SS+Refugee+neg+-+GT+Adv+FL




 * 1. Can’t solve—they have zero mechanism for preventing refugee flows—they can’t stop dictators from driving populations out of their countries.**


 * 2.** **Extended length of conflicts and economic incentive to continue those conflicts means the impacts are inevitable**
 * Crisp ‘3** (Jeff, Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit, UNHCR, “No solutions in sight,” Jan)

Causes of protracted refugee situations Why have so many refugee situations in Africa persisted for such long periods of time, leaving millions of uprooted people without any immediate prospect of a solution to their plight? The answer to this question can be found in a number of different, but interrelated factors. Conflict and non-intervention First and most obviously, __a large proportion of__ __Africa____’s refugee situations have become protracted because the armed conflicts which originally forced people to leave their own country have dragged on for so many years, making it impossible for them to return to their homeland.__ In this respect, it should be recalled that almost all of the wars that have affected the continent in recent years - Angola, Burundi, DRC, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Somalia, for example - have been characterized by intense ethnic and communal antagonisms, high levels of organized violence and destruction, as well as the deliberate targeting and displacement of civilian populations. __In many of these armed conflicts, moreover, the fighting has been sustained by the fact that various actors - politicians, the military, warlords, militia groups, local entrepreneurs and international business concerns - have a vested economic interest in the continuation of armed conflict.__


 * 3. No impact—there’s no scenario for an African ethnic conflict going nuclear—their Brown evidence is talking about India-Pakistan—there isn’t even a single African nation with the bomb.**


 * 4. Depletion of resources makes conflict and refugee flows inevitable**
 * Metz ‘3** (Steven and Raymond A. Millen, Director of Research and Chairman of the Regional Strategy and Planning Department, The Strategic Studies Institute, March, “Future War/Future Battlespace: The Strategic Role of American Landpower,” http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/00207.pdf)

The third __major source of conflict will be an intensified competition for resources, particularly in the poorer parts of the world__. __While the world’s population is growing at a slower rate than a few decades ago, it will exceed 8 billion by 2030, with almost all of the increase in the poorer regions__.16 __Urbanization also continues unabated__. By 2030 over three 10 fifths of the world’s people will live in cities. __This growth is accompanied by degradation of the physical environment. The mounting stress on the world’s water supplies, deforestation, desertification and the erosion of farmland are particularly troubling. These, in turn, fuel further urbanization and migrations__. So far, attempts by governments to control and manage the adverse effects of these trends have proven ineffective.17 Should this continue— and everything suggests it will—__the competition for resources, whether arable land, water, or capital, can provide a foundation for future conflicts. This might take the form of state aggression as regimes seek access to water, land, minerals, ports, or other resources.__ In most cases, though, states will realize that any gains attained this way will be negated by the high economic and political costs of aggression. Most resource-based conflicts, then, will be sectarian or ethnic, much like those in Western and Central Africa today.18


 * 5. Conflict and refugee flows inevitable due to an endless list of alternate causalities like poverty, ethnic rivalries, dictators, resource wars, diamond trade, colonialism, warlords, terrorism, and droughts.**




 * Turn—the** **US** **props up regimes that commit the atrocities**
 * Herman ’98 (**Edward S., Z Magazine, “The United States is clearly the world's no. 1 ‘rogue state’,” Sept 19)

The CIA and U.S. military forces have been outstanding direct instruments of terror. William Blum in Killing Hope lists 35 individuals or groups known to have been targeted by U.S. agents in assassination attempts, some (like Castro and Kaddafi) repeatedly, and with quite a few successfully killed. Larger scale U.S. terrorism has been carried out by its military establishment, with vastly larger civilian casualties, as in the bombing of Hanoi. __U.S. protected clients have also been in the forefront of world terrorism: the massacre of some 600 civilians by the Salvadoran army at the Rio Sumpul river in 1980, the killing of over 600 refugees by South Africa at the Kassinga camp in Angola in 1978, and the Phalange lsraeli massacre of over 1,800 Palestinians at Sabra Shatila in 1982__, each equalled or exceeded the collective total of the PLO, the Baader Meinhof gang, and the Red Brigades. __These are just single episodes of regimes that did a lot more killing. U.S. sponsorship of regimes like those of Marcos, Mobutu__, the Shah of Iran, __Suharto__, and the Greek colonels __involved the support of state terrorism on a global scale. The real terror network was a creation of__ __U.S.__ __policy for its own backyard, designed to get rid of obstacles to market expansion and__ __U.S.__ __amenable rule by terror.__