Country+PICs

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Republic of Zimbabwe.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits:

NET BENEFIT—CHINA D/A LINK CHARGER

A-China is Zimbabwe’s second biggest trade partner and has replaced western countries in aid—The US won’t have anything to do with China

Xinhua News Agency, April 19th 2007, “Chinese envoy says Sino-Zimbabwe cooperation enters new stage” lexisnexis.

Harare, April 19 (Xinhua) - The Sino-Zimbabwe trade and economic cooperation has entered a brand-new development stage in the wake of the Beijing Summit of the China-Africa Cooperation Forum last year, a senior Chinese diplomat said on Thursday. In an exclusive interview with Xinhua, the Chinese Ambassador to Zimbabwe Yuan Nansheng said fundamental changes have taken place in the bilateral relations and economic cooperation between the two countries since last year's summit. China has now become the second largest trade partner of Zimbabwe, after South Africa, and China is also the biggest tobacco buyer from Zimbabwe, with the total trade volume between the two countries reaching 275m US dollars in 2006, while a few years ago, China was not even among the top ten trade partners of Zimbabwe, according to the Chinese ambassador. According to the figures from the economic and commercial counsellor's office of the Chinese Embassy in Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe has bought more than 100,000 tons of fertilizers and pesticides from China with a 200m dollars buyer's credit loan offered by the Chinese banks, and China also put in place nearly 20m dollars to improve the telecommunications facilities in Zimbabwe under a 300m dollars agreement signed a few years ago. Also, Zimbabwe's largest bus company Zupco has newly bought 55 luxurious buses and various motor parts from China's FAW since last year. Yuan said the action plan adopted at the China-Africa Cooperation Forum last year has also boosted Chinese investment in this southern African country. China becomes the investor with the fastest direct foreign investment growth in Zimbabwe, replacing the western countries.

B-US intervention in countries dominated by Chinese influence will anger China

Drew Thompson, December 7th 2004, “Economic Growth and Soft Power: China’s Africa Strategy” The Jamestown Foundation http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?search=1&volume_id=395&issue_id=3170&article_id=2368982

China's interests in Africa represent an opportunity for the United States and the international community. China maintains friendly relations with most African nations, particularly nations that the U.S. has limited contact or diplomatic leverage over, such as Libya and Sudan. If President Bush seeks to address U.S. national security interests around the world, promoting social, political and economic development in Africa will have to become a significant priority for the administration. China can potentially be a strong ally in this effort.

But, as the U.S. and China seek to further their interests in Africa, whether they work together or at cross-purposes remains an open question. The U.S. could see China as a competitor, and become increasingly concerned about its growing spheres of influence, while China could see U.S. efforts to promote stability and democracy in Africa as an effort to cut off their access to raw materials and further contain China's professed "peaceful rise." Of course, China is always cautious of U.S. intentions, which might lead to suspicion of any overtures made to them to cooperate on issues, particularly involving other nations' internal affairs. China is likely to be initially reluctant to work with the U.S. on any efforts to coerce African countries to conform to a Western-centric global strategy. Concerns about the subjugation of their own interests, as well as any precedent such cooperation would set regarding a code of conduct for nations that China enjoys close relationships with, are sure to dominate Beijing's thinking on these issues. The Chinese remain wary that their cooperation on the North Korean nuclear issue might encourage Washington to seek to use their leverage on Sudan, Libya, Syria and Iran, without tangible benefits on the table for Beijing. U.S. assertions that China's effort to defuse the North Korean crisis is in their best interest might not translate as easily to problems in Africa. NET BENEFIT—ARMS RACE (1/2)

A-Mugabe’s government is extremely corrupt

Jens F. Laurson and George A Peieler, March 10th 2006, “Anti-humanitarian Aid” http://www.reason.com/news/show/117402.html

Western wealth is supposed to speed African development and fight grinding poverty, but the result doesn't match the intent. In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe has single-handedly destroyed the economy with western aid flowing. After a quarter-century of Mugabe, 80 percent of Zimbabweans live below the poverty line, inflation has soared to triple digits, and "land reform"—subsidized with British "development support"—takes lives and destroys agriculture. Mugabe takes the cash and blames the West, trashing the human rights of both large landowners and defenseless slumdwellers in Harare.

B-Aid money fuels furthers his corruption—the impact is linear

Blake Lambert, August 18th 2006, “For Many Africans, more aid is not the answer” World Politics review http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=126#

U2's Bono, Sir Bob Geldof, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs and the Make Poverty History campaign argue that a lack of aid dollars from western countries -- few of whom spend the internationally recognized target of 0.7 percent of Gross Domestic Product on overseas development assistance -- causes great harm to the continent.

That claim clearly ignores the estimate of several development economists that sub-Saharan Africa has received more than $500 billion in aid over the past four decades, which is the equivalent of four Marshall plans, though not a few countries are poorer today than they were then. It also dismisses the complaint of growing numbers of Africans who said their continent's greatest flaw is not a shortage of aid but their corrupt and unaccountable leaders.

"The problem is that this money actually makes the problem worse," said Dennis Matanda, a consultant and teacher in Kampala, Uganda. Western aid allows politicians to divert the money in order to build political fiefdoms or cults, according to Henry Lubega, a Ugandan working for a foreign TV network based in Kampala.

He suggested there's a direct relationship between the amount of money given to sub-Saharan African leaders and the rate of corruption in their countries.

Meanwhile, Andrew Barungi, a Ugandan student who's spent much of his life in Kenya, said politicians and bureaucrats are not the only ones to benefit from aid dollars.

"What's the point of giving $10 million when $3 million will go to a minister, a few sycophants and officials," he asked. "Three million goes to 'aid experts' from developed countries, $2 million on expensive cars, and the rest goes to projects which are unfinished." NET BENEFIT—ARMS RACE (2/2)

C- Mugabe channels money and buys arms, increasing the threat of an African Arms race

Tom Carter June 15th 2004 “Zimbabwe stocks up on jets, arms” Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20040615-121213-9266r.htm

The government of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe has ordered more than $240 million worth of jet fighters and other military equipment from China, renewing concerns of a sub-Saharan arms race in a region with no external threats.The purchase was revealed in a recent parliamentary meeting with Trust Maphosa, the secretary of Zimbabwe's Defense Ministry, the country's opposition said yesterday."We believe this is a kind of [intimidation] tactic because we are going towards very crucial elections next year," said opposition spokesman Giles Mutsekwa."The idea is that whatever the public does, there is the possibility of it being subverted by the military," he told Agence France-Presse.The order was for 12 fighter jets and 100 military vehicles, according to the British Broadcasting Corp."Who is giving money to the Mugabe regime to allow it to buy $200 million worth of military equipment when the economy has collapsed?" asked Annabel Hughes, executive director of the Zimbabwe Democracy Trust. "The world turns a blind eye now when he plans on purchasing new fighter jets and military vehicles to support his one-party dictatorship. Who exactly is the Mugabe regime planning on defending itself from?"

D- An arms race leads to terrorism

Vijay Mehta 30 September 2004 “The danger of arms trade in the global economy” Talk given at Sheffield http://www.arcuk.org/pages/danger_of_arms_trade_vj_shef.htm

Wars and civil unrest continue unabated in Africa, South Asia, (Kashmir and Nepal), Latin America (Colombia), and the Middle East. At least 40,000 deaths world-wide have been caused directly by armed conflict over the past year, with 50% of them in Sub-Saharan Africa. More than 500 million small arms and light weapons are in circulation around the world — one for about every 12 people. They were the weapons of choice in 46 out of 49 major conflicts since 1990, causing four million deaths — about 90 per cent of them civilians, and 80 per cent women and children. Human security is under increasing threat from the spread of small arms and light weapons and their illegal trade. They have devastated many societies and caused incalculable human suffering. They continue to pose an enormous humanitarian challenge, particularly in internal conflicts where insurgent militias fight against government forces. In these conflicts, a high proportion of the casualties are civilians who are the deliberate targets of violence — a gross violation of international humanitarian law. This has led to millions of deaths and injuries, the displacement of populations, and suffering and insecurity around the world.Nuclear weapons are the most devastating weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons were exploded twice in the 20th century and many other threats to use them have been made. The first bomb, on 6 August 1945, destroyed the Japanese city of Hiroshima and killed about 100,000 people at once. The second, on 9 August, destroyed the city of Nagasaki and killed about 70,000 people. Many more have died since then as a result of the radiation effects of those bombs. There are 30.000 nuclear warheads in the possession of the declared nuclear weapon states USA, Russia, France, UK and China on top of that there is worldwide proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology which is being deployed by countries such as India, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and Israel. When so much military hardware is available around the world terrorists can easily create mayhem by indiscriminate mass killing and destruction. Political violence, organised crime and inciting fear in the civilian population are becoming the hallmark of new terrorism.

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 illustrated dramatically that the international community failed, thus far at least, to understand the magnitude and implications of the terrorist threats to the very survival of civilization itself. Even the United States and Israel have for decades tended to regard terrorism as a mere tactical nuisance or irritant rather than a critical strategic challenge to their national security concerns. It is not surprising, therefore, that on September 11, 2001, Americans were stunned by the unprecedented tragedy of 19 al Qaeda terrorists striking a devastating blow at the center of the nation's commercial and military powers. Likewise, Israel and its citizens, despite the collapse of the Oslo Agreements of 1993 and numerous acts of terrorism triggered by the second intifada that began almost three years ago, are still "shocked" by each suicide attack at a time of intensive diplomatic efforts to revive the moribund peace process through the now revoked cease-fire arrangements [hudna]. Why are the United States and Israel, as well as scores of other countries affected by the universal nightmare of modern terrorism surprised by new terrorist "surprises"? There are many reasons, including misunderstanding of the manifold specific factors that contribute to terrorism's expansion, such as lack of a universal definition of terrorism, the religionization of politics, double standards of morality, weak punishment of terrorists, and the exploitation of the media by terrorist propaganda and psychological warfare. Unlike their historical counterparts, contemporary terrorists have introduced a new scale of violence in terms of conventional and unconventional threats and impact. The internationalization and brutalization of current and future terrorism make it clear we have entered an Age of Super Terrorism [e.g. biological, chemical, radiological, nuclear and cyber] with its serious implications concerning national, regional and global security concerns.

NET BENEFIT—HUMAN RIGHTS

A- Aid keeps Mugabe in power, multiplying human rights violations

Christopher Orlet, April 13th 2005, “From breadbasket to dustbowl” The American Spectator http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8020

DESPITE DRACONIAN ELECTION LAWS that make it illegal to criticize the government, despite blowing up and shutting down opposition newspapers, despite firing judges that ruled against him and placing armed sentries at polling stations, and despite torturing political opponents (Amnesty International documented 70,000 incidents of torture in 2002 alone), Mugabe somehow managed to lose the 2002 presidential election to Morgan Tsvangirai, head of the opposition MDC. It hardly mattered. If all else fails rig the vote count and charge the winner with conspiring to assassinate you.But by far Mugabe's most effective weapon against the opposition is the political use of food aid. Estimates vary, but probably half the population relies on food aid from the west. A report by the U.S.-sponsored Famine Early Warning System Network estimated that half of Zimbabwe's 13 million people would have no food by March 2005.These shortages have played into the hands of the dictator. In 2003, Human Rights Watch reported that "Zimbabwean authorities discriminate against perceived political opponents by denying them access to food programs." Peter Takirambudde, executive director of the Africa division of Human Rights Watch called withholding food aid "a human rights violation as serious as arbitrary imprisonment or torture." Just to buy food Zimbabweans have to register with the local ZANU-PF party official. Often they must chant slogans like "Down with Whites! Long live Robert Mugabe!" writes Harvard's Power. And those without a ZANU-PF party card cannot receive government-subsidized grain. International food aid, particularly that from UN food agencies, give the Mugabe government the prop it needs to remain in power. Without food aid as political leverage, experts say, the population would be more likely to revolt. Speaking to the Johannesburg-based Sunday Independent newspaper last week, Archbishop Ncube said, "I hope that people get so disillusioned that they really organize against the government and kick him out by a non-violent, popular, mass uprising....Because as it is, people have been too soft with this government." The most likely protesters, however, are among the country's 3.6 million citizens who have already fled the country

B- Human rights are a D-rule

Alan Gewirth, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Chicago, 1982 Human Rights

The primary thesis of the following essays is that human rights are of supreme importance, and are central to all other moral considerations, because they are rights of every human being to the necessary conditions of human action, i.e., those conditions that must be fulfilled if human action is to be possible either at all or with general chances of success in achieving the purposes for which humans act. Because they are such rights, they must be respected by every human being, in the primary justification of governance is that they serve to secure these rights. Thus the Subjects as well as the respondents of human rights are all human beings; the Objects of the rights are the aforesaid necessary conditions of human action and of successful action in general; and the justifying basis of the rights is the moral principle which establishes that all humans are equally entitled to have these necessary conditions, to fulfill the general needs of human agency.

NET BENEFIT—DEMOCRACY A- Aid keeps Mugabe in power

Christopher Orlet, April 13th 2005, “From breadbasket to dustbowl” The American Spectator http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8020

DESPITE DRACONIAN ELECTION LAWS that make it illegal to criticize the government, despite blowing up and shutting down opposition newspapers, despite firing judges that ruled against him and placing armed sentries at polling stations, and despite torturing political opponents (Amnesty International documented 70,000 incidents of torture in 2002 alone), Mugabe somehow managed to lose the 2002 presidential election to Morgan Tsvangirai, head of the opposition MDC. It hardly mattered. If all else fails rig the vote count and charge the winner with conspiring to assassinate you.But by far Mugabe's most effective weapon against the opposition is the political use of food aid. Estimates vary, but probably half the population relies on food aid from the west. A report by the U.S.-sponsored Famine Early Warning System Network estimated that half of Zimbabwe's 13 million people would have no food by March 2005.These shortages have played into the hands of the dictator. In 2003, Human Rights Watch reported that "Zimbabwean authorities discriminate against perceived political opponents by denying them access to food programs." Peter Takirambudde, executive director of the Africa division of Human Rights Watch called withholding food aid "a human rights violation as serious as arbitrary imprisonment or torture." Just to buy food Zimbabweans have to register with the local ZANU-PF party official. Often they must chant slogans like "Down with Whites! Long live Robert Mugabe!" writes Harvard's Power. And those without a ZANU-PF party card cannot receive government-subsidized grain. International food aid, particularly that from UN food agencies, give the Mugabe government the prop it needs to remain in power. Without food aid as political leverage, experts say, the population would be more likely to revolt. Speaking to the Johannesburg-based Sunday Independent newspaper last week, Archbishop Ncube said, "I hope that people get so disillusioned that they really organize against the government and kick him out by a non-violent, popular, mass uprising....Because as it is, people have been too soft with this government." The most likely protesters, however, are among the country's 3.6 million citizens who have already fled the country

B-Mugabe’s removal allows for democratization

Nicolas Van de walle 2002 “Africa’s Range of Regimes” Project Muse

Another key question is how deeply the incumbents have dug themselves into power. The longer a leader has been in power, the more personalized the regime is, and thus the harder it will be to institutionalize democratic procedures. This is particularly true of rulers who came to power in an undemocratic manner. The retirement of such longstanding personal rulers as Cameroon's Biya, Kenya's Moi, Zimbabwe's Mugabe, Togo's Gnassingbé Eyadema, Burkina Faso's Blaise Campaoré, Guinea's Lansana Conté, Equatorial Guinea's Teodoro Nguema, and Gabon's Omar Bongo is a necessary—though hardly a sufficient—condition for improved governance and fuller democracy in their respective countries. [End Page 76] In each of these regimes, the main current obstacle to democratic progress is the resistance to it orchestrated by the incumbent president and his circle. A partial exception to this generalization is the case of Senegal, where after a long and gradual reform process longtime president Abdou Diouf actually stepped down after losing a free and fair election in March 2000. 15 Otherwise, it is striking that all of the veteran rulers who managed to survive the initial transition wave of the early 1990s remain in power to this day.

C- African democracy key to solve case—stops health concerns and instability

Joseph Siegle, 2006. “Democratic Divergence in Africa” http://www.dai.com/pdf/African_Democracy_and_Aid.pdf

African democracies are also much more likely to avoid other forms of instability – famine, conflict, and refugee crises. Illustratively, democratizers are the source of less than 12 percent of Africa’s refugees; consolidating democracies comprise a fraction of a percent. Perhaps most importantly and contrary to popular perceptions, the numbers and magnitude of conflict in Africa have declined dramatically over the past 15 years of democratic advances.viii Where conflicts in the region persist, they are disproportionately represented by the autocratic or semi-authoritarian categories. This is true for the medium to high intensity conflicts in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, as well as the low intensity conflicts in Algeria, Burundi, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, and Somalia versus Nigeria and Uganda in the democratizing category. While all African conflicts are currently intra-state, the potential destabilizing effects for neighboring countries is acutely apparent.

SOUTH AFRICA 1NC

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Republic of South Africa.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits:

NET BENEFIT—CHINA D/A LINK CHARGER

A- South Africa is China’s premiere African partner

PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs, June 12 2006, “Ever deepening China-South Africa Strategic partnership” http://www.mfa.gov.cn/eng/wjb/zwjg/zwbd/t257544.htm

China and South Africa are both big developing countries of major influence. Since the establishment of diplomatic ties on January 1, 1998, bilateral relations have witnessed an all-round and rapid development. Mutual trust has been steadily enhanced along with frequent exchanges of high-level visits. In 2000, the two countries signed the Pretoria Declaration on partnership relations, followed by the establishment of the Bi-National Commission (BNC), under which five sectoral committees, respectively on diplomatic affairs, trade, education, science and technology, and defense, have been set up. In 2004, China and South Africa further defined their relations as "strategic partnership of equality, mutual benefit and common development". China-South Africa trade and economic cooperation have grown rapidly. With around 20% share in the China-Africa trade, South Africa is China's largest trading partner in Africa. For South Africa, China is its fifth largest trading partner with almost even trade balance. Bilateral trade volume of US$ 7.27 billion was recorded in 2005, a fourfold increase over that in 2000. In 2004, South Africa officially recognized China's market economy status, and announced on behalf of the South African Customs Union (SACU) the decision to commence Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations with China. Two-way investment between China and South Africa has also kept good momentum. Accumulated investment from China in South Africa reached US$ 250 million at the end of year 2005, while South Africa's paid-in investment in China reached a US$ 350 million high level. Cooperation in culture, science and technology, education, tourism and other field have also made rapid progress. A grand cultural event entitled "Bravo China --- Chinese Cultural Tour to Africa" staged in South Africa successfully in 2004. A series of culture activities named "Experiencing China" will take place in South Africa later this year. The Confucious College (Chinese Language Center) was established at Stellenbosch University. There are currently 3000 Chinese students studying in South Africa. Since South Africa was granted Approved Destination Status for out-bound Chinese tourist groups in 2001, more and more Chinese sightseers have traveled to South Africa.

B-US intervention in countries dominated by Chinese influence will anger China

Drew Thompson, December 7th 2004, “Economic Growth and Soft Power: China’s Africa Strategy” The Jamestown Foundation http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?search=1&volume_id=395&issue_id=3170&article_id=2368982

China's interests in Africa represent an opportunity for the United States and the international community. China maintains friendly relations with most African nations, particularly nations that the U.S. has limited contact or diplomatic leverage over, such as Libya and Sudan. If President Bush seeks to address U.S. national security interests around the world, promoting social, political and economic development in Africa will have to become a significant priority for the administration. China can potentially be a strong ally in this effort.

But, as the U.S. and China seek to further their interests in Africa, whether they work together or at cross-purposes remains an open question. The U.S. could see China as a competitor, and become increasingly concerned about its growing spheres of influence, while China could see U.S. efforts to promote stability and democracy in Africa as an effort to cut off their access to raw materials and further contain China's professed "peaceful rise." Of course, China is always cautious of U.S. intentions, which might lead to suspicion of any overtures made to them to cooperate on issues, particularly involving other nations' internal affairs. China is likely to be initially reluctant to work with the U.S. on any efforts to coerce African countries to conform to a Western-centric global strategy. Concerns about the subjugation of their own interests, as well as any precedent such cooperation would set regarding a code of conduct for nations that China enjoys close relationships with, are sure to dominate Beijing's thinking on these issues. The Chinese remain wary that their cooperation on the North Korean nuclear issue might encourage Washington to seek to use their leverage on Sudan, Libya, Syria and Iran, without tangible benefits on the table for Beijing. U.S. assertions that China's effort to defuse the North Korean crisis is in their best interest might not translate as easily to problems in Africa.

MADAGASCAR 1NC

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Republic of Madagascar.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits: NET BENEFIT—MALTHUS (1/2)

A- Population checks in Madagascar are key to slow deforestation

Alane O’connor, 1996, “What are the historical causes of deforestation in Madagascar and what is the situation today?” http://www.colby.edu/personal/t/thtieten/def-mad.html

Population growth didn't become a factor in forest degradation in Madagascar until 1940 when vaccines were introduced that lowered the death rate. During the next 40 years the population increased rapidly from 4.2 million to 9.2 million. This put a significant strain on the natural resources and estimates show that 4 million hectares of forests were cleared during this 40 year period, as compared to between 3 and 7 million hectares in the 40 year period from 1900 through 1940. Much of this deforestation, Jarosz argues, was still linked to the concessionary claims, export promotion, and insecure land tenure, rather than population growth alone. The current situation of forest use in Madagascar is not much more promising than the historical situation. The Malagasy often subsist on per capita income equal to $200 per year and 750,000 acres of forest are still felled every year. Deforestation at 1994 levels still costs Madagascar between $100-$300 million in decreased crop yields and the loss of productive forests. Coffee still represents 24% of the nation's exports, and the rice production situation has become so bad that Madagascar import most of what is consumed. Environmentalists and economists agree that what factors the communities need to survive must be identified and obtained from sources other than their environment. One method that has been identified is using the fees generated from tourism to support the local villages. There are currently 17 of these programs set up across Madagascar with the help of USAID, where 50% of the natural park proceeds directly benefit the villagers. Some problems still exist, however, as logging takes place in many of the areas set aside as national parks. Hunters and poachers as well as the illegal loggers are difficult to police. Population growth is also still a problem for Madagascar as the growth rate tops 3.0% per year. Some social discontent with the new parks system is also evident as citizens complain that parks are set aside without the consent of the local people. When the Ranomafana Forest was converted into a national park in 1991, 80,000 peasants that relied upon the forest as their primary source of income viewed the transformation as an economic disaster. However, had this park system not been implemented, it is estimated that there would have been absolutely no forest cover left in 2025. "If something more is not done in time we will have a major ecological disaster on our hands and Madagascar will die" (Matloff 8).

B- Loss of forests kill biodiversity unique to the island—serious global ramifications

Alane O’connor, 1996, “What are the historical causes of deforestation in Madagascar and what is the situation today?” http://www.colby.edu/personal/t/thtieten/def-mad.html

Rapid deforestation on the island of Madagascar has been an important factor in many global issues such as global warming, desertification, soil erosion and decreased biodiversity. Biodiversity is of particular concern for Madagascar as the rosy periwinkle, which is found almost exclusively on the tiny island off the coast of East Africa, is essential for the treatment of leukemia. Additionally, 90% of it's 250 species of reptiles, 29 of it's lemur species and 80% of it's plant species are unique to the island. If the forests continue to be rapidly destroyed without taking this biodiversity measure into account, it could have serious ramifications on the world. Madagascar's historic problem of deforestation can be linked to the detrimental policies of the colonial state in terms of land use and agriculture.

C- Biodiversity is critical to prevent extinction Richard Margoluis, Biodiversity Support Program, 1996, http://www.bsponline.org/publications/showhtml.php3?10 Biodiversity not only provides direct benefits like food, medicine, and energy; it also affords us a "life support system." Biodiversity is required for the recycling of essential elements, such as carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen. It is also responsible for mitigating pollution, protecting watersheds, and combating soil erosion. Because biodiversity acts as a buffer against excessive variations in weather and climate, it protects us from catastrophic events beyond human control. The importance of biodiversity to a healthy environment has become increasingly clear. We have learned that the future well-being of all humanity depends on our stewardship of the Earth. When we overexploit living resources, we threaten our own survival.

NET BENEFIT—MALTHUS (2/2)

D- Species extinction should be rejected—we have a moral obligation

Florida Journal of International Law 1994 (9 Fla. J. Int'l L. 189)

It is our responsibility, as tenants on the global commons, to prevent that which is within our power to prevent. As Senator Alan Cranston once said: The death of a species is profound, for it means nature has lost one of its components, which played a role in the inter-relationship of life on earth. Here the cycle of birth and death ends. Here there is no life, no chance to begin again - simply a void. To cause the extinction of a species, whether by commission or omission, is unqualifiedly evil. The prevention of this extinction ... must be a tenet among [hu]man's moral responsibilities. n86

SUDAN 1NC

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Republic of Sudan.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits:

NET BENEFIT—CHINA D/A LINK CHARGER

A-Sudan and China are key trade partners

Xinhuanet, 2004, “China ready to deepen relations with Sudan” Xinhuanet. http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/zflt/eng/zxxx/t222841.htm

China is ready to further deepen friendly cooperation with Sudan and advance bilateral relations in a stable and healthy way, a senior Chinese official said here Monday. Li Changchun, member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) Central Committee, made the remarks when meeting with Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmed El-Beshir. Li said that since China and Sudan established diplomatic relations 46 years ago, bilateral relations have maintained stable expansion despite changes in international situation. In recent years, the two countries have greatly strengthened their economic cooperation while maintaining smooth expansion of political relations, he said, noting that China has become the top trade partner of Sudan. China is ready to further deepen cooperation with Sudan in all fields on the basis of equality and mutual benefit and advance Sino-Sudanese relations in an ever stable and healthy way, said the Chinese official.

B-US has severed ties with Sudan—sanctions

David McKeeby, May 29th 2007, “United States Tightens Sudan Sanctions” http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2007&m=May&x=20070529151218idybeekcm0.6709101

The United States will tighten economic sanctions against Sudan for failing to end the violence in Darfur, President Bush announced May 29“For too long, the people of Darfur have suffered at the hands of a government that is complicit in the bombing, murder and rape of innocent civilians,” Bush said.Since 2003, violence in Darfur has claimed more than 200,000 lives, displaced 2 million people, and forced an additional 200,000 to flee into neighboring Chad, according to the State Department’s 2006 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, released in March.“My administration has called these actions by their rightful name: genocide,” Bush said. “The world has a responsibility to help put an end to it.”Bush proposed expanded sanctions in an April 18 speech, but delayed action at the request of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who hoped further international negotiation would break the diplomatic deadlock.

C- US taking action in Sudan because it is “troublesome” will piss off China

David H. Shinn, May 8th 2007, “Africa, China, the united States, and oil” CSIS http://forums.csis.org/africa/?p=34

Two Chinese academics wrote last year in the Far Eastern Economic Review that “energy security is already playing an increasingly important role in Sino-U.S. relations, intensifying friction on regional issues.” They cited, for example, policy disagreements between the United States and China over Sudan. Although Sudan is not a source of crude for the United States, it supplies about 7 percent of China’s imports. China also has significant energy investments in Sudan. As the United States tries to isolate or punish countries like Sudan, China has concluded that they are important to its energy security and the rapid growth of its economy. The two Chinese academics argued that the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party depends on this continuing strong and sustained economic growth. In the meantime, a senior U.S. official warned that Beijing’s ties with “troublesome” states would have repercussions. Countries deemed troublesome by the United States that export significant quantities of oil to China will probably continue to cause tension between the United States and China. There is no inherent reason, however, why American and Chinese energy policy in Africa should result in conflict. There are opportunities for Sino-American cooperation on the development and security of oil reserves. It is in the interest of both the United States and China to develop a secure supply of crude at a reasonable international price.

EXT-CHINA-SUDANESE PARTNERSHIP

China and the Sudan are furthering relations now

People’s Daily, July 17th 2007, “Sudanese FM praises Sudan-China relations” http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/6216896.html#

Sudanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Lam Akol praised on Monday the relations between Sudan and China and Beijing's support to Sudan on regional and international forums. The Sudanese foreign minister made the remarks to reporters at the end of a meeting of a Sudanese delegation which will accompany Sudanese First Vice President Salva Kiir Mayardit in his visit to China. "The visit is important in light of the developed relations between the two countries," Akol stressed. He disclosed that the meeting reviewed issues which would be discussed by the two sides during the visit for boosting further the relations between Khartoum and Beijing. "Sudan is keen on making the visit success", he said, adding that the delegation would brief the Chinese officials on current developments in Sudan and the peace process and the efforts for peaceful settlement of Darfur issue as well as China's possible contribution in the rehabilitation and reconstruction process. NET BENEFIT—GENOCIDE

A-China pushing for peace in Sudan

Reuters, July 18th 2007,“China praises Sudan for agreeing to Darfur peacekeepers” http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/HKG176496.htm

China praised the Sudanese government on Wednesday for agreeing to allow peacekeepers into the troubled region of Darfur and pledged to keep pushing for a solution to the problem. In a meeting with Sudan's first vice president Salva Kiir, Chinese Vice President Zeng Qinghong "praised the agreement between Sudan and the African Union and United Nations on peacekeeping troops", state TV reported. "China will actively push for an early solution to the Darfur problem together with the international community," Zeng said. Khartoum has accepted a joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force of some 20,000 troops and police to bolster the under-equipped African Union force of 7,000 in Darfur.

B- China’s position with Sudan puts it in a unique position to stop the genocide

Jim Fisher, June 27th 2007, “China’s influence a key to Peace in Darfur” All Africa http://allafrica.com/stories/200706280378.html

China's economic clout in Africa has grown over the years, putting it in a significant position to help end the genocide in Darfur, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a press interview in Paris. The international community cannot continue to leave "innocent populations ... to their fate," Rice said of the victims of the government-supported Jingaweit militia, which has devastated the Western Sudanese region, killing more than 200,000 people and displacing 2 million others since 2003. Rice attended the June 25-26 Paris conference on Darfur, which included U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, High Representative for European Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Louis Michel, European commissioner for development and humanitarian aid. Rice said in a June 25 interview with French television that the Chinese "do have a special relationship with the Khartoum government and recently they've begun to speak out about the need for the Khartoum government to live up to the obligations it has repeatedly taken [to protect Darfuris] and then not followed through." Given China's support in meeting challenges posed by nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, Rice said that she remains confident in Beijing.

C- China is in Sudan because the US has not taken importance to the region—plan changes this

PINR, June 2 2005, “'The Darfur Question at a Time of Increasing U.S.-China Competition” Power and interest News report. 'The Darfur Question at a Time of Increasing U.S.-China Competition

Today's American and Western attention for the Darfur question has much to do with Khartoum's new commercial and political ties with Iran and -- especially -- China. Beijing's attempt to gain influence in Africa is in fact one of our age's geopolitical novelties. Its main goal is to acquire African oil and gas at favorable conditions, in regions where Western oil majors must still compete for total control. Beijing's new African policy has been focused on Gabon, Nigeria and Sudan. It must be said, for the sake of accuracy, that Sino-Sudanese relations are not entirely new, for the arms trade between the two countries has been in place since the late sixties.

Control over oil reserves is at the top of China's wishes -- and Sudanese diffidence for the U.S. seems to be a good set-up for Chinese penetration as a powerbroker. In 2003, China's National Petroleum Corp. planned to invest one billion dollars to create Sudan's largest oil refinery. Moreover, as recent declarations from Sudanese Minister of Energy and Mining Awad Ahmed Al-Jazz confirmed, a newly-discovered oil field expected to produce 500,000 barrels per day of crude oil is located in the Darfur region. This latter is also the way to Chad, a country well-known for its natural gas reserves.

At a time of growing strategic partnership between U.S. geopolitical adversaries such as Iran and China, Sudan's importance is understandable in light of its energy assets and strategic position to securitize the "Greater Middle East."

NIGERIA 1NC

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits:

NET-BENEFIT—CHINA D/A LINK CHARGER

A- Nigeria is a strategic partner of China—its gets a shitload of oil there

The People’s Daily April 15th 2005 “China, Nigeria, Promise to build strategic partnership” http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200504/15/eng20050415_181105.html

China and Nigeria signed five economic agreements Thursday night, promising to upgrade their relations to a "strategic partnership." The five agreements, covering investment, telecommunication service and technical cooperation, were signed after an hour-long talk between Chinese President Hu Jintao and Nigeria President Olusegun Obasanjo, who is in China for a four-day state visit. China and Nigeria set up full diplomatic ties in 1971 and the trade volume between the two countries reached 2.18 billion US dollars. Nigeria is now China's second largest export market and fourth largest trade partner in Africa. During talks with Obasanjo, Hu suggested the two sides take active measures to expand the economic and trade cooperation and further boost two-way investment. He expressed hope that the two sides will improve cooperation in gas exploration, infrastructure construction and manufacturing industry to achieve common development. He suggested the countries enhance political trust through high- level visits and personnel exchanges, improve consultation and coordination in international affairs and join hands to maintain the interests of developing countries, boost south-south cooperation and promote the establishment of a fair and reasonable new international political and economic order.

B-China will see US action in Nigeria as trying to cut China off from oil Drew Thompson, December 7th 2004, “Economic Growth and Soft Power: China’s Africa Strategy” The Jamestown Foundation http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?search=1&volume_id=395&issue_id=3170&article_id=2368982

China's interests in Africa represent an opportunity for the United States and the international community. China maintains friendly relations with most African nations, particularly nations that the U.S. has limited contact or diplomatic leverage over, such as Libya and Sudan. If President Bush seeks to address U.S. national security interests around the world, promoting social, political and economic development in Africa will have to become a significant priority for the administration. China can potentially be a strong ally in this effort.

But, as the U.S. and China seek to further their interests in Africa, whether they work together or at cross-purposes remains an open question. The U.S. could see China as a competitor, and become increasingly concerned about its growing spheres of influence, while China could see U.S. efforts to promote stability and democracy in Africa as an effort to cut off their access to raw materials and further contain China's professed "peaceful rise." Of course, China is always cautious of U.S. intentions, which might lead to suspicion of any overtures made to them to cooperate on issues, particularly involving other nations' internal affairs. China is likely to be initially reluctant to work with the U.S. on any efforts to coerce African countries to conform to a Western-centric global strategy. Concerns about the subjugation of their own interests, as well as any precedent such cooperation would set regarding a code of conduct for nations that China enjoys close relationships with, are sure to dominate Beijing's thinking on these issues. The Chinese remain wary that their cooperation on the North Korean nuclear issue might encourage Washington to seek to use their leverage on Sudan, Libya, Syria and Iran, without tangible benefits on the table for Beijing. U.S. assertions that China's effort to defuse the North Korean crisis is in their best interest might not translate as easily to problems in Africa.

SWAZILAND 1NC

NET BENEFIT—CORRUPTION

A-Swaziland needs government fixins!

Awke Amosu, December 5th 2006 “How swaziland’s government model and aids crisis intersect” Wilson Center http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=116811&categoryid=0D59724D-B4D4-535A-9969D024AC260287&fuseaction=topics.events_item_topics&event_id=209843

The discussion was continued by Joseph Siegle, who compared Swaziland’s experience to other African development and governance experiences over the last twenty years. He began with a summary of how governance and development have been viewed across the continent. According to his assessment, significant changes have occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa in the last decade and a half. Siegle summarized the four different ways in which the 48 Sub-Saharan countries have been categorized, according to the Freedom House’s political rights and civil liberties index. The categories are consolidated democracies, democratizer countries, semi-authoritarian countries, and autocracies. He pointed out that Swaziland, Africa’s last remaining monarchy, was ranked as an autocracy. Given these indices Siegle noted that democracies tend to have relatively lower levels of corruption; meanwhile, autocracies view corruption as a means of maintaining the networks that keep them in power. Siegle believes that democracies also tend to do a better job of avoiding catastrophes. This is because within democracies, there are incentives for governments to respond to the population by enforcing policies to avoid crises. In terms of Swaziland, he stated that “King Mswati and other leaders can keep marching their societies off a cliff because no one has mechanisms to bring them in.” The problems in Africa and Swaziland are largely problems of governance. Democracy can serve to bring in more than intrinsic values in developing societies including checks and balances and a notion of power. This creates mechanisms whereby citizens are able to influence their leaders to implement changes. Lastly, Siegle addressed how the role of the international community can be problematic given their urgency to first respond to Swaziland’s HIV/ADIS, crisis which implies that Swaziland’s governance problems would only be addressed later. Siegle stressed that in setting up its priorities this way the international community would be focusing on the symptoms and therefore fail to address the root causes of the HIV/AIDS crisis. In sum, Siegle found Swaziland’s development performance to be in a decline due a government that is based on neo-patrimonial structures, plagued by corrupt practices, and eschewing checks and balances, all of which are contrary to the functioning of a true democracy.

B- Aid money fuels Corruption—it won’t get to the people

Blake Lambert, August 18th 2006, “For Many Africans, more aid is not the answer” World Politics review http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=126#

U2's Bono, Sir Bob Geldof, Dr. Jeffrey Sachs and the Make Poverty History campaign argue that a lack of aid dollars from western countries -- few of whom spend the internationally recognized target of 0.7 percent of Gross Domestic Product on overseas development assistance -- causes great harm to the continent.That claim clearly ignores the estimate of several development economists that sub-Saharan Africa has received more than $500 billion in aid over the past four decades, which is the equivalent of four Marshall plans, though not a few countries are poorer today than they were then. It also dismisses the complaint of growing numbers of Africans who said their continent's greatest flaw is not a shortage of aid but their corrupt and unaccountable leaders. "The problem is that this money actually makes the problem worse," said Dennis Matanda, a consultant and teacher in Kampala, Uganda. Western aid allows politicians to divert the money in order to build political fiefdoms or cults, according to Henry Lubega, a Ugandan working for a foreign TV network based in Kampala.He suggested there's a direct relationship between the amount of money given to sub-Saharan African leaders and the rate of corruption in their countries.Meanwhile, Andrew Barungi, a Ugandan student who's spent much of his life in Kenya, said politicians and bureaucrats are not the only ones to benefit from aid dollars."What's the point of giving $10 million when $3 million will go to a minister, a few sycophants and officials," he asked. "Three million goes to 'aid experts' from developed countries, $2 million on expensive cars, and the rest goes to projects which are unfinished." C- Only Counterplan solves—cutting of aid is key to check corruption

Andrew M. Mwenda, March 8th 2005 “Foreign Aid Sabotages Reform” International herald tribune http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/07/opinion/edmwenda.php

But why does the government of Uganda fail to implement such simple reforms? The answer is, foreign aid. Taxation is a politically explosive exercise - why should any government alienate political allies in the name of tax collection when international donors are willing to pick up its bills? By acting as a subsidy to government corruption and incompetence, foreign aid creates disincentives to fiscal reform. In a briefing with Blair, we challenged him with this argument, and he responded that the Commission for Africa will emphasize "good governance" - better tax administration and prudent public expenditure. But my point is that good governance is less a moral aspiration and more a product of enlightened self-interest. If international donors began to cut off the aid taps, governments in Africa would be forced to reform their fiscal policies or stare regime collapse in the eye. In London, Blair and his commissioners were talking about a "Marshal Plan for Africa." But Africa has already received more than a Marshal Plan, yet the continent grows poorer, not richer. At their height, the Marshal Plan funds were only 2.5 percent of the gross domestic product of their largest recipients, France and Germany. An average sub-Saharan Africa country gets foreign aid to the tune of 13 percent of its GDP - in historical terms, an unparalleled

UGANDA 1NC

Text: The United States federal government should [insert mandates of Affirmative plan], excluding the Republic of Uganda.

Observation 1—Competition—the plan and the counterplan are mutually exclusive, any permutation would sever out of the affirmative plan

Observation 2: Net Benefits:

NET BENEFIT—UGANDAN CORRUPTION

A—Ugandan government is Aid hungry--More Aid leads to more corruption

Zibb News June 18th 2007, “Aid Simply Doesn’t Work” http://www.zibb.com/article/1171835/Aid+Simply+Doesnt+Work+opinion

I have found in broad terms aid adds to the isolation of western publics creating an agenda of "we the rich" and in Africa "the poor" even if the aid industry may argue the reverse. Investment would fuse that gap since the agenda is not to give but to create wealth and requires the migration of western professionals and companies. The next G8 should be encouraged to study how to encourage investment and give aid a break. It is simply not working. Aid in Uganda oils the wheels of official corruption and the irony of the aid industry is that it also claims to be a champion of accountability. Democratisation in Uganda has blossomed in the size of the cabinet, parliament and local authorities. Along with this has been a commensurate growth in official corruption. One of the most aid intensive regimes in the world Uganda is also among the most corrupt countries. As a result the environment for doing business has not gotten better but more complex instead since corruption increases the cost of doing business.

B- Ugandan governments siphon money to help the rich—the disparity will just get worse with more aid

Herbert H. Werlin, 13 may 2005 “Corruption and Foreign Aid in Africa” Science Direct http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W5V-4G5BK00-1&_user=4257664&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000022698&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=4257664&md5=cfc37bc4970c7ae48fd20fac1d4b3a78

The Millennium Project assumes that doubling foreign aid will lead to a halving of poverty. However, even a country such as Uganda, which is considered likely to be helped by more foreign aid, poor public administration remains the problem. For instance, it is not the school fees insisted upon by the World Bank and/or imf (as critics so often charge) that reduces educational opportunity. More than three times what is spent in Uganda on the education of the poorest students is spent on the wealthiest fifth; much of the money intended for schools is stolen or diverted.5 The teacher retention rate in Uganda has been estimated at about 25 percent. More foreign aid alone is not going to ease the problems of such countries. While one can agree with the point made in the New York Times supporting the Millennium Project, that it “is counterproductive [for making] poor people suffer because they have bad governments,” the sad reality is that, without better governments, it is impossible to help poor people.6

C- Only Counterplan solves—cutting of aid is key to check corruption

Andrew M. Mwenda, March 8th 2005 “Foreign Aid Sabotages Reform” International herald tribune http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/07/opinion/edmwenda.php

But why does the government of Uganda fail to implement such simple reforms? The answer is, foreign aid. Taxation is a politically explosive exercise - why should any government alienate political allies in the name of tax collection when international donors are willing to pick up its bills? By acting as a subsidy to government corruption and incompetence, foreign aid creates disincentives to fiscal reform. In a briefing with Blair, we challenged him with this argument, and he responded that the Commission for Africa will emphasize "good governance" - better tax administration and prudent public expenditure. But my point is that good governance is less a moral aspiration and more a product of enlightened self-interest. If international donors began to cut off the aid taps, governments in Africa would be forced to reform their fiscal policies or stare regime collapse in the eye. In London, Blair and his commissioners were talking about a "Marshal Plan for Africa." But Africa has already received more than a Marshal Plan, yet the continent grows poorer, not richer. At their height, the Marshal Plan funds were only 2.5 percent of the gross domestic product of their largest recipients, France and Germany. An average sub-Saharan Africa country gets foreign aid to the tune of 13 percent of its GDP - in historical terms, an unparalleled