Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with the People’s Republic of China
AC Affirmative Answers to Diplomatic Capital Disadvantage
Download 2.62 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- No Internal Link: Diplomatic talks fail
- No Link: There are thousands of diplomats and the US can hire more
- No impact: the ISIS threat is exaggerated—MANY reasons
- Impact Calculus
2AC Affirmative Answers to Diplomatic Capital Disadvantage2AC Diplomatic Capital Disadvantage Answers
Middle East Briefing, April 2016 [Middle East Briefing (MEB) is a publication of Orient Advisory Group (OAG). OAG is a research and risk assessment firm based in both Washington, DC and Dubai, UAE “Middle East to Russia and China: C’mon in. We are Open for Business”, April 7, http://mebriefing.com/?p=2251] Russia’s President Vladimir Putin seems to be progressing in the unlikely path of establishing stronger ties between Russia and the nations of the Middle East. President Obama, on the other hand, seems to be progressing in the unlikely path of weakening US ties with those nations. The Russian path was unlikely because Putin is helping Assad, Iran (both are not considered friendly by most Arab countries) and is starting from very little diplomatic capital in his previous ties to the region. The US path was unlikely as well because President Obama is opposed to Assad and Iran’s expansion and he started from a very strong historical surplus in trust and a solid alliance with most of the region’s countries. While one is building his capital actively, the other is squandering his in earnest. But to be fair to the President, squandering US capital in the Middle East started before his terms. It was the Iraq war coupled with absurd strategies about changing regional political regimes which initially opened the road to a steady loss of US influence in the Middle East. President Obama did not do anything to stop the cascade, other than providing master pieces in the art of wordsmithing in his speech in Cairo and through avoiding certain terms like war on terror or Jihadist terrorist or whatever. In fact, he exacerbated the process of US loss of influence through a chain of unbelievable mistakes that the President does not even want to admit, not even one of them. When the President started his first term, he gave a speech in Cairo to change the region’s perceptions about US policy. Now, while he is at the end of his second term, he should question himself if he indeed did what he hoped for, or if he, in fact, made those perceptions worse. Instead, he blames the region’s regimes for his utter failure in improving US stand in the Middle East. It is actually kind of funny to hear that the President was more focused on East Asia than the Middle East. First, East Asia, where the President says he is going, is coming to the Middle East. And US strategic posture in East Asia did not qualitatively change in substantial way compared to what it was say 10 years ago. Even signing the nuclear deal with Iran did not make that nation any closer to Washington. It rather made Washington farer from both the Middle East and East Asia. Iran is currently emerging as an energy powerhouse with Russia and China for pipelines and future projects in Central Asia. It is coordinating with Russia in Syria, Afghanistan and the former Soviet countries of Central Asia. It is discussing westward gas paths with Moscow. And it is emerging as a powerful pillar of Russian and Chinese strategies in both the Middle East and Central Asia. What did President Obama have to say about Russia’s military intervention in Syria, which was closely coordinated with Tehran? He described it as a beginning of a “quagmire”. But he surprised everyone when he decided, just few weeks later, to coordinate with Russia in this very quagmire. Maybe he will come out now saying that he did that on purpose to help Putin drawn himself. There is always an excuse and the language is rich with all kinds of words. And China is also coming out of East Asia and going to the Middle East, while President Obama is travelling in the opposite directions. It is obvious that the Chinese and the Russians are too dumb to see what President Obama sees. The best defense of the President’s strategy is that it was a reflection of the US stretching itself thin during the Bush years. The US needed few years to regain what was wasted in economic, military and diplomatic muscles during that period. But how about Putin? He did not have much of muscles compared to the post-Bush US that Obama inherited, and after years of total loss of directions in Moscow. With limited capital, Putin embarked on his “quagmire” that multiplied his global influence and which was tempting enough to lure President Obama as well, and the Chinese are building their own capital from almost no diplomatic presence in the Middle East in the past. Beijing just appointed a special envoy to Syria. Xie Xiaoyan is a career diplomat who served as ambassador to Iran. The decision came after President Xi Jinping’s high profile visit to the Middle East last January. China is positioning itself to be in the right spot once the conflict in Syria ends. But why going to East Asia, where US enjoyed always very strong and stable alliances, should necessitate the “do nothing” approach of the President in the Middle East? The answer was almost expressed by the President himself who hinted in a recent interview that he is not convinced there is something worth defending in the region. He does not like the political structures there. He does not feel compelled to be an ally to regimes he does not like. Well, the Chinese and the Russians are running to replace him. The decline of U.S. influence in the Middle East will lead to the formation of new alliances able to address the regional security and economic challenges. This moment may go in the history of the post Second World War as a transformational point in the global balance of power. The Chinese President was welcomed warmly in Egypt and Iran. Several mega projects are being studied now between the two countries and China. This may usher in a new phase in Chinese-Middle Eastern presence to the benefit of both sides. Egyptians, in particular, are grateful. China offered considerable direct investments in a moment when others were pressuring Cairo or turning a cold shoulder to Egypt. And Mr. Xiaoyan, the Chinese special envoy, has his objective clear. In explaining the envoy’s mission Xiao Xian, head of Middle East studies at Yunnan University, said China should get more involved in resolving the crisis especially now that the situation in Syria was becoming clearer. “In my view, China should have participated more a long time ago. If we don’t do it now, it will be too late”, he said. He urged Beijing to engage more in peace talks, post-war reconstruction and discussions over the refugee crisis in keeping with its image as a “responsible great power”. “Other countries in the Middle East, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey all wish China to exert more influence”. Time to warn the Chinese: A quagmire is waiting for you guys. Be as smart as others and go to East Asia.
Washington Times, May 2016 [Major international news organization, “Assad won’t budge in Syria; Obama lacks leverage: Former diplomat”, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/17/assad-wont-budge-obama-lacks-leverage-ex-diplomat/] With international peace talks on Syria seeming to stall Tuesday, the Obama administration’s former ambassador to Riyadh predicted Syrian President Bashar Assad will remain in power as long as Washington and its allies fail to challenge him militarily. “Without greater military pressure on the Syrian government, it will not negotiate a compromise political settlement,” said Robert S. Ford, who told a congressional hearing that the Obama administration’s unclear policies toward the war have lost the trust of Syria’s opposition forces. “The United States lacks leverage with the armed opposition because it — and its regional backers — view us as inconsistent at best,” Mr. Ford told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. The former ambassador also stressed that Russia’s military intervention on behalf of the Assad regime has dimmed the prospects for a settlement to end the Syrian war. The Obama administration has long pushed for a “political transition” that would remove Mr. Assad from power, arguing there can be no lasting peace if he stays on. But talks have stalled since the breakdown last month of a partial cease-fire that the U.S. and Russia had negotiated. Mr. Ford’s comments on Tuesday came as foreign ministers from several powers involved in Syria’s war gathered in Vienna to discuss the prospects of restoring the cease-fire and breathing life into the elusive push toward a political transition. Reuters reported that a pessimistic atmosphere pervaded the meeting between countries backing the Assad regime — namely Russia and Iran — and its enemies, which include the U.S., the European Union and several of the Middle East’s leading Sunni Arab powers.
GAO, 2003 (Government Accountability Office, “U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Expands Efforts but Faces Significant Challenges: GAO-03-951.”, 4 September, GAO-03-951, EBSCO) To improve the planning, coordination, execution, and assessment of U.S. public diplomacy efforts, we recommend that the Secretary of State • develop and widely disseminate throughout the department a strategy that considers the techniques of private sector public relations firms in integrating all of State’s public diplomacy efforts and directing them toward achieving common and measurable objectives; • consider ways to collaborate with the private sector to employ best practices for measuring efforts to inform and influence target audiences, including expanded use of opinion research and better use of existing research; • designate more administrative positions to overseas public affairs sections to reduce the administrative burden; • strengthen efforts to train Foreign Service officers in foreign languages; and • program adequate time for public diplomacy training into State’s assignment process.
Mueller, 2015 [John, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, “Why the ISIS threat is totally overblown”, July 23, http://theweek.com/articles/567674/why-isis-threat-totally-overblown] Outrage at the tactics of ISIS is certainly justified. But fears that it presents a worldwide security threat are not. Its numbers are small, and it has differentiated itself from al Qaeda in that it does not seek primarily to target the "far enemy," preferring instead to carve out a state in the Middle East for itself, mostly killing fellow Muslims who stand in its way. In the process, it has alienated virtually all outside support and, by holding territory, presents an obvious and clear target to military opponents. A year ago, the main fear was that foreign militants who had gone to fight with ISIS would be trained and then sent back to do damage in their own countries. However, there has been scarcely any of that. In part, this is because, as Daniel Byman and Jeremy Shapiro have detailed in a Brookings Institution report, foreign fighters tend to be killed early (they are common picks for suicide missions); often become disillusioned, especially by in-fighting in the ranks; and do not receive much in the way of useful training for terrorist exercises back home. It might also be added that ISIS videos exultantly show foreign fighters burning their passports to demonstrate their terminal commitment to the cause — hardly a good idea if they want to return. In May 2015, an audio message apparently from the leader of ISIS exhorted Muslims either to join the ISIS ranks in the Middle East or to fight at home "wherever that may be." There was nothing about training people to return home to wreak havoc. More recently, the focus of fear has shifted from potential returnees to potential homegrown terrorists who might be inspired by ISIS's propaganda or example. However, ISIS could continue to be an inspiration even if it was weakened or destroyed. And, as terrorism specialist Max Abrahms notes, "lone wolves have carried out just two of the 1,900 most deadly terrorist incidents over the last four decades." There has also been a trendy concern about the way ISIS uses social media. However, as Byman and Shapiro and others have pointed out, the foolish willingness of would-be terrorists to spill their aspirations and their often childish fantasies on social media has been, on balance, much to the advantage of the police seeking to track them. However, ISIS's savvy use of social media and its brutality have had a major impact on two important American groups: public officials and the media. Sen. Dianne Feinstein has insisted, "The threat ISIS poses cannot be overstated" — effectively proclaiming hyperbole on the subject to be impossible, as columnist Dan Froomkin observes. Equally inspired, Sen. Jim Inhofe, born before World War II, has extravagantly claimed that "we're in the most dangerous position we've ever been in" and that ISIS is "rapidly developing a method of blowing up a major U.S. city." And on Michael Smerconish's CNN program last weekend, former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge issued the evidence-free suggestion that the recent tragic killings in Chattanooga followed a "directive" from ISIS. The media have generally been more careful and responsible about such extrapolations, and sometimes articles appear noting that some American and foreign intelligence officials think that "the actual danger posed by ISIS has been distorted in hours of television punditry and alarmist statements by politicians." But the media remain canny about weaving audience-grabbing references about the arrestingly diabolical ISIS into any story about terrorism.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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:
|