Relations impacts and cp’s
Download 1.27 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- ***TURKEY****
Aff AT: KORUS FTA CPKORUS FTA would negatively affect relations between the US and South Korea. Mark Manyin, 6 – Analyst in Asian Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division (February 9, “South Korea-U.S. Economic Relations: Cooperation, Friction, and Prospects for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA)”, http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl30566.pdf) One danger of launching FTA talks is that differences over strategic issues — particularly in dealing with North Korea — could negatively affect the negotiations or the consideration of the agreement in Congress and/or the National Assembly. South Korea’s policy of emphasizing bilateral reconciliation with North Korea generally has meant that Seoul has not supported U.S. actual and rhetorical efforts to pressure North Korea. As mentioned above, although the U.S. has supported the Kaesong industrial zone project inside North Korea, South Korea’s attempts to allow Kaesong-made products to have preferential tariff status into the United States could be contentious. The interplay between the FTA talks and developments with North Korea also could bring greater scrutiny to the relationship between South Korean firms and North Korean enterprises. For instance, many South Korean banks reviewed their connections to Banco Delta Asia following the September 2005 decision by the U.S. Treasury Department to warn U.S. financial institutions not to deal with the Macau bank because of its alleged laundering counterfeit U.S. currency produced in North Korea. Since the fall of 2005, North Korea has said it will not return to the six-party talks unless these “sanctions” are lifted. North Korea’s human rights abuses also could become intertwined with the FTA talks if human rights advocates decide to criticize the dealings of South Korean firms with North Korean enterprises. FTA would damage the US-ROK alliance and the economic side of the relationship. Mark Manyin, 6 – Analyst in Asian Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division (February 9, “South Korea-U.S. Economic Relations: Cooperation, Friction, and Prospects for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA)”, http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl30566.pdf) Additionally, if the FTA talks fail or become exceptionally bitter, they could damage the U.S.-South Korean alliance. Many observers believe that in recent years the economic side of the relationship has been the alliance’s strong suit, for four reasons. First, the creation of a robust dispute resolution body in the WTO in the mid-1990s has helped depoliticize many bilateral disputes. Second, the economic reforms pursued by South Korean since the 1997 economic crisis have helped resolved some of the two countries’ systemic disputes and on many disputes have given the United States allies at the top of South Korea’s government. Third, as mentioned earlier, the two sides have become more adept at managing disputes. Finally, the economic relationship has benefitted from the good fortune of few, if any, transcendent economic disputes over the past five years ***TURKEY****US-Turkey Relations lowUS-Turkey relations are tanked Schleifer 6/28/10 (Yigal, Christian Science Monitor and Eurasianet Correspondent, "US-Turkish relations appear headed for Rough Patch," Eurasianet, 28 June 2010, http://www.eurasianet.org/node/61426) Analysts are warning that relations between Turkey and the United States may be heading for a period of volatility, particularly in the wake of the botched May 31 Israeli commando raid on a Gaza aid flotilla, along with Ankara’s recent decision to vote “no” in the United Nations Security Council on sanctions against Iran. “There is a ceiling above which Turkish-American relations cannot improve, and there’s a floor which it can’t go below. But we are getting pretty close to the floor and the ability of the two countries to improve their relations really has a huge question mark over it. We are now talking about an undeclared crisis in the relations,” said Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies. Indeed, in a recent interview with The Associated Press, Philip Gordon, the State Department’s top official for European and Eurasian affairs seemed to echo that assessment. Gordon suggested that Turkey needed to take demonstrable action to affirm its commitment to both the United States and the Atlantic Alliance. Ankara, in recent years, has been plotting an increasingly independent and ambitious foreign policy course, one that sees an increased role for itself in regional and even global affairs. But observers say Turkey’s role in the Gaza flotilla incident and its subsequent harsh rhetoric against Israel, as well as its decision regarding the Iran sanctions vote, have brought into sharper relief some of the differences between Ankara’s and Washington’s approach on some key issues. [For background see EurasiaNet’s archive]. “I think the administration realizes it has a problem with Turkey, but it’s not a major rift. It’s subtler than that. I think what they will do is start looking at Turkey at a more transactional level for a while, meaning ‘What are you doing for me?’ and ‘This is what I can do for you,’” said Henri Barkey, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. “In the past we would have jumped through hoops for the Turks, but the Turks need to start being more sensitive to our concerns,” Barkey added. US-Turkey relations low over Iran sanctions Kagan 6/29 [2010, Robert, senior fellow @Carnegie endowment, Washington Post, lexis] But the administration handled that well, too. A Jimmy Carter might have felt compelled to applaud Turkey and Brazil. An administration determined to avoid confrontation with Iran might even have swung behind their diplomatic efforts. Led by Hillary Clinton, this administration gave them the back of its hand and made clear that they were not ready to play in the big leagues. Going a step further, it has declared that Turkey's behavior is damaging its relationship with the United States and its NATO allies. Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon warned last week that Turkish actions have placed its "orientation" in doubt and were making it "harder for the United States to support some of the things that Turkey would like to see us support." That was exactly the right message. US-Turkey relations low –flotilla and Iran sanctions Eurasia Net 6/28 [2010, US-Turkish Relations Appear Headed for Rough Patch, Yigal Schleifer, http://www.eurasianet.org/node/61426] Analysts are warning that relations between Turkey and the United States may be heading for a period of volatility, particularly in the wake of the botched May 31 Israeli commando raid on a Gaza aid flotilla, along with Ankara’s recent decision to vote “no” in the United Nations Security Council on sanctions against Iran. “There is a ceiling above which Turkish-American relations cannot improve, and there’s a floor which it can’t go below. But we are getting pretty close to the floor and the ability of the two countries to improve their relations really has a huge question mark over it. We are now talking about an undeclared crisis in the relations,” said Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies. Indeed, in a recent interview with The Associated Press, Philip Gordon, the State Department’s top official for European and Eurasian affairs seemed to echo that assessment. Gordon suggested that Turkey needed to take demonstrable action to affirm its commitment to both the United States and the Atlantic Alliance. 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:
|