Oil 1 Peak Oil 21
Neg Answers- World econ collapse = nuke war
Download 9.54 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Neg Answers- Oil key reform
- Neg Answers- No nuke program
- A2- Oil change doesn’t solve
- A2- negotiations solve
- A2- Stop Iran after goes nuclear
- A2- Oil key economy
- Economic Vulnerability
- Business Confidence: The Achilles Heel
Neg Answers- World econ collapse = nuke warGlobal economic collapse causes nuclear war and extinction (Christopher Lewis, PhD, 1998, “The Coming Age of Scarcity”, pg. 129) Most critics would argue, probably correctly, that instead of allowing underdeveloped countries to withdraw from the global economy and undermine the economies of the developed world, the United States, Europe, and Japan and others will fight neocolonial wars to force these countries to remain within this collapsing global economy. These neocolonial wars will result in mass death, suffering, and even regional nuclear wars. If First World countries choose military confrontation and political repression to maintain the global economy, then we may see mass death and genocide on a global scale that will make the deaths of World War II pale in comparison. However, these neocolonial wars, fought to maintain the developed nations’ economic and political hegemony, will cause the final collapse of our global industrial civilization. These wars will so damage the complex, economic and trading networks and squander material, biological, and energy resources that they will undermine the global economy and its ability to support the earth’s 6 to 8 billion people. This would be the worst-case scenario for the collapse of global civilization.
(The Middle East, July 2003, BNET.com, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2742/is_2003_July/ai_n25070522/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1) Recent structural reforms have laid the ground for further liberalisation and good governance. The government's efforts though at times obstructed by the Majlis (Parliament) and the Guardian Council (which acts as constitutional watchdog) have nonetheless improved the overall business climate. This is evident by the expansion in non-oil activities, rising domestic private-sector investment, some inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI) into non-energy sectors and the launch of Eurobonds. Neg Answers- No nuke programIran has no nuclear weapons program now (The New York Times, December 3 07, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/middleeast/03cnd-iran.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin, “U.S. says Iran ended atomic arms work”) WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb. The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran’s nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy. The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely keeping its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.” Iran is continuing to produce enriched uranium, a program that the Tehran government has said is designed for civilian purposes. The new estimate says that enrichment program could still provide Iran with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous estimates.
(The San Diego Union Tribune, 2/3/07, http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070203/news_lz1e3friedman.html) In 2005, Bloomberg.com reported, Iran's government earned $44.6 billion from oil and spent $25 billion on subsidies – for housing, jobs, food and 34-cents-a-gallon gasoline – to buy off interest groups. Iran's current populist president has further increased the goods and services being subsidized. So if oil prices fall sharply again, Iran's regime would have to take away many benefits from many Iranians, as the Soviets had to do. For a regime already unpopular with many of its people, that could cause all kinds of problems and give rise to an Ayatollah Gorbachev. We know how that ends. “Just look at the history of the Soviet Union,” Mau said. In short, the best tool we have for curbing Iran's influence is not containment or engagement, but getting the price of oil down in the long term with conservation and an alternative-energy strategy. Let's exploit Iran's oil addiction by ending ours. A2- negotiations solveIran will not abandon its nuclear program through negotiation Kenneth R. Timmerman, (executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran), October 2005, GETTING READY FOR A NUCLEAR-READY IRAN, www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub629.pdf After 16 months of intensified International Atomic energy Agency (IAEA) inspections during which Iran agreed to suspend 114 uranium enrichment and to stop building enrichment centrifuges, the Iranian leadership decided to reverse course and resume enrichment activities. On June 12, 2004, Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi announced that Iran “won’t accept any new [safeguard] obligations. Iran has a high technical capability and has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club. This is an irreversible path.” Kharrazi essentially pointed to the red line, indicating that Iran had no intention of abandoning its work to master the entire nuclear fuel cycle, from uranium mining, milling, conversion, and enrichment, to spent fuel reprocessing. “That somebody demands that we give up the nuclear fuel cycle . . . is an additional demand,” he said. “We can’t accept such an additional demand, which is contrary to our legal and legitimate rights,” he said. “No one in Iran can make a decision to deny the nation of something that is a source of pride.”1 That “pride” clearly does not stem from mastering civilian nuclear technology, since Iran has been working in this area since its first U.S.-built research reactor went critical in November 1967.2 A2- Stop Iran after goes nuclearIf Iran gets nuclear weapons it will be too late- all potential U.S. strategies for eliminating Iran’s nukes would worsen the situation. George Perkovich with Silvia Manzanero (Vice President for Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Paralegal at Stetson U and Carnegie Junior Fellow), October 2005, GETTING READY FOR A NUCLEAR-READY IRAN, In sum, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the options for coercive measures to roll back this capability are highly problematic. Political isolation, alone, would seem inadequate. Military force would be unlikely to “solve” the problem in the sense of completely eliminating Iran’s nuclear wherewithal. Use of force would likely unleash dangerous counteractions by Iran, which, in turn, would likely dissuade many in the international community from supporting such measures. A tremendous campaign to remove the offending government in Iran would seem beyond the means and will of the United States and the international community today. Robust economic sanctions, beyond those yet applied to any country,192 would seem more promising, though still highly problematic. The willingness to effectively apply such sanctions would depend heavily on the development of a widespread consensus that Iran’s proliferation is such a grave threat to international security and order that leading states and institutions of the international system must act decisively. A2- Oil key economyDespite high oil revenues, the Iranian economy is suffering from high unemployment rates and a politically sensitive stock market, both of which worsen social problems and risk instability in the Iranian government. Patrick Clawson, (senior editor of the Middle East Quarterly and director for research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy), WINTER 2007, Middle East Quarterly, VOLUME XIV: NUMBER 1, http://www.meforum.org/article/1068 Economic VulnerabilityHerein lays the opportunity. Despite the Iranian leaders' self-confidence, the Islamic Republic is economically vulnerable. Having pegged his reputation to his ability to help the ordinary man, Ahmadinejad faces problems delivering: notwithstanding the influx of hard currency, the Iranian economy is a mess; his policies are counterproductive, and Iranians' expectations are high. The World Bank's 2003 report about Iran noted, "Despite the growth in the 1990s, GDP [gross domestic product] per capita in 2000 is still 30 percent below what it was in the mid-1970s, compared with a near doubling for the rest of the world."[9] The contrast is glaring between the Iranian economy and the soaring economies of Persian Gulf emirates such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Qatar, and Kuwait. Tens of thousands of Iranians living in Dubai tell their compatriots about the quality of life there. Iranians are galled that Arabs—whom they have traditionally considered inferior—thrive while they lag behind. Rather than harness the oil windfall to close the quality-of-life gap, Ahmadinejad's policies will exacerbate it. He seeks to erect rather than dismantle barriers to trade while he ratchets up domestic production. By creating many problems for Renault, which built a billion-dollar facility in Iran, his government has discouraged new foreign investment.[10] Even if the Islamic Republic were to change its foreign policy direction, its reputation as a high-risk place to do business would remain. There has been an economic boom inside Iran, but this has been based upon profligate but finite government spending. For the period 2003-07, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects that if oil prices remain at their present high level, real GDP will grow 5.9 percent annually on average, while it forecasts that if the oil price declines to $30 per barrel, real GDP can grow at 5 percent annually thereafter.[11] In other words, the oil windfall is expected to result in less than 1 percent more growth per annum. Despite the flood of oil money, government policies are such that the IMF warns the Iranian budget will fall back into deficit within two years even if oil prices remain high.[12] Iranian government spending has led to several years of growth, but it has barely dented the country's long-term economic problems. While reported unemployment fell last year to an 8-year low of 10.3 percent, job creation remains insufficient to absorb the 700,000 young people entering the job market each year.[13] The IMF forecasts that even if oil prices remain at their present high level, unemployment will increase.[14] In its 2003 report, the usually understated World Bank summed up the "daunting unemployment challenge" with strong words: "Unless the country moves quickly to a faster path of growth with employment, discontent and disenchantment could threaten its economic, social, and political system."[15] Economic frustration feeds social problems. The Iranian government acknowledges that two million people—or 2.9 percent of the population—use narcotics; other estimates place the number at five to six million.[16] Divorce is also on the rise; one study found that 30 percent of newlyweds get divorced within three years.[17] The poor economy is also driving prostitution. While officials estimate Iran hosts 300,000 prostitutes,[18] there have been a number of corruption scandals involving judges and government social workers involved in procuring young girls.[19] Instead of enacting reforms to encourage job creation, the political elite is more comfortable with rising emigration rates, despite the brain drain's long-term erosion of Iran's economic vibrancy. Business Confidence: The Achilles' HeelInternational economic pressure could amplify unease within the Iranian business community. Iranian authorities acknowledge as much. "The [Tehran] stock market has shown to be hypersensitive to political issues (such as the course of the nuclear enrichment negotiations), as well as domestic economic policy uncertainties," writes the state-owned Karafarin Bank in its Survey of the Iranian Economy for October-December 2005. In 2005, the stock market index fell 26 percent. At the same time, the banking system was hit by a crisis from dishonored promissory notes, primarily by big firms unable to pay their debts.[20] Europe 2AC Add On Europe 2AC Shell (1/2) Oil prices rising now and expected to soon hit $200/barrel (LA Times, 6/28/08, “Envisioning a World of $200 a-barrel oil”, http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-oil28-2008jun28,0,5485259.story) Three months ago, when oil was around $108 a barrel, a few Wall Street analysts began predicting that it could rise to $200. Many observers scoffed at the forecasts as sensational, or motivated by a desire among energy companies and investors to drive prices higher. But with oil closing above $140 a barrel Friday, more experts are taking those predictions seriously -- and shuddering at the inflation-fueled chaos that $200-a-barrel crude could bring. They foresee fundamental shifts in the way we work, where we live and how we spend our free time. Rising oil prices risk oil shocks hurt the European Economy and cause inflation (The New York Times, 6/14/08, “Europe Worries About a 1970s-Style Oil Shock”, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/business/worldbusiness/14euro.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/L/Landler,%20Mark) FRANKFURT — In Europe, where the tight credit market has caused less havoc than in the United States, fears are focusing on another economic bogeyman: a 1970s-style oil shock. Gordon Brown, the prime minister of Britain, and Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, have both warned about the dangers of a new oil shock to Europe. Soaring fuel costs have incited strikes by fishermen and truck drivers from Spain to Scotland. Blockades have paralyzed highways outside Madrid and Barcelona. And with deliveries of auto parts disrupted across the Continent, Volkswagen shut down a car plant in Portugal on Friday. Fears that the spike in oil prices might start an inflationary spiral were reinforced on Friday when the European Union released figures showing that hourly labor costs jumped sharply in the first quarter, and are growing at their fastest pace since early 2003. A similar ripple effect occurred after the first oil shock in 1973, and it left Europe with a legacy of inflation and stagnation that took a decade, and a painful recession in the early-1980s, to banish. 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 9.54 Mb. Share with your friends:
|