Expansionism Good – Oil
Oil shocks crush the US economy
Setser 4 (Brad, Research Associate, Global Economic Governance Programme at Oxford http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~nroubini/papers/OilShockRoubiniSetser.pdf , AD: 7/6/10) jl
These effects are not trivial: oil shocks have caused and/or contributed to each one of the US and global recessions of the last thirty years. Yet while recent recessions have all been linked to an increase in the price of oil, not all oil price spikes lead to a recession. The 2003 spike associated with the invasion of Iraq is a good example. Private sector estimates generally suggest that a persistent 10% increase in the price of oil – say an increase from $30 to an average of $35 over the course of 2004 -- would reduce the US and the G7 growth rate by about 0.3%-0.4% within a year. Some (Goldman Sachs) are more pessimistic, and calculate that if oil prices were to increase further to levels closer to $45, the reduction in the G7 growth rate may be closer to 1% of GDP. Thus, private estimates of the negative effects of an oil shock currently range between 0.3% to 1% of US and G7 GDP growth. This means that the US economy, which was growing in Q4:2003 and Q1:2004 at about a 4.3% average rate could be expected to see a slowdown of its growth to a level between 4.0% and 3.3%. Global growth would also de-accelerate from its current very strong pace. And, indeed, the first estimate for Q2:2004 U.S. GDP growth was 3.0%, confirming that high oil prices in the first half of 2004 put a dent on real consumer demand. Looking ahead, persistence of oil prices at recent high levels of $43-44 per barrel (or even higher prices) could further slow down the U.S. economy below a 3% growth rate.
Extinction
Friedberg and Schoenfield 8 (Friedberg, professor of politics and international relations at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School, Schoenfeld, senior editor of Commentary, is a visiting scholar at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, N.J., “The Dangers of a Diminished America”, WSJ, http://online.wsj.vom/articles/SB122455074012352571.html, AD: 6/19/10) jl
Then there are the dolorous consequences of a potential collapse of the world's financial architecture. For decades now, Americans have enjoyed the advantages of being at the center of that system. The worldwide use of the dollar, and the stability of our economy, among other things, made it easier for us to run huge budget deficits, as we counted on foreigners to pick up the tab by buying dollar-denominated assets as a safe haven. Will this be possible in the future? Meanwhile, traditional foreign-policy challenges are multiplying. The threat from al Qaeda and Islamic terrorist affiliates has not been extinguished. Iran and North Korea are continuing on their bellicose paths, while Pakistan and Afghanistan are progressing smartly down the road to chaos. Russia's new militancy and China's seemingly relentless rise also give cause for concern. If America now tries to pull back from the world stage, it will leave a dangerous power vacuum. The stabilizing effects of our presence in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and our position as defender of last resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines could all be placed at risk. In such a scenario there are shades of the 1930s, when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peaceful democracies failed to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics who rose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited their divisions. Today we run the risk that rogue states may choose to become ever more reckless with their nuclear toys, just at our moment of maximum vulnerability.
**Russia Relations – Aff Answers
UQ – Relations Low – General
Spy scandal has derailed US-Russian relations
Engelstad 7/3 (Ryan, Newark Conflict Resolution Examiner, http://www.examiner.com/x-56495-Newark-Conflict-Resolution-Examiner~y2010m7d3-Spying-is-bad-With-Video, AD: 7/6/10) jl
The United States and Russia's relationship may again be on the rocks in light of recent espionage accusations against a ring of over 10 individuals, two of which were from Montclair, NJ. It was only last week when President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia were seen eating lunch together in Washington D.C. Now, President Obama's efforts to repair U.S.-Russia relations will surely be sidetracked. This is a conflict of a global nature, but these recent events can be compared to just about any relationship, and there are important lessons to be learned. (For more information about this conflict, check this artice from the Newark Star Ledger.)
Missile shield eroding relations now
Landay 10 (Jonathan S, McClatchy Staff Writer, http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/01/89641/us-russia-treaty-stalls-over-obama.html, AD: 7/5/10) jl
WASHINGTON — Negotiations to complete a new U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty have stalled over a Russian demand for the option to withdraw unilaterally if Moscow determines that U.S. missile defenses would threaten its intercontinental nuclear missile force, a senior U.S. official said Monday.
Similar "unilateral statements" have been included in previous arms control treaties, and the former Bush administration used one in 2002 to abrogate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the former Soviet Union.
The Obama administration, however, has rejected the Russian demand, fearing that it could make it harder to win the Republican votes needed for Senate ratification of the new nuclear arms pact.
Biden is pissing Russia off – Missile Shield
Cooper and Kulish 9 (Helene and Nicholas - NYT Staff Writers, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/world/europe/07iht-07munich.20001384.html, AD: 7/6/10) jl
MUNICH — Vice President Joseph Biden of the United States rejected the notion of a Russian sphere of influence Saturday, promising that the new government under President Barack Obama would continue to press NATO to seek "deeper cooperation" with like-minded countries.
Biden, in a much-anticipated speech at an international security conference, also said the Obama administration would continue to pursue a planned missile defense system that has angered the Kremlin, provided the technology works and is not too expensive. The missile defense shield, Biden said, is needed to "counter a growing Iranian capability."
Share with your friends: |