Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Tang-Talpallikar 1

N O V E M BE R C O N M A N U S C R I P T
C L E M E N TS H I G H S C H O O L C Y P R E S S C R E E K TO U R N A M E N T 3 0 N O V E M B E R 1 D E C E M B E R

INTRODUCTION
ATTENTION GETTER On foreign policy, President Obama has kept our nation safe from terrorism and restored our standing in the world. When it comes to one of our closest allies - Israel - President Obama has been resolute. Charles Schumer When we look around us, we see that we are not living in a place blasted by terrorists, despite the many who plot to blow us up every day. Thus, we agree with Schumer, that overall, our foreign policy helps our national security. Therefore:

PREVIEW STATEMENT We negate the Resolved: Current U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East undermines our national security. Our negation is two-fold: Firstly, we contend that the Doctrine that current US Foreign Policy in the Middle East is based on, SMART POWER, Maximizes our national security. Secondly, we contend that the aforementioned policies mitigate the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction. DEFINITIONS We define the following: Middle East: Middle East has fairly controversial definitions. Thus, when we approach the resolution today, we must examine its definition in todays world. We also attempt to be as inclusive as possible without leaving the realms of logic, to account for a variety of different arguments on both sides of the resolution. Because of this, we define the Middle East as how the G-8 summit, as well as the Middle East nations themselves define the term, to mean the primarily Muslim nations, as well as Israel, in Northern Africa and Southwestern Asia, generally stretching from Libya to Afghanistan, and often including Pakistan.

Tang-Talpallikar 2

Oxford defines the middle east as

an extensive area of southwestern Asia and northern Africa, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to Pakistan and including the Arabian peninsula.

Merriam Webster also defines the Middle East as:


the countries of SW Asia & N Africa usually considered to include the countries extending from Libya on the W to Afghanistan on the E

National security:
Former Defense Secretary Harold Brown:
then is the ability to preserve the nation's physical integrity and territory; to

maintain its economic relations with the rest of the world on reasonable terms; to preserve its nature, institution, and governance from disruption from outside; and to control its borders."

Weapons of Mass Destruction:


US Criminal Law code:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses

United States Law Code, Title 18


any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life

BODY

Tang-Talpallikar 3 ALWAYS READ:

OBSERVATION I: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS


Any object of evaluation will have some positive and negative attributes. Thus, to appreciate the resolution, we must utilize COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS and weigh whether the net impact of the policies specified in the resolution undermine our national security on balance. This can be done in two ways: A. Either identify an overarching doctrine of US policy, or B. Narrow the debate down to the most significant examples of policy We will attempt to do both in todays round. To put it simply: The Pro Side will win if they successfully show that overall, current U.S. foreign policies in the middle east undermine our national security more than they bolster them. If the Con side can show that current U.S. foreign policies ASSIST more than they HURT overall, regardless of the margin, the CON side wins the round today. READ IF TERRORIST PRO:

OBSERVATION II: TOPICALITY OF NON STATE ACTORS


Foreign Policy concerns INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, or relations to, with, and from OTHER STATE ACTORS. Policy regarding NON-STATE ACTORS, then, IS NOT FOREIGN POLICY. Even if an organization is state-sponsored, it is not relevant unless it is an organ of the government itself. Private entities, such as companies, are often subsidized here in the United States. Yet, we do not consider these corporations part of the government. The same logic follows for these other Non-State Actors. Thus, we will DISREGARD any and all POLICIES that ONLY IMPACT NON STATE ACTORS, such as TERRORISTS, NGOs, etc. ALWAYS READ:

CONTENTION I: SMART POWER


To begin, we must firstly examine the doctrine that current policies are based on. This is SMART POWER. SUBPOINT A: SMART POWER IS THE BEST GUIDING DOCTRINE Joseph Nye- 2009: "Smart power" is a term developed in 2003 to counter the misperception that soft power alone can produce effective foreign policy. Power is one's ability to affect the behavior of others to get what one wants. There are three basic ways to do this: coercion, payment, and attraction. Hard power is
I

Tang-Talpallikar 4 the use of coercion and payment. Soft power is the ability to obtain preferred outcomes through attraction. If a state can set the agenda for others or shape their preferences, it can save a lot on carrots and sticks. But rarely can it totally replace either. Thus the need for smart strategies that combine the tools of both hard and soft power. Thus, we can see that SMART POWER is the SOLE doctrine capable of guiding our actions. SUBPOINT B: CURRENT POLICIES IMPLEMENT SMART POWER

Hillary Clinton- Jan. 13, 2009, delivered a speech describing Obama policies, saying that:

As we focus on Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan, we must also actively pursue a strategy of smart power in the Middle East that addresses the security needs of Israel and the legitimate political and economic aspirations of the Palestinians; that effectively challenges Iran to end its nuclear weapons program and sponsorship of terror, and persuades both Iran and Syria to abandon their dangerous behavior and become constructive regional actors; that strengthens our relationships with Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, other Arab states, with Turkey, and with our partners in the Gulf to involve them in securing a lasting peace in the region.
Two key examples of American use of Smart Power include: a)Building relationships with Israel: Netanyahu- November 7, 2012: "The strategic alliance between Israel and the US is stronger than ever. I will continue to work with President Obama in order to assure the interests that are vital to the security of the citizens of Israel[and the US]." b)Aid to Middle East Countries: US Governments Afghan Aid Project: 244 total projects in fields like Agriculture, Democratic Growth, Health, Infrastructure, Economics, etc, receiving a total of 6.4 billion as of 2010 All other US Foreign policies are also examples of instantiation of this Doctrine. ALWAYS READ:

CONTENTION II: WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

SUBPOINT A: WMDS OUTWEIGH CONVENTIONAL ONES Harvards Belfer Center for International Affairs, The Commission on Americas National Interests, Americas National Interests, 2000,

Tang-Talpallikar 5

The greatest US concern in the Middle East is the continuing proliferation and build-up of WMD capabilities. Iran presents the most serious and complex WMD challenge in the region. Despite various arms control commitments, US intelligence agencies maintain that Iran is currently seeking to enhance its chemical and biological weapons capabilities, to extend the range and payload of its ballistic missile program, and to procure the necessary technologies and materials needed to produce nuclear weapons. A nuclear-armed Iran would fundamentally alter the balance of power in the region and would pose a major strategic challenge to the United States, particularly if hardline elements remain in power in Teheran.
SUBPOINT B: CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS ARE NOT A THREAT Essentially, the United States has the strongest conventional military, with defense spending totaling about 1.6 trillion dollars in 2012 alone, according to the Obama Administration. The US Military budget is greater than that of the next 9 countries, including China, Germany, the UK, and Russia, combined. Thus, conventional threats are not a problem. No other group can even come close to matching us in this regard, NO MATTER WHAT POLICIES WE UNDERTAKE. THUS, THE ONLY REMAINING THREAT IS WMDS. If the CON side can show that policies mitigate the impact of WMDs, the CON SIDE WINS THE ROUND.

SUBPOINT C: CURRENT POLICIES MITIGATE WMD THREATS


Dr. Lawrence J. Korb, Center for American Progress Action Fund

Iran has been tremendously weakened over the past two years by the Obama administrations successful efforts to muster international support for increased sanctions against the country. The Iranian government is divided, widely viewed as illegitimate by its people, and isolated internationally. Moreover, Irans economy is in shambles and its nuclear program has stalled, partly as a result of the sanctions.
Y O U S A F B U T T , P R O F E S S O R A T T H E J A M E S M A R T I N C E N T E R F O R N O N - P R O L I F E R A TI O N S TU D I E S A T TH E M O N TE R E Y I N S T I TU TE O F I N T E R N A T I O N A L S TU D I E S , F O R E I G N P O L I C Y M A G A Z I N E , T HE R I A L W O R L D , O C TO B E R 5 2 0 1 2 , H TTP : / / W W W . F O R E I G N P O L I C Y . C O M / A R T I C L E S / 2 0 1 2 / 1 0 / 0 5 / TH E _ R I A L _ W O R L D

IRAN IS MOVING AWAY FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONIZATION RED-LINES

In fact, according to the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran's stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6) gas actually declined to 91.4 kg from the 101 kg reported in May. This decrease in Iran's "enrich-able" 20 percent-enriched uranium stockpile is due to the conversion of some UF6 into metallic fuel-plates for the

Tang-Talpallikar 6 Tehran Research Reactor. Reconversion back to gaseous form is difficult and timeconsuming. Whatever nuclear weaponization "red lines" one cares to draw, Iran is actually retreating from them.

N U C L E A R THR E A T I N I T I A TI V E , P A K I S TA N I G O V E R N M E N T C O L L A P S E C H I E F T HR E A T TO N U C L E A R S E C U R I TY , J U L Y 2 9 2 0 1 1 , HT TP : / / W W W . N T I . O R G / G S N / A R TI C L E / P A K I S TA N I - G O V T C O L L A P S E - C HI E F - T HR E A T - T O - N U K E - S E C U R I TY - R E P O R T/

Our support of the Pakistani government prevents Nuclear Terrorism.

IF THE PAKISTANI GOVERNMENT COLLAPSED, EXTREMISTS COULD SECURE ACCESS TO PAKISTANS NUCLEAR WEAPONS

EXTREMISTS WOULD HAVE THE BEST CHANCE TO TAKE[N] POSSESSION OF

PAKISTANI NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOLLOWING THE BREAKDOWN OF THE


SOUTH ASIAN STATE'S GOVERNMENT, THE U.S. CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE CONCLUDED IN A

THE RESEARCH ARM OF CONGRESS NOTED THAT ISLAMABAD IN THE LAST DECADE HAS MADE CONSIDERABLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SECURITY SURROUNDING ITS GROWING NUCLEAR ARSENAL, WHICH THE REPORT ESTIMATES AT TODAY ENCOMPASSING 90 TO 110 WARHEADS . SAFEGUARDS INCLUDE MORE RIGOROUS VETTING OF NUCLEAR-WEAPON PERSONNEL,
REPORT THIS MONTH (SEE GSN, JULY 17). AN UPDATED COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM, AND LEGISLATION TO AUGMENT EXPORT RESTRICTIONS AND HEAD OFF DEVELOPMENT OF A PROLIFERATION OPERATION AKIN TO THE ABDUL QADEER KHAN RING.

CONCLUSION
In Conclusion: We negate the Resolved: Current U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East undermines our national security. Firstly, we contend that the Doctrine that current US Foreign Policy in the Middle East is based on, SMART POWER, Maximizes our national security. Secondly, we contend that the aforementioned policies mitigate the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Tang-Talpallikar 7