Relations impacts and cp’s

KORUS FTA – Now key time

William Rhodes, 10 – chairman of the U.S.-Korea Business Council and a senior vice chairman of Citigroup (2/18, “Mr. President, Enact This Trade Deal”, http://www.watsoninstitute.org/rhodes/media/pdf/2010_02_WSJ.pdf)

Yet nearly three years after the signing of the U.S.-Korea FTA, the agreement continues to await approval by Congress and Korea's National Assembly. Domestic politics in both countries have at various times played a part in slowing progress on the agreement, despite its great promise. Some U.S. stakeholders have voiced concerns that the agreement could leave certain sectors of the U.S. economy behind, and the Korean government has said it is ready to work with its U.S. counterparts to find solutions that address these issues. However, the window of opportunity for the U.S. to take advantage of the job creation potential of the FTA with Korea is shrinking rapidly. An economic study released last fall by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimated that nearly $35 billion in U.S. exports would be lost, putting at risk 345,000 American jobs, if the U.S. does not implement the FTA while other countries move forward with their own trade agreements with Korea. The Korea-European Union FTA, which offers European companies many of the advantages their U.S. peers would enjoy under the U.S.Korea deal, is expected to enter into effect later this year. Unless the U.S.-Korea FTA is implemented, there is significant risk that U.S. workers and businesses will be increasingly shut out of the world's most important growing economic engine. Korea, China and Japan recently launched a joint research project to study a trilateral free trade agreement, and the major economies of Asia are discussing the creation of an East Asian economic block that does not include the U.S. Continued inaction on the U.S.-Korea FTA threatens to undermine U.S. credibility in Asia, and around the world, as a serious trade partner. It is imperative in the current economic environment that we take every measure that will save and create new American jobs. The U.S.-Korea FTA will do this by increasing U.S. exports to one of its largest overseas markets, without raising the federal deficit. One of the most important steps President Obama can take to achieving his goal of doubling U.S. exports over the next five years is implementing the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement as soon as possible.

AT: Perm

US withdrawal and pressure on South Korea to reconcile with the North will hurt relations even when combined with the FTA

Kurlantzick, 7/12 [Joshua, fellow for southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2010, Newsweek How Obama Lost His Asian Friends, lexis]
For India, China, Indonesia, and every other high-growth economy in Asia, trade liberalization now is just as important as security partnerships. China already has a free-trade agreement with the 10 nations of ASEAN, and every week seems to bring news of a proposed new Asian trade deal with partners other than the U.S., including an India-ASEAN agreement and a South Korean deal with the European Union. But with the United States stuck in a period of prolonged economic weakness, Obama appears to have no appetite for any Asian trade agreements. Despite his decision to push forward with the South Korea deal, the administration has suggested that the two sides renegotiate pieces of the agreement--a move that could anger Seoul and scuttle the deal altogether. What's more, the new Asian trade vehicle Obama is promoting, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, seems far from having any real substance.

KORUS FTA CP – Military Net Benefit

US military uses Korea’s economy for its own purposes and taxes the people.
BBC Worldwide Monitoring, 8 (December 1, “North Korean party paper calls for struggle to end US ‘occupation’ of South”, http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T9714042601&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T9714042604&cisb=22_T9714042603&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=10962&docNo=4),
The United States' policy of occupying South Korea by force is the most brigandish and brazen-faced policy of plunder. The atrocities of plunder committed by the United States against the South Korean people are also without precedent in all ages and countries. From the first day it crawled into South Korea, the United States has fulfilled its interests by using the system of its military occupation to seize the wealth and properties of the South Korean people previously owned by the defeated Japanese imperialists under the name of so-called "enemy property." It is also maintaining a hold on the life of the South Korean economy through so-called "aid" and "treaties" and "agreements" of various kinds and making active use of this to achieve its military and political purposes. By establishing military bases and facilities and military training camps in all parts of the country, it has plundered the land and even the sea everywhere in South Korea. The expenses for the upkeep of the US imperialist forces of aggression amounting to billions of dollars each year, which are made up of the blood and sweat of the South Korean people, have reached an astronomical sum of more than 100 billion dollars over the past 60-odd years. Nowhere in this world is there such a brigandish aggressor and plunderer who occupies the land of another country by force and yet extorts compensation for it.

US military action increased tensions with South Korea
Katharine Moon 04, – Professor of Political Science at Wellesley College who serves on policy task forces designed to examine current U.S.-Korea relations (“South Korea-U.S. Relations”, http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/KMoon/asianperspective.pdf)
The United States is transforming its military alliance with South Korea to reflect changes in strategy and advances in technology. But Washington has failed to take into account the pro-found changes that have taken place in the nature of South Korean politics and society. U.S. failure to understand these new democratic dynamics have contributed to increased tensions at an intergovernmental level, angry demonstrators in South Korea, and the lack of a united response to a variety of regional issues including the nuclear crisis with North Korea.

Directory: file -> view
view -> Western Europe after wwii
view -> Author study: paul fleischman
view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide
view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg
view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh
view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce
view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy
view -> Table of Contents Lesson #
view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad

Download 1.27 Mb.

Share with your friends: