Therefore, it can

be argued that terms such as “development expert”, “consultant” or “expatriate” are not neutral but racialized (and gendered) in the sense that they are primarily associated with white (and male) persons. Despite newer tendencies within a participatory approach to value experiences and knowledge of ‘local’ persons, it is still assumed that some kind of intervention by development organizations is necessary e.g. in the form of “facilitators” or “moderators”. This means that although there has been a new rhetoric of respect for “indigenous” expertise with some NGOs even promoting knowledge exchange from ‘South to South’, knowledge is partly still ranked by its source instead of by its utility.

3. Their buzzwords buy into the status quo development discourse, not changePablo Alejandro Leal, Professor of Political Economy at the Benito Juárez University of Oaxaca State, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 90The historic and systemic failure of the development industry to ‘fix’ chronic underdevelopment puts it in the challenging position of having both to renew and reinvent its discourse and practice enough to make people believe that a change has, in fact, taken place and to make these adjustments while maintaining intact the basic structure of the status quo on which the development industry depends. This explains why we have seen, over the past 50 years, a rich parade of successive development trends: ‘community development’ in the post-colonial period, ‘modernisation’ in the Cold War period, and ‘basic human needs’ and ‘integrated rural development’ throughout the 1970s. The neo-liberal period (1980s to the present day) witnessed a pageant of such trends as ‘sustainable development’ and ‘participatory development’ from the late 1980s and all through the 1990s; ‘capacity building’, ‘human rights’, and ‘good governance’ throughout most of the 1990s; and, we must not forget, ‘poverty reduction/alleviation’ in the dawn of the twentyfirst century.








“Sustainable Development” Represents Development Discourse

1. Sustainable development shows how buzzwords get circulated into the mainstream Ian Scoones, Professorial Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 158Buzzwords – and the ambitions with which they are associated – that become mainstream and incorporated into routine, bureaucratic procedures often (perhaps always) suffer this fate. For many commentators writing since 2000, the simplistic managerialism of many initiatives labelled ‘sustainable development’ left much to be desired. Critiques focused on the lack of progress on major targets set in 1992, the endless repackaging of old initiatives as ‘sustainable’ this or that, and the lack of capacity and commitment within governments and international organisations to make the ideals of sustainability real in day-to-day practice. With the default bureaucratic mode of managerialism dominating – and its focus on action plans, indicators, and the rest – the wider political economy of sustainable development was being neglected, many felt. ‘It’s politics, stupid’, commentators argued. And, with mainstreaming and bureaucratisation, the urgency and political vibrancy is lost, and, with this, comes a dilution and loss of dynamism in a previously energetic and committed debate.

2. Sustainable development whitewashes the drawbacks of developmentReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, Spring 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 157Second, the sustainable development discourse tends to focus on "the degrading activities of the poor," such as slash and burn agriculture. It all but ignores the role played by development policies, such as the displacement of peoples and the intensification of waste creation in bringing about new environmental pressures.

3. “Sustainable development” erases conservation and whitewashes capitalismReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, Spring 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 157Third, it presents ecological degradation as an obstacle to continuing economic growth, rather than raising questions about the role of continuing economic growth in bringing about environmental degradation. The sustainable development discourse posits that development and conservation are not antagonistic. To the contrary, they are presented as complementary. Thus, while proponents of this discourse acknowledge that some changes to capitalism do need to be made, the overall merits of the system are rarely, if ever, questioned.


Biodiversity Claims Are Rooted In Development Discourse

1. Biodiversity rhetoric is a disguise to expand biotechnologies and capitalismReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, Spring 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 158In parallel with the rise of the sustainable development discourse has been an emergent concern on the part of some development enterprises with the conservation of biodiversity. Escobar asserts that this new concept must be understood not as a real scientific object, but as a historically produced discourse. While he concedes that the idea of biodiversity does appear to correspond with certain observable biophysical phenomena, he argues that the sudden global preoccupation with biodiversity conservation is being driven by political and economic concerns. The perceived need to protect biodiversity stems from the search for new genetic material that has accompanied the emergence of biotechnology as a new field of capitalist growth.

2. The discourse of biodiversity encapsulates nature as a commodity to be developedArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 203The rising discourse of biodiversity in particular achieves this feat. In this discourse, nature becomes a source of value in itself. Species of flora and fauna are valuable not so much as resources but as reservoirs of value that research and knowledge, along with biotechnology, can release for capital and communities. This is one of the reasons why ethnic and peasant communities in the tropical rain-forest areas of the world are finally being recognized as owners of their territories (or what is left of them), but only to the extent that they accept to treat it—and themselves—as reservoirs of capital. Communities and social movements in various parts of the world are being enticed by biodiversity projects to become "stewards of the social and natural 'capitals' whose sustainable management is, henceforth, both their responsibility and the business of the world economy". Once the semiotic conquest of nature is completed, the sustainable and rational use of the environment becomes an imperative. Here lies the underlying logic of sustainable development and biodiversity discourses.

3. Discourses of biodiversity construct nature as something to capitalizeArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 206The discourses of biodiversity and biotechnology can be situated within the framework of what Donna Haraway calls the postmodern reinvention of nature. This reinvention is being fostered by sciences such as molecular biology, genetics, and immunology, research trends such as the human genome project, and artificial intelligence and biotechnology. We could be moving from a regime of “organic” (premodern) and “capitalized” (modern) nature to a regime of “constructed” nature effected by novel forms of science and technology (Escobar 1994). In this regime, nature would be built by manifold biopractices.


Empowerment Is Code For Development

1. Empowerment is just a development buzzwords that fails in practiceSrilatha Batliwala, Civil Society Research Fellow at the Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations at Harvard University, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 111Of all the buzzwords that have entered the development lexicon in the past 30 years, empowerment is probably the most widely used and abused. Like many other important terms that were coined to represent a clearly political concept, it has been ‘mainstreamed’ in a manner that has virtually robbed it of its original meaning and strategic value. It is one of the best examples of what I have elsewhere described as the “...distortion of good ideas and innovative practices as they are lifted out of the political and historical context in which they evolved and rendered into formulas that are ‘mainstreamed’. This usually involves divesting the idea of its cultural specificity, its political content, and generalizing it into a series of rituals and steps that simulate its original elements, but lacking the transformative power of the real thing. Thus good ideas – evolved to address specific development challenges – are altered into universally applicable panaceas. Transferring the correct rhetoric – buzzwords and catch phrases emptied of their original meaning – is a vital part of this legerdemain.

2. Empowerment in development always goes to extremesInes Smyth, Oxfam GB’s Global Gender Policy Adviser, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 146Empowerment perhaps has the richest and most complex history and evolution of all relevant terms: from the seventeenth-century meaning of delegation and granting license to its reverse meaning – in a feminist sense – of self-generated positive change. In this long trajectory, the term has attracted contributions from the most extreme traditions: ‘feminist scholarship, the Christian right, New Age self-help manuals, and business management’.

3. “Empowerment” has been hijacked by development managersSrilatha Batliwala, Civil Society Research Fellow at the Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations at Harvard University, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 112From these historically, politically, and geographically diverse locations, empowerment was hijacked, in the 1990s, into increasingly bizarre locations, converted from a collective to an individualistic process, and skillfully co-opted by conservative and even reactionary political ideologies in pursuit of their agenda of divesting ‘big government’ (for which read: the welfare state) of its purported power and control by ‘empowering’ communities to look after their own affairs. Management gurus discovered ‘empowerment’ and infused it into the human-resource development and motivational practices of the corporate world, turning it to the service of profit making and competitiveness in the market place. Thus the 1990s witnessed a widespread co-option of the term by corporate management, neo-con political movements, and consumer-rights advocates.


Development Is Eurocentric

1. Development is Eurocentric paradigm to maintain Western dominationFarzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, p. 77Notions of absences and deficiencies in turn establish a very clear hierarchy, where the first or developed world is placed above the third or underdeveloped world. There is a very strong evolutionary streak in development discourse, most clearly articulated in the early development models of the 1950s and 1960s. Rostow’s (1960) well-known ‘stages of economic growth’, where all countries would eventually reach the stage of ‘high mass-consumption’, is only one articulation of the normative expectation that the third world will follow in the footsteps of the first. Although the Eurocentric and teleological nature of development discourse has been much toned down since the 1960s, there can be little doubt that the industrialised countries of the West remain the model for the third world development. At every turn, this discourse reinforces hierarchies. The very notion of development’ always invokes images of change for the better, from stagnation to dynamism, from simplicity to complexity, from scarcity to abundance. Before development, there is nothing but deficiencies. Underdeveloped areas have no history of their own, hardly any past worth development can be abandoned, and third world countries emerges as empty vessels waiting to be filled with the development received from the’ first world. The superiority and dominance of the first world over the third is thus continually reinforced through this discourse.

2. The epistemological basis of the Affirmative is rooted in Western privilegeReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, Spring 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 154Escobar contends that the history of capitalist expansion is inseparable from "the history of the advance of scientific discourses of modernity ... " He is particularly interested in drawing attention to the ways in which the position of epistemological privilege that has long been accorded to Western science has helped to justify the establishment of global systems of economic and political domination. By making explicit the ways in which relations of power and knowledge have shaped the production of "scientific truth," Escobar hopes to create opportunities for alternative understandings to be brought to the fore.

3. Development posits recipients of the plan as in homogenous terms that reflect a hierarchal elevation of the West above all othersKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013Derived from the colonial paradigm, development places the West “in hierarchical opposition to other areas of the globe which remained ‘traditional’ […] less scientific, less secular, less rational, less individualist, and less democratic.” These regions (and the people living there) are solely defined by their relation to the West and are consequently constructed as one homogeneous underdeveloped Third World. “In much literature in development there is a tendency to homogenize other cultures; to see non-western cultures as fixed, incomprehensible, recessive and particularistic. […] While specific ethnographic studies have explored cultural habits and dispositions, these have often become utilized in constructing generalized accounts of cultures, which speak, for example, of a singular, and often immutable, ‘African culture’.“ Consequently, following the traditions of colonial discourse development expresses “…the otherness in the name of sameness, reduce[s] the different to the already known, and thus fundamentally escape[s] the task of making sense of other worlds”.





Development Is Colonialist

1. Development discourse constructs “Third World” peoples as abnormalFarzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, p. 76The effect of this representation is twofold. First, it serves to erase differences within the third world. The essential characteristic of all third world countries is their lack of development; they are all poor, illiterate, primitive, and so forth. In this way, the street vendor in Dhaka, Bangladesh, the South African miner, the Landak family

in the Himalayas, the Kikuyu in Kenya become one and the same: poor and underdeveloped. The third world emerges as a homogeneous whole, in need of the same development to be administered by development experts. Second, the structuring of discourse around a series of absences legitimises actions and interventions in the third world. Absences appear as deficiencies, or abnormalities, to be remedied and rectified through development. The third-world-consists of deficiencies, waiting to be improved, reformed and eradicated. Development becomes a means of rescuing the third world, a legitimate and necessary form of intervention to remedy the misery and suffering associated with underdevelopment. In this way, development promises not only an end to the deficiencies of the third world, but also the third world itself as it becomes more like the first.

2. Development is a Western project of Eurocentric discourse of colonial dominationKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013On the universal scale of development the West serves as the benchmark, the ideal norm. In order to progress developing countries are in need of knowledge transfer from the West, because they cannot develop on their own. In other words: the colonial ideal of the “European occidental civilization” has been replaced by the “liberal democratic market economy” as the goal of human development. “International etiquette means that the crude modernisation view of ‘third world’ societies as backward, passive and tradition-bound, static and inert, awaiting the penetration of development from the West, is no longer ‘sayable’ in polite society. But it nevertheless lurks within the ‘discursive bricolage’ of development. And as such it can inform the framework within which intervention takes place”.

3. The development framework turns people into objects of colonial dominationKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013Within the framework of the development industry people living in ‘Third World’ countries become objects of knowledge, interventions, management and research. Through the collection of a multitude of data about the ‘Third World’ subjects by western development agencies makes them visible in order to evaluate them against the norm of development. It can be argued that the colonial idea of ‘trusteeship’ has been handed over from colonial officers to ‘development experts’.








Development Embodies Racism

1. Development is rooted in colonial racism, but engages in linguistic denialKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013The most obvious break line between colonial and development discourse is the official rejection of colonial imperialism and explicit racism by developmentalists. Certain terms such as “race” and “civilization” have almost completely vanished after the end of the colonial era and have been replaced by different terms such

as “underdeveloped”. “Overall, then, there has been a political imperative to distance the international aid industry from the colonial encounter so as to avoid tarnishing what is presented as a humanitarian project far removed from the […] exploitation of the colonial era”. As Kothari argues, this denial of the colonial heritage permitted the newly created development industry to work on and in so-called “Third Wold” countries without being scrutinized.

2. Whiteness and racism enter at every part of the development processUma Kothari, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester,January 2006, “Critiquing ‘race’ and racism in development discourse and practice,” Progress in Development Studies, p. 2Marcus Power (2003: 12) reminds us of the necessity to ‘flag up the continued importance of whiteness, racism and racial formations in thinking about, mapping and practising development today’ since development is largely ‘related to a “geopolitics” of “race”, where “developed” countries take an interest in and consider the needs of poor countries in ways that often issue directly from their own preoccupations and strategic political, cultural and economic objectives and perspectives’. While some of the papers do address this geopolitics of ‘race’ by focusing on how racialized discourses underpin western ideologies and influence understandings and representations of the third world, ideas of ‘race’ are evidently not unique to the west. Ideologies, policies and methodological approaches vary spatially as do the individual sensibilities of the increasingly diverse range of people involved in the development industry. Indeed, as the discussions at the meeting in Durban in 2001 on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination highlighted, ‘race’ and racism shape distinctions, exclusions and privileges and obstruct the full realization of human rights everywhere (United Nations (UN), 2001). Thus, although the focus here is on a racialized eurocentrism, it is not the intention to suggest a singular, homogenized discourse of development nor deny the existence of dissenting practitioners in the west and elsewhere.

3. Racism is the result of knowledge colonization from developmentKatrin Köhler, University of Vienna, September 7, 2011, “Colonial (Dis-)Continuities in Development Discourse and Practice,” Global Politics, http://www.globalpolitics.cz/clanky/colonial-dis-continuities-in-development-discourse-and-practice, accessed 4-28-2013Kothari also quotes a ‘black’ development worker talking about his experiences within an NGO in Zimbabwe: “If you want your organization’s plans to be approved quickly or you need to raise funds, you are better off appointing a white director”. He explains that regardless of experience and expertise ‘white’ persons generally have better access to international funding, because they are part of the “expatriate community” and therefore can easily connect with certain groups, which is important for building contacts with “white power holders.” However, racist stereotypes often are even internalized by ‘black’ persons: “‘Local counterparts’ have been visibly disappointed when they realized that their expatriate consultant was not white. This is reflective of what Ngugi calls the ‘colonization of the mind’ (1986) whereby for some formerly colonized people, whiteness becomes associated with high cultural values and the west with modernity and progress”.








The Alternative Solves

1. The alternative opens space for new theories and actionReade Davis, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Memorial University, Spring 2003, “Development Eco-Logies: Power and Change in Arturo Escobar's Political Ecology,” Studies in Political Economy, p. 163In a later essay, however, Escobar launched a spirited defense of the political underpinnings of his poststructuralist theory. Defying the accusation that poststructuralism inevitably leads to moral relativism, he has argued that, in fact, it provides "very clear criteria for making judgment and taking action based on the analysis of discourse and power and the overall aim of transforming entrenched political economies of truth. That these criteria can never be universal and valid once and for all does not disable action." He has called for the forging of new theories of practice that can account for a plurality of truths without abandoning political and ethical foundations.

2. The alternative opens space for local voices. It is a sound option that creates a starting point for changeArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 100-101The suggestion that we take into account people's own models is not only a politically correct position. On the contrary, it constitutes a sound philosophical and political alternative. Philosophically, it follows the mandate of interpretive social science that we take subjects as agents of self-definition whose practice is shaped by their self-understanding. This self-understanding may be grasped by the researcher or activist through ethnographic methods. This does not mean that the researcher or activist has to adopt the subjects' view or that the subjects' view is always right. Cultural relativists have often fallen into this double trap. It means that the interpretive social scientist has to take into account people's own descriptions as the starting point of theory, that is, of what has to be explained.

3. Trying to rehabilitate development discourse sanitizes and depoliticizes developmentPablo Alejandro Leal, Professor of Political Economy at the Benito Juárez University of Oaxaca State, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 95For participation to become part of dominant development practice, it first had to be modified, sanitised, and depoliticised. Once purged of all the threatening elements, participation could be re-engineered as an instrument that could play a role within the status quo, rather than one that defied it. Co-optation of the concept depended, in large measure, on the omission of class and larger social contradictions. As such, participation became another ingredient in the prevailing modernisation paradigm. This conceptualization holds that poverty, inequity, and marginalisation are results of a lack of application of technology, capital, and knowledge combined successfully through appropriate policy and planning mechanisms, leading to pertinent reforms of institutional structures (i.e. SAPs). The dominant discourses of mainstream development hold as fundamental the assertion that the pattern for these types of intervention are found in the Western rationalist tradition which focuses on behavioural models of rational choice rather than structural inequity or the human response to oppression.


Challenging Development Solves

1. We must debunk development discourse for real change against privilegeGilbert Rist, Professor of Political Science and teaches social and cultural anthropology, inter-cultural relations, and the history of development theories at the Graduate Institute of Development Studies, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 25The time has come – and it is indeed high time – to debunk the ‘development’ buzzword. To do so means that we must define it properly – relying on actual social practices, rather than wishful thinking. We must be aware of its inclusion in a corpus of beliefs that are difficult to shatter, expose its mischievous uses, and denounce its consequences. The most important thing, however, is to make it plain that there is life after ‘development’ – certainly a different one from what we in the privileged regions are used to, but there is no evidence to suggest that we would lose on such a deal.

2. Unmasking development illuminates new forms of representation and beingArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 223The crisis in the regimes of representation of the Third World thus calls for new theories and research strategies; the crisis is a real conjunctional moment in the reconstruction of the connection between truth and reality, between words and things, one that demands new practices of seeing, know ing, and being. Ethnography is by no means the sole method of pursuing this goal; but given the need to unmake and unlearn development, and if

one recognizes that the crucial insights for the pursuit of alternatives will be found not in academic circles—critical or conventional—or in the offices of institutions such as the World Bank but in a new reading of popular prac tices and of the reappropriation by popular actors of the space of hegemonic sociocultural production, then one must at least concede that the task of conceptualizing alternatives must include a significant contact with those whose "alternatives" research is supposed to illuminate. This is a conjunctural possibility that ethnography-oriented research might be able to fulfill, regardless of the discipline

3. A blueprint begs the question. Unmaking development requires changing discursive formations and the plan just repeats the same mistakesArturo Escobar, Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, p. 217The process of unmaking development, however, is slow and painful, and there are no easy solutions or prescriptions. From the West, it is much more difficult to perceive that development is at the same time self-destructing and being unmade by social action, even as it continues to destroy people and nature. The dialectic here tends to push for another round of solutions, even if conceived through more radical categories—cultural, ecological, politicoeconomic, and so on. This will not do. The empty defense of develop ment must be left to the bureaucrats of the development apparatus and those who support it, such as the military and (not all of) the corporations. It is up to us, however, to make sure that the life span of the bureaucrats and the experts as producers and enforcers of costly gestures is limited. Development unmade means the inauguration of a discontinuity with the discur sive practice of the last forty years, imagining the day when we will not be able to say or even entertain the thoughts that have led to forty years of incredibly irresponsible policies and programs. In some parts of the Third World, this possibility may already be (in some communities it always was) a social reality.


Discourse Analysis Good

1. The language of development operates to shape realityAndrea Cornwall, Professorial Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 1Words make worlds. The language of development defines worlds-in-the making, animating and justifying intervention in currently existing worlds with fulsome promises of the possible. Wolfgang Sachs contends, ‘development is much more than just a socio-economic endeavour; it is a perception which models reality, a myth which comforts societies, and a fantasy which unleashes passions’ (1992:1). These models, myths, and passions are sustained by development’s ‘buzzwords’.

2. Discourse analysis of development illuminates power-knowledge connections that sustain marginalized spacesFarzana Naz, staff writer, July - September 2006, “Arturo Escobar and the development discourse: An overview,” Asian Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, p. 71As Escobar (1995) argues, thinking about development in terms of discourse enables us to maintain a focus on power and domination, while at the same time exploring the discourse’s conditions of possibility as well as its effects. It allows us to ‘stand detached from [development], bracketing its familiarity, in order to analyse the theoretical and practical context with which it has been associated’ (Foucault, 1986: 3). In other words, development emerges as culturally and historically contingent, and the focus shifts from ‘what is’ to how subjects are formed within this discourse as developed and underdeveloped. This conception of the relationship between power and knowledge enables us to expose the political and strategic nature of discourse previously regarded as existing independently of power relations by virtue of their presumed scientific nature, and to ask instead ‘whom does discourse serve?’ (Foucault, 1980: 115).

3. Development buzzwords are vague and allow elites to selectively fill in meaningAndrea Cornwall, Professorial Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, 2010, Deconstructing Development Discourse, Buzzwords and Fuzzwords, p. 5The language of development is, as Fiona Wilson suggests, a hybrid, not quite the language of social science nor of ‘living’ English; its ‘vocabulary is restricted, banal and depersonalised’. Its ‘underlying purpose’, she notes, ‘is not to lay bare or be unequivocal but to mediate in the interests of political consensus while at the same time allowing for the existence of several internal agendas’. Policies depend on a measure of ambiguity to secure the endorsement of diverse potential actors and audiences. Buzzwords aid this process, by providing concepts that can float free of concrete referents, to be filled with meaning by their users. In the struggles for interpretive power that characterise the negotiation of the language of policy, buzzwords shelter multiple agendas, providing room for manoeuvre and space for contestation.