Neg Big List 12-04 Alabama 21 Alabama BP Neg 21 Alabama BP 22 Alabama BP 23 Alabama BP Pre Shirley 23 Alabama PL Jack Parker & William Landau @ GSU 25 Alabama LP - Negative vs. Liberty IPR – GSU Round 2 (Tim) 25 Alabama VM neg 26 Alabama VM Melissa Van Kirk & Mallory Morgan @ GSU 27 Appalachian State 28 Appalachian State BM @ GSU 28 Appalachian State MR (Evan Miles & Jonathan Russell) @ Richmond 28 Army 30 U.S. Military Academy CS (Suliman & Crow) @ Liberty 30 Military Academy DM (Camilla Dulys-Nusbaum & Renee Marren) @ Liberty 30 U.S. Military Academy HJ (Hammett & Jost) @ Liberty 30 U.S. Military Academy HK (Horowitz & Keyes) @ Liberty 31 Military Academy KZ (Matt Kalin & Klye Zeck) @ Liberty 31 U.S. Military Academy LP (Linford & Pan) @ Liberty 32 U.S. Military Academy TQ (Qirjazi & Thompson) @ Liberty 32 Augustana 33 Augustana BS neg 33 Augie BS vs. Affirmative Team: MO State JW @ UNI 33 Augustana HF neg 34 Baptist Bible College 36 Baptist Bible College MV @ Missouri State 36 Bard 37 Bard CF Neg 37 Bard CF 37 Bard CF Pre Shirley 39 Bard NS Neg 40 Bard NS Pre Shirley 41 Baylor 42 Baylor CM @ Missouri State 42 Baylor CM Negative @ UNI 44 Baylor JL @ Missouri State 44 Baylor LO 46 Baylor LO 46 Baylor LO Pre Shirley 47 Baylor RT Neg 47 Baylor RT Neg 48 Baylor RT Pre Shirley 48 Binghamton 49 Binghamton MN (Mabutas & Ni) @ Liberty 49 Binghamton GM (Jake Gartman & Matt Malia) @ Richmond 49 Binghamton LW (Dan Weiser & Jeremy Levine) @ Richmond 51 Binghamton OS (Erica Shapiro & Tamara Osdoby) @ Liberty 51 Boston College 53 Boston College BC Neg 53 Boston College BC 53 Boston College BC 54 Boston College BC Pre Shirley 54 Boston College BC 56 Boston College BC @ GSU 57 Boston College CS Neg 57 Boston College CS Neg 58 Boston College CS Neg 61 Boston College CS Neg 64 Boston College CS (Chung & Sullivan) @ Liberty 64 BC CS Neg IPR @ GSU 65 BC CS neg 67 Cal Berkeley 68 Cal Berkeley All Pre Shirley 68 Berkeley BW Neg 79 Berkeley BW Neg 80 Berkeley BW Neg 84 Berkeley BW 86 Berkeley BW Neg 87 Cal Berkeley BW @ Gonz 92 Cal Berkeley BW @ Gonz 92 UC Berkeley GR Neg 93 Cal Berkely GR Neg 93 Berkley GR 93 Cal Berkeley GR @ Gonz 94 Cal Berkeley GR @ Gonz 94 Cal Berkeley GrRe @ Gonz 95 Cal Berkeley GrRe @ Gonz 95 Berkeley LS Neg 95 Berkeley LS Neg 96 Cal Berkeley LS Neg 96 Cal Berkeley LS Neg 97 Berkeley LS Neg 99 Cal Berkeley LS @ Gonz 99 Cal Berkeley LS @ Gonz 100 Case Western 101 Case Western DD neg 101 Case Western DDNeg 101 Case Western DD Neg 104 Case Western DD Neg 105 Case Western DD Pre Shirley 106 Case Western NP (Karim Noujain & Adam Probst) @ Richmond 106 Case RP 108 Case RP 109 Case Western RP Neg 109 Case Western RP Pre Shirley 111 Catholic 112 Catholic All Pre Shirley 112 Catholic HJ@ Richmond 113 Catholic HK Neg 113 Catholic HK neg 114 Catholic HK 114 Catholic University HK (Koehl & Huntington) @ Liberty 115 Catholic University JS (Shoupe & Jackson) @ Liberty 115 Catholic PS Neg 116 Catholic PS Neg 116 Catholic PS Neg 116 Central Oklahoma 118 Central Oklahoma BC @ GSU 118 UCO DS Neg 118 Central Oklahoma DS 119 UCO DS @ Missouri State 119 UCO FS @ Missouri State 120 UCO HL @ Missouri State 121 UCO HW @ Missouri State 121 Clarion 122 Clarion University AD (Ryan Adamiak & David Durney) @ Richmond 122 Clarion Dz Neg 122 Clarion DZ Neg 123 Clarion DZ Neg 123 Clarion DZ Neg 124 Clarion DZ 125 Clarion DZ Pre Shirley 125 Clarion University GT (Matt Tenney & Alissa Graffius) @ Richmond 128 Clarion HN Neg 128 Clarion NH neg 129 Clarion NH Neg 130 Clarion HN Pre Shirley 131 Clarion HN 134 Clarion University NZ (Jessica Zezulewicz & Rob Noerr) @ Richmond 134 Clarion RT 134 Concordia 137 Concordia ES 137 Concordia ES Neg 138 Concordia ES Neg 138 Concordia FF 138 Concordia FF Neg 139 Concordia FF neg 140 Concordia FF 141 Concordia FF 143 Concordia FF Pre Shirley 145 CONCORDIA FF Negative@ UNI 147 Cornell 148 Cornell MT Neg 148 Cornell MT Neg 148 Cornell MT 149 Cornell MT neg 150 Cornell MT Pre Shirley 150 CSU Fullerton 153 Fullerton/Santa cruz IK neg 153 CSU Fullerton/Santa cruz IK neg 155 CSU Fullerton HP @ Gonz 156 CSU Fullerton HP @ Gonz 156 CSU Fullerton MM @ GSU 156 CSU Fullerton MM @ Gonz 157 CSU Fullerton MM @ Gonz 157 CSU Fullerton PM Neg 158 CSU-Fullerton PM Neg 158 CSU Fullerton MP @ Gonz 158 CSU Fullerton MP @ Gonz 159 CSU Northridge 160 CSU Northridge CL @ Gonz 160 CSU Northridge CL @ Gonz 160 Dartmouth 162 Dartmouth BM Neg 162 Dartmouth BM Neg 165 Dartmouth BM Neg 166 Dartmouth BM Neg 167 Dartmouth BM Pre Shirley 168 Dartmouth BM neg 173 Dartmouth BM@ GSU 174 Dartmouth CK neg 178 Dart CS Neg 179 Dartmouth CS Neg 180 Dartmouth CS 181 Dartmouth CS Pre Shirley 189 DARTMOUTH CS NEG VS EMORY CL @ GSU 191 DARTMOUTH CS T VS MSU BH @ GSU 194 Dartmouth CS @ GSU 194 Dartmouth KO Neg 195 Dartmouth KO 195 Dartmouth KO Pre Shirley 197 Dartmouth KO neg 201 Dartmouth KO neg 204 Dartmouth KO 205 Denver 206 Denver All Pre Shirley 206 Denver EM Neg 208 Denver EM Neg 209 Denver EM Neg 209 Denver SW Neg 209 Denver SW 210 Denver SW @ GSU 211 Eastern New Mexico 213 Eastern New Mexico University HW 213 Eastern New Mexico University HW Neg 213 Eastern new mexico HW Neg 213 Eastern New Mexico HW Neg 214 Eastern New Mexico HW Pre Shirley 215 Eastern New Mexico Negative @ Wichita 215 Emory 218 Emory AM – Negative vs. GW LW (blockade China) – Round 3 – GSU (Tim) 218 Emory AM @ GSU 218 Emory BI @ GSU 218 Emory CL Neg 219 Emory CL Neg 220 Emory CL Neg 222 Emory CL Pre Shirley 224 Emory CL neg 227 Emory CL neg 227 EMORY CL NEG VS NU BC @ GSU 228 Emory CL neg 229 Emory CL @ GSU 232 Emory CL @ GSU 235 Emory CS @ GSU 239 Emory FF 239 Emory FF @ GSU 239 Emory GD@ Richmond 240 Emory GP Neg 240 Emory GP Neg 243 Emory GP Neg 244 Emory GP 244 Emory GP Neg 245 Emory GP Pre Shirley 246 Emory HH Neg 251 Emory HH neg 253 Emory HH 256 Emory HH Pre Shirley 257 Emory HH @ GSU 260 Emory HL 260 Emory HL @ GSU 261 Emory HS (Christina Hagan & Vickie Stipick) @ Richmond 261 Emory HS @ GSU 262 Emory MP 262 Emory MP 263 Emory MP @ GSU 265 Emory MR @ GSU 265 Emory MS 266 Emory MS (Chapman Matis & Sally Strothers) @ Richmond 268 Emory MS 268 Emory MS 269 Emory MS @ GSU 271 Emory SuSt @ GSU 276 Emory StaSuh @ GSU 276 Emory SS Neg 277 Emory SS 278 Emory SS Neg 278 Emory SS Pre Shirley 279 Emory SunSch @ GSU 281 Emory TG @ GSU 282 Emporia 283 EMPORIA CR vs. Missouri State (MTCR) @ UNI 283 Emporia State DN @ Missouri State 283 EMPORIA JM NEG @ Wichita 284 Emporia State MR Neg. 286 Emporia State MR Neg 288 Emporia State MR Neg 288 Emporia MR 289 Emporia State MR Neg 290 Emporia MR Pre Shirley 291 Emporia State TW @ Missouri State 292 Florida 295 Florida BC neg 295 Florida BC 296 Florida BC Pre Shirley 296 Florida BC @ GSU 298 Florida LS @ GSU 300 Florida WW @ GSU 300 Florida State 301 Florida State LS 301 Florida State LS 301 Florida State LS 301 Florida State LS Pre Shirley 302 Florida State MR @ GSU 302 Florida State RR Neg 302 Florida State RR 303 Florida State RR Neg 305 Florida State RR 305 Florida State RR Pre Shirley 306 Fort Hays 307 Fort Hays CM 307 Fort Hays CM Neg 307 Fort Hayes cm 307 Fort Hayes CM neg 308 Fort Hays CR Neg 310 Fresno City 311 Fresno City College BY @ Gonz 311 Fresno City College BY @ Gonz 311 George Mason 312 George Mason All Pre Shirley 312 George Mason CR (Nicole Clagett & Linda Rosen) @ Liberty 315 George Mason GH (Salman Haider & Zack Golden) @ Liberty 315 George Mason FM Neg 315 George Mason FM Neg 316 George Mason FM Neg 316 George Mason GW Neg 316 George Mason GW @ Richmond 317 George Mason University GW (Grimm & Wagner) @ Liberty 318 George Mason KK (Preston Kussman & Robin Kirkman) @ Liberty 318 Georgetown 319 Georgetown BG Neg 319 Georgetown BG Neg 319 Georgetown BG Pre Shirley 321 Georgetown MO Neg 323 Georgetown MO Neg 323 George Washington 325 George Washington All Pre Shirley 325 George Washington FK 326 George Washington FK Neg 327 George Washington FK 327 George Washington FK (Emma Kelly & Richard Fowler) @ Richmond 327 George Washington LW Neg 328 George Washington LW Neg 328 George Washington LW Neg 329 George Washington LW 331 George Washington LW 332 George Washington LW @ GSU 334 Georgia 336 Georgia BS (Bhatt & Schmidt) @ Liberty 336 Georgia CM Neg 336 Georgia CM Neg 338 Georgia CM Neg 338 Georgia CM Pre Shirley 339 Georgia CM @ GSU 340 Georgia CR Neg 342 Georgia CR Neg 343 Georgia CR Neg 343 Georgia CR Neg 344 Georgia CR Pre Shirley 345 Georgia CR 345 Georgia CR @ GSU 346 Georgia DD – Negative vs. Florida (Taiwan Aff) GSU – Round 5 (Tim) @ Gsu 347 UGA DM Neg 348 Georgia DM Neg 349 Georgia DM Pre Shirley 350 Georgia DM 351 Georgia DS neg 354 Georgia GS @ GSU 355 Georgia State 356 Georgia State AS Neg 356 Georgia State AS Neg 356 Georgia State AS Pre Shirley 356 GSU FL 357 GSU FL Neg 357 GSU FL 357 Georgia State FL Pre Shirley 358 Georgia State FL neg 362 Georgia State FL @ Gonz 365 Georgia State FL @ Gonz 365 Georgia State ?? @ GSU 366 Georgia State SW @ Gonz 366 Georgia State SW @ Gonz 367 Gonzaga 368 Gonzaga BH Neg 368 Gonzaga BH 368 Gonzaga BH 369 Gonzaga BH Neg 369 Gonzaga BH @ Gonz 370 Gonzaga BH @ Gonz 370 Gonzaga DW 371 Gonzaga DW Neg 372 Gonzaga DW 373 Gonzaga DW Negative 373 Gonzaga DW Pre Shirley 374 Gonzaga DW @ Gonz 379 Gonzaga DW @ Gonz 381 Harvard 385 Harvard AR Neg 385 Harvard AR Neg 390 Harvard AR 391 Harvard AR Pre Shirley 395 Harvard AR neg 395 Harvard AR 396 Harvard KM Neg 397 Harvard KM Neg 399 Harvard KM Pre Shirley 403 Harvard KM neg 407 HARVARD KM NEG VS WAKE CH @ GSU 408 Harvard KM neg 411 Harvard KM neg 411 HARVARD KM CONSULT JAPAN @ GSU 413 HARVARD HUMAN RIGHTS 1NC @ GSU 414 Harvard KM Neg Missouri State MW GSU Rd 2 – 416 Harvard KM @ GSU 418 Harvard KP neg 418 Harvard KP @ GSU 420 Harvard LD 420 Harvard LD @ GSU 421 Harvard LD @ GSU 422 Harvard MP neg 423 Harvard MP 424 Harvard MP Pre Shirley 425 Idaho State 426 Idaho State BK Neg 426 Idaho State BK Neg 428 Idaho State BK Pre Shirley 428 Idaho State BK@ Gonz 429 Idaho State BK@ Gonz 429 Idaho State DY Neg 429 Idaho State DY neg 432 Idaho State DY 432 Idaho State DY Pre Shirley 433 Idaho State DY @ Gonz 439 Idaho State DY @ Gonz 440 Idaho State FR @ Gonz 440 Idaho State FR @ Gonz 440 Iowa 442 Iowa All Pre Shirley 442 Iowa KB @ GSU 442 Iowa LS Neg 443 Iowa LS Neg 445 Iowa LS 448 Iowa LS @ Ky RR 449 Iowa LS @ GSU 451 Iowa PR neg 454 Iowa PR 454 Iowa PR Neg 455 Iowa PR Neg 456 Iowa PR @ GSU 456 James Madison 457 James Madison All Pre Shirley 457 James Madison GY Neg 457 James Madison GY (Gonzales-Black & Yarbrough) @ Liberty 459 James Madison LG neg 460 James Madison LG Neg 460 James Madison LM (Evan Levy & Mary Mosely) @ Richmond 461 James Madison LP (Sean Lowry & Tiffany Pryce) @ Richmond 462 John Carroll 463 John Carroll FG Pre Shirley 463 John Carroll GF (Forchione & Gayetsky) @ Liberty 464 John Carroll GF @ GSU 464 John Carroll MS (Chris Schroeder & Sean McClure) @ Liberty 464 Johnson County 465 Johnson County BP @ Missouri State 465 Kansas 466 KANSAS NEG @ Wichita 466 Kansas ?? Neg vs. Miami Aff@ UNI 468 Kansas BL Neg 470 Kansas BL Neg 471 Kansas BL Neg 473 Kansas BL Neg 474 Kansas BL Pre Shirley 476 Kansas BL vs. Concordia@ UNI 476 Kansas BL @ GSU 477 Kansas CJ Neg 477 Kansas CJ Neg 479 Kansas CJ Neg 480 Kansas CJ Pre Shirley 483 Kansas CJ @ GSU 485 Kansas JW Pre Shirley 486 Kansas KP @ Missouri State 487 Kansas ST @ Missouri State 490 Kansas State 492 Kansas State AF @ Missouri State 492 Kansas State ER @ Missouri State 492 Kansas State LL @ Missouri State 493 Kansas State RS @ Missouri State 494 Kansas State SZ Neg 494 Kansas State SZ Neg 496 Kansas State SZ Pre Shirley 496 K-STATE NEG (against UMKC orientalism) @ Wichita 498 KCKCC 500 KCKCC BL @ Missouri State 500 KANSAS CITY KANSAS CC NEGATIVE @ Wichita 503 KCKCC CL @ Missouri State 503 KCKCC CM @ Missouri State 504 KCKCC MT @ Missouri State 505 Kentucky 506 Kentucky GG 506 Kentucky GG Neg 506 Kentucky GG 507 Kentucky GG Pre Shirley 507 Kentucky GG @ GSU 508 Kentucky JT neg 508 Kentucky JT @ GSU 509 Kentucky JT neg 512 Kentucky SJ Neg 513 Kentucky SJ 514 Kentucky SJ Neg 514 Kentucky SJ Neg 518 Kentucky SJ Neg 520 Kentucky SJ Pre Shirley 521 Kings 523 Kings College AD (Mitch Arnold & Joe Deegan) @ Liberty 523 LACC 524 LACC MM 524 LACC MM 524 LACC MM Neg 525 LACC MM Neg 525 LACC MM neg 526 LACC MM Pre Shirley 526 Liberty 527 Liberty BB 527 Liberty BH (Bond & Hovis) @ Liberty 528 Liberty BM neg 528 Liberty BM 528 Liberty University BM (Tabetha Bryant & Nate Milton) @ Richmond 530 Liberty University BU (Cole Bender & Donald Ussery) @ Richmond 530 Liberty CK Neg 531 Liberty CK 532 Liberty CK Pre Shirley 532 Liberty University DH (Spencer Drake & Garrett Halydier) @ Richmond 534 Liberty DH 534 Liberty University EJ (Julie Erb & Luke Jarmin) @ Richmond 535 Liberty HH Neg 536 Liberty HH Neg 537 Liberty HH Neg 539 Liberty HH Neg 543 Liberty HH Neg 545 Liberty HH @ GSU 546 Liberty University HO (Michelle Oh & Daniel Hu) @ Richmond 547 Liberty HP @ Liberty 548 Liberty University HT (Jenni Thurman & Erica Heerschap) @ Richmond 548 Liberty University HW (Ashley Weyand & Tiffany Herring) @ Richmond 549 Liberty HW@ Liberty@ Liberty 550 Liberty MM @ Liberty 550 Liberty University MO (Chase McCool & Zach Olson) @ Richmond 550 Long Beach 552 Long Beach FL @ Gonz 552 Long Beach FL @ Gonz 552 Louisville 553 Louisville all Pre Shirley 553 Louisville BG neg 553 Louisville BG 553 Louisville BG @ GSU 553 Louisville CM 554 Louisville CM neg 555 Macalester 556 Macalester HW Neg 556 Macalester HW neg 556 Macalester HW Pre Shirley 556 Marist 558 Marist AK Neg. 558 Marist AK 558 Marist AK Pre Shirley 559 Mary Washington 561 Mary Washington All Pre Shirley 561 Mary Washington BO (Bond & Ogburn) @ Liberty 574 Mary Washington BO @ GSU 577 Mary Washington (Univ of) BS (Scott Berry & Matt Struth) @ Richmond 577 Mary Washington BS @ GSU 578 Mary Washington CS (Collins & Struth) @ Liberty 578 Mary Washington CV @ GSU 581 UMW CV negative Round 5 vs. Oklahoma State at GSU 582 Mary Washington LM (Brian Leon & Katie Mason) @ Liberty 582 Mary Washington (Univ of) LM (Kate Leboeuf & Jason Martin) @ Richmond 584 Mary Washington LM @ GSU 585 Mary Washington (Univ of) RS (Jennifer Rollman & Cory Struble) @ Richmond 586 Mary Washington RS 587 Mary Washington RS (Rollman & Struble) @ Liberty 588 Mary Washington RS @ GSU 588 Mary Washington JW @ GSU 588 MWC JV v West Georgia DS @ GSU 589 Mary Washington WL 589 Mary Washington (Univ of) RW (Nick Ryan & Clint Woods) @ Richmond 591 Mary Washington RW @ GSU 592 Mary Washington SV (Simeone & Voglewede) @ Liberty 593 Mary Washington WJ Neg. 593 UMW WJ 593 Mary Washington WJ Neg 594 Mary Washington WS 595 Mary Washington WS 595 Mary Washington WS Neg 597 Mary Washington WS Neg 597 Mary Washington WT Neg 598 Mercer 601 Mercer SW neg 601 Mercer SW @ GSU 601 Mercer EP @ GSU 602 Miami Florida 603 Miami (Florida) GY @ GSU 603 Miami (Florida) ST @ GSU 603 Miami Ohio 604 Miami Ohio All Pre Shirley 604 Miami GV Neg 606 Miami GV 606 Miami GV (Neg) vs. MO State MoWh (Aff) @ UNI 606 Miami (Ohio) JR @ GSU 609 Miami Ohio MW Neg 609 Miami MW 612 Miami (Ohio) MY @ GSU 613 Michigan 615 Michigan FK Neg 615 Michigan FK Neg 615 Michigan FK 617 Michigan FK 618 Michigan FK Pre Shirley 619 Michigan FK Negative 624 Michigan FK neg 625 Michigan University FK @ GSU 626 Michigan JV Neg 627 Michigan JV Neg 628 Michigan JV Neg 628 Michigan JV Neg 629 Michigan JV Pre Shirley 633 Michigan JV neg vs. Capital RS @ UNI 637 Michigan University JV @ GSU 638 Michigan Dearborn 639 Michigan-Dearborn SF 639 Michigan Dearborn SF Neg 639 Michigan Dearborn SF Neg 639 Michigan-Dearborn SF Neg 640 Michigan Dearborn SF Pre Shirley 640 Michigan State 641 Michigan State All Pre Shirley 641 Michigan State AR Neg 659 MSU AR 660 MSU AR 661 MSU AR neg 661 MSU AR neg 662 Michigan State Univ. AR @ GSU 662 MSU BH Neg 663 MSU BH Neg 665 MSU BH Neg 668 MSU BH Neg 669 Michigan State BH Neg 672 MSU BH (NEG) 675 MSU BH @ Ky 676 Michigan State Univ. BH @ GSU 677 MSU BH NEG VS NU BrCh 677 MSU BH NEG VS KANSAS CJ 681 MSU 1NC VS WAKE PP (INTERNET) 685 MSU BH 2NR Strategy – vs Harvard DL Terror Talk Aff 689 Michigan State Univ. BH @ GSU 689 Michigan State Univ. BR @ GSU 689 MSU DT Neg 690 Michigan State DT Neg 691 Michigan State DT neg 693 Michigan State Univ. DT @ GSU 693 MSU HS neg 694 Michigan State LR Neg 696 MSU LR Neg 696 MSU LR 697 Michigan State Univ. LR @ GSU 698 Missouri 701 Mizzou PT @ Missouri State 701 Missouri State 703 Missouri State ?? Neg 703 Missouri State CK @ Missouri State 705 Missouri State BM Neg 706 Missouri State BM Neg 709 Missouri State BM Neg 709 Missouri State BM 710 Missouri State BM Neg 710 Missouri State BR (Neg) vs. Wayne State BR (Aff) @ UNI 712 Missouri State JW Neg 714 Missouri State JW Neg 715 Missouri St JW 715 Missouri State JW 716 Missouri State JW @ GSU 717 Missouri State JW 719 Missouri State JW neg 719 Missouri State KO Neg 721 Missouri State KO Neg 724 Missouri State KO Pre Shirley 724 Missouri State KO @ GSU 724 Missouri State MW Pre Shirley 725 Missouri State MW @ GSU 726 Missouri State MW Neg 729 Missouri State MW Neg 729 Missouri State MW Neg 730 Missouri State MW Neg 730 Missouri State MW Neg 731 Missouri State PT @ Missouri State 733 Navy 734 Navy FS 734 Navy FS Neg 734 Navy FS Pre Shirley 735 Northern Iowa 736 Northern Iowa BL @ Missouri State 736 Northern Iowa HM @ Missouri State 737 Northern Iowa PR 738 Northern Illinois 740 NIU PW vs. Affirmative Team: Missouri State KO @ UNI 740 North Texas 741 North Texas Negative @ Wichita 741 North Texas AP Neg 743 North Texas AP Neg 743 North Texas AP Pre Shirley 744 UNT CS 747 UNT CS 748 North Texas CS 748 North Texas CS Pre Shirley 750 North Texas CS @ Gonz 751 North Texas CS @ Gonz 751 North Texas CS @ Gonz 753 Northwestern 754 NU BrCh Neg 754 Northwestern BrCh Neg 756 Northwestern BrCh Neg 757 Northwestern BrCh neg 757 Northwestern BrCh Pre Shirley 759 NORTHWESTERN T NEG VS WAKE 762 NORTHWESTERN BrCh NEG VS EMORY CL (K) 762 NORTHWESTERN BrCh – 1NC VS CURRENCY (MSU) 764 NORTHWESTERN BrCh – US ECONOMY DISAD 766 Northwestern BrCh neg 768 Northwestern BrCh neg 768 Northwestern BrCH neg 769 Northwestern BraChe @ GSU 770 Northwestern BrCr Neg 771 Northwestern BrCr Neg 772 Northwestern BrCr Neg 773 Northwestern BrCr Neg 774 Northwestern BrCr Pre Shirley 775 Northwestern BrCr neg 781 Northwestern BrCr neg 781 Northwestern BM @ GSU 782 Northwestern BW 783 Nu BW 785 Northwestern BW neg 786 Northwestern BW Neg 787 Northwestern BW Pre Shirley 789 Northwestern BW neg 791 Northwestern BW neg 794 Northwestern BW @ GSU 795 Northwestern CT @ GSU 797 Northwestern DD 797 Northwestern DD Neg 798 Northwestern DD negative 799 Northwestern DD Neg 801 Northwestern DD Pre Shirley 802 Northwestern DD neg 804 Northwestern DD GSU Round 1 806 Northwestern DD @ GSU 807 Northwestern HB @ GSU 809 Northwestern HS neg 809 Northwestern HS neg 810 Northwestern HS neg 811 Northwestern HS neg 812 NYU 813 New York Univ. BP (Whitney Brown & Timothy Pimble) @ Richmond 813 Oklahoma 814 Oklahoma CJ 814 Oklahoma CJ Neg 814 Oklahoma CJ Neg 814 Oklahoma CJ 816 Oklahoma CJ neg 817 Oklahoma CJ Pre Shirley 817 Oklahoma DH @ Missouri State 818 Oklahoma JC @ GSU 818 Oklahoma MT @ Missouri State 818 Oklahoma SS @ Missouri State 819 Oregon 820 Oregon PS 820 Oregon PS Neg 820 Oregon PS 821 Oregon PS 821 Oregon PS 822 Oregon PS neg 822 Oregon ST @ GSU 823 Piedmont 825 Piedmont HW @ GSU 825 Piedmont MM @ GSU 825 Pepperdine 826 Pepperdine SW Neg 826 Pepperdine SW Neg 826 Pepperdine SW Pre Shirley 826 Pepperdine SW @ Gonz 830 Pepperdine SW @ Gonz 830 Pittsburgh 833 Pittsburgh FW Neg 833 Pittsburgh FW Neg 833 Pitt FW 834 Pittsburgh FW Pre Shirley 834 Pittsburgh FW (Melina Forte & David Weston) @ Richmond 836 Pitt GR neg 836 Pittsburgh GR G9uy Risko & Lissa Geiger) @ Richmond 837 Pittsburgh GR (Geiger & Risko) @ Liberty 837 Pittsburgh HW Neg 838 Pitt HW 838 Pittsburg HW 839 Pitt HW 845 Pittsburgh HW (Kristen Wlazelek & Cameron Hatzel-Treat) @ Richmond 846 Pittsburgh KM (Karlovic & Maldonado) @ Liberty 847 Puget Sound 848 Puget Sound BH @ Gonz 848 Puget Sound BH @ Gonz 848 Puget Sound CS Neg 848 Puget Sound CS Pre Shirley 849 Puget Sound CS @ Gonz 850 Puget Sound CS @ Gonz 851 Puget Sound JV @ Gonz 851 Puget Sound JV @ Gonz 851 Puget Sound MW @ Gonz 851 Puget Sound MW @ Gonz 852 Redlands 853 Redlands HW 853 Redlands HW Pre Shirley 853 Redlands HW @ Gonz 854 Redlands HW @ Gonz 854 Redlands SZ Neg 855 Redlands SZ Neg 855 Redlands SZ Neg 856 Redlands SZ Pre Shirley 857 Redlands SZ @ Gonz 858 Redlands SZ @ Gonz 858 Richmond 859 Richmond (Univ. of R) Andrea Adams & John Calhoun @ Richmond 859 Richmond AD (Andrea Adams & Jenn Donohue) @ Liberty 859 Richmond BC 859 Richmond BC Neg 859 Richmond (Univ. of R) BC (Matt Bodnar & Joe Chicvak) @ Richmond 860 Richmond BC (Bodnar & Chicvak) @ Liberty 860 Richmond (Univ. of R) Chris Florio & Paul Negrin@ Richmond 861 Richmond CS @ GSU 861 Richmond (Univ. of R) DS (Rada Dogandjieva & Brett Smith) @ Richmond 862 Richmond DS (Dogandjieva & Smith) @ Liberty 863 Richmond (Univ. of R) HS (Flemming Schneider & Lee Hoyle) @ Richmond 863 Richmond (Univ. of R) LW (Liz Lauzon & JJ Ward) @ Richmond 864 Richmond LW neg 864 Richmond (Univ. of R) MM (Zak Miller & Harlan Michelle) @ Richmond 865 Richmond MM (Michele & Miller) @ Liberty 866 Richmond (Univ. of R) MR (Andrew Ryan & David Marquardt) @ Richmond 866 Richmond MW (Lee Wells & Kate Mellinger) @ Liberty 866 Richmond MS (Schneider & Marquardt) @ Liberty 867 Richmond SS Neg 868 Richmond SS Neg 868 Richmond SS Pre Shirley 868 Richmond SS 870 Richmond SS 871 Richmond SS @ GSU 872 Richmond SS @ Gonz 873 Richmond SS @ Gonz 874 Rochester 875 Rochester KN Neg 875 Rochester KN Neg 875 Rochester KN Pre Shirley 875 Rochester LW 877 Rochester LW Pre Shirley 878 Samford 880 Samford AW Neg 880 Samford AW 880 Samford AW 881 Samford AW Pre Shirley 881 Samford BS Neg 884 Samford BS 885 Samford BS Neg 886 Samford BS 886 Samford MR Neg 888 Samford BS Pre Shirley 889 Samford MR 890 Samford MR neg 892 Samford MR Neg 893 Samford MR 894 Samford MR Pre Shirley 895 Samford MR 897 Samford MR @ GSU 898 San Francisco State 899 San Francisco State MN @ Gonz 899 San Francisco State MN @ Gonz 899 Southern California 901 Southern California All Pre-Shirley 901 USC BI Neg 909 Southern California BI Neg 909 Southern California BI @ Gonz 911 Southern California BI @ Gonz 913 Southern California FV @ Gonz 913 Southern California FV @ Gonz 914 USC JS Neg 914 Southern California JS @ Gonz 915 Southern California JS @ Gonz 917 USC LN 917 Southern California LN neg 918 Southern Cal LN Neg 920 Southern California LN @ Gonz 922 Southern California LN @ Gonz 922 Stanford 923 Stanford LL Neg 923 Stanford LL Pre-Shirley 924 Stanford LM Neg 925 Stanford LM Neg 925 Stanford LM Pre Shirley 925 Texas Austin 927 TEXAS NEGATIVE @ Wichita 927 Texas DJ Neg 930 Texas DJ Neg 930 Texas DJ Neg 931 Texas DJ Ben Durham and Reid Jones Pre Shirley 931 TEXAS DT 932 Texas DT Pre Shirley 933 Texas (Austin) SS @ Gonz 934 Texas (Austin) SS @ Gonz 935 Texas Dallas 936 UT Dallas All Teams Pre Shirley 936 Texas Dallas Neg (against emporia) @ Wichita 943 UT Dallas Negative @ UNI 945 UT Dallas AL Neg 945 UTD AL Neg 945 UT Dallas AL Neg 946 UTD AL neg 946 Texas-Dallas CS Neg 947 UTD CS 948 Texas Dallas CS Neg 949 Texas-Dallas CS 949 UT Dallas CS Neg 952 Texas San Antonio 953 UTSA AP @ Missouri State 953 UTSA RR @ Missouri State 953 Towson 954 Towson AW (Avery & Wheeler) @ Liberty 954 Towson AB (Evelin Andrespok & Tom Bako) @ Liberty 954 Towson BP (Iman Brickus & Normunds Pelnens) @ Richmond 954 Towson BP (Brickus & Pelnens) @ Liberty 955 Towson DL Neg 955 Tawson DL - 956 Towson DL neg 958 Towson DL Pre Shirley 958 Towson DL (Love & Diggs) @ Liberty 959 Towson HS neg 959 Towson HS 959 Towson HS Pre Shirley 960 Towson HS (Hostinar & Subotic) @ Liberty 960 Trinity 961 Trinity All Pre Shirley 961 Trinity University BR (Nick Burr & Michael Ritter) @ Richmond 962 Trinity ML Neg. 962 Trinity ML 963 Trinity ML 964 Trinity ML Neg 965 UMKC 966 UMKC DS @ Missouri State 966 UMKC FR Neg 967 UMKC FR 967 UMKC FR Neg 968 UMKC FR Neg 969 UMKC FR Neg 969 UMKC FR Pre Shirley 970 UMKC FR Negative vs. Affirmative Team: Oklahoma JL @ UNI 971 UMKC GR @ Missouri State 971 UMKC HM @ Missouri State 972 UMKC HS @ Missouri State 973 UMKC HW @ Missouri State 973 UMKC RS @ Missouri State 976 Vanderbilt 977 Vanderbilt RR @ GSU 977 Vermont 978 Vermont HL Neg 978 Vermont HL Pre Shirley 978 Vermont HK 983 Vermont HK Neg 984 Vermont HK Pre Shirley 984 Wake Forest 990 Wake CH @ Ky RR 990 WAKE FOREST CH NEG VS NU BC @ GSU 991 Wake Forest CH @ GSU 994 WAKE CP VS DARTMOUTH TAIWAN Neg 997 Wake Forest CP @ GSU 998 Wake Forest GL 999 Wake Forest GS @ GSU 999 Wake Forest HS (O.D. Hobeika & Lauren Sabino) @ Richmond 999 Wake Forest HS @ GSU 1001 Wake Forest KP @ GSU 1001 Wake Forest IT (Isinhue & Tedrow) @ Liberty 1002 Wake Forest IN @ GSU 1003 Wake Forest IZ (Matt Irvine & Kurt Zemlicka) @ Richmond 1003 Wake Forest IZ @ GSU 1005 Wake Forest MR (Morris & Ridley) @ Liberty 1007 Wake Forest MR @ GSU 1007 Wake Forest MR @ GSU 1008 Wake Forest OR (Mike Ochoa & Claire Reifsnyder) @ Richmond 1009 Wake Forest OR @ GSU 1010 Wake Forest OR @ GSU 1010 Wayne State 1012 Wayne BR NEG vs. Emporia State JM@ UNI 1012 WSU ET 1012 Wayne State ET neg 1013 Wayne State ET Pre Shirley 1013 Wayne ET @ UNI 1014 Wayne State FM Neg 1015 Wayne FM 1017 Wayne FM 1019 Wayne State FM Pre Shirley 1021 Wayne State FM @ GSU 1022 Wayne State KV @ GSU 1022 Wayne State MS 1022 Wayne State MS Neg 1023 Wayne State MS Pre Shirley 1023 Wayne St MS neg 1024 Wayne State MS (Neg) vs. UMKC FR (Aff.) @ UNI 1024 Wayne State NP (NEG) vs. Kansas KP (MTCR – Sanction Parent Companies) @ UNI 1026 Weber State 1029 Weber CD 1029 Weber CD 1029 Weber State CD 1030 Weber State CD Pre Shirley 1031 Weber State CD (Ryan Cheek & Aaron Dekeyzer) @ Richmond 1032 Weber State CD @ Gonz 1032 Weber State CD @ Gonz 1032 Weber State Univ. HO (Paige Huff & George Ortiz) @ Richmond 1033 Weber State OT @ Gonz 1033 Weber State OT @ Gonz 1033 West Georgia 1035 West Georgia DE Neg 1035 West Georgia DE 1037 West Georgia DE Pre Shirley 1037 West Georgia DS Neg v MWC JV Round 4 GSU 1038 West Georgia EG @ GSU 1038 West Georgia LM Neg 1039 West Georgia LM Neg 1039 West GA LM Neg 1040 West GA LM 1040 West Georgia LM Neg 1041 West Georgia LM neg 1044 West Georgia LM Neg 1045 West Georgia LM Pre Shirley 1048 Western Illinois 1049 Western Illinois HW Neg 1049 Western Illinois HW 1049 Western Illinois HW Pre Shirley 1050 Whitman 1053 Whitman All Pre Shirley 1053 Whitman College AH @ Gonz 1055 Whitman College AH @ Gonz 1055 Whitman BM Neg 1056 Whitman BM Neg 1057 Whitman BM Pre Shirley 1059 Whitman College BM @ Gonz 1062 Whitman College BM @ Gonz 1062 Whitman CM 1062 Whitman CM 1063 Whitman College CM @ Gonz 1065 Whitman College CM @ Gonz 1065 Whitman College GR @ Gonz 1065 Whitman College GR @ Gonz 1066 Whitman College KS @ Gonz 1067 Whitman College KS @ Gonz 1067 Whitman College RS @ Gonz 1067 Whitman College RS @ Gonz 1067 Whitman SS Neg 1070 Whitman SS 1071 Whitman SS Neg 1073 Whitman SS Neg 1074 Whitman SS 1077 Whitman SS @ Gonz 1078 Whitman College SS @ Gonz 1078 Whitman College SS @ Gonz 1080 Wichita 1081 WICHITA BL vs. CONCORDIA KK @ UNI 1081 Wichita State CS Neg 1081 Wichita CS 1082 Wichita CS Neg 1083 Wichita CS Pre Shirley 1084 Wichita State CS @ Missouri State 1086 Wichita State CS NEG vs. Kansas CJ (Airplanes) @ UNI 1088 Wyoming 1090 Wyoming CD Neg 1090 Wyoming CD 1092 Wyoming CD Neg 1093 Wyoming CD Pre Shirley 1095 Wyoming CD neg 1098 Wyoming CD @ GSU 1099 Wyoming CL Neg 1099 Wyoming CL neg 1100 Wyoming CL 1101 Wyoming CL Pre Shirley 1102 Wyoming CL @ GSU 1106 Wyoming GW @ Gonz 1107 Wyoming GW @ Gonz 1107 Wyoming PV @ Gonz 1108 Wyoming PV @ Gonz 1108 Wyoming JR @ GSU 1109 Wyoming JS Neg 1110 WYOMING JS 1110 Wyoming JS Pre Shirley 1114 zzUnknown 1119 Mystery ZZ 1119 DON’T KNOW WHO RAN IT, But we have neg args with cites…. So here you go@ UNI 1119 Alabama Alabama BP Neg Round7 Shirley Vs Team: Boston College BC Judge: Mika Case Args: WTO Advantage WTO Destroys free trade 1nc – Rockwell, 1-10-00, www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/wto.html To get at the true AND when government butts out 2nc – Special interest controls the WTO – their agenda is always to curtail free trade Sheehan, July 1999, The Free Market, Vol 17, No. 7 According to the hoopla WTO causes economic collapse Paul, 5-17-05, www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul250.html Corporations have hijacked the WTO – it will not protect free trade principles Greider, 9-22-03, The Nation, online The process of trade liberalization AND developing-country governments Competitiveness IP protection destroys competition, innovation Clement, 2003, online, Reason Online Innovation, they argue AND says Boldrin Companies will patent ideas useful to their competitors and intentionally leave them idle to secure their own market share, locking in inferior products Rideau, accessed 2005, http://fare.tunes.org/articles/patents.html Even worse than the above AND using inferior techniques IPR amount to info protectionism – inefficiency results Rideau above In the presence of information protectionism AND at doing something productive Companies with patents that go out of business take with them unique tech – stifling innovation Rideau, above Ultimately, because of the above AND before an eternity Ideas are intangible possessions of whoever’s mind in which they reside. Not being alienable, transferable, or destructible, ideas fial to fulfill the necessary criteria for what constitutes property; classifying them as such instates intellectual slavery McElroy, 2003, online AIP advocates claimed that AND mind the idea resided 1NC – AT innovation Rideau, 2000 As for the technical advancement AND as many marginal innovations Kills innovation Rideau, 2000 There remains to determine AND first and second order Monopolization causes double loss Rideau The fact that the net global effect AND primary effect of patents The threat of being surpassed by competitors means companies always have an incentive to innovate – patents are unimportant motivators Mutualist.org, accessed 2005, http://mutualist.org/id74.html And patents are not necessary AND the figure was 100% Profits are substantial without patents Mercer, 3-29-01 Absent patent protection AND may be incentive enough AT innovation – no impact Konklin, july 1986, The Voluntarist, No. 20, http://members.aol.com/vIntryst/wn20.html Off Case Args: T – economic pressure Coercion K – caselist Biz Con Block Strategy: Everything 2nr Strategy: Coercion, case Alabama BP Round 1 Vs. aff: NU BrCh Judged by: Lancaster Case Args: Need util to solve extinction Sissela Bok 1988 Applied Ethical Theory p. 203 Moral obligations to future generations Saugstad 1994 Moral Responsibility to Future generations of People Util calcs inevitable- pure alt – sacrifice Heard 1997 “Human Rights and Chimeras in Sheeps Clothing” Disad Biz Con (same) Kritik Free Trade K- see casebook Economic Pressure K Spivak 2004 Boundary “Economic pressure is a system of calculated debt” Derrida 1994 Spectres of Marx- economic warfare is the US exceptionalist position of violence Baudrillard 1996 “Global debt and parallax universe” systems of symbolic debt are totally knowledge Alabama BP Round #1 Shirley Vs Team: Northwester BrCh Judge: Lancaster Case Args: Util key when extinct at hand Moral obligation to future generations Util inev Off Case Args: Topicality increase = preexisting Substantially = 50% Biz con Coercion State kritik State intervention devalues Value of bomg Block Strategy: Coercion Biz con Case ethics 2nr Strategy: coercion Alabama BP Pre Shirley Bizcon B. 1.Trade threats destroy the US economy and global free trade Peter K. Yu, Executive Director, Intellectual Property Law Program and Deputy Director @ Howard M. Squadrom Program in Law, Media & Society, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, October 2000, American University Law Review, 50 Am. U.L. Rev. 131 2. The plan decimates business confidence throughout the entire economy Robert P. O'Quinn, Policy Analyst for International Economics and Trade Asian Studies Center, 7/25/1997, The Heritage Foundation, “A User's Guide To Economic Sanctions,” http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/BG1126.cfm C. Recession results when business confidence declines John Braithwaite, Australian Research Council Federation fellow, Australian National University, and Chair of the Regulatory Institutions, Network, 3 / 2004, The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 592 Annals 79, LN D. Global war results Walter Russell Meade, Senior Fellow For US Foreign Policy @ The Council on Foreign Relations, 1992, World Policy Institute E. Free trade prevents global war Lew Rockwell, President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1/10/2000, “WTO Follies,” LewRockwell.com, http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/wto.html XO Counterplan History demonstrates the inherent legality, broad applicability, and efficacy of XO’s Kenneth R. Mayer, Professor of political science @ Wisconsin, 2001, With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power, http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/chapters/s7095.html Precedent is the prime determinant of Executive authority – each instance vitally expands presidential power and facilitates future use Kenneth R. Mayer, Professor of political science @ Wisconsin, 2001, With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power, p. 56 Strong presidency is key to avoid terrorism, nuclear war, maintain US leadership, and deal effectively with trade and other economic problems Thomas Cronin, Professor of Political Science @ Whitman, Michael Genovese Professor of Political Science @ Loyola Marymount, 1998, The Paradoxes of the American Presidency, p. 203-204 Free Trade K A. Usurpation of Natural Rights – Suppressing free trade subordinates individual to the collectivist agenda of the state. Recognizing a moral duty to defend the free market is essential to stave off tyranny and the collapse of capitalism. Robert W. Tracinski, Editor of Intellectual Activist, Fellow @ Ayn Rand Insitute, 1998, The Moral Basis of Capitalism, The Center for the Advancement of Capitalism, http://www.capitalismcenter.org/philosophy/Essays/The_Moral_Basis_of_Capitalism.htm B. Adamancy – We have an ethical obligation to resist every invasion of freedom Sylvester Petro, Toledo Law Review, Spring 1974, pg 480 Topicality – Increase Is Pre-Existing A topical case must make greater a pre-existing condition by at least 50% to constitute a substantial increase The plan initiates a new sort of pressure, rather than expanding the intensity of pressure currently brought to bare against China. Topicality – Pressure A topical case must directly apply oppressive financial force against China that in-and-of-itself constitutes economic distress, not merely causes it. The plan does not directly instate oppressive economic cConditions. The act of filing a dispute has no effect on China’s economy; threats are non-events, in direct opposition to imposing economic constraints A. Cooper Drury, Department of Political Science @ University of Missouri, Yitan Li, Department of Political Science @ University of Missouri, 2003, “U.S. Economic Sanction Threats Against China: Failing To Leverage Better Human Rights,” http://www.missouri.edu/~drurya/sanctionthreats.pdf Alabama PL Jack Parker & William Landau @ GSU Judge: Solt Opponent: ??? BizCon Case: Yuan Revaluation CP, don't sanx PRC ever. Free Trade Good K. Trade restrictions are immoral. T WTO submission not topical. Alabama LP - Negative vs. Liberty IPR – GSU Round 2 (Tim) T – threats not topical – must apply actual financial force T – increase – must make greater by 50% - not new pressure Biz Con B. Link 1. trade threats destroy the US economy – Yu, American University LR, 200, “growth prospects for the U.S. economy” and “a coercive policy will threaten the integrity” 2. Plan crushes business confidence (cites eg of ’95 impact) O’Quinn, Heritage.org, 7-25-97, “economic sanctions cost the U.S.” and “reverberate through the U.S. economy” C. Impact Recession results from loss confidence Braithwaite, Annals AAPS, ’04, “capitalism thrives on hope” and “confidence to innovate” Global War results, Mead, ‘92 Free trade [prevents global war, Lew Rockwell, 2000, “free trade is a crucial foundation to prosperity” AT: IPR Biz Con Link Turns 1) They falsely assume an inelastic demand curve – the actual cost of piracy is small – Ross, National Interest, ’97, “while Chinese piracy of IPR” and “software industry operate” 2) Their impacts are minimal – DVDs are cheap 3) Chinese piracy is a minuscule percentage of total IP theft – econ loss continue Ross, National Interest, Fall, 97, “losses to U.S. firms from piracy” AT: Businesses like the plan: 1) Perception of unreliable trade partner – prevents foreing business solicitation of US products 2) Business opposes any trade restrictions on China Kagan, Weekly Standard, 5-24-99, “business opposed to any effort to limit China’s” and “because they know China will punish” 3) Even if isolated industries support certain protectionis measures, most despise Hawkins, 1-18-99, Weekly Standard, “The breadth of support in the business community” 4) Business oppose sanctions to remedy IP violations NYT, 5-11-96 “Chief executives in major industries” and “should not allow differences with Beijing” 5) Journal of Commerce – most businesses don’t care, 8-29-05, “most Western businesses, this is not” 2NC Biz Con Links Pressuring China on IP nucs the economy Financial Times, 6-19-05 “Washington has not challenged” and “company likens” and “pressing the nuclear button” IPRS amount to economic WMDs, Liu, Asia Times, 8-20-05, “IP rights have become an economic weapon of mass destruction” Competitiveness Advantage Answers: US competitiveness is not tied to growth – Krugman, Foreign Affairs, ’94, “The idea that a country’s” and “whether it be in health care or trade” Countries aren’t in economic competition – growing foreign economies expand US export markets – Krugman, Foreign Affairs, “countries do not compete” and “wages are in principle” and “productivity rises in Japan” Their evidence is the product of mathematical error, Krugman, “one of the remarkable” and “each of some interest” Relatively large blows to manufacturing don’t harm overall economic integrity Krugman, “total U.S. employment is well over” and “these workers are less than” Their turn is only short term – they damage long term competitiveness Straits Times, 4-17-05 “officials were reluctant to threaten China” and “take tougher action against” US companies will innovate, Bloomberg media, 3-9-05, “will innovate to keep pace with emerging economies” Kritik - Coercion Counterplan Executive Order CP = Presidential power Strong president is key to dealing with terrorism, trade deficits, etc. Alabama VM neg Round #5 GSU Vs. Wake MR Judged by: Danielle Weise Case Args: Solvency Nationalism: Nat’lism arises from Sin- hegemonic ambitions indep. of US behavior www.nti.org/db/china/engdocs/kgan0997.htm (Testimony) Kagan ‘Advocates of . . . American behavior.’ IP protection stifles nat’list takeover & prevents Sino-econ. depression American Univ. Law Review, 50 Am. U.L. Rev. 131 (October 2000) Yu ‘ Finally, an . . the West.’ Sino Econ. collapse empowers Nat’lists “An Analysis of the Military Threats Across the Taiwan Strait: Fact or Fiction”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 19, Issue 2 (Harold Kearsley) ‘ Thus, over . . against Taipei.’ Taiwan Adv. Frontline Econ. interdependence discourages war (Eland ’03), www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb74.pdf ‘Determining the . . and technology.’ Taiwanese air & naval superiority deter invasion (Eland ’03) same address ‘Taiwan now . . first place.’ Kritik Cap. Bad --> Biopolitics deployed in totalitarians societies which is bad – our strengthening of democratic structures prevents, not causes, their impact (Dickinson ’04) --> Central European History, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 18-19) ‘In an . . Nazi policies.’ Perm.: Do both combine modern & post-modern to create coalitions for change Best & Kellner (www2.cddc.vt.edu/illuminations/kell28.htm) ‘But it . . alienated labor.’ We must deploy resources of both the K & Plan to create best political action Same cite Coalitional Turn - Coalitional politics essential to challenging S.Quo power paradigms Bets & Kellner ‘01 www.democracynature.org/dn/vol7/best_kellner_postmodernism.htm ‘The emphasis . . particular group.’ Must combine the modern & post-modern to solve for shortcomings of each Best & Kellner www.2cddc.vt.edu/illuminations/kell28.htm ‘The postmodern . . coming millennium.’ Biopolitics Good – Leads to freedom & resistance to oppressive systems - resist from below Dickinson ‘04 (Dickinson ’04) --> Central European History, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 41-44) ‘In any . . influence groups.’ Alabama VM Melissa Van Kirk & Mallory Morgan @ GSU Judge: ??? Opponent: ??? Case: IPR Aspec Statism (Beres 94, Campbell 98) BizCon Appalachian State Appalachian State BM @ GSU (Miles/Patterson) vs. North Korea Prolif Pressure Off case arguments -T “On” – pressure must be directly on China not just against China to pressure other entities -Nuclear Apartheid K Non prolif leads to imperialism/colonialist violence in international relations. Shampa/Biswas 01’ “Nuclear Apartheid” Alt = Ban Companies From Selling censoring software; leads to communication solving conflict Simon 00’ Ebo 01’ Appalachian State MR (Evan Miles & Jonathan Russell) @ Richmond RND 2 Aff- Liberty HW “labor standards” HR K 1. value of human rights leading to catastrophe 2. Economic feared toward hegemony, not HR, Weatherly 99 3. Rights discourse destroys value of live- Bove 2002 ASEAN CP 1. a power vacuum in Aia risks increase Army International security Winter 1993-1994 pg 17 2. Consult Asean Simon 2004 3. Securing ties with Asean is key to cohesion and previewing a power value AIDS Fialyr 2003 US hege prevents AIDs solvency Rider 2005 Relations, Aids, environ human rights fails US already applying pressure to the yuan Crustsinger martin 2003 Federal News Rdaio Pressure on Yuan doesn’t solve Palmer, Dous 2004 “Bush turns down call for prche into yuan the standard Large revolution would stall Japan’s economy – Nikkei Weekly 2005 US Japan relations are critical to peace and stability block and Akaiya 1998 Asia is a potential nhot spot for instability conflict likely to go nuclear destroy US Nation on East 2000 Yuan overvalued which is unfair trade practice (Skinner, 05, Investment News) A Bill in congress makes clear currency manipulation unfair (Taipei Times, 05) C not revalue, trade war certain (Frauhheim, 05) CNETNews.com History shows that trade wars lead to real wars (Miller, Elwood, xx) War w/C --> nuclear holocaust (Johnson 2001, The Nation MISCELLANEOUS 1. Quiet Diplan (CP) QD is based on a promotion oriented approach to FoPo—Distinct from punishing or pressure 2. Inflation DA- A consume expectations of law inflation keeping econ in check and S hi oil prices, the Times 9/12 B- Ch. Imports keep mortgages low, lower world hurt housing market x the record 8.12.05 C (!) collapseof housing bubble kills g.econ ( x) Darls 05 Wwww.tompaine.com/articles/20050419/riding_the_real_estate_tsunami.php) D (!) Mead 04 3. Humil K same 4. Case 5. T Diplo=gov to gov Army U.S. Military Academy CS (Suliman & Crow) @ Liberty Topicality: Diplomatic pressure not military Disadvantages: Hegemony bad Hurts the US economy Increases terrorism US-Sino-Russian relations Military Academy DM (Camilla Dulys-Nusbaum & Renee Marren) @ Liberty Neg vs. George Mason CR, IPR Topicality: - Topicality Effects—plan is both conditional and not directly on China Disadvantages: - Nationalism DA - Hu consolidation now - pressure increases nationalism - causes regional wars - Taiwan DA - anti-China policies spur Taiwan independence, leading to war with China Case: - Hegemony Bad - causes terrorism - increases budget deficit - Tariff hurts US economy, increasing inflation - Food prices blip kills 2 million (Tampa Tribune) U.S. Military Academy HJ (Hammett & Jost) @ Liberty vs Countervailing Duties Topicality: And (must be both pressure Pressure can’t be contingent Must do pressure Can’t allow/threaten Future fiat bad Kritik: Gender IR Alternative = Tichner – must reject to step away and solve Takes out solvency MPX: oppression Disadvantages: WHO DA: Pressure increases nationalism Undermines WHO Collapses regime U.S. Military Academy HK (Horowitz & Keyes) @ Liberty vs Laogai Kritiks: Orientalism HR links (Zhou 2k5) No law is colonial (Ruskola 2k2) Find them inadequate (Ruskola 2k2) Racism (Macifie 2k2) Alt: investigate history (Said 98) Disadvantages: Taiwan: Taiwan Stable (China Daily, Sept 13, 2k5) Secession = Invasion (The Gleaner 2k4) MPX: war (The Nation 2k1, “Time to Bring the Troops Home”) Ice Age: Decrease econ growth increases energy consumption (Lugar 2k5) Brink of ice age (Spectator 2k3) Nuke war and extinction (Fisher 90) vs TRIPS (Pitt GR) Topicality: Econ pressure must be a sanction Disadvantages: Ice Age Tax Cuts: Bush has no pc left Bush pushing tax cuts Tax cuts hurt economy Military Academy KZ (Matt Kalin & Klye Zeck) @ Liberty Neg vs. George Mason KK, Counterplans: Consult ASEAN—solves for Hegemony (cooperation key to US soft power)—key to stop terrorism or nuke war Topicality: Trade Representative is not the USFG WTO is not predictable Disadvantages: Nationalism Hegemony Good U.S. Military Academy LP (Linford & Pan) @ Liberty Topicality: contingency (threat is contingent on extrinsic events) Disadvantages: Chinese Politics Relations Taiwan U.S. Military Academy TQ (Qirjazi & Thompson) @ Liberty T Violations: - WTO is only legal institution for trade (Trade and Industry Department 2k4, http://www.tid.gov.hr/english/trad_relations/tradeforq/wto_bkgd.html) - T diplomatic spec – 1. type 2. duration 3. manner Disadvantages: North Korea Nationalism Relations Augustana Augustana BS neg Round 1 Kentucky Vs. Wake Forest CP (EASA) Judged by: Kevin Hamrick Neitsche A. Link- the affirmatives construction of threat and the necessity of security represents a fear of the ultimate other, the fear of death. This narrow focus on technical means of policy implementation reinforces that fear. The 1ac performance is an attempt to control risk as opposed to confront it the desire to control is a mode of the negative will to power the desire to assimilate the radically different other, the other of death we cannot annihilate the other simply because we fear it. James der derian 1995 a Watson institute research professor of international studies and professor of political science at the university of massachussets at Amherst, the value of security” Hobbes Marx Nietzshche, Baudrillard. Pages 24-45 “The rapidity of change” “of risks and benefits” B. turns the case ressentiment socializes us to participate in violence and exploitation through the fear of a superior. This triggers an accelerating cycle that is the root cause of their harms. Roger Bromley, Professor of Nottingham Trent University, May 199, THE PEDAGOGUES OF RESSENTIMENT: the experience of hamlet “the discussion of ressentiment” “which secures such outcomes” C. Outweighs the case: Ressentiment leads to the self combustion of the human race bringing all of this to the despicable front James Hammond Author and American Philosopher 2004, Modern Times “no one analyzed” “the attention of ressentiment” D. Our alternative embraces the affirmative will to power through Nietzschean agonistics. Our approach opens the possibility of an agonistic democratic politics that affirms life and rejects political strategies that attempt to reduce life to mere self preservation Hatab, Lawrence J. Professor of Philosophy at Old Dominion University 2002 Prospects for a Democratic Agon Why We can still be Nietzscheans: The Journal of Nietzsche “how can we begin to” “ submission in democratic politics” Block Strategy K 2NR Strategy K. goes for our fear good arguments don’t apply, and perms are illegitimate Augie BS vs. Affirmative Team: MO State JW @ UNI On-Case Arguments: [Please include tags + full citations] Text of Topicality Violation China has high rates of investment – reuters aug. 15, 2005 “China, july investment higher” Sanctions cause capital flight – Jiang 2001 – The Chinese National Defense University Country Economic sanctions Econ pressure = sanctions Ware 2004 Seattle Journal For Social Justice Fall 2003 “Rule of force or rule of law?” Pressure Spec Key Topicality Cite/Tags: Key Negative Off-Case Arguments: [Please include tags + full citations] Counter-Plan Text: Relations/Trade War DA Zoellick Incr Relations Now – Newsweek 2005 Trade war between U.S.-China --> Shooting war Liv 2005 “Trade wars can lead to shooting war” Human Rights DA China seeking cooperation w/ U.S. – Kissinger 2005 Washington Post, June 13 Human rights progress being made now – work with China is key Dalphino 99 www.brookings.edu/comm/policybriefs/pb50.htm CP: USFG will make IPR compliance a conditions for being granted “Market economy” status. Framing the aff as a market economy issue derails protectionism in U.S. – Green 2004 Augustana HF neg Round #5: Kentucky Vs. aff: Wake LN Judged by: Westerfield, Zach Case Args: Sanctions Fail Russia/China Alliance Bad Disad: Plan drives China to Russia US-China Relations Disad: Automotive Industry Disad: China retaliates against economic pressure by excluding US automobile companies from China. Auto companies key economy. Consult Australia Counterplan: Net Benefit was US-Australia Relations Market Economy Status Incentives Counterplan: Condition giving China Market Economy status based on China refusing to buy arms from Europe. Protectionism DA Topicality “On” Block Strategy: Incentives CP, Protectionism DA, Russia/China Alliance Disad, Case 2NR Strategy: Case, Russia-China, Protectionism Baptist Bible College Baptist Bible College MV @ Missouri State Round 2 vs. KCKCC CM Case China and US are co-dependent Martin Wolf, Financial Times, Sept 19, 2005 “What are the…responsible for them.” US and China are poised for Cold War Martin Wolf, Financial Times, Sept 19, 2005 “The results include…the Cold War.” “Such an advance…power as well.” Peaceful commerce is the answer Adam Smith “The experience of Chinese…to manage conflict.” US force only answer to Sudan Washington Post, April 11, 2005 “Last June Sec…of the territory.” UN is the way to go Thalif Deen, InterPress Service, 2-9-2005 “Over the past…900 to 3000.” Saudi Press Agency, 4-21-2005 “UN General Assembly…this year alone.” UN offers more help through other countries than just China Terry Black, Wall Street Journal, 4-9-2005 UN successful and easy way to establish peace Jason Blick, CNN.com, 9-22-05 “At the Security Council…restored in Darfur.” China will not seek a peaceful way to restore peace BBC News “ The US which ways….peace in Darfur.” Bard Bard CF Neg Round 8 Shirley Vs Team: Fort Hayes CM Judge: Erin Witte Case Args: none Off Case Args: Topicality USFG case list Topicality Diplomatic pressure case list Topicality Economic pressure case list Block Strategy: 2nr Strategy: All three violations Bard CF Round #1 Shirley Vs Team: Redlands SZ Judge: Morgan Parmett Case Args: none Off Case Args: Topicality USFG 1. Must be state Topicality Resolved A. Break Down assumptions B. Violation – They don’t challenge assumptions behind the resolution. C. Standards – Education Depth better than Breadth because we have more limited debates to understand resolution. D. Voters A-priori Competing interpretations Key to solve resolution State-centrism K 1. The state-centric framework employed by the affirmative observes and constitutes states as the only valid actors in international relations, and, therefore, it limits our dissent to a nation-state centered form of dissent, which by definition requires a deferral of agency. (Site: Bleiker, Roland. 2000. “Popular Dissent, Human Agency and Global Politics.” P. 6) 2. Viewing the nation-state as the “irreducible component of identity ensure that “gender, along with class, race, and other facets of identity continue to be rendered invisible in international relations.” (Site: Steans, Jill. 1998. Gender and International Relations. P. 62) 3. This state-centric framework results the “undercultivation of student agency in the academic field of argumentation” and places students in the position of the spectator. The spectator mentality is bad. (Site. Mitchell, Gordon. 1998. “Pedagogical Possibilities for Argumentative Agency in Academic Debate.” Argumentation and Advocacy, v. 35) 4. Furthermore, engaging in a state-centric model of discourse and advocacy leaves us always perpetuating a “rhetoric of preparation” that forces us to constantly see our individual agency as something we will only have in the future. (Site. Mitchell, Gordon. 1998. “Pedagogical Possibilities for Argumentative Agency in Academic Debate.” Argumentation and Advocacy, v. 35) 5. Lastly, engaging in a state-centric framework keeps us constructing and imagining the world in large, national, and global terms while it keeps us distanced from the only possible avenue of change and resistance that is accessible to us—the local one. (Site: Nayar, Jayan. 1999. “Symposium: Reframing International Law for the 21st Century: Orders of Inhumanity.” Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, Fall 1999.) 6. The alt—focus on discourse and transversal dissent (Site: Bleiker, Roland. 2000. “Popular Dissent, Human Agency and Global Politics.” P. 6) Self-Imagination K I. Links A. The affirmative frames their case, like most debates about China within US international relations theory, within the context of three common but flawed assumptions. Chengxin Pan. 2004. The “China Threat” in American Self-Imagination: The Discursive Construction of Other as Power Politics. Alternatives 29 (2004) 305-331. Page 305. B. Within the context of these flawed assumptions, the affirmative constructs China as a threat and establishes this threat as an “objective” reality. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 307. II. Impacts A. Conceptions of china as a threatening other are not objective accounts of some external reality. Rather they are reflective of the American self-imagination, protective of US self-interests, and serve as self-fulfilling prophecies that legitimate power politics. I.E. The aff’s discourse turns their case—their terms and assumptions lead to the very problems that they claim merely to describe and attempt to solve. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 306. B. Constructing China as a threatening other fundamentally denies the existence and prevents the understanding of the many different Chinese realities and identities, and thus it prevents true and systemic change to China’s trajectory in global politics. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 318 C. Furthermore, the politico-strategic formulation of what the US can do to contain the “china threat” serves as the apex of the US power politics agenda and leads to unfettered US hegemony. Chengxin Pan. 2004.. Page 318-319 III. The Alternative A. Challenging assumptions begins the process of breaking down the myths and lies that maintain and perpetuate status quo politics. Patrick Reinsborough. 2003. “SmartMeme I: Direct Action at the Points of Assumption.” www.SmartMeme.com B. We all have a responsibility to question our assumptions and representations because they have an enormous impact on world politics. Bleiker in 2001 (Roland Bleiker, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 2001. ISSN 0305-8298. Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 509-533) C. The power politics game that characterizes the relationship between the US and China will only be perpetuated and worsened if we don’t attack the assumptions at the root of the problem. Only through the interrogation of assumptions and the de-colonization of our imaginations can we put an end to such destructive politics and open space for new ways of understanding China. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 326 Block Strategy: 2NC goes for both kritiks. 1NR goes for both topicality violations. Kind of spends time on USFG but doesn't really go for it. 2nr Strategy: 2NR goes for everything. Bard CF Pre Shirley Bard CF (Cassie Cornell and Angelina Fox)—Negative disclosure State-centrism K 1. The state-centric framework employed by the affirmative observes and constitutes states as the only valid actors in international relations, and, therefore, it limits our dissent to a nation-state centered form of dissent, which by definition requires a deferral of agency. (Site: Bleiker, Roland. 2000. “Popular Dissent, Human Agency and Global Politics.” P. 6) 2. Viewing the nation-state as the “irreducible component of identity ensure that “gender, along with class, race, and other facets of identity continue to be rendered invisible in international relations.” (Site: Steans, Jill. 1998. Gender and International Relations. P. 62) 3. This state-centric framework results the “undercultivation of student agency in the academic field of argumentation” and places students in the position of the spectator. The spectator mentality is bad. (Site. Mitchell, Gordon. 1998. “Pedagogical Possibilities for Argumentative Agency in Academic Debate.” Argumentation and Advocacy, v. 35) 4. Furthermore, engaging in a state-centric model of discourse and advocacy leaves us always perpetuating a “rhetoric of preparation” that forces us to constantly see our individual agency as something we will only have in the future. (Site. Mitchell, Gordon. 1998. “Pedagogical Possibilities for Argumentative Agency in Academic Debate.” Argumentation and Advocacy, v. 35) 5. Lastly, engaging in a state-centric framework keeps us constructing and imagining the world in large, national, and global terms while it keeps us distanced from the only possible avenue of change and resistance that is accessible to us—the local one. (Site: Nayar, Jayan. 1999. “Symposium: Reframing International Law for the 21st Century: Orders of Inhumanity.” Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, Fall 1999.) 6. The alt—focus on discourse and transversal dissent (Site: Bleiker, Roland. 2000. “Popular Dissent, Human Agency and Global Politics.” P. 6) Self-Imagination K I. Links A. The affirmative frames their case, like most debates about China within US international relations theory, within the context of three common but flawed assumptions. Chengxin Pan. 2004. The “China Threat” in American Self-Imagination: The Discursive Construction of Other as Power Politics. Alternatives 29 (2004) 305-331. Page 305. B. Within the context of these flawed assumptions, the affirmative constructs China as a threat and establishes this threat as an “objective” reality. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 307. II. Impacts A. Conceptions of china as a threatening other are not objective accounts of some external reality. Rather they are reflective of the American self-imagination, protective of US self-interests, and serve as self-fulfilling prophecies that legitimate power politics. I.E. The aff’s discourse turns their case—their terms and assumptions lead to the very problems that they claim merely to describe and attempt to solve. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 306. B. Constructing China as a threatening other fundamentally denies the existence and prevents the understanding of the many different Chinese realities and identities, and thus it prevents true and systemic change to China’s trajectory in global politics. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 318 C. Furthermore, the politico-strategic formulation of what the US can do to contain the “china threat” serves as the apex of the US power politics agenda and leads to unfettered US hegemony. Chengxin Pan. 2004.. Page 318-319 III. The Alternative A. Challenging assumptions begins the process of breaking down the myths and lies that maintain and perpetuate status quo politics. Patrick Reinsborough. 2003. “SmartMeme I: Direct Action at the Points of Assumption.” www.SmartMeme.com B. We all have a responsibility to question our assumptions and representations because they have an enormous impact on world politics. Bleiker in 2001 (Roland Bleiker, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 2001. ISSN 0305-8298. Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 509-533) C. The power politics game that characterizes the relationship between the US and China will only be perpetuated and worsened if we don’t attack the assumptions at the root of the problem. Only through the interrogation of assumptions and the de-colonization of our imaginations can we put an end to such destructive politics and open space for new ways of understanding China. Chengxin Pan. 2004. Page 326 Bard NS Neg Round 5 Shirley Vs Team: Pittsburgh FW Judge: Hester Case Args: Evidence from TAZ (Temporary Autonomous Zone) and Mark Taylor’s Erring: A postmodern a/theology, 1984 Their argument is mostly the following: The aff replaces God with themselves, i.e., they posit an end to history (the case harms) and situate the aff (plan) as savior. This humanism is based on faulty understanding of communication (their solvency take-out) and simply inverts the Master-Slave relationship (their DA). The alt is “purposelessness” or “erring” (Taylor’s word), which is functionally akin to “reject aff and don’t replace it with anything” Bard NS Pre Shirley Bard NS (Litta Naukushu and Nathan Sweed)—Negative disclosure Same as Bard CF Baylor Baylor CM @ Missouri State Round 1 vs. KCKCC MT T- On means on China Consult Japan CP 1. The United States is currently consulting with Japan over all developments in our China Policy. 2. The U.S. is actively engaging Japan in South East Asian Policy Development. They have agrred to closely consult japan on human rights issues in the region- the alliance is key to world-wide peace and stability. 3. Non-Consultation Destroys Relations- Whether Or Not The U.S. Consults Before Taking Action is the trump card. 4. The Plan is unilateral U.S. action- They do not consult Japan. 5. Genuine Consultation on other issues like human rights are absolutely critical to maintaining the allianc and preventing a nuclear arms race in Asia. 6. Japanese Rearment and Nuclearization would spark a chain reaction in Asia leading to nuclear conflict. Nationalism DA A. Hu is now moving toward reform and away from old school communism. B. U.S. Pressure Angers Hardliners C. Despite Attempts at old school reform, he can’t move to quickly. When forcd to decide, Hu will placate old school hardliners. D. Reform is key to solving the Taiwan crisis, E. The Result is a full scale global nuclear war. China Econ DA Selective Diplomacy DA A) Current State Dept. focus is on managing Saudi Arabia’s transition to a new government. B) The plan does it’s diplomatic pressure through the State dept. That’s normal means. C) New Diplomatic initiatives, especially in the areas of trade. Humyn Rights, and proliferation, will trade off with other more critical missions. D) Saudi Regime Collapse Causes WW3 Sanctions are Violent Octafinals vs. WSU CS Europe emerging as a superpower Nelson, 2002, The Washington Quarterly, 2002, “Transatlantic Transmutations” “That Europe could…or global action.” EU must unite on China policy Matt Burnett, The new Frontier: EU-China Relations, July 1-2, 2005, www.lse.ac.uk “China presents a new…each other.” The united EU produces a new life mentality, capable of deconstructing heg and violence Martin Beck Matuztik, Between Hope and terror: Habermas and Derrida Plead for the Impossible to Jacques Derrida in memoriam”, Fall 2004 “responsibility for one’s history…global domestic policy.” Nationalism Recent election of Ma as Taiwanese Nationalist Party means Hu will work harder on Taiwan relations but there are some doubts Asia News, “Hu Jianto congratulates Ma Ying-jeou, KMT’s new leader”, July 18, 2005 “Chinese President…did not favour.” Military hardliners oppose new US influence on China- brink is now Joe McDonald, AP News Service, “China General Threatens US over Taiwan”, July 15, 2005 “A Chinese general…The Financial Times.” Hu Can’t disburb the apple cart, but he does want to instigate political reform Bruce Einhorn, Biz Week, “Hu Jianto: China’s Gorbachev”, Oct 27, 2003 “Sound far-fetched….Science & Technology.” Hu is pushing democratic reform but won’t participate with the US Agence France Press, “Hu Jianto Attacks ‘Western’ reform and local corruption”, Sept 16, 2004 “Chinese President…abuse of power.” Hu is pushing grassroots democratic reforms that are necessary for China’s future but he still faces problems Matthew Forney, Time, B is for Ballot, Oct 13, 2003 “Hu’s comments seemed….aced the class yet.” Hu’s pushing int’l harmony Xinhua, Sept 5, 2003, “Chinese President Hu….nature and countries.” Hu is committed to democracy Matthew Forney, Time “B is for Ballot”, Oct 13, 2003 “As students across….democratic elections.” The communist party under Hu is moving towards moderation Frank Ching, New Straits Times, Sept 30, 2004, LN “A Key policy….exercise of power.” Baylor CM Negative @ UNI Counterplan – Economic NOT diplomatic Selective Diplomacy/Terrorism DA Diplomatic Resources focused on Terrorism – Smith 2005 – Congressional, April 14 “public diplomacy…adequate funding” Diplomatic pressure = state department State Dept. Bureaus of Public affairs May 25, 2005 “state department leads…trade to nuclear weapons.” New Diplomacy trades off with terrorism Lugar March 18, 2003 FNS, “state department has been starved” Strong diplomacy key to prevent terrorism Peterson 2002 – Foreign Affairs sept./oct. “public diplomacy…cooperation of foreign nations” Terrorism = extinction MacKinnon May 5, 2005 Washington Times “terrorists who seek to obliterate the U.S.” Baylor JL @ Missouri State China Threat China isn’t a threat- perceptions of such makes war inevitable Chengzan Pan, Alternatives, no. 29, pg. 305-331 We view China as a result of viewing ourselves SSPC CP Solves hegemony, eurocentrism and confrontation with the other Martin Beck Matasik, “Between Hope and Terror: Habermas and Derrida plead for the impossible to Jacques Derrrida in Memoriam”, Fall 2004 EU rise inevitable Feffer, 2005, “Goodbye Uncle Sam, Hello Team Europe”, www.alternet.org/story/21753 “Europe as exerted….finally coming onto its own.” China more likely to listen to EU www.cnn.com/2005/BUSINESS/09/07/China.trade.ap/?section=cnn_latest Politics Pombo bill won’t pass without dems Wernew, 9/21/05, www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/politics/12708044.htm “Conservative lawmakers….vote Thursday.” Plan boosts Bush’s popularity Roger Mitton, 9/3/05, Straits Times, LN “It would be an exaggeration….appeasing China over Taiwan.” Pombo bill guts endangered species Act Miller, Press Enterprise, 9/20/05, LN “Environmental critics quickly…endangered species.” ESA checks extinction “We are currently faced with the greatest rate of….brink of extinction.” EU wins in the WTO Phillipe LeGrain, Nov 3, 2003, “Last Resort”, The New Republic, LN “The European Commission, which….actions on the dollar.” CD increases econ and dip clout of the EU and decreases US heg Telegraph Herald, June 5, 2005, Double Take, LN “A historical geopolitical….not militarily.” EU transcends the state. It’s the only counterbalancer to US power- solves nuclear war Rorty, 2003, “Humiliation Solidarity” Dissent Magazine, Fall 2003 “The European Union….created by nuclear weapons.” UN China won’t veto Iran sanctions Michael Hedges, Houston Chronicles Aug 10, 2005, www.chron.com/cs/CDT/ssistory.mpl/nation/3305556 “The United States is backing…unilaterally as Iran.” Pressure kills horse-trading in UNCS Collun Lynch, Washington Post, July 6, 2004 (2001)?, Trade Deal war Chinese support of US policy on Iraq “The United States released more…now becoming clear.” Sanctions key to check Iranian prolif Perkovich and Manzanero, May 2004, “Plan B: Using sanctions to end Iran’s nuclear program.” Baylor LO Round # 6 Shirley Vs. aff: UMKC FR Judged by: Winfrey Case Args: Levinas – Narratives totalize identity Shapiro 97 p.101 Critchley 02 Cambridge Companion to Levinas p. 11-13 Butler 04 p.132-134 Longxi 98 Minority Opposites p. 20-22 Kritik Baudrillard Consumer Society 1970 p.30-31 Baudrillard Selected Writings p. 42-43 Sim and Sim83 Nihilism Alt Topicality Resolved Got To Have a Plan Block Strategy Plan, Baudrillard, Case 2NR Strategy Plan and Theory Baylor LO Round 2 Shirley Vs. aff: Case Western HP Judged by: Moritato Case Args: Cant change iran’s intent to destroy the jewish state Iran can make deploy NBC now NK alt cause China wont enforce desp. sanctions Kritik Shapiro Borders You ignore immediacy of the other allowing violent cartography Kritik Baudrillard Caring about the nuclear threat destroys the meaning to life Alt is transparent nihilism- baudrillard 93 and 70 Block Strategy Both K’s 2NR Strategy Both K’s Baylor LO Pre Shirley Baylor LO (main negative positions...) Anthropocentrism Kritik (the discourse of the 1AC is human-centric and doesn't include discursive space for nature). Levinas Kritik-- this K is about making discursive space for "the other". The representations of China in the 1AC do not show compassion for "the other". Western, universalized human rights rhetoric is otherizing. Threat rhetoric is otherizing. Embrace the other. Gender Kritik--- the rhetoric of the affirmtive is gendered/masculinized. The aff advocates use of the State, coercive pressure, etc-- these are msaculinized approaches to ir and should be rejected Topicality- Economic Pressure =s Sanctions Topicality- "and" means that economic and dipomatic pressure must be two separate actions in the plan Sanctions Bad-- they hurt the poor, they are capitalist, they never work, they cause human rights violations, etc. Baylor RT Neg Round 7 Shirley Vs Team: Kentucky GG Judge: Case Args: No war in Taiwan Plan = war Same economic interdependence stops war Off Case Args: Pressure = conditional Same pressure spec Gotta be sanctions Vagueness T-bills UN Sanctions DA Block Strategy: Case, T-bills, UN Sanctions 2nr Strategy: Case T-Bills Baylor RT Neg Round 2 Shirley Vs Eastern New Mexico HW Judge: Paul Hood Case Args: none Off Case Args: T econ pressure=sanctions Resolved=reflexive (must defend USFG action) Gender K-Old school [Peterson and Runyan, Bem; IR, State, Protection, HR Links] Non-violence K (Kappelen’s [“The Will to violence: The politics of personal behaviors”] p. 1-3, 14-15,11-12 Baylor RT Pre Shirley Baylor RT's favorite Neg. arguments include: T- gotta be two separate actions, diplomatic and economic pressure are distinct T- gotta include economic sanctions Gender K-- IR/state action is masculine, patriarchy is bad and should be rejected Nationalism DA-- plan foments chinese nationalism, Hu has to invade Taiwan to save face Chinese Economy DA-- trade pressure/Sanctions jack the Chinese economy; prolif Impax U.N. Security Council DA (China retaliates against the plan by blocking US initiatives in the UN Security Council; the Impact scenarios are Iran Sanctions Good, Burma Sanctions Good, Syria Sanctions Good) Politix DA-- Bush winner's win; plan is popular which allows the Pombo California oil drilling bil to pass, gutting the ESA, kills species Dollar DA-- China retaliates against trade pressure by selling off U.S. T-bills; economy impax EU Counterplan-- the EU will pressure China on whatever the plan does; the EU is china's biggest trading partner Binghamton Binghamton MN (Mabutas & Ni) @ Liberty vs Nuc Prolif --> Iran Topicality: diplomacy pressure nonprolif Kritik: “The Awakening” The Awakeining Shell First, by attempting to push off death the aff only continues to ensure an eternal form of suffering through their focus on a quick fix that pushes death off to the nebulous future where it no longer appears threatening Wallace 1993 (Alan Monk. Scholar, Teacher, and Practiinoer) Tbetan Buddhism, Wisdom Publications: Somerville, Massachusetts) p. 11-12 All of us acknowledge that one day we will die. In fact,….. “I” who experiences thes changing events remains essentially the same. Fortunately, by simply accepting death and political defeat we all have a psychic inwardness that must proceed action and which can prevent the worst of tragedies Armstrong 01 (Karn teache at ledback college in 99 muslim public affairs concel media award winner, Buddha, penguin books, London england p 18-19 The Hebrew prophets overturneds….and sought to integreate it within the conditions of daily life. Threat construction (Lipschintz) Binghamton GM (Jake Gartman & Matt Malia) @ Richmond RND 2 Aff- Pace LT Sovereignty Kritik: We must take an unprecedented step away from the sovereign violence that characterized the 20th century, embracing the new international allows us to do this. Aff frustrates this project by placing primacy in the nation-state. Derrida in 94, Negotiations: Interventions and Interviews 1971-2001 (published in 2002), p. 237-241 The 1AC is fraught with assumptions about international relations that give primacy to modern conceptions of sovereignty by using master narratives that locate the PRC as an entity external to the US in order to enact pressure. This (re)inscribes Cold War ideological representations of danger – this prevents us from having an objective understanding of the world. David Campbell, 1998, Writing Security (Revised Edition), p. 6-9, 18-19 Sovereignty divides the world into life-zones and death-zones, concentrating cruelty onto the populations that are rendered expendable and are disqualified from political existence. Etienne Balibar, 2004, We, The People of Europe? Reflections On Transnational Citizenship, p. 126-129 This turns us to subjects of biopower, which enables war, genocide and nuclear destruction. Foucault, 1978, History of Sexuality Vol. 1, p. 136-137 Sovereignty has colonized our minds, it prevents non-violence alternatives to foreign policy. Our criticism problematizes this which opens space for new political possibilities that aren’t attached to sovereignty. Campbell again, p. 197-199 Topicality: Discussing and condemning US concerns between diplomatic officials constitutes diplomatic pressure. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, march 28, 2005, www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/shrd/2004/43109.htm The United States engaged …. And religious freedom violations. International economic pressure is sanctions, trade war, and econ warfare. Robert Pape, “Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work,” International Security, Fall 1997, vol 22, issue 2, p. ebsco AFF vs MWU “MTCR” Antiproliferation= orientalist Gusterson, 1999 Cultural Anthropology v 14.1 “Nuclear Weapons and the other in the western imagination” Tech Gap causes violence Broughton 1996 Genocide, War and Human Survival, “US over Iraq: High technology and Low Culture in the Gulf Conflict Need to confront and dissect orientalism Gusterson, 1999 (ibid) Nuclear orientalism masks global inequalities Gusterson 99 Terror talk bad and causes self-fulfilling prophecy Porras 94 Utah Law Review 144, L/N People in China can’t afford the internet Shaw 98 www.ojr.org/ojr/business/1017967553.php Democratization causes conflict Mansfield and Snyder, 1995 Foreign Affairs, vol. 74 Issue 3, “Democratization and War” Binghamton LW (Dan Weiser & Jeremy Levine) @ Richmond Vs Emory GD INC T Diplomacy- American Heritage Dictionary = “sensitivity” World politics dict dialogue and negotiation Sanx are not sensitive. Vagueness is slapped on the end Feminism- Material feminism is being replaced by post structural feminism, but appartently focusing on militarism props up material feminism. Shell 03 Post-structural feminism K to creating a feminist movement that avoids fracture and essentialism, McLaren 02 On Case No inherent barrier, we just sanctioned some company 100 minon, language of securitization bad, Lipschitz 95; image of prolif bad, prlif metaphor guts solvency, mutimeroo The weapons state: Proliferation and the framing of security 108-110; sanctions hurt women due to economic vulnerability; heg predicated upon propag shore, power politics value hegemony over survival, Chomsky 02, crisis politics deny humanity, Chomsky 02;Zhang 01; existence of the state is predicated upon violence, Barclay 90, sanctions fail, India and Pakistan tests prove, Griswold 2000; Chinese rise to power will be peaceful, Jessup 05; good intentions get coopted by sate, turns case, Cohen 85; only 5% of population is at risk to die in Nuclear war, Clayton 85; there is consciousness after death, Waltz 93; must accept inevitability of death waltz 95 Binghamton OS (Erica Shapiro & Tamara Osdoby) @ Liberty Kritiks: The Awakeining Shell First, by attempting to push off death the aff only continues to ensure an eternal form of suffering through their focus on a quick fix that pushes death off to the nebulous future where it no longer appears threatening Wallace 1993 (Alan Monk. Scholar, Teacher, and Practiinoer) Tbetan Buddhism, Wisdom Publications: Somerville, Massachusetts) p. 11-12 All of us acknowledge that one day we will die. In fact,….. “I” who experiences thes changing events remains essentially the same. Fortunately, by simply accepting death and political defeat we all have a psychic inwardness that must proceed action and which can prevent the worst of tragedies Armstrong 01 (Karn teache at ledback college in 99 muslim public affairs concel media award winner, Buddha, penguin books, London england p 18-19 The Hebrew prophets overturneds….and sought to integreate it within the conditions of daily life. Threat construction (Lipschintz) Boston College Boston College BC Neg Round 8 Shirley Vs Team: Wyoming CL Judge: Hardy Case Args: Off Case Args: T ANWR North Korea – 6 party talks relations Block Strategy: North Korea, T 2nr Strategy: North Korea Boston College BC Round # 3 Shirley Vs. aff: USC LN Judged by: Carver Disad ANWR bad (as disclosed) Disad North Korea (as disclosed) Disad Nationalism (as disclosed) Topicality T substantial (as disclosed) Block Strategy ANWR North Korea Case 2NR Strategy North Korea Case Boston College BC Round 1 Shirley Vs Team: Clarion DZ Judge: Elisha NIx Case Args: Olym[pic boycotts fail Util good Human rights pressure fails Sex trafficking fails Nationalism turn Off Case Args: Engagement CP North Korea ANWR bad- china bashing link, biodiversity impact Block Strategy: all 2nr Strategy: North Korea and engagement Boston College BC Pre Shirley i forgot about consult - sorry i fail net benefit prior and binding consultation is necessary to sustain US alliance with Japan - only genuine cosutation solves kazuhisa, japan quarterly, sept 99 "THe most urgent...cooperation" japan will withdraw unless they feel = partnership roy, asian affairs 04 "since the end of the cold...equitable" without strong US support - japanese miitarization = nuclearization lind, international security, summer 04 "The antimilitarist argument...allergy" japanese nuclearization -> prolif and nuke war jospeh cirincione, foreign policy, march 22, 00 "The blocks would fall...1945" hu is consolidating his power in china LA times 10/12/05 “China’s top leader…determination” specific link Hu must avoid clashing with old guard politburo members to consolidate power Financial Times, 9/3/05 “Now halfway through…core” hu appointments are key to ensuring greater civilian control over the military Nikkei Weekly, 9/5/05 “Even so, the country’s….momentum” weak civilian control increases the risk of military aggression Mario esteban, centre for east asian studies, will political liberalization of mainland china reduce the risk of military conflict in the Taiwan Strait? April 05 http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/slc/EATS%20II%20Mario%20Esteban.pdf “With regard to…it” rise of nationalism will undermine Hu and lead to military aggression Eric Two Chu Cheow, The japan times, april 1, 05 http://search.japantimes.co.jp/print/opinion/eo2005/eo20050401a1.htm “Hu is encouraging the…region” Chinese nationalism resuls in nuclear war State louis post- dispatch, 7/25/05 “As china gains…arsenals” t-bills china will not sell off US treasury bills in the s.q. Washington post 9/10/05 “China will not sell…economists” increasing economic pressure on China will cause it to sell off US Treasury bills Liam Halligan, the telegraph, june 19 05 “Krugman’s analysis…already” treasury bill sell-off will destroy the US and global economy Liam Halligan, the telegraph, june 19 05 “That sounds…going” MEAD North korea Chinese support key to success of 6 party talks BBC monitoring Asia-Pacific, 11/305 “Nearly two months…there” specific link solving North Korea problem = mpossible without good Sino-American relations David Shambaugh, Financial Times 9/1/05 “Few, if any…disruptions” failure of 6 party talks increase risk of a Korean war James Goodby, brookings, 2/4/05 http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/goodby/20050204.htm “At the end…Asia” North Korea war -> nuclear war Bruce Bennett and nina hachigian, international herald tribune, 1/31/04 “north Korea takes…order” Engagement CP We agree that human rights abuses in China are troubling, however, we call for ongoing engagement and dialogue between our cultures, rather than pressure and economic coercion. Engaging with China is the best way to cause change – pressure only makes the problem worse Yitan Li and Cooper Drury, Department of Political Science at the University of Missouri, International Studies Perspectives, Volume 5, Issue 4, November 2004, p.391 Boston College BC Round 4 Georgia State Vs. aff: Emory MS Internet Aff Judged by: Joe Packer Case Args: China is really authoritarian now will buy tech elsewhere (no card) china has not democratic tradition it will fail no impact: democracy will be more violent (no card) China will not back down Plan sparks nationalism Nationalism leads to nuclear war Democracy = transition wars democracy leads to violent protests democracy leads to AIDS prolif terrorism slow transition is better (no card) Xingjiang will split off if China democratizes Xingjiang is key to oil supply oil dependency leads to nuclear war China relations with NK scenario Consult Japan ASPEC Block Strategy Kick the Counterplan and ASPEC Go for case and the disad 2NR Strategy Went for disad outweighs mitigated case Boston College BC @ GSU Judge:??? Case: Trade- Tariffs US- Chinese Realtions Cinsult Japn T- USFG Economics Pressure on the human rights bad, engagement good Boston College CS Neg Round 6 Shirley Vs Team: Redlands HW Judge: Paul Kerr Case Args: Sanctions fail China will reject pressure AIDS mutation checks Vaccine will be developed in 15 years No stigma now in china Legal reforms on AIDs coming New leaders solve AIDS stigma SARS motivated China Off Case Args: CP: The USFG should establish a Joint US-China Commission on Public Health. The purpose of the Commision should be to focus attention at a sustained, high-level dialogue on building U.S.-Chinese partnerships in public health, specifically concerning HIV/AIDS. As a form of introduction, the USFG should raise the salience of HIV/AIDS within the US-China Commission on Science and Technology. The USFG should offer to repeal anti-dumping legislation if the PRC ends its discriminatory practices against HIV/AIDS activist and the people most susceptible to HIV/AIDS and allows any US HIV/AIDS funding to reach injection drug users, the commercial sex industry, sexual minorities, and those in rural areas sustained dialogue motivates HIV/AIDS action joint commission spurs coop repealing antidumping laws increases coop Hu/nationalism Hu credible now Pressure hurts Hu cred That exposes Hu to the old guard, hurting agenda Appointments crucial to civilian control of the military Civilian control solves conflict Nationalism sparks nuke war ANWR (read before) North Korea (read before) T- Human rights is in the Universal Declaration. AIDs isn’t included Block Strategy: Nationalism, north korea, ANWR, CP, case 2nr Strategy: Nationalism, cp, case Boston College CS Neg Round # 3 Shirley Vs Team: Emory CL Judge: Mancuso Case Args: Taiwan independence frontline: 1. US pressure not only fails to deter the movement, but also increases its zeal Andy Peterson 2004 Wash Quarterly lexis spring “U.S. disapproval has done little to deter” and “to the United States” 2. US policies have no effect on Taiwan’s move towards independence Robert S. Ross 2001 The National Interest, lexis fall “Ending ambiguity by clearly stating” and “even a limited war” 3. political motivation is stacked against Taiwanese declaration of independence Robert Ross again- same cite “Taiwan also has critical political stakes” and “declaration of independence” 4. Taiwanese economic dependency on china encourages preservation of the Squo Ross again – same cite “Taiwan’s interest in preserving” and “provocations from Taipei” China won’t invade Ross 2001 same cite “Why China wants peace with Taiwan” and “relationship with the United States” Japan frontline Sino-japan conflict is inevitable a) security council- china’s refusal to support Japan’s bid makes conflict inevitable 1ac Cheow evidence B) lack of democratization Edward friedman 2000 ed. Edward Friedman and Barrett L. McCormick pg. 99 What If China Doesn’t Democratize “if china’ and “nationalism” c) Senkaku islands The Economist 3/25/05 lexis “The list can go on” and “confrontation might follow” d) history The economist same “Tensions might be” and “sea-bed rights” 2. they hate each other – historical imperialism 3. aff doesn’t resolve Taiwan issue a) plan doesn’t reverse japan’s military suppot for Taiwna b_) japan will continue visits to Taiwan Off Case Args: Nationalism Hu is consolidating his power in china La times oct 12 2005 lexis “china’s top leader emerged’ and “hu’s careful determination” He has political capital Economist intelligence unit nov 2 2005 Pfactiva “china’s president, hu” and “will continue” b) 1. US pressure on china increases nationalism Martha cottam and Richard cottam 2001 Nationalism and Politics: the political behavior of nation states, pg. 242 “how nationalistic will china become” and “highly attentive public” Hu must avoid clashing with old guard politburo members to consolidate power FT sept 3 2005 p7 “now halfway through hthe first” and “at its core” St louis post dispatch impact card Hu appointments are key to ensuring greater civilian control over the military Nikkei Weekely sept 5 2005 “even so, the country’s” and “further momentum” Weak civilian control increases the risk of military aggression Mario Esteban 2005 april, will political liberalization of mainland china reduce the risk f military conflict in the Taiwan strait? http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/slc/EATS%20II%20Mario%20Esteban.pdf “with regard to the army” and “than states without it” Rise of nationalism will undermine hu Eric teo chu cheow 2005 april The Japan Times “Hu is encouraging the rise” and “the Asian region” Relations Negotiations are speeding up – they have momentum Xinhua nov 9 2005 “few expected the breakthrough” and “speeding up” Recognition of Taiwan as a separate country offends china Greg mastel oct 9 2003 http://www.newamericancentury.org/Taiwan-20031009.pdf “as anyone” and “fta with Taiwan” Solving NK problem impossible without good relations David shambaugh sept 1 2005 FT “few, if any” and “global disruptions” Failure of 6 party talks causes a Korean war James E. Goody feb 4 2005 http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/goodby/20050204.htm “at the end of the day” and “in northeast asia” Korean war = extinction Pat fungamwango oct 25 1999 Times of Zambia (Lusaka) Africa News “If there is one place today” and “an apocalypse on earth” Counterplan : Call them Taiwan, not ROC heres more ev Strait Times 7/10/04 “Ms Rice then reiterated “ and “its handling of Taiwan” 2. plan has no chance of solvency- china will rejct the CBMs if the acknowledgment of a sovereign Taiwan state is a requirement. That's the 1nc glosserman ev CP ev US dept of stat july 05 “Taiwan has lobbied strongly” and “sovereign state” ROC is de facto sovereign Economic Expert.comp. p. http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Republic:of:China.html ”The Republic of China” and “Hong Kong, and Macau” and “while the term” China constsist of 22 provinces, including Tibet and Mongolia and 2 special administrative regions including hong kong and macao Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia 6th ed 2005 http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0857291.html “China comprises 22 provinces” and “status in 1999” Block Strategy: 1NR: Topicality Interpretation: all answers don’t apply, put pressure on the island Taiwan, but can’t call it Republic of China, all evidence is based on it, Taiwan belongs to china- Fairness jurisdiction and education AT: w/m part of china 1. Taiwan is part of mainland, but ROC is not. Extra topical AT: part of Above AT: UN proves 1. AT:C/I 1. explodes limits on or directed to –anything that pertains to China, pressuring Japan would be topical 2. extra topical- directed to, calling it the ROC is not PRC, separate entity 3. ground- ROC, can’t predict spec ground, can’t make arguments about indepednece they will spike out of that AT: reas 4. not reasonable- Taiwan would be but they go outside literature 5. reas is not objective 3. solves limits, infinite expansion 4. definition mos treasonable AT: no case 1. CX answers- talk about Taiwan talk about government of Taiwan, plan could have been topical if didn't say ROC 2. not part of china AT: extra t 1. disproves the resolution cant vote for them 2. ground arguemtsn can’t access increase in ground 3. only prepared to debate resolutioin not predictable AT: lit demands 1. arbitraryr 2. evidence ssays should call it Taiwan 3. CP checks AT:CP checks 1. unfair have to do theory and other things AT: sever 1. strat skew b) shouldn't have to run CP to get to ground zero AT: self-servig 1. limits and ROC not part of china 2. balance of a precedent, what you justify in round AT: C/I must spec part china They don't meet Solve all offense because pressure Counterplan n/u- even CIA calls it Taiwan not ROC emp denied more evidence X 2. plan no chance- will reject CBMS, glosserman evidence 3. will kill relations, 4. US dip interactions- US st department calls it 5. sanctions check- then have to accept it. They say china hates Taiwan 1. hate in context of ROTaiwan, 2. good to be consistent and call it Taiwan, stable advocacy 3. ev specific delinated Dispo/PICs 2nr Strategy: Same as 1NR Boston College CS Neg Round 1 Shirley Vs Team: Catholic PS Judge: Jim Lyle Case Args: Sudan 1. No bomb – no scenario for nuclear war. 2. No African war to nuclear war. 3. Never escalate Africa news 2004 4. Deusche no evidence says solving cenocide can solve No impact timeframe 5. not complict 6. consequences. Pakistan Answers 1. China limited arms transfers to Pakistan. 2. China uses Pakistan to Balance India. 3. Cap Market Sanction = decreases cooperation with US. 4. Increases Weapons Transfers to Pakistan. Solvency Answers 1. No solve – go through others. 2. No solve – go through hong kong 3. Empirically Capital Market Sanctions Fail. 4. Oil $ Turn Sanction on Oil $ = Percieved as war act against China. Leads to Global nuclear war. 5. Sanctions fail 3 reasons Hon Kong US Backlash China Relations 6. Unilateral Sanctions Fail Off Case Args: Nationalism Hu has political capital 2002 1. US pressure increases nationalism 2005 2. Hu must avoid clashing with old guard. Hu reform key to ensure power Weak civilian control decrases control over the military. Leads to nuclear war St Louis Dispatch 2005 Biz Con US economy high now Greenspans from Reuters, 11-3 Capital Markets will destroy biz con 2002 “financial institution” “on targeting companies” Biz Con is key to the economy Haig 93 “provide investment” Nuclear war. Mead 92 Politics ANWR won’t pass in conference budget reconciliation bill because of opposition by House republicans. Edie News, 11-11 http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=10768&channel=0 “The drilling in the publically-owned Alaskan park would have been…that includes the Arctic Refuge.” Pressuring is key to PC Brooks, October 28, 2005 (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) “Third, repair relations with Capitol Hill. Congress dominates all second terms…it’s possible that Mr. Bush, learning from President Regan, can, too. Impacts ANWR causes worldwide species loss. Star Tribune, March 19, 2002 “As the Wilderness Society argues…own special places?” Impact is extinction Elrich 98 “But just because some functional groups…no redundancy” Counterplan Anti-dumping is outdated and unfair – repaling would lead to cooperation. Ikenson, 3-7, 2005 http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/briefs/tbp-022.pdf “U.S. antidumping policy toward China…services liberalization.” Engaging China on Sudan is more effective than sanctions. Lyman, July 21, 2005 http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2005hearings/written_testimonies/05_07_21_22wrts/lyman_princeton_wrts.pdf “Finally, the United States should begin to engage China…happening any time soon.” Competition. Disads to capital markets. Engagement is the only way to get cooperation – pressur eis counter-productive Thomson 2002 Block Strategy: ANWR Extensions GOP leaders will bring up ANWR in the conference bill. Cincinnati Post, 11-10, 2005 “Still, removing the Arctic oil drilling…budget package” ANWR will appear again in the conference bill but GOP moderates will kill it again. NYT, 11-11 “Mr. Blunt said the Budget committee…opposed to the drilling.” ANWR will be included in the final conference bill. Energy Washington Week, 11-9, 2005 “To avoid almost certain defeat…the conference agreement” 2nr Strategy: Boston College CS Neg Round #1 Shirley Vs Team: Catholic SP Judge: Lyle Case Args: Sudan answers 1. no scenario for nuclear war 2. no escalation Africa News 04 3. Impact evidence is bad doesn’t assume aff and no timeframe 4. CP solves complicity 5. Consequentialism key to rational beings Pakistan answers: 1. China limiting arms transfers to Pakistan now 2. China uses Pakistan to balance India 3. Cap Mkt Sanction decreases cooperation with the US, inc weapon sales to Pakistan Solvency 1. No solvency for others 2. No solvency – go through Hong Kong 3. Empirically Cap Mkt Sanction fail 4. Oil $ turn 5. Sancytion on Oil perceived as act of war by China 6. global nuclear war 7. sanctions fail: hong kong, US backlash, China retaliation (trade war) 8. Unilateral sanctions fail Off Case Args: Nationalism (as per caselist) Biz Con (Econ increasing Reuters 11-3, Biz Con key Haye 93, Mead 92) Politics (ANWR Bad: Species): Wake observer got cites CP: engage about plan, and repeal antidumping law if China cooperates Block Strategy: Pltx / Bix con / CP: kicked nationalism Boston College CS (Chung & Sullivan) @ Liberty vs. Women’s Rights Topicality: economic pressure = sanctions USFG = government, not personal demands Counterplan: The USFG should consult Japan over whether to do the plan – Japan will be given an up or down veto that the US will abide by. Kazuhisha, Japan Quarterly, 9-99 Lind, International Security, Vol. 99 No.1 – Summer 2k4 Roy, Asian Affairs, vol. 31 no. 2 Ciricione, Joseph, Foreign Policy, 3/22/2k Disadvantages: Nationalism Hu has PC to get appointments (Reuters, 9/29/2k5) HR pressure weakens HU (Eric Cheuer = “Shifting winds in China: how far can Beijing go?” Pacnet 38 B Appointments key to civilian control on military (Nikkei Weekly 9/5/2k5) Weak CMR = aggression (Eslehar “will political liberalization of mainland China reduce risk of violent conflict in the Taiwan Strait” April 5) Nationalism = nuke war (St. Louis Dispatch, 7/2k5) T-Bill: China will not sell off US treasury bills in the SQ. (Washington Post, September 10, 2k5, p. factiva “China will not sell large … according to state economists.” Increasing economic pressure on China will cause it to sell off US t-bills (Halligan, The Telegraph, June 19, 2k5 “Krugman’s analysis highlights … much more protectionist already.” Treasury bill sell-off will destroy the US and global econ (same cite as above “That sounds familiar…the global recovery going”) Relations: US working with China now on NK (International Hearld Tribune, Sept 22, 2k5 “Analysts say and officials … win-win situation” Sanctions are perceived as US bullying (Frieman, 2k4 China, Arms Control, and Nonproliferation p. 183, “finally, the United States continues … its values on China” Solving NK is impossible w/o good Sino-US relations (Shambaugh, Financial Times, 9/1/05 “few, if any, relationships … produce global disruptions Implementation of the Joint Statement will prevent NK collapse (Toronto Star, Sept 24, 2k5 “A predictable master … for Dear Leader” NK regime collapse cause nuc war (Bennet and Hachigian, January 31, 2k4, International Herald Tribune “NK takes military action … militarily to restore order”) BC CS Neg IPR @ GSU WTO Answers Doha failure will undermine WTO credibility Business Line, August 12, 2005, p. Lexis “Hong Kong must set the stage” US has filed a WTO case challenging EU subsidies to Airbus American Society of International Law, June 7, 2005, http://www.asil.org/insights/2005/05/insights050607.html WTO Airbus ruling will crush its credibility Garten, Newsweek, April 4, 2005, p. lexis WTO case would alienate China and reduce cooperation on NK and Doha Economic Intelligence Unit, 8-3-2005 pfactiva “Doha round of WTO talks” Nationalism Links Pacific Affairs, September 02, “China will exert greater efforts to enforce” Central News Agency, March 8, 2005, “rising nationalism shape beijing’s current thinking” Chinese Economy Answers Chinese economy will grow at 9.2 % Financial Times, 9/9/05 lexis “ADB economists said” FDI to china increasing Preeg 2005, http://www.uscc.gov/hearing/2005hearings “FDI then increased sharply” Alt Causality Fishman, 2005, Hearings, “no enforcement of intellectual property rights in china” IP Theft will not harm the innovation of Chinese companies because they will be protected by the Chinese government and courts Shenkar, 05 The Chinese Century, p. 86 Turn: Counterfeiting sustains the Chinese economy by providing cheap goods, technology, and bymaking Chinese firms competitive Fishman, 2005, How the rise of the next superpower challenges America and the World, p. 236 Turn: Cracking down on piracy will cause massive unemployment and social unrest, undermining political stability Shenkar, 2005, the Chinese Century, p. 88 Solvency answers WTO pressure will fail to motivate China to improve IPR Hung, 2003, Asia Pacific Business Review, Autumn, p. 75-6 Local governments won’t enforce laws Pei 2005, FNS, “local governments are heavily involved” No solvency – increasing enforcement in china will cause counterfeiters to move to other countries Mendenhall, 04, Hrgs, “Pirates have also become globalized” Evidence to prove a WTO case is not avaible yet Technology Daily July 18, 2005, pfactiva “Mendenhall said” Bringing a bad case will harm China’s compliance with WTO rules Yu, 05, IP Law and Business, September 1, pfactiva Turn US leadership US will lose the case Yu Losing hurts US credibility Shaffer, 05 www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hela/papers/pub-priv-teubingen-new.doc Tarnishing US trade credibility decreases overall us global leadership Scwartz & Sykes, 02 The Journal of Legal Studies, p. 179 “linkage exists between credibility” Competitiveness Answers US Will remain leader US Newswire, Feb 28, 2005, “lower borrowing costs” US not losing its high technological lead to China, Imports from China are all low tech machines which we used to import from other Asian countries The National Journal, July 30, 2005, “Computers, fax machines” US business won’t see higher revenues because Chinese consumers can’t afford to buy the gods Fishman, 2005, China Inc: How the rise of the next superpower challenges America and the world, p. 246 No solvency for competitiveness—other factors more important than piracy Harris, 2004, Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, Fall, “managerial and manufacturing failures” BSA exaggerates costs of piracy The economist, may 21, 2005, p. 69, Bill Gates chirped BC CS neg Round # 4GSU Vs. aff: Emory CL CBMs aff Judged by: Spring Case Args: Deterrence Olympics Solve Taiwan say no Heg solves war China wont attack Etc Relations – India impact Nationalism Topicality On 2NR Strategy Topicality On Cal Berkeley Cal Berkeley All Pre Shirley CHINESE POLITICS A – UNIQUENESS HU HAS FULLY CONSOLIDATED HIS POWER – USING IT FOR ECONOMIC REFORMS NOW Dallas Morning News 10/16/05 B – LINK HU HAS TO BALANCE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND CALMING POLITICAL OPPOSTION – PLAN CAUSES GOVERNMENT COLLAPSE Dallas Morning News 10/16/05 THE PLAN CAUSES A TRADEOFF – POLITICAL CAPITAL FINITE LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 281-282 C – IMPACT 1. CHINESE LEADERSHIP KEY TO ASIAN STABILITY Wu Xinbo 2005 – Center for American Studies @ Fudan University Shanghai 2. IMPACT IS NUCLEAR WAR Kennedy 2000 – Prof History @ Yale Daily Yomiuri, 1-10 NATIONALISM DISAD EXTERNAL PRESSURE CAUSES CHINESE NATIONALISM ZHA ET AL 2000 – PROF’S POLI SCI JAPAN, HONG KONG, AND NEW ZEALAND U CHINA INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN THE 21ST CENTURY, PAGE 113 C – IMPACTS 1 – WESTERN BASED NATIONALISM SPREADS OUT OF CONTROL AND CAUSES REGIME COLLAPSE ONG 2002 – PROF CHINESE FOREIGN POLICY UNIVERSITY OF HULL CHINA’S SECURITY INTERESTS IN THE POST COLD WAR ERA, PAGE 178-179 2 – PRC COLLAPSE CAUSES ASIAN NUCLEAR PROLIF YEE AND STOREY 2002 – PROF IR @ HONG KONG U AND DEAKIN U 3 – NUCLEAR WAR CIRINCIONE 2000 (FOREIGN POLICY 3/22) RELATIONS DISAD B – LINKS 1 – AGGRESSIVE DIPLOMACY FEEDS THE SECURITY DILEMMA AND CAUSES AN ESCALATING CRISIS IN US-CHINA RELATIONS JOHNSTON 2003 – PROFESSOR OF CHINA IN WORLD AFFAIRS @ HARVARD INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, VOL 27 NO 4, IS CHINA A STATUS QUO POWER, SPRING 2 – ECONOMIC PRESSURE IS VIEWED AS A FUNDAMENTAL SECURITY THREAT ONG 2002 – PROF CHINESE FOREIGN POLICY UNIVERSITY OF HULL CHINA’S SECURITY INTERESTS IN THE POST COLD WAR ERA, PAGE 149-150 C – IMPACTS 1 – COOPERATIVE US-CHINA RELATIONS SOLVE TERRORISM, WMD’S, CRIME, ENVIRONMENT AUTHORITARIANISM, NORTH KOREA, TAIWAN, PAKISTAN, DISEASE, ENERGY, ECONOMY, AND GLOBAL WARS GARRETT 2003 – DIRECTOR ASIA PROGRAMS ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES US CHINA RELATIONS IN THE EARLY TWENTY FIRST CENTURY, PAGE 76-77 2 – ASIAN INSTABILITY CAUSES NUCLEAR WAR KENNEDY 2000 – PROF HISTORY @ YALE DAILY YOMIURI, 1-10 3 – TURNS THE CASE – RELATIONS CONFLICTS SPILLOVER – PRESSURE MAKES US-CHINA CONFLICT INEVITABLE DENG AND WANG 2005 – ASSOCIATE PROF’S POLY SCI @ NAVAL ACADEMY AND GEORGIA TECH CHINA RISING, PAGE 115 SUDAN 1NC T ECONOMIC PRESSURE A – INTERPRETATION. ECONOMIC PRESSURE IS THE TANGIBLE USE OF THE TOOLS OF ECONOMIC STATECRAFT AS NEGATIVE ECONOMIC LEVERADGE DIRECTED TOWARDS AN ISSUE WITHIN THE PRC ECONOMIC PRESSUE IS NEGATIVE ECONOMIC LEVERADGE DAMROSCH 1989 – PROF COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, POLITICS ACROSS BORDERS, 83 A.J.I.L. 1 THE TOOLS OF ECONOMIC STATECRAFT INCLUDE A VARIETY OF TANGIBLE MECHANISMS OHAEGBULAM 1999 – PROF INT’L AFFAIRS @ U SOUTH FLORIDA A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, PAGE 333 ON MEANS DIRECTED AGAINST AMERICAN HERITAGE 2000 – http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=on ON TRADE EMBARGOES ARE PLACED TO BLOCK A STATE FROM EXPORTING ITS GOODS TO ANOTHER COUNTRY OHAEGBULAM 1999 – PROF INT’L AFFAIRS @ U SOUTH FLORIDA A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, PAGE 333-344 UNITED STATES TRADE EMBARGOES ARE UTILIZED TO PREVENT THE TARGET FROM TRADING WITH THE UNITED STATES Alan Einisman, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade Winter 2000 B – VIOLATION. THE PLAN PLACES AN ECONOMIC EMBARGO TO MAKE CHINA GET ON BOARD NEW SUDAN HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES, NOT CHANGE A CURRENT STATE OF ACTION THE ECONOMIC PRESSURE OF THE PLAN IS DIRECTED ON SUDAN NOT CHINA RELATIONS 1NC LINK PUTTING AN OIL EMBARGO ON CHINA WOULD CAUSE A WAR Toshi Yoshihara Research Fellow at the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis and Richard Sokolsky Distinguished Research Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, Winter/Spring 2002 COUNTERPLAN 1NC A – TEXT: THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD ENTER INTO BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA OVER THE ISSUE OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN THE HORN OF AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST. THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUBMIT A RESOLUTION TO THE UNITED NATIONS AUTHORIZING THE AFRICAN UNION MISSION IN SUDAN TO USE FORCE TO PROTECT CIVILIANS AND SUPPLEMENTING THAT FORCE WITH TROOPS, FINANCIAL AND LOGISTICAL SUPPORT. B – NET BENEFITS: 1 – PRESSURE FAILS - ENGAGING CHINA IS KEY TO SOLVING THE CASE AND FUTURE CHINESE US RELATIONS Michael Ranneberger - Ambassador, assistant secretary, Africa Bureau - JULY 28, 2005 (FDCH) 2 – ENGAGING CHINA OVER SUDAN CAUSES CHINESE CHANGE IN SUDAN POLICY Financial Times 3/22/05 3 – THE US SHOULD SUPPLEMENT THE AU THROUGH THE UN Jim Lobe, Bureau Chief for Inter Press Service "Rights: US Hosted Sudan's Spy Chief Amid Darfur Killing" May 24, 2005 4 – ENGAGING CHINA AND SUPPLEMENTING THE AFRICAN UNION SOLVES GENOCIDE IN DARFUR Washington Post 4/11/05 5 – ENGAGEMENT IS KEY TO PROMOTE LONG TERM COOPERATION ON ALL ISSUES Cha 1999 – PROF GOVERNMENT @ GEORGETOWN ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 47 AFRICA ADVANTAGE 1NC 1. NO AFRICA WAR IMPACT – A – NO EXTERNAL ACTOR WOULD INITIATE A NUCLEAR WAR IN AFRICA LIKE DEUSCH DESCRIBES B – THEIR EVIDENCE ASSUMES A LACK OF DEMOCRATIZATION WHICH IS NONUNIQUE Michael Ranneberger - Ambassador, assistant secretary, Africa Bureau - JULY 28, 2005 (FDCH) C – ETHIOPIA CREATES HORN CONFLICT David Shinn – prof of IR, GWU and Fmr. Department of State Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Sudan and Joshua Eisenman - co-editor “China and the Developing World” 10/13/2005 http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=408&issue_id=3491&article_id=2370338 D – ARMS RACE NON UNIQUE Carolyn Bartholomew US/China Economic and Security Review Commission 7/28/2005 (FDCH) 2. AFRICAN WAR INEVITABLE BBC 9/30/05 3. CHAD DOESN’T SPILLOVER – IT’S A DOMESTIC PROBLEM AND OTHER ISSUES OUTWEIGH Zoellick – deputy secretary of state and Sen. Lugar - 9/28/05 (FNS) 4. NO RISK OF VIOLENT CONFLICT – FRANCE AND THE US INTERVENE IN CHAD, POLITICAL GROUPS ARE IN DISARRAY AND THE COUNTERPLAN INCREASES RISKS OF SOLVING THIS BECAUSE OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIANISM Africa News 10/5/04 5. NO SOLVENCY – THEIR EVIDENCE ASSUMES POLITICAL ISSUES NOT CONFLICT RESOLUTION Africa News 10/5/04 SOLVENCY 1NC 1. PRESSURE FAILS A – RUSSIA AND ZIMBABWE BLOCK SOLVENCY The Post and Courier 5/9/05 B – FRANCE AND GERMANY Eibner and Jacobs American Anti-Slavery Group 3/18/03 http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=6703 C – INTERNATIONAL RESISTANCE Sen. Lugar 9/28/05 (FNS) 2. TURN DEVELOPMENT A - CHINESE INVESTMENT SPURS DEVELOPMENT IN THE HORN David Shinn – prof of IR, GWU and Fmr. Department of State Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Sudan and Joshua Eisenman - co-editor “China and the Developing World” 10/13/2005 http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=408&issue_id=3491&article_id=2370338 B – TURNS CASE Zoellick – deputy secretary of state - 9/28/05 (FNS) 3. SUDAN WONT REACT TO PRESSURE THE ECONOMIST 10/15/05 4. TURN RUSSIA A – STOPPING CHINESE SUPPORT INCREASES RUSSIAN ARMS SALES David Shinn – prof of IR, GWU and Fmr. Department of State Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Sudan and Joshua Eisenman - co-editor “China and the Developing World” 10/13/2005 http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=408&issue_id=3491&article_id=2370338 B – TURNS CASE – RUSSIAN WEAPONS ARE BETTER Toshi Yoshihara Research Fellow at the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis and Richard Sokolsky Distinguished Research Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, Winter/Spring 2002 Fletcher Forum of World Affairs Journal 5. TURN ASIAN WAR A. BLOCKADING OIL CAUSES IT LA Times 7/17/05 B. GOES NUCLEAR Kennedy 2000 – Prof History @ Yale Daily Yomiuri, 1-10 6. OTHER COUNTRIES FILL IN FOR SUDANESE OIL International Special Reports 01 (http://www.internationalspecialreports.com/africa/01/sudan/energy_mining/) ZIZEK K Robinson and Tormey 2005 – PhD, School of Politics, and Prof Politics and Critical Theory @ U Nottingham A Ticklish Subject? Thesis Eleven, No. 80 Robinson 2005 – University Nottingham Theory and Event, 8:1, January, “The Political Theory of Constitutive Lack: A Critique” Robinson and Tormey 2003 – PhD, School of Politics, and Prof Politics and Critical Theory @ U Nottingham ‘Did somebody say “Leninism”?: Zizek and Revolution,’ http://homepage.ntlworld.com/simon.tormey/articles/Zizeklenin.pdf Robinson 2005 – University Nottingham ‘The Politics of Lack’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 6 p.259-269 CONSULT AUSTRALIA SOLVES Malik-Professor of Security Studies at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu-‘5 www.apcss.org feb. Genuine consultation is critical to alliance cohesion AAP NEWSFEED 7/27/01 CANBERRA, July 27 AAP - Two good mates get together for a chat Alliance Cohesion is key to regional and global stability---solves multiple scenarios for international conflict. Gnehm-Visiting Professor of International Affairs at George Washington-‘1 Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55, No. 2 History is on our side---Australia will say yes Edwards-Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University-‘1 Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 55, No. 2 CHINESE POLITICS LINK – PRESSURE OKSENBERG AND ECONOMY 1999 – SENIOR FELLOW @ HOOVER AND DIRECTOR ASIA STUDIES COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS CHINA JOINS THE WORLD, PAGE 36 CHINESE POLITICS LINK – HU GOOD – POLITICAL CAPITAL FINITE DENG AND WANG 2005 – ASSOCIATE PROF’S POLY SCI @ NAVAL ACADEMY AND GEORGIA TECH CHINA RISING, PAGE 225-226 CHINA POLITICAL CAPITAL FINITE LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 281-282 CHINESE POLITICS – POLITICAL CAPITAL LINK LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 309 CHINESE POLITICS INTERNAL – DOMESTIC POLITICS S/O FOREIGN POLICY LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS THE MAKING OF CHINESE FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY IN THE ERA OF REFORM, PAGE 151-152 CHINESE POLITICS LINK – FOREIGN POLICY – FOCUS / DOMESTIC TRADEOFF LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 78 CHINESE POLITICS LINK – GOOD – TURNS RELATIONS LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 308 CONSULT CONGRESS 1 – SOLVES THE CASE. CONGRESS SUPPORTS PRESSURE ON CHINA SUETTINGER 2003 – BROOKINGS FELLOW BEYOND TIANANMEN, PAGE 426 POLITICS. BUSH MUST CONSULT CONGRESS TO AVOID MASSIVE DISRUPTIONS OF THE AGENDA SUETTINGER 2003 – BROOKINGS FELLOW BEYOND TIANANMEN, PAGE 425 RELATIONS. CONSULTING CONGRES IS CRITICAL TO MAINTAINING A ROBUST RELATIONSHIP WITH CHINA MYERS OKSENBERG AND SHAMBAUGH 2001 – HOOVER FELLOW, PROF IR STANFORD, PROF POLY SCI GWU MAKING CHINA POLICY, PAGE 39-40 BUSH LINK – GOOD – TOPIC SUETTINGER 2003 – BROOKINGS FELLOW BEYOND TIANANMEN, PAGE 426 ENGAGEMENT COUNTERPLAN C – NET BENEFITS 1 – PRESSURE FAILS MYERS OKSENBERG AND SHAMBAUGH 2001 – HOOVER FELLOW, PROF IR STANFORD, PROF POLY SCI GWU MAKING CHINA POLICY, PAGE 87 2 – ENGAGEMENT IS KEY TO PROMOTE LONG TERM COOPERATION ON ALL ISSUES CHA 1999 – PROF GOVERNMENT @ GEORGETOWN ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 47 3 – ONLY THE COUNTERPLAN SOLVES THE RELATIONS DISAD POLLACK 2003 – PROF ASIAN STUDIES @ NAVAL WAR COLLEGE US CHINA RELATIONS IN THE EARLY TWENTY FIRST CENTURY, PAGE 32-33 ENGAGEMENT LINK / CP SOLVES – DON’T PRESSURE CHINA POLLACK 2003 – PROF ASIAN STUDIES @ NAVAL WAR COLLEGE US CHINA RELATIONS IN THE EARLY TWENTY FIRST CENTURY, PAGE 32-33 ENGAGEMENT CP – SOLVES FUTURE TRADE EXPECTATIONS AND THE CASE LI 2003 – SENIOR LECTURER IR @ LIVERPOOL U CHINESE FOREIGN POLICY, ED ZHAO, PAGE 42-43 ENGAGEMENT CP – SOLVES NATIONALISM DISAD ZHA ET AL 2000 – PROF’S POLI SCI JAPAN, HONG KONG, AND NEW ZEALAND U CHINA INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN THE 21ST CENTURY, PAGE 100-101 ENGAGEMENT CP – CHINA CALLS THE US’S BLUFF*** DENG AND WANG 2005 – ASSOCIATE PROF’S POLY SCI @ NAVAL ACADEMY AND GEORGIA TECH CHINA RISING, PAGE 225 NO SOLVENCY – CHINA DOESN’T RESPOND TO PRESSURE DENG AND WANG 2005 – ASSOCIATE PROF’S POLY SCI @ NAVAL ACADEMY AND GEORGIA TECH CHINA RISING, PAGE 225-226 US pressure on China isn’t supported by our Asian allies Sutter 2005 – Professor of Asian Affairs @ Georgetown Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, China’s Rise in Asia, Occasional Paper Series HUMAN RIGHTS NEG – PRESSURE DOESN’T SOLVE LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 140 ENGAGEMENT CP – HUMAN RIGHTS PRESSURE FAILS – NOT CREDIBLE LAMPTON 2001 – PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 254-255 NONPROLIF NEG – SANCTIONS FAIL JING DONG 2003 – SENIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE CENTER FOR NONPROLIFERATION STUDIES CHINESE FOREIGN POLICY, ED ZHAO, PAGE 171 NONPROLIFERATION PRESSURE FAILS – US SELLS TOO MANY WEAPONS ITSELF ROSS 1999 – PROF POLY SCI BOSTON COLLEGE ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 193 2NC ENGAGEMENT CP – CHINA SEEKS COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES – ALL ISSUES*** POLLACK 2003 – PROF ASIAN STUDIES @ NAVAL WAR COLLEGE US CHINA RELATIONS IN THE EARLY TWENTY FIRST CENTURY, PAGE 72-73 PROMOTES SUSTAINED LONG-TERM RECIPROCAL COOPERATION ON ALL ISSUES CHA 1999 – PROF GOVERNMENT @ GEORGETOWN ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 47 ENGAGEMENT SOLVES LONG TERM COOPERATION AND SUCCEEDES FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH ROSS 1999 – PROF POLY SCI BOSTON COLLEGE ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 183-184 PRESSURE CAUSES MISPERCEPTIONS AND HOSTILE CHINA – ONLY ENGAGEMENT SOLVES LONG-TERM US-CHINA COOPERATION ROSS 1999 – PROF POLY SCI BOSTON COLLEGE ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 184 ENGAGEMENT SOLVES – BINDS CHINA TO INTERNATIONAL NORMS THROUGH DOMESTIC INTERESTS ROSS 1999 – PROF POLY SCI BOSTON COLLEGE ENGAGING CHINA, ED. JOHNSTON AND ROSS, PAGE 184-185 ENGAGE CP AND LINK – HUMAN RIGHTS – AT PRESSURE SOLVES – TURNS CASE YEE AND STOREY 2002 – PROF IR @ HONG KONG U AND DEAKIN U THE CHINA THREAT: PERCEPTIONS, MYTHS, AND REALITY, PAGE 217-218 ENGAGEMENT CP – SOLVES HUMAN RIGHTS MARSH AND DREYER 2003 – PROF POLY SCI @ MIAMI U AND FELLOW @ FPRI US CHINA RELATIONS IN THE 21ST CENTURY, PAGE 39-40 ENGAGEMENT CP – CHINA COOPERATES ON NON-PROLIFERATION JING DONG 2003 – SENIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE CENTER FOR NONPROLIFERATION STUDIES CHINESE FOREIGN POLICY, ED ZHAO, PAGE 151 AT ENGAGEMENT CP PERM – COERCIVE POLICIES ARE VIEWED AS CONTAINMENT JOHNSTON AND ROSS 1999 – PROFS SOCIAL AND POLY SCI @ HARVARD ENGAGING CHINA, PAGE XIV-XV POLITICS A. India deal will require political capital but will pass now Business Recorder 05 (7/28) B. Bush’s political capital is stretched thin due to Hurricane Katrina – he must save the remainder of it to ensure passage of the US-India nuclear agreement Business Standard 9/13/05 Rightly or wrongly, the slow response to Katrina is being seen primarily as a federal failure, particularly of C. Pressuring China drains Bush’s poltical capital LAMPTON 2001 (PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS SAME BED DIFFERENT DREAMS, PAGE 337-338) In the realm of legislation, in addition to passing laws, members of Con¬gress can flood the legislative in- D. US-India nuclear cooperation agreement is critical to US-Indian relations which prevent terrorism, proliferation and instability in Asia Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs 05 (Nicholas, 9/8, http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/m-news+article+storyid-12590.html) The United States now has a window of opportunity to seize the initiative with India, to build bonds and E. Terrorism risks extinction Yonah Alexander, professor and director of the Inter-University for Terrorism Studies, 8/28/03 (Washington Times) Last week's brutal suicide bombings in Baghdad and Jerusalem have once again Nuclear deal will require significant political capital The Hindu 05 (7/21) The language of the joint statement would allow India room to negotiate on specific issues. For instance, it speaks of signing and adhering to "an additional protocol" with respect to civilian nuclear facilities which Bush will need capital to pass India nuclear agreement Asia Times 05 (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GH12Df01.html, 8/12) Massachusetts Democratic Congressman Edward Markey authored the amendment. "Why should the US-Indian relations are critical to prevent interstate conflict in Asia Blackwill, US Ambassador to India, 03 (Robert, http://www.state.gov/p/sa/rls/rm/16884.htm, 1/27) Peace within Asia -- a peace that promotes freedom and prosperity - will be advanced by the transformed Strong US-Indian relations are key to solve India-Pakistan conflict Perlmutter, Professor of Political Science at American University, 00 (Amos, Washington Times, 9/12) An American strategic partnership with India, the largest democracy in Asia, which is becoming Asia's TAIWAN NEG US diplomacy effectively constraining Chen in the SQ---China appeased Sutter- professor of Asian Studies at the School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University-6/16/05 www.csis.org/pacfor Chinese perceives U.S. deterrent is both capable and credible Ross-Professor, Department of Political Science B.C.-‘2 http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/international_security/v027/27.2ross.html Navigating the Taiwan Strait: Deterrance, Escalation Dominance, and US-China Relations Strategic ambiguity maintaining the peace—US policy shift collapses balance O’Hanlon-senior fellow at the Brookings Institution-2K CAN CHINA CONQUER TAIWAN? Brookings.edu Status quo deters Chinese aggression---Independence assures war Ross-Professor, Department of Political Science B.C.-‘2 http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/international_security/v027/27.2ross.html SQ solves---US policy key Sutter- professor of Asian Studies at the School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University-6/16/05 www.csis.org/pacfor Abandoning balanced approach to Taiwan undermines Sino-US relations Swaine-Senior Associate Carnegie Endowment for International Peace-‘3 http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1417 12/7 Tilting US policy towards Taiwan collapses Sino-US relations and causes asian instability Swaine-Senior Associate Carnegie Endowment for International Peace-‘4 http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1511 4/21 Economic interdependence prevents war Economist 1/13/05 http://taiwansecurity.org/News/2005/Economist-130105.htm Economic integration reduces risk of conflict Bush-Managing Director American Institute in Taiwan-‘2 http://www.brookings.edu/views/speeches/bush/20020403.htm WTO will diffuse conflict Oxley-chairman of the Australian APEC Study Centre-‘3 Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 57, No. 1 ENGAGEMENT CP – MORE 1 – PRESSURE ON IPR UNDERMINES US-SINO RELATIONS AND DEVASTATES IMPLEMENTATION OF PROTECTIONS OKSENBERG AND ECONOMY 1999 – SENIOR FELLOW @ HOOVER AND DIRECTOR ASIA STUDIES COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS CHINA JOINS THE WORLD, PAGE 195 2 – US BILATERAL NEGOTIATION AND ASSISTANCE FOR CHINESE IPR PROTECTION IS KEY TO EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SIPO 2005 – STATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE OF THE PRC WHITE PAPER ON IPR PROTECTION, 4-27, http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo_English/ndbg/bps/t20050427_45415.htm 2 – US BILATERAL NEGOTIATION AND ASSISTANCE FOR CHINESE IPR PROTECTION IS KEY TO EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SIPO 2005 – STATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE OF THE PRC WHITE PAPER ON IPR PROTECTION, 4-27, http://www.sipo.gov.cn/sipo_English/ndbg/bps/t20050427_45415.htm 3 – CHINA IS LOOKING FOR COOPERATION AND SEEKS TO COMPROMISE ON TRADE ISSUES SINHA 2003 – PROFESSOR GLASGOW UNIVERSITY SINO-AMERICAN RELATIONS, PAGE 187-188 EMBARGO NEG A. Uniqueness-High-level diplomacy diffusing US/European tension over the embargo in the SQ. Saalman-The Power and Interest News Report-4/5 http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_printable&report_id=287&language_id=1 B. Link-The plan collapses US/European relations. Archick-Specialist in European Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division, Congressional Research Service-4/5 European Union’s Arms Embargo on China: Implications and Options for U.S. Policy http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/45458.pdf C. Impact-Relations are key to global stability Ikenberry, professor at Georgetown U, 2001 (John, “Strengthening the Atlantic Political Order” The New Transatlantic Agenda: Facing the Challenges of Global Governance. Ed. Gardner and Stefanova, p. 18-9) Only the counterplan can establish a collective system of export controls to limit key transfers of military technology---the plan undermines this approach and collapses US/European defense cooperation. Aerospace Industries Association 5/5 http://www.aia-aerospace.org/issues/subject/wp_china_0505.pdf. Now is a key time to build a transatlantic partnership on Asia policy---only the counterplan can build the infrastructure for sustainable export controls. Gill, Freeman Chair in China Studies Center for Strategic and International Studies-3/16/05 Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Lifting of the EU Arms Embargo on China Strong transatlantic dialogue is vital to crafting effective china policies. The plan shatters the frame of cooperation. Gill- chair in China Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies-9/6/05 The International Herald Tribune EU has and will continue to place strong limits on military exports to China Austin-Director of Research at the Foreign Policy Centre in London-5 The 1989 China Arms Ban: Putting Europe’s Position to Congress http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/444.pdf INTERNET NEG A. Uniqueness---China loosening up on censorship regulation. Shaw ‘4 USC Annenberg Online Journalism Review http://www.ojr.org/ojr/business/1017967553.php 1. Anti-censorship focus disempowers PRC reformers undermining political liberalization. Kalanthil-associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace-‘3 Foreign Policy 3/1 2. Pressure on censorship causes human rights crackdowns Kalathil and Boas-associates Information Revolution and World Politics Project at Carnegie Endowment-‘1 HTTP://WWW.CARNEGIEENDOWMENT.ORG/FILES/21KALATHILBOAS.PDF 3. Restrictions on internet investment undermine democratic reform San Francisco Chronicle 9/18/05 U.S. tech giants are helping the Chinese express themselves online -- as long as they don't write about democracy, C. Liberalization will solve Internet censorship LEMON 2004 HTTP://WWW.PCWORLD.COM/NEWS/ARTICLE/0,AID,116278,00.ASP Berkeley BW Neg Vs Emory CL Aff Quarters, Shirley Economic integration creates restraints against use of force Glaser, American Foreign Policy Interests 23, 2001 On the positive side, trade and investment… change in the status quo. Economic CBMs spillover Xinjian, 1997 http://www.stimson.org/pubs.cfm?ID=175 CBMs in Asia have already expanded beyond… CBMs in other fields. Non-military CBMs increasing Press Trust of India, 5-3-2005 China on Tuesday announced major confidence… visit the mainland since 1949. Informal contacts easing tension International Crisis Group, Sept. 2005, Asia Briefing No. 42, www.crisisgroup.org China’s recent positive initiatives… government dialogue remained. Maritime hotline in the SQ Allen, 1999 http://www.stimson.org/japan/pdf/cbmapstraits.pdf Maritime safety measures… twenty-four hours a day. Steady increase in CBMs in the status quo Glosserman, 2002 http://www.csis.org/pacfor/issues/v05n02_ch1.cfm Although the subject isn’t usually framed… break out by miscalculation. Loss of political capital crushes CBM implementation Desjardins, 1996, p. 47 Domestic politics… in treaty form. Plan causes PLA backlash Glaser, American Foreign Policy Interests, Vol. 27, 2005 China officially proposed the establishment… Affairs in the 1990s. More ev Chen’s reelection for another… rejects one China. Carrier shift U no carrier- it’s viewed as incompatible with warfare in the information tech age Ji 2005 china brief vol 5 issue 4 2-15 “not compatible with warfare in the IT age” and “will emerge” More ev Ji “not compatible with the PLA’s” and “leadership attention” Ji again “elsewhere, ian storey” and “displays of power.” Nationalism impacts- PLA won’t get on board Glaser- CSIS 04 http://www.csis.org/isp/Taiwan/cbm_glaser.pdf ‚unless tension“ an d“mitigated through CBMs“ CBMs flame nationalist setiment Huaqiu 97 http://www.stimson.org/pubs.cfm?ID=175 Weak CBMs won’t spillover—backsliding turns the case Desjardins 96 Adeplphi Paper 307 p 43 “maintaining interest” and “completely unravel” Rethinking Confidence-Building Measures: Obstacles to agreement and the risks of overselling the process. Implementation failures turn the case Desjardins again “the successful application of CBMs” and “its CBMs partner” Berkeley BW Neg Round # 8 Shirley Vs Team: Harvard KM Judge: Pomorski Case Args: Adv 1 1. no impact bird flu low risk hunter 05 2. it’ll burn out US news 05 3. increased sanitation and infrastructure solve [x] 4. no mutation [x 05] Adv 2 1. unique link: deficit decreasing to firm control on spending – plan kills China’s macro-economic strategy Global Newswire 1-18-05 China’s Finance Minister Jin … laid off due to China’s industrial reforms. 2. collapse in fiscal discipline kills china econ Bird et al 2004 “China’s Fiscal System: A Work in Progress,” November, www.economics.utoronto.ca/brandt/China’sFiscalSystem_Oct12.pdf 3. spending is zero sum; plan trades off with water issues Nankivell 2005 China Brief Vol 5 No 17 Water issues in China are evolving … Shanghai is a very real possibility. 4. water shortages collapse government [x] Nankivell 2005 China Brief Vol 5 No 17 As water shortages impact and restrict … several injured and hospitalized. 5. alt causes 11 of them [x] 6. Chinese democracy coming now [x 04] 7. alt caus fake drugs [x 03] Solvency 1. global trafficking kills solvency [x 04] 2. research constraints kill CITES enforcement [x] 3. trade pressure kills solvency [x 99] 4. status quo solves [x] Off Case Args: P-Spec (case list) Must specify form of economic and diplomatic pressure Economic statecraft has lots of mechanisms [x] Violation: must specify in the plan text Limits: infinite mechanisms Ground: enormous topic, this guarantees links Voting issue, esp. if 2ac clarifies T on On = directly against Not direct pressure Limits: all multilateral institutions explode topic Ground: indirect avoids CP Coercion Machan 83 Fundamental to existence Machan Violation of property rights invalidate plan [x] Plan is illegitimate, you cant vote for it [rand 66] Relations (case list) High now Aggressive diplomacy escalates security dilemma and causes relations crisis [x] Unilateral economic pressure destroys relations [x] US-China relations key to global stability [x 03] Goes nuclear [Kennedy 2000] Bizcon (case list) Econ high now [Bloomberg 11/3] Sanctions cause uncertainty [Yang 04] Sanctions decrease market growth [crippen 99] Key to economy [braithwaithe 04] CP (read by Berkeley RG against Harvard AR) Text increase bilateral cooperation with China and Solves the case, more effective [Waters 02] Solves civil society better [x 03] Block Strategy: 2NC Biz con Not going for it… concede biz con low now and no link to animals Reasons for recession now are alt causes to case Solvency Global markets – big market in Africa they don't solve and Russia [x] and south American [x] And resource constraints are impossible to overcome and impossible to capture thos einb lack market – their ev is about CITES solve not their plan Thr plan increases demand but doesn't assume trade increase – no amount of pressure can stop profitable black market – [x] and rhino market [kerry 99] and tiger proves [kerry99] and [kerry 99] and penalties insufficient [x] and societal and culture change [x] and economic incentives solve without trade bans [x] Relations They say no impact but 1nc garrett solves all impacts of case (a) leads to stability and civil society and (b) borders 14 other countries… escalate to global nuclear war – they cant so no nuclear winter because their 1ac impacts are nuke war to extinction and textiles something [x] they say no link to SARS but all their cx args n