Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with the People’s Republic of China
Download 2.62 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Obama has limited diplomatic capital—if he tries to push the plan, then he will fail on other issues
- Just like one person, US diplomacy can’t do ten things at once effectively
2NC/1NR AT #3—Diplomats Fill InThey say No trade-off and the US can hire more diplomats, but [GIVE :05 SUMMARY OF OPPONENT’S SINGLE ARGUMENT]
[PUT IN YOUR AUTHOR’S NAME] It’s much better than their GAO evidence because: [PUT IN THEIR AUTHOR’S NAME] [CIRCLE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS]: (it’s newer) (the author is more qualified) (it has more facts) (their evidence is not logical/contradicts itself) (history proves it to be true) (their evidence has no facts) (Their author is biased) (it takes into account their argument) ( ) (their evidence supports our argument) [WRITE IN YOUR OWN!] [EXPLAIN HOW YOUR OPTION IS TRUE BELOW] Our Military Times evidence is over a decade newer than their evidence. We have no idea how diplomatic hiring has changed since then. Also, it would take time to hire diplomats and we need to do diplomatic talks against ISIS now! [EXPLAIN WHY YOUR OPTION MATTERS BELOW] This matters because: the judge should defer to us on the most logical and newest evidence. We are winning that China policy would trade off and cause our impact which would result in a large death toll.
Walt, 2009 [Stephen M, Prof of IR @ Harvard, “Nibbled to death by ducks?,” Foreign Policy, http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/07/27/nibbled_to_death_by_ducks] Moreover, simultaneously its own . In particular, it provides governments that are opposed to some or all of Washington's agenda with an obvious way to respond: they can "just say no." In Taming American Power, I labeled this strategy "balking," (a term suggested to me by Seyom Brown) and I argued that it was a common way for weak states to prevent a dominant power from imposing its will. In a world where the United States remains significantly stronger than any other power, few states want to get into a direct test of strength with Washington. But American power is not so vast that it can simply snap its fingers and expect everyone to do its bidding. Why? Because exercising leverage is itself costly, and the more you do in one area, the more latitude that opponents somewhere else are likely to have. still So states that don’t want to do what Obama wants can delay, dither, obfuscate, drag their feet, or just say no, knowing that the United States doesn’t have the resources, attention span, staying power, or political will to force their compliance now or monitor it afterwards. An even better tactic (perfected by a number of close U.S. allies) is to pretend to comply with American wishes while blithely going ahead with their own agendas. So NATO allies promise to increase their defense efforts but never manage to do much; Israel promises to stop building settlements but somehow the number of illegal settlers keeps growing, the Palestinians pledge to reform but make progress at a glacial pace, Pakistan suppresses jihadis with one hand and subsidizes them with the other, Iran agrees to negotiate but continues to enrich, China says it will crack down on copyright violations but the problem remains pervasive, and so on. In On War, Carl von Clausewitz famously described what he termed the "friction" of warfare; the accumulated set of minor obstacles and accidents that made even the simplest of objectives difficult to achieve. The same problem can arise in foreign policy: even when everything is simple, "the simplest things are very difficult." States that oppose what the United States is trying to do have lots of ways of increasing that friction without triggering an actual crisis. In other words, Obama's foreign policy may fail not because he loses some dramatic confrontation, but simply because a whole array of weaker actors manage to grind him down. In this scenario he doesn't get vanquished, just "nibbled to death by ducks." Obama took office with energy, a new vision, an experienced team, and lengthy "to-do" list. But one can already sense the forward motion slowing, which will encourage opponents to dig their heels in deeper and throw more obstacles trying to advance the ball on so many different fronts carries hours in a day, and the White House can't devote equal attention and political capital to every issue in his path There are only 24 hours a day. If the administration keeps trying to do everything at once, there is a real danger that their actual foreign policy achievements will be quite modest. The sooner they decide which goals they think they can actually bring off, and focus their energies there, the more likely they are to succeed . And a few tangible successes might actually make the other items on their agenda easier to accomplish later on.
SCHAEFFER, 2000 [Brett, Fellow in the Center for International Trade at Heritage Foundation; The Greening of U.S. Foreign Policy; p.46] Diplomacy is the first option in addressing potential threats to U.S. national interests and expressing U.S. concerns and priorities to foreign nations. The daily conduct of diplomacy through U.S. missions and representatives is essential in articulating U.S. interests and eliciting cooperation and support for those interests abroad. Because diplomatic currency is finite—clearly, foreign countries and officials cannot be expected to endlessly support and promote U.S. concerns—it is critically important that the United States focus its diplomatic efforts on issues of paramount importance to the nation. Traditionally, these priorities had been opposing hostile domination of key geographic regions, supporting our allies, securing vital resources, and ensuring access to foreign economies (Holmes and Moore 1996, xi-xvii). Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2015 2015 -> Police Militarization 2015 -> 2015 ihbb championships: hs history Bowl Round 4 – Prelims First Quarter 2015 -> Wrtp/big step · 3841 W. Wisconsin Ave., Milwaukee, wi 53208 2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 December 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles 2015 -> Darton College 2015 -> Training Workshop on Planning and Implementation of Multi-Sectoral Development Programme (MsDP) in Bihar Date : 6th 2015 -> Rao bulletin 15 June 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles 2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 September 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles 2015 -> Rao bulletin 1 August 2015 html edition this bulletin contains the following articles 2015 -> Science, and transportation united states senate Download 2.62 Mb. Share with your friends:
|