College Policy Debate Forums
November 19, 2017, 11:30:35 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE, INCLUDING LOGGING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.  EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR USE THE CONTACT US LINK AT THE TOP.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Category 2 - Borderline Countries Wording Thread  (Read 3561 times)
stables
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Posts: 334


« on: May 19, 2011, 03:39:11 PM »

Please use this thread to discuss this second tier of nations. These countries are similar to the core, but there are reasons why they are less central to the recent uprisings. An initial review of these countries suggested they may not be the most essential countries to the topic, but additional review is probably warranted to confirm that judgment. Mike Davis and Sarah Partlow-Lefevre will lead this group.

Algeria
Kuwait
Lebanon
Mauritania
Morocco
Sudan
Logged

Gordon Stables
Assistant Dean for Student Affairs
Director of Debate & Forensics
Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism
University of Southern California
stables
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Posts: 334


« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2011, 04:05:53 PM »

Assessing Sudan

Hays Watson shared this research and analysis. Thanks for the good work!

Here's a rough compilation of my Sudan emails that you should feel free to post if you think it will help:

One, my initial reaction is no.  I've included a series of democracy assistance and Sudan articles, but in the short amount of time I spent researching (only 30 minutes or so), I'm skeptical that more specific/more extensive evidence exists in favor of extending democracy assistance to/in Sudan.

Two, if Sudan is subject to further research, the literature seems to support greater US assistance (maybe democracy assistance) to Southern Sudan, not Sudan proper.  Southern Sudan, coming off the recent referendum on independence, is the dominant topic in democracy/governance/Sudan discussions, at least from what I can glean from the lit base.

Three, it's a great area of research, but might be better served as a DA (dip capital/focus and/or aid trade-off) given what I've seen and what I predict regarding the dearth of good specific democracy assistance solvency evidence.

The best arg for Sudan's inclusion is that it's Sudan, it's perpetually ignored (by us, by policymakers, by the world, etc.), and the educational benefits of debating a slightly "messy" country (i.e. maybe not the greatest ev in favor of democracy assistance) outweigh the risk of strategic disadvantages (poor lit base, Aff biased, etc.). 

I'd err on the side of no, but that's just from the little bit of work I did a few days ago.  I honestly don't think the Arab Spring really even refers to the events in Sudan (or Southern Sudan) since North/South political developments have been occurring for the better part of the past decade.

I do think that the countries should serve as the limit to the topic, not what "democracy assistance" means.  I think we need a term of art that isn't 100  % conclusive so that evidence-based T debates can occur (like with development assistance, Indian Country, constructive engagement, etc.). 

Just my two cents,

Hays

Random/relevant articles for demo asst/Sudan:

Generic demo assist solvency
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:z0qU68ncTTgJ:www.diplomacyandpower.com/%3Fcategory_name%3Ddemocracy+u.s.+%22democracy+assistance%22+southern+sudan&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lecture/Sudan-From-the-Diplomatic-Front-Line-in-Search-of-Peace
--great Southern Sudan key to Darfur ev

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9FuWyJJAz3UJ:www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/03/the-role-of-the-united-states-in-southern-sudans-referendum+%22southern+sudan%22+democracy+assistance+u.s.&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
--search "southern sudan" at Heritage for a series of articles

Bipart support for demo assist to Southern Sudan
http://blog.heritage.org/?p=49532

Good governance key to sustainable peace in Sudan
http://www.mercycorps.org/sites/default/files/Sudan.pdf

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ruth-allen/why-southern-sudan-should_b_832051.html

General 411
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0124Pev-bO4J:www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa/countries/sudan/+%22southern+sudan%22+democracy+assistance+u.s.&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Secessionism
http://www.usip.org/publications/secession-and-precedent-in-sudan-and-africa

Neg "aid fails" in Sudan
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Nscv0id71gsJ:thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/4696-us-aid-to-southern-sudan-tells-a-familiar-story+%22southern+sudan%22+governance+assistance+u.s.&cd=25&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

***Honestly, the majority of articles advocate US engagement or development assistance, not democracy assistance
Logged

Gordon Stables
Assistant Dean for Student Affairs
Director of Debate & Forensics
Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism
University of Southern California
Kris Willis
Newbie
*
Posts: 37


« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2011, 09:27:15 AM »


Attached is a file with some research and thoughts regarding Kuwait's inclusion. My interest here is to provide information for discussion and debate. Below are my initial thoughts regarding the debatability of Kuwait in the topic area.

Kris

My thoughts:

I spent the last two months of the high school topic researching Kuwait, specifically with the intent to write a negative file centered on the internal politics of the country as it related to troop withdrawal. Below is a collection of some of the internal links and descriptions to support my claims I will make in this review. It is not all encompassing, but does represent the literature that could be expected regarding Kuwait and political/democratic reforms.

I believe the country has some great potential for inclusion. There is a strong democratic movement within the country aimed at predominately two goals: Economic reforms via privatization and moving away from government run businesses and oil, and human rights with an emphasis on those who are not Kuwaiti gaining equal rights (close to 40% of the people in Kuwait fit into groups being excluded currently). Some literature suggests these movements are working together and others say they are separate factions. There is also literature that argues some of these movements (namely those aimed at equal rights) are instigated by the Iranian regime and hence will be a likely case debate area. There is also some literature about women’s rights and issues within the country that could also serve as an affirmative (or negative) case area.

Kuwait also represents a good topic country because of its close relationship to the US and vital interests within MENA. From Oil, troops and forward deployment, Iran and proliferation issues, Iraq withdrawal, and its role as a “role-model” for democracy and human rights within the region, Kuwait serves as a country with lots of advantage areas to debate and democracy is a key internal link to all of these issues.

However, there are some drawbacks to the inclusion of Kuwait. The largest one would be the relationship the US has with Kuwait, the many active programs they jointly work together on (here is an extensive list of previous programs/projects the US State department worked on with Kuwait: http://2002-2009-mepi.state.gov/c10156.htm). However, this also cuts through some of the debates about Government to Government cooperation because the relationship is there and strong. Also, if the USAID was the actor, according to the USAID website there currently are no programs in Kuwait through USAID: http://www.usaid.gov/locations/ (it is a map and designates not programs in Kuwait). Which could mean it is a better country but needs to be considered when crafting a resolution.

Another potential problem (although it could be an advantage area as well) is the Kuwaiti Government doesn’t just crackdown on movements, it also restricts information that can be release and published. It recently expelled the al jazeera news agency from within the country. After this happened, which also included a strengthening on restrictions for Kuwaiti news agencies, there were virtually no articles written about the democratic protests from this point on. I recognize this could be great for debate and a good reason to include Kuwait; however, it severely cuts the number of articles and information about the current events within Kuwait and also calls into question the reliability of news coming from Kuwait. While this may be great for debate, it could also prove problematic for productive and thoughtful debate about the country. I feel strongly about the education and knowledge produced from and through debate, and I think it is lost if the information we have access to is not valid or reliable. I am sure many will say that is what debate is for, and I agree with this to a large extent, but if both sides of the issue are false then the discussion has no chance to be fruitful.

* KuwaitMENAfileWillis.doc (96.5 KB - downloaded 404 times.)
Logged
stables
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Posts: 334


« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2011, 10:27:45 AM »

I am reposting kilakevthekevdogkilionare's enire post about including either Sudan in the topic. Please continue all discussion of Sudan (or any of the category 2 countries) on this thread.

-------------------------

Re: Category 3 - Reasons to include and to not include - Wording Thread
« Reply #33 on: Today at 05:54:40 AM »
Quote  Modify  Remove  Split Topic
On to something different.....

A) Sudan

For increasing Demo Assistance to this country I think that is would be educationally viable as Sudan does not have a Demo is the Squo, does not receive a significant amount of Demo funds from the USA, has Demo NGOs (as in the cite), could have good advantages like Genocide (Its doubtful any other aff could have a genocide adv), fem adv, terrorism, soft power, ect., the aff can probably link to the generic args/core of the topic, would have a specific neg, and can have competition against foreign CPs. 

http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/ACDI-CIDA.nsf/eng/ANN-52131918-NBM (yay Canada, though there is a Demo NGO listed). 

South Sudan is succeeding from North Sudan on July 9th, 2011.  By Sudan in the topic paper I'm assuming Gordon is talking about the gov in Khartoum (North Sudan).  I think we should start thinking about whether or not South Sudan should be included in the topic? 

Reasons to Include South Sudan


1) Lots of Aff Inherency, The Demo just began there, I'm sure US Demo funding does not specify between North Sudan and South Sudan, all the reason why we should increase Demo funding.

2) Regional Significance/Education, If Sudan is included in the topic then its lit base will probably talk about needing to fix South Sudan in order to fix/prevent war in North Sudan.  If theres a strong Internal Link saying Demo Assistance solves this then it could be a viable advantage. 

Reasons to not Include South Sudan


1) Leads to Specific Advantages outside the Arab World, like stability advantages for the Horn of Africa or Central Africa, or possibly AU legitimacy advantages, though on the other hand all the North African countries in the topic have a risk of causing an this advantage to exist.

2) Extra T/Effects T Affs, the lit on South Sudan could cause teams to bust out a team that involves Ethiopia or Eritrea that could lead to some benefit for South Sudan.  Though on the other hand North Sudan could face the same issue as it has Ethiopian and Eitrean refugees and shares a boarder with both countries. 

3) Is there Solvency Advocates?, its such a new country there might not be though I doubt that because the North Sudan lit must talk about South Sudan.

4) We could just make North Sudan T and that would solve back South Sudan, This interpretation could allow the edu about South Sudan to be present in North Sudan debate rounds w/o the adv.s ourside the Arab world. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/07/world/main7327084.shtml (Obama says he will recognize South Sudan as a country when it declares independence so theres no risk of plan flaws)

B) Topic wording

Mauritania and Sudan would, topically, be apart of Sub Saharan Africa, so if these two countries are included in the resolution then it can't be MDNA.   

C) West Sahara, by any chance Gordon Stables were you planning as including this as a part of Morocco or ignoring or ?
Logged

Gordon Stables
Assistant Dean for Student Affairs
Director of Debate & Forensics
Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism
University of Southern California
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by 2by2host.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!